kyleplusitunes
Regular Member
imported post
legalities?
legalities?
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
is open carry without a cpl on HORSEBACK legal? dogsled? motorized wheelchair?
- Thread starter kyleplusitunes
- Start date
SpringerXDacp
New member
imported post
The first question that needs to be asked is, do horses, dogsleds and motorized wheelchairs meet the definition of "vehicles" under Michigan law?
I do know from previous research that in Michigan for cases of DUI/BUI that golfcarts, bicycles, boats, horses, riding lawnmowers, mopeds, ATV's, etc are considered vehicles.
I also know from previous research back in early 2005,my sister, before her passing,was considering a CPL (due to being confinedto a motorized wheelchair) andthat wheelchairs, motorized or not, are not considered vehicles in Michigan.
IANAL and in my opinion, as long as you are not under the influence and/or within a Public Right-of-Way, OC on horseback and dogsleds would be legal without a CPL.
The first question that needs to be asked is, do horses, dogsleds and motorized wheelchairs meet the definition of "vehicles" under Michigan law?
I do know from previous research that in Michigan for cases of DUI/BUI that golfcarts, bicycles, boats, horses, riding lawnmowers, mopeds, ATV's, etc are considered vehicles.
I also know from previous research back in early 2005,my sister, before her passing,was considering a CPL (due to being confinedto a motorized wheelchair) andthat wheelchairs, motorized or not, are not considered vehicles in Michigan.
IANAL and in my opinion, as long as you are not under the influence and/or within a Public Right-of-Way, OC on horseback and dogsleds would be legal without a CPL.
cabman1
Regular Member
imported post
http://www.ada.gov/#AnchorFederal47857
heres a link to the american disability assoc,
I dont know about the other things but the wheelchair cant be regulated like that.
http://www.ada.gov/#AnchorFederal47857
heres a link to the american disability assoc,
I dont know about the other things but the wheelchair cant be regulated like that.
Beerme
Banned
imported post
kyleplusitunes wrote:
go troll somewhere else
kyleplusitunes wrote:
a dog sled in spring?
go troll somewhere else
chevytaHOE5674
Regular Member
imported post
I've wondered about OC while on a farm tractor? Driving between fields(on public roads) and to other land is a tractor considered a "vehicle"? Would a guy have to have a CPL to OC while driving?
I've wondered about OC while on a farm tractor? Driving between fields(on public roads) and to other land is a tractor considered a "vehicle"? Would a guy have to have a CPL to OC while driving?
zigziggityzoo
Campaign Veteran
imported post
chevytaHOE5674 wrote:
Yes, even off-roads, unless you're on your property (property you lease or own).
chevytaHOE5674 wrote:
Yes, even off-roads, unless you're on your property (property you lease or own).
chevytaHOE5674
Regular Member
imported post
zigziggityzoo wrote:
zigziggityzoo wrote:
That's what I figured. I have my CPL so it isn't an issue for me, but I know a few others that need to get their CPL's so they can carry while tractoring.
Venator
Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
imported post
zigziggityzoo wrote:
Maybe, I know farm equipment gets lots of exemptions. Further research is needed to see if Farm "vehicles" are defined or included in the term "vehicles" in the statute.
You certainly may be correct, I'm just thinking out loud.
zigziggityzoo wrote:
Maybe, I know farm equipment gets lots of exemptions. Further research is needed to see if Farm "vehicles" are defined or included in the term "vehicles" in the statute.
You certainly may be correct, I'm just thinking out loud.
sasha601
Regular Member
imported post
So, is a horse a "vehicle" under Michigan Law. Can someone post relevant statutes?
So, is a horse a "vehicle" under Michigan Law. Can someone post relevant statutes?
zigziggityzoo
Campaign Veteran
imported post
Venator wrote:
In the particular statute, 750.227, "Vehicle" is not defined. We can look to other laws, and to the Black's Law Dictionary for an answer. But in reality, a Vehicle can be anything that gets you from point A to point B, no matter what else the vehicle can do. It could be anything from a limousine to a skateboard. In other words - yet another grey area in the law that's just waiting for a test case.
Venator wrote:
In the particular statute, 750.227, "Vehicle" is not defined. We can look to other laws, and to the Black's Law Dictionary for an answer. But in reality, a Vehicle can be anything that gets you from point A to point B, no matter what else the vehicle can do. It could be anything from a limousine to a skateboard. In other words - yet another grey area in the law that's just waiting for a test case.
zigziggityzoo
Campaign Veteran
imported post
sasha601 wrote:
The one for concealed carry (750.227) doesn't define vehicle.
sasha601 wrote:
Depends on which michigan law - the way the laws work in MI is that each statute has its own set of definitions, and if there is no definition, it's up to the courts to decide.
The one for concealed carry (750.227) doesn't define vehicle.
sasha601
Regular Member
imported post
zigziggityzoo wrote:
If meaning of certain word is not defined in the statute, is it not the obligation of the court to interpret it in favor of accused? So, if person is charged with concealing without CPL while on the horse, would it be judges obligation to instruct the jury that "vehicle" definition must be interpreted in favor of accused? Is it not how our justice system works or should work?
zigziggityzoo wrote:
If meaning of certain word is not defined in the statute, is it not the obligation of the court to interpret it in favor of accused? So, if person is charged with concealing without CPL while on the horse, would it be judges obligation to instruct the jury that "vehicle" definition must be interpreted in favor of accused? Is it not how our justice system works or should work?
