-
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.
CADL v MOC court case transcripts
- Thread starter scot623
- Start date
smellslikemichigan
Campaign Veteran
what i have gathered from this is that we have a world class legal team. the guys are brilliant and well-spoken.
scot623
Regular Member
2 very telling portions of the transcripts. Kudos to our lawyer for getting these question answered.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dean Questions, Lance Answers
Q. Well, actually I'm going to move on. Mr. Werner, you mentioned that concealed carry is permitted in the library?
A. Yes.
Q. Is concealed carry permitted in schools?
A. No.
Q. Now, you signed an affidavit in this case. You caused this action to be brought in this court. You're aware that you are seeking for the Court to declare that the CADL facilities are school property, are you not?
A. Yes.
Q. Well, if they are declared school property ‐‐
A. There will be no concealed carry at CADL.
Q. So isn't it your ‐‐ your objective isn't really a concern about open carry but it's a concern about anybody who has a firearm in CADL facilities?
A. My concern is about safety and it's about open carry in the library. That's why we're here today.
Q. Mr. Werner, is it your goal to prohibit those who are concealed pistol licensees from entering CADL facilities with firearms?
A. I guess so. I guess ‐‐ I guess that's where we're at, yes.
Q. So if it was up to you, nobody with a firearm would set foot in the CADL facilities?
A. Yep.
Q. Is there any other places you think that nobody should go with a firearm?
Second question and answer...
Q. Okay. Let me ask you this, I think you mentioned one of the reasons why you were providing shadow security is because you don't know how patrons will react?
A. That's correct.
Q. Well, what is it you're presuming will happen with patrons that causes some concern?
A. I'm concerned that a patron will attack one of the guys with the guns.
Q. So you're concerned ‐‐ I mean, you're a lawyer. Wouldn't that be an assault or a battery on the part of the patron?
A. I'm concerned that the patron will attack the person with the gun and the person with the gun will shoot the patron.
Q. I'm trying to understand why you believe the person ‐‐ the first patron, the one that's not carrying a firearm, or presumably isn't carrying a firearm, would be attacking someone with a gun?
A. We have a lot of ‐‐ well, we have some patrons that have issues with their personality that make them highly unpredictable and it's hard to tell how they're going to react. It could be a concerned parent. I don't know. We definitely have patrons with some personality issues, though.
Q. Well, let's get into that. When you say they have personality issues, is that one of the reasons you provide security at the CADL facilities because some of the patrons have personality issues?
A. I provide security at the CADL facility to maintain a safe environment for everybody. It's not specifically for any one reason. It's just to maintain a safe environment for everyone.
Q. Is that one of the reasons?
A. Yeah. I think it is a reason. It's good to have people on hand.
Q. So you have security there because some of the patrons who may be unarmed have some personalty issues, is what you're saying?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. And you also mentioned one of the other reasons that you provide shadow security because you don't know how the employees will react.
A. That's right.
Q. Well, do you have concerns? I mean, have you ever talked to your employees and said, if a man comes in with a gun don't tackle him?
A. My employees are terrified and it's hard to say. I've talked to them, yes, but it's hard to figure out how they're going to react in a situation. I had ‐‐ like I said, I had an employee that had a melt down. I don't know how people are going to react. They know what's appropriate and they need to stay away, but, again, you put somebody in a tense situation, it's hard to tell how they're going to react.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dean Questions, Lance Answers
Q. Well, actually I'm going to move on. Mr. Werner, you mentioned that concealed carry is permitted in the library?
A. Yes.
Q. Is concealed carry permitted in schools?
A. No.
Q. Now, you signed an affidavit in this case. You caused this action to be brought in this court. You're aware that you are seeking for the Court to declare that the CADL facilities are school property, are you not?
A. Yes.
Q. Well, if they are declared school property ‐‐
A. There will be no concealed carry at CADL.
Q. So isn't it your ‐‐ your objective isn't really a concern about open carry but it's a concern about anybody who has a firearm in CADL facilities?
A. My concern is about safety and it's about open carry in the library. That's why we're here today.
Q. Mr. Werner, is it your goal to prohibit those who are concealed pistol licensees from entering CADL facilities with firearms?
A. I guess so. I guess ‐‐ I guess that's where we're at, yes.
Q. So if it was up to you, nobody with a firearm would set foot in the CADL facilities?
A. Yep.
Q. Is there any other places you think that nobody should go with a firearm?
Second question and answer...
Q. Okay. Let me ask you this, I think you mentioned one of the reasons why you were providing shadow security is because you don't know how patrons will react?
A. That's correct.
Q. Well, what is it you're presuming will happen with patrons that causes some concern?
A. I'm concerned that a patron will attack one of the guys with the guns.
Q. So you're concerned ‐‐ I mean, you're a lawyer. Wouldn't that be an assault or a battery on the part of the patron?
A. I'm concerned that the patron will attack the person with the gun and the person with the gun will shoot the patron.
Q. I'm trying to understand why you believe the person ‐‐ the first patron, the one that's not carrying a firearm, or presumably isn't carrying a firearm, would be attacking someone with a gun?
A. We have a lot of ‐‐ well, we have some patrons that have issues with their personality that make them highly unpredictable and it's hard to tell how they're going to react. It could be a concerned parent. I don't know. We definitely have patrons with some personality issues, though.
Q. Well, let's get into that. When you say they have personality issues, is that one of the reasons you provide security at the CADL facilities because some of the patrons have personality issues?
