| Author | Post |
|---|
Mike
Super Moderator
|
Posted: Sat Jul 5th, 2008 03:56 am |
|
Interesting that all of a sudden this year, just like Connecticut authorities clarifying that open carry is legal in Connecticut, Michigan authorities have done same:
"Open carry of firearms
Subject to MCL 750.234d, it is legal to carry a visible pistol in public."
Source: Michigan State Police Legal Update No. 66 (June 16, 2008), available at http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/MSP_Legal_Update_No._66_238184_7.pdf.
|
UTOC-45-44
Regular Member
| Joined: | Thu Feb 22nd, 2007 |
| Location: | Morgan, Utah USA |
| Posts: | 2582 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 5th, 2008 04:27 am |
|
Mike wrote: Interesting that all of a sudden this year, just like Connecticut authorities clarifying that open carry is legal in Connecticut, Michigan authorities have done same:
"Open carry of firearms
Subject to MCL 750.234d, it is legal to carry a visible pistol in public."
Source: Michigan State Police Legal Update No. 66 (June 16, 2008), available at http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/MSP_Legal_Update_No._66_238184_7.pdf.
I just don't like this part of the Document.
"Without a CPL, a non-resident may not have a pistol in Michigan. "
|
Mike
Super Moderator
|
Posted: Sat Jul 5th, 2008 09:08 am |
|
UTOC-45-44 wrote: I just don't like this part of the Document.
"Without a CPL, a non-resident may not have a pistol in Michigan. "
All you have to do is hold a gun carry permit from your home state.
|
adam40cal
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jul 5th, 2008 12:24 pm |
|
I give the Michigan State Police credit they've always been good about updating their websites to inform police of legal issues.
|
warlockmatized
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jul 5th, 2008 06:19 pm |
|
EXCELLENT post
A+ to the MSP for keeping up to date.
|
DickTracy1953
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jul 5th, 2008 06:59 pm |
|
I never knew that a non resident could not have a sidearm in Michigan without having a carry permit from his home state. My friend Col. Randy always brings at least one pistol with him when he visits. Now I guess I'd best tell him the skinny.
|
Mike
Super Moderator
|
Posted: Sat Jul 5th, 2008 07:07 pm |
|
DickTracy1953 wrote: I never knew that a non resident could not have a sidearm in Michigan without having a carry permit from his home state. My friend Col. Randy always brings at least one pistol with him when he visits. Now I guess I'd best tell him the skinny.
That is my understanding due to the "safety inspection" (i.e., registration) requirement in Michigan - any expert from Michigan care to chime in with specifics? Like can non-permit holder visiting or moving to Michigan keep the handgun in his home till he gets it safety inspected?
Clearly Heller implies that regulations banning gun possession in one's home are unconstitutional - all state statutes need to be checked and reformed so that, where registration is required, a grace period exists for visitor and new residents.
|
dougwg
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jul 5th, 2008 07:37 pm |
|
Yes, it is ILLEGAL to "bring" a gun across Michigan border with out being a holder of a concealed carry license issued by the persons "home" state.
Assume NOTHING else!
If you are a resident from lets say TX and have a carry permit from a different state, say FL, you CAN NOT carry it into MI. You must have a license from "your state of residence".
Another way is to transfer it through an FFL. But thats a bunch of BS, hoop jumping and paper work.
Like can non-permit holder visiting or moving to Michigan keep the handgun in his home till he gets it safety inspected?
Yes, they can "keep" it at home until he gets it SI. Which I believe should be "immediate". I'm not so sure about the legality's of bringing them into the state while moving here. (who the hell is moving TO Michigan  I was just gunna hang out and shut off the lights after everyone has left)
IANAL and your question, while seeming simple when you wrote it, is far from easy to answer.
some other info - http://www.migunowners.org/forum/showthread.php?t=27257
Last edited on Sat Jul 5th, 2008 07:53 pm by dougwg
|
UTOC-45-44
Regular Member
| Joined: | Thu Feb 22nd, 2007 |
| Location: | Morgan, Utah USA |
| Posts: | 2582 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 5th, 2008 08:27 pm |
|
Mike wrote: UTOC-45-44 wrote: I just don't like this part of the Document.
"Without a CPL, a non-resident may not have a pistol in Michigan. "
All you have to do is hold a gun carry permit from your home state.
