Gosirr
Regular Member
imported post
We need a legal definition of federal law, on the pistol free zones, oc and cc.
We need a legal definition of federal law, on the pistol free zones, oc and cc.
-
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.
-
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.
What question would you ask a legal authority on MI handgun laws.
- Thread starter Venator
- Start date
SpringerXDacp
New member
imported post
Gosirr wrote:
As far as I'm concerned, this is enough proof for me:
“Your analysis is correct. Non-CPL pistol free zones do not apply to CPL holders. The CPL pistol free zones only apply to CPL holders carrying a concealed pistol. Therefore, a CPL holder may openly carry a pistol in Michigan's pistol free zones.”
Sincerely, Sgt. Thomas Deasy, [/b]Michigan[/b] [/b]State[/b] Police Executive Resource Section, (517) 336-6441
“…My office has contacted the Michigan State Police legislative liaison and has received some answers to share with you. According to the liaison, it is legal to openly carry a firearm in a "Pistol Free [highlight= #88ffff]Zone" if you are a licensed CPL holder. I was advised that your information was correct that MCL 28.425o and MCL 750-234d permit this activity. I was informed that there was no other additional relevant laws regarding this matter…” Michael A Prusi, State Senator 38th District"
ETA: School zone thread
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/view_topic.php?id=14562&forum_id=30&highlight=school+zone+act
Gosirr wrote:
As far as I'm concerned, this is enough proof for me:
“Your analysis is correct. Non-CPL pistol free zones do not apply to CPL holders. The CPL pistol free zones only apply to CPL holders carrying a concealed pistol. Therefore, a CPL holder may openly carry a pistol in Michigan's pistol free zones.”
Sincerely, Sgt. Thomas Deasy, [/b]Michigan[/b] [/b]State[/b] Police Executive Resource Section, (517) 336-6441
“…My office has contacted the Michigan State Police legislative liaison and has received some answers to share with you. According to the liaison, it is legal to openly carry a firearm in a "Pistol Free [highlight= #88ffff]Zone" if you are a licensed CPL holder. I was advised that your information was correct that MCL 28.425o and MCL 750-234d permit this activity. I was informed that there was no other additional relevant laws regarding this matter…” Michael A Prusi, State Senator 38th District"
ETA: School zone thread
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/view_topic.php?id=14562&forum_id=30&highlight=school+zone+act
DrTodd
Michigan Moderator
imported post
DrTodd
Michigan Moderator
imported post
Michigan CPL holders are exempt from the federal law regarding school zones!
Short answer:
Since all MI CPL licenses are limited to residents of Michigan and they undergo a background check, there is an exception to the Federal prohibition of guns in school zones for MI CPL licensees. See: http://www.handgunlaw.us/documents/batf_school_zone.pdf
Long answer:
Federal Law does provide an exemption for CPL holders,
see 2(B)(ii),
"if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do
so by the State in which the school zone is located or a
political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or
political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains
such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or
political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified
under law to receive the license;"
The BATF interpretation of the law (see link above) is that this
exemption does not extend to permit holders who are legal to carry in
a given state by virtue of a reciprocity or recognition statute.
Example: If a Colorado resident with a Colorado
Concealed Handgun Permit carries in Michigan, which (a) recognizes
the permit and (b)has no state provisions barring open carry by
a permit holder in a school zone, then that Colorado Concealed
Handgun Permit holder is nonetheless still in violation of Federal law
if he or she carries in a school zone. (This is very easy to do just driving
around anywhere within 1,000ft.)
Michigan CPL holders are exempt from the federal law regarding school zones!
Short answer:
Since all MI CPL licenses are limited to residents of Michigan and they undergo a background check, there is an exception to the Federal prohibition of guns in school zones for MI CPL licensees. See: http://www.handgunlaw.us/documents/batf_school_zone.pdf
Long answer:
Federal Law does provide an exemption for CPL holders,
see 2(B)(ii),
"if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do
so by the State in which the school zone is located or a
political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or
political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains
such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or
political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified
under law to receive the license;"
The BATF interpretation of the law (see link above) is that this
exemption does not extend to permit holders who are legal to carry in
a given state by virtue of a reciprocity or recognition statute.
Example: If a Colorado resident with a Colorado
Concealed Handgun Permit carries in Michigan, which (a) recognizes
the permit and (b)has no state provisions barring open carry by
a permit holder in a school zone, then that Colorado Concealed
Handgun Permit holder is nonetheless still in violation of Federal law
if he or she carries in a school zone. (This is very easy to do just driving
around anywhere within 1,000ft.)
Venator
Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
imported post
DrTodd wrote:
What about what Doug posted?
