B
Bikenut
Guest
I posted some of this in a different thread but the premise captured my attention... yet I'm not legal savvy enough to know if there is any weight or leverage in the concept............ help would be appreciated.
In regards to illegal ordinances.......
"Active enforcement" would be when a police officer arrested a person for violating an ordinance.
"Passive enforcement" would be when a council intentionally allows an illegal ordinance to remain on the books where citizens can read it and after reading it obey it because they are unaware of MCL 123.1102.
Now I underlined and put intentionally in bold for a reason... because if the council knows the ordinance is illegal yet refuses to change it to comply with State law then it is obvious the council's intention is to mislead folks into believing the ordinance is legal and must be obeyed.... which would be "passive enforcement".
Ok... now my question... since
MCL 123.1102 which provides, in pertinent part:
A local unit of government shall not impose special taxation on, enact or enforce any ordinance or regulation pertaining to, or regulate in any other manner the ownership, registration, purchase, sale, transfer, transportation, or possession of pistols or other firearms, ammunition for pistols or other firearms, or components of pistols or other firearms, except as otherwise provided by federal law or a law of this state.
would that part in bold only refer to "active enforcement" or would it also refer to "passive enforcement"?
If it refers to "passive enforcement" and a council knows the ordinance is illegal yet refuses to change it... is there any actual legal recourse against a council that knowingly breaks State law?
In regards to illegal ordinances.......
"Active enforcement" would be when a police officer arrested a person for violating an ordinance.
"Passive enforcement" would be when a council intentionally allows an illegal ordinance to remain on the books where citizens can read it and after reading it obey it because they are unaware of MCL 123.1102.
Now I underlined and put intentionally in bold for a reason... because if the council knows the ordinance is illegal yet refuses to change it to comply with State law then it is obvious the council's intention is to mislead folks into believing the ordinance is legal and must be obeyed.... which would be "passive enforcement".
Ok... now my question... since
MCL 123.1102 which provides, in pertinent part:
A local unit of government shall not impose special taxation on, enact or enforce any ordinance or regulation pertaining to, or regulate in any other manner the ownership, registration, purchase, sale, transfer, transportation, or possession of pistols or other firearms, ammunition for pistols or other firearms, or components of pistols or other firearms, except as otherwise provided by federal law or a law of this state.
would that part in bold only refer to "active enforcement" or would it also refer to "passive enforcement"?
If it refers to "passive enforcement" and a council knows the ordinance is illegal yet refuses to change it... is there any actual legal recourse against a council that knowingly breaks State law?