house votes overwhelmingly to repeal purchase permit/registration

[Jared]

Just a point of clarification:

California law very closely resembles Federal law... one of a few states that does.. The OCers in San Diego, and elsewhere in CA, were pretty diligent in providing maps to participants of these walks which detailed where the relevant school zones were. Therefore, if someone would have violated a zone, I'm pretty sure they would have been charged because, like I said, state law also prohibits carry near a school.

Just one example, but moot because OC of a handgun is now illegal in CA: (found here: http://nc.opencarry.org/forums/show...Carry-Meet-8&p=1414693&viewfull=1#post1414693)

Weekly San Diego Open Carry Meet 8

Hi everyone!

FireMark and I thought it might be fun to mix things up a bit so this week I tried to get ahold of the management at a local pool hall that I really like. As things turned out, that place will have to wait for maybe next week.

But the good news is this: I just spoke with the manager of another neighborhood poolhall in Clairemont and we are all set for this Monday night at 7 pm. He was very welcoming, says they don't discriminate against anyone and as Mondays are pretty quiet they'd love to have us. I checked the surrounding area and it is outside of any "only criminals get to have guns because this is a gun-free-school-zone so please don't hurt me" restriction.

They have large and small tables, food, drinks, everything. There is also a Dolci Mango frozen yogurt place there that is very good if you've got a sweet tooth. The address is below.

Hungry Stick
4664 Clairemont Mesa Boulevard, San Diego, CA 92117-2005
858-272-1412

Sorry for the late notice but that's how it worked out.

I'll be there at 7 with my girlfriend, the bartender is Wes, the manager is Gary. Be sure to say hello. Bring a newbie/friend/significant other/possible love interest AND YOUR RECORDER LOCKED ON AND RECORDING and I'll see you all there!

Sam​

The California GFSZ is different than the federal version. The federal applies to firearms for public and private schools. The California version only applies to handguns and it only applies to public schools. Regarding the other issue, I didn't intend for it to become a ******* contest. My apologies, PM sent.

 

[DrTodd]

Info sent in PM..

 

[TheQ]

Your argument assumes that the feds would only charge you with a GFSZA violation. Usually, the largest number of charges possible are levied in the hope that one would stick.

However, I can answer affirmatively that there was a sole charge of violating the GFSZA, and yes, the person was convicted. see: United States v Danks (Eighth Circuit 1999)

Could you link me to some details on the case? I'm very curious.

 

[DrTodd]

Could you link me to some details on the case? I'm very curious.

Try this link. He was only charged with possession... and was convicted.

http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-8th-circuit/1296266.html

 

[DrTodd]

California Penal Code § 626.9(a) This section shall be known, and may be cited, as the Gun-Free School Zone Act of 1995.(b) Any person who possesses a firearm in a place that the person knows, or reasonably should know, is a school zone, as defined in paragraph (1) of subdivision (e), unless it is with the written permission of the school district superintendent, his or her designee, or equivalent school authority, shall be punished as specified in subdivision (f).(e) As used in this section, the following definitions shall apply:​

(1) "School zone" means an area in, or on the grounds of, a public or private school providing instruction in kindergarten or grades 1 to 12, inclusive, or within a distance of 1,000 feet from the grounds of the public or private school.
​

​

http://www.ci.manhattan-beach.ca.us/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=7102

 

[Jared]

Purchase Permits may not be a safe haven

I've looked over the permit to purchase law and I think that the permit to purchase may not be the safe haven you all think it is.

Please follow this carefully before you anti HB 5225 folks jump all over me.

A purchase permit is a license to possess; however, once you went through the process and registered the gun, you are no longer under the license to purchase. You are now just a lawful handgun owner.

A license to purchase also expires in 10 days after issuance. Therefore; after 10 days, the license expires. While you are a lawful possessor of the handgun, you are no longer licensed to possess. Think of it as a one time usable and then disposable license. Once you use the license, it is expired and its purpose served.

The GFSZ says that you must have a valid license to possess or carry. Once the license to purchase expires, you no longer have a valid license to possess as understood under the federal law.

This is why the purchase permit is not going to cover you if the DOJ under Obama decides to crack down on you non CPL holders.

I know the Michigan Attorney General's Office has taken the position that a license can mean permission (machine gun opinion) and that some on here have broadly applied that to the purchase permit law. Keep in mind that the AG's opinion doesn't mean squat to the Feds and nothing from the GFSZ points to supporting the purchase permit theory.

We could speculate on here but before you all call your senators to kill the bill, please know that you are most likely wrong on the purchase permit theory and that it will do NOTHING to protect a non CPL holder from a GFSZ charge if one was ever to come to fruition.

Many people on Calguns (people close to Alan Gura and Alan Gura himself) are great people to run legal theories by, and from what I've gathered from their circle, at least one of them thinks that the purchase permit theory on here is laughable.

Purchase Permit from Hawaii = valid for 1 year (long arms).
Purchase Permit from Iowa = valid for 5 years.
Purchase Permit from Minnesota = valid for 5 years.
Certificate of Eligibility from California = valid for 1 year.
Purchase Permit from New Jersey = valid for life (FID Card for long arms).
Purchase Permit from Michigan = valid for 10 days then it's expired and you no longer have it.

