Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Taylor, MI Gun Ban in City Parks

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Taylor, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    75

    Post imported post

    Sec. 20-60. Firearms, hunting, trapping. No person shall in any park hunt, trap or pursue wildlife at any time. No person shall use, carry or possess firearms of any description, air rifles, spring guns, bows and arrows, slings or any other forms of weapons potentially inimicable to wild life and dangerous to human safety or any instrument that can be loaded with and fire blank cartridges or any kind of trapping device. Shooting into any park areas from beyond park boundaries is forbidden. (Ord. No. 82-130, § 7(D)(1), 10-26-82) Cross references: Weapons generally, § 19-226 et seq.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Monroe, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    77

    Post imported post

    I just read that myself, along with others in the area restricting carry in public.

    Flat Rock, Riverview, Gibraltar are almost all the same wording. They must have copied each other.



    Maybe some e-mails will be sent to them soon...

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Taylor, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    75

    Post imported post

    Has anyone constructed a template letter to mail to city councils to repeal these unlawful bans?

  4. #4
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Venator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lansing area, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    6,446

    Post imported post

    WaltherP99C wrote:
    Has anyone constructed a template letter to mail to city councils to repeal these unlawful bans?
    I have used this with great success. Modify as necessary. Just an email to the major, city attorney and the Chief of police will get the ball rolling.

    Dear Mayor XXX

    I have become aware of an illegal and unenforceable ordinance you havein regards to the banning firearms in (parks, etc.). The pertinent section is below.

    COPY ILLEGAL ORDINANCE HERE

    [/i][/b]As you may or may not know, in 1990 the State of Michigan passed MCL 123.1102 which provides, in pertinent part: A local unit of government shall not impose special taxation on, enact or enforce any ordinance or regulation pertaining to, or regulate in any other manner the ownership, registration, purchase, sale, transfer, transportation, or possession of pistols or other firearms, ammunition for pistols or other firearms, or components of pistols or other firearms, except as otherwise provided by federal law or a law of this state.

    In MCRGO v. Ferndale[/i], the Michigan Court of Appeals held that local units of government may not impose restrictions upon firearms possession.

    THE MICHIGAN APPEALS COURT CONCLUDED[/b]: April 29, 2003 9:10 am. v No. 242237

    In sum, we conclude that § 1102 is a statute that specifically imposes a prohibition on local units of government from enacting and enforcing any ordinances or regulations pertaining to the transportation and possession of firearms, and thus preempts any ordinance or regulation of a local unit of government concerning these areas.

    Further, we conclude that the specific language of the 2000 amendments to MCL 28.421 et seq., particularly §§ 5c and 5o, which were adopted more than a decade after the enactment of § 1102, do not repeal § 1102 or otherwise reopen this area to local regulation of the carrying of firearms.17 Accordingly, we hold that the Ferndale ordinance is preempted by state law and, consequently, we reverse.

    My hope is that you amend this ordinance and any other ordinance that bans firearms. I have contacted other municipalities and they have chosen to amend their ordinances to avoid any possible civil suits like the Federal suit in Grand Haven (see below). For further information on open carry and citizens rights see this newsletter published by the Law Enforcement Action Forum (LEAF) of the Municipal League of Michigan.

    http://www.mml.org/insurance/shared/publications/leaf_newsletter/2009_04.pdf

    May 12, 2009

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

    The Law Offices of Steven W. Dulan, PLC announces federal civil rights suit against City of Grand Haven and Ottawa County over open-carry ordinance.

    The suit, brought under Title 42, Section 1983 of the U.S. Code, was filed on behalf of Christopher Fetters, an off-duty Air Force Security Officer who was attending the Coast Guard Festival in Grand Haven last year. Mr. Fetters was openly carrying a holstered pistol, which is legal under Michigan law, as in most states. He was arrested and detained and charged with a violation of a Grand Haven city ordinance prohibiting open carry of firearms. His gun was initially seized, although it was later returned.

    Michigan law prohibits local units of government from making any law with respect to firearms, (MCL 123.1102.) The public policy goal of the statute is to provide a uniform system of gun laws statewide so that citizens do not have to guess regarding what local rules might exist as they move from one locality to the next.

    The complaint alleges, among other issues, violations of Mr. Fetters' civil rights under the 2d, 4th, and 14th , Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, and Article I, Section 6 of the Michigan Constitution, which reads, "Every person has a right to keep and bear arms for the defense of himself and the state," when he was physically restrained, disarmed, and subjected to verbal harassment and ridicule by law enforcement personnel.

