What's the latest news on HB 5225?

stainless1911 said:

Unless you don't qualify to use your rights, then it starts looking pretty good.

Click to expand...

Should say something like "Unless you've done something wrong and lose the right, then it starts looking pretty good". The way you make it sound you were to short or a bad shot, so you didnt qualify.

If we go to Constitutional Carry, like we should, the CPL should remain available to everyone, and have the restrictions removed so that people like me, the M1 Kid, and a few others like us could get one. That way you're covered in the GFSZs as well as the other states that are still under a tyrannous dictatorship.

Maybe the kid that got thrown in JV for beating his first grade teacher to death with a mace could be given one too. "Shall not be infringed" means....well...


Right?

WilDChilD said:

Should say something like "Unless you've done something wrong and lose the right, then it starts looking pretty good". The way you make it sound you were to short or a bad shot, so you didnt qualify.

Click to expand...

A right that can be lost isn't a right.

I maintain my position on people who cannot qualify.

I hope you're not confused about your rights. I mean, do you really think you have a right to carry into a church, nevermind that the first amendment is supposed to protect that right as well as the second. And I do hope you don't think that you have the right to carry a gun in your own car, because I got news, you don't. And I wouldn't want you to be deluded into thinking you have a right to protect yourself and your children at their school, because that simply isn t true. Or in thinking that you have the right to carry at a place that is charged with the safety of your kids while they are being watched after school. Or maybe you thought you had the right to carry a gun into the places that sell alcohol in the state, regardless if you ever drink. Or maybe a hospital, a place you would assume your health and your life are of a little bit higher value than most others. You dont have the right to carry ion a casino either, but if you are there, you are already taking chances, so what does it really matter?

NHCGRPR45 said:

Constitutional carry isn't the magic bullet some think it is, in the states that have it there are a great many places off limits to people with firearms. Our state with the current system is just plain better than they are. We are virtually unlimited in where we can have a firearm, either open or concealed. All the places we can't carry can be counted on 1 hand with fingers to spare. We get so caught up on an idea that no one thinks about what might happen if we actually get what you want. Simply not having to get a cpl to carry a gun isn't worth what we may have to lose to get that kind of system. ConCarry is like a dog chasing a car he wouldn't be able to do anything once he caught it, if he catches it.

Same thing with this bill, it hurts more people than it helps, we get caught up on one idea, no "registration" and forget what could happen to people if that happens.

Click to expand...

Can you cite to the bold part. Every state is different. In Michigan if Con Carry were being discusses, these things would be worked out. The one thing that needs to be corrected is CC in a vehicle without a license. Once that is granted the other PFZ could be worked on.

I would think MOC would be all over CON CARRY as it would allow OC or CC most anywhere without permission from the state.

As for the GFSZ, reciprocity, etc... a permit would still be available for those that want it. EASY PESY.

Venator said:

Can you cite to the bold part. Every state is different. In Michigan if Con Carry were being discusses, these things would be worked out. The one thing that needs to be corrected is CC in a vehicle without a license. Once that is granted the other PFZ could be worked on.

I would think MOC would be all over CON CARRY as it would allow OC or CC most anywhere without permission from the state.

As for the GFSZ, reciprocity, etc... a permit would still be available for those that want it. EASY PESY.

Click to expand...

What about those that couldnt get one, even if it would be available under Con Carry?

See what I was talking about is, getting rid of the PP and GFZS's is like getting rid of the CPL and GFSZ's. Something I think people over looked when rallying for and supporting Con Carry but opposing the repeal of the PP system. All in all its the same thing, so thats why I stated "would those of you opposing the PP repeal also oppose Con Carry?"

Even if we achieved Con Carry and still offered the CPL, those that cant qualify for a CPL now wouldnt qualify for one at that point unless the (extremely) long list of disqualifications is reviewed and shortened to only severe crimes. So if those circumstances existed, offering a CPL for exemption is still a moot point for some people.

However, I think getting 750.227 repealed should be a priority because that is something that effects everyone, CPL or not. Its an unconstitutional law, you mean to tell me the state recognizes my car as my property under the 4th Amendment because they require a warrant to search it, but at the same time its not my property so I cant possess a gun while driving or occupying my vehicle??

I received a Reply to the Email I sent to the Bill's Sponsor (Paul Opsommer). It appears that there is a Substitute Bill in the works that is similar to what I was proposing ("We currently have a substitute bill that is very similar to what I believe you are proposing"). More will be revealed...

Cant wait.

Venator said:

I would think MOC would be all over CON CARRY as it would allow OC or CC most anywhere without permission from the state.

Click to expand...

Who said they weren't?

scot623 said:

Who said they weren't?

Click to expand...

By their actions, or lack of.

Venator said:

By their actions, or lack of.

Click to expand...

Hmmm...maybe I'm obtuse, you'll need to expand on that.

Venator said:

I would think MOC would be all over CON CARRY as it would allow OC or CC most anywhere without permission from the state.

Click to expand...

The "King Quitter" has provided his pearls of wisdom for the "Non-Quitters" within MOC to reflect upon.

People say I don't learn from my mistakes, but I prove that I do. You just keep doing the same thing over and over again.

stainless1911 said:

Be nice Pat.

People say I don't learn from my mistakes, but I prove that I do.

Click to expand...

You haven't learned jack and your latest escapade proves it.

stainless1911 said:

People say I don't learn from my mistakes, but I prove that I do.

Click to expand...

Except you refuse to learn to use the frickin' quote function so people know who the hell you're replying to.

Bronson

hahaha sorry Bronson.

Bronson said:

Except you refuse to learn to use the frickin' quote function so people know who the hell you're replying to.

Bronson

Click to expand...

forgot the quote button again, sorry. :lol:

scot623 said:

Hmmm...maybe I'm obtuse, you'll need to expand on that.

Click to expand...

Not obtuse, but playing games.

One way to support CON CARRY would have been for MOC to have participated at the Oh you know the CON CARRY Rally and have a representative there to speak and a few volunteers there to man a table. I believe some of the MOC officers were asked to be a speaker. Yet they were glaringly absent.

Also I don't recall seeing any promotion for the rally on the MOC forum or homepage. Just a few things like that.

Venator said:

Not obtuse, but playing games.

One way to support CON CARRY would have been for MOC to have participated at the Oh you know the CON CARRY Rally and have a representative there to speak and a few volunteers there to man a table. I believe some of the MOC officers were asked to be a speaker. Yet they were glaringly absent.

Also I don't recall seeing any promotion for the rally on the MOC forum or homepage. Just a few things like that.

Click to expand...

Oh...that...yes...

At least MOC didn't "oppose" the rally...more like we stayed "neutral" on it.

As far as leaders being absent, I was there for 45 minutes and noted one other board member present and several other people from the leadership team, yourself included