|
|
|
OpenCarry.org - Discussion Forum > Stories From The States > Michigan > MICHIGAN OPEN CARRY INFO HERE
|
|
||
| OpenCarry.org - Discussion Forum > Stories From The States > Michigan > MICHIGAN OPEN CARRY INFO HERE
|
|||
| Moderated by: jpierce | ||
| Author | Post | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Venator Regular Member 
|
PLEASE DO NOT POST TO THIS TREAD: http://miopencarry.org/ Our site is up. It's a work in progress so bear with us. We may be going with google as a payment method, paypal has too many hoops. We have our logo on all kinds of merchandise from cafe press. We still have lots of work to do in getting all the info we want up, but it's a start. Thanks to all the Board members for getting us this far. And thanks to all the others that are taking up the banner of freedom. Cheer, Brian Jeffs, President MOC, Inc. Just a reminder we have several items with the MOC logo for sale. Check it out, it's easy with cafe press. http://www.cafepress.com/miopencarry Welcome to the Michigan forum. Many of your questions about open carry will be answered in the information seen below. Also included is the information packet we send to local Police Departments. There are also some links you might enjoy. Enjoy reading the many posts and experiences people have while exercising a basic human right, that of self defense. We welcome all questions and comments and ask only when you post something either state it as your opinion or include a citation of your “fact”. Also, feel free to copy and use/modify any of this information for your individual needs. To help us determine the number of members from Michigan I'm requesting any member that has not put a location under their screen name to please do so. To see how many members there are from Michigan. Click on the word Michigan under a posters screen name, this will take you to a Michigan members listing. Thank You. The objectives of Michigan open carry are:
To help us determine the number of members from Michigan I'm requesting any member that has not put a location under there screen name to please do so. This data will help us with press releases on how many members we have from Michigan as well as show the web owners that Michigan is in the fore-front of promoting open carry. If you are not comfortable in listing a specific area, you can list the closest large city (Detroit area), or county (Grand Traverse) or region (Eastern UP, MI, or Central Michigan.....), you get the idea. If this is still too specific than just put Michigan. To see how many members there are from Michigan. Click on the word Michigan under a posters screen name, this will take you to a Michigan members listing. WHAT WE HAND OUT TO PEOPLE ABOUT OPEN CARRY You can download this info in a word document from these two links. Thanks to nikon1123 for hosting the links. Info pamphlet: http://people.emich.edu/nburden/info.doc Letter to LEOs: http://people.emich.edu/nburden/LEOs.doc Info packet in brochure form here: http://home.comcast.net/~gosirr/Brochure10-29-08.doc w/o flags http://home.comcast.net/~gosirr/Brochure10-29-08a.doc w/flags Ferndale ordinance is preempted by state law and, consequently, we reverse. MCRGO v. Ferndale: The Michigan Court of Appeals held that local units of government may not impose restrictions upon firearms possession. 4) Brandishing and disturbing the peace are not an offense while lawfully openly carrying a firearm. ADVISORY NOTE: Though this section on disturbing the peace does not deal with firearms, due to the nature of this code, this law has been cited by officers to suppress or discourage lawful open carry. Since a person who is not licensed to carry concealed MUST open carry their firearms on foot in order to avoid criminal charge, nor is there any duty for anyone licensed to conceal their handgun, open carry is not disorderly conduct. The open carrying of firearms is not by itself threatening, nor does it cause a hazardous or physically offensive condition. BRANDISHING Opinion No. 7101 February 6, 2002: …In the absence of any reported Michigan appellate court decisions defining "brandishing," it is appropriate to rely upon dictionary definitions…..the term brandishing is defined as: "1. To wave or flourish menacingly, as a weapon. 2. To display ostentatiously. A menacing or defiant wave or flourish." This definition comports with the meaning ascribed to this term by courts of other jurisdictions…the court recognized that in federal sentencing guidelines, "brandishing" a weapon is defined to mean "that the weapon was pointed or waved about, or displayed in a threatening manner." Applying these definitions to your question, it is clear that a reserve police officer, regardless whether he or she qualifies as a "peace officer," when carrying a handgun in a holster in plain view, is not waving or displaying the firearm in a threatening manner. Thus, such conduct does not constitute brandishing a firearm in violation of section 234e of the Michigan Penal Code. It is my opinion, therefore, that…by carrying a handgun in a holster that is in plain view, does not violate section 234e of the Michigan Penal Code, which prohibits brandishing a firearm in public. 5) A person openly carrying a firearm on foot in a legal manner when approached by a police officer and questioned where the only reason for the questioning is because of the openly carried firearm need not give that officer their name and address. No license or ID is required to openly carry a firearm. It is your option to provide ID/CPL. ADVISORY NOTE: Each situation is different. We recommend you cooperate with all lawful questions and requests. Ask the officer if the reason you are being detained is for the legal open carry of a firearm. After giving your name and address, ask if you are free to go, ask if you are being detained. If they continue to ask questions about ID and why you are carrying a gun, repeat the question, am I free to go? Am I being detained? If the situation escalates ask for a supervisor. Remember the officer can arrest you for anything, don’t resist the arrest. After an illegal arrest you may have legal options you can employ. 6) An AG opinion, the MSP and Senator Prusi stated that a person with a CPL can carry a firearm openly in the exempted areas listed in MCL 750.234d. For example, with permission from the owner you can openly carry a handgun in a bar, sports arena, etc. Opinion No. 7097 January 11, 2002… A person licensed by this state… to carry a concealed weapon….By its express terms, section 234d prohibits certain persons from carrying a firearm in the enumerated places but explicitly exempts from its prohibition “[a] person licensed by this state or another state to carry a concealed weapon.” Thus, any person licensed to carry a concealed pistol, including a private investigator, is exempt from the gun-free zone restrictions imposed by section 234d of the Penal Code and may therefore possess firearms while on the types of premises listed in that statute. “Your analysis is correct. Non-CPL pistol free zones do not apply to CPL holders. The CPL pistol free zones only apply to CPL holders carrying a concealed pistol. Therefore, a CPL holder may openly carry a pistol in Michigan's pistol free zones.” Sincerely, Sgt. Thomas Deasy, Michigan State Police Executive Resource Section, (517) 336-6441 “…My office has contacted the Michigan State Police legislative liaison and has received some answers to share with you. According to the liaison, it is legal to openly carry a firearm in a "Pistol Free Zone" if you are a licensed CPL holder. I was advised that your information was correct that MCL 28.425o and MCL 750-234d permit this activity. I was informed that there was no other additional relevant laws regarding this matter…” Michael A Prusi, State Senator 38th District" ADVISORY NOTE: Before carrying a handgun we recommend that you become familiar with all state and federal laws in regards to firearm laws and the use of deadly force. Taking a self defense/firearm course is recommended. Michigan has a self defense act PA No. 309 July 18, 2006 that states you do not have to retreat from a threat, but you must meet the legal requirements before you engage in the use of deadly force. FOR MORE INFO SEE www.miopencarry.org *The information contained above is not meant to be legal advice, but is solely intended as a starting point for further research on the subject of open carry in Michigan. You are responsible in determining the accuracy of any information listed above. If you have further questions it is advisable to seek out an attorney that is well versed in firearm law. DEADLY FORCE IN MICHIGAN The “CASTLE DOCTRINE” package of bills was signed into law on July 20, 2006. The law became effective on October 1, 2006. This law removes the duty to retreat from a violent attack. Individuals in Michigan, as in most states, have always had the right to stand their ground and defend themselves with no duty to retreat when attacked inside the four walls of their home. However, if attacked outside the four walls of their home, even if on their own property (such as the backyard, detached garage, or a pole building), individuals in Michigan were required to retreat from a violent attack if able to do so safely. As of October 1, 2006, there is no longer a “duty to retreat” from a violent attack as long as the individual is in a place where they have a legal right to be and as long as they are not engaged in illegal activity. The “Use of Deadly Force” continuum still applies. The escalating degrees of force still apply to all situations and the “Reasonable Man” standard is still used to evaluate an individual’s actions in a given circumstance. This means that the following three valid reasons to use deadly force still apply to all situations: 1) Fear of Death. 2) Fear of Serious Bodily Injury. 3) Fear of Forcible Sexual Penetration. In addition to these three reasons for the use of deadly force, the following three conditions must exist in order for the use of deadly force to be justifiable: 1. Imminent - One of the three above listed reasons for the use of deadly force must be about to happen; it cannot be something that will happen tomorrow or in a few weeks. 2. Intent - The attacker has to have demonstrated some sort of intent. This can be verbal or non-verbal. The display of a weapon, verbal threats, or aggressive advances after being told to stay away are all indications of intent. 3. Ability – The attacker has to have the ability to carry through with their intended attack. If someone says they are going to shoot you, but have no firearm, then they do not have the ability to shoot you at that moment. You still must act reasonably and apply the above principles of the use of deadly force. Here is what this law does change. This law removes the duty to retreat anywhere that an individual has a legal right to be provided that they are not engaged in illegal activity. If a person acts with reasonable force, up to and including deadly force, then the prosecuting attorney must prove that the person acted unlawfully in order to take the case to trial. This is a change from current procedure where a person who acts in self-defense must prove that they acted lawfully after being charged and possibly taken to court. In addition, if a person cannot be charged and convicted criminally, the new law provides that they cannot be prosecuted civilly. If for some reason a civil case is allowed to proceed, the person who used justifiable self-defense shall be awarded court and attorney’s fees. This all means that you must still act in a reasonable manner. Your firearm should still be your “tool of last resort” for self-defense. The emotional trauma and aftermath of shooting another human being will be absolutely devastating. It should be avoided if at all possible. This law mitigates the aftermath so that a decision made under the duress of defending oneself against a criminal does not destroy your life criminally or financially. You are encouraged to read these laws for yourself and evaluate them. For professional legal advice, you should consult a lawyer familiar with firearms law and the use of deadly force in Michigan. The new laws are 2006 PA 309 and 2006 PA 313. Above modified From: http://www.southsidesportsmanclub.com/stand-your-ground.html SELF-DEFENSE ACT (EXCERPT) Act 309 of 2006 780.972 Use of deadly force by individual not engaged in commission of crime; conditions. Sec. 2. (1) An individual who has not or is not engaged in the commission of a crime at the time he or she uses deadly force may use deadly force against another individual anywhere he or she has the legal right to be with no duty to retreat if either of the following applies: (a) The individual honestly and reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent death of or imminent great bodily harm to himself or herself or to another individual. (b) The individual honestly and reasonably believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent sexual assault of himself or herself or of another individual. (2) An individual who has not or is not engaged in the commission of a crime at the time he or she uses force other than deadly force may use force other than deadly force against another individual anywhere he or she has the legal right to be with no duty to retreat if he or she honestly and reasonably believes that the use of that force is necessary to defend himself or herself or another individual from the imminent unlawful use of force by another individual. 