Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: My Gun Rights Questions for Mike Cox with responses.

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Macomb County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,865

    Post imported post

    In another thread I explained how if you really wanted to know a candidates position on certain issues you should simply ask him or her directly and then do research on the candidates has already done to prove they stand behind what they say. Thats exactly what I did.

    I'm not bias towards a candidate either. Most of us here have the same views on firearm ownership and gun rights. To be honest I think we have very few differences in this area. What I did was I started off like any normal citizen. I researched the every single fact I could find and weighed the candidates actions as a public servant. If I wanted further clarification I got them directly.

    With all that said here is the meat and potatoes. I asked 3 pin pointed questions like I suggested to another person on the forum. These are my questions with responses:

    1.) What is Mike’s opinion on allowing law abiding gun owners access to SBR, SBS, silencers, class 3 items that are licensed by the NFA?

    Answer: Short Barreled Rifles (SBR) and Shotguns (SBS) are regulated in the same manner as machine guns or any other NFA item by the NFA-BATFE (National Firearms Act - Branch of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives) SBR SBS is legal to own under the federal laws and regulations as long as they are registered in the NFRTR (National Firearms Registry and Transfer Record) managed by the NFA-BATFE. The NFA will transfer an SBR or SBS as long as the applicant is vetted i.e. FBI Prints, Back Ground Check, Photo's, Certificate of US Citizenship, Signature of CLEO i.e. Sheriff, the proper registration forms, everything in duplicate and a payment of the $200 transfer tax. The NFA will approve the transfer if all checks out and it is legal to own in the state and local jurisdiction of the applicant.

    It is not legal to own a SBR SBS in Michigan unless it is a Curio and Relic classified SBR or SBS. See MCL 750.224 B which prohibits SBR SBS unless classified C&R. So while the AG believes everybody has a right to keep and bear arms including SBR and SBS, the state law prevents it in most cases and the AG does not have the power to arbitrarily enact new state law as much as he may clarify state law. Legislation would need to be drafted, approved by both houses of the legislature and signed by the Governor in order to approve SBR SBS.

    Mike should generally support all NFA items as there is a clear federal right to own such items albeit a highly regulated right and the state of Michigan has enacted laws that prevent a law abiding person from legally exercising their federal right to own some such items. The approval and transfer of such items is a function of the NFA-BATFE and applicants are vetted so ownership should not be an issue. Privately owned, registered NFA firearms and devices are never used by their owners in the commission of a crime. There have only been a few cases in decades of criminal misuse of a legally owned machine gun and it was by an Ohio LE officer.

    Criminals will evade the process entirely and not legally possess a machine gun, sbr, sbs, silencer, aow etc. If anything they may engage in the illegal manufacture of such items. They will not seek legal means of registered - tax paid, federally and LE approved registration and transfer. This makes the NFA issue moot as they are highly regulated and almost never used in crime. The federal penalty for illegal unregistered possession of an NFA item is a felony 10 years in federal prison and or a $250,000 fine plus state felony charges and fines and prohibition of federal and state gun rights forever after.

    This is what people don't realize. The legal NFA owner treads the straight and narrow path or faces the wrath of the law.


    2.) Will Mike work on the elimination of pistol free zones.

    Answer: Why not? If a person is properly licensed and charged with the responsibility for himself and his actions to carry a pistol concealed why should he be considered less responsible in a so-called pistol free zone when he knows he must maintain responsibility or face the law?

    3.) What is Mike’s opinion of open carry and if a ban of the practice were to be pushed by the gun control advocates would he speak out against such legislation?

    Answer: Mike has instructed the state LE agencies that open carry is a constitutionally protected liberty under Michigan Constitution Article 1, Section 6 which says " Every person has a right to keep and bear arms for the defense of himself and the state." Mike would oppose a prohibition of open carry as an unconstitutional infringement of a constitutional guarantee.


    *I have not altered the responses in any way. I've provided them as they were presented to me and received permission to publicly post these responses.

    Please feel free to discuss these issues on the thread and post any further information anyone else may have on Mike.

  2. #2
    Guest

    Post imported post



  3. #3
    Regular Member Yooper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Houghton County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    808

    Post imported post

    I thought I read before, but maybe I'm wrong, that he supported getting rid of the handgun registration as well.

    I know people who live in states (WI) that can't bring their pistols here, even for hunting season, and relatives that can't bring their pistols here because they don't have a permit from their home state. Not that they're prohibited, but OC/CC is legal in your car there, as well as CC on private property and while hunting, so they've not had a need to get one.

