Author Topic: Posting Re: CADL v MOC  (Read 8492 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline esq_stu

  • Posts: 8
Posting Re: CADL v MOC
« on: February 22, 2011, 04:46:59 PM »
Just a thought:

You've no doubt heard spokesmen, officials, lawyers, et al. say to the press at various times, "sorry, I can't comment about ongoing litigation."

The press, politicians, as well as the public at large, are going to be very interested in what MOC members, officers, and directors, and the rest of us say here and on other forums.  Discussions revealing information, be it facts or just attitudes, about an ongoing legal case in a public forum have ways of biting the parties.

Please think about that when you decide to post information pertaining to either the events leading up to the lawsuit, the strategies and tactics, the legal arguments, and other things that might be helpful to CADL or harmful to MOC and its likelihood of success in court.

All the best,

Stu

Offline TheQ

  • Website Content Manager
  • MOC Lifetime Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4263
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc.
  • First Name (Displayed): Phillip
Re: Posting Re: CADL v MOC
« Reply #1 on: February 22, 2011, 06:07:32 PM »
Sound advise from an esquire and a gentleman.
I Am Not A Lawyer (nor a gunsmith).

Offline autosurgeon

  • MOC Treasurer
  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1056
  • First Name (Displayed): Ryan
Re: Posting Re: CADL v MOC
« Reply #2 on: February 22, 2011, 06:17:53 PM »
Very good advise... and I am making this a sticky.
Anything I post may be my opinion and not the law... you are responsible to do your own verification.

Blackstone (1753-1765) maintains that "the law holds that it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."

Offline Big Gay Al

  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 133
  • Rock Island Armory 1911A1 FS Tactical .45 ACP
    • Big Gay Al's Big Gay (Gun) Blog
  • First Name (Displayed): Al
Re: Posting Re: CADL v MOC
« Reply #3 on: May 01, 2011, 04:49:17 PM »
Just a thought:

You've no doubt heard spokesmen, officials, lawyers, et al. say to the press at various times, "sorry, I can't comment about ongoing litigation."

The press, politicians, as well as the public at large, are going to be very interested in what MOC members, officers, and directors, and the rest of us say here and on other forums.  Discussions revealing information, be it facts or just attitudes, about an ongoing legal case in a public forum have ways of biting the parties.

Please think about that when you decide to post information pertaining to either the events leading up to the lawsuit, the strategies and tactics, the legal arguments, and other things that might be helpful to CADL or harmful to MOC and its likelihood of success in court.

All the best,

Stu
So, does that mean if we come across information that we think might help, not knowing if anyone else is aware, we should not post it?
Big Gay Al
Coordinator, Michigan Pink Pistols

Offline autosurgeon

  • MOC Treasurer
  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1056
  • First Name (Displayed): Ryan
Re: Posting Re: CADL v MOC
« Reply #4 on: May 01, 2011, 05:30:37 PM »
Email it to the leadership of MOC board@michiganopencarry.org they can then send it to our attorneys.

Sent from my Droid Flipside using Tapatalk
Anything I post may be my opinion and not the law... you are responsible to do your own verification.

Blackstone (1753-1765) maintains that "the law holds that it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."

Offline venator

  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 339
    • My Parents Open Carry book order
Re: Posting Re: CADL v MOC
« Reply #5 on: May 18, 2011, 07:56:13 PM »
MOC legal team filed response to OC/brandishing.  Go here to read brief: http://www.migunowners.org/forum/showthread.php?t=135653
Family book on OPEN CARRY go to: http://www.myparentsopencarry.com/
Looking forward to having more smites than posts.  Thanks all.
The above are my opinions only.  Please seek an attorney concerning all questions of law.