But does this not mean that a person CANNOT OC as a right but rather a privilege?
TJ
|
mvpel
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Jul 5th, 2008 11:12 pm |
|
Looks like the "safety inspection" (read "registration") requirement might have been repealed in Michigan, to take effect sometime in the near future if it hasn't already:
http://www.michiganvotes.org/2007-HB-4491
Anyone have any more information about this?
Last edited on Sat Jul 5th, 2008 11:14 pm by mvpel
|
d_clark
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sun Jul 6th, 2008 05:29 pm |
|
mvpel wrote: Looks like the "safety inspection" (read "registration") requirement might have been repealed in Michigan, to take effect sometime in the near future if it hasn't already:
http://www.michiganvotes.org/2007-HB-4491
Anyone have any more information about this?
From House Bill 4491
Enacting section 2. This amendatory act takes effect 180 days after the date it is enacted into law. Enacting section 3. This amendatory act does not take effect unless all of the following bills of the 94th Legislature are enacted into law: (a) Senate Bill No. 370. (b) House Bill No. 4490.
From Senate Bill no. 370:
Received in the House on June 27, 2008, to concur with the Senate-passed version of the bill. Passed in the House (95 to 12) on June 27, 2008
So if I understand this correctly, would take affect 180 days from June 27,2008
|
Mike
Super Moderator
|
Posted: Sun Jul 6th, 2008 05:33 pm |
|
d_clark wrote: mvpel wrote: Looks like the "safety inspection" (read "registration") requirement might have been repealed in Michigan, to take effect sometime in the near future if it hasn't already:
http://www.michiganvotes.org/2007-HB-4491
Anyone have any more information about this?
From House Bill 4491
Enacting section 2. This amendatory act takes effect 180 days after the date it is enacted into law. Enacting section 3. This amendatory act does not take effect unless all of the following bills of the 94th Legislature are enacted into law: (a) Senate Bill No. 370. (b) House Bill No. 4490.
From Senate Bill no. 370:
Received in the House on June 27, 2008, to concur with the Senate-passed version of the bill. Passed in the House (95 to 12) on June 27, 2008
So if I understand this correctly, would take affect 180 days from June 27,2008
I'm totally confused as to what version of what bill passed and what it does so some Michigan expert needs to summaRIZE it in plain English for us.
If the registration scheme is Michigan is repealed, this is great news and can be used as an example to show DC that they need to repeal their scheme and gives support to courts scrutinizing registration schemes as well.
|
dougwg
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sun Jul 6th, 2008 05:45 pm |
|
No Mike, it's not all peaches and cream.
"Look, here is what we gained:
No trip to PD for pistol safety inspection
Misdemeanor, now civil infraction for failure to report purchase
Here is what we lost, gave up.
Express legislative authority for State Police LIEN/centralized pistol database.
Registration burden shifted from seller to purchaser
30 day must carry permit to purchase
Must either mail or vist PD with purchase permit in 10 days.
Must self-report to police lawful constitutional activity--possession of a pistol.
Four copies of permit, not three
Must show CCP to security officers if stopped.
What we gave up has nothing to do with safety or fighting crime--but rather, we increased governmental control over our own lawful activity. Some call this progress.
Here is what I learned:
1) Legislators do not care what you say where key Michigan pro-gun organizations give prior blessing.
2) Key-pro gun organization do not care what you say, unless its consistent with what they already want.
3) Not a single Michigan pro-gun organization that supported these laws, believes for one minute that you or I have a Michgan Constitutional right to bear arms that cannot be balanced by "reasonable legislative restrictions." If they did believe it, they could not have supported these bills.
Here is what I already knew:
What a man sows, he reaps."
|
Mike
Super Moderator
|
Posted: Sun Jul 6th, 2008 06:25 pm |
|
dougwg wrote: No Mike, it's not all peaches and cream.
"Look, here is what we gained:
No trip to PD for pistol safety inspection
Misdemeanor, now civil infraction for failure to report purchase
Here is what we lost, gave up.
Express legislative authority for State Police LIEN/centralized pistol database.
Registration burden shifted from seller to purchaser
30 day must carry permit to purchase
Must either mail or vist PD with purchase permit in 10 days.
Must self-report to police lawful constitutional activity--possession of a pistol.
Four copies of permit, not three
Must show CCP to security officers if stopped.
