Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: check it out

  1. #1
    Regular Member dougwg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    MOC Charter Member Westland, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,445

    Post imported post


    FIREARMS AND FIREWORKS

    324.40111 Discharging firearm within 150 yards of dwelling or farm of another

    750.227d Firearm improperly carried in vehicle (loaded, not cased, etc.)

    750.227 Carrying a concealed weapon

    750.237 Possession of firearm by person under influence

    750.234d Possession of firearm on certain premises

    480.17c Firearm as forbidden explosive in a Commercial MV(49 CFR 173.54f)

    750.234e Brandishing a firearm in public

    CONCEALED PISTOL LICENSE VIOLATIONS

    28.425k(2)(c) Possession of a firearm with a bodily alcohol content .02-.079

    * 28.425k(2)(a)or(b) Possession of a firearm with a bodily alcohol content greater than .08

    28.425f Failure to possess or display either driver’s license, Michigan ID and

    concealed pistol license

    28.425f(5) Failure to immediately disclose possession of concealed pistol

    28.425o Possession of a concealed pistol in a “pistol free” zone

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

    Post imported post

    dougwg wrote:


    CONCEALED PISTOL LICENSE VIOLATIONS


    28.425k(2)(c) Possession of a firearm with a bodily alcohol content .02-.079


    * 28.425k(2)(a)or(b) Possession of a firearm with a bodily alcohol content greater than .08

    Where did you get this from?

    What is confusing is they say, it is a CPL violation if in "possesion of a firearm with a BAC of .02-.079", then they say "a BAC greater than .08".

    I've heardif you are CCing and blow over a .02, it is a violation; but if you are OCing, and not in a PFZ you can blow up to a .08.

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,544

    Post imported post

    T Vance wrote:
    dougwg wrote:


    CONCEALED PISTOL LICENSE VIOLATIONS


    28.425k(2)(c) Possession of a firearm with a bodily alcohol content .02-.079


    * 28.425k(2)(a)or(b) Possession of a firearm with a bodily alcohol content greater than .08
    *

    Where did you get this from?

    What is confusing is they say, it is a CPL violation if in "possesion of a firearm with a BAC of .02-.079", then they say "a BAC greater than .08".

    I've heard*if you are CCing and blow over a .02, it is a violation; but if you are OCing, and not in a PFZ you can blow up to a .08.
    You have to actually read the cited law. The summaries don't explain the law accurately.

    28.425k is speaking of a concealed pistol under authority of a CPL.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Taurus850CIA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,071

    Post imported post

    arrrgh
    "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.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Taurus850CIA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,071

    Post imported post

    [Code of Federal Regulations]
    [Title 49, Volume 2]
    [Revised as of October 1, 2009]
    From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access
    [CITE: 49CFR173.54]

    [Page 458]

    TITLE 49--TRANSPORTATION

    CHAPTER I--PIPELINE AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY ADMINISTRATION,
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

    PART 173_SHIPPERS[MDASH]GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SHIPMENTS AND
    PACKAGINGS--Table of Contents


    Subpart C_Definitions, Classification and Packaging for Class 1

    Sec. 173.54 Forbidden explosives.

    Unless otherwise provided in this subchapter, the following
    explosives shall not be offered for transportation or transported:
    (a) An explosive that has not been approved in accordance with Sec.
    173.56 of this subpart.
    (b) An explosive mixture or device containing a chlorate and also
    containing:
    (1) An ammonium salt, including a substituted ammonium or quaternary
    ammonium salt; or
    (2) An acidic substance, including a salt of a weak base and a
    strong acid.
    (c) A leaking or damaged package or article containing an explosive.
    (d) Propellants that are unstable, condemned or deteriorated.
    (e) Nitroglycerin, diethylene glycol dinitrate, or any other liquid
    explosives not specifically authorized by this subchapter.
    (f) A loaded firearm (except as provided in 49 CFR 1544.219).
    (g) Fireworks that combine an explosive and a detonator.
    (h) Fireworks containing yellow or white phosphorus.
    (i) A toy torpedo, the maximum outside dimension of which exceeds 23
    mm (0.906 inch), or a toy torpedo containing a mixture of potassium
    chlorate, black antimony (antimony sulfide), and sulfur, if the weight
    of the explosive material in the device exceeds 0.26 g (0.01 ounce).
    (j) Explosives specifically forbidden in the Sec. 172.101 table of
    this subchapter.
    (k) Explosives not meeting the acceptance criteria specified in
    Sec. 173.57 of this subchapter.
    (l) An explosive article with its means of initiation or ignition
    installed, unless approved in accordance with Sec. 173.56.

