Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 26

Thread: WILX Lansing article on HB4009

  1. #1
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Venator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lansing area, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    6,445

    WILX Lansing article on HB4009

    http://www.wilx.com/home/headlines/P...114606524.html

    Why do they have to start the video with my fat ass.

    If one Michigan lawmaker has his way, people will be able to carry concealed weapons almost anywhere they want. There is new legislation on the table that would legalize the current "no carry" zones, but some agencies think this would do more harm than good.
    "We have a Constitution that says we do have a right to protect ourselves with a gun," said Senator Mike Green (R-Mayville).
    Senator Green has sponsored legislation that would extend the state's concealed carry law to hospitals, sports stadiums, schools and other public places that are forbidden under current law.

    "We believe it's been proven time and time again that we're not talking about people out to hurt somebody or demean somebody," said Sen. Green. "We're talking about good, honest, law abiding citizens that want to protect themselves."
    It's been more than ten years since the State passed it's current concealed pistol law and Major Joel Maatman of the Ingham County Sheriff's Office says the law works just fine the way it is.

    "Personally I think this is too radical," said Maatman. "I think the legislators got it right the first time."
    And Maatman said when you start carrying guns in certain public venues, the idea of protection could backfire including mis-use and accidental firing.

    "I think there are certain venues, people want to go and they want to feel free and safe and not be around someone with a weapon."
    Lansing Community College is one of those venues that has already dismissed the idea of expanding the so-called "carry zones." Tuesday, in a statement from the college: "LCC President Brent Knight opposes any repeal of 'No Carry' zones as they relate to college campuses. He said the intent of the proposed legislation is not in the best interest of the community and is contrary to the educational process."

    Senator Green said he expects opposition to the legislation but says the intent is truly not to make people feel unsafe, but, the complete opposite.
    Last edited by Venator; 01-25-2011 at 09:20 PM.
    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.

  2. #2
    Regular Member lil_freak_66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Mason, Michigan
    Posts
    1,811
    Seemed rather negative...especially compared to what they've done in the past IMO
    not a lawyer, dont take anything i say as legal advice.


  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    People carry anyhow, patriots, criminals and OCers.

  4. #4
    Campaign Veteran smellslikemichigan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Troy, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,321
    i guess this is why he's the president of a community college... in lansing...
    "He said the intent of the proposed legislation is not in the best interest of the community and is contrary to the educational process."

    how can the carry of firearms, something completely un-related to education, be contrary to education? that is a ridiculous statement.
    "If it ain't loaded and cocked it don't shoot." - Rooster Cogburn
    http://www.graystatemovie.com/

  5. #5
    Regular Member TheQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Lansing, Michigan
    Posts
    3,448
    Quote Originally Posted by Venator View Post
    If one Michigan lawmaker has his way, people will be able to carry concealed weapons almost anywhere they want.
    They try to make it sound like only one law maker supports this idea -- to make it seem less popular and a bad idea. I was in contact with Megan Norman today. I couldn't arrange time for the interview.
    Call for a cop, call for an ambulance, and call for a pizza. See who shows up first.

    I am not a lawyer (merely an omnipotent member of a continuum). The contents of this post are not a substitute for sound legal advice from a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.

    Comments and views stated in my post are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of Michigan Open Carry, Inc. unless stated otherwise in the post.

  6. #6
    Regular Member TheQsAidan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Lansing
    Posts
    8

    My e-mail to the reporter of the story

    Dear Ms. Norman,

    I am writing to express my disappointment with the one-sided slant to the news report regarding the proposed changes to the concealed carry law. http://www.wilx.com/home/headlines/P...114606524.html

    While it is true that both sides of the issue were covered, the lead-in to this story, "If one Michigan lawmaker has his way..." gives the feeling that there is no support for this legislation. I am very disappointed that there was no opportunity for a statement from the gentleman seen firing and carrying his pistol, Mr. Brian Jeffs.

    Also, a key point was missed in this story. Under the current law, it is perfectly legal for a person with a Concealed Pistol License to carry their handgun in those "pistol-free zones" as long as they carry openly. The link below is to the Michigan State Police Legal Update #86. It provides a very clear picture of what is and is not allowed in Michigan.

    http://www.michigan.gov/documents/ms...2_336854_7.pdf

    Thank you for your time.

