Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Proposed resolution HCR 009 and HB 6518 (2008) against federal firearm laws.

  1. #1
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Venator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lansing area, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    6,445

    Post imported post





    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
    Feb. 25, 2009

    Michigan pushes back against proposed federal registration

    New federal law would supersede those of the States

    State Rep. Paul Opsommer (R-93) announced today a new bi-partisan package of resolutions that will assert Michigan’s right to bear arms under its Constitution, the supremacy of the Second Amendment over the Commerce Clause, and the will of the Michigan legislature to not recognize or enforce unconstitutional firearm restrictions placed upon its citizens.

    Opsommer’s resolution, HCR 009, speaks directly to the many new federal firearm laws


    that are being introduced. “Even though I am only a State legislator, some of these federal proposals are so egregious that you really don’t have a choice but to get involved,” said Opsommer. “They would trample over our own Constitution and firearm laws, and I don’t think we can sit idly by to just wait and see if and when these bills become law”.

    Opsommer said he will also be reintroducing his bill HB 6518 (2008) and expanding it so that it also addresses the new agenda Illinois Congressman Bobby Rush has added to his anti-firearm’s wish list. The bill was introduced last year in reaction to coercive attempts by Mayor Bloomberg to create new video surveillance databases of gun purchases with Wal-Mart.

    “Congressman Rush’s legislation would also call for other biometric schemes that would include the fingerprinting of law abiding citizens and a new Attorney General approved picture ID card,” said Opsommer. “We were able to halt provisions last year that could have required a new and vague national ID card in order to buy firearms, and we will do so again whether it is to register firearms, ammunition, or handloading equipment.”
    An Amazon best seller "MY PARENTS OPEN CARRY" http://www.myparentsopencarry.com/

    *The information contained above is not meant to be legal advice, but is solely intended as a starting point for further research. These are my opinions, if you have further questions it is advisable to seek out an attorney that is well versed in firearm law.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    MOC Charter Member - Shelby Township, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    199

    Post imported post

    Any Link to the text of HCR 009 ?

  3. #3
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Venator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lansing area, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    6,445

    Post imported post

    http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(rwb...9&query=on

    Rep. Opsommer offered the following concurrent resolution:

    House Concurrent Resolution No. 9.


    A concurrent resolution to reaffirm the right to bear arms under the Michigan Constitution, the supremacy of the Second Amendment over the Commerce Clause, and the intent of the Michigan Legislature to not recognize or enforce unconstitutional firearm restrictions placed upon its citizens.

    Whereas, Article I, Section 6 of the Michigan Constitution, clearly affirms a right to bear arms. This provision prescribes that the primary purpose of the right to bear arms is not related solely to hunting but clearly allows Michigan citizen’s to be able to protect one's self, family, and possessions from the private lawlessness of other persons or potential tyranny of governments; and

    Whereas, There are also federalism provisions under the United States Constitution that prohibit the federal government from interfering with the right to bear arms within Michigan. The Tenth Amendment guarantees to the states and their people all powers not granted to the federal government elsewhere in the United States Constitution; and

    Whereas, Article I, Section 8 of the United States Constitution provides the federal government with the power to regulate commerce. However, this provision only empowers the government to regulate commerce between states and cannot be used to impose regulations onto firearms beyond this scope or that are at cross-purposes with the Second Amendment; and

    Whereas, Several new federal laws have been proposed that would overstep the bounds of both the Second Amendment, Michigan’s sovereign constitution, and its firearm laws; and