    Criminal charges were later dropped by the Grand Haven City Attorney's Office, after being informed of the unenforceability of their ordinance. No allegations were ever made that Mr. Fetters ever threatened anyone, or in any other way disturbed the peace on the day of his arrest. He is demanding damages for violation of his civil rights as a citizen of the United States and of Michigan.

    The case has been filed in the U.S. Court, Western District of Michigan in Grand Rapids and has been assigned Case Number 1:09-CV-00190.


    Please update me on any action you undertake to correct this situation. I thank you for your time and consideration in this matter.

    Respectfully,
    John Smith
    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.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Taylor, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    75

    Post imported post

    Perfect. Thank you.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Lansing, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    188

    Post imported post

    Man, I wish I had seen this earlier. I wrote two yesterday that are very similar but this woulda saved me a ton of writing.

  7. #7
    Regular Member dougwg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    MOC Charter Member Westland, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,445

    Post imported post

    But wait, there's more.
    Responsibilities of public office

    City officials and employees are bound to uphold the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Michigan and to carry out impartially and comply with the laws of the nation, state and the city. City officials and employees must not exceed their authority or breach the law or ask others to do so. City officials and employees are bound to observe in their official acts the highest standards of morality and to discharge the duties of their offices faithfully, regardless of personal consideration, recognizing that their conduct in their official affairs should be above reproach.

    All city officials and employees shall safeguard public confidence by being honest, fair and respectful of all persons and property with whom they have contact, by maintaining nonpartisanship in all official acts, and by avoiding conduct which may tend to undermine respect for city officials and employees and for the city as an institution.
    http://www.cityoftaylor.com/files/cl..._Ordinance.pdf

    and
    Section 20.02 Locational Requirements for Regulated Uses

    (a) The establishment of a regulated use listed below (whether the use is primary, secondary, or accessory) is prohibited if the use will be within a 1,000 foot radius of another regulated use:

    (1) Adult regulated uses, as listed in Section 20.05(c) Classification.

    (2) Firearms dealers (where over ten percent (10%) of the business revenues are generated by the sale of firearms) distributors, repair shops, firing ranges (only in an enclosed building), and similar establishments.

    (3) Pawn shops.

    (4) Tattoo parlor.

    (b) The establishment of a regulated use listed in (a) above (whether the use is primary, secondary, or accessory) is prohibited if the use will be within one thousand (1,000) feet of any of the following:

    (1) Church, religious institution, or building used primarily for religious worship and related religious activities.

    (2) Public or private elementary or secondary school, vocational school, special education school, junior college or university.

    (3) Any Single-Family Residential District, Multiple-Family Residential District or Midtown District.

    (4) Lot or parcel in residential use.

    (5) Public park.
    http://www.cityoftaylor.com/files/ec...rdinance09.pdf


  8. #8
    Regular Member dougwg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    MOC Charter Member Westland, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,445

    Post imported post

    Hello Sgt. Thomas Deasy,

    I'm the General Manager of a small manufacturing company in Taylor, MI. I am currently preparing the Federal form [ATF Form 7 (5310.12)] to obtain a Federal Firearm License to Manufacture from the BATFE so that we may begin manufacturing firearms and components of firearms.

    One of the items on the form pertains to local laws and ordinances(Item #27). After some research and telephone calls to Lori Sell who is the zoning supervisor of Taylor (734-374-1572) and also to Executive Director of the Planning Department, Joseph R. Nardone's office (734-374-2745), it was brought to my attention that Taylor has just revised it's ordinance code and there is an item within the code (Section 20.01) that states:


    (a) The establishment of a regulated use listed below (whether the use is primary, secondary, or
    accessory) is prohibited if the use will be within a 1,000 foot radius of another regulated use:
    (1) Adult regulated uses, as listed in Section 20.05(c) Classification.
    (2) Firearms dealers (where over ten percent (10%) of the business revenues are generated by
    the sale of firearms) distributors, repair shops, firing ranges (only in an enclosed building),
    and similar establishments.
    (3) Pawn shops.
    (4) Tattoo parlor.
    (b) The establishment of a regulated use listed in (a) above (whether the use is primary,
    secondary, or accessory) is prohibited if the use will be within one thousand (1,000) feet of any of the following:
    (1) Church , religious institution, or building used primarily for religious worship and related religious activities.
    (2) Public or private elementary or secondary school, vocational school, special education
    school, junior college or university.
    (3) Any Single-Family Residential District , Multiple-Family Residential District or Midtown
    District.
    (4) Lot or parcel in residential use.
    (5) Public park.



