Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Is this legal? town ordinance

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    SW Michigan, ,
    Posts
    20

    Post imported post

    WWW.portland-michigan.org/. Code of ordinances, chapter22, section 22-28. If not I'm writting.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    144

    Post imported post

    Clearly seems illegal to me ...

    gettysburg wrote:
    http://WWW.portland-michigan.org/. Code of ordinances, chapter22, section 22-28. If not I'm writting.

  3. #3
    Regular Member autosurgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Lawrence, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    3,845

    Post imported post

    Sec. 22-28. Firearms and other weapons; fireworks.
    It shall be unlawful for any person, except a police officer or other peace officer, to bring into or have in his possession in any park or recreation area:
    (1) Any pistol or revolver or objects upon which loaded or blank cartridges may be used. Official starters, at authorized track and field events, are excepted from this restriction;
    (2) Any rifle, shotgun, BB gun, airgun, spring gun, slingshot, bow, or other weapon in which the propelling force is gunpowder, a spring, or air, without first having obtained a written permit from the director for possessing same; or
    (3) Have in his possession or set off any fireworks. Permits may be given for conducting properly supervised fireworks in designated park areas.
    (Code 1972, § 20.510; Ord. No. 135, § 10.01, eff. 5-4-1981)
    State Law References: Firearms and weapons, MCL 750.222 et seq.; fireworks, MCL 750.243a et seq.

    The parts in red are unenforceable due to preemption and should be removed.
    Anything I post may be my opinion and not the law... you are responsible to do your own verification.

    Blackstone (1753-1765) maintains that "the law holds that it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    SW Michigan, ,
    Posts
    20

    Post imported post

    So amend rather than repeal?

  5. #5
    Regular Member FatboyCykes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Warren, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    942

    Post imported post

    gettysburg wrote:
    So amend rather than repeal?
    Not really up to you, they will deal with it as they see fit. Most likely they will amend out the unenforceable parts rather than repealing the whole of the statute. Or add a little ditty like; except as otherwise allowed by law.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Jackson, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    367

    Post imported post

    FatboyCykes wrote:
    gettysburg wrote:
    So amend rather than repeal?
    Not really up to you, they will deal with it as they see fit. Most likely they will amend out the unenforceable parts rather than repealing the whole of the statute. Or add a little ditty like; except as otherwise allowed by law.
    that is just misleading. one might think, oh, well i guess that would be police officers. amend to strike the unenforcables is what i would try for.... but yet.... who I am?

    Kimberguy! thats who!

    ok i havnt slept in 37.5 hours

    good night

Posting Permissions

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