Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 265

Thread: Temporary Restraining Order-CADL v. Michigan Open Carry, Inc.

  1. #1
    Regular Member sprinklerguy28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    666

    Temporary Restraining Order-CADL v. Michigan Open Carry, Inc.

    Today Michigan Open Carry, Inc. was served a temporary restraining order from Capital Area District Library(CADL). This order bans MOC members and it affiliates from open carrying into the CADL's libraries. We ask that for now you refrain from OCing there for the time being. We will be having a hearing on February 24, 2011 at 11:00am. The court is located at 303 W. Kalamazoo, 2nd Floor, Lansing, MI. MAP

    MOC has retained legal counsel to represent us in this matter. We ask all who can to come out to show your support. This case can have huge implications on 2A rights.

    TRO
    Last edited by sprinklerguy28; 02-18-2011 at 08:35 AM.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Good luck guys. You are on the right side of the fight.

  3. #3
    Regular Member MarineSgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Allendale, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    195
    Wow. How can they do that? So a judge seriously signed it?
    Last edited by MarineSgt; 02-17-2011 at 09:15 PM.
    Someone who can't be trusted to walk free in public with a firearm shouldn't be walking around free.

  4. #4
    Regular Member TheQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Lansing, Michigan
    Posts
    3,448
    Call for a cop, call for an ambulance, and call for a pizza. See who shows up first.

    I am not a lawyer (merely an omnipotent member of a continuum). The contents of this post are not a substitute for sound legal advice from a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.

    Comments and views stated in my post are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of Michigan Open Carry, Inc. unless stated otherwise in the post.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    I hope they don't throw the book at you over the library thing.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Kalamazoo, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    576

    Angry

    So has anyone contacted the Judge's bosses (AG), to see how they are going to correct this violation of law ?

    Or are we going to just get the PA-53 dismissed ?

    Oh never mind i forgot i'm just a layman, seek legal counsel & cross our fingers :-)

    GRRR !!!!!

  7. #7
    Regular Member Bronson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Battle Creek, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,157
    Quote Originally Posted by sprinklerguy28 View Post
    MOC has retained legal counsel
    Who?

    Bronson
    Those who expect to reap the benefits of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it. – Thomas Paine

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    290
    I really would like to read the text of the order.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Michigander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Mulligan's Valley
    Posts
    4,830
    My thought is same as Mastiff's. Call the AG's office. This was after all decided after Ferndale's former mayor Chuck Goedert decided he was smarter than the law and caused MCRGO vs Ferndale. This is merely a repeat of the same arrogance. It's the AG's place to stop these things. The feds could also be asked to help out due to color of law statutes, but the AG's office really needs to handle this. Last I talked to them, which was in the era of Mike Cox, they definitely made it sound like they would put an end to gun rights abuses from city governments.
    Last edited by Michigander; 02-18-2011 at 01:37 AM.
    Answer every question about open carry in Michigan you ever had with one convenient and free book- http://libertyisforeveryone.com/open-carry-resources/

    The complete and utter truth can be challenged from every direction and it will always hold up. Accordingly there are few greater displays of illegitimacy than to attempt to impede free thought and communication.

  10. #10
    Regular Member TheSzerdi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Melvindale, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    290
    [sarcasm] It's great that a government run, tax funded, public service can file a restraining order against an entire non-profit corporation for engaging in a legal activity. [/sarcasm]

  11. #11
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by TheSzerdi View Post
    [sarcasm] It's great that a government run, tax funded, public service can file a restraining order against an entire non-profit corporation for engaging in a legal activity. [/sarcasm]
    And back it up with lawyers that you have to pay for on both sides.

  12. #12
    Regular Member TheQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Lansing, Michigan
    Posts
    3,448
    Call for a cop, call for an ambulance, and call for a pizza. See who shows up first.

    I am not a lawyer (merely an omnipotent member of a continuum). The contents of this post are not a substitute for sound legal advice from a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.

