|
The law is very technical. Semantics are a very important element of any discussion of the law. Any attorney can tell you that an "and" means a big difference than an "or."
Example #1:
element 1. blah blah blah; and
element 2. blah blah blah
Example #2:
element 1. blah blah blah; or
element 2. blah blah blah
In the first example a person would have to be guilty of element 1 AND element 2. In the second example the person would only have to meet element 1 OR element 2. They would not have to do both.
While this may seem off topic, it is to emphasize a point. Often, statutes have "terms of art" or language which requires legal training to understand. Therefore, we often have posts on these legal forums which misinterpret or miscommunicate what the the law states. It is important to realize that when you pass off your opinion as fact you are doing a disservice to those who may rely upon your statements.
I certainly understand people's willingness to want to help people understand these complex topics. And directing people to the appropriate statutes or cases is definitely a good start. However, unless one understands how to brief a case or knows what to look for when analyzing a case or statute, it might be best to refrain from offering an opinion about what the case or statute means. Every attorney looks beyond the language of statutes to see how courts have interpreted those statutes. And sometimes even judges disagree about what a statute actually means. (If you want a headache, research the legislative history of a statute).
That being said. What is my advice? Discourage and disallow such discussions. Remove frequent violators. At the very least, you would be able to show a "good faith" effort to preventing any illegal activity upon your MUD.
|