2006, Act 309, Eff. Oct. 1, 2006. WHAT WE SEND TO LEO DEPARTMENTS: Dear Chief or Sheriff: Attached is information on the legality of the open carry of a handgun in Michigan. The open carry of a handgun has increased in Michigan in the last year as more and more citizens are becoming aware of its legality. It is our hope that this information is helpful to you and that you will take the time to review the information and inform your officers on the legality of the open carry of a handgun in Michigan. We also hope that you work with your 911 dispatchers in regards to asking some simple question when they receive a call of a “person with a gun”. If you have questions please talk with your prosecuting attorney or you can contact me via email or phone for more information. We thank you for your time and consideration in this regard and appreciate the difficult job you all do. Sincerely, PURPOSE: To provide guidance in calls for services that involves a person who is openly carrying a pistol in a holster. As you may know any law abiding citizen of the State of Michigan who can legally possess a firearm may openly carry (in a holster) said firearm in all places not explicitly exempt by law without a CPL (1). Those that do not have a CPL when transporting their firearms must do so as prescribe by law. No local ordinance concerning firearm possession is enforceable due to Michigan’s preemption law (2). Brandishing and disturbing the peace are not an offense while lawfully openly carrying a firearm (3). Attorney General Opinion 7101, 2/02 states...by carrying a handgun in a holster that is in plain view, does not violate section 234e of the Michigan Penal Code, which prohibits brandishing a firearm in public.” ]In regards to disorderly conduct [size=due to the nature of this code, this law has been cited by officers to suppress or discourage lawful open carry. ]Since a person who is not licensed to carry concealed MUST open carry their firearms on foot in order to avoid criminal charge, nor is there any duty for anyone licensed to conceal their handgun, open carry is not disorderly conduct. The open carrying of firearms is not by itself threatening, nor does it cause a hazardous or physically offensive condition. A person openly carrying a firearm on foot in a legal manner when approached by a police officer and questioned where the only reason for the questioning is because of the openly carried firearm need not give that officer their name and address. No license or ID is required to openly carry a firearm. Officers should not editorialize against open carry by private citizens in any way shape or form, or in any way suggest that a person should conceal their firearm. Suggestions and editorializing against lawful open carry may be interpreted as “commands” by civilians who are lawfully open carrying and may subject officers to complaints filed against them, as well as possible legal action against themselves and the department. Recently it has been opined by the AG opinion, the MSP and Senator Prusi that persons with a CPL can carry a firearm openly in the exempted areas listed in MCL 750.234d. (4). It is suggested that Law enforcement supervisors inform their staff in regards to the legality of openly carrying a handgun in Michigan. It is also suggested that an officer protocol be developed in dealing with such a call. It also would be beneficial to inform your dispatchers and your county 911 department in developing a protocol on receiving a “man with a gun” call. An example of some questions to ask a person calling 911 about a person openly carrying is included. It is our hope that by informing you and all law enforcement personnel throughout the state about the legality of open carry that we can avoid any civil or criminal actions that might otherwise occur. If you have questions or concerns please contact your prosecuting attorney. We thank you for your time and consideration in this regard, and as law abiding citizens we appreciate the demanding and dangerous work you all do. Footnotes: 1) Sec. 234d (1) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (2), a person shall not possess a firearm on the premises of any of the following: a) A depository financial institution or a subsidiary or affiliate of a depository financial institution. b) A church or other house of religious worship. c) A court. d) A theatre. e) A sports arena. f) A day care center. g) A hospital. h) An establishment licensed under the Michigan liquor control act. (2) This section does not apply to any of the following: a) A person who owns, or is employed by or contracted by, an entity described in subsection (1) if the possession of that firearm is to provide security services for that entity. b) A peace officer. c) A person licensed by this state or another state to carry a concealed weapon. d) A person who possesses a firearm on the premises of an entity described in subsection (1) if that possession is with the permission of the owner or an agent of the owner of that entity. (2) MSP Legal Update Newsletters: April 2007 and June 2008 http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/MSP_Legal_Update_No._66_238184_7.pdf Did You Know: It is not illegal under Michigan law to openly carry a pistol. Preemption: In MCRGO v. Ferndale, the Michigan Court of Appeals held that local units of government may not impose restrictions upon firearms possession. Therefore, officers should check with their prosecutors before enforcing an ordinance that imposes a general ban on openly carrying a pistol. THE MICHIGAN APPEAL COURT CONCLUDED: April 29, 20006 v No. 242237 In sum, we conclude that § 1102 is a statute that specifically imposes a prohibition on local units of government from enacting and enforcing any ordinances or regulations pertaining to the transportation and possession of firearms, and thus preempts any ordinance or regulation of a local unit of government concerning these areas. Further, we conclude that the specific language of the 2000 amendments to MCL 28.421 et seq., particularly §§ 5c and 5o, which were adopted more than a decade after the enactment of § 1102, do not repeal § 1102 or otherwise reopen this area to local regulation of the carrying of firearms.17 Accordingly, we hold that the Ferndale ordinance is preempted by state law and, consequently, we reverse. In 1990, the Michigan legislature enacted MCL 123.1102 which provides, in pertinent part: A local unit of government shall not impose special taxation on, enact or enforce any ordinance or regulation pertaining to, or regulate in any other manner the ownership, registration, purchase, sale, transfer, transportation, or possession of pistols or other firearms, ammunition for pistols or other firearms, or components of pistols or other firearms, except as otherwise provided by federal law or a law of this state. (3) Act 328 of 1931 750.234e Brandishing firearm in public; applicability; violation as misdemeanor. Sec. 234e. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2), a person shall not knowingly brandish a firearm in public. (2) Subsection (1) does not apply to any of the following: (a) A peace officer lawfully performing his or her duties as a peace officer. (b) A person lawfully engaged in hunting. (c) A person lawfully engaged in target practice. (d) A person lawfully engaged in the sale, purchase, repair, or transfer of that firearm. History: Add. 1990, Act 321, Eff. Mar. 28, 1991 Opinion No. 7101 February 6, 2002 In part: … Section 234e of the Michigan Penal Code does not define the crime of brandishing a firearm in public. The Michigan Criminal Jury Instructions, published by the Committee on Standard Criminal Jury Instructions, does not include a recommended jury instruction on brandishing a firearm. Research discloses that while the term "brandishing" appears in reported Michigan cases,2 none of the cases define the term. In the absence of any reported Michigan appellate court decisions defining "brandishing," it is appropriate to rely upon dictionary definitions. People v Denio, 454 Mich 691, 699; 564 NW2d 13 (1997). According to The American Heritage Dictionary, Second College Edition (1982), at p 204, the term brandishing is defined as: "1. To wave or flourish menacingly, as a weapon. 2. To display ostentatiously. –n. A menacing or defiant wave or flourish." This definition comports with the meaning ascribed to this term by courts of other jurisdictions. For example, in United States v Moerman, 233 F3d 379, 380 (CA 6, 2000), the court recognized that in federal sentencing guidelines, "brandishing" a weapon is defined to mean "that the weapon was pointed or waved about, or displayed in a threatening manner." Applying these definitions to your question, it is clear that a reserve police officer, regardless whether he or she qualifies as a "peace officer," when carrying a handgun in a holster in plain view, is not waving or displaying the firearm in a threatening manner. Thus, such conduct does not constitute brandishing a firearm in violation of section 234e of the Michigan Penal Code. It is my opinion, therefore, …by carrying a handgun in a holster that is in plain view, does not violate section 234e of the Michigan Penal Code, which prohibits brandishing a firearm in public. JENNIFER M. GRANHOLM, Attorney General (4)Three opinions on this topic. An AG’s opinion, the Michigan State Police, and a State Senator’s. AG opinion No. 7097 FIREARMS LAWS OF MICHIGAN January 11, 2002: This conclusion is not affected by the provisions of section 234d of the Michigan Penal Code, 1931 PA 328, MCL 750.1 et seq. That statute prohibits certain persons from possessing firearms on certain types of premises as follows: Sec. 234d (1) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (2), a person shall not possess a firearm on the premises of any of the following: a) A depository financial institution or a subsidiary or affiliate of a depository financial institution. b) A church or other house of religious worship. c) A court. d) A theatre. e) A sports arena. f) A day care center. g) A hospital. h) An establishment licensed under the Michigan liquor control act. (2) This section does not apply to any of the following: a) A person who owns, or is employed by or contracted by, an entity described in subsection (1) if the possession of that firearm is to provide security services for that entity. b) A peace officer. c) A person licensed by this state or another state to carry a concealed weapon. d) A person who possesses a firearm on the premises of an entity described in subsection (1) if that possession is with the permission of the owner or an agent of the owner of that entity. [Emphasis added.] By its express terms, section 234d prohibits certain persons from carrying a firearm in the enumerated places but explicitly exempts from its prohibition “[a] person licensed by this state or another state to carry a concealed weapon.” Thus, any person licensed to carry a concealed pistol,… is exempt from the gun-free zone restrictions imposed by section 234d of the Penal Code and may therefore possess firearms while on the types of premises listed in that statute. MSP opinion: Your analysis is correct. Non-CPL pistol free zones do not apply to CPL holders. The CPL pistol free zones only apply to CPL holders carrying a concealed pistol. Therefore, a CPL holder may openly carry a pistol in Michigan's pistol free zones. Sincerely, Sgt. Thomas Deasy, Michigan State Police Executive Resource Section, 714 S. Harrison Rd. East Lansing, MI 48823 (517) 336-6441 Senator Prusi’s opinion: My office received your inquiry regarding the legality of a licensed CPL holder to open carry a firearm in "Pistol Free Zones." On Friday we received a copy of your correspondence, as Senator Carl Levin's Office referred your letter to my office because your concerns mainly pertain to state issues. As such, I am happy to assist you in this matter. My office has contacted the Michigan State Police legislative liaison and has received some answers to share with you. According to the liaison, it is legal to openly carry a firearm in a "Pistol Free Zone" if you are licensed a CPL holder. I was advised that your information was correct that MCL 28.425o and MCL 750-234d permit this activity. I was informed that there was no other additional relevant laws regarding this matter….Michael A Prusi, State Senator 38th District" Example of a 911 Protocol for “Person with a gun call” 911: This is 911 what is your emergency? Caller: Ah….not sure if this is an emergency but there’s some guy with a gun on his belt here in the Wal-Mart. 911: Is the gun in a holster or is this person waving the gun around or threatening anyone? Is anyone injured? What is the man doing? Caller: Aaah…no one is hurt. Aaaah…the guy is just shopping. Pushing a cart looking at some frozen carrots I think. Aah he’s looking at carrots. 911 : Does this man seem to be intoxicated or mentally impaired? Does he appear to be acting irrationally? Caller: No he doesn’t seem to be acting strange other than the gun. Can’t you send some officers here to check him out? Think of the children. 