 

[TheQ]

Not sure I can buy into the 10 days. From 28.422:

(4) Applications for licenses under this section shall be signed by the applicant under oath upon forms provided by the director of the department of state police. Licenses to purchase, carry, possess, or transport pistols shall be executed in quadruplicate upon forms provided by the director of the department of state police and shall be signed by the licensing authority. Four copies of the license shall be delivered to the applicant by the licensing authority. A license is void unless used within 10 days after the date it is issued.

So if it's used, it's not void...?

 

[Venator]

I've looked over the permit to purchase law and I think that the permit to purchase may not be the safe haven you all think it is.

Please follow this carefully before you anti HB 5225 folks jump all over me.

A purchase permit is a license to possess; however, once you went through the process and registered the gun, you are no longer under the license to purchase. You are now just a lawful handgun owner.

A license to purchase also expires in 10 days after issuance. Therefore; after 10 days, the license expires. While you are a lawful possessor of the handgun, you are no longer licensed to possess. Think of it as a one time usable and then disposable license. Once you use the license, it is expired and its purpose served.

The GFSZ says that you must have a valid license to possess or carry. Once the license to purchase expires, you no longer have a valid license to possess as understood under the federal law.

This is why the purchase permit is not going to cover you if the DOJ under Obama decides to crack down on you non CPL holders.

I know the Michigan Attorney General's Office has taken the position that a license can mean permission (machine gun opinion) and that some on here have broadly applied that to the purchase permit law. Keep in mind that the AG's opinion doesn't mean squat to the Feds and nothing from the GFSZ points to supporting the purchase permit theory.

We could speculate on here but before you all call your senators to kill the bill, please know that you are most likely wrong on the purchase permit theory and that it will do NOTHING to protect a non CPL holder from a GFSZ charge if one was ever to come to fruition.

Many people on Calguns (people close to Alan Gura and Alan Gura himself) are great people to run legal theories by, and from what I've gathered from their circle, at least one of them thinks that the purchase permit theory on here is laughable.

Purchase Permit from Hawaii = valid for 1 year (long arms).
Purchase Permit from Iowa = valid for 5 years.
Purchase Permit from Minnesota = valid for 5 years.
Certificate of Eligibility from California = valid for 1 year.
Purchase Permit from New Jersey = valid for life (FID Card for long arms).
Purchase Permit from Michigan = valid for 10 days then it's expired and you no longer have it.

While this is an argument we have heard before, the fact remains you need to get a license to possess the handgun and a background check is done and it's issued by the state....SO one could argue that you have met the Federal requirements. In essence you are licensed to possess the handgun until you die or no longer possess that handgun.

 

[stainless1911]

while this is an argument we have heard before, the fact remains you need to get a license to possess the handgun and a background check is done and it's issued by the state....so one could argue that you have met the federal requirements. In essence you are licensed to possess the handgun until you die or no longer possess that handgun.

+1

 

[Big Gay Al]

In case you all didn't know, MCRGO "the largest gun rights group in Michigan" is pushing to get this law passed. They say they got Shall issue passed, and they'll get this passed also.

Just in case you didn't know.

 

[Jared]

Not sure I can buy into the 10 days. From 28.422:



So if it's used, it's not void...?

If it's used, then it's consumed.

Also, there is an expiration date right on the license. That does not help.

Assume for the moment that a GFSZ charge was levied by the U.S. Attorney, I don't think the argument that the license is valid for life if you use it would be considered for a second.

 

[DrTodd]

Actually, Jared is correct. I posted regarding this issue quite a while back and received many of the same type of responses that I see here now (Good memory, Venator). (I just PMd Jared the same info before I even got to the Michigan forum... Oh silly me) Basically, that License is a license to buy the pistol and bring it down to your PD to register it. You have 10 days to do it. Many PDs demand you give the license back if you don't end up registering the pistol within the 10 days. I don't think they would do this if the license was valid for "life".
However, I do think it is silly that MI demands of residents of other states that they do something that, were the facts reversed, a Michigan resident could not do-- namely produce a license to possess a pistol (different than a CPL) if they wish to possess a pistol in the state.

 

[DrTodd]

While this is an argument we have heard before, the fact remains you need to get a license to possess the handgun and a background check is done and it's issued by the state....SO one could argue that you have met the Federal requirements. In essence you are licensed to possess the handgun until you die or no longer possess that handgun.

Yep, it is an argument...and you will have your argument... and since the onus of proof is on those claiming an exception to law (People v Henderson, 1974)... who wins??

 

[Glock9mmOldStyle]

I think this will become law...

This whole debate may be a moot point. I see this being passed simply because the vast majority of PD's do not want to deal with issuing permits. Plus they do not make money on it. If they did, you could bet they would be trying to defeat this bill with all the resources they could muster. So far that's not the case people. Follow the money...follow the money...if it's not there, neither are our sworn reps, which at times can be a very good thing

Remember some of the scariest words in the English language are: "I'm from the government and I'm here to help". Doh!

