• 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.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • 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.

Gun on his hip, state Sen. Arlan Meekhof demonstrates his support for allowing CC

xmanhockey7

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2010
Messages
1,195
Concerns about reciprocity handling of the additional exemption is probably something best hammered out in another bill after we have some experience behind us with this bill. I don't see this bill harming our reciprocity.

I understand I'm just saying now that this seems to be a trend maybe there will be reciprocation for it. Hopefully we can get full reciprocity back in this state in another bill, the way it was when we were may issue.
 

PDinDetroit

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2009
Messages
2,328
Location
SE, Michigan, USA
Huh? How would where our state allows its own residents to carry have any effect on another state? You keep coming up with niggling little arguments that don't make sense. Who are you and what have you done with NCHEDOIINVLSJO47859374H3OH?

Bronson

rofl128589139170898009.jpg
 

Venator

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Messages
6,462
Location
Lansing area, Michigan, USA
Probably both, I see the additional training to cost 50 to 150 dollars additional, or whatever the NRA class costs if you were to take it as a stand alone class.



The statement brought up another worry, will we loose reciprical agreements with other states? Since or restrictions have been lowered? That would certainly be a serious concern. Right now MI CPL's are the most recognized license to be had.

1 last thing could we get a non-resident license abillity in this bill?? That would be a great way for some extra funds for MI.

Actually the change increases the standards just by raising the number of shots fired for a regular CPL. Nothing other changes in that regard.

If you want to CC in our PFZ, you have to TAKE MORE training. So over all Michigan requires more training than any state.

I don't see our reciprocity changing at all.
 

G22

Regular Member
Joined
May 16, 2010
Messages
74
Location
Michigan, USA
Actually the change increases the standards just by raising the number of shots fired for a regular CPL. Nothing other changes in that regard.

If you want to CC in our PFZ, you have to TAKE MORE training. So over all Michigan requires more training than any state.

I don't see our reciprocity changing at all.

I've taken HG1 twice, HG2 once, and carbine1 from MDFI. Close to 1000rds each class. While I have not taken PPOTH NRA class, I dare say that MDFI is far better...but most likely cannot be used to fulfill the requirements.

I also don't see reciprocity changing. When in another state we already have to abide by their rules, not those of Michigan.
 
Last edited:

ManInBlack

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2006
Messages
1,551
Location
SW Idaho
The most liberty oriented CPLs too. Show me another state that has a concealment license where the only place you couldn't carry is state-overseen casinos and courts. Even the so-called "Constitutional Carry" states have restrictions.

In Idaho, the only places off limits to those concealing with a permit are courthouses, jails, and K-12 schools. If you are open carrying with/without a permit, you are only prohibited from K-12 schools.

Are you allowed to carry concealed in jails in Michigan?
 

ManInBlack

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2006
Messages
1,551
Location
SW Idaho
Non-residents are zero concern of mine. If you want our gun laws, move here.

I certainly don't want your gun laws. You all are making progress, but compared to most of the west, they suck. No offense.

I was responding to theQ's assertion, but thanks for your worthless, bandwidth-wasting comment.
 

PDinDetroit

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2009
Messages
2,328
Location
SE, Michigan, USA
I certainly don't want your gun laws. You all are making progress, but compared to most of the west, they suck. No offense.

I was responding to theQ's assertion, but thanks for your worthless, bandwidth-wasting comment.

Hey! We have not seen you trolling the Michigan Forum of OCDO in a while. How have you been?
 

ManInBlack

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2006
Messages
1,551
Location
SW Idaho
Is anyone going to discuss my comment on TheQ's assertion that Michigan has "the most liberty oriented CPLs," or are you just going to engage in baseless attacks?

For the record, I don't "troll" the Michigan section. I actually spend a fair amount of time in Michigan as I have family and property there. Even if I didn't, welcome to the internet. This isn't your private club.
 
Last edited:

detroit_fan

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Messages
1,172
Location
Monroe, Michigan, USA
can we please stay civil and not get this thread locked like the other one. this is a big bill for those of us in MI, and it may be moving fast, lets not get distracted from it by arguing over petty crap, please.

maninblack- please just drop it and quit encouraging an argument, if you really care about MI laws than your time would be much better spent helping us spread the word about this bill and supporting it. thanks
 

scot623

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
1,421
Location
Eastpointe, Michigan, USA
1 last thing could we get a non-resident license abillity in this bill?? That would be a great way for some extra funds for MI.

This is the only person in this thread who asked about non-resident permits. Because of that fact, my post was directed at THIS statement. Sorry maninblack...I wasn't talking to you.
 

MKEgal

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
4,383
Location
in front of my computer, WI
stainless1911 said:
It's a step towards Constitutional Carry.
:question: I don't understand.
It looks to me like the restrictions on lawful carry will become greater, or at the very least more complicated & expensive than they already are.

Making fewer (or no) criminal empowerment zones would be progress,
or making a carry license easier &/or less expensive to obtain.

Also, how would these new laws affect what non-MI licenses are accepted in MI?
Would other states' licenses only be accepted if their training requirements matched MI?
If not, why?
Would other states' licenses only be accepted for the lower level of MI permit, or for complete reciprocity?
Again, why?
If someone with, say, a PA license [background check only] is allowed to carry in MI, why should residents be held to a (much!) higher standard?

And before I get ignored as being a non-resident, I'm right next door in WI.
At least the non-resident parts affect me.
 

PDinDetroit

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2009
Messages
2,328
Location
SE, Michigan, USA
Is anyone going to discuss my comment on TheQ's assertion that Michigan has "the most liberty oriented CPLs," or are you just going to engage in baseless attacks?