911: Does the person appear to be 18 years old or older? Caller: I would say he’s about 35 years old, average build, dark short hair, and he has a short beard. He’s wearing khaki pants with a dark blue polo shirt. 911: Sir, the open carry of a handgun is legal in Michigan by any lawful person 18 years old or older. Unless the person is waving it around in a threatening manner or is acting irrationally there is nothing we can legally do. Now if the person should threaten someone or become agitated let us know and we’ll send a car, but until then have a good night. If 911dispatchers had a protocol similar to this over simplified example for handling this type of call; that is just by asking a few short questions the adrenalin factor would be reduced and officer stress would be diminished. Each department can decide if a patrol car needs to be dispatched to investigate this kind of call, and if so, the officer would have more information on how to handle the encounter. Our suggestions when contacted by an LEO for lawful open carry. 1. Be polite and ask the law enforcement officer (LEO) why he is detaining you. If the LEO response is for open carry, inform the LEO it is legal to open carry in Michigan, and ask if you are free to go. 2. If the LEO states that you are not free to go, ask again if the only reason you are being detained is because of lawful open carry and repeat “officer am I free to go”. 3. If the LEO continues to detain you and asks for an ID or a license to carry a concealed pistol (CPL), tell the LEO you are not required to have an ID or a CPL to open carry. By law if the stop is only for the legal open carry of a firearm, you do not have to give your name. It is your option to provide an ID/CPL if you desire. Providing an ID or CPL may expedite the stop and we recommend that you do so. 4. If the officer wants to disarm you let him remove your firearm. Do not place your hands anywhere near the firearm. We recommend you cooperate with all lawful requests. Continue to repeat that open carry is legal and ask “officer am I free to go”. 5. Do not argue with the LEO, do not say anything that will be used against you. Do not editorialize on the law. 6. If the situation escalates ask for the LEO’s supervisor. Remember the officer can arrest you for anything, don’t resist the arrest. After an illegal arrest you may have legal options you can employ. 7. Never consent to a search of your person or vehicle. State “I DO NOT consent to any search. The LEO may search you anyway don’t fight the search. Save any arguments for a court of law. Keep asking if you are free to go, and “Why am I being detained.” 8. If you are arrested, ask for an attorney and remain silent until you have counsel. We recommend you carry a voice recorder to tape the interaction between yourself and the LEO. Taping a public conversation is legal in Michigan. The wiretap law refers to a third party taping a private conversation between two parties that are unaware that the conversation is being taped. Taping a conversation Mich. Comp. Laws § 750.539c: A private conversation legally cannot be overheard or recorded without the consent of all participants. 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. 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, an interpretation that makes it legal for 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). Under the Michigan statute, a parent may not vicariously consent to a recording for a minor child. Williams v. Williams, 603 N.W. 2d 114 (Mich. Ct. App. 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. Go info on your 4th amd. Rights. http://www.laaw.com/seizure_chart.htm A good article on LEO encounters. WHEN APPROACHED BY POLICE WHILE OPEN CARRYING. By John M. Collins, Esq., General Counsel, Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association, Shrewsbury, Massachusetts Because it is legal in most states to carry a handgun if properly licensed, a report that an individual possesses a handgun, without any additional information suggesting criminal activity, might not create reasonable suspicion that a crime is being or will be committed.1 Where simply carrying a handgun is not in itself illegal and does not constitute probable cause to arrest,2 it follows that carrying a handgun, in and of itself, does not furnish reasonable suspicion justifying a Terry stop. The same applies to persons in motor vehicles. An investigatory stop is only justified when the police have "a reasonable suspicion, based on specific, articulable facts and reasonable inferences there from," that the subject "had committed, was committing, or was about to commit a crime."3 State laws vary regarding both open and concealed carrying of firearms, but courts are usually sensitive to officer and public safety concerns over the presence in public of firearms. Mere possession may not be sufficient to authorize police action, but in circumstances where the gun presents an imminent threat because of shots just fired, or likely to be fired, and thereby presents a "suggestion of threats of violence, acts of violence, impending criminal activity, or concern for public safety," a court is likely to find there was reasonable suspicion for a threshold inquiry.4 Anonymous Tip In a 1990 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed that, through corroboration of its detail, an anonymous tip can be enough to give rise to the reasonable suspicion required for a stop.5 More recently though, the U.S. Supreme Court in 2000 ruled that an anonymous tip that a person is carrying a gun is not sufficient to justify a police officer's stop and frisk of that person, even where descriptive detail regarding the subject has been corroborated. The Court declined to adopt the "firearms exception" to Terry's requirement of reasonable suspicion.6 Similarly, in another 2000 Supreme Court case, an anonymous tip with a physical description and location that a person had a gun was not enough for reasonable suspicion, absent anything else to arouse the officer's suspicion.7 In that case the Court ruled that it was irrelevant that the defendant fled when the officer got out of his car and ordered the defendant to approach him.8 The tipster need not deliver an ironclad case to the police to justify an investigatory stop; it suffices if a prudent law enforcement officer would reasonably conclude that the likelihood existed that criminal activities were afoot and that a particular suspect was probably engaged in them.9 Clearly, not every report of a citizen is worthy of belief or sufficient to justify a response by an officer. A caller could, for example, intend merely to harass someone by making an anonymous call to police and claiming someone had a gun hidden in his or her vehicle or on his or her person. The ultimate issue on the report's usefulness is whether the contents (and other attendant circumstances) create a reasonable suspicion that a dangerous situation exists, creating authority to detain or frisk or both. It certainly helps if the report contains particular facts that do one or more of the following: • Create a suggestion of threats of violence in this situation • Are themselves acts of violence • Indicate impending criminal activity • Raise a reasonable concern for public safety Of course, in the many jurisdictions where carrying a concealed weapon is illegal, this analytical step may be obviated and inquiry will proceed to the next issue, the likely veracity of the information source. In the case of an anonymous tip, the question will be whether corroboration of detail goes beyond the mere description of a person already in public. Examples of Appropriate Police Actions Examples may be helpful here. Police officers would be acting reasonably in stopping and frisking an individual after receiving information on the street from a known bystander that the person was displaying a handgun on a street corner in a high crime area at 5:30 in the morning, or if it reasonably appears that a suspect is not only armed but also dangerous, as would be the case if the individual appeared to be reaching for his or her weapon. The possession of a firearm by a minor in many states may be viewed as presumptively illegal, and thus sufficient to justify an investigatory stop of the minor by the police, again provided the information source is sufficiently credible. A constitutionally reliable report of the sighting of someone carrying a sawed-off shotgun-especially in states where this is illegal-would likely justify an immediate investigatory stop. Loading a weapon in public, especially where there is no clearly lawful reason for doing so (to begin hunting or target shooting, for instance), and especially in a high crime area at night or during early morning hours, could provide the extra information some courts require in order to allow police officers to conduct an investigatory stop and frisk of a person reportedly in possession of a firearm. Enforcement Guidelines Where a police officer receives a report that a person is in possession of a firearm, but the weapon is not visible to the officer, the following options are available: • Engage in a voluntary contact and simply ask the person if he or she has a firearm. • If he or she confirms he or she is in possession of a gun, the officer may ask the person to voluntarily hand it over just while the interview takes place, or insist that they hand it over if there is a reasonable belief that the safety of the officer or public is in jeopardy, or that the person has used it in a crime or is about to do so. • If the person denies having a firearm or refuses to answer, and the officer does not otherwise have (legally sufficient) reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, the officer must allow the person to continue on his or her way. • If the person denies having a firearm or refuses to answer, but the officer has a reasonable suspicion that the person is armed and presents a danger to the officer or public, the officer may conduct a stop and frisk the person. If the officer finds a weapon, the officer may hold it while conducting the field inquiry. As long as the person is properly licensed, and no arrest takes place, the officer must return the gun at the conclusion of the interview. • If the officer has a warrant or has probable cause to arrest the person for a crime, the officer may conduct a thorough search (not merely a frisk) and take possession of any weapon. • Where the person appears to be a minor and therefore too young to have firearm (in most states), the police may have reason to believe that a crime is being committed (unlawful carrying of a firearm) and may therefore conduct a stop rather than a mere encounter. 1 See, for example, Com. v. Couture, 407 Mass. 178, 552 N.E.2d 538 (1990), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 951, 111 S. Ct. 372, 112 L.Ed.2d 334 (1990). 2 Id. 3 See Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S. Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (196 4 Com. v. Alvarado, 423 Mass. 277, 667 N.E.2d 856 (199 . 5 Alabama v. White, 496 U.S. 325, 110 S. Ct. 2412, 110 L.Ed.2. 301 (1990). 6 Florida v. J.L., 529 U.S. 266, 120 S. Ct. 1375, 146 L.Ed.2d 254 (2000). 7 Pennsylvania v. D.M., U.S. 120 S. Ct. 203, 146 L.Ed.2d 953 (2000). 8 Id. 9 Alabama v. White, 496 U.S. 325, 1105 S. Ct. 2412, 110 L.Ed.2d 301 (1990); U.S. v. Diallo, 29 F.3d 23 (1st Cir. 1994); U.S. v. Taylor, 162 F.3d 12 (1st Cir. 199 . PREEMPTION LAW in part: In 1990, the Michigan legislature enacted MCL 123.1102 which provides, in pertinent part: A local unit of government shall not impose special taxation on, enact or enforce any ordinance or regulation pertaining to, or regulate in any other manner the ownership, registration, purchase, sale, transfer, transportation, or possession of pistols or other firearms, ammunition for pistols or other firearms, or components of pistols or other firearms, except as otherwise provided by federal law or a law of this state. CAMPUS CARRY: The preemption law to which you're referring can be found in MCL 123.1102. That statute generally prohibits a local unit of government from regulating firearms. However, colleges and universities are not local units of government for the purposes of that statute; MCL 123.1101 defines "Local unit of government" as "a city, village, township, or county." Further, various statutes in Chapter 390 of the Michigan Compiled Laws grant state colleges and universities broad authority to enact ordinances (e.g., MCL 390.5 grants that power to the University of Michigan). Therefore, it appears that a university can enact and enforce an ordinance prohibiting a CPL holder from carrying a pistol on campus beyond classrooms and dormitories (see MCL 28.425o - the pistol free zone statute for CPL holders). There are a number of non-statutory preemption theories used by the courts. It is possible that a court or the Attorney General may hold that state law does preempt a university ordinance. However, at this time we're not aware of an opinion holding that way. Finally, it's worth noting that there's a difference between an ordinance and a policy. A university policy does not carry the force of law, and likely only applies to students, faculty, and employees. If you are a university