 

[stainless1911]

If it's used, then it's consumed.

Also, there is an expiration date right on the license. That does not help.

Assume for the moment that a GFSZ charge was levied by the U.S. Attorney, I don't think the argument that the license is valid for life if you use it would be considered for a second.

Actually, Jared is correct. I posted regarding this issue quite a while back and received many of the same type of responses that I see here now (Good memory, Venator). (I just PMd Jared the same info before I even got to the Michigan forum... Oh silly me) Basically, that License is a license to buy the pistol and bring it down to your PD to register it. You have 10 days to do it. Many PDs demand you give the license back if you don't end up registering the pistol within the 10 days. I don't think they would do this if the license was valid for "life".
However, I do think it is silly that MI demands of residents of other states that they do something that, were the facts reversed, a Michigan resident could not do-- namely produce a license to possess a pistol (different than a CPL) if they wish to possess a pistol in the state.

But the gun has been registered to the individual for life once the license is turned in.

The license has several facets,
the License
to purchase
posess
transport
and so on.

The purchase has the expiration date.
The rest of it does not. Otherwise, the gun and person checked by the police after 10 days would not be able to posess, or transport, as the license would have expired after that 10 days.

 

[smellslikemichigan]

i can tell you from personal experience of myself, my family, my friends and from the experiences i've read, that the permit is a HUGE inconvenience. regardless of civil rights questions, it's EXTREMELY inconvenient almost to the point of being prohibitive to people with jobs in some municipalities. just a few examples:
st clair, where i used to live was not too bad until they pulled this crap (or tried to on my wife):
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...ictory-in-Saint-Clair-MI-regarding-preemption

a friend of mine had trouble in ferndale, he is far from the first or the last, he ended up side-stepping them and just getting his CPL:
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...erndale-do-they-just-like-messing-with-people

another one from ferndale:
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?64253-Ferndale-Police-Department-problem

these examples are just a drop in the bucket. i've read numerous complaints of police departments imposing waiting periods, notary fees and ridiculously short business hours for permits. so besides being a violation of the 2A, these permits are a major nuisance and need to be GONE.

 

[stainless1911]

I too had a SNAFU just a couple weeks ago as a result of this infringement.

 

[Jared]

But the gun has been registered to the individual for life once the license is turned in.

The license has several facets,
the License
to purchase
posess
transport
and so on.

The purchase has the expiration date.
The rest of it does not. Otherwise, the gun and person checked by the police after 10 days would not be able to posess, or transport, as the license would have expired after that 10 days.

Incorrect Neil. The license itself has an expiration date. The law then automatically extends the license from 10 days to 30 days for the purpose of transporting the gun that was just acquired on your purchase license. The license is no longer valid in any manner after 30 days. You simply just have a lawful handgun.

I know some people want really would like to think this purchase permit thing is a godsend but chances are that the purchase permit argument would not keep you out of jail if a GFSZ charge ever came about.

 

[Jared]

i can tell you from personal experience of myself, my family, my friends and from the experiences i've read, that the permit is a HUGE inconvenience. regardless of civil rights questions, it's EXTREMELY inconvenient almost to the point of being prohibitive to people with jobs in some municipalities. just a few examples:
st clair, where i used to live was not too bad until they pulled this crap (or tried to on my wife):
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...ictory-in-Saint-Clair-MI-regarding-preemption

a friend of mine had trouble in ferndale, he is far from the first or the last, he ended up side-stepping them and just getting his CPL:
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...erndale-do-they-just-like-messing-with-people

another one from ferndale:
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?64253-Ferndale-Police-Department-problem

these examples are just a drop in the bucket. i've read numerous complaints of police departments imposing waiting periods, notary fees and ridiculously short business hours for permits. so besides being a violation of the 2A, these permits are a major nuisance and need to be GONE.

Sarcasm on.


Are you sure? I mean, it's a small price to pay so that the few people without CPL's who carry to not be affected by one of the most unenforced federal gun laws in history.

Even though this purchase permit lifetime license concept is extremely rocky at best, it's worth putting up with.

Just deal with the purchase permit abuse, be a good citizen and take the time off work and jump through all their hoops and consider it a sense of nationalism and a tribute to the Klu Klux Klan to go register that gun, just as they intended for you to do back when the law was written.

Sarcasm off.

 

[Jared]

This whole debate may be a moot point. I see this being passed simply because the vast majority of PD's do not want to deal with issuing permits. Plus they do not make money on it. If they did, you could bet they would be trying to defeat this bill with all the resources they could muster. So far that's not the case people. Follow the money...follow the money...if it's not there, neither are our sworn reps, which at times can be a very good thing

I never thought that the vast majority of PD's would be supportive of HB 5225, that's good to hear. Hopefully the voice of the municipal government get their way over the battered gun owners who will call to continue their abusive relationship.

WOW, I never thought I would be support the municipal governments and local police on any bill regarding guns. I guess there is a first time for everything.

I'm just glad that if the purchase permit repeal happens then handgun ownership will be open to a whole new class of people that are in limbo because they can possess federally but not under Michigan law.