    Anne Godwin

  7. #7
    Regular Member autosurgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Lawrence, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    3,845
    Quote Originally Posted by TheQsAidan View Post
    Dear Ms. Norman,

    I am writing to express my disappointment with the one-sided slant to the news report regarding the proposed changes to the concealed carry law. http://www.wilx.com/home/headlines/P...114606524.html

    While it is true that both sides of the issue were covered, the lead-in to this story, "If one Michigan lawmaker has his way..." gives the feeling that there is no support for this legislation. I am very disappointed that there was no opportunity for a statement from the gentleman seen firing and carrying his pistol, Mr. Brian Jeffs.

    Also, a key point was missed in this story. Under the current law, it is perfectly legal for a person with a Concealed Pistol License to carry their handgun in those "pistol-free zones" as long as they carry openly. The link below is to the Michigan State Police Legal Update #86. It provides a very clear picture of what is and is not allowed in Michigan.

    http://www.michigan.gov/documents/ms...2_336854_7.pdf

    Thank you for your time.

    Anne Godwin
    Thank you and welcome to OCDO!
    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."

  8. #8
    Regular Member ken243's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Clio, MI
    Posts
    141
    Quote Originally Posted by Venator View Post
    Why do they have to start the video with my fat ass.
    The camera adds 20lbs.

    A little one sided report if you ask me. I would sure love to watch the news one of these days and see NEWS without personal or political agends pushed around. Report a story get the FACTS. Opinions based on pure ignorance is the most damaging part of society.
    Last edited by ken243; 01-26-2011 at 06:54 AM.

  9. #9
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Venator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lansing area, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    6,445
    Quote Originally Posted by smellslikemichigan View Post
    i guess this is why he's the president of a community college... in lansing...
    "He said the intent of the proposed legislation is not in the best interest of the community and is contrary to the educational process."

    how can the carry of firearms, something completely un-related to education, be contrary to education? that is a ridiculous statement.
    Hell, I don't even know what that means. Back it up with something, otherwise it's pure emotion and nothing more.
    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.

  10. #10
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Venator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lansing area, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    6,445
    Quote Originally Posted by ken243 View Post
    The camera adds 20lbs.

    A little one sided report if you ask me. I would sure love to watch the news one of these days and see NEWS without personal or political agends pushed around. Report a story get the FACTS. Opinions based on pure ignorance is the most damaging part of society.
    They used footage from a previous interview with me on Open Carry. See wanted to speak with me for this report. I left a message on her voice mail, but she never got back with me.
    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.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,605
    Michigan Public Safety Code 28.425o needs to be REPEALED.
    Furthermore, Michigan Penal Codes 750.234d AND 750.234e need to be REPEALED as well.

  12. #12
    Michigan Moderator Shadow Bear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Grand Rapids
    Posts
    1,018
    [QUOTE=ken243;1453561]The camera adds 20lbs. [QUOTE]


    How many cameras were they using?!? Sorry, couldn't resist....

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Eaton Rapids, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    13

    WILX Lansing article on HB4009

    You might as well just forget any hopes you may hold when you live in the Lansing area. Anyone who is anyone in Ingham county will not have this and shove their democratic weight around to keep everyone miserable.

    You are not safe in Lansing or Ingham county, yet the public wants to feel safe. They are being held back from their "lovely" governmental parties.

  14. #14
    Regular Member lil_freak_66's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Mason, Michigan
    Posts
    1,811
    Quote Originally Posted by glock2340 View Post
    You might as well just forget any hopes you may hold when you live in the Lansing area. Anyone who is anyone in Ingham county will not have this and shove their democratic weight around to keep everyone miserable.

    You are not safe in Lansing or Ingham county, yet the public wants to feel safe. They are being held back from their "lovely" governmental parties.
    Dont even get me started on the Lansing police dept or the city council

    I could go on and on about them all day

    Ingham county LEO's dont seem bad,but i dont like the Sheriff
    not a lawyer, dont take anything i say as legal advice.