employee, you are bound by the policy (MCL 28.425n allows employers to prohibit employee CPL holders from carrying at work). Sincerely, Sgt. Thomas Deasy, Michigan State Police Executive Resource Section, 714 S. Harrison Rd. East Lansing, MI 48823 (517) 336-6441 Quotes: In regards to the lawful open carry of a handgun and preemption: Ferndale PD Lt. Bill Wilson said. "It's a little known law, They use it to test rookies. They'll ask: What do you do if you see someone with a six-shooter strapped to his waist. The answer better be nothing or the rookie needs remedial training." "If they are not brandishing it in a threatening way or going inside a bar, bank or school, which are some of the prohibitions, they are not breaking any law." After the litter pick up the PD did NOT receive any 911 calls: "I did expect people to call," Wilson said. "It's fairly common in other parts of the country but you don't see it around here. Part of the justification is you are telling everyone I have a gun and I will use it for protection. Right or wrong it makes sense." Daily Tribune article May, 10th, 2009 Judge Ron W. Lowe, 35th District Judge (Wayne Co.), Preliminary Hearing, 11/7/08. "Everybody seems to be in agreement that open carry in Michigan is permitted. PD Chief John Benthall, City of Burton. "I have researched this every way I can and I cannot find any law against it." From the Flint Journal; 6/14/08 City of Ypsilanti Assistant Attorney, Karl A. Barr: “I have reviewed the matter and you are correct that State Law preempts the City ordinance with regard to handguns.” (Email response July, 2008) Hastings Police Chief Jerry Sarver: ....acknowledged that Michigan law allows people to carry their handguns in a holster. "We're not going to interfere with them," Sarver said before the rally. ", DETROIT FREE PRESS July 25, 2008 JOIN OUR TALK SHOW AND LISTEN TO PAST SHOW at these links. Call direct at 810-208-1854 http://www.flinttalkradio.com/sas.htm To see past shows go here: http://micpl.com/ Link to Mich. Supreme Court decisions. http://coa.courts.mi.gov/resources/opinions.htm IF YOU CAN ONLY WATCH ONE VIDEO THIS YEAR MAKE IT THIS ONE: http://www.examiner.com/x-536-Civil-Liberties-Examiner~y2008m8d4-Loose-lips-can-get-you-arrested-or-why-you-shouldnt-talk-to-the-police?cid=Examiner OR this link. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4097602514885833865 Great Book on line STOPPING POWER: http://www.pulpless.com/gunclock/stop0584.pdf Attorney General summary of Michigan FOIA act. http://www.michigan.gov/ag/0,1607,7-164-17337_18160-51242--,00.html FOIA letter generator for Michigan along with some information. http://www.rcfp.org/foialetter/index.php This is a form letter that you can use as a guide. http://prfamerica.org/images/pdfs/FOIL-Sample-Letter.pdf Attorneys that will take on cases regarding firearm laws. Steven Dulan Attorney, site: http://www.stevenwdulan.com/ Jim Simmons: Law Offices of James T. Simmons, P.C. 45700 Village Boulevard Shelby Township, Michigan 48315-6093 (586) 566-1900 (586) 532-4110 fax jtsimmons@jtsimmons.com David Bieganowski. 400 E 8th St., Traverse City, phone (231) 947-6073. Melissa M. Pearce: 2276 Wixom Rd. Commerce Twp., MI 48382 (248) 467-1930 FAX (248) 684-0029 melissapearce@ix.netcom.com. John Freeman, Criminal Defense Attorney Liberty Center Suite 200--100 W. Big Beaver Road Troy, MI 48084 866-720-3708 or 248-918-0790 Emergency 24/7: 313-330-2653 Troy, MI Pro-gun and NRA member. Free initial consultation with the Law Office of John Freeman, call 866-720-3708 toll free, or send us an e-mail. Website: http://www.formerfedlawyer.com/ Matthew G. Davis, 119 E. Kalamazoo St. Lansing, MI 48933 (517) 913-5107 Cell (517) 281-9374 Foster5701@hotmail.com Keith S Watson,1017 East Kalamazoo Street Lansing, MI 48912 (517)372-7000 Dean Greenblat, 40700 Woodward Ave, Suite A, Birmingham MI 48009 Phone # 248 644 7520 Fax # 248 644 8760 Matthew C. Connolly: 409 E. 8th St. Traverse City, MI 49686 231-499-4339 connolly_law@hotmail.com Last edited on Wed Jul 1st, 2009 08:54 pm by Venator |
|||||||||
|
cupcake Regular Member
|
That was awesome! Great Job! |
|||||||||
|
lockman State Researcher 
|
So I have concluded as an Illinois resident I can only open carry in MI if I do not transport my firearm in a motor vehicle. As I would not be within any of the codified exemptions (If I tell the truth). MI has got to scrap those transport rules. Those regulations remind me of the NYC permits that allow transport to and from the range. Of course everybody involved in a self defense shooting was "on my way to the range". Speaking of scrapping laws, back to work on Illinois. |
|||||||||
|
cupcake Regular Member
|
Don't forget that one from out of state must posess a license to carry from their home state in order to possess a firearm here, even for open carry. |
|||||||||
|
Tucker6900 Regular Member 
|
Man, I was looking for open carry information for MI......and I found it. Thanks so much!!! |
|||||||||
|
SpringerXDacp Regular Member 
|
Perfect!!! Thanks Brian. This will be a big helping hand for the new members. |
|||||||||
|
warlockmatized Regular Member 
|
Awesome as always Brian. GREAT job!!! |
|||||||||
|
steve jaye Regular Member 
|
Love the post, exactly what new members needed! I have one suggestion though, when you talk about the MSP Legal Update news letter, we should use the most current edition ie MSP Legal Update Newsletter: June 16th 2008 NO 66: Did You Know: …It is not illegal under Michigan law to openly carry a pistol…... I have already PRINTED and but in the mail to NOVI,WEST BLOOMFIELD and WIXOM PD’s, also emailed them! |
|||||||||
|
Venator Regular Member
|
This was published by the Michigan Municipal League and is the Law Enforcement Action Forum Newsletter for April 2009. I like the title Open carry is more than open carry Brian G. Jeffs It’s true that open carry has many advantages: a faster draw, a larger caliber handgun and greater round capacity; sure it’s been shown to deter crime, and it is immensely more comfortable in warm weather, but it is much more than that.Open carry brings gun ownership out of the closet. It shows your friends and neighbors, your state and your country that you are not afraid of taking on the responsibility of protecting your self and the ones you love from evil. Open carry is a visible expression of our natural right to self preservation. Open carry makes a statement that we are not afraid to stand up to the “politically correct” ideology that has created a nanny state, where the government is there to help us if we just do as they say, and a pox on anyone that disagrees. Open carry can lead us out of this stupor and deliver us once again to the days when a man could stand tall and be proud of his community, his state, and his country. When you open carry you are saying to the world, I’m my own man, I’m able and willing to defend myself, my family, and if need be my community, my state, and my country. It also states that I’m willing to stand up and speak truth to authority. It’s shameful that we as law abiding citizens must stand up to authority, the very authority that we have empowered, when questioned about our lawful right to openly carry a firearm. But stand up we must. The open carry of a firearm speaks volumes and it’s says much more than just open carry. Last edited on Thu May 28th, 2009 08:48 pm by Venator |
|||||||||
|
asforme Activist Member
|
cupcake wrote: Don't forget that one from out of state must posess a license to carry from their home state in order to possess a firearm here, even for open carry. I have been trying to figure this out. Michigan recognizes the concealed carry permits of other states, but reading the law I cannot find any exemption from the registration and safety inspection for out of state permit holders. (despite the fact that to be eligible to have a gun registered or inspected you must be a resident) I know it would be contradictory, but inconsistent laws never stopped activist judges and police from using them to enforce their will. |
|||||||||
|
Venator Regular Member
|
Attached is a letter from Paul Garfield the Michigan Representative for GOA relating his support of OCDO and the open carry of a firearm. GOA letter to OCDO.pdf Attached Image (viewed 143 times): Last edited on Mon Nov 10th, 2008 03:12 pm by Venator |
|||||||||
|
asforme Activist Member
|
Venator wrote: If you have a conceal carry license from your home state you don't have to get an inspection or registration from Michigan. I figured this was true, but I can't find the cite that lists an exemption from inspection or registration. I visit Michigan often and I like to be able to quote laws when confronted. |
|||||||||
|
cupcake Regular Member
|
I wanted to find the exemptions for you, but I have to admit: I'm at a loss. Not where I thought it would be. Anybody else smarter than me? |
|||||||||
|
asforme Activist Member
|
cupcake wrote: I wanted to find the exemptions for you, but I have to admit: I'm at a loss. Not where I thought it would be. Anybody else smarter than me? Well at least you make me feel better. I thought I was missing something obvious. |
|||||||||
|
SpringerXDacp Regular Member
|
asforme wrote: Venator wrote:If you have a conceal carry license from your home state you don't have to get an inspection or registration from Michigan. Asforme, if you have a valid carry permit/license from your home state of Va, then you are good to go.  750.231a Exceptions to § 750.227(2); definitions. Sec. 231a. (1) Subsection (2) of section 227 does not apply to any of the following: (a) To a person holding a valid license to carry a pistol concealed upon his or her person issued by his or her state of residence except where the pistol is carried in nonconformance with a restriction appearing on the license. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 750.227 Concealed weapons; carrying; penalty. Sec. 227. (1) A person shall not carry a dagger, dirk, stiletto, a double-edged nonfolding stabbing instrument of any length, or any other dangerous weapon, except a hunting knife adapted and carried as such, concealed on or about his or her person, or whether concealed or otherwise in any vehicle operated or occupied by the person, except in his or her dwelling house, place of business or on other land possessed by the person. (2) A person shall not carry a pistol concealed on or about his or her person, or, whether concealed or otherwise, in a vehicle operated or occupied by the person, except in his or her dwelling house, place of business, or on other land possessed by the person, without a license to carry the pistol as provided by law and if licensed, shall not carry the pistol in a place or manner inconsistent with any restrictions upon such license. (3) A person who violates this section is guilty of a felony, punishable by imprisonment for not more than 5 years, or by a fine of not more than $2,500.00. History: 1931, Act 328, Eff. Sept. 18, 1931 ;-- CL 1948, 750.227 ;-- Am. 1973, Act 206, Eff. Mar. 29, 1974 ;-- Am. 1986, Act 8, Eff. July 1, 1986 Constitutionality: The double jeopardy protection against multiple punishment for the same offense is a restriction on a court's ability to impose punishment in excess of that intended by the Legislature, not a limit on the Legislature's power to define crime and fix punishment. People v. Sturgis, 427 Mich. 392, 397 N.W.2d 783 (1986). Oops!!! Edit to add links: 750.227 and 750.231a Last edited on Sat Jul 12th, 2008 02:47 am by SpringerXDacp |
|||||||||
|
asforme Activist Member
|
SpringerXDacp Your exemption is to 750.227 about carrying concealed weapons. I was looking for exemptions to: 750.228 Failure to have pistol inspected; applicability; penalty. Sec. 228.Fortunately I found it. 750.231b Sale and safety inspection; persons exempt. Sec. 231b. Origionally I was just looking at subsection 2 of Sec. 228 and not seeing anything about CHP holders out of state, then I found 231b. Last edited on Sat Jul 12th, 2008 03:12 am by asforme |
|||||||||
|
cupcake Regular Member
|
Very good, I knew it wouldn't be hard to find someone smarter than me. |
|||||||||
|
Venator Regular Member
|