What we gave up has nothing to do with safety or fighting crime--but rather, we increased governmental control over our own lawful activity. Some call this progress.
Here is what I learned:
1) Legislators do not care what you say where key Michigan pro-gun organizations give prior blessing.
2) Key-pro gun organization do not care what you say, unless its consistent with what they already want.
3) Not a single Michigan pro-gun organization that supported these laws, believes for one minute that you or I have a Michgan Constitutional right to bear arms that cannot be balanced by "reasonable legislative restrictions." If they did believe it, they could not have supported these bills.
Here is what I already knew:
What a man sows, he reaps."
So, I guess a marginally positive net gain by precluding need to physically transport handgun to authorities for "safety inspection"?
DC registration requires physical presentation of firearm - the Michigan move away from that is still a nice thing to point to.
|
lockman
State Researcher
| Joined: | Sat Aug 19th, 2006 |
| Location: | Elgin, Illinois USA |
| Posts: | 638 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 6th, 2008 06:34 pm |
|
What about OC by an Illinois resident? I have a FOID card which shows I have had a criminal background check and am authorized by the state of Illinois to purchase, possess and transport firearms. The only stipulation on my FOID card other than carrying or using firearms unlawfully is "This does not authorize the carrying of a concealed weapon".
As far as OC is concerned, a FOID card does allow open carry in the state of IL except where prohibited by law. Will MI honor it?
Last edited on Sun Jul 6th, 2008 06:35 pm by lockman
|
dougwg
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sun Jul 6th, 2008 07:34 pm |
|
NO
FOID is really nothing more than a permission slip. Which is BS.
We don't even need one in Michigan.
You MUST have a concealed carry permit issued by your state of residence!
I can't be MORE clear than that.
|
lockman
State Researcher
| Joined: | Sat Aug 19th, 2006 |
| Location: | Elgin, Illinois USA |
| Posts: | 638 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 6th, 2008 11:41 pm |
|
Ok just so this is crystal.
If you live in Michigan you do not need a CPL to open carry?
If you do not live in Michigan you need a CPL from your home state to open carry in Michigan?
|
dougwg
Regular Member
|
Posted: Mon Jul 7th, 2008 12:06 am |
|
lockman wrote: Ok just so this is crystal.
If you live in Michigan you do not need a CPL to open carry?
Correct
If you do not live in Michigan you need a CPL from your home state to open carry in Michigan?"
I see no alternative.
|
vmaxanarchist
Activist Member
| Joined: | Sat Mar 24th, 2007 |
| Location: | Naperville, Il |
| Posts: | 103 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 7th, 2008 03:56 am |
|
lockman wrote: What about OC by an Illinois resident? I have a FOID card which shows I have had a criminal background check and am authorized by the state of Illinois to purchase, possess and transport firearms. The only stipulation on my FOID card other than carrying or using firearms unlawfully is "This does not authorize the carrying of a concealed weapon".
As far as OC is concerned, a FOID card does allow open carry in the state of IL except where prohibited by law. Will MI honor it?
Get a CC permit from any other state. Michigan law allows the possession of a handgun by a U.S. citizen with a CC permit from any state. You can then OC. Also you would be exempt from the pistol free zones.
The CC law requires the permit to be from your own state. So, no CC and you can only transport in a car under the same manner with a legal reason as a resident of MI who does not have a CC permit.
I have posted the pertinent laws on other previous posts.
|
Mike
Super Moderator
|
Posted: Mon Jul 7th, 2008 05:08 am |
|
vmaxanarchist wrote: lockman wrote: What about OC by an Illinois resident? I have a FOID card which shows I have had a criminal background check and am authorized by the state of Illinois to purchase, possess and transport firearms. The only stipulation on my FOID card other than carrying or using firearms unlawfully is "This does not authorize the carrying of a concealed weapon".
As far as OC is concerned, a FOID card does allow open carry in the state of IL except where prohibited by law. Will MI honor it?
Get a CC permit from any other state. Michigan law allows the possession of a handgun by a U.S. citizen with a CC permit from any state. You can then OC. Also you would be exempt from the pistol free zones.
The CC law requires the permit to be from your own state.
A great reason for folks with nonres FL CHPs to sue to quash this violation of the privileges and immunities clause.
|
Current time is 12:54 pm | Page: 1 2 3   |
|