Venator
Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
imported post
sasha601 wrote:
sasha601 wrote:
No actually we have court decisions that say they favor the prosecution in this type of case. Sucks don't it.
Venator
Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
imported post
sasha601 wrote:
We have discussed this last year on this forum and lots of good data is there. Many have said there is no justice in courts just decisions and you could be charged and convicted for almost anything. One reason is that there are just too many laws.
sasha601 wrote:
As has been stated above, YES by dictionary definition a horse is a vehicle, so is a wheel-barrow. Gray area as Zig says. But I would like to see the prosecutor charge someone for concealed carry on a horse when the person is OCing on a horse. The outrage from the community would, I hope, be tremendous.
We have discussed this last year on this forum and lots of good data is there. Many have said there is no justice in courts just decisions and you could be charged and convicted for almost anything. One reason is that there are just too many laws.
SpringerXDacp
New member
imported post
Venator wrote:
...and also,
Venator wrote:
...and also,
sasha601
Regular Member
imported post
Venator wrote:
Really? I was under impression that in criminal cases definitions that are not clearly defined required to be interpreted in favor of accused. Do you have any more details on it? Perhaps some cases in the past?
Venator wrote:
Really? I was under impression that in criminal cases definitions that are not clearly defined required to be interpreted in favor of accused. Do you have any more details on it? Perhaps some cases in the past?
Venator
Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
imported post
sasha601 wrote:
http://coa.courts.mi.gov/documents/opinions/final/coa/20080226_c271414_39_271414.opn.pdf
Look at the top of page two. Over all this is a great case to review because it deals with what is considered in or on a motorcycle in a concealed carry charge. You will also see where the court uses dictionary definitions to help make their decisions.
Sucks huh?
sasha601 wrote:
http://coa.courts.mi.gov/documents/opinions/final/coa/20080226_c271414_39_271414.opn.pdf
Look at the top of page two. Over all this is a great case to review because it deals with what is considered in or on a motorcycle in a concealed carry charge. You will also see where the court uses dictionary definitions to help make their decisions.
Sucks huh?
kyleplusitunes
Regular Member
imported post
who is trolling bud? Not only has a great conversation spurred from this, but if you must know, I am packing for my annual dog sled trip up in Nuiqsut Alaska, which is about 500 miles north of Fairbanks, only accessible by helicopter from the south.
While I am not asking the legalities of dog sledding in Alaska, I am however curious because I am going to defiantly dog sledding in the UP next winter!
who is trolling bud? Not only has a great conversation spurred from this, but if you must know, I am packing for my annual dog sled trip up in Nuiqsut Alaska, which is about 500 miles north of Fairbanks, only accessible by helicopter from the south.
While I am not asking the legalities of dog sledding in Alaska, I am however curious because I am going to defiantly dog sledding in the UP next winter!
Hyperion
Regular Member
imported post
Wheelchairs...interesting. As a matter of practicality, it would be perilous for a prosecutor to claim that a wheelchair was a "vehicle". That would raise a significant Equal Protection issue and raise a claim of Overbreadth. i.e. Why should someone who needs a wheelchair to get around the same as an able-bodied person be hampered by a statute that only the able-bodied person could comply with? This is why wheelchairs cannot be regulated like motor vehicles.
I doubt you will ever see that case brought to trial.
How about some hypotheticals that take things to the extreme (this is what I try to do all day long). How about an able-bodied person riding in a horse-drawn carriage? Change the man to someone with no legs. Change the carriage to a wheelchair that is pulled by a dog. How about putting the pistol in a holster affixed to the dog because the legless man cannot wear a holster? There is seldom a law that is impinges upon liberty that does not unconstitutionally intrude on protected rights.
Wheelchairs...interesting. As a matter of practicality, it would be perilous for a prosecutor to claim that a wheelchair was a "vehicle". That would raise a significant Equal Protection issue and raise a claim of Overbreadth. i.e. Why should someone who needs a wheelchair to get around the same as an able-bodied person be hampered by a statute that only the able-bodied person could comply with? This is why wheelchairs cannot be regulated like motor vehicles.
I doubt you will ever see that case brought to trial.
How about some hypotheticals that take things to the extreme (this is what I try to do all day long). How about an able-bodied person riding in a horse-drawn carriage? Change the man to someone with no legs. Change the carriage to a wheelchair that is pulled by a dog. How about putting the pistol in a holster affixed to the dog because the legless man cannot wear a holster? There is seldom a law that is impinges upon liberty that does not unconstitutionally intrude on protected rights.
lapeer20m
Regular Member
imported post
We have beat this horse to death several times (pun intended) This is a gray area one should stay away from so they don't end up in court, but the question is this:
If you carry a pistol on a horse, or tractor, or bicycle, is the pistol "in the vehicle."
That is the standard that you have to meet in order to violate the statute.
The best answer is that you should not do it without cpl, because if you violate the statute it is a felony. Is it really worth the risk?
http://legislature.mi.gov/(S(zjoepq...0-227&query=on&highlight=concealed AND pistol
We have beat this horse to death several times (pun intended) This is a gray area one should stay away from so they don't end up in court, but the question is this:
If you carry a pistol on a horse, or tractor, or bicycle, is the pistol "in the vehicle."
That is the standard that you have to meet in order to violate the statute.
The best answer is that you should not do it without cpl, because if you violate the statute it is a felony. Is it really worth the risk?
http://legislature.mi.gov/(S(zjoepq...0-227&query=on&highlight=concealed AND pistol