Corporate policies on Open Carry. MOC is compiling coporate poilicies on firearms. These businesses allow OC or CC and follow state laws in regards to firearms. MOC works hard on getting stores to allow the lawful carry of firearms for personal defense and follow state law in that regard. If you have other policies please PM me details and I will update them. Corporate policies on Open Carry. BOB EVANS From:Garrett_Hajes@bobevans.com Bob Evans - Reference # 536155 We certainly appreciate you taking the time to e-mail regarding our Bob Evans Restaurants. Bob Evans follows all local, state, and federal laws pertaining to firearms. Please contact your local Bob Evans restaurants for the specific regulations. Again, Mr. Spice, we appreciate your comments. We value your patronage and appreciate your interest in Bob Evans Farms Inc. Barnes & Noble Original Message From: "Mary Ausman" <MJAusman@bn.com> To: XXXXXXXXXXX Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 1:42 PM Subject: Barnes & Noble Thank you for your email. While we are unable to discuss customer situations with an uninvolved third part, to answer your question, Barnes & Noble complies with the law and, except where prohibited by law, does not prohibit its customers from carrying handguns or other firearms in a Barnes & Noble store in accordance with the laws of the state in which a store is located. Sincerely, Mary Ausman Supervisor, Customer Retention Barnes & Noble, Inc. 122 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10011 tel: (800) 422-7717 fax: (212)352.3660 http://www.barnesandnobleinc.com Walmart Policy is to follow the law of the state the store located. Customer Service1-800-Wal-Mart (1-800-925-627  Questions regarding a Wal-Mart Store issue702 SW 8th Street Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Bentonville, Arkansas 72716-8611 Email contact link: http://walmartstores.com/contactus/feedback.aspx Audio of Walmart Policy: Walmart_Firearm_Policy_Call.mp3 Cabelas: Policy is to follow the law of the state the store located. Thank you for the recent email. I am very sorry for the confusion that took place at our retail location. Our corporate office has taken action in regards to the below mentioned issue and here is what has been decided. We have made the decision to comply with state laws in regards to open carry. We do not ask customers to check concealed or open carry weapons where the state has laws governing this situation. Our signs refer to firearms that are being returned or sold to Cabela's. If you are still having problems please feel free to let us know Thanks again Becky Lead Associate Cabela's Retail Information 1-800-905-2731 retail.contactgroup<AT>cabelas.com Toys-R-US Dear Mr. Ross: Thank you for contacting Toys R Us regarding the recent tragedy in our store. Naturally, we want our guest's to be safe and feel confident while they are shopping. We adhere to the state law of whatever state a particular store is located in since the governing laws regarding gun control vary across the country. At this time I have not been notified that this will change though I can not guarantee that it won't in the future. I invite you to submit your concerns to our corporate head office for further attention. Toys R Us Attn: Gerald Storch (CEO) 1 Geoffrey Way Wayne, NJ 07470 If you have any further questions or concerns please email us or contact our customer service line at 1-800-869-7787. Sincerely, Beverly McCann Toys R Us Corporate Guest Relations Team LOWE'S Dear XXXX XXXX: Thank you for giving Lowe's the opportunity to respond to your concerns regarding our policy on firearms in our stores. Lowe's currently does, and will continue to abide by federal, state and local laws regarding firearms, and we do not prohibit customers from carrying firearms into our stores. Our first and foremost concern is for the safety of our customers, however; we take all comments and concerns from our customers seriously. We are considerate of all customers, and will remain neutral regarding the right to carry firearms. We will respect federal, state and local laws regarding this. If Lowe's can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call 1-866-284-8989 or email execustservice@lowes.com. You may also contact us by mailing your correspondence to P.O. Box 1111, Mail Code CON8, North Wilkesboro, North Carolina 28659. Thank you, Julie Holloway Lowe's Executive Customer Service BEST BUY's POLICY from Customer Contact <CustomerContact@bestbuy.com> to XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX date Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 7:31 PM subject Best Buy Gun policy - XXXXXXXX mailed-by bestbuy.com Best Buy strives to comply with all applicable law and statues. Best Buy also strives to provide a safe and comfortable shopping environment for all our customers. Best Buy does not ban guns at our retail locations. As a general rule, Best Buy does not post “no guns allowed” signs in our stores and we are not aware of any individual stores that might have posted such a sign. Great Lakes Crossings Mall Auburn Hills: Mr. Knarre, regional VP at Taubman (owner/manager of Great Lakes Crossing Mall) called yesterday (4/17/2009) to inform me of his followup. OC is permitted in GLC. My email to him recapping the phone call: To: xxx@taubman.com> Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 Subject: Re: Taubman Policy--Lawful Firearms Carry in Michigan Malls Mr. Knarre, Thank you for your followup call to me this afternoon informing me of discussions with your legal staff, GLC security, and Auburn Hills police and conclusions on the below matters. The following are the key points as I understand them: --The GLC security director (Jim) states he did not issue a ban on me carrying a visible firearm in GLC. My belief about such a ban, based on what the Auburn Hills police were saying to me that GLC security was saying to them, is a misunderstanding. No such ban was issued, so none needs to be rescinded. --Lawful carry of concealed or visible firearms is permitted at GLC. --GLC security has discretion on how to handle guest complaints, if they arise. --This subject has been discussed with the Auburn Hills police officers who are regularly at the mall. Home Depot. Policy is to follow the law of the state the store located. http://www.tennesseefirearms.com/law...s/homedepo.pdf Customer care number. 1-800-430-3376 Contact link: http://www.homedepot.com/webapp/wcs/...atalogId=10053 Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 06:13:57 -0400 (EDT) From: "HD Consumer Affairs" <hdconsumeraffairs@homedepot.com> To: warchild44spcl@yahoo.com Subject: Re: Other Website Questions Dear Jerry, The Home Depot Customer Care is in receipt of your email. We appreciate you taking the time to email us. Our general policy is not to ban customers from carrying firearms on the Home Depot property in those states having a concealed firearm law, provided they are carrying the firearm in accordance with the applicable laws. If the firearm is not concealed in accordance with the carrying permit (typically that means concealed and cannot be seen by members of the public), it is up to the manager based on personal comfort level to approach the individual directly and request them to leave the premises or to contact local law enforcement for purposes of having the individual removed. Thank you for contacting us. Sincerely, Ricky Customer Care Attached Image (viewed 1 time): Last edited on Tue May 12th, 2009 08:37 pm by Venator |
|||||||||
|
asforme Activist Member
|
Venator wrote: However, non-residents are subject to the Michigan law while carrying a pistol in Michigan, including those restricting where pistols may be carried, the implied consent provision, disclosure to a peace officer when stopped, and carrying while under the influence. A non-resident should acquaint himself or herself with the Michigan law before carrying a concealed pistol in Michigan 28.425k Acceptance of license as implied consent to submit to chemical analysis of breath, blood, or urine.I believe this is what is referred to by implied consent, meaning that if you do not consent your permit is revoked. I don't want to be a test case, but I would like to see how Michigan would go about revoking a license from another state. |
|||||||||
|
Venator Regular Member
|
The MOC buttons are in. I have 100 to start. Order yours today. I plan on selling these for $2 ea. at get-togethers as a fund raiser. Profits at this time will go towards a projector for MOC presentations. I will sell them on-line with a minimum order of 5 for $10 and I’ll pay the shipping. Multiples of 5 are allowable, for example 10, 15, 20 at $2 each with free shipping. I’ll take cash, checks, and Money orders. Make them out to Brian Jeffs. PM me to order, I’ll need a name and a mailing address. I’ll send the buttons when I receive your payment. The buttons are 2.25” in diameter. Attached Image (viewed 26 times): Last edited on Fri May 8th, 2009 01:16 pm by Venator |
|||||||||
|
Furner Regular Member 
|
Can we add to the "methods" to have something to the effect of "Protect our personal protection rights through the prevention of infringing legislation" |
|||||||||
|
Venator Regular Member
|
Furner wrote: Can we add to the "methods" to have something to the effect of "Protect our personal protection rights through the prevention of infringing legislation" You have a goal and method in one. How does this sound? Comments welcome Objective: Protect our right to self-defense Method: Staying informed of and acting against infringing legislation. |
|||||||||
|
warlockmatized Regular Member
|
Venator wrote: Furner wrote:I like it.Can we add to the "methods" to have something to the effect of "Protect our personal protection rights through the prevention of infringing legislation" |
|||||||||
|
ilbob Activist Member
|
The non-resident issue was discussed at length somewhere else not too long ago. IANAL, but IIRC, the consensus eventally was this. 1. You can't have a handgun in MI unless you have a carry permit from some other state. However, there is a bulletin at the MSP web site that says a NR cannot have a handgun in MI unless he has a carry permit from his home state. Based on what the law actually says, it appears the bulletin is not quite correct. Presumably, a NR with some kind of permit from some other state could OC, but there may be other issues like the idiotic school zone prohibitions. 2. You can't conceal carry unless you have a carry permit from your HOME state. |
|||||||||
|
Venator Regular Member
|
ilbob wrote: The non-resident issue was discussed at length somewhere else not too long ago. This is the reason you can't have a handgun in Michigan if you don't have a CPL. The safety requirement is now outlawed and it will be interesting to see what happens in this regard. FROM MSP: Michigan law requires that a person obtain a License to Purchase a pistol (MCL 28.422) before possessing a pistol in this state. Once a person buys a pistol with a License to Purchase, it must be safety inspected (MCL 28.429). Only residents of Michigan are eligible for licenses and safety inspections. Because a non-resident cannot satisfy those requirements they cannot lawfully possess a pistol here (for any purpose). Exceptions to those requirements are found in MCL 28.432. One of those exceptions is for persons licensed by their state of residence to carry a concealed pistol. As for the home state issue, issue. See this. This recent law trumps older laws. THE MICHIGAN PENAL CODE (EXCERPT) Act 328 of 1931 750.231a Exceptions to § 750.227(2); definitions. Sec. 231a. (1) Subsection (2) of section 227 does not apply to any of the following: (a) To a person holding a valid license to carry a pistol concealed upon his or her person issued by his or her state of residence except where the pistol is carried in non conformance with a restriction appearing on the license. (b) To the regular and ordinary transportation of pistols as merchandise by an authorized agent of a person licensed to manufacture firearms. (c) To a person carrying an antique firearm as defined in subsection (2), completely unloaded in a closed case or container designed for the storage of firearms in the trunk of a vehicle. (d) To a person while transporting a pistol for a lawful purpose that is licensed by the owner or occupant of the motor vehicle in compliance with section 2 of 1927 PA 372, MCL 28.422, and the pistol is unloaded in a closed case designed for the storage of firearms in the trunk of the vehicle. (e) To a person while transporting a pistol for a lawful purpose that is licensed by the owner or occupant of the motor vehicle in compliance with section 2 of 1927 PA 372, MCL 28.422, and the pistol is unloaded in a closed case designed for the storage of firearms in a vehicle that does not have a trunk and is not readily accessible to the occupants of the vehicle. (2) As used in this section: (a) "Antique firearm" means either of the following: (i) A firearm not designed or redesigned for using rimfire or conventional center fire ignition with fixed ammunition and manufactured in or before 1898, including a matchlock, flintlock, percussion cap, or similar type of ignition system or replica of such a firearm, whether actually manufactured before or after 1898. (ii) A firearm using fixed ammunition manufactured in or before 1898, for which ammunition is no longer manufactured in the United States and is not readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade. (b) "Lawful purpose" includes the following: (i) While en route to or from a hunting or target shooting area. (ii) While transporting a pistol en route to or from his or her home or place of business and place of repair. (iii) While moving goods from 1 place of abode or business to another place of abode or business. (iv) While transporting a licensed pistol en route to or from a law enforcement agency for the purpose of having a safety inspection performed on the pistol as is required by section 9 of 1927 PA 372, MCL 28.429, or for the purpose of having a law enforcement official take possession of the weapon. (v) While en route to or from his or her abode or place of business and a gun show or places of purchase or sale. (vi) While en route to or from his or her abode to a public shooting facility or public land where discharge of firearms is permitted by law, rule, regulation, or local ordinance. (vii) While en route to or from his or her abode to a private property location where the pistol is to be used as is permitted by law, rule, regulation, or local ordinance. History: Add. 1964, Act 215, Eff. Aug. 28, 1964 ;-- Am. 1973, Act 191, Eff. Mar. 29, 1974 ;-- Am. 1974, Act 55, Imd. Eff. Apr. 1, 1974 ;-- Am. 1978, Act 280, Imd. Eff. July 6, 1978 ;-- Am. 2002, Act 82, Imd. Eff. Mar. 26, 2002 |