  15. #15
    Regular Member Golden Eagle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    SW Michigan
    Posts
    254

    Angry

    Quote Originally Posted by wilx
    http://www.wilx.com/home/headlines/P...114606524.html

    "I think there are certain venues, people want to go and they want to feel free and safe..."

    All I can think to say is screw you Major Joel Maatman why can't I as a law abiding citizen be allowed to feel safe!
    The news media plays politics more than the politicians do.

  16. #16
    Michigan Moderator DrTodd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    3,337
    Because HE can carry concealed in "PROHIBITED" places, he has no concern for others.
    What really is interesting is that Michigan allows Reserve Officers to carry in these areas too; they don't even have to be on the job or under supervision of a deputy to enjoy the privilege. They are not police officers and have no other right to arrest than any other citizen. Basically, the state has allowed a group of citizens, with NO special training, to get a pass. IMHO, this is a huge violation of the Equal Protection of the laws.
    Last edited by DrTodd; 02-07-2011 at 08:53 PM.
    Giving up our liberties for safety is the one sure way to let the violent among us win.

    "Though defensive violence will always be a 'sad necessity' in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men." -Saint Augustine

    Disclaimer I am not a lawyer! Please do not consider anything you read from me to be legal advice.

  17. #17
    Regular Member xmanhockey7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Portage, MI
    Posts
    1,490
    Quote Originally Posted by DrTodd View Post
    Because HE can carry concealed in "PROHIBITED" places, he has no concern for others.
    What really is interesting is that Michigan allows Reserve Officers to carry in these areas too; they don't even have to be on the job or under supervision of a deputy to enjoy the privilege. They are not police officers and have no other right to arrest than any other citizen. Basically, the state has allowed a group of citizens, with NO special training, to get a pass. IMHO, this is a huge violation of the Equal Protection of the laws.
    Well at least there is now a greater chance of having someone with a gun in these bogus PFZ. Besides they're doing free work for the community and if they run into some idiot criminal they need to be able to protect themselves wherever they are because it does happen.

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Davisburg, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    8,948
    He wouldn't save anyone but himself, that has been evidenced by his actions.

  19. #19
    Michigan Moderator DrTodd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    3,337
    Quote Originally Posted by xmanhockey7 View Post
    Well at least there is now a greater chance of having someone with a gun in these bogus PFZ. Besides they're doing free work for the community and if they run into some idiot criminal they need to be able to protect themselves wherever they are because it does happen.
    Shouldn't everyone have the same right to protect themselves from criminal behavior?
    I would argue that if instead of carving out exceptions in the CPL law that we instead held all individuals who need a CPL to carry concealed to the same requirements and exceptions, we already would be allowed to CC in a PFZ. But instead, the legislature chooses to pass more and more "exceptions"...which basically divides the CPL holders into the Privileged CPL holders and the Ordinary CPL Holders. (If the person actually is a LEO, they don't even need a CPL so it is just "citizens" we are talking about)

    I have been a reserve officer (not now) and I currently face more "criminals" in my regular "job" than I ever really did as a Reserve Deputy. In fact, within the first two months of this school year, we had armed officers arresting students in the classroom (2x), 4 students shot (2 dead, 2 injured; not at school, though), and I regularly find quite a bit of brass in the parking lot during the warmer months. I have also been told by a student who is known to be "dirty" (ie they carry illegally at school) that he was going to "take me out". I am sure many here deal with similar situations during their day, too.
    So, a person who is a 9-5 accountant and works 8 hours a month as a reserve officer covering parades/fairs and directing traffic is more worthy than we? I would rethink that assumption.
    Last edited by DrTodd; 02-12-2011 at 12:23 PM.
    Giving up our liberties for safety is the one sure way to let the violent among us win.

    "Though defensive violence will always be a 'sad necessity' in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men." -Saint Augustine

    Disclaimer I am not a lawyer! Please do not consider anything you read from me to be legal advice.

