Raggs
Regular Member
Who saw this coming?
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(ql...g.aspx?page=getObject&objectName=2013-HB-4104
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(ql...g.aspx?page=getObject&objectName=2013-HB-4104
We saw it coming with the last SB59. So many so called 2A supporters were quick to give up their right to open carry they were bound to make a bill banning it. This is for the next compromise ... Not surprised at all..
(6) AN INDIVIDUAL SHALL NOT INTENTIONALLY DISPLAY OR OPENLY
11 CARRY A PISTOL ON THE PREMISES LISTED IN SUBSECTION (1)(A) TO (I)
12 UNLESS THE INDIVIDUAL OWNS THE PREMISES DESCRIBED IN SUBSECTION (1)
13 OR IS EMPLOYED OR CONTRACTED BY THE OWNER OR OTHER PERSON WITH
14 CONTROL OVER THE PREMISES DESCRIBED IN SUBSECTION (1), THE
15 POSSESSION OF THE PISTOL IS TO PROVIDE SECURITY SERVICES FOR THE
16 PREMISES OR IS OTHERWISE IN THE SCOPE OF THE INDIVIDUAL'S OFFICIAL
17 DUTIES, OR THE INDIVIDUAL IS ACTING WITH THE EXPRESS WRITTEN
18 CONSENT OF THE OWNER OF THE PREMISES OR AN AGENT OF THE OWNER OF
19 THE PREMISES. THIS SUBSECTION APPLIES BEGINNING MAY 1, 2013.
Thanks to the MOC library debacle. We get them trying to add this to the PFZ's:
(I) A PUBLIC LIBRARY AS DEFINED IN SECTION 2 OF THE STATE AID
16 TO PUBLIC LIBRARIES ACT, 1977 PA 89, MCL 397.552.
Is a pile of OCDO people and MOC for this bill too?
Somehow I doubt the answer is in the Declaration of Independence. The British are long gone.
Why even feed stainlesses trolling?
I do have one compliment for this bill. At least it is logical, versus the last iteration of SB 59. It is logical that anti-gunners would go after OC. It is illogical that Michigan gun organizations went after OC.
Anti-gunners are going after OC. At least this bill makes sense.
You just can't let it rest can you? Will you bring SB59 up for the next ten years?
This is an open carry advocacy website. I am an open carry advocate. I will take opportunities to keep present threats to OC fresh in everyone's minds. Frequent reminders of present threats keeps everyone informed on what to be on the lookout for. We want to constantly be on the lookout for threats to OC.
Michigan gun organizations involved recently in SB 59 tried to criminalize some open carry in the recent past. None have confirmed they would not repeat such compromising on OC in the future. None have indicated to what limit they would refrain from throwing OC under the bus. Therefore, those Michigan gun organizations are among the present threats to OC in Michigan.
I will bring up SB 59 as often as need be as a reminder of this particular present threat to OC, until it is no longer a present threat to OC. It will cease being a present threat when the MI gun orgs state they are no longer in the business of criminalizing OC to advance their own or others' agendas.
Michigan gun organizations involved recently in SB 59 tried to criminalize some open carry in the recent past.
Changed my mind. Won't waste my breath on this thread. It'll be fun to watch you guys get worked up on a bill that'll never see committee though.
Don't forget to take your blood pressure medication.
This is an open carry advocacy website. I am an open carry advocate. I will take opportunities to keep present threats to OC fresh in everyone's minds. Frequent reminders of present threats keeps everyone informed on what to be on the lookout for. We want to constantly be on the lookout for threats to OC.
Michigan gun organizations involved recently in SB 59 tried to criminalize some open carry in the recent past. None have confirmed they would not repeat such compromising on OC in the future. None have indicated to what limit they would refrain from throwing OC under the bus. Therefore, those Michigan gun organizations are among the present threats to OC in Michigan.
I will bring up SB 59 as often as need be as a reminder of this particular present threat to OC, until it is no longer a present threat to OC. It will cease being a present threat when the MI gun orgs state they are no longer in the business of criminalizing OC to advance their own or others' agendas.
Whatever Dan. You keep sounding the horn of discontent. Of course those MI gun rights groups you are disparaging have done a hell of a lot more for gun rights (open carry included) than anything I have seen you do as of yet. Don't bother to respond, as I doubt I will even waste my time reading this thread any longer. I am tired of arguing with absolutists.
Changed my mind. Won't waste my breath on this thread. It'll be fun to watch you guys get worked up on a bill that'll never see committee though.
Don't forget to take your blood pressure medication.
I will bring up SB 59 as often as need be as a reminder of this particular present threat to OC, until it is no longer a present threat to OC. It will cease being a present threat when the MI gun orgs state they are no longer in the business of criminalizing OC to advance their own or others' agendas.
Didn't we already hash this out? If you were for shall issue CPL, then you are operating on a logical fallacy. It was shown to you that the shall issue law did exactly what you are so against in SB59. Grant a right for many more people than it removed a right from, and it did indeed remove rights.
Your droning has long passed over to harping and beating a dead horse.
Before you further damage your credibility I suggest you abandon your repeated error.
You are making yourself look petty and immature with the repeated pokes and stabs.
Considering the bill is sponsored by 3 Dems, I agree with you. I don't think it will get out of committee.Changed my mind. Won't waste my breath on this thread. It'll be fun to watch you guys get worked up on a bill that'll never see committee though.
Don't forget to take your blood pressure medication.