Results 1 to 23 of 23

Thread: Man asserts open-carry rights after being asked to leave Flint State of the City Addr

  1. #1
    Campaign Veteran smellslikemichigan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Troy, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,283

    Man asserts open-carry rights after being asked to leave Flint State of the City Addr

    let's start a list of how many laws were violated by flint PD in this incident:

    http://www.mlive.com/news/flint/index.ssf/2012/03/man_asserts_open-carry_rights.html


    "Jason-Michael, an
    Occupy Flint activist
    who asserts his legal right to keep a pistol strapped to his side in plain view, was approached by police and told he had to leave.

    He left without incident, but he isn't happy."

    He plans to write the governor and the sheriff about the issue and said he may take his complaint further.

    "'I'm going to seek some kind of administrational reprieve and if that's not happening... it's going to turn into a lawsuit,' Jason-Michael said."
    Last edited by smellslikemichigan; 03-14-2012 at 11:19 AM.
    "If it ain't loaded and cocked it don't shoot." - Rooster Cogburn
    http://www.graystatemovie.com/

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member thebigsd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Quarryville, PA
    Posts
    3,564
    Well, I hope he follows through with his threat of a lawsuit if the issue is not satisfactorily resolved. It's also pretty bad when the newspaper also references another open carrier getting harassed for a legal activity within the last month.
    "When seconds count between living or dying, the police are only minutes away."

  3. #3
    Regular Member Tucker6900's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Iowa, USA
    Posts
    1,194
    Ok, I may get flamed for this, but here goes.

    I understand not everyone has the ability to stand their ground in these situations. Be it a financial problem or whatever. And Im not trying to say the subject in the story did the wrong thing, but this is the perfect example of letting the law make the mistake of unlawfully arresting the subject. I get that noone wants to be arrested, but in circumstances such as this, it would have been perfect to let them arrest you, and fight it after the fact.

    The issue I see with the way this unfolded, the odds of a lawsuit being filed are slim. No one was injured, unlawfully detained, etc. And dont get me wrong, his rights as a citizen were severly violated. However, a complaint may "slap the hand" of a LEO department, but thats as far as it will go. There needs to be more focus on the fact that law enforcement committed a crime.

    Im not volunteering anyone for this, but its how I feel.

  4. #4
    Campaign Veteran smellslikemichigan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Troy, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,283
    i agree tucker, but as you said, who is going to be "that guy". almost everyone has a reason not to be arrested... whether it be jeopardizing a job or a child custody situation. i think the Flint PD, just by the simple act of kicking him out of the meeting violated at least a couple laws. preemption and open meetings act perhaps? and the chief is unrepentant which does not bode well for them. i think a lawsuit may yield fruit without anyone having to go to jail. that being said, i definitely agree that an unlawful arrest/detention would have gone a long way to solidify a lawsuit.
    a good response from the OC community around flint might to be to turn up en masse to the next public meeting.
    Last edited by smellslikemichigan; 03-14-2012 at 12:44 PM.
    "If it ain't loaded and cocked it don't shoot." - Rooster Cogburn
    http://www.graystatemovie.com/

  5. #5
    Regular Member PDinDetroit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    SE, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,330
    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker6900 View Post
    Ok, I may get flamed for this, but here goes.

    I understand not everyone has the ability to stand their ground in these situations. Be it a financial problem or whatever. And Im not trying to say the subject in the story did the wrong thing, but this is the perfect example of letting the law make the mistake of unlawfully arresting the subject. I get that noone wants to be arrested, but in circumstances such as this, it would have been perfect to let them arrest you, and fight it after the fact.

    The issue I see with the way this unfolded, the odds of a lawsuit being filed are slim. No one was injured, unlawfully detained, etc. And dont get me wrong, his rights as a citizen were severly violated. However, a complaint may "slap the hand" of a LEO department, but thats as far as it will go. There needs to be more focus on the fact that law enforcement committed a crime.

