Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 94

Thread: Repeal Permit to Purchase to be heard tomorrow 6/08/2010

  1. #1
    Regular Member bandersnatch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Chesterfield, MI
    Posts
    97

    Post imported post

    I don't know if this has been posted about yet, but I'm at work and can't research if it has or not. This is tomorrow, thus I have posted in haste:

    http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=5872
    "Are you sure Hank done it this way?" - Waylon Jennings

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Northwest Kent County, Michigan
    Posts
    757

    Post imported post

    Wow, that has been happening under the radar (mine at least). I didn't know it was being pushed and I hope it is successful. That purchase permit hassle really needs to go.

  3. #3
    Activist Member hamaneggs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    warren, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,251

    Post imported post

    That would be HB 5972 & 5973.Contact your Reps(email,call) and tell them to support these bills ASAP! AT house.mi.gov !
    Today JESUS would tell me to sell my coat and buy two Springfield XD Compact 45acp's!

    NRA LIFER,GOA,MOC Inc.,CLSD,MCRGO,UAW! MOLON LABE!!

  4. #4
    Activist Member hamaneggs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    warren, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,251

    Post imported post

    hamaneggs wrote:
    That would be HB 5972 & 5973.Contact your Reps(email,call) and tell them to support these bills ASAP! AT house.mi.gov !
    My bad! It's house.mi.gov-Representatives .
    Today JESUS would tell me to sell my coat and buy two Springfield XD Compact 45acp's!

    NRA LIFER,GOA,MOC Inc.,CLSD,MCRGO,UAW! MOLON LABE!!

  5. #5
    Regular Member fozzy71's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Roseville, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    932

    Post imported post

    hamaneggs wrote:
    That would be HB 5972 & 5973.Contact your Reps(email,call) and tell them to support these bills ASAP! ATÂ* house.mi.gov !
    The forum consensus seems to be that these are not necessarily good bills: http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum30/45477.html
    "I like users who quote smellslikemichigan in their signature lines." - fozzy71

  6. #6
    Regular Member lil_freak_66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Mason, Michigan
    Posts
    1,811

    Post imported post

    i personally like the registration thing,it gives non cpl holders the ability to carry within 1000 ft. of a school,which we know without that ability non cpl holders wouldnt be able to carry much of anywhere.

    but if the state were to say that anybody legally allowed to own a firearm is automatically licensed...then id want to get rid of registration

    get rid of pfz's too, the alcohol thing at the very least.

    yeah,thats what id like to see...
    not a lawyer, dont take anything i say as legal advice.


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

    Post imported post

    This is really a gun control bill. The only positive about it, is you don't have to get a permit to purchase anymore. The bad is that people who don't have CPL's lose the ability to carry within 1000' of a school.

    So think about it. The gun grabbers give up us having to get a permit to purchase ( and thus, no background check) on PRIVATE sales. Dealer sales will switch to the NICS system. In return, they get at least a 2000' diameter gun free zone around every school (except CPL holders). When you get towns that have multiple schools, it could nearly eliminate non CPL carry in that town. We're still stuck with registration, AND, it authorizes us to be charged $1, instead of what is now free. And then there's the whole thing about the CPL expiration date...which I still don't know what they're trying to do there......


    ETA, if it was a bill that eliminated all permit to purchase, registration, safety inspections, and who knows what else, and handguns were to be treated the same as longuns for purchase, sales, possession purposes, then I'd be all for it.
    Rand Paul 2016

  8. #8
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,754

    Post imported post

    If anyone recalls I asked a while back if there was anything to the rumors I've heard from police and local .gov officials that laws were in the works to get rid of OC?

    Well.... heeeeeerrrrreee they are...

    HIB 5972 and HIM 5973....

    http://www.legislature.mi.gov/docume...0-HIB-5972.htm

    http://www.legislature.mi.gov/docume...0-HIB-5973.htm

    I really didn't expect to see a new bill addressing OC directly as in creating a new anti OC law because that would bring about a huge "gun control" backlash. But sneaking it through with these two bills is about what I expected.