|||||||||
|
Venator Regular Member
|
Posted this on the info thread: Quotes: In regards to the lawful open carry of a handgun: Burton Police Chief John Benthall said "I have researched this every way I can and I cannot find any law against it." From the Flint Journal; 6/14/08 |
|||||||||
|
Bronson Regular Member
|
I heard back from the Battle Creek police chief and he said that B.C. has no official position on it, they just follow state law. But he advised me that if a citizen calls to report a person with a gun the PD is required to investigate to determin the intent of that person. Bronson |
|||||||||
|
Furner Regular Member
|
Bronson wrote: I heard back from the Battle Creek police chief and he said that B.C. has no official position on it, they just follow state law. But he advised me that if a citizen calls to report a person with a gun the PD is required to investigate to determin the intent of that person. Thats bull@#$%. If someone calls the police and reports someone smoking on the sidewalk, are they required to investigate it to make sure it is a cigarette and not illegal drugs? But at least it is good to hear that they dont have some belief that they can enforce illegal laws. |
|||||||||
|
azebolsky Regular Member
|
Have you had any issues with this as of yet though? I'm wondering if I can do my grocery shopping at Wal-mart and Meijers with OC, or if I should continue to buy oversized t-shirts to make use of my CCW. Curious as to your experiences with BCPD/EPD. *S* |
|||||||||
|
Venator Regular Member
|
azebolsky wrote: Have you had any issues with this as of yet though? I'm wondering if I can do my grocery shopping at Wal-mart and Meijers with OC, or if I should continue to buy oversized t-shirts to make use of my CCW. Curious as to your experiences with BCPD/EPD. Welcome. If you have read the Info page at the top of the forum you will realize how many people are now OCing everyday in Michigan. The info page addresses all of your concerns and questions. You can also see the LIST YOUR EXPERIENCES here thread which shows that our members have OCed in over 45 cities in Michigan. Deciding to OC is a choice and with choice comes responsibility. OC is legal in Michigan of that fact there is no longer any question. But private property like stores can ban weapons, or green T-shirts, or monkeys, so if they ask you to leave you must do so or face trespassing charges. Our members find that most of the time people don't notice you OCing and if they do they don't seem to care. Our members have OCed for thousands of hours over the last 3 years or so, and have had only a couple of encounters with LEO's, with no arrests known. So start reading and welcome again. PS If you plan on sticing around, please indicate Michigan under your screen name this adds to our members numbers. Thanks. Last edited on Fri Jul 25th, 2008 04:02 pm by Venator |
|||||||||
|
warlockmatized Regular Member
|
Venator wrote: azebolsky wrote:In order to be able to select Michigan as your state you must FIRST choose USA as your countryHave you had any issues with this as of yet though? I'm wondering if I can do my grocery shopping at Wal-mart and Meijers with OC, or if I should continue to buy oversized t-shirts to make use of my CCW. Curious as to your experiences with BCPD/EPD. Welcome to the forum. |
|||||||||
|
azebolsky Regular Member
|
Thanks both of ya's. Learning quite a bit today it seems. <-----Venat, fixed it for ya. *S* Last edited on Fri Jul 25th, 2008 09:08 pm by azebolsky |
|||||||||
|
Greggy_D Regular Member
|
. Last edited on Tue Jul 29th, 2008 05:37 pm by Greggy_D |
|||||||||
|
PA-Carry Regular Member 
|
One of the things that I just read on MSPs website is that if you are stopped by a LEO (if carrying concealed or an out-of-stater), you are required to show your CPL as well as your gov't ID : http://www.michigan.gov/msp/0,1607,7-123-1591_3503_4654-10941--,00.html "Upon request, an individual licensed to carry a concealed pistol shall show both of the following to a police officer:
Kinda makes it impossible to "sterile carry."  Edit: Punctuation Last edited on Thu Jul 31st, 2008 10:14 am by PA-Carry |
|||||||||
|
dougwg Regular Member 
|
Only if they are carrying concealed must they show ID If open carried, you may do so "sterile". For those that don't know "sterile carry" is carrying a sidearm without carrying personal ID or your CPL. |
|||||||||
|
Venator Regular Member
|
dougwg wrote: Only if they are carrying concealed must they show ID Doug, do you know anyone that goes sterile? |
|||||||||
|
dougwg Regular Member
|
Yes, as a matter of fact I do! Last edited on Thu Jul 31st, 2008 01:16 pm by dougwg |
|||||||||
|
asforme Activist Member
|
That was my understanding. Yes it's illegal for an out-of-stater to carry without a CPL because it is illegal for them to possess without a CPL. But the officer must have reasonable suspicion that the person is a non-resident before they can request ID. And since there is no requirement to carry ID, you cannot be forced to prove your innocence (residency). Am I correct in this line of thinking? |
|||||||||
|
dougwg Regular Member
|
I'm not sure if you're right or not, but that sure is clever thinking on your part. |
|||||||||
|
DanM Regular Member 
|
asforme wrote: That was my understanding. Yes it's illegal for an out-of-stater to carry without a CPL because it is illegal for them to possess without a CPL. But the officer must have reasonable suspicion that the person is a non-resident before they can request ID. And since there is no requirement to carry ID, you cannot be forced to prove your innocence (residency). An officer doesn't have to have any suspicion or justification whatsoever to lawfully request any information or identification from you. The key word is "request". Police are absolutely lawfully entitled to approach you and start talking, ask questions, and ask you to do things. If you comply with the requests, it is a consensual stop and is lawful. Also, if you are driving or crossing an international border you must comply with requests for identification. That being said, you understand otherwise you have the right to decline to verbally interact with the officer, ask if you are being detained, and ask if you are free to go, correct? Without RS or PC, they cannot lawfully detain or arrest you, or search you unless you give consent. Remember, you may be arrested and searched anyway. But without RS or PC and without your consent to be searched, an arrest/search is unlawful, any charges would likely be dismissed, and you would probably have the basis for a lawsuit with a nice settlement. |
|||||||||
|
ghostrider Regular Member 
|
Venator wrote: ...
Youtub video has been removed. |
|||||||||
|
Venator Regular Member
|
PTT |
|||||||||
|
Gosirr Regular Member 
|
First I would like to thank you all for the education. I'm new to the forum and I'm dissy with the welth of info I have gotten. I have sent the LEO info document to my police chief in Hazel Park,MI. (no responce) Was wondering if anyone has oc'd in Hazel Park yet? I still have the jitters about doing it alone my first time. MY background: ccw holder for about 6 yrs now. I carry cc most of the time -Glock 23. |
|||||||||
|
SpringerXDacp Regular Member
|
Gosirr wrote: First I would like to thank you all for the education. I'm new to the forum and I'm dissy with the welth of info I have gotten. I have sent the LEO info document to my police chief in Hazel Park,MI. (no responce) Was wondering if anyone has oc'd in Hazel Park yet? I still have the jitters about doing it alone my first time. MY background: ccw holder for about 6 yrs now. I carry cc most of the time -Glock 23. Welcome to OCDO Gosirr. Can you attend the Lapeer County Picnic on Sunday, August 31? Also, the Charity Event on Saturday, September 13 (See Threads)? |
|||||||||
|
Mike Super Moderator
|
SpringerXDacp wrote: Gosirr wrote:First I would like to thank you all for the education. I'm new to the forum and I'm dissy with the welth of info I have gotten. I have sent the LEO info document to my police chief in Hazel Park,MI. (no responce) Was wondering if anyone has oc'd in Hazel Park yet? I still have the jitters about doing it alone my first time. MY background: ccw holder for about 6 yrs now. I carry cc most of the time -Glock 23. What picnic is this? Dop we have a thread that explains all the upcoming events in MI? |
|||||||||
|
SpringerXDacp Regular Member
|
Mike wrote: SpringerXDacp wrote:Gosirr wrote:First I would like to thank you all for the education. I'm new to the forum and I'm dissy with the welth of info I have gotten. I have sent the LEO info document to my police chief in Hazel Park,MI. (no responce) Was wondering if anyone has oc'd in Hazel Park yet? I still have the jitters about doing it alone my first time. MY background: ccw holder for about 6 yrs now. I carry cc most of the time -Glock 23. Lapeer County Thread: http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum30/15093.html Charity Event Thread: http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum30/12077.html ETA: Not at this time Mike. Hopefully, in the near future, OC events can be organized in a earlier fashion to allow for an Event Schedule Thread, for example. Last edited on Sun Aug 24th, 2008 07:53 pm by SpringerXDacp |
|||||||||
|
Mike Super Moderator
|
SpringerXDacp wrote: Mike wrote:SpringerXDacp wrote:Gosirr wrote:First I would like to thank you all for the education. I'm new to the forum and I'm dissy with the welth of info I have gotten. I have sent the LEO info document to my police chief in Hazel Park,MI. (no responce) Was wondering if anyone has oc'd in Hazel Park yet? I still have the jitters about doing it alone my first time. MY background: ccw holder for about 6 yrs now. I carry cc most of the time -Glock 23. Maybe Venator or somebody can create a "Michigan Events Schedule Thread," then i will sticky it, and Venator can update the initial post - just bare bones of who/what/where etc for each event - so much seems to be happnening in Michigan! |
|||||||||
|
SpringerXDacp Regular Member
|
Mike wrote: SNIP Sounds good to me. If Brian or someone else here (Mi) does not want to do it, I will. |
|||||||||
|
nuxi Regular Member
|
Continuing on the firearms and universities topic: It was mentioned that university policy is different from a law, but MCL has this gem regarding Michigan Tech's Board of Control: "When the rules and regulations are adopted, posted on the premises to which they pertain, and also published in newspapers circulated in Baraga and Houghton counties, they shall constitute ordinances. Any violation of such ordinances is a misdemeanor, punishable by a fine of not more than $100.00 or imprisonment for not more than 60 days, or both." Does anyone know what legally constitutes posting on a premises? |
|||||||||
|
northofnowhere Activist Member 
|
nuxi, Could you link me that mcl info, I was unable to find reference to it. I live in the area and my brother attends, so I open and conceal carry there frequently. thanks |
|||||||||
|
Venator Regular Member
|
Added a brief section on the use of deadly force in Michigan. |
|||||||||
|
nuxi Regular Member
|
MCL390.363 And two MTU pages covering their policy: http://www.admin.mtu.edu/admin/policy/fac/5002.htm http://www.admin.mtu.edu/admin/boc/policy/ch15/ch15p7.htm I graduated two years ago, but I don't remember any signs posted on the premises as described in MCL 390.363. So I'm curious what counts as posting on the premises. |
|||||||||
|
northofnowhere Activist Member
|
I have looked for signage on the dorms and public safety building, but have not found any. I am a volunteer fireman, my chief happens to be a public safety officer there as well. He is well aware of my open carrying as there is usually an empty holster on my at a fire call, lol. half a mile to get to the firehall at a nice rate of speed through town streets, easier to remove and glove box the weapon without the holster. Anyways, i will ask him and ask if there was ever any talk that it is not a legal policy you can enforce on the general public, as there is no postings regarding it as required by law. Kinda interesting twist, and I think I may have been happier not knowing this. Alas, it doesnt sound like parking areas are exempt either. On top of that, the reason for the policy is to keep the campus safe. It clearly hasn't helped with the letter threats or bombs they found on campus some years back. perhaps they should make a ordinance insisting all legally allowed to students carry a gun instead. |
|||||||||
|
nuxi Regular Member
|
Well just remember that dorms and classrooms are covered under CPL law. You can't concealed carry there. Not sure if you have a CPL or not. I just got mine. I might be up that way this weekend, so I'd be interested to know the answer. Although since I spend most of the time drunk off my ass when I visit, I probably won't bother bringing up a firearm. |
|||||||||
|
Venator Regular Member