    Im not volunteering anyone for this, but its how I feel.
    If you get arrested, you MAY have a better case in Civil regards. The problem is that you lose "the offensive" and are then required to Defend Oneself from CRIMINAL CHARGES and spend your "capital" on this instead (capital includes resources and possibly Public Opinion).

    Here is the Main Law that was violated here:

    Quote Originally Posted by MCL 752.11
    Upholding or enforcing the law; duty of public officials.

    Sec. 1.

    Any public official, appointed or elected, who is responsible for enforcing or upholding any law of this state and who wilfully and knowingly fails to uphold or enforce the law with the result that any person's legal rights are denied is guilty of a misdemeanor.
    http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-752-11

    The OPEN MEETINGS ACT Act 267 of 1976 was violated as well, in particular MCL 15.263.

    Quote Originally Posted by MCL 15.263
    Meetings, decisions, and deliberations of public body; requirements; attending or addressing meeting of public body; tape-recording, videotaping, broadcasting, and telecasting proceedings; rules and regulations; exclusion from meeting; exemptions.

    Sec. 3.

    (1) All meetings of a public body shall be open to the public and shall be held in a place available to the general public. All persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting except as otherwise provided in this act. The right of a person to attend a meeting of a public body includes the right to tape-record, to videotape, to broadcast live on radio, and to telecast live on television the proceedings of a public body at a public meeting. The exercise of this right shall not be dependent upon the prior approval of the public body. However, a public body may establish reasonable rules and regulations in order to minimize the possibility of disrupting the meeting.

    (2) All decisions of a public body shall be made at a meeting open to the public.

    (3) All deliberations of a public body constituting a quorum of its members shall take place at a meeting open to the public except as provided in this section and sections 7 and 8.

    (4) A person shall not be required as a condition of attendance at a meeting of a public body to register or otherwise provide his or her name or other information or otherwise to fulfill a condition precedent to attendance.

    (5) A person shall be permitted to address a meeting of a public body under rules established and recorded by the public body. The legislature or a house of the legislature may provide by rule that the right to address may be limited to prescribed times at hearings and committee meetings only.

    (6) A person shall not be excluded from a meeting otherwise open to the public except for a breach of the peace actually committed at the meeting.

    (7) This act does not apply to the following public bodies only when deliberating the merits of a case:

    (a) The worker's compensation appeal board created under the worker's disability compensation act of 1969, Act No. 317 of the Public Acts of 1969, as amended, being sections 418.101 to 418.941 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.

    (b) The employment security board of review created under the Michigan employment security act, Act No. 1 of the Public Acts of the Extra Session of 1936, as amended, being sections 421.1 to 421.73 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.

    (c) The state tenure commission created under Act No. 4 of the Public Acts of the Extra Session of 1937, as amended, being sections 38.71 to 38.191 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, when acting as a board of review from the decision of a controlling board.

    (d) An arbitrator or arbitration panel appointed by the employment relations commission under the authority given the commission by Act No. 176 of the Public Acts of 1939, as amended, being sections 423.1 to 423.30 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.

    (e) An arbitration panel selected under chapter 50A of the revised judicature act of 1961, Act No. 236 of the Public Acts of 1961, being sections 600.5040 to 600.5065 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.

    (f) The Michigan public service commission created under Act No. 3 of the Public Acts of 1939, being sections 460.1 to 460.8 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.

    (8) This act does not apply to an association of insurers created under the insurance code of 1956, Act No. 218 of the Public Acts of 1956, being sections 500.100 to 500.8302 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, or other association or facility formed under Act No. 218 of the Public Acts of 1956 as a nonprofit organization of insurer members.

    (9) This act does not apply to a committee of a public body which adopts a nonpolicymaking resolution of tribute or memorial which resolution is not adopted at a meeting.

    (10) This act does not apply to a meeting which is a social or chance gathering or conference not designed to avoid this act.