[/font][/font]
DrTodd wrote:
What about what Doug posted?
[/font][/font]
[/font][/font]
Venator
Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
imported post
And isn't this in regards to loaded firearms? You can still have a long gun in your car as long as it's unloaded and in a case or truck on school property or driving with it within 1000' of school property.
And isn't this in regards to loaded firearms? You can still have a long gun in your car as long as it's unloaded and in a case or truck on school property or driving with it within 1000' of school property.
DrTodd
Michigan Moderator
imported post
Venator,
Yes, if the case is locked....here are the exceptions:
from http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/922(q).html
Venator,
Yes, if the case is locked....here are the exceptions:
from http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/922(q).html
Code:
Subparagraph (A) does not apply to the possession of a firearm—
(i) on private property not part of school grounds;
(ii) if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so
by the State in which the school zone is located or a
political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or
political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains
such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or political
subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive
the license;
(iii) that is—
(I) not loaded; and
(II) in a locked container, or a locked firearms rack that is on
a motor vehicle;
(iv) by an individual for use in a program approved by a school in the school zone;
(v) by an individual in accordance with a contract entered into between a school in the school zone and the
individual or an employer of the individual;
(vi) by a law enforcement officer acting in his or her official capacity; or
(vii) that is unloaded and is possessed by an individual while traversing school premises for the purpose of gaining
access to public or private lands open to hunting, if the entry on school premises is authorized by school
authorities.DickTracy1953
Regular Member
imported post
My question would be: what firearms to you own.
My question would be: what firearms to you own.
DrTodd
Michigan Moderator
imported post
DickTracy1953,
I think that is the best question yet!
DickTracy1953,
I think that is the best question yet!
Bronson
Regular Member
imported post
Venator wrote:
I guess it would depend on whether the law considers a permit to purchase (you can own it) = a license to possess (you can carry it).
I read what Doug posted:
"if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to
do so by the State..."
As saying that you must bespecificallylicensed to possess (conceal)not just purchase.
I found these definitions at http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/license:
Permit: A license or warrant to do something not forbidden by law
License: The permission granted by competent authority to exercise a certain privilege that, without such authorization, would constitute an illegal act.
Using those definitions it would seem that a permit to purchase is not equal to a license to possess (conceal).
At least that's how I take it, but I'm not a lawyer
Bronson
Venator wrote:
[/font][/font]
I guess it would depend on whether the law considers a permit to purchase (you can own it) = a license to possess (you can carry it).
I read what Doug posted:
"if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to
do so by the State..."
As saying that you must bespecificallylicensed to possess (conceal)not just purchase.
I found these definitions at http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/license:
Permit: A license or warrant to do something not forbidden by law
License: The permission granted by competent authority to exercise a certain privilege that, without such authorization, would constitute an illegal act.
Using those definitions it would seem that a permit to purchase is not equal to a license to possess (conceal).
At least that's how I take it, but I'm not a lawyer
Bronson
Leader
Regular Member
imported post
Bronson wrote:
I don't see where possess means to conceal.
Your definitions says that a permit is a license.
If you possess a handgun that you didn't get a permit to purchas before you got it, that would constitute an illegal act.
If you get the permit (license) before you purchas a handgun, the act ofpossessing that handgunwould not be forbidden by law.
Bronson wrote:
Venator wrote:
I guess it would depend on whether the law considers a permit to purchase (you can own it) = a license to possess (you can carry it).
I read what Doug posted:
"if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to
do so by the State..."
As saying that you must bespecificallylicensed to possess (conceal)not just purchase.
I found these definitions at http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/license:
Permit: A license or warrant to do something not forbidden by law
License: The permission granted by competent authority to exercise a certain privilege that, without such authorization, would constitute an illegal act.
Using those definitions it would seem that a permit to purchase is not equal to a license to possess (conceal).
At least that's how I take it, but I'm not a lawyer
Bronson
I don't see where possess means to conceal.
Your definitions says that a permit is a license.
If you possess a handgun that you didn't get a permit to purchas before you got it, that would constitute an illegal act.
If you get the permit (license) before you purchas a handgun, the act ofpossessing that handgunwould not be forbidden by law.
dougwg
Regular Member
imported post
What I posted was just that.
It's clear as mud and no one really knows what is right and wrong.:banghead:
Just another great big frickin gray area, a land mine that people have to be worried about. :cuss:
People can say "well I called this official or that lawyer" or what the hell ever and NONE ofthat matters. All it takes is an over zealous LEO and prosecutor and you're screwed!
Which is the whole reason for this thread.
What I posted was just that.
