State Sen. Mike Green tells teacher/audience "guns are ok in school"... WINNING!

But you left off the beginning...


750.237a Individuals engaging in proscribed conduct; violation; penalties; definitions.

Sec. 237a.

(1) An individual who engages in conduct proscribed under section 224, 224a, 224b, 224c, 224e, 226, 227, 227a, 227f, 234a, 234b, or 234c, or who engages in conduct proscribed under section 223(2) for a second or subsequent time, in a weapon free school zone is guilty of a felony punishable by 1 or more of the following:



Then the closest I can find is:



750.226 Firearm or dangerous weapon; carrying with unlawful intent.


Sec. 226.

Carrying firearm or dangerous weapon with unlawful intent—Any person who, with intent to use the same unlawfully against the person of another, goes armed with a pistol or other firearm or dagger, dirk, razor, stiletto, or knife having a blade over 3 inches in length, or any other dangerous or deadly weapon or instrument, shall be guilty of a felony, punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than 5 years or by a fine of not more than 2,500 dollars.



or:



750.227b Carrying or possessing firearm when committing or attempting to commit felony; “law enforcement officer” defined.


Sec. 227b.

(1) A person who carries or has in his or her possession a firearm when he or she commits or attempts to commit a felony, except a violation of section 223, section 227, 227a or 230, is guilty of a felony

OC in and of its self is not a felony.

What legalese should I be aware of?

Golden Eagle said:

But you left off the beginning...


750.237a Individuals engaging in proscribed conduct; violation; penalties; definitions.

Sec. 237a.

(1) An individual who engages in conduct proscribed under section 224, 224a, 224b, 224c, 224e, 226, 227, 227a, 227f, 234a, 234b, or 234c, or who engages in conduct proscribed under section 223(2) for a second or subsequent time, in a weapon free school zone is guilty of a felony punishable by 1 or more of the following:



Then the closest I can find is:



750.226 Firearm or dangerous weapon; carrying with unlawful intent.


Sec. 226.

Carrying firearm or dangerous weapon with unlawful intent—Any person who, with intent to use the same unlawfully against the person of another, goes armed with a pistol or other firearm or dagger, dirk, razor, stiletto, or knife having a blade over 3 inches in length, or any other dangerous or deadly weapon or instrument, shall be guilty of a felony, punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than 5 years or by a fine of not more than 2,500 dollars.



or:



750.227b Carrying or possessing firearm when committing or attempting to commit felony; “law enforcement officer” defined.


Sec. 227b.

(1) A person who carries or has in his or her possession a firearm when he or she commits or attempts to commit a felony, except a violation of section 223, section 227, 227a or 230, is guilty of a felony

OC in and of its self is not a felony.

What legalese should I be aware of?

Click to expand...

Not a felony, but illegal. You forgot this part:


(4) Except as provided in subsection (5), an individual who possesses a weapon in a weapon free school zone is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by 1 or more of the following:

(a) Imprisonment for not more than 93 days.

(b) Community service for not more than 100 hours.

(c) A fine of not more than $2,000.00.

(5) Subsection (4) does not apply to any of the following:

(a) An individual employed by or contracted by a school if the possession of that weapon is to provide security services for the school.

(b) A peace officer.

(c) An individual licensed by this state or another state to carry a concealed weapon.

(d) An individual who possesses a weapon provided by a school or a school's instructor on school property for purposes of providing or receiving instruction in the use of that weapon.

(e) An individual who possesses a firearm on school property if that possession is with the permission of the school's principal or an agent of the school designated by the school's principal or the school board.

(f) An individual who is 18 years of age or older who is not a student at the school and who possesses a firearm on school property while transporting a student to or from the school if any of the following apply:

(i) The individual is carrying an antique firearm, completely unloaded, in a wrapper or container in the trunk of a vehicle while en route to or from a hunting or target shooting area or function involving the exhibition, demonstration or sale of antique firearms.

(ii) The individual is carrying a firearm unloaded in a wrapper or container in the trunk of the person's vehicle, while in possession of a valid Michigan hunting license or proof of valid membership in an organization having shooting range facilities, and while en route to or from a hunting or target shooting area.

(iii) The person is carrying a firearm unloaded in a wrapper or container in the trunk of the person's vehicle from the place of purchase to his or her home or place of business or to a place of repair or back to his or her home or place of business, or in moving goods from one place of abode or business to another place of abode or business.

(iv) The person is carrying an unloaded firearm in the passenger compartment of a vehicle that does not have a trunk, if the person is otherwise complying with the requirements of subparagraph (ii) or (iii) and the wrapper or container is not readily accessible to the occupants of the vehicle.

(6) As used in this section:

(a) “Antique firearm” means either of the following:

(i) A firearm not designed or redesigned for using rimfire or conventional center fire ignition with fixed ammunition and manufactured in or before 1898, including a matchlock, flintlock, percussion cap, or similar type of ignition system or a replica of such a firearm, whether actually manufactured before or after the year 1898.

(ii) A firearm using fixed ammunition manufactured in or before 1898, for which ammunition is no longer manufactured in the United States and is not readily available in the ordinary channels of commercial trade.

(b) “School” means a public, private, denominational, or parochial school offering developmental kindergarten, kindergarten, or any grade from 1 through 12.

(c) “School property” means a building, playing field, or property used for school purposes to impart instruction to children or used for functions and events sponsored by a school, except a building used primarily for adult education or college extension courses.

(d) “Weapon free school zone” means school property and a vehicle used by a school to transport students to or from school property.

The teacher said I would give my life for one of my students...and hes like well he'd shoot you and your student...haha...classic. :lol:

Thx all for taking through it with me. My thought was if (1) was legal then (2) (3) and (4) wouldn't mater, that was my big error.
Good to correct Mr. Green.

What is interesting is that under the Federal Gun Free Zone Act of 1995, if a LEO carries his pistol either openly or concealed, although legal according to MI gun law, would be illegal under Federal Law.
http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/44/922

DrTodd said:

What is interesting is that under the Federal Gun Free Zone Act of 1995, if a LEO carries his pistol either openly or concealed, although legal according to MI gun law, would be illegal under Federal Law.
http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/44/922

Click to expand...

I'm assuming you mean an off-duty officer.

(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;

(iii) that is—

(I) not loaded; and

(II) in a locked container, or a locked firearms rack that is on a motor vehicle;


(iv) by an individual for use in a program approved by a school in the school zone;

(v) by an individual in accordance with a contract entered into between a school in the school zone and the individual or an employer of the individual;

(vi) by a law enforcement officer acting in his or her official capacity; or

(vii) that is unloaded and is possessed by an individual while traversing school premises for the purpose of gaining access to public or private lands open to hunting, if the entry on school premises is authorized by school authorities.

Click to expand...

I would agree that an off-duty officer that didn't possess a MI CPL and was carrying under the authority of the LEOSA wouldn't be able to carry in a school zone because the exemption listed in (ii) above specifically states that the license to possess the pistol must be issued by the state where the school is located.

Hmmm, just got to thinking. Assuming that an officer doesn't have to get a Permit To Purchase/Possess and then register in his own name his duty weapon that would be the only firearm he couldn't possess in a Fed. school zone. He could possess a pistol that he purchased on his own because he would then have the PP for that pistol. Which would cover him according to the Fed. law (I'm assuming no CPL).

Additionally MI law exempts a "peace officer" and makes no mention of on or off duty.

750.237a

(5) Subsection (4) does not apply to any of the following:

(b) A peace officer.

Click to expand...

So the way I read it as long as the off-duty officer isn't carrying his duty weapon in a school zone he should be ok.

Bronson

Actually, the law states "official capacity". So, I think it could be argued that if the officer is there to pick up their child or see the last quarter of a basketball game and possesses a firearm, this would be illegal. So, an officer "on duty" but not acting in their official capacity, ie not there for a reason that requires a LEO, would, IMHO, be violating federal law.

what about LEOSA? that trumps everything.

Maybe not...

http://theerant.yuku.com/reply/3563...Amendments--S-1132-----President---signe.html

http://www.silencertests.com/silencer-forum/viewtopic.php?f=75&t=64397

http://www.usacarry.com/forums/conc...n/7389-h-r-218-l-e-o-safety-act-2004-a-2.html

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/archive/index.php/t-141532.html

and there are many more of the same opinion. Although LEOSA specifically says that it "trumps" state law, one must still adhere to Federal Law.

Federal Gun free school zone law is past having to go away, I think.

I've known Mike for some time now, this does not surprise me one bit, he has constantly been for his constituents, even going as far as voting with the democrats against Snyder's anti teacher scam and pension taxes.....