    (11) This act shall not apply to the Michigan veterans' trust fund board of trustees or a county or district committee created under Act No. 9 of the Public Acts of the first extra session of 1946, being sections 35.601 to 35.610 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, when the board of trustees or county or district committee is deliberating the merits of an emergent need. A decision of the board of trustees or county or district committee made under this subsection shall be reconsidered by the board or committee at its next regular or special meeting consistent with the requirements of this act. “Emergent need” means a situation which the board of trustees, by rules promulgated under the administrative procedures act of 1969, Act No. 306 of the Public Acts of 1969, as amended, being sections 24.201 to 24.328 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, determines requires immediate action.
    http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-15-263

    Here are the Penalties for Violating the OPEN MEETINGS ACT Act 267 of 1976:

    Quote Originally Posted by OPEN MEETINGS ACT Act 267 of 1976
    MCL 15.272 Violation as misdemeanor; penalty.

    Sec. 12.

    (1) A public official who intentionally violates this act is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than $1,000.00.

    (2) A public official who is convicted of intentionally violating a provision of this act for a second time within the same term shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be fined not more than $2,000.00, or imprisoned for not more than 1 year, or both.

    MCL 15.273 Violation; liability.

    Sec. 13.

    (1) A public official who intentionally violates this act shall be personally liable in a civil action for actual and exemplary damages of not more than $500.00 total, plus court costs and actual attorney fees to a person or group of persons bringing the action.

    (2) Not more than 1 action under this section shall be brought against a public official for a single meeting. An action under this section shall be commenced within 180 days after the date of the violation which gives rise to the cause of action.

    (3) An action for damages under this section may be joined with an action for injunctive or exemplary relief under section 11.
    http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-15-272
    http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-15-273
    http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-act-267-of-1976

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,952
    Sooner or later, some cop is going to go to jail over this. Then, its on. They are going to seek retaliation, and the gun owners will become more emboldened to assert rights like open carry, and filing suits that they should have been doing all along.

  7. #7
    Regular Member PDinDetroit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    SE, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,330
    Citizen Open Carrying at City Council Meeting: ZERO LAWS VIOLATED.

    Police Officers Telling Citizen Open Carrying at City Council Meeting that HE MUST LEAVE: Multiple Rights Violations, Multiple Misdemeanor Violations, Responsible for Multiple Civil Liabilities.

    Rights Violations: US Constitution 1st Amendment, US Constitution 2nd Amendment, MI Constitution Article I Section 3, MI Constitution Article I Section 5, MI Constitution Article I Section 6, Michigan Open Meetings Act of 1976.

    Misdemeanor Violations: MCL 752.11, MCL 15.263 subsections (1) (4) (6) (Misdemeanor Penalty in MCL 16.272).

    Civil Liabilities: 42 USC § 1983 (Civil action for deprivation of rights), MCL 15.271, MCL 15.273

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,952
    The misdemeanors were the laws that were violated.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Eastpointe, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,440
    MOC was interviewed by MLive for a follow up story. Stay tuned.

  10. #10
    Regular Member PDinDetroit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    SE, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,330
    Quote Originally Posted by scot623 View Post
    MOC was interviewed by MLive for a follow up story. Stay tuned.
    Schweet! Good job sir!

    BTW - I put a "little birdie" in the ear of the article's author to run a follow-up story. I hope I have been helping here (put a ton of comments out there on the article).

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Eastpointe, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,440

  12. #12
    Campaign Veteran Glock9mmOldStyle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Taylor, Wayne County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,048

    Lightbulb +1 Rob - Maybe we should visit them?

    Damn insomnia; couldn't sleep so I started digging. Buried in the Flint City webpages {not under council were most rational people would look} I found the following:

    http://www.cityofflint.com/clerk/cc_faq.asp (See # 5 - 7)

    Snip:

    City Council meets on the second and fourth Monday of every month at 5:30 p.m. Special meetings may be called by the Mayor or by any two (2) members of the Council upon twenty-four (24) hours notice to each Council member and the public stating the purpose of the meeting.