It's clear as mud and no one really knows what is right and wrong.:banghead:
Just another great big frickin gray area, a land mine that people have to be worried about. :cuss:
People can say "well I called this official or that lawyer" or what the hell ever and NONE ofthat matters. All it takes is an over zealous LEO and prosecutor and you're screwed!
Which is the whole reason for this thread.
DrTodd
Michigan Moderator
imported post
Michigan Law:
MCL28.422 License to purchase, carry, or transport pistol; issuance; qualifications; applications; sale of pistol; exemptions; basic pistol safety brochure; forging application; implementation during business hours.
Federal Law:
US Code Title 18, 922
2(B)(ii),
"if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do
so by the State in which the school zone is located or a
political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or
political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains
such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or
political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified
under law to receive the license;"
My opinion is given for educational purposes only and may not work for your specific situation. It is not legal advice, nor am I an attorney. I would suggest finding your own local lawyer to get legal advice.
Michigan Law:
MCL28.422 License to purchase, carry, or transport pistol; issuance; qualifications; applications; sale of pistol; exemptions; basic pistol safety brochure; forging application; implementation during business hours.
Federal Law:
US Code Title 18, 922
2(B)(ii),
"if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do
so by the State in which the school zone is located or a
political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or
political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains
such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or
political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified
under law to receive the license;"
My opinion is given for educational purposes only and may not work for your specific situation. It is not legal advice, nor am I an attorney. I would suggest finding your own local lawyer to get legal advice.
DrTodd
Michigan Moderator
imported post
I could be wrong, but "Purchase" and "Carry" and "Transport "would be a type of "Possession" as possess has seemingly been applied to a sense of control, and "purchase", "transport", and "carry" all require some sense of "possession".
My opinion is given for educational purposes only and may not work for your specific situation. It is not legal advice, nor am I an attorney. I would suggest finding your own local lawyer to get legal advice.
[font="arial, helvetica, swiss"][/font]
I could be wrong, but "Purchase" and "Carry" and "Transport "would be a type of "Possession" as possess has seemingly been applied to a sense of control, and "purchase", "transport", and "carry" all require some sense of "possession".
My opinion is given for educational purposes only and may not work for your specific situation. It is not legal advice, nor am I an attorney. I would suggest finding your own local lawyer to get legal advice.
[font="arial, helvetica, swiss"][/font]
taxwhat
Regular Member
imported post
DrTodd wrote:
DrTodd wrote:
OK But where do it say in Both US and Michigan Constatution ""suggest finding your own local lawyer to get legal advice.":" In Small print ?
DrTodd
Michigan Moderator
imported post
taxwhat wrote:
taxwhat wrote:
Right next to where it says that "These can't be applied until the SC determines which "Rights" have been incorporated to apply to the states"....
OC4me
Regular Member
imported post
Is open or concealed carry of 'antique' firearms treated exactly the same as modern firearms? I.e. can a person posses an 'antique' in any of the pistol free zones?
It would be nice to have some way, albeit old-fashioned and less effective, to defend myself in an otherwise off-limits 'victim disarmament' zone when I visit Michigan.
Is open or concealed carry of 'antique' firearms treated exactly the same as modern firearms? I.e. can a person posses an 'antique' in any of the pistol free zones?
It would be nice to have some way, albeit old-fashioned and less effective, to defend myself in an otherwise off-limits 'victim disarmament' zone when I visit Michigan.
joshuaeberly
New member
imported post
DrTodd wrote:
"every citizen has the right to keep and bear arms, for the defense of himself and the state" (rough quote, and don't NOONE dare ask me to cite our constitution, if you don't know where it is, go look it up)
DrTodd wrote:
SCOTUS doesn't have ANYTHING to say about our STATE constitution.taxwhat wrote:Right next to where it says that "These can't be applied until the SC determines which "Rights" have been incorporated to apply to the states"....
"every citizen has the right to keep and bear arms, for the defense of himself and the state" (rough quote, and don't NOONE dare ask me to cite our constitution, if you don't know where it is, go look it up)
DrTodd
Michigan Moderator
imported post
I'm afraid that Taxwhat's comments (and my sarcastic ramblings) are sadly as applicable to the MI Constitution as to the US Constitution... just try "bearing arms" while driving in MI without having a "permission slip"/CPL from the state government.
I'm afraid that Taxwhat's comments (and my sarcastic ramblings) are sadly as applicable to the MI Constitution as to the US Constitution... just try "bearing arms" while driving in MI without having a "permission slip"/CPL from the state government.
taxwhat
Regular Member
imported post
DrTodd wrote:
DrTodd wrote:
+2 .......... sarcastic ramblings? Says Who ! I agree .