View Poll Results: Is OC in Michigan a RIGHT or a PRIVILEGE?

Voters
18. You may not vote on this poll
  • OC in Michigan is a RIGHT.

    13 72.22%
  • OC in Michigan is a PRIVILEGE.

    5 27.78%
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 65

Thread: Do you have a RIGHT to OC or CC here in Michigan?

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Lincoln Park, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    51

    Post imported post

    I am a bit envious of all you CC'ers. I am especially envious of you OC'ers. Heck, I am even envious of all you handgun owners.

    Just about everyone here talks about their RIGHT to OC. And, I guess, on the surface at least, it appears as though we have that RIGHT. However, here in Michigan, as I have pointed out in another post, one must ask permission from the Government to purchase a handgun. One must also ask permission from the Government to CC. And even though one does not have to ask permission to OC, I cannot get over the fact that permission was granted by the Government simply to own the handgun that an OC'er is carrying. Therefore, wether or not OC becomes everyday commonplace all over Michigan, I still cannot see it as a RIGHT when I know that the person carrying asked permission to own that handgun (this assumes the person is a law-abiding citizen, of course).

    So my envy is temperred with the knowledge that each and every one of you asked permission from the Government for the PRIVILEGE to own a handgun.

    In light of my statements above, do you believe you have a RIGHT to OC or do you believe it is a PRIVILEGE?

  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,544

    Post imported post

    Handguns require a Permit to purchase/CPL, so yes, you have to ask.

    You maintain the RIGHT to OC with long arms, though.

    MICHIGAN Article II, Section 5
    . Every person has a right to bear arms for the defense of himself and the state.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Generaldet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    President, CLSD, Inc., Oxford, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,073

    Post imported post

    I believe that it is still our right no matter what. Yes I had to file paperwork etc. and I don't agree with that, but just because state legislature forces me to abide by their rules right now, to me anyway doesn't make it any less my right. They are the ones who are in the wrong with all their red tape. For me the 2nd amendment is my carry permit. It's the right that our forefathers gave us (not a God given right). Hopefully one day we will have a country that can openly carry and obtain firearms without hassle or persecution from others.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Lincoln Park, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    51

    Post imported post

    Generaldet wrote:
    For me the 2nd amendment is my carry permit.
    That seems contradictory to me: On the one hand, Amendment II enumerates a RIGHT, while on the other hand you have a carry PERMIT. PERMIT, which means some entity granted you PERMISSION to carry it.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Michigander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Mulligan's Valley
    Posts
    4,830

    Post imported post

    There are 2 ways you can look at it. On the face of it, Michigan is completely out of line with the second amendment. This is not New York or California, and it is despicable that the politicians still require us to register handguns.

    On the other hand, if you get a CPL, Michigan is one of the most free states in the country for carrying.

    And as ziggy pointed out, you can carry long guns, which I will say again is something that we should do like they did in ohio recently. Specifically they walked around with slung and unloaded rifles after talking it over with the police to make sure there would be no problems. There is no reason at all why we couldn't do that here, particularly in a smaller town with a police chief who is pro gun.
    Answer every question about open carry in Michigan you ever had with one convenient and free book- http://libertyisforeveryone.com/open-carry-resources/

    The complete and utter truth can be challenged from every direction and it will always hold up. Accordingly there are few greater displays of illegitimacy than to attempt to impede free thought and communication.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Lincoln Park, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    51

    Post imported post

    Michigander wrote:
    On the other hand, if you get a CPL, Michigan is one of the most free states in the country for carrying.
    See, this is Doublethink to me. In other words, I have a lot of freedom to exercise my right, as long as I ask permission first.

    I'm sorry, but as long as I have to ask permission, I do not view it as a right.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Generaldet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    President, CLSD, Inc., Oxford, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,073

    Post imported post

    RubberArm wrote:
    Generaldet wrote:
    For me the 2nd amendment is my carry permit.
    That seems contradictory to me: On the one hand, Amendment II enumerates a RIGHT, while on the other hand you have a carry PERMIT. PERMIT, which means some entity granted you PERMISSION to carry it.
    You're logic is correct in the terms that you put it but faulty on the bigger picture. What I'm referring to is that I was given a right in my "Bill of Rights" but government has decided to step on those rights. I believe that just because a government feels they have to monitor and control everything and try to take liberties and rights from the people that doesn't make them correct. It's still a right that was given to me and we must fight to get that back. To me it's the same as when the settlers stole the country from the Cherokee, Lakota, Choctaw and hundreds of other native tribes. It was their right to be here, it's their land (and still is) yet Native Americans were forced to register and live in camps and be slaughtered by the thousands by the U.S. gov. They made the indian feel it was a "privilege" just to be alive and on a reservation. Same as many other similar examples across the world.