    A special meeting that is called a City Council meeting requires posting for eighteen (18) hours.

    Committee meetings on the Wednesday before any regularly scheduled Council meeting.

    Councils Special Affairs Committee meets at 4 p.m. prior to any regularly scheduled Council meeting. These times are subject to change.

    The Council conducts it's business in the Council Chambers or in the Committee-of-the Whole conference room. Both are located on the third floor of the city hall building. On occasion the Council can meet at other locations.

    *All citizens have the opportunity to be heard at all regular meetings of the council. If a member of the public is addressing Council at a scheduled public hearing, he or she gains recognition from the Chair by standing. If a member of the public wishes to speak on any other matter before Council, ** he or she shall submit a statement in writing containing his or her name, address and the topic to be covered. This statement will be put into a box before the Council meeting begins. This box is located at the entrance of the Council Chambers. *These rules violate the MI open meetings act in two ways: They require citizens to identify themselves in order to speak and they are "attempting" to limit comments to "any other matter before council". Figures from a city under control of a EFM that they cannot follow the law.
    http://www.legislature.mi.gov/docume...tgsfreedom.pdf
    15.263 Meetings, decisions, and deliberations of public body; requirements; attending or addressing meeting of public body;
    tape-recording, videotaping, broadcasting, and telecasting proceedings; rules and regulations; exclusion from meeting;
    exemptions.
    Sec. 3. (1) All meetings of a public body shall be open to the public and shall be held in a place available to the general
    public. All persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting except as otherwise provided in this act. The right of a person to
    attend a meeting of a public body includes the right to tape-record, to videotape, to broadcast live on radio, and to telecast live
    on television the proceedings of a public body at a public meeting. The exercise of this right shall not be dependent upon the
    prior approval of the public body. However, a public body may establish reasonable rules and regulations in order to minimize
    the possibility of disrupting the meeting.
    (2) All decisions of a public body shall be made at a meeting open to the public.
    (3) All deliberations of a public body constituting a quorum of its members shall take place at a meeting open to the public
    except as provided in this section and sections 7 and 8.
    (4) A person shall not be required as a condition of attendance at a meeting of a public body to register or otherwise provide
    his or her name or other information or otherwise to fulfill a condition precedent to attendance.

    (5) A person shall be permitted to address a meeting of a public body under rules established and recorded by the public
    body. The legislature or a house of the legislature may provide by rule that the right to address may be limited to prescribed
    times at hearings and committee meetings only.
    (6) A person shall not be excluded from a meeting otherwise open to the public except for a breach of the peace actually
    committed at the meeting.


    They say that all are invited to attend and comment is assumed to be part of that attendance, yet they attempt to intimidate people who speak by asking for their personal information. In effect they are saying you cannot speak unless you can be added to a database of theirs. While I don't care that much about giving them personal info, their intent is clear & it is not to put you on a X-mas card list. I have found more often than not members will not read their home addresses into the record. Once again, do as we say & not as we do government at work.
    Council Info
    Phone: 810-766-7418
    Fax: 810-766-7032

    Location
    3rd Floor City Hall
    Room 310
    1101 S. Saginaw St.
    Flint. MI 48502

    Business Hours: Monday to Friday
    8 a.m. to 5 p.m.



    It appears that Flint's Court is in another building located at:
    68th District Court
    Floyd J McCree Building
    630 S. Saginaw Street; Flint, Michigan 48502
    Located on Saginaw Street between 2nd and 3rd Street
    http://www.68thdistrictcourt.com/

    Going by the information above it looks like the next meeting(s) will be on Monday March 26 at 5:30pm. Then in April on the 9th & the 23rd.
    I would be happy to attend and coordinate a carpool(s) from the Metro Detroit area if anyone is interested in going once a date is picked.