  20. #20
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,756
    Quote Originally Posted by DrTodd View Post
    Shouldn't everyone have the same right to protect themselves from criminal behavior?
    I would argue that if instead of carving out exceptions in the CPL law that we instead held all individuals who need a CPL to carry concealed to the same requirements and exceptions, we already would be allowed to CC in a PFZ. But instead, the legislature chooses to pass more and more "exceptions"...which basically divides the CPL holders into the Privileged CPL holders and the Ordinary CPL Holders. (If the person actually is a LEO, they don't even need a CPL so it is just "citizens" we are talking about)

    I have been a reserve officer (not now) and I currently face more "criminals" in my regular "job" than I ever really did as a Reserve Deputy. In fact, within the first two months of this school year, we had armed officers arresting students in the classroom (2x), 4 students shot (2 dead, 2 injured; not at school, though), and I regularly find quite a bit of brass in the parking lot during the warmer months. I have also been told by a student who is known to be "dirty" (ie they carry illegally at school) that he was going to "take me out". I am sure many here deal with similar situations during their day, too.
    So, a person who is a 9-5 accountant and works 8 hours a month as a reserve officer covering parades/fairs and directing traffic is more worthy than we? I would rethink that assumption.
    Not directed at you DrTodd... just bouncing off your post.

    Perhaps it is time... rather past time I think... to expose the whole CPL fiasco for what it really is... a means of controlling who gets to carry a gun... and who doesn't.

    A CPL is only an expansion of the old Sheriff of the West who, in order to be the only one with a gun in town, declared there would be no guns allowed in town... except for his chosen deputies of course.

    CPL's are nothing more than the government making a privilege.. for the honored privileged... out of what used to be the right of every person to keep and bear.
    Last edited by Bikenut; 02-12-2011 at 01:21 PM.
    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.

  21. #21
    Michigan Moderator DrTodd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    3,337
    Quote Originally Posted by Bikenut View Post
    Not directed at you DrTodd... just bouncing off your post.

    Perhaps it is time... rather past time I think... to expose the whole CPL fiasco for what it really is... a means of controlling who gets to carry a gun... and who doesn't.

    A CPL is only an expansion of the old Sheriff of the West who, in order to be the only one with a gun in town, declared there would be no guns allowed in town... except for his chosen deputies of course.

    CPL's are nothing more than the government making a privilege.. for the honored privileged... out of what used to be the right of every person to keep and bear.
    C'mon Bikenut... you know I agree 100% with the whole cc/oc with NO permit required... federal law needs to be worked on too, 'til then I'm keeping my CPL.

    I was just pointing out that the StateOfMI's logic whereby only "special" people w/ a CPL should be allowed to CC in a PFZ... even though we haven't received any less training and may even be in more danger than those who are given the privileged access card with the "checked-box". Sort of a SUPER privilege card.

    I do think some other states are really are bringing the whole "constitutional carry" issue to the forefront as of late (Iowa, Wisconsin, Wyoming to name a few)... so the issue is getting out there, albeit slowly.

    But yes, the whole idea of a permission slip to exercise a right is anathema to what this country was founded upon. But that could be saved for another thread... if not a whole other website.
    Giving up our liberties for safety is the one sure way to let the violent among us win.

    "Though defensive violence will always be a 'sad necessity' in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men." -Saint Augustine

    Disclaimer I am not a lawyer! Please do not consider anything you read from me to be legal advice.

  22. #22
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,756
    Quote Originally Posted by DrTodd View Post
    C'mon Bikenut... you know I agree 100% with the whole cc/oc with NO permit required... federal law needs to be worked on too, 'til then I'm keeping my CPL.
    As weird and as incomprehensible as it may seem.... I was actually agreeing with the content of your earlier post but didn't want my reply to seem as if were directed at you personally.... hence I worded my reply the way I did.

    OK?
    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.

  23. #23
    Michigan Moderator DrTodd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    3,337
    Quote Originally Posted by Bikenut View Post
    As weird and as incomprehensible as it may seem.... I was actually agreeing with the content of your earlier post but didn't want my reply to seem as if were directed at you personally.... hence I worded my reply the way I did.

    OK?
    I knew that, just having some fun.

