The 4 MSP Legal updates that explain the legality of Open Carry in MI

detroit_fan said:

I only know of 1 Federal Bank in Michigan, and it's in detroit. I believe the full name is Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago: Detroit Branch. I didn't expect you to go there, but just wanted to mention it since it is a prohibited place(by federal law).

Click to expand...

the federal reserve is a private bank. no more federal than federal express or federal ammunition.

Golden Eagle said:

Another discussion. Most say Federal law, hes out of state so he needs to follow the 1000 foot rule.

Click to expand...

TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 44 > § 922 > PARAGRAPH q(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—

(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;

Click to expand...

The term “school zone” means—

(A) in, or on the grounds of, a public, parochial or private school; or

(B) within a distance of 1,000 feet from the grounds of a public, parochial or private school.

Click to expand...

Bronson

Has anyone ever managed to edit/shrink the MSP LU so it fits on 2 sides of a single sheet of paper?

Didn't want to start a new thread just in case this has been covered elsewhere.

Just found this on the MSP website.


Check it out: http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/CPL_Quick_Reference_Card_-_01-07_revision_284262_7.pdf

My apologies. I misread their cite.
It is correct as stated and a useful chart to have on hand.

Where in the statute does it authorize the seizure of a pistol for violating the CPL act?

WARCHILD said:

As expected, they have bogus requirements on the transport portion..(see bottom of second chart).

Click to expand...

A person in a vehicle, with bodily alcohol content, will not be in violation of the CPL Act if the pistol is:

-Locked in the trunk.
-If there is no trunk, then unloaded and locked in a container separate from the ammunition.​

Click to expand...

(3) This section does not prohibit an individual licensed under this act to carry a concealed pistol who has any bodily alcohol content from transporting that pistol in the locked trunk of his or her motor vehicle or another motor vehicle in which he or she is a passenger or, if the vehicle does not have a trunk, from transporting that pistol unloaded in a locked compartment or container that is separated from the ammunition for that pistol or on a vessel if the pistol is transported unloaded in a locked compartment or container that is separated from the ammunition for that pistol.

Click to expand...

stainless1911 said:

Where in the statute does it authorize the seizure of a pistol for violating the CPL act?

Click to expand...

http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-28-425g

This is why I asked in another thread if your pistol was taken...way back when

Thanks doc. That's why I was confused about it. My gun has been "detained" a couple times, but never seized.

According to the 5th amendment, they cant seize the weapon anyhow, but who cares about that pesky old outdated document anyhow?

stainless1911 said:

Thanks doc. That's why I was confused about it. My gun has been "detained" a couple times, but never seized.

According to the 5th amendment, they cant seize the weapon anyhow, but who cares about that pesky old outdated document anyhow?

Click to expand...

It always amazes me that people are shocked that "government" regularly violates the letter, and the spirit, of those amendments. If instead of looking at these as what is allowed, people saw these as limits to the power of governmental agents, it would cut down on these types of violations.

From: Aimee Maike <MaikeA@michigan.gov>
Sent: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 20:50:08 -0000 (UTC)
Subject: MCL 28.425o, MCL 750.234d, and open carry

Mr. Cupka,

MCL 28.425o lists the premises upon which a CPL holder may not carry a concealed pistol. MCL 28.425o does not apply to a CPL holder when he or she is carrying a visible non-concealed pistol, commonly referred to as open carry. MCL 750.234d lists the premises upon which a person shall not possess a firearm; however, CPL holders are specifically exempted by subsection (2)(c). Therefore, CPL holders may carry a visible non-concealed pistol on the premises listed in MCL 28.425o and MCL 750.234d without being in violation of either statute.

The following are links to the pertinent statutes for your review:

MCL 28.425o
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(vidajy45mwvpgvboqggcel55))/documents/mcl/pdf/mcl-28-425o.pdf

MCL 750.234d
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(vidajy45mwvpgvboqggcel55))/documents/mcl/pdf/mcl-750-234d.pdf

Please feel free to contact me directly with any further questions you may have regarding this issue.

Sincerely,
Sergeant Aimee Maike
Michigan State Police
Office of the Director
Legal Resource and Education Unit
333 South Grand Avenue
P.O. Box 30634
Lansing, Michigan 48909
Desk: (517) 241-1906
Fax: (517) 241-0991

I wonder if he would be able to send that out to all municipalities so they stop breaking the law.

...we have with similar things in the past

There's a lot of good information on this thread. Thank you.