    Whereas, It is not the intent of the Michigan Legislature to pass laws that would mandate the use of “coded,” “serialized,” or “chipped” ammunition, to create databases of such ammunition, or to outlaw the ability of people to hand load otherwise lawful ammunition. Furthermore, it is not the intent of the Michigan Legislature to pass laws that would mandate the use of so called “smart gun” technology that wirelessly or otherwise authenticates and enables a firearm to be used by only one person. Furthermore, it is not the intent of the Michigan Legislature to allow for licensing schemes for the purchase of firearms that would mandate facial recognition, iris scans, fingerprinting, or other advanced biometric technology. Furthermore, it is not the intent of the Michigan Legislature to regulate the private transfer or sale of firearms beyond what is currently required by law. Furthermore, it is not the intent of the Michigan Legislature to pass laws that would make firearm ownership or use dependent upon the purchase of personal insurance policies or other similar risk instruments. Furthermore, it is not the intent of the Michigan Legislature to prohibit firearm ownership to individuals based upon their reporting of the past use of pain killers or other medications for surgical recovery, dental procedures, and other legitimate medical purposes. Furthermore, it is not the intent of the Michigan Legislature to pass laws that would infringe upon the ability of firearm owners to keep such weapons loaded and readily accessible within their homes, or that would allow for officials to inspect firearms within their homes without first obtaining a valid search warrant issued in conjunction with a lawful criminal investigation. It is however the intent of the Michigan Legislature to ensure that such firearm schemes are not imposed upon the citizens of Michigan by either the federal government or itself, and would view such infringements as violations of both the Second Amendment and the Michigan Constitution; now, therefore, be it

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That we reaffirm the right to bear arms under the Michigan Constitution, the supremacy of the Second Amendment over the Commerce Clause, and the intent of the Michigan Legislature to not recognize or enforce unconstitutional firearm restrictions placed upon its citizens.

    Resolved, That copies of this resolution be transmitted to the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, members of the Michigan congressional delegation, and the head of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms.



    An Amazon best seller "MY PARENTS OPEN CARRY" http://www.myparentsopencarry.com/

    *The information contained above is not meant to be legal advice, but is solely intended as a starting point for further research. These are my opinions, if you have further questions it is advisable to seek out an attorney that is well versed in firearm law.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    MOC Charter Member - Shelby Township, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    199

    Post imported post

    Thanks! Don't know why my search didn't find it...

  5. #5
    Regular Member MI-copperhead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Anti-urban, Bible thumping, Tekonsha, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    118

    Post imported post

    E-mail sent to my Rep., and message passed on to other gunowners.
    "Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death !" Patrick Henry

  6. #6
    Regular Member MI-copperhead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Anti-urban, Bible thumping, Tekonsha, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    118

    Post imported post

    I posted your message over at theSecond Amendment March Forum with a link back to this forum.
    "Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death !" Patrick Henry

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    17

    Post imported post

    So I need a little clarification. In the original law federal law would over rule a states law about firearms. So for example would this make SBRs and suppressors legal in Michigan?

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Secretary MOC, Inc. Frankenmuth, , USA
    Posts
    894

    Post imported post

    Cowboy5995 wrote:
    So I need a little clarification. In the original law federal law would over rule a states law about firearms. So for example would this make SBRs and suppressors legal in Michigan?
    I could be very wrong, but I'm pretty sure this would do nothing to current law. Basically it's just "us" officially saying we won't let the Federal Government impose laws on our state that we do not want.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Taurus850CIA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,071

    Post imported post

    SQLtables wrote:
    Cowboy5995 wrote:
    So I need a little clarification. In the original law federal law would over rule a states law about firearms. So for example would this make SBRs and suppressors legal in Michigan?
    I could be very wrong, but I'm pretty sure this would do nothing to current law. Basically it's just "us" officially saying we won't let the Federal Government impose laws on our state that we do not want.
    Yep, that's the way I read it, too.
    "Fault always lies in the same place, my fine babies: with him weak enough to lay blame." - Cort

    Gun control is like trying to reduce Drunk Driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars.

    Sentio aliquos togatos contra me conspirare.

    The answer to "1984" is "
    1776"

    With freedom comes much responsibility. It is for this reason so many are loathe to exercise it.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Cadillac Area, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    96

    Post imported post

    Thanks for notifying me about these matters. I have sent a message to my State Rep. and my State Senator regarding this resolution and bill. If you don't know who your Rep. and Senator are you can look them up here: http://www.michigan.gov/som/0,1607,7...6050--,00.html

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Chesterfield, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    111

    Post imported post

    I received a reply to my Emailfrom my StateRepresentative (Haase, Dem, 32 District) on this. She said, "This resolution has been referred to the House Committee on Judiciary, which is not a committee I currently am a member of. However, be assured I will keep your thoughts in mind when this legislation comes before me on the floor of the House."

    That's probably the company line all contituents hear when they correspond with their Reps. She hasn't replied yet to my thoughts regarding HB4348.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •