• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Proposed Open Carry Ban HB4104

mikestilly

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
1,869
Location
Macomb County, Michigan, USA


We saw it coming with the last SB59. So many so called 2A supporters were quick to give up their right to open carry they were bound to make a bill banning it. This is for the next compromise ... Not surprised at all..

(6) AN INDIVIDUAL SHALL NOT INTENTIONALLY DISPLAY OR OPENLY
11 CARRY A PISTOL ON THE PREMISES LISTED IN SUBSECTION (1)(A) TO (I)
12 UNLESS THE INDIVIDUAL OWNS THE PREMISES DESCRIBED IN SUBSECTION (1)
13 OR IS EMPLOYED OR CONTRACTED BY THE OWNER OR OTHER PERSON WITH
14 CONTROL OVER THE PREMISES DESCRIBED IN SUBSECTION (1), THE
15 POSSESSION OF THE PISTOL IS TO PROVIDE SECURITY SERVICES FOR THE
16 PREMISES OR IS OTHERWISE IN THE SCOPE OF THE INDIVIDUAL'S OFFICIAL
17 DUTIES, OR THE INDIVIDUAL IS ACTING WITH THE EXPRESS WRITTEN
18 CONSENT OF THE OWNER OF THE PREMISES OR AN AGENT OF THE OWNER OF
19 THE PREMISES. THIS SUBSECTION APPLIES BEGINNING MAY 1, 2013.

Thanks to the MOC library debacle. We get them trying to add this to the PFZ's:

(I) A PUBLIC LIBRARY AS DEFINED IN SECTION 2 OF THE STATE AID
16 TO PUBLIC LIBRARIES ACT, 1977 PA 89, MCL 397.552.


Is a pile of OCDO people and MOC for this bill too?
 
Last edited:

Michigander

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2007
Messages
4,818
Location
Mulligan's Valley
We now need to all contact our reps. Call them not just once, but every time you deem it necessary to update them. And email them often. Post your letters here, so that others may copy and paste them too.
 

Ezerharden

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2011
Messages
723
Location
Erie, MI
We saw it coming with the last SB59. So many so called 2A supporters were quick to give up their right to open carry they were bound to make a bill banning it. This is for the next compromise ... Not surprised at all..

(6) AN INDIVIDUAL SHALL NOT INTENTIONALLY DISPLAY OR OPENLY
11 CARRY A PISTOL ON THE PREMISES LISTED IN SUBSECTION (1)(A) TO (I)
12 UNLESS THE INDIVIDUAL OWNS THE PREMISES DESCRIBED IN SUBSECTION (1)
13 OR IS EMPLOYED OR CONTRACTED BY THE OWNER OR OTHER PERSON WITH
14 CONTROL OVER THE PREMISES DESCRIBED IN SUBSECTION (1), THE
15 POSSESSION OF THE PISTOL IS TO PROVIDE SECURITY SERVICES FOR THE
16 PREMISES OR IS OTHERWISE IN THE SCOPE OF THE INDIVIDUAL'S OFFICIAL
17 DUTIES, OR THE INDIVIDUAL IS ACTING WITH THE EXPRESS WRITTEN
18 CONSENT OF THE OWNER OF THE PREMISES OR AN AGENT OF THE OWNER OF
19 THE PREMISES. THIS SUBSECTION APPLIES BEGINNING MAY 1, 2013.

Thanks to the MOC library debacle. We get them trying to add this to the PFZ's:

(I) A PUBLIC LIBRARY AS DEFINED IN SECTION 2 OF THE STATE AID
16 TO PUBLIC LIBRARIES ACT, 1977 PA 89, MCL 397.552.


Is a pile of OCDO people and MOC for this bill too?

Actually once Snyder learned that OC was legal in those areas, it was just a matter of time until this was tried. This would have occurred regardless of SB59 so give it a rest already. Now is not the time to beat that dead horse again, now is the time to work against this new bill.
 

DanM

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
1,928
Location
West Bloomfield, Michigan, USA
I do have one compliment for this bill. At least it is logical, versus the last iteration of SB 59. It is logical that anti-gunners would go after OC. It is illogical that Michigan gun organizations went after OC.

