Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: OC / Liquor License / CPL / Repealed?

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    109

    Post imported post

    Edit so noone reading this assumes they can possess a firearm on the premises of a business licensed by the liquor control commission... http://www.legislature.mi.gov/docume...58-of-1998.pdfstates: (5) A reference in any other law to the Michigan liquor control act, 1933 (Ex Sess) PA 8, being MCL 436.1 to 436.58, is considered to be a reference to this act.

    Ok, so here it goes... I've never seen this covered here.

    MCL 750.234d states a person shall not possess a firearm on the premises of:

    (h) An establishment licensed under the Michigan liquor control act, Act No. 8 of the Public Acts of the Extra Session of 1933, being sections 436.1 to 436.58 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.

    http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(ast...e=mcl-750-234d

    So, I got to looking this morning for this liquor control act of 1933, 436.1 - 436.58. Couldn't find much by just searching the MCL, but eventually ended up at MCL 436.2301. Here's what it has to say:

    436.2301 Repeal of acts and parts of acts.



    Sec. 1301.

    The following acts and parts of acts are repealed:

    (a) The Michigan liquor control act, 1933 (Ex Sess) PA 8, MCL 436.1 to 436.58.

    (b) 1959 PA 94, MCL 436.101 to 436.103.

    (c) 1962 PA 218, MCL 436.121 to 436.125.

    (d) 1972 PA 213, MCL 436.131 to 436.133.

    (e) The tourism and convention facility promotion tax act, 1985 PA 107, MCL 436.141 to 436.148.

    https://legislature.mi.gov/(S(lcijda...e=mcl-436-2301

    So, what does this mean for 750.234d? Is that section still enforceable since 436.2301 is repealed?

    Edit: Technically, these business are not licensed under the old act any more--they are licensed under the new act. I'm guessing their liquor license says this right on it. Even if it was enforceable, they're licensed under a different act. If I'm completely wrong here... well, it wouldn't be the first time.


  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran smellslikemichigan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Troy, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,321

    Post imported post

    i would be curious to delve into this further. the thought has crossed my mind as well.
    "If it ain't loaded and cocked it don't shoot." - Rooster Cogburn
    http://www.graystatemovie.com/

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    109

    Post imported post

    Just out of curiosity, is there another law saying you can't possess a firearm on the premises, making this topic pointless? I was just searching this morning to show someone you couldn't even possess a firearm at a place licensed to sell alcohol without a license, and 750.234d is what I came across when searching Google (which led me here).

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948

    Post imported post

    Ive been curious about this too.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    109

    Post imported post

    Maybe what we need is a picture of a current liquor license to see what act they are licensed under.

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,544

    Post imported post

    Look under the new law. There's a section that states that any other portion of the law referring to the old liquor code is equivalent to pointing to the new liquor code.

    I don't have a cite because I'm too lazy to cite tonight. Look it up.

  7. #7
    Regular Member WARCHILD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Corunna, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,772

    Post imported post

    I don't have the cite either but Brian researched this and basically the new law encompasses the 1933 law as in effect with the new law.
    Contact Brian, I'm sure he has it.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    109

    Post imported post


    (5) A reference in any other law to the Michigan liquor control act, 1933 (Ex Sess) PA 8, being MCL 436.1 to 436.58, is considered to be a reference to this act.


    Page 79 of 79. I think it's pretty ridiculous that someone trying to understand the law would look it up and see it was repealed... without the help of this site, I probably would have assumed 750.234d(h) was no longer applicable.

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran smellslikemichigan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Troy, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,321

    Post imported post

    yep, law is very complicated. if it were easier to understand a lot of people would be representing themselves and a lot of lawyers would be out of jobs. hey... do you think the lawmakers, who are mostly lawyers do this on purpose??? can't imagine such a thing. ::bloody sarcasm::
    "If it ain't loaded and cocked it don't shoot." - Rooster Cogburn
    http://www.graystatemovie.com/

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Michigan, USA
    Posts
    109

    Post imported post

    No, I don't. I think the politicians are the ones making the laws and they're only in politics because they couldn't make it in the real world. Thus, they'll get no benefit from it unless they're taking money on the side.

  11. #11
    Campaign Veteran smellslikemichigan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Troy, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,321

    Post imported post

    politicians are by and large, lawyers
    "If it ain't loaded and cocked it don't shoot." - Rooster Cogburn
    http://www.graystatemovie.com/

Posting Permissions

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