    Here is a link to the ordinance code in it's entirety. http://www.cityoftaylor.com/files/ec...rdinance09.pdf



    It was my understanding that according to ACT 319 of 1990, [MCL 123.1102] no local unit of government shall enact or enforce any law or ordinance pertaining to firearms or components of firearms and therefor the section of Taylors ordinance code I listed above is unenforceable.



    Therefore it is my interpretation that the city of Taylor has no legal grounds to prohibit the manufacture or distribution of firearms within the city and I can can move forward with my application for my manufacturing license from the BATFE. Do you agree?



    Sincerely,



    XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Mr. XXXXXXXXXXXX,

    Before answering your question, it is important to note that the MSP does not have the authority to issue binding legal opinions. We offer our interpretations only to assist members of the public in their attempts to comply with the law. This caveat is especially important with a question like yours, as it touches on a topic about which we have no expertise (zoning).

    That said, it appears your interpretation is correct. The state - through MCL 123.1102 - has expressed its intent to completely occupy the field of firearms regulation. Thus, it appears local units of government cannot regulate firearms absent a specific grant of authority from the state. I briefly reviewed Michigan's zoning statutes and was unable to find one expressly granting such authority.

    Zoning ordinances can trump preemption statutes when they indirectly affect a field of regulation occupied by the state. For example, a zoning ordinance that establishes a residential area can have the lawful indirect effect of preventing the operation of a gun store in that area. However, the Taylor ordinance in question directly regulates firearms, which appears to be contrary to MCL 123.1102.

    Again, we are not zoning experts. There may be a statute or court case squarely answering your question that we're not aware of. Therefore, I suggest that you ask Taylor's zoning officials about the statutory authority for their ordinance as it pertains to firearms. If they are unable to provide you with a satisfactory answer, you should seek the advice of an attorney with expertise in zoning matters.

    Sincerely,

    Lt. Thomas Deasy
    Michigan State Police
    Executive Division
    714 S. Harrison Rd.
    East Lansing, MI 48823
    (517) 336-6441

  9. #9
    Regular Member dougwg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    MOC Charter Member Westland, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,445

    Post imported post

    ttt

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Southwest, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    291

    Post imported post

    This is what I presented to the Texas Township Board on Monday.

    "I’m here tonite to object to 2 Texas Township Ordinances with regard to the prohibition on the possession and transportation of firearms in Texas Township Parks and KVCC. The Ordinances are numbered Section 24-32 and Section 14-43 respectfully.
    Sec. 24-32. Regulations.
    The following regulations shall govern activities and uses at township parks:
    (1)No firearms shall be permitted in the parks.

    Sec. 14-43. Firearms.
    No person, except a peace officer in the discharge of his duties, shall, without the written consent of an authorized representative of the college, possess or discharge a firearm on college property.

    Michigan State Law, specifically MCL 123.1102, prohibits municipalities from enacting ordinances regarding the possession of firearms. Texas Township Ordinance Sec. 24-32 and 14-43 are in violation of State law and exposes the Township to civil suits from engaged citizens who may be illegally arrested and prosecuted, thus requiring an expensive defense under this ordinance, or who may sue the Township as a result of an arrest, or due to the inability to protect themselves in the event of a confrontation. Additionally, these Ordinances leave the impression with the citizens of Texas Township that the Board has the authority to enact such ordinances, which it clearly does not. Citizens of other municipalities have brought similar ordinances to the attention of their elected representatives; as examples, governmental bodies in Traverse City, Alpena, Warren, South Haven and Kalamazoo County, after input from their own attorneys, and in a timely manner, have brought their formerly illegal ordinances into compliance with State Law.

    I initially contacted Supervisor Healy in July of last year regarding this issue and despite months of back and forth emails no real effort has been made on his part other than asking for my patience. During this time I provided Supervisor Healy with all current Michigan Firearms Laws, position papers from the Michigan Municipal League, pertinent State Laws, Court opinions and the progress made by the Kalamazoo County Parks Director. His latest email, 3 days ago, stated that while he recognizes this needs to be addressed, the resolution of these illegal ordinances was of low priority as ‘there are many challenges on the plate’ that since no ‘situations’ have occurred there is no need to move it up the priority list.

    To me, I see this as the canary in the coal mine – I believe it to be the responsibility and a priority, of all our elected representatives to protect our rights as citizens. If Township Officials are unwilling to remove illegal ordinances from our Codes, and are disrespectful of our rights as citizens in this matter, I’m concerned about the trustful nature of the relationship between elected officials and the citizenry.