    Btw, I was wondering if the State of Michigan just required a background check and then immediately issued the CPL at no cost or maybe just to cover ink and paper... would that be something that could be supported by members here? Would cover the Fed requirement for carry in GFSZs if it was automatically renewed every 5 years... and we could have it cover all kinds of carry; long gun, pistol, mace, tazers, whatever. Maybe even make it immediately available at the time of purchase of any firearm from any dealer. Just a crazy thought...
    Giving up our liberties for safety is the one sure way to let the violent among us win.

    "Though defensive violence will always be a 'sad necessity' in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men." -Saint Augustine

    Disclaimer I am not a lawyer! Please do not consider anything you read from me to be legal advice.

  24. #24
    Regular Member Bikenut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Saginaw, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,756
    Quote Originally Posted by DrTodd View Post
    I knew that, just having some fun.

    Btw, I was wondering if the State of Michigan just required a background check and then immediately issued the CPL at no cost or maybe just to cover ink and paper... would that be something that could be supported by members here? Would cover the Fed requirement for carry in GFSZs if it was automatically renewed every 5 years... and we could have it cover all kinds of carry; long gun, pistol, mace, tazers, whatever. Maybe even make it immediately available at the time of purchase of any firearm from any dealer. Just a crazy thought...
    No.... no ... no... and HELL NO!!! Once the government has the ability to reduce a right to a privilege written on a little slip of paper the government then has control over who gets that little slip of paper. And the more stuff regulated (controlled) by the little slip of paper the less freedom the people have.... and the more control the government has over the people.

    Because, as nice as it may seem to have been given a little slip of paper as a "go anywhere card" by daddy government that slip of paper can be giveth... and can be thaketh away too leaving you with a no go anywhere at all screwing from daddy government.

    You would have the CPL... a "license issued by the government that controls an activity and can only be gotten from the government after meeting the requirements set forth by the government", a "permit giving permission from and issued by the government that controls an activity and can only be gotten from the government after meeting the requirements set forth by the government"... suddenly control every kind of gun in every kind of area in every way? Just to have the privilege and/or convenience of carrying/buying/having other types of.... "arms"? And of course government would never abuse the power of control over all kinds of arms and carry... now would it?

    There should be no reason to ask "permission" to exercise a right. A right automatically comes with "permission" built in. And anyone (government) who wants to make folks ask permission are interested in only one thing..... exerting control over the exercising of what is a right because anyone who understands what a right really is....... is difficult to control. Take away the right and the difficulty to control goes with it.
    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.

  25. #25
    Michigan Moderator DrTodd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    3,337
    Quote Originally Posted by Bikenut View Post
    No.... no ... no... and HELL NO!!! Once the government has the ability to reduce a right to a privilege written on a little slip of paper the government then has control over who gets that little slip of paper. And the more stuff regulated (controlled) by the little slip of paper the less freedom the people have.... and the more control the government has over the people.

    Because, as nice as it may seem to have been given a little slip of paper as a "go anywhere card" by daddy government that slip of paper can be giveth... and can be thaketh away too leaving you with a no go anywhere at all screwing from daddy government.

    You would have the CPL... a "license issued by the government that controls an activity and can only be gotten from the government after meeting the requirements set forth by the government", a "permit giving permission from and issued by the government that controls an activity and can only be gotten from the government after meeting the requirements set forth by the government"... suddenly control every kind of gun in every kind of area in every way? Just to have the privilege and/or convenience of carrying/buying/having other types of.... "arms"? And of course government would never abuse the power of control over all kinds of arms and carry... now would it?

    There should be no reason to ask "permission" to exercise a right. A right automatically comes with "permission" built in. And anyone (government) who wants to make folks ask permission are interested in only one thing..... exerting control over the exercising of what is a right because anyone who understands what a right really is....... is difficult to control. Take away the right and the difficulty to control goes with it.
    Thought you might say that. And for the most part, I agree.The other option, then, is to advocate and wait until all laws are repealed that in any way prohibit anyone from carrying a firearm. Perhaps my children's grandchildren will know what true freedom is... because that would probably be the earliest such an ideal situation could be realized.
    Giving up our liberties for safety is the one sure way to let the violent among us win.

    "Though defensive violence will always be a 'sad necessity' in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men." -Saint Augustine

    Disclaimer I am not a lawyer! Please do not consider anything you read from me to be legal advice.

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •