stainless1911
Banned
excuses, excuses.
It has been clearly and publicly stated that the Michigan Legislature is waiting for the Michigan Court of Appeals to Rule on the CADL Case before they act.
Take your angst somewhere else.
Really, when and by whom? Is this "official" or a rumor? Why would the legislature wait for the Michigan Court of Appeals? Perhaps the Michigan Court of Appeals is waiting for the legislature... who knows? It is surprising, too, that people are so quick to say that we should wait for a CADL decision to attempt to carry at the Hoedown... unless I have misunderstood the response.
Really, when and by whom? Is this "official" or a rumor? Why would the legislature wait for the Michigan Court of Appeals? Perhaps the Michigan Court of Appeals is waiting for the legislature... who knows? It is surprising, too, that people are so quick to say that we should wait for a CADL decision to attempt to carry at the Hoedown... unless I have misunderstood the response.
that only accunts for, in a sickeningly weak way, for the legislatures inaction on one small corner of the changes in law that need to be made. It says nothing of their incompetence in other matters such as transportation and PFZs, yet they can still screw around with letting military minors carry, while costing reciprocity in other states.
They had time to introduce it, that means they had time to do something more productive with their time.
They had time to introduce it, that means they had time to do something more productive with their time.
And you had time to write this post...
Whats with you today PD? Not ripping on you or anything, just a little concerned.
yes, Its better than not being able to make rent.
I will refer you to TheQ, scot623, and sprinklerguy as they are who stated it to me (among others - like the lawyers we are working with).
If the Court of Appeals finds CADL is Preempted, then the Preemption Law has been upheld and does not require changes (even though there are changes we would like to see made). This is more than likely how the Michigan Legislators "see" it - Laws are "confirmed" to some degree by court cases such as with CADL (although that is not necessary). I am in no way saying it is "right", but I believe it to be the case.
I do not think people are saying not to carry at the Hoedown, more so that there may not be clear legal standing either way until the CADL Decision is made. I believe that an argument may be made WRT MCL 124.504 more than likely, but I believe that Resources being limited cause priorities to be set.
It has been clearly and publicly stated that the Michigan Legislature is waiting for the Michigan Court of Appeals to Rule on the CADL Case before they act.
Take your angst somewhere else.
When you are plotting the cause and effect you seem to forget that if you had been working maybe you would not be have gotten into the trouble you did.Lets say, for the sake of argument, that I got a job a couple months ago, and I could pay the rent. No food, gas, or medical care mind you, but hey, at least Id have a job right? Then all this crap went down (which I'll explain shortly), and because of it, I can't drive anywhere. I would have lost that job, and then would be evicted at the end of the month.
brilliant plan.
I was just wondering. If the message was that MOC resources are limited and anyone who carries there is on their own, that is fair. But, the way it was written seemed to imply that people shouldn't carry there because the law is unclear. There is a difference, which I think was acknowledged later.
Second, because of the clouded issue of authorities possibly not being covered by preemption, I am not going to pursue a fight against said possible firearm ban unless the CADL case is won giving me clear case law to cite.
Now if anyone else feels up to the task should a firearm ban be enacted, feel free to pursue the issue and post about it here.
Let me clarify. First, I have not heard or been told firearms are banned. Knowing the event organizers and Detroits predisposition against guns(it took me a full year to get them to reverse previous firearm ban, when law was crystal clear), I can only assume they will enact a ban because of the venue change. My post was simply a warning to those who may choose to open carry based on last years success that they may be met with opposition this year. Anyone who wants to OC there...rock on!
Second, because of the clouded issue of authorities possibly not being covered by preemption, I am not going to pursue a fight against said possible firearm ban unless the CADL case is won giving me clear case law to cite.
Now if anyone else feels up to the task should a firearm ban be enacted, feel free to pursue the issue and post about it here.
Scot623, no need to clarify, I realize no one has been told that firearms are banned. I also understood that you assume it may happen... based upon your personal experience. I also understand that for you, personally, you aren't comfortable OCing there at this time. I'm fine with that too.
I would like to direct my thoughts to the the rest of the post. What I find interesting is the amount of weight that is being applied to the CADL issue, not only in this post but in other posts written by others.
I am not trying to downplay the significance of the case, but it's significance comes in possible events, not what has already been done. The ruling, as it stands right now, carries no precedent and has very little that currently threatens carry in Lansing, let alone elsewhere in Michigan.
In regards to the POSSIBLE Court of Appeals decision, let's assume the case is taken up by the Court of Appeals soon and it is decided that CADL's power to regulate firearms is preempted. That outcome may or not be decisive for any other situation: it could be decided narrowly that the CADL can't regulate but not mention other libraries formed under different law; the court could decide that all library authorities are preempted but not mention other authorities; or the court could decide all authorities are preempted. But even with the outcome that seems best, that all authorities are preempted, the court could decide to designate the opinion as "unpublished"... which would mean that it does not stand as precedent for future cases. So basically, only one out of the five outcomes I mentioned would be enough to guarantee, to some degree, that all authorities are specifically preempted and the decision would apply to other cases as precedent. Then, if CADL appeals to the Michigan Supreme Court... :shocker: (Notice I didn't even include the possibility that CADL power to regulate firearms is decided to NOT have been preempted)
My point is... what are the chances that we would receive clear case law that could be cited?
All excellent questions, no one here will be able to answer with any certainty.
It could well be that the Hoedown goes down not even trying to Ban Firearm Carry. Do we even know the answer to that question?