    I find it difficult to believe that over the last six months there has been absolutely no time to attend to this concern. Tonight, I respectfully ask the Board to swiftly address and remove these illegal ordinances, and provide a timeline for resolution."
    Carry on



  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    taylor , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    28

    Post imported post

    just wondering if anyone fallowed up with Taylor

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Commerce Twp, ,
    Posts
    83

    Post imported post

    Venator wrote:
    WaltherP99C wrote:
    Has anyone constructed a template letter to mail to city councils to repeal these unlawful bans?
    I have used this with great success. Modify as necessary. Just an email to the major, city attorney and the Chief of police will get the ball rolling.

    Dear Mayor XXX

    I have become aware of an illegal and unenforceable ordinance you havein regards to the banning firearms in (parks, etc.). The pertinent section is below.

    COPY ILLEGAL ORDINANCE HERE

    [/i][/b]As you may or may not know, in 1990 the State of Michigan passed MCL 123.1102 which provides, in pertinent part: A local unit of government shall not impose special taxation on, enact or enforce any ordinance or regulation pertaining to, or regulate in any other manner the ownership, registration, purchase, sale, transfer, transportation, or possession of pistols or other firearms, ammunition for pistols or other firearms, or components of pistols or other firearms, except as otherwise provided by federal law or a law of this state.

    In MCRGO v. Ferndale[/i], the Michigan Court of Appeals held that local units of government may not impose restrictions upon firearms possession.

    THE MICHIGAN APPEALS COURT CONCLUDED[/b]: April 29, 2003 9:10 am. v No. 242237

    In sum, we conclude that § 1102 is a statute that specifically imposes a prohibition on local units of government from enacting and enforcing any ordinances or regulations pertaining to the transportation and possession of firearms, and thus preempts any ordinance or regulation of a local unit of government concerning these areas.

    Further, we conclude that the specific language of the 2000 amendments to MCL 28.421 et seq., particularly §§ 5c and 5o, which were adopted more than a decade after the enactment of § 1102, do not repeal § 1102 or otherwise reopen this area to local regulation of the carrying of firearms.17 Accordingly, we hold that the Ferndale ordinance is preempted by state law and, consequently, we reverse.

    My hope is that you amend this ordinance and any other ordinance that bans firearms. I have contacted other municipalities and they have chosen to amend their ordinances to avoid any possible civil suits like the Federal suit in Grand Haven (see below). For further information on open carry and citizens rights see this newsletter published by the Law Enforcement Action Forum (LEAF) of the Municipal League of Michigan.

    http://www.mml.org/insurance/shared/publications/leaf_newsletter/2009_04.pdf

    May 12, 2009

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

    The Law Offices of Steven W. Dulan, PLC announces federal civil rights suit against City of Grand Haven and Ottawa County over open-carry ordinance.

    The suit, brought under Title 42, Section 1983 of the U.S. Code, was filed on behalf of Christopher Fetters, an off-duty Air Force Security Officer who was attending the Coast Guard Festival in Grand Haven last year. Mr. Fetters was openly carrying a holstered pistol, which is legal under Michigan law, as in most states. He was arrested and detained and charged with a violation of a Grand Haven city ordinance prohibiting open carry of firearms. His gun was initially seized, although it was later returned.

    Michigan law prohibits local units of government from making any law with respect to firearms, (MCL 123.1102.) The public policy goal of the statute is to provide a uniform system of gun laws statewide so that citizens do not have to guess regarding what local rules might exist as they move from one locality to the next.

    The complaint alleges, among other issues, violations of Mr. Fetters' civil rights under the 2d, 4th, and 14th , Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, and Article I, Section 6 of the Michigan Constitution, which reads, "Every person has a right to keep and bear arms for the defense of himself and the state," when he was physically restrained, disarmed, and subjected to verbal harassment and ridicule by law enforcement personnel.

    Criminal charges were later dropped by the Grand Haven City Attorney's Office, after being informed of the unenforceability of their ordinance. No allegations were ever made that Mr. Fetters ever threatened anyone, or in any other way disturbed the peace on the day of his arrest. He is demanding damages for violation of his civil rights as a citizen of the United States and of Michigan.

    The case has been filed in the U.S. Court, Western District of Michigan in Grand Rapids and has been assigned Case Number 1:09-CV-00190.


    Please update me on any action you undertake to correct this situation. I thank you for your time and consideration in this matter.

