Disturbing the peace charge

This from the Grand Rapids PD website:

Question:
I know it is required to have a concealed weapons permit to carry a pistol concealed, but is it against the law to carry a pistol out in the open?
​

Answer:
With or without a Carrying a Concealed Weapons (CCW) permit, you cannot walk around with a firearm in public. If you have a valid CCW permit, you would be violating both State and City ordinances pertaining to brandishing or flourishing a firearm (reference State law 750.234e and City ordinance 9.172.) If you do not have a valid CCW permit, you would be violating the above laws and several others.
​

Click to expand...

ghostrider wrote:

This from the Grand Rapids PD website:

Question:
I know it is required to have a concealed weapons permit to carry a pistol concealed, but is it against the law to carry a pistol out in the open?
​

Answer:
With or without a Carrying a Concealed Weapons (CCW) permit, you cannot walk around with a firearm in public. If you have a valid CCW permit, you would be violating both State and City ordinances pertaining to brandishing or flourishing a firearm (reference State law 750.234e and City ordinance 9.172.) If you do not have a valid CCW permit, you would be violating the above laws and several others.
​

Click to expand...

I'm on this. I will email the department and set them straight on this crap. Send me the link to this section Please, I can't find it. NEVER MIND I FOUND IT. Disgusting.

Click to expand...

The significant thing about this is that it could easily make accidental exposure or printing of CCW fall under the same offense.

Click to expand...

It also explaines why my CCW instructor told us that accidental exposure would be illegal.

Click to expand...

In the absence of any reported Michigan appellate court decisions defining "brandishing," it is appropriate to rely upon dictionary definitions. People v Denio, 454 Mich 691, 699; 564 NW2d 13 (1997). According to The American Heritage Dictionary, Second College Edition (1982), at p 204, the term brandishing is defined as: "1. To wave or flourish menacingly, as a weapon. 2. To display ostentatiously. –n. A menacing or defiant wave or flourish." This definition comports with the meaning ascribed to this term by courts of other jurisdictions. For example, in United States v Moerman, 233 F3d 379, 380 (CA 6, 2000), the court recognized that in federal sentencing guidelines, "brandishing" a weapon is defined to mean "that the weapon was pointed or waved about, or displayed in a threatening manner."

Applying these definitions to your question, it is clear that a reserve police officer, regardless whether he or she qualifies as a "peace officer," when carrying a handgun in a holster in plain view, is not waving or displaying the firearm in a threatening manner. Thus, such conduct does not constitute brandishing a firearm in violation of section 234e of the Michigan Penal Code.

Click to expand...

ghostrider wrote:

The significant thing about this is that it could easily make accidental exposure or printing of CCW fall under the same offense.

Click to expand...

It also explaines why my CCW instructor told us that accidental exposure would be illegal.

Click to expand...

...did you see what skippy wrote? Please check into it. It clearly defines what brandishing is and is not in Michigan.

1. Accidental exposure or printing of your handgun violates no law. None. Please prove me wrong...

2. Your instructor is a misinformedand is lying.I hope you bring it to his/her attention. Accidental exposure is not illegal.



The AG opinion.

In the absence of any reported Michigan appellate court decisions defining "brandishing," it is appropriate to rely upon dictionary definitions. People v Denio, 454 Mich 691, 699; 564 NW2d 13 (1997). According to The American Heritage Dictionary, Second College Edition (1982), at p 204, the term brandishing is defined as: "1. To wave or flourish menacingly, as a weapon. 2. To display ostentatiously. –n. A menacing or defiant wave or flourish." This definition comports with the meaning ascribed to this term by courts of other jurisdictions. For example, in United States v Moerman, 233 F3d 379, 380 (CA 6, 2000), the court recognized that in federal sentencing guidelines, "brandishing" a weapon is defined to mean "that the weapon was pointed or waved about, or displayed in a threatening manner."

Applying these definitions to your question, it is clear that a reserve police officer, regardless whether he or she qualifies as a "peace officer," when carrying a handgun in a holster in plain view, is not waving or displaying the firearm in a threatening manner. Thus, such conduct does not constitute brandishing a firearm in violation of section 234e of the Michigan Penal Code.

Click to expand...

EDIT: In regards to the local ordinance, please see the discussions regarding preemption.

Click to expand...

SNIP

Notice how the statement by GRPD said that OC is in voilation of "State and Citty ordinance."

Still haven't found the MCL for DTP.

