MI firearms forfeiture confiscation legislation making its way through Senate comm.

FROM GOA:

Broad firearms forfeiture confiscation legislation making its way through Senate committee!

Bill can be found here:
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2009-2010/billintroduced/House/pdf/2010-HIB-6139.pdf


COMMITTEE: Judiciary
DATE: Tuesday, September 21, 2010
TIME: 1:00 P.M.
PLACE: Room 210, Farnum Building, 125 W. Allegan Street, Lansing, MI 48933
PHONE: Marnie Wills, Committee Clerk (517-373-6920)

SB 212 Sen. Kahn Law enforcement; other; police agency to retain certain confiscated weapons for use by that police agency; amend firearms act to allow under certain circumstances.
SB 1283 Sen. Kuipers Health; abortion; ultrasound equipment used on woman seeking an abortion; require use of most technologically advanced equipment on site.
SB 1376 Sen. Cropsey Probate; trusts; technical amendments to the Michigan trust code; provide for.
SB 1377 Sen. Clarke Probate; trusts; cross-reference to the estates and protected individuals code in the cemetery regulation act; correct to reflect adoption of Michigan trust code.
SB 1378 Sen. Stamas Probate; trusts; cross-reference to the estates and protected individuals code in the prepaid funeral and cemetery sales act; correct to reflect adoption of Michigan trust code.
SB 1491 Sen. Kuipers Corrections; other; confidentiality requirements for certain reports made by probation officers; revise.
SB 1492 Sen. Kuipers Criminal procedure; records; copies of presentence reports; require to be provided to certain individuals under certain circumstances.

So let me see if someone steals my firearms and they wind up 300 miles away and that city doesn't make an effort to contact me or makes a half baked effort they can wait 30 days and cash in on my loss? Reading the bill it should be 180 days when stolen or lost. There should be actual proof of contact and No immunity of liability if there was not a proven track record that the victim was properly notified. I already went through this with 3 firearms stolen and I was never contacted when they were found. One was one of the original 44 magnums used in the original Dirty Harry movie a 6.5 inch model 29.

I attached the PDF just in case they bury that link somewhere.


I call BULLSH*T


There needs to be in place a defined criteria to make sure the VICTIM does not get VICTIMIZED again by the Government.

3 allow the owner of the firearm to claim the firearm within that 30-
4 day period if he or she is authorized to possess the firearm. The
5 30-day period required under this subdivision is in addition to the
6 30-day period required under subdivision (a).
7 (4) The department of state police is immune from civil
8 liability for disposing of a firearm in compliance with this
9 section.

Venator said:

FROM GOA:

Broad firearms forfeiture confiscation legislation making its way through Senate committee!

Bill can be found here:
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2009-2010/billintroduced/House/pdf/2010-HIB-6139.pdf

NOTICE OF SCHEDULED MEETING ​

COMMITTEE: Judiciary
DATE: Tuesday, September 21, 2010
TIME: 1:00 P.M.
PLACE: Room 210, Farnum Building, 125 W. Allegan Street, Lansing, MI 48933
PHONE: Marnie Wills, Committee Clerk (517-373-6920 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting**************517-373-6920******end_of_the_skype_highlighting)

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Wayne Kuipers, Chairperson
AGENDA ​

SB 212 Sen. Kahn Law enforcement; other; police agency to retain certain confiscated weapons for use by that police agency; amend firearms act to allow under certain circumstances.
SB 1283 Sen. Kuipers Health; abortion; ultrasound equipment used on woman seeking an abortion; require use of most technologically advanced equipment on site.
SB 1376 Sen. Cropsey Probate; trusts; technical amendments to the Michigan trust code; provide for.
SB 1377 Sen. Clarke Probate; trusts; cross-reference to the estates and protected individuals code in the cemetery regulation act; correct to reflect adoption of Michigan trust code.
SB 1378 Sen. Stamas Probate; trusts; cross-reference to the estates and protected individuals code in the prepaid funeral and cemetery sales act; correct to reflect adoption of Michigan trust code.
SB 1491 Sen. Kuipers Corrections; other; confidentiality requirements for certain reports made by probation officers; revise.
SB 1492 Sen. Kuipers Criminal procedure; records; copies of presentence reports; require to be provided to certain individuals under certain circumstances.