    Comments and views stated in my post are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of Michigan Open Carry, Inc. unless stated otherwise in the post.

  13. #13
    Regular Member MarineSgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Allendale, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    195
    It seems CADL's argument against pre-emption is like this:

    If the City of Detroit changed their name to the Authority of Detroit, then they would be exempt as they are no longer considered a "local unit of government". My three year old has stronger logic skills than those who work at CADL.
    Someone who can't be trusted to walk free in public with a firearm shouldn't be walking around free.

  14. #14
    Regular Member DanM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    West Bloomfield, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,937
    Quote Originally Posted by sprinklerguy28 View Post
    We will be having a hearing on February 24, 2011 at 11:00am. . . . We ask all who can to come out to show your support. This case can have huge implications on 2A rights.
    What kind of hearing is this? Is it preliminary to anything else, or is it a day arguments are made and this judge decides whether the TRO stands or falls? I may be able to burn a vacation day and carpool others with me, but I wouldn't want to burn it and gas for anything but the most effective day to be there.

    Even if it *looks* like *the* day, is it possible/likely/certain CADL would ask for postponement and the judge possibly/likely/certainly would grant postponement?

    Your counsel probably has a good feel for all these questions. What does he think?

    I gotta ask these questions, because vacation days are scarce and important, and the answers to these questions aren't clear from the info so far.
    Last edited by DanM; 02-18-2011 at 08:40 AM.
    "The principle of self-defense, even involving weapons and bloodshed, has never been condemned, even by Gandhi . . ."--Dr. Martin Luther King Jr

    “He who cannot protect himself or his nearest and dearest or their honor by non-violently facing death, may and ought to do so by violently dealing with the oppressor. He who can do neither of the two is a burden.”--M. K. Gandhi

    "First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." --M. K. Gandhi

  15. #15
    Regular Member sprinklerguy28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    666
    Link to a copy of the TRO is in the first post now.

  16. #16
    Regular Member DetroitBiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    318
    "A temporary restraining order granted to the Capital Area District Library on Wednesday is designed to keep members of Michigan Open Carry or any associated people from bringing weapons into the library or any of its branches.
    The restraining order was granted the same day an 18-year-old Lansing man attended a CADL meeting at the downtown Lansing location with a gun. Lansing police were called to the scene and determined the gun was an airsoft gun, which is like a BB gun, Lt. Noel Garcia said. The man was asked to leave and left without incident, Garcia said."

    Can anyone confirm this to be true? and if so, Why an airsoft gun?

  17. #17
    State Researcher lockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Elgin, Illinois, USA
    Posts
    1,202
    And what effect does this have on people not members of MOB and without knowledge of MOB decide to carry anyway?

  18. #18
    Regular Member PDinDetroit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    SE, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,336
    Quote Originally Posted by DanM View Post
    What kind of hearing is this? Is it preliminary to anything else, or is it a day arguments are made and this judge decides whether the TRO stands or falls? I may be able to burn a vacation day and carpool others with me, but I wouldn't want to burn it and gas for anything but the most effective day to be there.

    Even if it *looks* like *the* day, is it possible/likely/certain CADL would ask for postponement and the judge possibly/likely/certainly would grant postponement?

    Your counsel probably has a good feel for all these questions. What does he think?

    I gotta ask these questions, because vacation days are scarce and important, and the answers to these questions aren't clear from the info so far.
    AFAIK, that is the day to answer the TRO and get it overturned. The complaint is separate from the TRO and may be addressed differently.

  19. #19
    Regular Member PDinDetroit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    SE, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,336
    Quote Originally Posted by lockman View Post
    And what effect does this have on people not members of MOB and without knowledge of MOB decide to carry anyway?
    IANAL!

    The TRO appears to be very broad and could be construed to affect OCDO Members (along with others).