    .gov now works on the.... offer them a carrot we don't care about and while the stupid masses are chasing that carrot and not looking pork 'em in the... well... you know the rest.

    Both of these bills are poison!!!! Read them..... and contact your Reps....

    We do not have a government "of the people, by the people, for the people" anymore.... all we have are sneaky clever little elitist wannabe tyrants intent on screwing over us peasants.
    Gun control isn't about the gun at all.... for those who want gun control it is all about their own fragile egos, their own lack of self esteem, their own inner fears, and most importantly... their own desire to dominate others. And an openly carried gun is a slap in the face to all of those things.

  9. #9
    Regular Member malignity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Warren, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,101

    Post imported post

    Bikenut, that post really needs its own thread if it doesn't have one already.
    All opinions posted on opencarry.org are my own, and do not necessarily reflect the views of opencarry.org or Michigan Open Carry Inc.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,754

    Post imported post

    malignity wrote:
    Bikenut, that post really needs its own thread if it doesn't have one already.
    Are we or are we not talking about HIB 5972 and HIB 5973?

    Will these bills impact OCing in school zones... or not?

    Are these bills a sneaky back door way to impact said OCing in school zones... or not?

    What part of all that needs a new thread? The fact that I didn't jump on the...."Hey! Let's all get this done!" bandwagon?

    ....................... sigh ...............

    Read the bills and keep in mind that the word "license" in the old law is what the Federal law recognizes as an exemption to the "no guns in a school zone" thing. And once the word "license" is dropped the exemption to the Fed law goes out the window.....

    And a "school zone" is 1000 feet in all directions from school property... so... how big is the school property? Add 1000 feet to that and try to figure out if you are legally OC'ing or have strayed 10 feet into that "school zone". I'll bet LE will know exactly where that 1000 foot line is.

    And yes, that IS a sneaky back door way of offering the carrot dropping "licensing" in order to give a screwing to OC.

    And I have no doubt this is just one incremental step in an effort to get rid of OC without raising the controversial issue of "gun control".... even if it still is "OC gun control".
    Gun control isn't about the gun at all.... for those who want gun control it is all about their own fragile egos, their own lack of self esteem, their own inner fears, and most importantly... their own desire to dominate others. And an openly carried gun is a slap in the face to all of those things.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    2,247

    Post imported post

    lil_freak_66 wrote:
    i personally like the registration thing,it gives non cpl holders the ability to carry within 1000 ft. of a school,which we know without that ability non cpl holders wouldnt be able to carry much of anywhere.

    but if the state were to say that anybody legally allowed to own a firearm is automatically licensed...then id want to get rid of registration

    get rid of pfz's too, the alcohol thing at the very least.

    yeah,thats what id like to see...

    gun grabbers give up us having to get a permit to purchase ( and thus, no background check) on PRIVATE sales.
    Somewhere I seem to be missing something. One person says that he likes the registration of guns. Another says that no backgound check on private sales but has to fill out a bill of sale for registration and carry it down to the police station. I know all of you make fun of South Carolina not allowing open carry but if this is what I have to put up with for open carry I will be glad to keep our set of laws. Half or my pistol collection was obtained legally from inheritance and I am not about to go running down to the police station to tell them all about it. Dang, people happy about having to register their guns, what's next a Sara Brady statue.

    BTW - Those trying to say this is someone sneaking something in on you, those bill were filed on March 18, over three months ago and just now making it to committee hearings. Someone is falling down on the job of monitoring the legislature for such stuff. Sounds like they don't have to sneak anything in.

  12. #12
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,754

    Post imported post

    PT111 wrote:
    Someone is falling down on the job of monitoring the legislature for such stuff. Sounds like they don't have to sneak anything in.
    Agreed... someone isn't watching the hen house close enough!
    Gun control isn't about the gun at all.... for those who want gun control it is all about their own fragile egos, their own lack of self esteem, their own inner fears, and most importantly... their own desire to dominate others. And an openly carried gun is a slap in the face to all of those things.

