Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: reciprocity

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Warren, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    228

    reciprocity

    will our michigan CPL be reciprocal to wisconsin november 1?

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Levittown, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    771
    Assuming MI does a background check when they issue you your MI...then yes WI should honor it....according to the law...so just hope WIDOJ doesn't screw it up.
    Last edited by mrjam2jab; 08-25-2011 at 09:52 PM.

  3. #3
    State Researcher lockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Elgin, Illinois, USA
    Posts
    1,202
    Quote Originally Posted by ElectricianLU58 View Post
    will our michigan CPL be reciprocal to wisconsin november 1?
    ON or about November 1st, check the WI DOJ websight, they should have published a list by Nov 1st.

  4. #4
    Regular Member xmanhockey7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Portage, MI
    Posts
    1,490
    According to the bill pasted, yes, Michigan meets their requirement for reciprocity.
    "No state shall convert a liberty to a privilege, license it, and charge a fee therefor.- Murdock vs Pennsylvania 319 US 105

    ...If the state converts a right into a privelege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right... with impunity.
    - Shuttleworth vs City of Birmingham, Alabama 317 US 262

    Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no legislation which would abrogate them.
    - Miranda vs Arizona 384 US 436

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Warren, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    228
    thank you.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Bronson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Battle Creek, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,157
    Just don't carry within 1000' of a school when you go visit.

    Bronson
    Those who expect to reap the benefits of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it. – Thomas Paine

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Levittown, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    771
    Quote Originally Posted by Bronson View Post
    Just don't carry within 1000' of a school when you go visit.

    Bronson
    WI has that covered...

    (2) ISSUANCE AND SCOPE OF LICENSE. (a) The depart-
    ment shall issue a license to carry a concealed weapon to
    any individual who is not disqualified under sub. (3) and
    who completes the application process specified in sub.
    (7). A license to carry a concealed weapon issued under
    this section shall meet the requirements specified in sub.
    (2m).
    (b) The department may not impose conditions, limi-
    tations, or requirements that are not expressly provided
    for in this section on the issuance, scope, effect, or con-
    tent of a license.
    (c) Unless expressly provided in this section, this sec-
    tion does not limit an individual’s right to carry a firearm
    that is not concealed.
    (d) For purposes of 18 USC 922 (q) (2) (B) (ii), an
    out−of−state licensee is licensed by this state
    .

  8. #8
    Regular Member TheQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Lansing, Michigan
    Posts
    3,448
    Nevermind. Read 18 USC 923...

    We should encourage Michigan to do this. I'll bring it up to Senator Green's office.
    Last edited by TheQ; 08-26-2011 at 09:30 PM.
    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.

  9. #9
    Michigan Moderator DrTodd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    3,337
    Quote Originally Posted by TheQ View Post
    Nevermind. Read 18 USC 923...

    We should encourage Michigan to do this. I'll bring it up to Senator Green's office.
    Yep, it's great that Wisconsin put that in their law... but the downside is that it is an untested defense to the charge of a violation of the aforementioned federal law. Although I support the addition of this to Michigan law, and readily admit that such a statement may stop state and local LEOs from giving someone grief over it, I'm not so sure about the feds. Yes, it may work so don't respond as if I don't think it will, but it really is untested. I also think some other states (Wyoming ?) also have a similar statement in their laws.
    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.

  10. #10
    Regular Member TheQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Lansing, Michigan
    Posts
    3,448
    18 USC 922
    ...
    (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;
    ...

    I think the language in the WI bill makes it clear that for the purposes of 18 USC 922 out of state licensees are licensed the same as in-state licensees.

    I'll post it on MGO's legal beagle corner to see if we can get some scholarly opinions from people that are licensed attorneys.

    Posted here
    Last edited by TheQ; 08-26-2011 at 09:30 PM.
    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.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Levittown, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    771
    Quote Originally Posted by TheQ View Post
    18 USC 922
    ...

