What's the latest news on HB 5225?

More crap about how OC makes you a target for LE (sure, it can...for some more than others, I guess). I've been quite the active Open Carrier for 2 years now. In fact, these days I'm "Mr. Open Carry" in many ways.

I guess by some miracle I've stayed below the radar.

HB 5225 passed the commitee.Our rights pre-exist all laws of this Nation! Infringement has happened(in state and fed law)!The question is "are You going to Fight(sacrifice your life)" in Defense of Your Right?Bikenut understands.You have the Right to Free Speech.What are You gonna do if they put ducktape over Your mouth(same as making unconst-laws)?Do You still have the Right to Free Speech or has it been infringed?We still have all Our Rights and always will!What We do about them being infringed is The Answer We All Have to Make!CARRY ON!
P.S- WE HAVE TO STICK TOGETHER ON THIS!

hamaneggs said:

HB 5225 passed the commitee.Our rights pre-exist all laws of this Nation! Infringement has happened(in state and fed law)!The question is "are You going to Fight(sacrifice your life)" in Defense of Your Right?Bikenut understands.You have the Right to Free Speech.What are You gonna do if they put ducktape over Your mouth(same as making unconst-laws)?Do You still have the Right to Free Speech or has it been infringed?We still have all Our Rights and always will!What We do about them being infringed is The Answer We All Have to Make!CARRY ON!
P.S- WE HAVE TO STICK TOGETHER ON THIS!

Click to expand...

excellent news! I see the MSP did everything they could to try and stop it, so the fight has just begun. As for sticking together, hopefully most of the 2A supporters in this state will step up and help to pass this, even if other "pro-2A" MI groups are doing nothing to help.

We appreciate the "stab"

How awful we be concerned about our constituents without CPLs. How horrible, indeed!

TheQ said:

We appreciate the "stab"

How awful we be concerned about our constituents without CPLs. How horrible, indeed!

Click to expand...

i never mentioned MOC

if you choose to support permission slips to even buy a gun and gov't record keeping on those firearms that is the choice of your board and PAYING members, you made that perfectly clear. it may make you happy to know that msp spoke against it, and are doing what they can to kill the bill, just like they tried to do to shall issue cpl's.

i would urge all of you that would like to see purchase permits and registration done away with (like it is in almost every state in the country) to please contact your State Rep and ask them to support HB 5225 today

Does anyone have a link to the amended bill as passed?

smellslikemichigan said:

​http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(ua...g.aspx?page=getobject&objectname=2011-HB-5225

Click to expand...

Thanks. I thought I had read on MGO that they had amended it but if they did the new versions are not available yet.

Yance said:

Regarding Consitutional Carry...If we (as gun owners) cant get behind repealing the PP and registration how can we even ask and rally to be a constitutional carry state? Once we become constitutional carry the CPL and PP go out the window. I guess if we want to know how its really handled leadership from orgs of those states that allow consitutional carry should be contacted. Consitutional carry would open someone up in the worst way to the GFSZ, so if legislature to become a constitutional carry state came about, would those of you opposing this oppose that as well?

Click to expand...

Getting rid of our CPL is a terrible idea. It protects us in many ways and forces compliance on the state level. Aslo if you want to travel you almost always need some type of license get rid of ours and you make it very hard to travel to some states.

The CPL scheme is quite possibly the #1 worst infringement that has ever been worded into law, It suprises me to hear you say such a thing.

Just my 2 cents

Getting rid of LTP/PP is a great idea in theory. MOC has very valid concerns here. Which, as a paying member, I shall attempt to illuminate. Put your thinking caps on folks. For those without one just go back to watching TV.

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/26000.html

MI has roughly:
Population, 2011 estimate 9,876,187

Persons under 18 years, percent, 2010 23.7% or 2,370,285 people rounded

9,876,187
- 2,370,285
-----------------
7,505,902 left (minus those barred from carrying) for our purposes I will use 5% of population as a estimate.
- 375,275
----------------
7,130,607

Today - there are approximately 319,880 Michigan CPL holders.
http://www.mcrgo.org/mcrgo/

So if we subtract this number we get:

7,130,607
- 319,880
-----------------
****************************************************************************************************************
6,810,727 People who can be affected by this bill via Federal Gun Free Zones without the current protection of the PP/LTP
****************************************************************************************************************
This data should also make us look at what a small percentage of the population we are as OCers. I hope it motivates us to try to increase those numbers, without sacrificing the rights of nearly 7 MILLION Michigan residents.The bill needs to protect them somehow?

