If I refuse to show my ID/CPL I will not be charged with any "stop and ID" violation as Michigan doesn't have one, however, I will be charged with the mcl 750.234d violation. . . .
The elements of the crime of carrying in a MCL 750.234d area are:
1. Possession of a firearm.
2. In one of the listed places (banks, Alcohol Licensee, etc)
You are missing a third element, which is in the law:
3. Not a person fitting the listed exceptions to MCL 750.234d
An officer is free to
investigate whethor or not you are in violation of all three of these elements, however he may not legally
detain/arrest you until he has RAS or PC that you are in violation of all three. You are legally free to not talk to him or provide ID during his
investigation (you are not being detained/arrested), AND legally you are
free to go while he is investigating (you are legally not being detained/arrested). He he may not legally
detain/arrest you without RAS or PC that you are in violation of all three elements.
You are OCing in a Bank:
Element 1 is evidenced by the pistol being clearly seen on your belt (possession)
Element 2: You are in a Bank (defined by state law but probably pretty apparent)
That is the crime... the ONLY elements. Upon seeing this the officer now not only has Reasonable Suspicion but also PC to arrest on the MCL 750.234d misedemeanor.
No. You must include the third element mentioned. Upon seeing you, the officer must have RAS or PC that you are not an excepted person to go beyond investigation to detention/arrest of you. He can try to ascertain the third element with all the legal powers at his disposal just short of detention/arrest of you, but bottom line is, legally, he may try to engage you in a voluntary stop and answering questions/showing ID, but he may not legally detain/arrest you for suspected violation of MCL 750.234d unless he has RAS or PC that you are in violation of the THREE elements discussed (not just the two you cite).
If we took the logic of posters here who thinks that an officer needs to have a reasonable suspicion of the exceptions to the laws, this is what we would have:
1. Can't even investigate a person smoking Marijuana on their front yard unless the officer ascertains that the person doesn't have a Medical Marijuana Card? If I ask for ID, have I turned Michigan into a Stop and ID state and violate the 4th Amendment??
2. Driving by a house late in the eveneing and see someone breaking into a house; oh, can't investigate unless the officer knows for certain that the person is not the homeowner. If the officer does go and ask for ID to prove the person lives there, they somehow turn Michigan into a "stop and ID" state?
No one is prohibiting the officer from
investigating. The officer is prohibited from
detaining or
arresting a person without RAS or PC.
3. Actually, since "insanity at the time of the crime" is a defense to any crime, under your logic, police officers would need to prove that a person is NOT insane at the time of the crime in order to even question a suspect they see most likely breaking a law, let alone arrest.
So, since the arrest and or detention for any crime at anytime is most likely just a pretext to ID you, and because you think that the officer needs to prove you ARE NOT an exception (insane), you will sue under your 4th Amendment rights, and win.
Good luck with that...
Insanity is not a defense, in the sense of a finding of whether or not you are committing or have committed a crime. It is a defense against you being found wholly or partially responsible
for a crime you have been found to have committed. Notice, the question of whether or not you are committing or have committed a crime has been settled. The question of insanity comes
after it is determined you have committed a crime, not during the investigation into whether or not you are committing a crime. During the investigation into whether or not a person is in the act of committing a crime (such as MCL 750.234d violation) RAS and PC being legally established before a proper detention/arrest is made is completely required.