    Respectfully,
    John Smith
    Venator, the letter is an excellent template. Carefully worded and addresses the point. If everyone can adjust the letter to his/her particular local government body without changing more than inserting their own unconstitutional ordinances, the movement will be much stronger. This is what I think the movement should have - consistent letters, consistent goals, consistent agendas, and the same respectful tone to government leaders that your sample letter demonstrates.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    43

    Post imported post

    mpearce wrote:
    This is what I think the movement should have - consistent letters, consistent goals, consistent agendas, and the same respectful tone to government leaders that your sample letter demonstrates.
    I agree.

    Professionalism begets professionalism.


  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Wixom, Michigan, , USA
    Posts
    18

    Post imported post

    TTT per conversation w/ doug at todays Westland event. Heritage park seems like a might be a mighty fine place for an OC picnic.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Burton, Michigan
    Posts
    3,361

    Post imported post

    firespec35 wrote:
    TTT per conversation w/ doug at todays Westland event. Heritage park seems like a might be a mighty fine place for an OC picnic.
    Welcome to OCDO Firespec35.

    You canadd your location by going to My Account and then Profile. Pick USA under Country first and then pick Michigan under State.


  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    detroit, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    149

    Post imported post

    SpringerXDacp wrote:
    firespec35 wrote:
    TTT per conversation w/ doug at todays Westland event. Heritage park seems like a might be a mighty fine place for an OC picnic.
    Welcome to OCDO Firespec35.

    You canadd your location by going to My Account and then Profile. Pick USA under Country first and then pick Michigan under State.
    Heritage park would be a great PlACE FOR A PICNIC

  17. #17
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Venator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lansing area, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    6,446

    Post imported post

    Sent this today. I concur a picnic in Taylor would be a good idea.

    taylornews@aol.com; Cburke4Taylor@gmail.com; Taylor_PD@ci.taylor.mi.us





    Dear Mayor Lamarand:



    I am investigating an alleged statement made by a resident of Taylor claiming that the Taylor Police Department would “take down” any person they saw open carrying a firearm. As you know the open carry of a firearm is lawful in Michigan and local ordinances banning such are illegal and unenforceable due to the 1990 state statute MCL 123.1102. The pertinent section of your unlawful ordinance is underlined below.



    I have also included a memo on open carry the Lansing Police Department has released to their officers on the proper protocol when dealing with a person that is open carrying a firearm. It is hoped that the Taylor PD will act appropriately and within the law when encountering a person openly carrying a firearm in public.



    ARTICLE III. USE REGULATIONS
    Sec. 20-60. Firearms, hunting, trapping.
    No person shall in any park hunt, trap or pursue wildlife at any time. No person shall use, carry or possess firearms of any description, air rifles, spring guns, bows and arrows, slings or any other forms of weapons potentially inimicable to wild life and dangerous to human safety or any instrument that can be loaded with and fire blank cartridges or any kind of trapping device. Shooting into any park areas from beyond park boundaries is forbidden.
    (Ord. No. 82-130, § 7(D)(1), 10-26-82)
    Cross references: Weapons generally, § 19-226 et seq.
    [/i]

    [/i]

    ARTICLE VI. OFFENSES AGAINST PUBLIC SAFETY
    Sec. 19-226. Confiscation of firearms and replica firearms.
    (a)All weapons, guns, pistols, firearms, knives, dirks, razors, stilettos, or any other sharp edged or pointed instruments or weapons carried are hereby declared forfeited to the city.
    (b)All replica and imitation firearms, as defined in section 19-239, carried or possessed by any person are hereby declared forfeited to the city.
    (Ord. No. 75-51, § 6.8, 2-11-75; Ord. No. 08-428, 2-19-08)
    [/i]



    As you may or may not know, in 1990 the State of Michigan passed MCL 123.1102 which provides, in pertinent part: A local unit of government shall not impose special taxation on, enact or enforce any ordinance or regulation pertaining to, or regulate in any other manner the ownership, registration, purchase, sale, transfer, transportation, or possession of pistols or other firearms, ammunition for pistols or other firearms, or components of pistols or other firearms, except as otherwise provided by federal law or a law of this state.



    In MCRGO v. Ferndale, the Michigan Court of Appeals held that local units of government may not impose restrictions upon firearms possession.