    One day, maybe not in our life time, the people will take those rights back.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Michigander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Mulligan's Valley
    Posts
    4,830

    Post imported post

    That's because that's what it is, that is how it is set up. Believe me, I share your anger and frustration about CPL's. Few people are as spiteful as I am about the fact they exist, and that the state extorts money from people in order to have a right its own constitution protects. People who have been here for more than a couple months know how often I bitch about this. It REALLY drives me nuts. Moving back from Arizona, and losing the right to carry in a car or a grocery store was incredibly infuriating. Not to mention once again having to worry about some nonsense about where I can drive to with my pistol in the trunk. I mean sheesh! The nerve of the treasonous tyrants that make Michigans laws! I will always be bitter as hell about Michigan's blatent disregard for the safety of its residents.

    When the idea of getting rid of concealed pistol free zones for CPL holders was getting tossed around the legislature, I wouldn't contact any reps, because I don't believe that giving the state 110 bucks or so makes someone more capable or knowledgeable with firearms than the next guy or gal. A "right" that the government extorts money to obtain is not a right, it is a privilege given to those who have the money and initiative to obtain it.

    Nevertheless CPL's are shall issue, and IF you have one, you have more legal ability to carry than most people in the gold star states.

    I side with you, that is a fact. But that doesn't change the fact that there are 2 ways to look at it.
    Answer every question about open carry in Michigan you ever had with one convenient and free book- http://libertyisforeveryone.com/open-carry-resources/

    The complete and utter truth can be challenged from every direction and it will always hold up. Accordingly there are few greater displays of illegitimacy than to attempt to impede free thought and communication.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Lincoln Park, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    51

    Post imported post

    Generaldet wrote:
    What I'm referring to is that I was given a right in my "Bill of Rights" but government has decided to step on those rights. [...] It's still a right that was given to me and we must fight to get that back.
    Off-topic a bit, but the "Bill of Rights" gave no rights to anyone. The Bill of Rights enumerated inalienable rights that already existed. The phrase, "...endowed by their Creator, with certain inalienable rights..." comes to mind.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Not on this website, USA
    Posts
    2,482

    Post imported post

    RubberArm wrote:
    Generaldet wrote:
    For me the 2nd amendment is my carry permit.
    That seems contradictory to me: On the one hand, Amendment II enumerates a RIGHT, while on the other hand you have a carry PERMIT. PERMIT, which means some entity granted you PERMISSION to carry it.
    So if this truely is the case then what are you going to do to change it Rubberarm?



  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Sterling hgts, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    34

    Post imported post

    you could also look at it this way. While being checked out first before the purchase of a handgun you know the person carrying is not a mental case or a felon at least at the time of purchase.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Michigander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Mulligan's Valley
    Posts
    4,830

    Post imported post

    T Vance wrote:
    So if this truely is the case then what are you going to do to change it Rubberarm?

    As MOC grows, and becomes better respected by politicians, it will probably become more able to effectively lobby for things like this.
    Answer every question about open carry in Michigan you ever had with one convenient and free book- http://libertyisforeveryone.com/open-carry-resources/

    The complete and utter truth can be challenged from every direction and it will always hold up. Accordingly there are few greater displays of illegitimacy than to attempt to impede free thought and communication.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Lincoln Park, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    51

    Post imported post

    T Vance wrote:
    So if this truely is the case then what are you going to do to change it Rubberarm?
    I'm not sure what to do about it.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Lincoln Park, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    51

    Post imported post

    Devildog wrote:
    you could also look at it this way. While being checked out first before the purchase of a handgun you know the person carrying is not a mental case or a felon at least at the time of purchase.
    Actually, whether or not a person was convicted of a felony, if he/she has served his/her sentence and/or paid his/her fine, and is no longer on parole or probation, then his/her right to keep and bear arms should not be infringed either.

