• 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.

Official SB59 Debate thread

Do you support SB59 in its current (as of 12/1) form?

  • Total voters
    39
Status
Not open for further replies.
TheQ

TheQ

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2010
Messages
3,379
Location
Lansing, Michigan
mudvr1212 said:
I know but why wasn't it an even 100? Would those 2 extra bullets qualify you as an expert marksman? If so, sign me up maybe I'll get my exemption box checked. :uhoh:
Click to expand...

The two rounds (I've heard) is to account for 2 possible Mis-fires in a box of 100.
 
Venator

Venator

Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Messages
6,462
Location
Lansing area, Michigan, USA
Raggs said:
So this bill will also further the NRA, a group known for not liking open carry?
Click to expand...

Yes and no.

Here's the thing, if you got a NRA certificate for your CPL and you did not shoot 98 rounds then the certificate is invalid as the instructor didn't follow the NRA requirement for the certification. If you didn't get 8 hours of total training you didn't meet the state requirement. If you were taught the legal portion by anyone other than a lawyer or a certified police office you did not meet the NRA's requirement.


So the changes in SB-59 address these issues.
 
SpringerXDacp

SpringerXDacp

New member
Joined
May 12, 2006
Messages
3,341
Location
Burton, Michigan
1245A Defender said:
Under my plain reading of the current law,,,, ANYONE!!! with or without a CPL can OC IN a GFZ under 425o...

By the plain reading of the law (28.425o), that is correct.

"(1) Subject to subsection (5), an individual licensed under this act to carry a concealed pistol, or who is exempt from licensure under section 12a(1)(f), shall not carry a concealed pistol on the premises of any of the following:"

However, with the exceptions of schools, most of the prohibit places under 750.234d, are enumerated under 28.425o, as prohibited places unless per 750.234d:

"(c) A person licensed by this state or another state to carry a concealed weapon."

"(d) A person who possesses a firearm on the premises of an entity described in subsection (1) if that possession is with the permission of the owner or an agent of the owner of that entity."

The law is wrote in a negitive kind of way.

Pure Michigan.

those "licensed under this act" shall not carry concealed....
Click to expand...

Blue
 
G

Gort

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2010
Messages
104
Location
Newport, Michigan, USA
I voted NO
I don't want to pay for a restriction, extra classes, extra penalties, I like not having to worry that i may be printing or accidental show.
Make's me think of a mouse trap, with extra rich peanut butter.
 
Shadow Bear

Shadow Bear

Michigan Moderator
Joined
Dec 17, 2010
Messages
1,004
Location
Grand Rapids
Why is everyone so adamant against getting additional training? I would think that anyone serious about the responsibility of carrying a sidearm would take every opportunity to obtain additional training....

Training is good; what's the down side?
 
detroit_fan

detroit_fan

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Messages
1,172
Location
Monroe, Michigan, USA
Shadow Bear said:
Why is everyone so adamant against getting additional training? I would think that anyone serious about the responsibility of carrying a sidearm would take every opportunity to obtain additional training....

Training is good; what's the down side?
Click to expand...

I think the issue for most is *required* training. Most of us are pretty "liberty-minded", so being told we HAVE to do something pisses us off, especially if that requirement is attached to a "right"
 
TheQ

TheQ

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2010
Messages
3,379
Location
Lansing, Michigan
Shadow Bear said:
Why is everyone so adamant against getting additional training? I would think that anyone serious about the responsibility of carrying a sidearm would take every opportunity to obtain additional training....

Training is good; what's the down side?
Click to expand...

I'm all for additional training. I don't like the idea of law mandating it, but I'm willing to swallow it.
 
DanM

DanM

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
1,928
Location
West Bloomfield, Michigan, USA
Shadow Bear said:
Why is everyone so adamant against getting additional training?
Click to expand...

Because no additional training is currently required to carry in a PFZ. And it is proven that no additional training is needed to carry in a PFZ, because there is a record of people doing it innumerable times without incident.

If the boat doesn't leak, it doesn't need fixing.
 
FreeInAZ

FreeInAZ

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2012
Messages
2,508
Location
Secret Bunker
DanM said:
Because no additional training is currently required to carry in a PFZ. And it is proven that no additional training is needed to carry in a PFZ, because there is a record of people doing it innumerable times without incident.

If the boat doesn't leak, it doesn't need fixing.
Click to expand...

^^^
THIS +1 Dan.

I know this is just another gift for the FAT CATS in Lansing. But why? :confused:

Venator will be taking calls on SB59 this Saturday at 1PM. Call in at 810-208-1854

Also I think he's doing a stump the host gun law segment. Callers will have a chance to win a prize.:banana: (Hint Griff.)
 
Last edited:
backenj

backenj

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
82
Location
Muskegon,Mi
griffin said:
You cannot legally OC in a PFZ unless you pay for the privilege.
Click to expand...

detroit_fan said:
That argument really doesn't work though, because you can only OC in the PFZ's if you have a CPL, so it's already a privilege, correct?
Click to expand...

Yes, you are both correct. What I meant was that I'll have to pay more/again for the privilege to CC. I've already paid for the privilege of a CPL. I use the word privilege loosely.
 
backenj

backenj

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
82
Location
Muskegon,Mi
Big Gay Al said:
Actually, there are more than Zero that can legally CC in a PFZ. Anyone with the box checked on their CPL, like Private investigators, cops who have CPLs, judges or any of the other "exempted class" of CPL holders can and likely do CC legally in PFZs.
Click to expand...

I wasn't referring to people already exempt. This bill doesn't apply to them. I was referring to the "new" people it would cover.
 
detroit_fan

detroit_fan

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Messages
1,172
Location
Monroe, Michigan, USA
DanM said:
Because no additional training is currently required to carry in a PFZ. And it is proven that no additional training is needed to carry in a PFZ, because there is a record of people doing it innumerable times without incident.

If the boat doesn't leak, it doesn't need fixing.
Click to expand...

in some areas this is true, however, wasn't (he who shall not be named) threatened with arrest where he lived for doing so? not everyone agrees with you on this. i understand you have the funds to fight such a charge, but most of us do not. so even though people have done it successfully, other have done so unsuccessfully, it is not settled law.

ETA- this is exactly why it is not a viable option for most of us-

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?108694-And-Birmingham-is-at-it-again
 
Last edited:
DanM

DanM

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
1,928
Location
West Bloomfield, Michigan, USA
detroit_fan said:
DanM said:
Because no additional training is currently required to carry in a PFZ. And it is proven that no additional training is needed to carry in a PFZ, because there is a record of people doing it innumerable times without incident.

If the boat doesn't leak, it doesn't need fixing.
Click to expand...

in some areas this is true, however, wasn't (he who shall not be named) threatened with arrest where he lived for doing so? not everyone agrees with you on this. i understand you have the funds to fight such a charge, but most of us do not. so even though people have done it successfully, other have done so unsuccessfully, it is not settled law.
Click to expand...

In all areas it is true that the track record of OC'ers in PFZ's demonstrates that carry in PFZ's does not require "training". I'm addressing the necessity (or lack thereof, as my facts suggest) for "training" to carry in PFZ's.

You are addressing the risk of prosecution for OC'ing in a PFZ, which is totally NOT what I was talking about. Did you screw up the post quoting mechanism?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top