    Kind Regards - G9OS
    Attached Files Attached Files
    Last edited by Glock9mmOldStyle; 03-16-2012 at 02:59 AM. Reason: pdf
    “A government that does not trust it’s law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms is itself unworthy of trust.” James Madison.

    “Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples' liberty's teeth.” “The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good.” George Washington

  13. #13
    Regular Member TheQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Lansing, Michigan
    Posts
    3,429
    I'd rather not go all "in your face" straight out. I am presently looking for a volunteer in the MOC leadership wiling to communicate with Flint cordially. If all else fails -- sure, we can mass OC and even involve more media.

    Of course, I'm only speaking for MOC -- individuals can and will do as they may. *shrugs* I'm just trying to avoid the "in your face" logo so many on MGO assign to us by suggesting we try civil and quiet discussions first.
    Last edited by TheQ; 03-16-2012 at 09:09 AM.
    Call for a cop, call for an ambulance, and call for a pizza. See who shows up first.

    I am not a lawyer (merely an omnipotent member of a continuum). The contents of this post are not a substitute for sound legal advice from a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.

    Comments and views stated in my post are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of Michigan Open Carry, Inc. unless stated otherwise in the post.

  14. #14
    Regular Member PDinDetroit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    SE, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,330
    Quote Originally Posted by TheQ View Post
    I'd rather not go all "in your face" straight out. I am presently looking for a volunteer in the MOC leadership wiling to communicate with Flint cordially. If all else fails -- sure, we can mass OC and even involve more media.

    If course, I'm only speaking for MOC -- individuals can and will do as they may. *shrugs* I'm just trying to avoid the "in your face" logo so many on MGO assign to us by suggesting we try civil and quiet discussions first.
    +1.

    We attempt to "work with" not "against" City Officials, despite what they may have done.

  15. #15
    Campaign Veteran Glock9mmOldStyle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Taylor, Wayne County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,048

    Thumbs up +1

    Quote Originally Posted by TheQ View Post
    I'd rather not go all "in your face" straight out. I am presently looking for a volunteer in the MOC leadership wiling to communicate with Flint cordially. If all else fails -- sure, we can mass OC and even involve more media.

    Of course, I'm only speaking for MOC -- individuals can and will do as they may. *shrugs* I'm just trying to avoid the "in your face" logo so many on MGO assign to us by suggesting we try civil and quiet discussions first.
    Yes - I agree that we should work with them if possible. I know in the past that Flint city officials have been somewhat "hostile" to OCers, very similar in attitudes to their bankrupt colleagues in Pontiac. Now that may have changed, and I hope that's the case here, but if not, I and others stand ready to assist in any way possible.
    “A government that does not trust it’s law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms is itself unworthy of trust.” James Madison.

    “Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples' liberty's teeth.” “The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good.” George Washington

  16. #16
    Regular Member griffin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Okemos, MI
    Posts
    850
    Quote Originally Posted by Glock9mmOldStyle View Post
    *These rules violate the MI open meetings act in two ways: They require citizens to identify themselves in order to speak and they are "attempting" to limit comments to "any other matter before council".
    If I am reading this right, it doesn't appear they are actually violating the open meetings act. They don't require people to identify to attend the meetings, which is all it states. They also don't require people to identify beforehand or submit questions beforehand if they are going to speak to matters currently before the council. They only require people to identify and submit questions beforehand if they want to talk about other matters which currently are not before the council. In any event, it doesn't appear to me they are violating any laws, unless I am missing something.
    Last edited by griffin; 03-16-2012 at 05:49 PM.
    "If we lose freedom here, there's no place to escape to."
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." – William F. Buckley
    "...go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains set lightly upon you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." – Samuel Adams
    Wheels