    [Amdt. 173-224, 55 FR 52617 Dec. 21, 1990, as amended at 56 FR 66267,
    Dec. 20, 1991; Amdt. 173-236, 58 FR 50236, Sept. 24, 1993; 67 FR 61013,
    Sept. 27, 2002; 68 FR 48569, Aug. 14, 2003]


    Items under the authority of this law require a Bill of Ladings. Items that require a Bill of Ladings go in the box behind the truck. This does not cover personal belongings in the vehicle itself.

    For some reason, I couldn't type that outside the quote box. My computer must suck.
    "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.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Taurus850CIA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,071

    Post imported post

    "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.

  7. #7
    Regular Member kyleplusitunes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Lennon Michigan, ,
    Posts
    533

    Post imported post

    not sure what you're saying here, but here is a response from a firearm in a CMV

    This responds to your letter regarding the applicability of the Hazardous Materials Regulations
    (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171- 180) to the transportation of a loaded personal firearm lawfully
    carried by a commercial motor vehicle operator while in the performance of his or her duties.
    Specifically, you ask whether the transportation of
    such a firearm is prohibited by the HMR under the “forbidden explosives” clause in
    § 173.54(f).
    The answer to your question is no. Unless otherwise specified in § 173.54(f), a personal loaded
    or unloaded firearm lawfully carried by a commercial motor vehicle operator is not considered in
    commerce and therefore not subject to the HMR. Under this scenario, a commercial motor
    vehicle operator who carries a personal firearm while in the performance of his or her duties is
    subject to local or State jurisdiction regarding such matters. This response has been coordinated
    with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.
    I trust this satisfies your inquiry. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance.
    Sincerely,
    Hattie L. Mitchell
    Chief, Regulatory Review and Reinvention
    Office of Hazardous Materials Standards
    173.54(f)

  8. #8
    Regular Member Taurus850CIA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,071

    Post imported post

    kyleplusitunes wrote:
    not sure what you're saying here, but here is a response from a firearm in a CMV

    This responds to your letter regarding the applicability of the Hazardous Materials Regulations
    (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171- 180) to the transportation of a loaded personal firearm lawfully
    carried by a commercial motor vehicle operator while in the performance of his or her duties.
    Specifically, you ask whether the transportation of
    such a firearm is prohibited by the HMR under the “forbidden explosives” clause in
    § 173.54(f).
    The answer to your question is no. Unless otherwise specified in § 173.54(f), a personal loaded
    or unloaded firearm lawfully carried by a commercial motor vehicle operator is not considered in
    commerce and therefore not subject to the HMR. Under this scenario, a commercial motor
    vehicle operator who carries a personal firearm while in the performance of his or her duties is
    subject to local or State jurisdiction regarding such matters. This response has been coordinated
    with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.
    I trust this satisfies your inquiry. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance.
    Sincerely,
    Hattie L. Mitchell
    Chief, Regulatory Review and Reinvention
    Office of Hazardous Materials Standards
    173.54(f)
    It's a rebuttal to "
    480.17c Firearm as forbidden explosive in a Commercial MV(49 CFR 173.54f)
    ", which is commonly referred to as the law that makes handgun possession in a CMV illegal. That quote contains both the MI law, and the Federal law. Both say the same thing.


    "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.

  9. #9
    Regular Member SlowDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Redford, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    424

    Post imported post

    There is no law written anywhere that says your CMV is any different then your POV when it comes to carrying a weapon. I have been through inspections and actually stepped out of my truck with my pistol on my hip. As soon as they see it they ask if I have a License to carry and that's the end of it. I have been hassled a few times over the years by <idiot> LEO's but never arrested or sited for it.
    Only two have offered their lives for you. A Soldier and Jesus....

  10. #10
    Regular Member dougwg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    MOC Charter Member Westland, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,445

    Post imported post

    Thats great to see.

    But still, notice the OP, it's a "cheat sheet" for LEO's. It seems as though they are being taught that it's still illegal for a CPL holder to carry on a CMV.

    My point in posting the above is simply the way misinformation is spread and is continuing to be spread.

    Now that that's been put to bed, now on to the other subject highlighted.


    28.425k(2)(c) Possession of a firearm with a bodily alcohol content .02-.079

    This should read:

    28.425k(2)(c) Possession of a concealed firearm with a bodily alcohol content .02-.079


  11. #11
    Regular Member Taurus850CIA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,071

    Post imported post

    dougwg wrote:
    Thats great to see.

    But still, notice the OP, it's a "cheat sheet" for LEO's. It seems as though they are being taught that it's still illegal for a CPL holder to carry on a CMV.

    My point in posting the above is simply the way misinformation is spread and is continuing to be spread.
    That's disturbing. Is this conjecture, or genuine? If genuine, where did you find it?
    "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.

Posting Permissions

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