Open Carry Grocery Store Wanted.

[Guest]

imported post

???

750.231a isn't even mentioned in 750.227.

 

[SpringerXDacp]

imported post

CV67PAT wrote:

???

750.231a isn't even mentioned in 750.227.

750.231a is exceptions to 750.227.

Section 227:

(2) A person shall not carry a pistol concealed on or about his or her person, or, whether concealed or otherwise, in a vehicle operated or occupied by the person, except in his or her dwelling house, place of business, or on other land possessed by the person, without a license to carry the pistol as provided by law and if licensed, shall not carry the pistol in a place or manner inconsistent with any restrictions upon such license.

Section 231a, Lawful Purpose,(i)--->(vii) applies to Section 227. However, Section 234d prohibits possession of firearms on the "premises" of (a)--->(h) under Subsection (1) of 234d.

 

[stainless1911]

imported post

Thats why I park next door, and walk over. Unarmed, even though its against the Michigan constitution, which is made invalid by the laws mentioned above.

a privilege, not a right

 

[SpringerXDacp]

imported post

stainless1911 wrote:

Thats why I park next door, and walk over. Unarmed, even though its against the Michigan constitution, which is made invalid by the laws mentioned above.

a privilege, not a right

And that would be legal per 750.231a, but then, that would depend on what's next door where you park.

(b) "Lawful purpose" includes the following:

(i) While en route to or from a hunting or target shooting area.

(ii) While transporting a pistol en route to or from his or her home or place of business and place of repair.

(iii) While moving goods from 1 place of abode or business to another place of abode or business.

(iv) While transporting a licensed pistol en route to or from a law enforcement agency or for the purpose of having a law enforcement official take possession of the weapon.

(v) While en route to or from his or her abode or place of business and a gun show or places of purchase or sale.

(vi) While en route to or from his or her abode to a public shooting facility or public land where discharge of firearms is permitted by law, rule, regulation, or local ordinance.

(vii) While en route to or from his or her abode to a private property location where the pistol is to be used as is permitted by law, rule, regulation, or local ordinance.

 

[Guest]

imported post

SpringerXDacp wrote:

CV67PAT wrote:

???

750.231a isn't even mentioned in 750.227.

750.231a is exceptions to 750.227.

Section 227:

(2) A person shall not carry a pistol concealed on or about his or her person, or, whether concealed or otherwise, in a vehicle operated or occupied by the person, except in his or her dwelling house, place of business, or on other land possessed by the person, without a license to carry the pistol as provided by law and if licensed, shall not carry the pistol in a place or manner inconsistent with any restrictions upon such license.

Section 231a, Lawful Purpose, (i)--->(vii) applies to Section 227. However, Section 234d prohibits possession of firearms on the "premises" of (a)--->(h) under Subsection (1) of 234d.

Is transportation and possession the same?

Is it in possession if unloaded in the trunk?

I can just see someone getting jacked on this one.

 

[stainless1911]

imported post

SpringerXDacp wrote:

stainless1911 wrote:

Thats why I park next door, and walk over. Unarmed, even though its against the Michigan constitution, which is made invalid by the laws mentioned above.

a privilege, not a right

And that would be legal per 750.231a, but then, that would depend on what's next door where you park.

(b) "Lawful purpose" includes the following:

(iii) While moving goods from 1 place of abode or business to another place of abode or business.

(vii) While en route to or from his or her abode to a private property location where the pistol is to be used as is permitted by law, rule, regulation, or local ordinance.

^^Theres the moving goods thing, (iii), and ths last one, (vii), where the pistol is to be used as permitted, etc.. I would fall back on the constitution, as allowing one to open cary as being permitted by law, etc...

As I understand it, there is no case law, but otherwise,almost everything we do as OC would be in violation. Thats why I bolded the word "includes" the following.

I have been very concerned with this problem, both for myself, and for any one of us.

I would very much like everyones thoughts on this problem.


^ pat, I really dont know yet, Ive been trying to pin this down since my case.

 

[Guest]

imported post

stainless1911 wrote:

SpringerXDacp wrote:

stainless1911 wrote:

Thats why I park next door, and walk over. Unarmed, even though its against the Michigan constitution, which is made invalid by the laws mentioned above.

a privilege, not a right

And that would be legal per 750.231a, but then, that would depend on what's next door where you park.

(b) "Lawful purpose" includes the following:

(iii) While moving goods from 1 place of abode or business to another place of abode or business.

(vii) While en route to or from his or her abode to a private property location where the pistol is to be used as is permitted by law, rule, regulation, or local ordinance.

^^Theres the moving goods thing, (iii), and ths last one, (vii), where the pistol is to be used as permitted, etc.. I would fall back on the constitution, as allowing one to open cary as being permitted by law, etc...

As I understand it, there is no case law, but otherwise,almost everything we do as OC would be in violation. Thats why I bolded the word "includes" the following.

I have been very concerned with this problem, both for myself, and for any one of us.

I would very much like everyones thoughts on this problem.


^ pat, I really dont know yet, Ive been trying to pin this down since my case.

There is no case law for the lawful purposes.

There have been some plea bargains to it though to prevent trial for more serious charges.

There just is not anything, that I am aware of, to define if the list is exclusively or inclusive.

 

[stainless1911]

imported post

Thats my understanding of the situation as well.

And thats one reason Im concerned that myself, or someone else might get screwed.

Be careful about probable cause, and RAS. And do not consent to searches.

 

[sprinklerguy28]

imported post

Remember it states "lawful purposes include. It is not all inclusive, but just a partial list of what is legal.

 

[SpringerXDacp]

imported post

sprinklerguy28 wrote:

Remember it states "lawful purposes include. It is not all inclusive, but just a partial list of what is legal.

Most of us here would agree and possibly MSP, however, there are far too many folks (LEO's for example) that would disagree. Unfortunately, there's no OAG or case law that I'm aware of that indicates/proves that it is or is not inclusive. From my understanding, there are Bills in place to amend 231a.

 

[stainless1911]

imported post

^ correct

BTW, what do we do to help move these bills along? I have contacted the state reps via email, and have met personally with mine laready.

 

[Kusala]

imported post