  13. #13
    Regular Member autosurgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Lawrence, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    3,845

    Post imported post

    Bikenut wrote:
    PT111 wrote:
    Someone is falling down on the job of monitoring the legislature for such stuff. Sounds like they don't have to sneak anything in.
    Agreed... someone isn't watching the hen house close enough!
    This may well be the bills that are being shopped around....
    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."

  14. #14
    Regular Member Master Control's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    SE Regional / Augusta, Michigan
    Posts
    144

    Post imported post

    Bikenut wrote:
    If anyone recalls I asked a while back if there was anything to the rumors I've heard from police and local .gov officials that laws were in the works to get rid of OC?

    Well.... heeeeeerrrrreee they are...

    HIB 5972 and HIM 5973....

    http://www.legislature.mi.gov/docume...0-HIB-5972.htm

    http://www.legislature.mi.gov/docume...0-HIB-5973.htm

    I really didn't expect to see a new bill addressing OC directly as in creating a new anti OC law because that would bring about a huge "gun control" backlash. But sneaking it through with these two bills is about what I expected.

    .gov now works on the.... offer them a carrot we don't care about and while the stupid masses are chasing that carrot and not looking pork 'em in the... well... you know the rest.

    Both of these bills are poison!!!! Read them..... and contact your Reps....

    We do not have a government "of the people, by the people, for the people" anymore.... all we have are sneaky clever little elitist wannabe tyrants intent on screwing over us peasants.
    Thank You & good looking out yooper & bikenut;

    My hat off to you both for kicking that knowledge with good and wholesome information.

    I'm going to give them a read right now
    "Liberty's too precious a thing to be buried in books...Men should hold it up in front of them every single day of their lives and say: 'I'm free to think and to speak. My ancestors couldn't. I can. And my children will."
    ,,, So Mote Be


    Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.-- JC

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948

    Post imported post

    Bikenut and Yooper are EXACTLY RIGHT.

    Bikenut, I think Malignity was acknowledging that you were correct, and suggested that you start a thread on it in an effort to bring it out in the light.

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948

    Post imported post

    If this goes through, then under the federal law, can a non CPL holder drive by a school with the gun stored according to 231a?

  17. #17
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,754

    Post imported post

    stainless1911 wrote:
    Bikenut and Yooper are EXACTLY RIGHT.

    Bikenut, I think Malignity was acknowledging that you were correct, and suggested that you start a thread on it in an effort to bring it out in the light.
    It is Yooper who deserves the credit for bringing this sneaky screwing contained in these bills to light....

    http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum30/45477.html

    And if Malignity's intent was to start a new thread talking about those bills this thread touting support for these bad bills is exactly the right place to discuss just how bad these bills are.

    I have no personal problem with Malignity... or anyone on this forum for that matter... but I am strongly convinced these bills are what LE, and other .gov agencies, is putting their hopes into for stopping OC.

    I also expect more of the same kinds of sneaky crap to come along to further the clamp down on OC.

    Friends... we must be vigilant. We must watch each and every piece of legislation that is worked on... hell.. every bit that is even thought of... and carefully read the wording with the thought in mind that there is a screwing in there somewhere... and find it.

    We desperately need vigilant watchdogs in Lansing... and in Washington!
    Gun control isn't about the gun at all.... for those who want gun control it is all about their own fragile egos, their own lack of self esteem, their own inner fears, and most importantly... their own desire to dominate others. And an openly carried gun is a slap in the face to all of those things.

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948

    Post imported post

    Agreed, but how many people actually do something besides reading this, and maybe preaching to the choir about it.

    Oh I know, almost no one, which is exactly why we have so much senseless gun control.