Anti-gunners are going after OC. At least this bill makes sense.
 

Ezerharden

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2011
Messages
723
Location
Erie, MI
I do have one compliment for this bill. At least it is logical, versus the last iteration of SB 59. It is logical that anti-gunners would go after OC. It is illogical that Michigan gun organizations went after OC.

Anti-gunners are going after OC. At least this bill makes sense.

You just can't let it rest can you? Will you bring SB59 up for the next ten years?
 

TheQ

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2010
Messages
3,379
Location
Lansing, Michigan
Changed my mind. Won't waste my breath on this thread. It'll be fun to watch you guys get worked up on a bill that'll never see committee though.

Don't forget to take your blood pressure medication.
 
Last edited:

DanM

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
1,928
Location
West Bloomfield, Michigan, USA
You just can't let it rest can you? Will you bring SB59 up for the next ten years?

This is an open carry advocacy website. I am an open carry advocate. I will take opportunities to keep present threats to OC fresh in everyone's minds. Frequent reminders of present threats keeps everyone informed on what to be on the lookout for. We want to constantly be on the lookout for threats to OC.

Michigan gun organizations involved recently in SB 59 tried to criminalize some open carry in the recent past. None have confirmed they would not repeat such compromising on OC in the future. None have indicated to what limit they would refrain from throwing OC under the bus. Therefore, those Michigan gun organizations are among the present threats to OC in Michigan.

I will bring up SB 59 as often as need be as a reminder of this particular present threat to OC, until it is no longer a present threat to OC. It will cease being a present threat when the MI gun orgs state they are no longer in the business of criminalizing OC to advance their own or others' agendas.
 
Last edited:

Ezerharden

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 22, 2011
Messages
723
Location
Erie, MI
This is an open carry advocacy website. I am an open carry advocate. I will take opportunities to keep present threats to OC fresh in everyone's minds. Frequent reminders of present threats keeps everyone informed on what to be on the lookout for. We want to constantly be on the lookout for threats to OC.

Michigan gun organizations involved recently in SB 59 tried to criminalize some open carry in the recent past. None have confirmed they would not repeat such compromising on OC in the future. None have indicated to what limit they would refrain from throwing OC under the bus. Therefore, those Michigan gun organizations are among the present threats to OC in Michigan.

I will bring up SB 59 as often as need be as a reminder of this particular present threat to OC, until it is no longer a present threat to OC. It will cease being a present threat when the MI gun orgs state they are no longer in the business of criminalizing OC to advance their own or others' agendas.

Whatever Dan. You keep sounding the horn of discontent. Of course those MI gun rights groups you are disparaging have done a hell of a lot more for gun rights (open carry included) than anything I have seen you do as of yet. Don't bother to respond, as I doubt I will even waste my time reading this thread any longer. I am tired of arguing with absolutists.
 

griffin

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Messages
871
Location
Okemos, MI
Michigan gun organizations involved recently in SB 59 tried to criminalize some open carry in the recent past.

icon_rolleyes.gif
 

Raggs

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2012
Messages
1,181
Location
Wild Wild West Michigan
Changed my mind. Won't waste my breath on this thread. It'll be fun to watch you guys get worked up on a bill that'll never see committee though.

Don't forget to take your blood pressure medication.

Phil if you aren't going to comment then don't. It seems you know something about this bill and could add insightful reasoning but you choose not too. Why is that?
 

Raggs

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2012
Messages
1,181
Location
Wild Wild West Michigan
DanM, While you have made it clear in the past that I am no OC advocate I agree that OC will be pt on the table the frist time it is needed, with the blessing of gun organizations.

This is an open carry advocacy website. I am an open carry advocate. I will take opportunities to keep present threats to OC fresh in everyone's minds. Frequent reminders of present threats keeps everyone informed on what to be on the lookout for. We want to constantly be on the lookout for threats to OC.