Click to expand...

Venator said:

FROM GOA:
Broad firearms forfeiture confiscation legislation making its way through Senate committee!

Click to expand...

I read SB 212. It is not new firearms forfeiture/confiscation legislation, nor does it expand on anything with regard to firearms forfeiture/confiscation. It only adds to what police agencies legally can do with weapons already forfeited/confiscated. To the list of ways to "dispose" of such a firearm is added:

"This section does not prohibit a police agency from retaining any pistol, weapon, or device carried or possessed in violation of this act for official use by that police agency, including for training or educational purposes."

Presuming due process is followed with regard to other areas of the law governing weapon forfeiture/confiscation, and a bad guy loses his weapon to the cops, I don't have a problem with this added language to allow the cops to get legitimate use out of that weapon.

GOA seems to be overreacting. At least, it appears to me they are mischaracterizing SB 212. It's not anything new or added with regard to the action of firearm forfeiture/confiscation itself.

i really don't think its such a bad thing. instead of destroying the guns they can be kept as an option to be used by the cops. may actually save some departments some money, i am all for helping out our cops.

Ya know, the only good thing I can see is this...

If I properly secure my firearms to where the possibility of them being stolen is very poor, and someone else does not and their guns happened to be stolen then auctioned off, there's a good chance I can get some nice guns for cheap prices. Sucks for that person, but their loss is my gain I guess.

Maybe this is a bad way at looking at things, I don't know.. Just trying to see the positive here. We may have some cheap guns that can be purchased by police auctions in the future, no?

NHCGRPR45 said:

i really don't think its such a bad thing. instead of destroying the guns they can be kept as an option to be used by the cops. may actually save some departments some money, i am all for helping out our cops.

Click to expand...

Also appears they can be sold at public auctions.

DanM said:

I read SB 212. It is not new firearms forfeiture/confiscation legislation, nor does it expand on anything with regard to firearms forfeiture/confiscation. It only adds to what police agencies legally can do with weapons already forfeited/confiscated. To the list of ways to "dispose" of such a firearm is added:

"This section does not prohibit a police agency from retaining any pistol, weapon, or device carried or possessed in violation of this act for official use by that police agency, including for training or educational purposes."

Presuming due process is followed with regard to other areas of the law governing weapon forfeiture/confiscation, and a bad guy loses his weapon to the cops, I don't have a problem with this added language to allow the cops to get legitimate use out of that weapon.

GOA seems to be overreacting. At least, it appears to me they are mischaracterizing SB 212. It's not anything new or added with regard to the action of firearm forfeiture/confiscation itself.

Click to expand...

This is the way I understood it also... especially the last paragraph. Or, am I missing something?

maybe GOA jumped the gun on this one, this seems more beneficial than harmful. selling guns back to legal owners could be a big payday for cash strapped LEOS also any new modern standard LE type gun could be issued to an officer, saveing the department between 500-900 on a new firearm. or if the officer had to buy there own gun, like eastpointe then it could save that officer cash out of pocket. seems like good legislation to me, so far.:banana:

NHCGRPR45 said:

maybe GOA jumped the gun on this one, this seems more beneficial than harmful. selling guns back to legal owners could be a big payday for cash strapped LEOS also any new modern standard LE type gun could be issued to an officer, saveing the department between 500-900 on a new firearm. or if the officer had to buy there own gun, like eastpointe then it could save that officer cash out of pocket. seems like good legislation to me, so far.:banana:

Click to expand...

Could the concern be that the "local" pd may not be as diligent with their contact of the owner as MSP would be... since they are actually gaining the use of the firearm if the owner doesn't get it? Since registrations are not renewed, what happens if the pistol has been moved to a new address?? How will they contact the registered owner?

Seems like an incentive for the PDs to try to confiscate your guns, so they can put them in their own hands cheap or less.

stainless1911 said:

Seems like an incentive for the PDs to try to confiscate your guns, so they can put them in their own hands cheap or less.

Click to expand...

Does the MSP do this now? Hmm... seems easy to just say the owner was "unreachable".

stainless1911 said:

Seems like an incentive for the PDs to try to confiscate your guns, so they can put them in their own hands cheap or less.

Click to expand...

Yep. I am also against them being allowed auctioning anything.