• 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.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • 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.

WASH, RINSE, REPEAT

Status
Not open for further replies.

lil_freak_66

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2008
Messages
1,799
Location
Mason, Michigan
imported post

iirc,if you are part of that conversation you can record it.

not sure about the difference between private and public conversations,but imo a LEO recording you in a detainment is the same as you recording the LEO in that same detainment.
 

Burlyman78

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2010
Messages
16
Location
, ,
imported post

Michigan

Any person who willfully uses any device to overhear or record a conversation without the consent of all parties is guilty of illegal eavesdropping, whether or not they were present for the conversation. Illegal eavesdropping can be punished as a felony carrying a jail term of up to two years and a fine of up to $2,000. Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.539c.

In addition, any individual who divulges information he knows, or reasonably should know, was obtained through illegal eavesdropping is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for up to two years and a fine of up to $2,000. Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.539e. Civil liability for actual and punitive damages also are sanctioned. Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.539h.

The eavesdropping statute has been interpreted by one court as applying only to situations in which a third party has intercepted a communication. This interpretation allows a participant in a conversation to record that conversation without the permission of other parties. Sullivan v. Gray, 324 N.W.2d 58 (Mich. Ct. App. 1982).

The state Supreme Court stated in a July 1999 ruling that a participant in a conversation “may not unilaterally nullify other participants’ expectations of privacy by secretly broadcasting the conversation” and that the overriding inquiry should be whether the parties “intended and reasonably expected that the conversation was private.” Therefore, it is likely that a recording party may not broadcast a recorded conversation without the consent of all parties. Dickerson v. Raphael, 601 N.W.2d 108 (Mich. 1999).

It is a felony to observe, photograph or eavesdrop on a person in a private place without the person’s consent. Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.539d. A private place is a place where one may reasonably expect to be safe from intrusion or surveillance, but not a place where the public has access. Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.539a.

Additionally, the Court of Appeals of Michigan held in 2006 that neither the secretary to a school district superintendent who allegedly circulated a facsimile sent to the superintendent, nor those who saw the facsimile, were liable under the state eavesdropping statute, since the facsimile machine was not used to record or access the messages sent to the superintendent. Vollmar v. Laura, 2006 WL 1008995 (Mich. Ct. App. 2006) (Unreported).

Source: http://www.rcfp.org/taping/states/michigan.html
 

SpringerXDacp

New member
Joined
May 12, 2006
Messages
3,341
Location
Burton, Michigan
imported post

Michigan is a 1-party State where, for example, when you are pulled over for defective equipment or stopped/detained in Wally World for carrying. There is no expectations of privacy in both examples. As long as you gave yourself permission to record audio and/or visual in both cases, you are not in violation. Just my opinion.
 

Rich3077

New member
Joined
Apr 19, 2010
Messages
4
Location
, ,
imported post

SpringerXDacp wrote:
Michigan is a 1-party State where, for example, when you are pulled over for defective equipment or stopped/detained in Wally World for carrying. There is no expectations of privacy in both examples. As long as you gave yourself permission to record audio and/or visual in both cases, you are not in violation. Just my opinion.
I have studied Michigan recording laws and found the above to be true. I have recorded an attorney and used it against her in federal court. I have also recorded my employer and used it to my advantage.

In almost all cases there is no expectation of privacy... unless of course you where talking to a freind/family member. in ALL business calls no expectation of privacy is observed. This means that you can record even the phone call.

Peace
Rich
 

autosurgeon

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
3,831
Location
Lawrence, Michigan, United States
I find it Sad that Ghostrider feels the need to remove a perfectly useful post due to his issues with MOC of which this board has nothing to do... Do note he removed it from the MOC forum as well.

In light of this development I feel there is far more going on then an issue with MOC.
 
Last edited:

DrTodd

Michigan Moderator
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,272
Location
Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
I find it Sad that Ghostrider feels the need to remove a perfectly useful post due to his issues with MOC of which this board has nothing to do... Do note he removed it from the MOC forum as well.

In light of this development I feel there is far more going on then an issue with MOC.

Definitely different than what I would expect... not saying he is (or is not) justified, as the case may be....just unexpected. Hmmm.
 

stainless1911

Banned
Joined
Dec 19, 2009
Messages
8,855
Location
Davisburg, Michigan, United States
I doubt it. He went off on me the other day when I tried to get him to chill out a bit. I knew his post wasnt towards me at first, but he seemed to think that I thought it was. I just diddnt want any more division than there is within the movement. The pecking order, politics, posturing, us (ocdo) vs. them (moc, teamspeak, whatever) , the ignore list and so on.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Just start a new thread recreating the info; get a moderator to delete this one.

The internet may have cached the page. My google-fu is not up to figuring out how to find it, though. Maybe somebody else can.
 
Last edited:

PDinDetroit

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2009
Messages
2,328
Location
SE, Michigan, USA

Yes, that site appears to be where some are going now after having an issue with OCDO and MOC. There is a TeamSpeak site that has been posted here, one that is actually the UFO TeamSpeak "Server". I am not sure that the site has completely gotten "off the ground" and there appears to be some political issues that occurred as well with persons resigning from positions.

On this TeamSpeak yesterday, ghostrider asked me if a thread was deleted could an administrator recover it. I now understand the context of the question.

I firmly believe that we need to stand together as Firearm Owners and not work against one another.
 

Michigun

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2010
Messages
139
Location
Michigan
for the google cache, type this in google's main page:

Code:
wash rinse site:forum.opencarry.org

results will change over time but for now i see the second result comes up with the cached link after it and it shows the complete post.
 

autosurgeon

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 29, 2008
Messages
3,831
Location
Lawrence, Michigan, United States
Per my discussions via email with Ghostrider UFO is the only location that has permission to host Wash Rinse Repeat at this time.

Lets respect that. However I do not see any reason the link to UFO is a problem.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
for the google cache, type this in google's main page:

Code:
wash rinse site:forum.opencarry.org

results will change over time but for now i see the second result comes up with the cached link after it and it shows the complete post.

Great! Thanks!

OK guys. The direct link is below.

Which OCDO member from Michigan will post the information into a new thread?

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:dRmktvHho2sJ:forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php%3F50010-WASH-RINSE-REPEAT+wash+rinse+site:forum.opencarry.org&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top