Michigan gun organizations involved recently in SB 59 tried to criminalize some open carry in the recent past. None have confirmed they would not repeat such compromising on OC in the future. None have indicated to what limit they would refrain from throwing OC under the bus. Therefore, those Michigan gun organizations are among the present threats to OC in Michigan.

I will bring up SB 59 as often as need be as a reminder of this particular present threat to OC, until it is no longer a present threat to OC. It will cease being a present threat when the MI gun orgs state they are no longer in the business of criminalizing OC to advance their own or others' agendas.
 

DanM

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
1,928
Location
West Bloomfield, Michigan, USA
Whatever Dan. You keep sounding the horn of discontent. Of course those MI gun rights groups you are disparaging have done a hell of a lot more for gun rights (open carry included) than anything I have seen you do as of yet. Don't bother to respond, as I doubt I will even waste my time reading this thread any longer. I am tired of arguing with absolutists.

I'm an individual and gun groups are numerous individuals, makes sense they do more. I'm a reasonable person who deals in facts. Not sure of your point, though.

If being opposed to criminalization of currently legal gun rights is "absolutist", I plead guilty as charged.
 

PDinDetroit

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2009
Messages
2,328
Location
SE, Michigan, USA
Changed my mind. Won't waste my breath on this thread. It'll be fun to watch you guys get worked up on a bill that'll never see committee though.

Don't forget to take your blood pressure medication.

Didn't we see Royal Oak, Berkley, and Huntington Woods try to Ban Firearms from Public Buildings back in 2010 (and some of us showed up to discuss the matter with them)? Doesn't Jim Townsend (D) Represent those Districts, who we see as one of the Three (3) Bill Sponsors?

BTW - There is another bill to Ban Firearms from Public Libraries by these same Three (3) Bill Sponsors:

http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?2013-HB-4105

With only Three (3) Bill Sponsors, it seems unlikely to even be heard in Committee, but these did get referred to the Committee on Local Government so I am not sure about that Committee. I am torn between:

1) Give these bills the attention they deserve: None

2) Write My Representative and give him a piece of my mind.
 

HKcarrier

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2011
Messages
816
Location
michigan
I will bring up SB 59 as often as need be as a reminder of this particular present threat to OC, until it is no longer a present threat to OC. It will cease being a present threat when the MI gun orgs state they are no longer in the business of criminalizing OC to advance their own or others' agendas.



Didn't we already hash this out? If you were for shall issue CPL, then you are operating on a logical fallacy. It was shown to you that the shall issue law did exactly what you are so against in SB59. Grant a right for many more people than it removed a right from, and it did indeed remove rights.

Your droning has long passed over to harping and beating a dead horse.

Before you further damage your credibility I suggest you abandon your repeated error.

You are making yourself look petty and immature with the repeated pokes and stabs.
 

detroit_fan

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2009
Messages
1,172
Location
Monroe, Michigan, USA
Didn't we already hash this out? If you were for shall issue CPL, then you are operating on a logical fallacy. It was shown to you that the shall issue law did exactly what you are so against in SB59. Grant a right for many more people than it removed a right from, and it did indeed remove rights.

Your droning has long passed over to harping and beating a dead horse.

Before you further damage your credibility I suggest you abandon your repeated error.

You are making yourself look petty and immature with the repeated pokes and stabs.

+1. it's to the point that i don't even enjoy coming here anymore, every thread turns into DanM on his soapbox, and it's been going on for over a month now.
 

DrTodd

Michigan Moderator
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,272
Location
Hudsonville , Michigan, USA
Perhaps since the bill further limits CC in addition to adding yet another area where a CPL holder won't be able to legally Conceal Carry, the chances of this passing are slim. However, if it did get through the legislature, the Governor would most likely sign it.
 

Big Gay Al

Michigan Moderator
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
1,944
Location
Mason, Michigan, USA
Changed my mind. Won't waste my breath on this thread. It'll be fun to watch you guys get worked up on a bill that'll never see committee though.

Don't forget to take your blood pressure medication.
Considering the bill is sponsored by 3 Dems, I agree with you. I don't think it will get out of committee.
 
Top