  17. #17
    Campaign Veteran Glock9mmOldStyle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Taylor, Wayne County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,048
    Quote Originally Posted by griffin View Post
    If I am reading this right, it doesn't appear they are actually violating the open meetings act. They don't require people to identify to attend the meetings, which is all it states. They also don't require people to identify beforehand or submit questions beforehand if they are going to speak to matters currently before the council. They only require people to identify and submit questions beforehand if they want to talk about other matters which currently are not before the council. In any event, it doesn't appear to me they are violating any laws, unless I am missing something.
    You are correct. To the "wriggle" of the law. However if you say all are welcome that would imply that all are welcome to speak without worry of retribution. This was the intent of this ACT. Of course given an inch some will twist & bend to get a mile. I always counter this by simply saying to a council the following: "I would be happy to read my full legal name and address into the record if all the members will do the same first." To date (3) times, they (city council members around the area) refused to do so. So what does that tell you of their intentions?
    Last edited by Glock9mmOldStyle; 03-16-2012 at 06:01 PM. Reason: icon
    “A government that does not trust it’s law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms is itself unworthy of trust.” James Madison.

    “Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples' liberty's teeth.” “The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good.” George Washington

  18. #18
    Regular Member PDinDetroit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    SE, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,330
    Quote Originally Posted by griffin View Post
    If I am reading this right, it doesn't appear they are actually violating the open meetings act. They don't require people to identify to attend the meetings, which is all it states. They also don't require people to identify beforehand or submit questions beforehand if they are going to speak to matters currently before the council. They only require people to identify and submit questions beforehand if they want to talk about other matters which currently are not before the council. In any event, it doesn't appear to me they are violating any laws, unless I am missing something.
    Quote Originally Posted by MCL 15.263
    Meetings, decisions, and deliberations of public body; requirements; attending or addressing meeting of public body; tape-recording, videotaping, broadcasting, and telecasting proceedings; rules and regulations; exclusion from meeting; exemptions.

    Sec. 3.

    (1) All meetings of a public body shall be open to the public and shall be held in a place available to the general public. All persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting except as otherwise provided in this act. The right of a person to attend a meeting of a public body includes the right to tape-record, to videotape, to broadcast live on radio, and to telecast live on television the proceedings of a public body at a public meeting. The exercise of this right shall not be dependent upon the prior approval of the public body. However, a public body may establish reasonable rules and regulations in order to minimize the possibility of disrupting the meeting.

    (2) All decisions of a public body shall be made at a meeting open to the public.

    (3) All deliberations of a public body constituting a quorum of its members shall take place at a meeting open to the public except as provided in this section and sections 7 and 8.

    (4) A person shall not be required as a condition of attendance at a meeting of a public body to register or otherwise provide his or her name or other information or otherwise to fulfill a condition precedent to attendance.

    (5) A person shall be permitted to address a meeting of a public body under rules established and recorded by the public body. The legislature or a house of the legislature may provide by rule that the right to address may be limited to prescribed times at hearings and committee meetings only.

    (6) A person shall not be excluded from a meeting otherwise open to the public except for a breach of the peace actually committed at the meeting.

    (7) This act does not apply to the following public bodies only when deliberating the merits of a case:

    (a) The worker's compensation appeal board created under the worker's disability compensation act of 1969, Act No. 317 of the Public Acts of 1969, as amended, being sections 418.101 to 418.941 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.

    (b) The employment security board of review created under the Michigan employment security act, Act No. 1 of the Public Acts of the Extra Session of 1936, as amended, being sections 421.1 to 421.73 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.

    (c) The state tenure commission created under Act No. 4 of the Public Acts of the Extra Session of 1937, as amended, being sections 38.71 to 38.191 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, when acting as a board of review from the decision of a controlling board.

    (d) An arbitrator or arbitration panel appointed by the employment relations commission under the authority given the commission by Act No. 176 of the Public Acts of 1939, as amended, being sections 423.1 to 423.30 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.