    ...

    I think the language in the WI bill makes it clear that for the purposes of 18 USC 922 out of state licensees are licensed the same as in-state licensees.

    I'll post it on MGO's legal beagle corner to see if we can get some scholarly opinions from people that are licensed attorneys.

    Posted here
    Can't read it unless logged in...

  12. #12
    Regular Member TheQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Lansing, Michigan
    Posts
    3,448
    Quote Originally Posted by mrjam2jab View Post
    Can't read it unless logged in...
    Well -- sign up! It's a happening forum.
    Last edited by TheQ; 08-26-2011 at 10:37 PM.
    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.

  13. #13
    Regular Member Bronson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Battle Creek, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,157
    Quote Originally Posted by TheQ View Post
    I think the language in the WI bill makes it clear that for the purposes of 18 USC 922 out of state licensees are licensed the same as in-state licensees.
    (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;
    It's not enough for WI to "license" out of staters by recognizing their out of state license. WI must be the state that does the background check and it must be done before the "license" is issued. If they recognize a license that has already been issued it doesn't meet the letter of the law.

    At least that's how I read it.

    Bronson
    Those who expect to reap the benefits of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it. – Thomas Paine

  14. #14
    Michigan Moderator DrTodd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    3,337
    Quote Originally Posted by Bronson View Post
    It's not enough for WI to "license" out of staters by recognizing their out of state license. WI must be the state that does the background check and it must be done before the "license" is issued. If they recognize a license that has already been issued it doesn't meet the letter of the law.

    At least that's how I read it.

    Bronson
    Apparently, so does the ATF.

    http://www.handgunlaw.us/documents/batf_school_zone.pdf

    (see 4th paragraph)
    Last edited by DrTodd; 08-28-2011 at 02:31 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.

  15. #15
    Michigan Moderator DrTodd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    3,337
    Well, to answer the OP's original question, I asked my magic 8-ball. It said to "ask again later" and "it is likely".
    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.

  16. #16
    Regular Member xmanhockey7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Portage, MI
    Posts
    1,490
    It is my understanding in the state of Rhode Island the attorney general's office can issue concealed carry permits (they can apply to I believe local law enforcement that "shall issue" the permit but state law does say the attorney general "may issue"). If I am correct that only the attorney general would be responsible some licenses, it would seem to me if any one gets a permit from the AG office they would not be exempt because it wouldn't be " law enforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license" it would be the attorney general. I could be wrong about this but from what I understand on how their licensing system works I think it's possible.
    "No state shall convert a liberty to a privilege, license it, and charge a fee therefor.- Murdock vs Pennsylvania 319 US 105

    ...If the state converts a right into a privelege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right... with impunity.
    - Shuttleworth vs City of Birmingham, Alabama 317 US 262

    Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no legislation which would abrogate them.
    - Miranda vs Arizona 384 US 436

  17. #17
    Regular Member Bronson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Battle Creek, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,157
    I believe the AG is considered the chief legal and law enforcement officer of the state.

    From the Rhode Island AG website:

    As head of the Department of Law, the Attorney General is the top law enforcement official in the State of Rhode Island.
    Bronson
    Those who expect to reap the benefits of freedom, must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it. – Thomas Paine

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Levittown, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    771
    Quote Originally Posted by xmanhockey7 View Post
    It is my understanding in the state of Rhode Island the attorney general's office can issue concealed carry permits (they can apply to I believe local law enforcement that "shall issue" the permit but state law does say the attorney general "may issue"). If I am correct that only the attorney general would be responsible some licenses, it would seem to me if any one gets a permit from the AG office they would not be exempt because it wouldn't be " law enforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license" it would be the attorney general. I could be wrong about this but from what I understand on how their licensing system works I think it's possible.
    It's my understanding that non-residents apply thru AG...residents apply thru local LEO. And as stated AG is most of the time the top LEO of the state.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •