detroit_fan
Regular Member
Back on topic...
I do support the bill as written, for a couple reasons. The OC part has been well discussed, and I think the majority of us dislike it, but I also think the advantage of having a "black and white" law that carry is allowed in these places is a good thing. If that was the only part of the bill I would probably oppose it, but it does include some very good things imo, those are-
Elimination of the gun boards. We have all complained about them for a long time, I would be happy to see them go away. They can also no longer force you to appear just to get a CPL, they would have to include what statue they believe would prohibit you from obtaining your CPL in order to make you appear.
Elimination of long waits to get CPL. Currently some counties take several months to issue, under 59 they would only have 45 days from the time you apply to issue or deny you, so no matter where you live you WILL be given an answer in 45 days or less
A requirement that any denial of CPL or denial of PFZ endorsement include an explanation with the statue that they are denying under, and the ability to take them to court and win all fee's costs from them if you win.
A section in 59 says counties CAN NOT force you to fill out any forms or give any information other than the MSP approved CPL application. This would eliminate some of the counties that require "extra" paperwork.
They also could not force you to "prove" you have met the training requirement for renewal, they woudl be prohibited from requiring anything more than a signed statement. This would help in some counties that have tried to make you do re-training for renewal.
Fingerprint access would be better. The bill says this about fingerprints-
Reasonable access to fingerprinting services during normal business hours as is necessary to comply with the requirements of this act The failure of a county sheriff to maintain fingerprinting capability in compliance with this act or to provide reasonable access to fingerprinting services during normal business hours to applicants for a concealed pistol license on the day of application does not affect the 45-day period from the date of application in which the licensing authority is required to issue or deny a license.
So with all of that said, I do think there is more good than bad in the bill. I also think the bill is dead and not going to pass, but that is just a feeling I have.
I do support the bill as written, for a couple reasons. The OC part has been well discussed, and I think the majority of us dislike it, but I also think the advantage of having a "black and white" law that carry is allowed in these places is a good thing. If that was the only part of the bill I would probably oppose it, but it does include some very good things imo, those are-
Elimination of the gun boards. We have all complained about them for a long time, I would be happy to see them go away. They can also no longer force you to appear just to get a CPL, they would have to include what statue they believe would prohibit you from obtaining your CPL in order to make you appear.
Elimination of long waits to get CPL. Currently some counties take several months to issue, under 59 they would only have 45 days from the time you apply to issue or deny you, so no matter where you live you WILL be given an answer in 45 days or less
A requirement that any denial of CPL or denial of PFZ endorsement include an explanation with the statue that they are denying under, and the ability to take them to court and win all fee's costs from them if you win.
A section in 59 says counties CAN NOT force you to fill out any forms or give any information other than the MSP approved CPL application. This would eliminate some of the counties that require "extra" paperwork.
They also could not force you to "prove" you have met the training requirement for renewal, they woudl be prohibited from requiring anything more than a signed statement. This would help in some counties that have tried to make you do re-training for renewal.
Fingerprint access would be better. The bill says this about fingerprints-
Reasonable access to fingerprinting services during normal business hours as is necessary to comply with the requirements of this act The failure of a county sheriff to maintain fingerprinting capability in compliance with this act or to provide reasonable access to fingerprinting services during normal business hours to applicants for a concealed pistol license on the day of application does not affect the 45-day period from the date of application in which the licensing authority is required to issue or deny a license.
So with all of that said, I do think there is more good than bad in the bill. I also think the bill is dead and not going to pass, but that is just a feeling I have.
