Venator
Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
imported post
xd-40 wrote:
xd-40 wrote:
And that's the rub.
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
OPEN CARRY COURT CASE, IWB concealed?
- Thread starter dougwg
- Start date
taxwhat
Regular Member
imported post
Hi and welcome ! Pm on the way
Hi and welcome ! Pm on the way
Venator
Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
imported post
frankone wrote:
frankone wrote:
A juror is not supposed to have any or limited knowledge or details of the crime in order to serve. If it was found a juror had been on this site they would be dismissed or shot!
joshuaeberly
New member
imported post
Venator wrote:
Venator wrote:
:what:dismissed I hope.
dougwg
Regular Member
Mississippian
Regular Member
imported post
I hope they don't wind up with a law like what we have in MS...
Weare supposed to be able tolegallyOC without a permitbut the gun cannot be even bepartially concealed.
A judge has ruled that a holster, even one like this will be considered partially concealed...So, for a guy (or gal) to legally OC like I am doing in this pic, they would have to first obtain a CC permit:banghead:.
So good luck and I'll be watchin'
I hope they don't wind up with a law like what we have in MS...
Weare supposed to be able tolegallyOC without a permitbut the gun cannot be even bepartially concealed.
A judge has ruled that a holster, even one like this will be considered partially concealed...So, for a guy (or gal) to legally OC like I am doing in this pic, they would have to first obtain a CC permit:banghead:.
So good luck and I'll be watchin'
Hcidem
Regular Member
imported post
That judge must strongly believe that this might be mistaken for a cigarette lighter...no, it a phone...no, maybe a cordless drill. Oh my, what can it be? Could it...do you think...it... might be...a gun!!!
Any judge like that is sorely lacking in the first quality a judge requires, good "judgement."
That judge must strongly believe that this might be mistaken for a cigarette lighter...no, it a phone...no, maybe a cordless drill. Oh my, what can it be? Could it...do you think...it... might be...a gun!!!
Any judge like that is sorely lacking in the first quality a judge requires, good "judgement."
taxwhat
Regular Member
imported post
Please go to Internet rebroadcasts of Wayne County PA Kim Worthy on perjury and being under oath !! Good stuff will SHE go after all ?>
Please go to Internet rebroadcasts of Wayne County PA Kim Worthy on perjury and being under oath !! Good stuff will SHE go after all ?>
Michigander
Regular Member
imported post
Mississipian, I did think of exactly that possibility. That is why this case is so important. It would be unconstitutional by the Michigan state constitution to have a ruling like the crap you have there, so I doubt it would hold up upon appeal, but we could all end up getting really badly hassled.
Mississipian, I did think of exactly that possibility. That is why this case is so important. It would be unconstitutional by the Michigan state constitution to have a ruling like the crap you have there, so I doubt it would hold up upon appeal, but we could all end up getting really badly hassled.
Dan F.
Regular Member
imported post
Venator wrote:
I think the judge is trying to re-write the law by including the reference to a "reasonable person". The law and the AG opinion state that a concealed pistol is not visible (hence "concealed"). Both are silent as to the qualifications of the observer. The transcriptsare very difficult to follow but it appears the judge is aware that he may be setting some precedent here.
Venator wrote:
I think the judge is trying to re-write the law by including the reference to a "reasonable person". The law and the AG opinion state that a concealed pistol is not visible (hence "concealed"). Both are silent as to the qualifications of the observer. The transcriptsare very difficult to follow but it appears the judge is aware that he may be setting some precedent here.
dougwg
Regular Member
imported post
Just got some great news.
It looks as though a very large pro-2A orginazaion is looking at supporting this case(jumping on the band wagon if you will)
Would OCD
rg want to join in the fight?
Would MOC want to join in the fight?
Just got some great news.
It looks as though a very large pro-2A orginazaion is looking at supporting this case(jumping on the band wagon if you will)
Would OCD
rg want to join in the fight?Would MOC want to join in the fight?
Venator
Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
imported post
dougwg wrote:
dougwg wrote:
More info?? If you want MOC members to help with cost can you set up a seperate palpal account for it?Just got some great news.