|
Can we take the campus talk to this thread http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum30/9853.html Much of campus policies, etc., have been discussed. This tread is just for new people getting initial information on OC. |
|||||||||
|
Day Regular Member
|
The law defines ‘lawful purpose’ as: 1) While en route to or from a hunting or target shooting area. 2) While transporting a pistol to or from home or place of business and a place of repair. 3) While moving goods from one place of residence or business to another place of residence or business. 4) While transporting a licensed pistol to or from a law enforcement agency for the purpose of having a safety inspection performed (registering the pistol) or to have a law enforcement official take possession of the pistol. 5) While en route to or from home or place of business to a gun show or place of purchase or sale. 6) While en route to or from home to a public shooting facility or land where the discharge of firearms is permitted. 7) While en route to or from home to private property where the pistol is to be used as permitted by law, rule, regulation, or local ordinance. I bought my first pistol today (a Taurus 1911-AlL, and she's beautiful), and I've been looking for information on Michigan's open carry laws. This was a great help, but I'm still a tad confused. If you can only lawfully transport your pistol under the above circumstances, how are you supposed to get your pistol to a place where you'd like to open carry? Say I want to open carry in my local Wal-mart, but I need to drive there. Would it be unlawful to transport my pistol to Wal-mart? |
|||||||||
|
Mike Super Moderator
|
Day wrote: The law defines ‘lawful purpose’ as: 1) While en route to or from a hunting or target shooting area. 2) While transporting a pistol to or from home or place of business and a place of repair. 3) While moving goods from one place of residence or business to another place of residence or business. 4) While transporting a licensed pistol to or from a law enforcement agency for the purpose of having a safety inspection performed (registering the pistol) or to have a law enforcement official take possession of the pistol. 5) While en route to or from home or place of business to a gun show or place of purchase or sale. 6) While en route to or from home to a public shooting facility or land where the discharge of firearms is permitted. 7) While en route to or from home to private property where the pistol is to be used as permitted by law, rule, regulation, or local ordinance. I think you are conflating restrictions on "carrying a handgun" with "transporting" a handgun. 18 USC 926 A provides place to place immunity as you presumably know already; reagrdless, what does full text of Michigan statute say on this subject? |
|||||||||
|
ghostrider Regular Member
|
Mike wrote: Day wrote:The statute refers to what are inclusions of lawful purpose. It makes no such definition.The law defines ‘lawful purpose’ as: 1) While en route to or from a hunting or target shooting area. 2) While transporting a pistol to or from home or place of business and a place of repair. 3) While moving goods from one place of residence or business to another place of residence or business. 4) While transporting a licensed pistol to or from a law enforcement agency for the purpose of having a safety inspection performed (registering the pistol) or to have a law enforcement official take possession of the pistol. 5) While en route to or from home or place of business to a gun show or place of purchase or sale. 6) While en route to or from home to a public shooting facility or land where the discharge of firearms is permitted. 7) While en route to or from home to private property where the pistol is to be used as permitted by law, rule, regulation, or local ordinance. (b) “Lawful purpose” includes the following: http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(hpw2rw45zqrjb245rnbrrtat))/mileg.aspx?page=getobject&objectname=mcl-750-231a&query=on&highlight=pistol%20AND%20en%20AND%20route The MSP website has taken the word "includes", and changed it to "defines". |
|||||||||
|
DrTodd Regular Member 
|
Mike wrote: Day wrote:18 USC 926 Pertains to the "interstate" transportation of a firearm, not the "intrastate" transportation of firearms; BIG difference as far as the law is concerned. States would need to interpret through the courts. New Jersey and Illinois communities, as examples, are known for citing people who transport because of the inter/intra issue.The law defines ‘lawful purpose’ as: 1) While en route to or from a hunting or target shooting area. 2) While transporting a pistol to or from home or place of business and a place of repair. 3) While moving goods from one place of residence or business to another place of residence or business. 4) While transporting a licensed pistol to or from a law enforcement agency for the purpose of having a safety inspection performed (registering the pistol) or to have a law enforcement official take possession of the pistol. 5) While en route to or from home or place of business to a gun show or place of purchase or sale. 6) While en route to or from home to a public shooting facility or land where the discharge of firearms is permitted. 7) While en route to or from home to private property where the pistol is to be used as permitted by law, rule, regulation, or local ordinance. Yes, it appears that the MSP page did change the wording of the law. The law gives examples but seems to allow that there are more lawful purposes than listed whereas the MSP page is limiting the lawful purposes portion to those listed. This is much like the MSP's Pistol Free Areas webpage which USED to say that CPL holders could not posses a firearm in the listed areas, but now does say "concealed" pistols. |
|||||||||
|
Mike Super Moderator
|
DrTodd wrote: 18 USC 926 Pertains to the "interstate" transportation of a firearm, not the "intrastate" transportation of firearms; BIG difference as far as the law is concerned. States would need to interpret through the courts. No, read the text of the statute - it provides place to place immunity. |
|||||||||
|
DrTodd Regular Member
|
I did, and here is what I see: TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 44 > § 926A § 926A. Interstate transportation of firearms Notwithstanding any other provision of any law or any rule or regulation of a State or any political subdivision thereof, any person who is not otherwise prohibited by this chapter from transporting, shipping, or receiving a firearm shall be entitled to transport a firearm for any lawful purpose from any place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm to any other place where he may lawfully possess and carry such firearm if, during such transportation the firearm is unloaded, and neither the firearm nor any ammunition being transported is readily accessible or is directly accessible from the passenger compartment of such transporting vehicle: Provided, That in the case of a vehicle without a compartment separate from the driver’s compartment the firearm or ammunition shall be contained in a locked container other than the glove compartment or console. So, in Title 18 in the US Code, it says INTERSTATE transportation. The reasoning here is that Congress's power is "limited" to interstate issues, not issues that begin and end within a state. The definition of interstate has been expanded to cover many issues which, on the surface, appear to be intratstae issues, though. The reason for this is that Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 of the US Constitution known as the Commerce Clause, states that Congress has the power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes. See Gibbons v. Ogden, (1824) |
|||||||||
|
Mike Super Moderator
|
DrTodd wrote: I did, and here is what I see: The title of the section is not what counts - the text controls. See bolded sections above. If you think a state is going to do a Lopez attack on the intra-state application of the immunity, Raich citing Wickard is the easy rejoinder. |
|||||||||
|
DrTodd Regular Member
|
True, however, relying on a case that concerns Congress' ability to regulate marijuana, and seeing that some members of the court have a very "state rights" point of view, and looking at the subject matter involved, I would tend to err conservatively and not rely on 18 USC 926 to bail me out when I'm standing before a court in Michigan. But, if you feel that case law supports your position go for it, I'm sure the prosecutor could find as much case law that supports the state's rights position. Hopefully, you have a judge that supports your interpretation. |
|||||||||
|
Mike Super Moderator
|
DrTodd wrote: True, however, relying on a case that concerns Congress' ability to regulate marijuana, and seeing that some members of the court have a very "state rights" point of view, and looking at the subject matter involved, I would tend to err conservatively and not rely on 18 USC 926 to bail me out when I'm standing before a court in Michigan. But, if you feel that case law supports your position go for it, I'm sure the prosecutor could find as much case law that supports the state's rights position. Hopefully, you have a judge that supports your interpretation. Look, the statute is what it is - no case law stands against the plain text. But the issue rarely comes up because in almost all states (and I presume Michigan too, yes?), if you are FOPA compiant, you are also state law compliant. Further, it is simply very rare to ever have a police officer go into a trunk or other locked container without violating the Fourth Amendment and triggering the exclusionary rule. |
|||||||||
|
DrTodd Regular Member
|
Please don't take this personally nor as philosophical oposition as I agree that I should be able to transport my firearm in Michigan for any legal purpose, and it is utterly inane that Michigan has chosen to limit transportation to the degree it has. The current law is much better than previous regulations, though, because at least it expanded legal transportation. But, to answer your very clear and succinct point/assumption, No, apparently( or at least it is arguable), FOPA compliance would NOT meet the compliance demanded in Michigan. Michigan limits the transportation for narrowly defined "lawful purposes" and, while reading the discussion here and elsewhere, there is some ambiguity as to what is actually meant by "lawful purposes", FOPA provides no guidance. Personally, I would side with the fact that the wording in Michigan law does not preclude there being lawful purposes other than those listed. But, that is for Michigan to decide. To research this a bit further, I looked through some US Supreme Court cases and did see this, excerpted from US v. Lopez (1995). In the decision, the court states: ""The possession of a gun in a local school zone is in no sense an economic activity that might, through repetition elsewhere, substantially affect any sort of interstate commerce. Respondent was a local student at a local school; there is no indication that he had recently moved in interstate commerce, and there is no requirement that his possession of the firearm have any concrete tie to interstate commerce. To uphold the Government's contentions here, we would have to pile inference upon inference in a manner that would bid fair to convert congressional authority under the Commerce Clause to a general police power of the sort retained by the States."" So, my guess, and it is only a guess, is that if a person traveled from Grand Rapids to Lansing (ie not outside of Michigan), that activity DOES NOT impact interstate commerce and falls outside of a 18 USC 926 protection. Especially in the first paragraph of my quote, the court goes to great lengths to limit the Federal Government's ability to control this area because it is an area that has historically been under the jurisdiction and control of the states. In the cases you cited, and many others I looked through, when ruling that the Feds had legislative jurisdiction, the courts have gone to great pains to show that the topic of each particular case affected interstate commerce. But here we have a decision which says that a local situation concerning firearms can't be connected as was done in the other cases. Understand, I agree with you that Michigan's law is terrible and should be changed. But I wouldn't want any expansion of the power of the Federal Government to decide state firearms law. Its illogical to aver that because I am pro-2nd amendment and that the Feds can control this (intrastate travel) issue, but when they seek to LIMIT my 2A rights through legislation and connections to the Commerce Clause, that I am against the power that the Federal Gov't has taken upon itself. I understand that this is frustrating but, that is the way the enumerated powers work, like it or not: Interstate issues are the domain of the Feds, intrastate issues are the domain of the states. If I am traveling from Michigan to Ohio, the provisions of 18 USC 926 would thankfully apply. However, I think it is somewhat of a stretch to think that 18 USC 926 would apply in a situation where there are very tenuous connections to interstate commerce. |
|||||||||
|
Venator Regular Member