A. I provide security at the CADL facility to maintain a safe environment for everybody. It's not specifically for any one reason. It's just to maintain a safe environment for everyone.
Q. Is that one of the reasons?
A. Yeah. I think it is a reason. It's good to have people on hand.
Q. So you have security there because some of the patrons who may be unarmed have some personalty issues, is what you're saying?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. And you also mentioned one of the other reasons that you provide shadow security because you don't know how the employees will react.
A. That's right.
Q. Well, do you have concerns? I mean, have you ever talked to your employees and said, if a man comes in with a gun don't tackle him?
A. My employees are terrified and it's hard to say. I've talked to them, yes, but it's hard to figure out how they're going to react in a situation. I had ‐‐ like I said, I had an employee that had a melt down. I don't know how people are going to react. They know what's appropriate and they need to stay away, but, again, you put somebody in a tense situation, it's hard to tell how they're going to react.
detroit_fan
Regular Member
I can't wait for the appeal
smellslikemichigan
Campaign Veteran
the court has to make the final decision before we can appeal
TheQ
Regular Member
We have a judicial system that gives us an "impartial judge". We might win in the circuit court (yeah right)
WARCHILD
Regular Member
Please don't refer to it as the "judicial" system.
There has been little justice for the common man for many years. That's why I only refer to it as the "legal" system; little justice or ethics...but..."it's legal".
stainless1911
Banned
Glock9mmOldStyle
Campaign Veteran
I don't know about you but I'm mad as hell & I'm not going to take this crap any more
I read the complete transcript & it is clear this is a Kangaroo trial with a judge who doesn't give a damn about what the law says. I hope after a judges review panel goes through her actions in this case, that she is removed from the bench and barred from practicing law in MI FOREVER! See folks this is how fascists work, if we don't like the laws passed by the elected officials of the "little people" we just find a corrupt judge and under-mine the people's law and replace it with our own....he he he he....how dare the serfs expect us to obey their laws!
I don't know about you but I'm mad as hell & I'm not going to take this crap any more!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGIY5Vyj4YM
I read the complete transcript & it is clear this is a Kangaroo trial with a judge who doesn't give a damn about what the law says. I hope after a judges review panel goes through her actions in this case, that she is removed from the bench and barred from practicing law in MI FOREVER! See folks this is how fascists work, if we don't like the laws passed by the elected officials of the "little people" we just find a corrupt judge and under-mine the people's law and replace it with our own....he he he he....how dare the serfs expect us to obey their laws!
I don't know about you but I'm mad as hell & I'm not going to take this crap any more!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGIY5Vyj4YM
Last edited:
stainless1911
Banned
At least they are consistent.
Glock9mmOldStyle
Campaign Veteran
Sadly Q,
WARCHILD is spot on here.
The more I see of our legal system the more I become convinced it is an ILLEGAL system designed to keep the commoners in their place while furthering agendas of the elites & power mongers... my heart breaks for the lack of liberty in what was once the greatest beacon of freedom for the world to see: The United States of America.
Last edited:
stainless1911
Banned
The Court :
"There's no reason to
2 carry a weapon in the library. Hopefully ‐‐
3 hopefully we don't have another 9/11. We don't
4 need ‐‐ we don't have terrorism in our libraries.
5 Maybe there will come a time in this country we need
6 weapons in a library and I'll be singing a different
7 tune."
Bill of rights, or bill of needs?
"There's no reason to
2 carry a weapon in the library. Hopefully ‐‐
3 hopefully we don't have another 9/11. We don't
4 need ‐‐ we don't have terrorism in our libraries.
5 Maybe there will come a time in this country we need
6 weapons in a library and I'll be singing a different
7 tune."
Bill of rights, or bill of needs?
Last edited:
detroit_fan
Regular Member
Is there really any doubt as to how it is going to play out at this level?
smellslikemichigan
Campaign Veteran
one can only hope that this activist judge has a little more time to do her homework than she did before the first hearing. i'm not holding my breath though.
one thing... it's abundantly clear that warner is extremely ignorant of the difference between MOC and OCDO and also of forums and blogs.
I usually call it the "just-us" system.
detroit_fan
Regular Member
I'm with you, on both parts.
lapeer20m
Regular Member
It is amazing how a "library law specialist" with a masters degree can be so ignorant when it comes to firearm law in relation to libraries.
Most of the 20 or so open carry advocates that were in attendance are better versed in gun law than either Mr Werner or the Judge.
There was a collective sigh when the judge said this:
Most of the 20 or so open carry advocates that were in attendance are better versed in gun law than either Mr Werner or the Judge.
There was a collective sigh when the judge said this:
Last edited:
Haman J.T.
New member
If we do get a judge without an unconstitutional agenda and understands the law and our rights,no problem! Judges and lawyers are still people,able to mess up,according to what they understand.CADL's side and the judge don't understand the law according to their testimony.We'll just have to keep going until we get someone that does know and understand the law.Just because they went to school doesn't mean they "Get It".Thats why discussions in court are called "Arguments" and the more vague,complicated the laws are written the more arguing there's going to be! Thats where we are at! The people are responsible for electing boobs,who write complicated and vague laws,that have to be argued about in court by some(CADL,the judge) that don't GET IT!
stainless1911
Banned
Unless he's saving it for later, I dont know why Dean didn't say something, I know he knows, I've spoken to him about this specific part of the law myself.
autosurgeon
Regular Member
When a judge makes a ruling that is not the time to argue...