  20. #20
    Regular Member PDinDetroit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    SE, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,336

    My Thoughts

    Here are some of my thoughts on the CADL Lawsuit and other assorted items (some or all of this you probably already know). I cannot believe the absolute BS in the lawsuit, I am pissed off!

    1. I have read through some of the Complaint and Ex-Parte TRO. What the hell were they smoking when they wrote this up? Did the Ann Arbor Hash Bash move to Lansing/Ingham County without Media Coverage??? I know, I know, back on the subject at hand.

    2. The CADL Press Release is incorrect and does not match the terms of the Signed Ex-Parte TRO (page 29), but does match the Ex-Parte Emergency Motion for TRO (Page 23). These inconsistencies should be brought up in the Responses to the TRO and the Complaint.

    3. The CADL Mission Statements have clearly been violated during the past few weeks (http://cadl.org/about). By this TRO, they are definitely not "Community-based services and collections accessible to all", and by their actions of security following around OC'ers essentially harassing them, they are definitely not providing "Excellence in patron service".

    4. Their Weapons Policy under #3 is not specific enough as to what is allowable and therefore cannot be followed by library patrons (http://cadl.org/about/policy/policy-SER103.pdf). This clearly needs to be addressed in the Responses.

    5. Under their Code of Conduct, I believe that the ACLU might be interested in the following: "15. People may not solicit or beg in the library." I believe that Royal Oak just had some contact about this very same item.

    6. Under their Code of Conduct, I believe that the following would be against MI Constitution Article I Section 11: "19. Patrons must provide identification when requested by library staff."

    7. They believe that they are an authority and not subject to preemption since authorities are not specifically included in MCL 123.1101. The counter to that is that they are compromised of 2 entities that fall under the definition of local unit of government under MCL 123.1101 and the URBAN COOPERATION ACT OF 1967 (Act 7 of 1967) clearly defines the 2 entities and the authority as Public Agencies in MCL 124.502 (http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-124-502) and they may only exercise "any power, privilege, or authority that the agencies share in common and that each might exercise separately" according to MCL 124-504 (http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-124-504). The only minor "gotcha" here may be MCL 124.503 (http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-124-503), but each separate municipalities' libraries would be adopting "bylaws and regulations governing the board and the library" coming under preemption in MCL 123.1102 and therefore MCL 124-504 would not stop that authority from being exercised, only that they cannot regulate certain items such as FIREARMS. If they could regulate rights, then no RIGHTS are safe within the walls of the CADL.

    8. The TRO and Compliant encompass actions to restrict and/or eliminate the following RIGHTS of specific persons: US Constitution 1A and MI Constitution Article 1 Section 5 for RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION (carrying a firearm openly can be construed as a Political Statement) and US Constitution 2A and MI Constitution Article 1 Section 6 for the RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS.

    9. The TRO and Compliant encompass actions to restrict rights only of specific persons belonging to or affiliated with MOC, who have not been charged with nor convicted of any crime under Due Process of Law. This would create a class of persons that can Open Carry at CADL Locations as long as they are not affiliated with MOC. This would be a violation of Equal Protection Under Law based upon US Constitution 14A and MI Constitution Article 1 Section 2.

    10. The TRO and Compliant claim persons are carrying unlawfully, carrying improperly, and are trespassing. Yet, the Lansing Police Department will refuse to respond to remove them from the premises. The statements are incongruous and the CADL should be "called onto the carpet" to answer questions on these. I would guess the entire District Library Board and the Library Director should be deposed and called to the stand to highlight their stupidity.

    11. Within the TRO and Compliant, the District Library Board claims to have the authority under law to enact regulations concerning carry of firearms while at the same time claiming they have no adequate remedy at law from stopping people from carrying firearms. Priceless! Again, call them onto the carpet!

    12. The statements within the TRO and Compliant regarding MOC Members being a danger carrying their firearms are not supported by any fact nor by any past incident within CADL. Statements like "accidental discharge" occurring with holstered firearms really takes the cake!