|
Guys this thread is suppose to be a place where the basics of OC in Michigan are outlined. While the discussions are great can you start a new thread on this subject? Please. |
|||||||||
|
DrTodd Regular Member
|
Venator, I was concerned about that, too. Can these posts be placed somewhere else?? I assumed since a "super moderator" had brought this discussion here from another topic area, the discussion had to be here... Thanks |
|||||||||
|
Gosirr Regular Member
|
I recently sent a copy of the LEO document to the chief of police in my city. It was sent via email. Any help would be apreciated. This is his responce: "FROM: dniedermeier@aol.com Hazel Park Chief of Police I am a bit confused over your use of the AG opinion 7097. It basically states that CPL holders are not covered by 234d, however, open carry is. Likewise, CPL holders have their own list which is mostly inclusive of the same locations plus a few others in the law enacted in 2000. Banks appear to be not listed for CPL but restricted for open carry while courts are prohibited in 234d and restricted for CPL in other language that permits the chief judge to make rules. Basically, both laws co-exist. Am I missing something? Open carry is a pretty basic concept. It however could easily get the person choosing to exercise this right in difficulty by not paying attention to what he or she is doing as they go through their daily lives. " 9-5-08 EMAIL UPDATES: MY EMAIL:9-4-08 Thank you for responding to my email. opencarry.org is here to answer any questions that people have about open carry. Before people open carry they should become familiar with state and federal laws. In essence what all this means is that a person with a CPL can carry openly in all the restricted places listed in 750.234d, except for places that are restricted by the CPL. The CPL covers places you can't carry concealed, and i think the bank is the only difference. We try and inform people of that. But we can not control peoples behavior, they will do what they do regardless of what we suggest. I am wondering if Hazel Parks patrol officers are informed as well as you are on this? Thanks for you time, and we appreciate the demanding and dangerous work you do. CHIEF'S REPLY EMAIL: I don't want to go back and forth over this.....however, I wonder if you might be missing something pertaining to the pistol free zones? Both lists are very, very similar. Therefore excluding both open and concealed carry regardless of permit (re:234d) in locations contained on the lists. A person can carry with a CPL any of the specific locations listed in 234d ONLY if that location is not also prohibited in the CPL legislation! At the end of the day, open carry and CPL carry are prohibited in what appears to be all but the one location (banks for CPL). Again, courts are permitted to make their own rules for carry within their buildings. AND A SECOND REPLY:I read your e-mail over again and I am not sure....we may be saying the same thing but it is a bit confusing to determine. I NOTICED HE DIDNT ANSWER MY QUESTION. Please move if posted in wrong section. Last edited on Fri Sep 5th, 2008 06:53 pm by Gosirr |
|||||||||
|
Venator Regular Member
|
Gosirr wrote: I recently sent a copy of the LEO document to the chief of police in my city. It was sent via email. Any help would be helpfull in his reeducation training(lol). This is his responce: First off great job and thanks. At least he responded. Most don't, thank him for that. Tell him that opencarry.org is here to answer any questions that people have about open carry and that before people open carry they should become familiar with state and federal laws. In essence what all that means is that a person with a CPL can carry openly in all the restricted places listed in 750.234d. Simple. The CPL covers places you can't carry concealed. We try and inform people of that. BUT WE CAN NOT control peoples behavior, they will do what they do regardless of what we suggest. But at least you have a dialog going with the chief, keep it going in a polite and educational way. |
|||||||||
|
Darth AkSarBen Regular Member 
|
The Chief's statement "Open carry is a pretty basic concept. It however could easily get the person choosing to exercise this right in difficulty by not paying attention to what he or she is doing as they go through their daily lives." seems to convey that he would advise anyone, who open carries, to be mindful of the fact that you do HAVE a loaded pistol on you, and as you go grocery shopping, you may get distracted and slip into the bank to make a deposit and not think about it (forgetting you have a pistol on your person can happen). Wandering into the wrong place, even though you are not breaking the law in other places, could put you in illegal territory. He seems open to discussion, and it would be good to visit on friendly terms. I transport my pistol all the time, unloaded, in a case, in the trunk of my car. Do I open carry? Haven't yet, but I have the prerogative to, just decided not to. I can always be on my way to or from a shooting range as well. BTW, would it not be an interesting thread to post ALL the shooting ranges, and their addresses here in Michigan? I, and others, could keep a print out of the addresses of our local area and we would ALWAYS be either going to or coming from a shooting range.  |
|||||||||
|
Taurus850CIA Regular Member 
|
Venator wrote: dougwg wrote:I know this is a somewhat old post, but it's got my curiosity piqued. I'm under the impression that if one is in possession of a handgun, one must also have the safety inspection/registration for it. Even if not, the law does state that loaning/borrowing of handguns is prohibited except between CPL holders. If you are in possession of a handgun, and cannot prove that you are the person who's name is on the registration, you may find yourself in a little bit of trouble. It may be the "probable cause" an officer needs to give you a ride. To carry in any fashion without all the proper documentation seems risky, not to mention rather inconvenient. If you find yourself in the very situation that you carry your arms to defend against, you're going to need your ID.Only if they are carrying concealed must they show ID Last edited on Sun Sep 21st, 2008 05:33 am by Taurus850CIA |
|||||||||
|
Darth AkSarBen Regular Member
|
Welcome Taurus850CIA !! From the Michigan State Police Bulletin #66 I copied and pasted the following: " Safety Inspection Certificates Michigan law does not require a person to have a copy of their certificate with their pistol after it has been registered; nor does the law require that a person keep a copy. " Now, if someone knows the direct link you can go there and read it, copy it or print it out for yourself. Personally, I made a copy of my safety inspection and have a copy in my billfold and one in a case I transport the pistol in. Once the pistol is registered, any LEO should be able to take down the serial number, and run the info on just that and it should come back who it's registered to. This usually amounts to just seconds. |
|||||||||
|
Venator Regular Member
|
Taurus850CIA wrote: Venator wrote:dougwg wrote:I know this is a somewhat old post, but it's got my curiosity piqued. I'm under the impression that if one is in possession of a handgun, one must also have the safety inspection/registration for it. Even if not, the law does state that loaning/borrowing of handguns is prohibited except between CPL holders. If you are in possession of a handgun, and cannot prove that you are the person who's name is on the registration, you may find yourself in a little bit of trouble. It may be the "probable cause" an officer needs to give you a ride. To carry in any fashion without all the proper documentation seems risky, not to mention rather inconvenient. If you find yourself in the very situation that you carry your arms to defend against, you're going to need your ID.Only if they are carrying concealed must they show ID As you have read the green card myth lives on and you don't need the registration card. When the new law comes into effect you will NOW have to have it for 6 months (why?, don't ask me.) As for the law, the LEO doesn't have PC to see if you own the gun anymore than he has PC to determine if you own your cell phone or the shirt on your back. They have no legal way to determine if you own your guns then they do your TV. So that's crap in regards to LEO's using that excuse to hassle you. |
|||||||||
|
Spyder6510 Regular Member
|
Under the section of "what we hand out to people about open carry" link to the Youtube video is no good... the video has been removed by the owner (see below). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QZtWmivIYw&feature=related |
|||||||||
|
northofnowhere Activist Member
|
If someone has that video, I can host it on my servers. I did purchase a couple related domain names such as miopencarry.org which simply points to the michigan forums here, but would make a nice domain name for files and videos such as that. |
|||||||||
|
Gosirr Regular Member
|
I made this info card. I hope the link works. You should be able to print on a perforated business card sheet. This is something you can carry in your wallet, to give out. http://home.comcast.net/~gosirr/OpenCaryCard.doc edit: link works now-spelling error, Added age per SAS request. Attachment: OpenCaryCard.doc (Downloaded 47 times) Last edited on Sat Oct 4th, 2008 09:20 pm by Gosirr |
|||||||||
|
Big Gay Al Regular Member 
|
Just a thought, has anyone seen this (http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum61/3424.html)? Looks pretty well done. I will grant, our little info packet has a lot of good stuff. But is all of it totally necessary? Might there be a way to condense it down? To be honest, the only problem I have with the MOC info, it exceeds the borders of the printable area that my printer recognizes. So, I either have to change the font size, and/or the margins which usually expand it out to 3 pages, or pick something to delete. Anyway, just a thought I'm tossing out there. |
|||||||||
|
SpringerXDacp Regular Member
|
Big Gay Al wrote: Just a thought, has anyone seen this (http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum61/3424.html)? Al, link does not work. Nor does this: http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum61/3424.html Last edited on Thu Oct 16th, 2008 06:28 am by SpringerXDacp |
|||||||||
|
ghostrider Regular Member
|
SpringerXDacp wrote: Big Gay Al wrote:Try it without the ")?"Just a thought, has anyone seen this (http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum61/3424.html)? http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum61/3424.html |
|||||||||
|
Big Gay Al Regular Member
|
Oops, my bad. |
|||||||||
|
Gosirr Regular Member
|
Where do we buy the "Did you know?" tee shirts? I did a search but cant find it. |
|||||||||
|
warlockmatized Regular Member
|
Gosirr wrote: Where do we buy the "Did you know?" tee shirts? I did a search but cant find it.The thread is located here http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum30/13697.html I would get with Doug (pm/reply/message) and see if he has any left. |
|||||||||
|
MI-copperhead Regular Member 
|
Great post for us newbees. Thanks for making this a sticky. I'm glad I was able to find this site. Earl |
|||||||||
|
zigziggityzoo Campaign Veteran 
|
Chiming in as a newbie. Spread the word to my entire gun club. +50 families on the OC team. /salute! |
|||||||||
|
zigziggityzoo Campaign Veteran
|
Double post... Last edited on Sat Nov 29th, 2008 04:32 am by zigziggityzoo |
|||||||||
|
warlockmatized Regular Member
|
zigziggityzoo wrote: Chiming in as a newbie. Spread the word to my entire gun club. +50 families on the OC team.Welcome to OCDO. Hopefully your message was well received. |
|||||||||
|
zigziggityzoo Campaign Veteran
|
warlockmatized wrote:
Oh it most definitely was. A few people were *somewhat* aware, but none were too keen on trying it. Once they read the laws and AG opinions for themselves, they were convinced. Last edited on Sat Nov 29th, 2008 11:08 pm by zigziggityzoo |
|||||||||
|
USnavySailor Regular Member
|
Great thread! Thank you for the info. Newbie here and very pleased to learn that we can still exercise our rights to open carry here in Michigan. Great news. Thanks for the info! |
|||||||||
|
Venator Regular Member
|
ttt |
|||||||||
|
Venator Regular Member
|
ttt |
|||||||||
|
Galt Regular Member
|
Would it be illegal for a MD "resident" (although 2/3 of the year is spent in MI) to take a pistol into MI just go use it at a range? I know a non-resident can't OC, right? |
|||||||||
|
autosurgeon Regular Member 
|
do you have a concealed carry permit? And does MI reciprocate with MD. If both of those are true then yes! Also you might be able to OC as well. |
|||||||||
|
Galt Regular Member
|
autosurgeon wrote:do you have a concealed carry permit? And does MI reciprocate with MD. If both of those are true then yes! Also you might be able to OC as well. Only in dreams; MD is extremely anti-gun. It's a "may-issue" state, which might as well be no-issue. |
|||||||||
|
autosurgeon Regular Member
|
Well then I am afraid that you cannot even posses a pistol in MI... there might be a hunting provision but I am not sure about that. |
|||||||||