For the record, I don't "troll" the Michigan section. I actually spend a fair amount of time in Michigan as I have family and property there. Even if I didn't, welcome to the internet. This isn't your private club.

See? I ask how you are and this is how you reply. :p

We have "been here, done this before" and you like to attack rather than discuss. It was so easy to draw you out...

It looks like Idaho has some pretty good laws on locations to carry being allowed. Congrats! As for other States, not so much. Since you are the one who wants to take issue with TheQ's statement, please have fun with it yourself!
 

detroit_fan

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Messages
1,172
Location
Monroe, Michigan, USA
:question: I don't understand.
It looks to me like the restrictions on lawful carry will become greater, or at the very least more complicated & expensive than they already are.

Making fewer (or no) criminal empowerment zones would be progress,
or making a carry license easier &/or less expensive to obtain.

Also, how would these new laws affect what non-MI licenses are accepted in MI?
Would other states' licenses only be accepted if their training requirements matched MI?
If not, why?
Would other states' licenses only be accepted for the lower level of MI permit, or for complete reciprocity?
Again, why?
If someone with, say, a PA license [background check only] is allowed to carry in MI, why should residents be held to a (much!) higher standard?

And before I get ignored as being a non-resident, I'm right next door in WI.
At least the non-resident parts affect me.

All that will change with the current license is that you will have to fire more rounds. The PFZ exemption level license will be optional, so the added cost and training will only apply if you want those exceptions. It's better than what we have now because currently there is no lawful way for us to CC in the PFZ's.

I don't think it will affect what non-resident licenses are accepted, as far as I know MI honors ALL state permits, even ones like PA and GA that require no shooting. As far as why would a MI resident be held to a higher standard that is a legit question, but what is the alternative? Only allow reciprocity with states that match our training requirement? I think our policy to honor all licenses regardless of training qualifications is the best it can be, what else could we do in that area that would be better?

This bill is not perfect, but it is better than what we have now, which is NO way to CC in PFZ's. With this bill at least you will have that option if you are willing to do the extra day of class. If this bill passes and the public can see that allowing carry in the PFZ's is a non-issue, I think in the future you will just see 1 level of CPL, and that will allow PFZ's exemptions. Baby steps is better than no steps imo, and we have had no steps in MI for a LONG time.

OT- hope your case gets settled soon, I donated already and will try to donate more soon.
 

PDinDetroit

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2009
Messages
2,328
Location
SE, Michigan, USA
:question: I don't understand.
It looks to me like the restrictions on lawful carry will become greater, or at the very least more complicated & expensive than they already are.

Making fewer (or no) criminal empowerment zones would be progress,
or making a carry license easier &/or less expensive to obtain.

Also, how would these new laws affect what non-MI licenses are accepted in MI?
Would other states' licenses only be accepted if their training requirements matched MI?
If not, why?
Would other states' licenses only be accepted for the lower level of MI permit, or for complete reciprocity?
Again, why?
If someone with, say, a PA license [background check only] is allowed to carry in MI, why should residents be held to a (much!) higher standard?

And before I get ignored as being a non-resident, I'm right next door in WI.
At least the non-resident parts affect me.

Today, regular everyday citizens in Michigan have slim to no hope of getting the "Exempt" Status their CPL for Concealed Pistol Free Zones (and Slim just left town on a fast horse). This bill provides the ability of getting the "Exempt" Status from Concealed Pistol Free Zones which is progress. I would like more progress than this and less cost, but here in Michigan is takes time to get there.

Before 2001, there were NO CONCEALED CARRY PISTOL FREE ZONES and CCW's were "May Issue" (which were very difficult to get). In 2001, the only way that "Shall Issue" for CPL's was going to pass was to include Concealed Carry Pistol Free Zones due to specific Organizations not supporting without that (and Concealed Carry in such zones is only Civil Infraction). Now in 2012 that "blood did not run in the streets" nor did Michigan become "the Wild West/OK Corral with shootouts", these same Organizations are OK with allowing Expanded Exemptions which will weigh heavily with the ability to Relax Restrictions in Pistol Free Zones. Down the road, these efforts add up to help moving towards Constitutional Carry in Michigan.

As to changing reciprocity, the existing agreements would likely stay in place with the Michigan Attorney General having to determine how the New Exemptions would be mapped to existing reciprocity.
 

hermannr

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2011
Messages
2,327
Location
Okanogan Highland
The most liberty oriented CPLs too. Show me another state that has a concealment license where the only place you couldn't carry is state-overseen casinos and courts. Even the so-called "Constitutional Carry" states have restrictions.

I don't know, Washington State does pretty good...You can OC into the State Senate Chambers (or town council) here without any license or any training, or you can CC into the same places with a CPL if that is what you like.

We have the standard courthouse (they have to have an electronic screening and a lock box) stuff, the one "off" place might be that a "over 21 only" bar is restricted, but you can OC or CC in a retaurant that serves, and you can drink too if you wish...same rules for carry as for driving. Local governments cannot make laws concerning firearms that conflict with State law, at all. Same laws everywhere in the state. RCW 9.41.300 for what the towns and counties can do. RCW 9.41.050 for the state prohibitions, and .060 for the exceptions if you care to look.

Our CPL requires no training, must issue (unless a federal prohibited person), non-resident must issue, same terms. $55.25 for 5 years.

Could there be a couple changes that would make it even better? Yes, like, you could carry in any place of public accomodation (as definded in the ADA) That would keep retail from telling you to leave if you have a carry. BTW: Signs mean nothing, you have to be told by the owner/representitive of the establishment.
 
Last edited:
Top