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948

    Post imported post

    It just hit me, I diddnt see anything about an expiration date on the licence I have on the gun I currently own. Perhaps this would apply to guns purchased after the law passes, IF it passes, but the licence to purchase the pistols we already own should be valid, and therefore allow carry within the 1000 feet fed limit regardless.

    What do you guys think?

  20. #20
    Regular Member lil_freak_66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Mason, Michigan
    Posts
    1,811

    Post imported post

    stainless1911 wrote:
    It just hit me, I diddnt see anything about an expiration date on the licence I have on the gun I currently own. Perhaps this would apply to guns purchased after the law passes, IF it passes, but the licence to purchase the pistols we already own should be valid, and therefore allow carry within the 1000 feet fed limit regardless.

    What do you guys think?
    grandfathered in?

    lemme get a few weeks to get a purchase permit first,so that im covered.
    not a lawyer, dont take anything i say as legal advice.


  21. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948

    Post imported post

    lil_freak_66 wrote:
    stainless1911 wrote:
    It just hit me, I diddnt see anything about an expiration date on the licence I have on the gun I currently own. Perhaps this would apply to guns purchased after the law passes, IF it passes, but the licence to purchase the pistols we already own should be valid, and therefore allow carry within the 1000 feet fed limit regardless.

    What do you guys think?
    grandfathered in?

    maybe that, or a loophole thats in our favor for a change.

  22. #22
    Regular Member Bronson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Battle Creek, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,157

    Post imported post

    malignity wrote:
    Bikenut, that post really needs its own thread if it doesn't have one already.
    We've been discussing this for the better part of a week now. See the links to the previous thread in some of the other posts.

    I just received an MCRGO update in my email today touting the common sense goodness of these bills. Read my comments in the other thread and I think you'll see my stand on them.

    Junk legislation that accomplishes nothing of worth.

    Bronson
    Those who expect to reap the benefits of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it. – Thomas Paine

  23. #23
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Venator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lansing area, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    6,445

    Post imported post

    Bikenut wrote:
    If anyone recalls I asked a while back if there was anything to the rumors I've heard from police and local .gov officials that laws were in the works to get rid of OC?

    Well.... heeeeeerrrrreee they are...

    HIB 5972 and HIM 5973....

    http://www.legislature.mi.gov/docume...0-HIB-5972.htm

    http://www.legislature.mi.gov/docume...0-HIB-5973.htm

    I really didn't expect to see a new bill addressing OC directly as in creating a new anti OC law because that would bring about a huge "gun control" backlash. But sneaking it through with these two bills is about what I expected.

    .gov now works on the.... offer them a carrot we don't care about and while the stupid masses are chasing that carrot and not looking pork 'em in the... well... you know the rest.

    Both of these bills are poison!!!! Read them..... and contact your Reps....

    We do not have a government "of the people, by the people, for the people" anymore.... all we have are sneaky clever little elitist wannabe tyrants intent on screwing over us peasants.
    These bills were in the works before OC was popular in Michigan. They are proposed to help firearm owners and because many legislators are ignorant of many firearm laws it would adversely affect OCing without a CPL near schools. I'm sure they were not aware of that. I think Michigander spoke with Sheltrown and Kim about this problem. I suspect that before/if it becomes law this problem will be worked out.

    I will also be contacting Joel about these bills.


    An Amazon best seller "MY PARENTS OPEN CARRY" http://www.myparentsopencarry.com/

    *The information contained above is not meant to be legal advice, but is solely intended as a starting point for further research. These are my opinions, if you have further questions it is advisable to seek out an attorney that is well versed in firearm law.

  24. #24
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Venator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lansing area, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    6,445

    Post imported post

    I have sent this to the principle representatives involved. I will post their responses.

    Dear Representatives:

    HB-5972 and it’s impact on the federal gun free school zones.