It looks as though a very large pro-2A orginazaion is looking at supporting this case(jumping on the band wagon if you will)
Would OCD
Would MOC want to join in the fight?
Venator
Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
imported post
dougwg wrote:
dougwg wrote:
duplicate.Just got some great news.
It looks as though a very large pro-2A orginazaion is looking at supporting this case(jumping on the band wagon if you will)
Would OCD
Would MOC want to join in the fight?
dougwg
Regular Member
imported post
No! I can not set up a paypal account.
No! I can not set up a paypal account.
cmdio
Regular Member
imported post
Dan F. wrote:
Also some of Detroit's immediate suburbs are also in Wayne county, and in my experience when I was called down to Frank Murphy for jury duty, it seems to me that most of the people who actually show up for their jury duty are from the suburbs.
Also I think that the defense attorney would be able to disqualify anyone in the jury pool who were themselves or had family that was victim of gun crime (seems to me it would be impossible for them to be objective about such a case), which also might help get a reasonable jury of peers should this even go to trial.
Is there a 36th district Judge assigned to the case yet? I know a couple of the judges and would be interested to know if it's either of them. If there's anything I can do to help out let me know, also if it goes to trial I may be able to attend as 36th district is very close for me.
Dan F. wrote:
From my understanding (based mainly on discussions with my girlfriend who is in law school, and my limited legal knowledge) most laws are based upon the viewpoint or actions of a "reasonable person".
Also some of Detroit's immediate suburbs are also in Wayne county, and in my experience when I was called down to Frank Murphy for jury duty, it seems to me that most of the people who actually show up for their jury duty are from the suburbs.
Also I think that the defense attorney would be able to disqualify anyone in the jury pool who were themselves or had family that was victim of gun crime (seems to me it would be impossible for them to be objective about such a case), which also might help get a reasonable jury of peers should this even go to trial.
Is there a 36th district Judge assigned to the case yet? I know a couple of the judges and would be interested to know if it's either of them. If there's anything I can do to help out let me know, also if it goes to trial I may be able to attend as 36th district is very close for me.
cmdio
Regular Member
imported post
taxwhat wrote:
taxwhat wrote:
Even if we didn't post on this thread, when asked if we knew anything about the defendant or the crime we would have to answer in the affirmative (not a fan of lying to judges), so I don't really see how posting on this thread would matter as there is no way we would be jurors for this case anyway.
Michigander
Regular Member
imported post
As far as I know, jurors are supposed to stay clear of the web all together. With Michigan's OTIS system, it's too easy to get info that could sway a juror's opinion.
As far as I know, jurors are supposed to stay clear of the web all together. With Michigan's OTIS system, it's too easy to get info that could sway a juror's opinion.
taxwhat
Regular Member
imported post
cmdio wrote:
cmdio wrote:
If a person who is or maybe pro gun reads the post on this case,You fill in the blank .
Hcidem
Regular Member
imported post
I had a thought on this case today. I don't know if I have heard it said before or not, but the term, "procedural felony," came to mind.
There is no victim here. There isn't even any contraband. The defendent is being charged with two distinct "procedural felonies" where what he used and what he did are not in question. Its how he did it that is being questioned here.
Even if he had concealed a gun (which he did not), even if he had transported it improperly (which, again, he did not), is it right to charge a citizen with a felony just because a person did not perform according to our lawmakers' wishes?
This thought clarifies how very wrong the underlying laws in this case happen to be.
I had a thought on this case today. I don't know if I have heard it said before or not, but the term, "procedural felony," came to mind.
There is no victim here. There isn't even any contraband. The defendent is being charged with two distinct "procedural felonies" where what he used and what he did are not in question. Its how he did it that is being questioned here.
Even if he had concealed a gun (which he did not), even if he had transported it improperly (which, again, he did not), is it right to charge a citizen with a felony just because a person did not perform according to our lawmakers' wishes?
This thought clarifies how very wrong the underlying laws in this case happen to be.