This is the best I could do with the data available to me. If you have more recent data, please post it. The point is - there is a huge portion of our people who, if they choose to carry without getting the CPL, ( frankly the current system would collapse if they all applied in a short time period from one another) could be in violation of Federal law.

I hope this bill can be "tweaked" to take the masses into consideration. CPL holders by the numbers above are less than 5% of the population that potentially could be carrying.

Anyone can twist numbers to support their position. How many of those 6.8m people OC w/o CPL and have to deal with GFSZ? How many buy guns and have to deal with LTP?

Could someone please explain to me how exactly this removes the permit to purchase. I read the HB5255 posted to the mi legislature site and it doesn't seem to remove anything of substance. It amends the current requirements to say that they can't charge money for the permit, and extend it to 30 days. But the requirement to take and pass a test, and get the permit is still intact. So how exactly does this do anything of substance for anyone? Yes 30 days is better than 10, and free is better than any amount of money charged, however, it's not doing what is advertised. As of right now (261804QMAY12 -or- May 26th 2012 at 6:05pm EDT) on http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2011-2012/billintroduced/House/htm/2011-HIB-5225.htm. If this has been amended to do what the NRA says it's doing, then the amended bill needs to be posted.

fozzy71 said:

Anyone can twist numbers to support their position. How many of those 6.8m people OC w/o CPL and have to deal with GFSZ? How many buy guns and have to deal with LTP?

Click to expand...

He's talking about those who could, not necessarily those who would.

Cant get a solid # on a "would".

xarmy9 said:

Could someone please explain to me how exactly this removes the permit to purchase. I read the HB5255 posted to the mi legislature site and it doesn't seem to remove anything of substance. It amends the current requirements to say that they can't charge money for the permit, and extend it to 30 days. But the requirement to take and pass a test, and get the permit is still intact. So how exactly does this do anything of substance for anyone? Yes 30 days is better than 10, and free is better than any amount of money charged, however, it's not doing what is advertised. As of right now (261804QMAY12 -or- May 26th 2012 at 6:05pm EDT) on http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2011-2012/billintroduced/House/htm/2011-HIB-5225.htm. If this has been amended to do what the NRA says it's doing, then the amended bill needs to be posted.

Click to expand...

HB5498 (http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2011-2012/billintroduced/House/htm/2012-HIB-5498.htm)
and
HB5499 (http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2011-2012/billintroduced/House/htm/2012-HIB-5499.htm)
are tie-barred to 5225 (meaning they can't pass unless 5225 passes). They are the ones that deal directly with the repeal of the PTP/Registration scheme.
Also, I swear I read the substitute to 5225 that was more direct than the original 5225 language that's on the MI legislature site, but I can't find it for the life of me now.

Huh?

fozzy71 said:

Anyone can twist numbers to support their position. How many of those 6.8m people OC w/o CPL and have to deal with GFSZ? How many buy guns and have to deal with LTP?

Click to expand...

Who's twisting anything? How many grains of sand are on the beach at any given metro park? What is the average speed of a humming bird? What's your point?

I was clear that CPL holders are a small part of people [who under current law, are able to carry a firearm for protection]. As to how many people would choose to carry side arms of the 6.8 Million aren't we supposed to hope that all of them will? You know advocate that others exercise their rights. "A right un-exercised is a right lost".

Or are we back to us cool people who qualified, took the class, and shelled out our money, are the only ones we should really care about? For the sake of argument let's say 1 in 10 does, that's still 680,000 law abiding citizens that will have to do the 1,000 foot tango around every school/daycare center in the state, or risk federal prosecution!

stainless1911 said:

He's talking about those who could, not necessarily those who would.

Cant get a solid # on a "would".

Click to expand...

I know what he was referring to, thanks. Do you ever think before you post?

I think about more than you realize.

And I like it that way.

Last edited by fozzy71; Today at 07:11 PM. Reason: I am so done with this thread.

No don't go please grace us with your social skills & overall goodness.

[video=youtube;H75eQX006jA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H75eQX006jA[/video]

Seriously, you seem to be a bit "Grouchy" Fozzy. I try to see things from the big picture. I hope you will too. The idea of the bill is good - it just lacks (currently) the protections needed for most people.

stainless1911 said:

The CPL scheme is quite possibly the #1 worst infringement that has ever been worded into law, It suprises me to hear you say such a thing.

Click to expand...

I don't know why. I have always been an advocate for our CPL system. I think it could be enhanced to remove the Gun Free Zones, reduce the time and cost of getting one and adding the ability to protect property. It could be better, but it is pretty good right now.