    HB-5972, if enacted would infringe on the firearm rights of every person that does not have a CPL. Currently a non-CPL holder can possess a firearm within 1000 feet of a school because Michigan has a LICENCE to purchase and does a background check which meets the federal requirements for an exemption under TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 44 > §922 (See below). If a state has a licensing requirement for a handgun, a person that possesses said license can open carry within the 1000’ gun free zone. Michigan’s current law meets this federal exemption, and Michigan non-CPL holders can exercise their State and Federal constitutional rights by being allowed to open carry a handgun within 1000’ of a school.

    HB5972 effectively eliminates this federal exemption. If this bill is passed as written you would be infringing on thousands of citizen’s 2nd Amendment rights by creating a large gun free zone, especially in large cities with several school districts. Look at a Lansing map and draw a 1000 foot circle around every school in the area and you will quickly see the onerous gun free zones this bill would create. Wisconsin has no state licensing requirements and law enforcement is currently using this 1000' zone to restrict it's citizens open carry rights in urban areas.

    I’m asking all of you to consider the impact of this bill as written on the citizens of Michigan. The bill needs to be reworked by looking at the federal implications it will create. Or amend Michigan’s “gun free school zone” statute to allow possession/exemption of a firearm within 1000’ of a school if the firearm is legally registered.

    I would be happy to discuss this bill with any of you and hope that you will rethink this onerous bill as written.

    Thank you.
    Brian Jeffs, MS, CPG
    Director of Research
    Michigan Open Carry, Inc.


    A SUMMARY OF HOUSE BILL 5972 AS INTRODUCED 3-18-10

    The bill would amend the law that governs the purchase and possession of a pistol[1] by a member of the general public who does not have a concealed pistol license (or is not otherwise exempt). Section 2 of Public Act 372 of 1927, MCL 28.422, currently prohibits anyone from purchasing, carrying, possessing, or transporting a pistol in Michigan without obtaining a license for it beforehand from the local police or sheriff department. This license is sometimes called a "license to purchase" or a "purchase license." (Form RI-060) The bill would amend Section 2 to do the following things:[/b]

    [/b]Eliminate the current requirement that anyone who purchases, carries, possesses, or transports a pistol in Michigan must obtain a license for it beforehand from the local police or sheriff department.[/b] (Under the Michigan Penal Code, failure to do so is currently a misdemeanor.)

    Eliminate current eligibility criteria in state law for acquiring a pistol, such as the requirement that the person be at least 18 and a lawful resident of Michigan, have correctly answered at least 70 percent of the questions on a basic pistol safety questionnaire, not have been previously adjudged insane or lacking in legal capacity, not be subject to a restraining order for domestic violence or stalking. (The eligibility criteria that the bill would eliminate are described more fully below.)

    Eliminate the authority of a police or sheriff department to deny a pistol license to an otherwise qualified applicant if probable cause existed to believe the person posed a risk to himself or herself or to others or would commit a crime with the pistol.

    Replace the current pistol licensure system with a registration requirement. (After a person acquired a new pistol, he or she would have to submit a registration form in person or by mail. Failure to mail in or deliver this registration form would be a civil infraction, not a crime.)

    Allow anyone to bring a pistol into Michigan for 30 days without registering it.

    Allow someone who had a license to carry a pistol from another state and who was in Michigan for no more than 180 days without intending to establish permanent residency, to bring pistols into Michigan, or purchase new ones in Michigan, without registering them.

    TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 44 > §922 in part:

    (2)

    (A) It shall be unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm that has moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone.

    (B) Subparagraph (A) does not apply to the possession of a firearm[/b]—

    (i) on private property not part of school grounds;

    (ii) if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located or a political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license; [/b]

    An Amazon best seller "MY PARENTS OPEN CARRY" http://www.myparentsopencarry.com/

    *The information contained above is not meant to be legal advice, but is solely intended as a starting point for further research. These are my opinions, if you have further questions it is advisable to seek out an attorney that is well versed in firearm law.

  25. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948

    Post imported post

    How soon can we find out the decision?

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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