    13. Denial of a Person's Rights does not cause them harm? Unbelievable!!!

    I think that is enough for now...

  21. #21
    Regular Member DanM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    West Bloomfield, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,937
    Quote Originally Posted by lockman View Post
    And what effect does this have on people not members of MOB and without knowledge of MOB decide to carry anyway?
    The TRO specifies who it applies to, and there are a lot of open carriers outside of those boundaries that the TRO is not legally binding upon.

    That being said, that would not prevent CADL from calling the police on *anyone* open carrying, the police citing you for trespass, and when you protest that you are not one of the defendants in this TRO, the police tell you to "tell it to the judge".

    Therefore, if you are not subject to this TRO and you want to open carry, be prepared to possibly be charged with trespass and take time off of work and spend the money to try and get the charge dismissed in court or yourself acquitted by a jury or accept a plea deal because you have neither the time or the money to put up a legal fight.

    I am not a lawyer. Consult your attorney on everything I just said.

    The above possibly gives control of legal processes to your opponents.

    Or, follow the very good suggestion that has been put out there many times before: keep control of legal processes, and do not give others control of the legal process. You keep control of the legal process by not going to this library, seeing if the TRO is overturned, and, if it isn't, acting as an individual or joining others in a civil suit against this library to get their illegal rules overturned.

    I recommend the latter course (keep control of the legal process).
    "The principle of self-defense, even involving weapons and bloodshed, has never been condemned, even by Gandhi . . ."--Dr. Martin Luther King Jr

    “He who cannot protect himself or his nearest and dearest or their honor by non-violently facing death, may and ought to do so by violently dealing with the oppressor. He who can do neither of the two is a burden.”--M. K. Gandhi

    "First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." --M. K. Gandhi

  22. #22
    Regular Member PDinDetroit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    SE, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,336
    Quote Originally Posted by DanM View Post
    The TRO specifies who it applies to, and there are a lot of open carriers outside of those boundaries that the TRO is not legally binding upon.

    That being said, that would not prevent CADL from calling the police on *anyone* open carrying, the police citing you for trespass, and when you protest that you are not one of the defendants in this TRO, the police tell you to "tell it to the judge".

    Therefore, if you are not subject to this TRO and you want to open carry, be prepared to possibly be charged with trespass and take time off of work and spend the money to try and get the charge dismissed in court or yourself acquitted by a jury or accept a plea deal because you have neither the time or the money to put up a legal fight.

    I am not a lawyer. Consult your attorney on everything I just said.

    The above possibly gives control of legal processes to your opponents.

    Or, follow the very good suggestion that has been put out there many times before: keep control of legal processes, and do not give others control of the legal process. You keep control of the legal process by not going to this library, seeing if the TRO is overturned, and, if it isn't, acting as an individual or joining others in a civil suit against this library to get their illegal rules overturned.

    I recommend the latter course (keep control of the legal process).
    IANAL! IMO!

    In the TRO, the Lansing Police refused to respond to trespass for persons Openly Carrying Pistols in Holsters on the basis of violating CADL Weapons Policy.

    What they would hit you with is Contempt of Court for violating the TRO. You would then have to prove in court you are not an MOC Member or affiliated in any way.

  23. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    Actually, I could prove that.

    When the smoke clears, is there a way to sue the court who issued the illegal TRO based on deprivation of rights? And the library with the same allegations?

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Eastpointe, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,440
    Quote Originally Posted by stainless1911 View Post
    Actually, I could prove that.

    When the smoke clears, is there a way to sue the court who issued the illegal TRO based on deprivation of rights? And the library with the same allegations?
    How about we all stay focused on the hugely important case in front of us. Any talk about suing courts and libraries is nothing more than a distraction at this point.

  25. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    Fair enough, I just wondered if it could be done, considering they are both .gov.

Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •