|
|
|
OpenCarry.org - Discussion Forum > Stories From The States > Michigan > Michigan State Police Legal Update 16 June 08: OC is legal!
|
|
||
| OpenCarry.org - Discussion Forum > Stories From The States > Michigan > Michigan State Police Legal Update 16 June 08: OC is legal!
|
|||
| Moderated by: jpierce | ||
| Author | Post | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Mike Super Moderator
|
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 
|
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: 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
|
UTOC-45-44 wrote: I just don't like this part of the Document. All you have to do is hold a gun carry permit from your home state. |
|||||||||
|
adam40cal Regular Member 
|
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 
|
EXCELLENT post A+ to the MSP for keeping up to date. |
|||||||||
|
DickTracy1953 Regular Member 
|
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
|
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 
|
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
|
Mike wrote: UTOC-45-44 wrote:I just don't like this part of the Document. But does this not mean that a person CANNOT OC as a right but rather a privilege? TJ |
|||||||||
|
mvpel Regular Member
|
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
|
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: 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
|
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: 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
|
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
|
dougwg wrote: No Mike, it's not all peaches and cream. 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 
|
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
|
NO FOID is really nothing more than a permission slip. Which is BS. We don't even need one in Michigan. I can't be MORE clear than that.You MUST have a concealed carry permit issued by your state of residence! |
|||||||||
|
lockman State Researcher
|
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
|
lockman wrote: Ok just so this is crystal. |
|||||||||
|
vmaxanarchist Activist Member
|
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". 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
|
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". A great reason for folks with nonres FL CHPs to sue to quash this violation of the privileges and immunities clause. |
|||||||||
|
SpringerXDacp Regular Member 
|
vmaxanarchist wrote: SNIP I disagree. There are only 2 ways for a non-resident to possess/use a handgun in Michigan, whether you OC or CC: 1) You must have a permit/license from your state of residence. 2) You are relocating/moving to the State of Michigan, then see, per MCRGO: 10. I have just moved to Michigan from another state. How much time do I have to register my pistols? MCL 28.422 & MCL 28.429 Upon establishing legal residency, you should immediately contact your local law enforcement agency, pass the basic safety questionnaire, and complete both a License to Purchase and Safety Inspection Certificate. |
|||||||||
|
Venator Regular Member 
|
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". This is not clear. The law states any CPL from any state. True. But an AG opinion has stated it must be from your home state. You could test it, which I think someone did and was convicted??? I'm not sure on this. But the State police are telling us it must be from your home state. On another thread I posted that a bill is introduced to recognize any non-resident that can posses a handgun in their home state to posses it in Michigan. Here is the link to the bill, with the gist of it below. http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2007-2008/billintroduced/House/pdf/2008-HIB-5985.pdf (1) Sections 2 an 1d 9 do not apply to any of the following: (J) A NONRESIDENT WHO IS LICENSED TO CARRY, POSSESS, USE, AND TRANSPORT A PISTOL IN ANOTHER STATE OR WHO IS EXEMPT FROM LICENSURE IN THAT OTHER STATE, WHO CARRIES, POSSESSES, USES, OR TRANSPORTS A PISTOL IN THIS STATE FOR A PERIOD NOT TO EXCEED 30 DAYS. AS USED IN IN THIS SUBDIVISION, "NONRESIDENT" MEANS AN INDIVIDUAL WHO IS A LAWFUL RESIDENT OF ANOTHER STATE, THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, OR A TERRITORY OR POSSESSION OF THE UNITED STATES. |
|||||||||
|
SpringerXDacp Regular Member
|
Venator wrote: SNIP I still read this as the non-resident of Michigan is still required to possess a permit/license from their residential state. I'm not sure about this at all. May need MSP and AG opinion. Last edited on Mon Jul 7th, 2008 08:16 pm by SpringerXDacp |
|||||||||
|
mvpel Regular Member
|
The Second Amendment is an individual right now, so Michigan's laws to the contrary regarding possession of lawfully-owned firearms are effectively null and void. But then, in New Hampshire, I'm exempt from licensure to possess, use, and transport, and exempt from licensure to carry openly, so does that count? |
|||||||||
|
vmaxanarchist Activist Member
|