    THE MICHIGAN APPEALS COURT CONCLUDED: April 29, 2003 9:10 am. v No. 242237



    In sum, we conclude that § 1102 is a statute that specifically imposes a prohibition on local units of government from enacting and enforcing any ordinances or regulations pertaining to the transportation and possession of firearms, and thus preempts any ordinance or regulation of a local unit of government concerning these areas.[/i]

    [/i]

    Further, we conclude that the specific language of the 2000 amendments to MCL 28.421 et seq., particularly §§ 5c and 5o, which were adopted more than a decade after the enactment of § 1102, do not repeal § 1102 or otherwise reopen this area to local regulation of the carrying of firearms.17 Accordingly, we hold that the Ferndale ordinance is preempted by state law and, consequently, we reverse.[/i]



    My hope is that you amend this ordinance and any other ordinance that bans firearms. I have contacted other municipalities and they have chosen to amend their ordinances to avoid any possible civil suits like the Federal suit in Grand Haven (see below). For further information on open carry and citizens rights see this newsletter published by the Law Enforcement Action Forum (LEAF) of the Municipal League of Michigan.

    http://www.mml.org/insurance/shared/publications/leaf_newsletter/2009_04.pdf



    Please respond to me within 10 days on any action you undertake to correct this situation. I thank you for your time and consideration in this matter.



    Respectfully,

    Brian Jeffs. Director of Research

    Michigan Open Carry, Inc.



    [size=May 12, 2009][/size]

    [size=][/size]

    [size=FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:][/size]

    [size=][/size]

    [size=The Law Offices of Steven W. Dulan, PLC announces federal civil rights suit against City of Grand Haven and Ottawa County over open-carry ordinance.][/size]

    [size=][/size]

    [size=The suit, brought under Title 42, Section 1983 of the U.S. Code, was filed on behalf of Christopher Fetters, an off-duty Air Force Security Officer who was attending the Coast Guard Festival in Grand Haven last year. Mr. Fetters was openly carrying a holstered pistol, which is legal under Michigan law, as in most states. He was arrested and detained and charged with a violation of a Grand Haven city ordinance prohibiting open carry of firearms. His gun was initially seized, although it was later returned.][/size]

    [size=][/size]

    [size=Michigan][/size][size= law prohibits local units of government from making any law with respect to firearms, (MCL 123.1102.) The public policy goal of the statute is to provide a uniform system of gun laws statewide so that citizens do not have to guess regarding what local rules might exist as they move from one locality to the next.][/size]

    [size=][/size]

    [size=The complaint alleges, among other issues, violations of Mr. Fetters' civil rights under the 2d, 4th, and 14th , Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, and Article I, Section 6 of the Michigan Constitution, which reads, "Every person has a right to keep and bear arms for the defense of himself and the state," when he was physically restrained, disarmed, and subjected to verbal harassment and ridicule by law enforcement personnel.][/size]

    [size=][/size]

    [size=Criminal charges were later dropped by the Grand Haven City Attorney's Office, after being informed of the unenforceability of their ordinance. No allegations were ever made that Mr. Fetters ever threatened anyone, or in any other way disturbed the peace on the day of his arrest. He is demanding damages for violation of his civil rights as a citizen of the United States and of Michigan.][/size]

    [size=][/size]

    [size=The case has been filed in the U.S. Court, Western District of Michigan in Grand Rapids and has been assigned Case Number 1:09-CV-00190.][/size]


    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.

  18. #18
    Campaign Veteran Glock9mmOldStyle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Taylor, Wayne County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,047

    Post imported post

    Outstanding! Give them HELL Doug!

    - Jeff
    A government that does not trust its law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms is itself unworthy of trust. James Madison.

    Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples' liberty's teeth. The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good. George Washington

  19. #19
    Campaign Veteran Glock9mmOldStyle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Taylor, Wayne County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,047

    Post imported post

    UPDATE!!!

    I attended Taylor's Council meeting last night & spoke to Chief Tamsen in person about the illegal ordinances on the books. He told me that officers recently have been directed on the proper way to handle OC MWAG calls so there shouldn't be any issues. Taylor Government is in complete chaos, with Council members taking each other to court or the Mayor filling suits against members and vice/versa and they wonder why 6 out of 7 of Council and the Mayor are facing recalls?

    Something tells me that getting these folks to fix anything is going to be a battle. They can't even work with each other so I won't hold my breath on them working with us.


    Taylor's government is FUBAR

    Signed,

    Living under illegal gun ordinances

    - G9mmOS
    A government that does not trust its law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms is itself unworthy of trust. James Madison.

    Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples' liberty's teeth. The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good. George Washington

Posting Permissions

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