    If such a person cannot be trusted with a firearm, then they should not be free to roam the streets either.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Niles & Lawton, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    295

    Post imported post

    Regardless of what the 'law of the land' says, every person has the RIGHT(or an obligation) to defend themselves.

    Just ask the Drug dealers and gang bangers if they picked up there PtP, or there CPL?

    I agree that if you want to remain a law abiding citizen you've got to 'ask permission', and that is asinine. There is a simple phrase I've said for awhile, "The law only effects the law abiding".

    Almost 86% of felons worst fear was that the person they were robbing had a gun.

    Not to mention all the stopped sexual assaults, and potential violence that are never reported. It's sad to say, but unless people 'evolve' into a peaceful species. I don't see the need for personal protection being far behind.

    "Guns are used 2.5 million times a year in self-defense. Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year—or about 6,850 times a day."

    Denver GR examiner-

    Beware anyone that says they're are going to make you safer:" A government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take from you everything you have"

    Just look at the bill that's out now: "The Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009" Could remove all 2nd A rights of American citizens, as well as close down the gun industry entirely.



  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Lincoln Park, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    51

    Post imported post

    BreakingTheMold wrote:
    Regardless of what the 'law of the land' says, every person has the RIGHT(or an obligation) to defend themselves.
    But in this case, I'm specifically referring to handguns. Sure, I don't need to ask the Government for permission to buy a knife, or shovel, or a bow and arrow, or a sling-shot, or an aluminum baseball bat, or crow-bar, or a big stick off a tree, or learning martial arts, etc. So denying me the right to keep and bear handguns does not, in and of itself, deny me the right to defend myself. But it does deny me the right to defend myself in what is usually going to be the most effective and efficient method and tool at my disposal.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Sterling hgts, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    34

    Post imported post

    True but there are alot of people who served there sentance and then commited another more serious crime. And odds are they will do it again mybe not all but most. Example while serving in the military overseas i seen a person who should have not been alowed to handle a weapon let alone be in the service of this country, because of the things he did to others then to himself.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Lincoln Park, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    51

    Post imported post

    Devildog wrote:
    True but there are alot of people who served there sentance and then commited another more serious crime. And odds are they will do it again mybe not all but most. Example while serving in the military overseas i seen a person who should have been alowed to handle a weapon let alone be in the service of this country, because of the things he did to others then to himself.
    And do you think that being a felon and going on to commit "another more serious crime" means that he would follow the laws concerning the purchase of handguns?

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Sterling hgts, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    34

    Post imported post

    No i do not but mybe it will make it harder for them to get hands on one.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Lincoln Park, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    51

    Post imported post

    Devildog wrote:
    No i do not but mybe it will make it harder for them to get hands on one.
    So I should be alright with a right being taken from me so that "maybe" it will make it harder for a convicted felon to get his hands on one? That's not a good trade, IMHO.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Sterling hgts, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    34

    Post imported post

    As i dont totally agree with the current situation regaurding purchases, I think we do need a way of making sure a individual is competent wether they have done there time. Now i know not all felons are a risk and should be able to exercise there rights. But some dont deserve ANY.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Niles & Lawton, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    295

    Post imported post

    "They won't make your hunting rifle illegal, They'll call it a sniper gun first"

    Any form of gun control is still GUN CONTROL. As for felons, I'd say it depends on there original offense.



  23. #23
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,544

    Post imported post

    RubberArm wrote:
    Devildog wrote:
    No i do not but mybe it will make it harder for them to get hands on one.
    So I should be alright with a right being taken from me so that "maybe" it will make it harder for a convicted felon to get his hands on one? That's not a good trade, IMHO.
    Restricting a felon's rights shouldn't restrict yours unless you're also a felon.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Sterling hgts, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    34

    Post imported post

    I agree but how does one find out who is a felon

  25. #25
    Activist Member hamaneggs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    warren, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,251

    Post imported post

    Devildog wrote:
    No i do not but mybe it will make it harder for them to get hands on one.
    It's easier for a felon to get a gun than a law abiding person.They walk down the street and hand over the cash and they have a gun. Laws printed on paper mean nothing to them! It's that simple!Laws prevent nothing when it comes to criminals!I say do away with all gun laws and the good people will have no problem taking care of crime under penalty of death!
    Today JESUS would tell me to sell my coat and buy two Springfield XD Compact 45acp's!

    NRA LIFER,GOA,MOC Inc.,CLSD,MCRGO,UAW! MOLON LABE!!

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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