Venator wrote: 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". Can you post the AG opinion? I haven't seen one that says the CC permit exemption for possesion only applies to resident permits. Also who was this someone? Here is the exemption. "28.432 Inapplicability of MCL 28.422 and 28.429; citation as “Janet Kukuk act”. Sec. 12. (1) Sections 2 and 9 do not apply to any of the following: (f) A United States citizen holding a license to carry a pistol concealed upon his or her person issued by another state." I still do not see how this says the permit must be from the non-residents own state. I think the confusion comes from the assumption that the holder of a CC permit would be using it to CC and thus not be exempt from the CC law. However possesion and thus OC is expressly legal. Last edited on Tue Jul 8th, 2008 06:08 am by vmaxanarchist |
|||||||||
|
Mike Super Moderator
|
vmaxanarchist wrote: Can you post the AG opinion? I haven't seen one that says the CC permit exemption for possesion only applies to resident permits. Also who was this someone? I think you are on to somthing as for OCing with nonres permit - besides, the nonres discrimination is unconstitutional under the priv. and Imm. clause - law suit in Georgia takibng this on in part right now. |
|||||||||
|
Venator Regular Member
|
vmaxanarchist wrote: Venator wrote: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". It wasn't an AG opinion and after talking with the MSP I was referred to MCL 28.432a (h) which states exemptions to obtaining a CPL. This states a CPL must be from your home state to be recognized in Michigan. This is all I have found at this time. FIREARMS (EXCERPT) Act 372 of 1927 28.432a Persons to whom requirements inapplicable; "local corrections officer" defined. Sec. 12a. (1) The requirements of this act for obtaining a license to carry a concealed pistol do not apply to any of the following: (a) A peace officer of a duly authorized police agency of the United States or of this state or a political subdivision of this state, who is regularly employed and paid by the United States or this state or a subdivision of this state, except a township constable. (b) A constable who is trained and certified under the commission on law enforcement standards act, 1965 PA 203, MCL 28.601 to 28.616, while engaged in his or her official duties or going to or coming from his or her official duties, and who is regularly employed and paid by a political subdivision of this state. (c) A person regularly employed by the department of corrections and authorized in writing by the director of the department of corrections to carry a concealed pistol during the performance of his or her duties or while going to or returning from his or her duties. (d) A person regularly employed as a local corrections officer by a county sheriff, who is trained in the use of force and is authorized in writing by the county sheriff to carry a concealed pistol during the performance of his or her duties. (e) A person regularly employed in a city jail or lockup who has custody of persons detained or incarcerated in the jail or lockup, is trained in the use of force, and is authorized in writing by the chief of police or the county sheriff to carry a concealed pistol during the performance of his or her duties. (f) A member of the United States army, air force, navy, or marine corps while carrying a concealed pistol in the line of duty. (g) A member of the national guard, armed forces reserves, or other duly authorized military organization while on duty or drill or while going to or returning from his or her place of assembly or practice or while carrying a concealed pistol for purposes of that military organization. (h) A resident of another state who is licensed by that state to carry a concealed pistol. (i) The regular and ordinary transportation of a pistol as merchandise by an authorized agent of a person licensed to manufacture firearms. (j) A person while carrying a pistol unloaded in a wrapper or container in the trunk of his or her vehicle or, if the vehicle does not have a trunk, from transporting that pistol unloaded in a locked compartment or container that is separated from the ammunition for that pistol from the place of purchase to his or her home or place of business or to a place of repair or back to his or her home or place of business, or in moving goods from 1 place of abode or business to another place of abode or business. (k) A peace officer or law enforcement officer from Canada. (2) As used in this act, "local corrections officer" means that term as defined in section 2 of the local corrections officers training act, 2003 PA 125, MCL 791.532. History: Add. 1964, Act 216, Eff. Aug. 28, 1964 ;-- Am. 1976, Act 102, Imd. Eff. Apr. 27, 1976 ;-- Am. 1978, Act 282, Imd. Eff. July 6, 1978 ;-- Am. 1978, Act 519, Imd. Eff. Dec. 19, 1978 ;-- Am. 2000, Act 381, Eff. July 1, 2001 ;-- Am. 2002, Act 719, Eff. July 1, 2003 ;-- Am. 2006, Act 559, Imd. Eff. Dec. 29, 2006 Popular Name: CCW Popular Name: Concealed Weapons Popular Name: Right to Carry Popular Name: Shall Issue |
|||||||||
|
vmaxanarchist Activist Member
|
Venator wrote: "It wasn't an AG opinion and after talking with the MSP I was referred to MCL 28.432a (h) which states exemptions to obtaining a CPL. This states a CPL must be from your home state to be recognized in Michigan. This is all I have found at this time." I was aware of the law you posted. That was why I advised that for a person with only a CC permit not from their home state, they cannot CC. The law in question that requires a resident permit is only a exemption for concealed and car carry. |
|||||||||
|
vmaxanarchist Activist Member
|
Mike wrote: vmaxanarchist wrote:Can you post the AG opinion? I haven't seen one that says the CC permit exemption for possesion only applies to resident permits. Also who was this someone? I agree that these discriminatory laws are unconstitutional. However as a practical matter these exemptions are a way for someone like me who cannot obtain a resident permit to carry in Michigan right now, and not have to wait for another SCOTUS opinion. I also find it ironic that kind of like restaurants in Virginia, Michigan requires me to OC as the only legal way for me to carry while visiting. I can imagine an MI LEO telling me I should conceal after showing him my non-resident UT permit, and having to tell him "sorry, that would be illegal". |
|||||||||
|
Big Gay Al Regular Member 
|
dougwg wrote:
I can tell you, from practical experience. When I moved to Michigan from The People's Democratic Republic of Illinois, in 2001, I called MSP to find out what I had to do with my firearms when I moved here. The officer I talked to, told me that yes, I could bring my firearms into Michigan, since I was moving here permanently. That I'd have to get my pistols registered....sorry, "safety inspected" as soon as it was possible to do so. I never could get any sort of time table, as far as how soon I had to do this, just that the sooner, the better. Although, he indicated that the best way to do it was to get my driver's license switched first, then get the guns registered. And as long as I didn't do something silly, like carry without a permit, or do something else with them that might draw attention to myself, by members of law enforcement, I'd be fine. Turned out, this was a good thing. When I went to register my pistols, there was some sort of hiccup in the system, and another person with the same name was coming up as me. This person had a felony record. It took a while (and a couple of phone calls to the Illinois state police) to get the record stuff straightened out. Needless to say, I got to know the clerks in the Ingham County Sherrif's office pretty well. We were almost on a first name basis.  And then, when everything did get straigtened out, I went back later to have a pistol I'd bought, safety inspected, the clerks there (almost all female) would be joking with me the whole time. "I dunno, he's a felon, should we let him keep this very nice pistol? Ah, might as well, I don't think he'll harm us."  Last edited on Fri Jul 18th, 2008 05:53 pm by Big Gay Al |
|||||||||
|
Sheldon Regular Member
|
Now for the good part... although it has specific language that originally answers a question pertaining to "Private Investigators" language in the text is not specific on this point, therefore it would seem to indicate that certain areas that are often referred as Criminal Empowerment Zones, do not apply to those who are licensed by the State of Michigan to carry a Concealed Weapon. from http://www.ag.state.mi.us/opinion/datafiles/2000s/op10173.htm
Last edited on Fri Jul 18th, 2008 05:54 pm by Sheldon |
|||||||||
|
Venator Regular Member
|
Sheldon wrote: Now for the good part... although it has specific language that originally answers a question pertaining to "Private Investigators" language in the text is not specific on this point, therefore it would seem to indicate that certain areas that are often referred as Criminal Empowerment Zones, do not apply to those who are licensed by the State of Michigan to carry a Concealed Weapon. Kind of old news here. Since I'm the one that put all three opinions together some time ago and have included it in our info packet for over 6 months. |
|||||||||
|
Big Gay Al Regular Member
|
I have just a few questions and comments on this. dougwg wrote: Here is what we lost, gave up. Express legislative authority for State Police LIEN/centralized pistol database.You mean, they didn't have this already??? Must either mail or vist PD with purchase permit in 10 days.Ok, but before it was MUST visit PD with permit and pistol within 10 days. I'd call this one a plus. Must self-report to police lawful constitutional activity--possession of a pistol.Already had to do this under the old law. After buying a pistol, have to present it for "safety inspection." No loss, but gain not having to go to the station for fake inspection. Four copies of permit, not threeBig deal, one more piece of paper, not a different piece, just a copy of another we already have to have. 30 day must carry permit to purchase What does this mean? Must show CCP to security officers if stopped Where does it say that? |
|||||||||
|
Sheldon Regular Member
|
Received this e mail today it may help to clarify some issues...
|
|||||||||
|
Sheldon Regular Member
|
Venator wrote:
Ah yes but you forget those of us that need bigger easer to read un cluttered fonts, I post for that group as well. |
|||||||||
|
Venator Regular Member
|
Sheldon wrote: Venator wrote: Like me? I don't know what that has to do with posting old information? |
|||||||||
|
Sheldon Regular Member
|
Venator wrote: Sheldon wrote:Venator wrote: so which looks better and is easer to read a cluttered post with a lot of information that is repeated a lot or.... |
|||||||||
|
Sheldon Regular Member
|
Venator wrote:
or something like this, as you reply and re quote the thread tends to get messy and may end up being reposted to clean things up to be easer to follow, at 50sh your eyes are in better condition than they will be at 57 so please have pity on those of us with not quite there vision. I keep telling my 21 year old that this is the reason he is a better shot at 100 + yards his eyes are shaper than mine are now but just wait someday he will understand... Last edited on Mon Jul 21st, 2008 08:45 pm by Sheldon |
|||||||||
|
theboyzmom Regular Member 
|
This is a bit late in the conversation, but my understanding of the ability to carry with a permit from another state is based upon the reciept of the permit from the other state. For someone to get one in most states, you must be a resident of that state. The legislative intent was to allow people to carry thier guns when they visit our state. I am not sure if you would be legal to go to another state and get a CPL based upon out of state residence. But I could be wrong - it happens a couple of times a day.  |
|||||||||
|
Bronson Regular Member
|
theboyzmom wrote: I am not sure if you would be legal to go to another state and get a CPL based upon out of state residence. There are states that offer non-resident permits or allow non-residents to obtain a permit. Bronson |
|||||||||
|
Big Gay Al Regular Member
|
Sheldon wrote: Venator wrote:I can read either one. But then I have glasses to correct MY vision.Sheldon wrote:Venator wrote: |
|||||||||
|
Sheldon Regular Member
|
Bronson wrote:
Just a little history: yep N before Mi passed it's shall issue law, state residents flocked to get out of state permits which the state recognized. We had the highly coveted "General Permit" which was all but impossible to obtain, so this was one way they plugged that gap. After they did that is when the big push to enact the shall issue law. |
|||||||||
|
Sheldon Regular Member
|
Venator wrote:I can read either one. But then I have glasses to correct MY vision. so do I but the question is which one is easer on the eyes?  |
|||||||||
|
Big Gay Al Regular Member
|
Sheldon wrote: Venator wrote: NO, Venator didn't write the one below, I did.I can read either one. But then I have glasses to correct MY vision. All I know is, I can get by just fine with this normal sized font. |
|||||||||
|
ChuckB Regular Member 
|
I think the smaller font is easier on the eyes to be honest....But then again I'm notas long in the tooth as some of the others  |
|||||||||
|
SpringerXDacp Regular Member
|
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: Back On Topic IMO, this is due to gun forums, such as: OCDO, GT & MGO and all the members who sent letters to the/their local PD's and Sheriff's Dept. I thank all of you for what you have done. |
|||||||||
|
mvpel Regular Member
|
So essentially, MCL 28.432 makes it impossible for a resident of Vermont and Illinois, and most residents of New Jersey, New York, California, to legally POSSESS a pistol in the state of Michigan. That's begging for a legal challenge, ain't it? |
|||||||||
|
Big Gay Al Regular Member
|
mvpel wrote: So essentially, MCL 28.432 makes it impossible for a resident of Vermont and Illinois, and most residents of New Jersey, New York, California, to legally POSSESS a pistol in the state of Michigan. Probably, but I think that would take a resident from one of those states to challenge it, and said resident would need deep pockets to afford such a challenge. |
|||||||||