griffin
Regular Member
I agree with this. OP went from OC to CC right before the LEO's eyes.
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Odd LEO encounter in BC
- Thread starter gasgasmi
- Start date
stainless1911
Banned
The constitution says that the right shall not be infringed. That includes regulating how you choose to exercise the right. If you choose to conceal like the criminals do, that is your right.
The law is vague. One part is 'any person...stopped...(traffic stop or otherwise), shall'
What if the LEO, elbow on table, waggles his little finger, saying nothing.
In that event it just looks coy. I don't see this (on foot, him seated, hat off, on private property, off-call eating lunch) as a 'stop'.
That's the problem with CPL disclosure laws. Michigan, Ohio, and a few other states, need to get rid of these laws.
Look at it this way. Say you're a tree cutter and you're wearing plaid shirt, lumberjack attire and boots and you walk into the restaurant with a chain saw (a little one). Is a LEO gonna stop and ID you? (You're on foot because you live two houses over).
NO! Yet a chainsaw is just as 'odd', lethal, dangerous as a firearm. (remember the 20 foot rule on a guy with a knife).
What if the LEO, elbow on table, waggles his little finger, saying nothing.
In that event it just looks coy. I don't see this (on foot, him seated, hat off, on private property, off-call eating lunch) as a 'stop'.
That's the problem with CPL disclosure laws. Michigan, Ohio, and a few other states, need to get rid of these laws.
Look at it this way. Say you're a tree cutter and you're wearing plaid shirt, lumberjack attire and boots and you walk into the restaurant with a chain saw (a little one). Is a LEO gonna stop and ID you? (You're on foot because you live two houses over).
NO! Yet a chainsaw is just as 'odd', lethal, dangerous as a firearm. (remember the 20 foot rule on a guy with a knife).
RenkaiWulf
Regular Member
you can vote as a felon here in Michigan, you just can not vote while serving your sentence
http://www.michigan.gov/sos/0,1607,7-127-1633_11619-123989--,00.html
smellslikemichigan
Campaign Veteran
why, a license is required to drive, but when i enter my vehicle i don't expect to be accosted by the police unless they have prior knowledge that i do not posses a driver's license. the same applies with a CPL. unless the officer has powers that allow him to mind meld or use the force and know whether or not I have a CPL or have RAS that a crime has been or is about to be committed, then he has no reason to ask for a CPL.
stainless1911
Banned
Laws don't make sense, they were written by the senseless.
You can CC at home without a CPL. Why? Its private property. If they want to search your home they need a warrant, why? Because its private property. They also need a warrant to search your car, why? Because it's private property. If you carry a gun in your car without a CPL, its a felony. Make sense?
You can CC at home without a CPL. Why? Its private property. If they want to search your home they need a warrant, why? Because its private property. They also need a warrant to search your car, why? Because it's private property. If you carry a gun in your car without a CPL, its a felony. Make sense?
Bronson
Regular Member
Yance
Regular Member
To further this age old argument..
OCing, as we all know, in michigan requires no license (CPL) therefore the MSP LEO had nothing to confront the OP for because OC is legal with no license require and according to MSP update #86 someone OCing a pistol is to be seen as lawful activity.
Once the OPs jacket covered the pistol he was carrying a firearm concealed on his person, a violation of MCL 750.227 which states a person shall not carry a concealed firearm on or about their person...
The MSP LEO had RAS to question the OP and request to see his CPL due to the fact that the OP was now carrying a concealed weapon in violation of MCL 750.227 unless he is exempt by having a CPL.
Now that the officer has witnessed the OP cover up his firearm he now has a reason to believe that the crime of carrying a concealed firearm is being committed, thus leading to the stop and questioning of the CPL. Once the MSP LEO figured out the OP was exempt by having a valid MI CPL the OP was allowed to go on his way.
PDinDetroit
Regular Member
Yance
Regular Member
You know what I mean... I also did this (CPL) to mean you dont need a CPL or other Carry type permit issued after purchase. 28.422 is obviously a license to carry, but with someone OC it is to be assumed they are legal and in accordance with MCL 28.422 (essentially MSP update 86).
cmdr_iceman71
Regular Member
+ 1
Thanks PDinDetroit you and a few others on this board are very good at retrieving and citing the related laws.
It irks me to no end when I read people saying no license is required to OC in Michigan. I saw that in the comments section of the article regarding the man in Grand Rapids who was detained for OCing at the school while voting. One must remember we have far more newbies and lurkers, than regular particpants so it is important that we state our case most accurately. Why? Because not everyone will know what we really mean to say and then go outside half cocked from a legal point of view.
DrTodd
Michigan Moderator
Thank you... dispelling misinformation is tedious but very necessary
smellslikemichigan
Campaign Veteran
the law requires a license to operate a vehicle, but i don't see police stopping everyone getting into a vehicle to ask to see a driver's license
PDinDetroit
Regular Member
You are most welcome.
Sorry I have not been here as often as I would like. For the past 6 months, I have been having terrible headaches and the doctors are not sure of the cause or solution yet. For those who pray, please do so for me.
stainless1911
Banned
PM sent.
Bronson
Regular Member
In the past they've done that exact thing until the Supreme Court told them to stop doing it. And until the SC told them to stop it was legal for them to do so.
Bronson
DrTodd
Michigan Moderator
In Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S. 648 (1979), the US Supreme Court ruled that the police stopping vehicles for no reason other than to check the drivers' licenses and registrations was unconstitutional.
I've had multiple occasions in which I transferred from OC to CC, or vice versa in which an officer saw me before and afterwards and nothing was said to me.
I had put my jacket on in my car before I got out in a parking lot, and it was covering my handgun I didn't adjust it open until I got out and there happened to be an officer right there sitting in his car.
The other time I was inside a WaWa and there where two officers walking out who definitely saw me OC, and I put my jacket over the gun because it started raining outside and walked outside where they where standing at that point and walked strong side past them and they nodded but said nothing.
I think it depends on the officers and the area that your in, the first time I expected to be stopped because of the county I was in but wasn't the second time I wasn't surprised when nothing was said to me.
I had put my jacket on in my car before I got out in a parking lot, and it was covering my handgun I didn't adjust it open until I got out and there happened to be an officer right there sitting in his car.
The other time I was inside a WaWa and there where two officers walking out who definitely saw me OC, and I put my jacket over the gun because it started raining outside and walked outside where they where standing at that point and walked strong side past them and they nodded but said nothing.
I think it depends on the officers and the area that your in, the first time I expected to be stopped because of the county I was in but wasn't the second time I wasn't surprised when nothing was said to me.
Bronson
Regular Member
Thanks for the cite. My point being that until the Delaware v. Prouse SC ruling the police were doing this and it was considered constitutional because a higher authority hadn't yet told the police that it WASN'T constitutional. The way I see it the same thing will have to happen for concealed carriers before the police are forced to stop detaining them simply for noticing that they are concealing a pistol.
Bronson
gasgasmi
Regular Member
I was surprised this time. I figure he was fishing, or bored, or wanted to intimidate someone that day and I was the first chance. I knew I was legal so I wasn't worried.