J.Gleason
Banned
imported post
Come on now don't be afraid.
Come on now don't be afraid.
-
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.
How many people think it is smart to give out info on a legal case in this forum?
- Thread starter J.Gleason
- Start date
J.Gleason
Banned
imported post
Hmmm, that's it? Only 3 votes huh.
Hmmm, that's it? Only 3 votes huh.
imported post
JG,
I don't fully understand the question. In fact, the title of the thread and the question in the poll don't match, so it's even more confusing. Are you talking about cases generally, or just "investigations?"
I think it would be kind of silly not to give out information on cases as it becomes public. I habitually post information in this and other fora about gun cases I have, because I think they are of interest to people on the fora and I want people to know what is happening in the courtroom as it pertains to gun issues. In addition to letting people know what's happening, so they can react appropriately, an informed electorate makes better decisions at election time. People we elect include judges, or presidents that appoint judges, prosecutors, etc. They have a very real impact on what happens with gun issues.
Now, I'm not sure what you mean by "investigations." What information would people have about ongoing investigations? Such information is not generally publicly available.
JG,
I don't fully understand the question. In fact, the title of the thread and the question in the poll don't match, so it's even more confusing. Are you talking about cases generally, or just "investigations?"
I think it would be kind of silly not to give out information on cases as it becomes public. I habitually post information in this and other fora about gun cases I have, because I think they are of interest to people on the fora and I want people to know what is happening in the courtroom as it pertains to gun issues. In addition to letting people know what's happening, so they can react appropriately, an informed electorate makes better decisions at election time. People we elect include judges, or presidents that appoint judges, prosecutors, etc. They have a very real impact on what happens with gun issues.
Now, I'm not sure what you mean by "investigations." What information would people have about ongoing investigations? Such information is not generally publicly available.
Master Doug Huffman
Banned
imported post
And when it does come into the public domain then it should be widely publicized. The thought that only the best face should be shown is disingenuous.
Not speaking for JG, we may be seeing some intemperate temper that I find quite understandable.
And when it does come into the public domain then it should be widely publicized. The thought that only the best face should be shown is disingenuous.
Not speaking for JG, we may be seeing some intemperate temper that I find quite understandable.
M
McX
Guest
imported post
depends upon the topic being discussed, we all come to share and learn. but slamming an individual, or publicizing his woes, is NOT good.
depends upon the topic being discussed, we all come to share and learn. but slamming an individual, or publicizing his woes, is NOT good.
Spartacus
Banned
imported post
It doesn't take a poll or vote to know that blabbering about sensitives issues is a bad idea.
Only post whores like Masterbator Doug or Gossip Girls who need to get a life feel the need to dredge up dirt all the time.
You are like dogs who eat their own vomit. Leave it the fcuk alone or it will make you sick and affect many people, not just the main actor.
.
.
Spelling edit...
It doesn't take a poll or vote to know that blabbering about sensitives issues is a bad idea.
Only post whores like Masterbator Doug or Gossip Girls who need to get a life feel the need to dredge up dirt all the time.
You are like dogs who eat their own vomit. Leave it the fcuk alone or it will make you sick and affect many people, not just the main actor.
.
.
Spelling edit...
rcawdor57
Campaign Veteran
imported post
J.Gleason wrote:
J.Gleason, I think we should all use common sense and not write anything that can be twisted and turned into something that can be used to demonize the poster or anyone we may be "discussing". We all should know by now that EVERYONE watches these posts in this forum and can be guaranteed that they are all being recorded to be used in a negative light.
I feel I know why you started this thread and I agree with you 100%. What we write here, if used in court, will most likely be twisted into a Cerberus type creature with nothing good coming from it. Be careful what we write......very careful.:exclaim:
Oh, and I voted NO.
J.Gleason wrote:
J.Gleason, I think we should all use common sense and not write anything that can be twisted and turned into something that can be used to demonize the poster or anyone we may be "discussing". We all should know by now that EVERYONE watches these posts in this forum and can be guaranteed that they are all being recorded to be used in a negative light.
I feel I know why you started this thread and I agree with you 100%. What we write here, if used in court, will most likely be twisted into a Cerberus type creature with nothing good coming from it. Be careful what we write......very careful.:exclaim:
Oh, and I voted NO.
lockman
State Researcher
imported post
That depends on which side you are on.
That depends on which side you are on.