    (e) An arbitration panel selected under chapter 50A of the revised judicature act of 1961, Act No. 236 of the Public Acts of 1961, being sections 600.5040 to 600.5065 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.

    (f) The Michigan public service commission created under Act No. 3 of the Public Acts of 1939, being sections 460.1 to 460.8 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.

    (8) This act does not apply to an association of insurers created under the insurance code of 1956, Act No. 218 of the Public Acts of 1956, being sections 500.100 to 500.8302 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, or other association or facility formed under Act No. 218 of the Public Acts of 1956 as a nonprofit organization of insurer members.

    (9) This act does not apply to a committee of a public body which adopts a nonpolicymaking resolution of tribute or memorial which resolution is not adopted at a meeting.

    (10) This act does not apply to a meeting which is a social or chance gathering or conference not designed to avoid this act.

    (11) This act shall not apply to the Michigan veterans' trust fund board of trustees or a county or district committee created under Act No. 9 of the Public Acts of the first extra session of 1946, being sections 35.601 to 35.610 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, when the board of trustees or county or district committee is deliberating the merits of an emergent need. A decision of the board of trustees or county or district committee made under this subsection shall be reconsidered by the board or committee at its next regular or special meeting consistent with the requirements of this act. “Emergent need” means a situation which the board of trustees, by rules promulgated under the administrative procedures act of 1969, Act No. 306 of the Public Acts of 1969, as amended, being sections 24.201 to 24.328 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, determines requires immediate action.
    MCL 15.263 subsections (1) (4) (6) were violated by the Flint Police Department.

    MCL 15.263 subsection (1): A person was not allowed to attend the meeting of the Public Body. They were told to leave where no provision of the Open Meetings Act provides for removal from the meeting for carrying a pistol openly.

    MCL 15.263 subsection (4): A person was not allowed to attend the meeting of the Public Body unless they disarm and do not carry a pistol openly. This would be a condition precedent to attendance at the meeting of the Public Body, which is clearly not allowed.

    MCL 15.263 subsection (6): A person was not allowed to attend the meeting of the Public Body for carrying a pistol openly. The only way to exclude a person is due to a breach of the peace actually committed at the meeting, which the person would have been charged for or at least mentioned in the News Articles.

  19. #19
    Regular Member PDinDetroit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    SE, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,330

  20. #20
    Campaign Veteran Glock9mmOldStyle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Taylor, Wayne County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,048

    Unhappy

    Quote Originally Posted by PDinDetroit View Post
    Lots of negative comments from the feelings crowd. If possible I urge any who care, to post in the comments section to this story.
    Last edited by Glock9mmOldStyle; 03-17-2012 at 10:57 AM.
    “A government that does not trust it’s law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms is itself unworthy of trust.” James Madison.

    “Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples' liberty's teeth.” “The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good.” George Washington

  21. #21
    Regular Member griffin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Okemos, MI
    Posts
    850
    PDinDetroit, my reply has nothing to do with the Flint police incident. I was replying to Glock9mmOldStyle about something different.
    "If we lose freedom here, there's no place to escape to."
    "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." – William F. Buckley
    "...go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains set lightly upon you; and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen." – Samuel Adams
    Wheels

  22. #22
    Michigan Moderator Shadow Bear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Grand Rapids
    Posts
    987
    Oh, dear- next someone will 'disrupt' things by using their First Amendment rights. We should get rid of this open meeting nonsense forthwith. The people need to trust their government to do the right thing without a bunch of slack jawed yokels horning in!

    /sarc
    'If the people are not ready for the exercise of the non-violence of the brave, they must be ready for the use of force in self defense. There should be no camouflage.....it must never be secret.' MK Gandhi II-146 (Gandhi on Non-Violence)-- Gandhi supports open carry!

    'There is nothing more demoralizing than the fake non-violence of the weak and impotent.' MK Gandhi II-153 (Gandhi on Non-Violence)

  23. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,952
    They really dont care what people say anyhow, might as well.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •