• 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.

HYPOTHETICAL SB-59 dies, new bill offered

Do you support the bill described below

  • Yes

    Votes: 5 27.8%

  • No

    Votes: 13 72.2%
  • Total voters
    18
S

scot623

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
1,421
Location
Eastpointe, Michigan, USA
hypothetical...

SB-59 is dead. New bill offered, what say you.

NO CPL needed to OC in bars/restaurants/Meijer(any liquor licensed place), theaters, Churches/synagogues and NO CPL needed to carry in a vehicle..

BUT!!!

OC is illegal in schools, daycares, hospitals and stadiums.

DO YOU SUPPORT THIS BILL??
 
Raggs

Raggs

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2012
Messages
1,181
Location
Wild Wild West Michigan
I think I would agree to this. you should be able to carry in the bolded areas. And it doesn't create another level of privileged people. and as has been argued many times the open carry with a cpl is a grey area for schools, daycares, hospitals and stadium.

scot623 said:
hypothetical...

SB-59 is dead. New bill offered, what say you.

NO CPL needed to OC in bars/restaurants/Meijer(any liquor licensed place), theaters, Churches/synagogues and NO CPL needed to carry in a vehicle..

BUT!!!

OC is illegal in schools, daycares, hospitals and stadiums.

DO YOU SUPPORT THIS BILL??
Click to expand...
 
griffin

griffin

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Messages
871
Location
Okemos, MI
Heck no I don't support your bill! Any new bill should eliminate all PFZs and require all citizens to own firearms and open carry daily. A Kennesaw, Georgia gun bill on steroids, if you will. Anything less will be a compromise!
 
M

MikeTheGreek

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
590
Location
Northville, Michigan
griffin said:
Heck no I don't support your bill! Any new bill should eliminate all PFZs and require all citizens to own firearms and open carry daily. A Kennesaw, Georgia gun bill on steroids, if you will. Anything less will be a compromise!
Click to expand...

First part about eliminating PFZ's, YES. I believe that's a very reasonable goal to set. The second part about requiring to own and carry...haha, that would make the world a better place, but I can't see that EVER happening, especially in Michigan.
 
Big Gay Al

Big Gay Al

Michigan Moderator
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
1,944
Location
Mason, Michigan, USA
MikeTheGreek said:
First part about eliminating PFZ's, YES. I believe that's a very reasonable goal to set. The second part about requiring to own and carry...haha, that would make the world a better place, but I can't see that EVER happening, especially in Michigan.
Click to expand...
Make it like Kennesaw's law, those who object are exempted. ;)
 
S

Small_Arms_Collector

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2011
Messages
436
Location
Eastpointe Michigan
MikeTheGreek said:
Why would you require everyone to carry but except anyone who objects? That makes no sense. You HAVE To do this, but if you dont want to..fine.

0.o
Click to expand...

The exact text of the ordinance is:

[Sec 34-21][18]

(a) In order to provide for the emergency management of the city, and further in order to provide for and protect the safety, security and general welfare of the city and its inhabitants, every head of household residing in the city limits is required to maintain a firearm, together with ammunition therefore.
(b)Exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who suffer a physical or mental disability which would prohibit them from using such a firearm. Further exempt from the effect of this section are those heads of households who are paupers or who conscientiously oppose maintaining firearms as a result of beliefs or religious doctrine, or persons convicted of a felony.
 
S

scot623

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
1,421
Location
Eastpointe, Michigan, USA
Based on the results of the poll so far, it appears this site should change its name to Open Carry with a CPL.org. This law would improve the carry laws in this state for every gun owner who doesn't have a CPL. Interesting results so far.
 
Big Gay Al

Big Gay Al

Michigan Moderator
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
1,944
Location
Mason, Michigan, USA
MikeTheGreek said:
Why would you require everyone to carry but except anyone who objects? That makes no sense. You HAVE To do this, but if you dont want to..fine.

0.o
Click to expand...
Because, to force people to do something is UN-American, sort of like forcing us to buy health insurance, even if we don't want to. DOH. :)
 
Bronson

Bronson

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2008
Messages
2,126
Location
Battle Creek, Michigan, USA
scot623 said:
hypothetical...

SB-59 is dead. New bill offered, what say you.

NO CPL needed to OC in bars/restaurants/Meijer(any liquor licensed place), theaters, Churches/synagogues and NO CPL needed to carry in a vehicle..

BUT!!!

OC is illegal in schools, daycares, hospitals and stadiums.

DO YOU SUPPORT THIS BILL??
Click to expand...

Yes.

Bronson
 
B

Bikenut

Guest
No.. I would not support such a bill.. or any other bill that has the basic premise that the government should be in control of where, how, why, or for whom, the right to bear arms is "allowed".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top