Click to expand...

kmcdowel wrote:

ghostrider wrote:

The significant thing about this is that it could easily make accidental exposure or printing of CCW fall under the same offense.

Click to expand...

It also explaines why my CCW instructor told us that accidental exposure would be illegal.

Click to expand...

...did you see what skippy wrote? Please check into it. It clearly defines what brandishing is and is not in Michigan.

1. Accidental exposure or printing of your handgun violates no law. None. Please prove me wrong...

2. Your instructor is a misinformedand is lying.I hope you bring it to his/her attention. Accidental exposure is not illegal.



The AG opinion.

In the absence of any reported Michigan appellate court decisions defining "brandishing," it is appropriate to rely upon dictionary definitions. People v Denio, 454 Mich 691, 699; 564 NW2d 13 (1997). According to The American Heritage Dictionary, Second College Edition (1982), at p 204, the term brandishing is defined as: "1. To wave or flourish menacingly, as a weapon. 2. To display ostentatiously. –n. A menacing or defiant wave or flourish." This definition comports with the meaning ascribed to this term by courts of other jurisdictions. For example, in United States v Moerman, 233 F3d 379, 380 (CA 6, 2000), the court recognized that in federal sentencing guidelines, "brandishing" a weapon is defined to mean "that the weapon was pointed or waved about, or displayed in a threatening manner."

Applying these definitions to your question, it is clear that a reserve police officer, regardless whether he or she qualifies as a "peace officer," when carrying a handgun in a holster in plain view, is not waving or displaying the firearm in a threatening manner. Thus, such conduct does not constitute brandishing a firearm in violation of section 234e of the Michigan Penal Code.

Click to expand...

EDIT: In regards to the local ordinance, please see the discussions regarding preemption.

Click to expand...

I'm familiar with all that. I'm just saying that it makes sense that the instructor would teach that since the GRPD has stated it's policy. No need to shoot the messenger. The instructor doesn't need to teach his students something that will get them in trouble in the local area, right or wrong. He isn't an activist.

I've read a great many of the threads on this forum dealing with OC and preemption. I'm not saying I agree with him, just connecting the dots as to why he would teach the misinformation. Even the lawyer who taught the class told me in a private conversation that OC was illegal in GR. Now I know why.

Notice how the statement by GRPD said that OC is in voilation of "State and Citty ordinance."

Still haven't found the MCL for DTP.

Click to expand...

ghostrider wrote:

SNIP

Notice how the statement by GRPD said that OC is in voilation of "State and Citty ordinance."

Still haven't found the MCL for DTP.

Click to expand...

I've been searching Michigan Legislature for DTP, Inducing Panic, etc., and found nothing.

I have found DTP to be at a local unit of gov level (Townships & Cities):

http://www.municode.com/resources/code_list.asp?stateID=22

Click to expand...

THE GRPD IS POSTING INCORRECT DATA. IT is not illegal to open carry in GR. The chief keeps this info up so he can manipulate the un-informed, and control the citizenry of the city.

I have sent an email to the chief explaining all this. No response yet and I'm not expecting one. I will continue to ask the Chief to remove his erronious and deceptive information. Perhaps I can get an attorney to write a letter to have it removed.

Seems our next open carry meeting should be in downtown GR.

Click to expand...

Been searching herehttp://www.michbar.org/ (State Bar of Michigan) for case law: Disturbing The Peace, Disorderly Conduct, Open Carry, Open Carrying a Firearm, Expectation of Privacy, Etc.

Click to expand...

Don't understand all this crap about OC. The law is very clear on that and the Attorney General has made his ruling about this. OC is NOT against the law and any LEO attempting to violate people on this law will be dealt with.

Some LEO's will attempt to ticket or arrest you for assumed violations such as Brandishing (the Attorney General has stated that brandishing will be understood as what the Webster dictionary says it is. Showing in a menacing manner. OC is not menacing by itself, therefore no crime is being committed). It doesn't matter if John Q. Citizen is spooked by the sight of OC. Get over it.

Some LEO's will also try to cite you for disturbing the peace. What most police officers are not aware of is that Michigan law is very clear about charging citizens with false crimes. It is against the law to do so. You can't be charged or arrested for committing a crime that doesn't exist. I know. That was tried with me twice and I sued the police departments and won. OC is not against the law by itself. Too bad that some LEO's don't approve. I don't need their approval. Their job is to enforce the laws, not interpret them. That's for lawyers, judges and courts. Worked for me.

Click to expand...