    I dream of the day where handguns in michigan are treated the same as rifles/shotguns
    Rand Paul 2016

  4. #4
    Regular Member lil_freak_66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Mason, Michigan
    Posts
    1,811

    Post imported post

    Yooper wrote:
    I thought I read before, but maybe I'm wrong, that he supported getting rid of the handgun registration as well.

    I know people who live in states (WI) that can't bring their pistols here, even for hunting season, and relatives that can't bring their pistols here because they don't have a permit from their home state. Not that they're prohibited, but OC/CC is legal in your car there, as well as CC on private property and while hunting, so they've not had a need to get one.

    I dream of the day where handguns in michigan are treated the same as rifles/shotguns
    id like to see rifles and shotguns treated as handguns.



    but ONLY for carrying,without having to go through the stuff we do at political events
    not a lawyer, dont take anything i say as legal advice.


  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Plymouth/Canton, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    252

    Post imported post

    Here is a 2 part question for Mike Cox...

    How would you, if elected Governor of the State of Michigan, deal with or handle overzealous prosecutors when they repeatedly harass law abiding citizens who legally poses and carry firearms with frivolous law suits?

    Would the same law abiding citizen be afforded the ability to go after the previous said branch of government threw legal action, without that branch of government being able to claim immunity from prosecution?


    My VOTE depends on how he answers these 2 questions.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Macomb County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,865

    Post imported post

    THway wrote:
    Here is a 2 part question for Mike Cox...

    How would you, if elected Governor of the State of Michigan, deal with or handle overzealous prosecutors when they repeatedly harass law abiding citizens who legally poses and carry firearms with frivolous law suits?

    Would the same law abiding citizen be afforded the ability to go after the previous said branch of government threw legal action, without that branch of government being able to claim immunity from prosecution?


    My VOTE depends on how he answers these 2 questions.
    I suggest you show up to one of the many events he's attending http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum30/36303.html and ask him yourself. Or attend the large rally they are having http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum30/36573.html

    In my opinion possibly both of those questions may be in the realm of an attorney general or maybe a chief of police not a governor. From what I've seen the overzealous people out there look to be mostly untrained officers or one with a grudge against open carry then anything to do with persecutors.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Yooper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Houghton County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    808

    Post imported post

    lil_freak_66 wrote

    id like to see rifles and shotguns treated as handguns.



    but ONLY for carrying,without having to go through the stuff we do at political events
    I'm missing something here.....
    We can O.C. rifles/shotguns
    CC of rifles/shotguns, while not impossible, is rather impractical.

    Do you mean carrying loaded in a vehicle?


    Rand Paul 2016

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Macomb County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,865

    Post imported post

    Gun rights!!! I met Mike today. Had a great conversation about gun rights, and Class 3. Look at the attachment. A MUST read!

  9. #9
    Guest

    Post imported post

    Question #2 asks directly if Cox will work to eliminate pistol free zones.
    His answer implies that he will.

    Question #3 asks if he would speak out against a prohibition of OC.
    His answer is explicit that he would oppose any attempt.

    But when asked about NFA items he "generally supports" ownership.

    In one answer he will support legislation because a person is vetted and found to be ok.

    But he doesn't give the same whole heart response to a person vetted to own NFA items. He uses his current office position to work around answering.

    His NFA answer is soft. He quotes all the federal laws and requirements that a person has to comply with to possess NFA items, but only "generally supports" private ownership.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Macomb County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,865

    Post imported post

    IMO NFA is a political hot potato. Michigan is full of donkey's .. and in my opinion he will need to gain the support of a majority of independence and some dems in order to win the majority. It's not an easy thing to do and outside of firearms enthusiasts NFA is not a real popular issue to press.

  11. #11
    Guest

    Post imported post

    Nonetheless, Mike Cox is still far better than the career politician Bouchard.

    Too bad about NFA items though. Only a handful of states don't allow them. Michigan has some of the most restrictive gun laws, yet everyone thinks that they're the norm. For instance, only 4 other states require handgun registration.

    Maybe some low key effort to adopt federal laws can be initiated.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Macomb County, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,865

    Post imported post

    CV67PAT wrote:
    Nonetheless, Mike Cox is still far better than the career politician Bouchard.

    Too bad about NFA items though. Only a handful of states don't allow them. Michigan has some of the most restrictive gun laws, yet everyone thinks that they're the norm. For instance, only 4 other states require handgun registration.

    Maybe some low key effort to adopt federal laws can be initiated.
    The majority of our problems are a direct result of the Michigan State Police. Especially the NFA restrictions and how suppressors got to where they are today.

Posting Permissions

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