• 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.

A statement from the leadership of Michigan Open Carry on the Passage of SB 59

Status
Not open for further replies.

Big Gay Al

Michigan Moderator
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
1,944
Location
Mason, Michigan, USA
I took CQT Handgun 1 which meets the requirements or an advanced CPL. $150

Handgun 1- Meets Pistol Free Zone Exemption Requirements Hide Details Course Fee: $150.00
9-Hour Course
Practical classroom drills, lectures
Introduction to dynamic shooting...

http://www.cqtusa.com/main/Training.aspx
Well, $150.00 isn't too bad. As for the 250 rounds, I usually have at least 500 rounds on hand for each handgun I typically carry, so that's no big deal either. Thing is, I already took this course once. It was a charity event that SAFR put on. Back then it cost me $50.00, plus the ammo I used. I took 300 rounds, and I don't think I used more than 150. The course it's self was a lot of fun. I gotta find the instructor and see what he charges for it under normal circumstances.
 

Big Gay Al

Michigan Moderator
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
1,944
Location
Mason, Michigan, USA
I fully expect to see PPOTH(or equivalent) for $100. It may not be the best instructor, but I think it will be available at that price-point.
The last thing I'm concerned about is the instructor. :) I've already taken the course once. Granted it was several years ago, and I didn't get a certificate or any thing, but it was a charity event, and the money went to support families of Jackson County National Guardsmen who were on duty overseas.

For $100.00, I'll be happy with that, even if what I get is a repeat of the New Orleans training class that crammed 12 hours into "3" in order to be certified as being able to work armed security in Louisiana. (That was a real joke. Now I know for certain why New Orleans is called "The Big Easy." )
 

Michigander

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2007
Messages
4,818
Location
Mulligan's Valley
Because overall there is more good in the bill than bad? Because it eliminates PFZs for potentially 340,000 Michigan CPL holders? Because it codifies lawful firearms carry in former PFZs so gun-owners don't have to worry about judges like Aquilina deciding what a law states because it appears to have an unintentional loophole?

Case law sometimes has to be made, and it's not easy. Activist judges are a problem, but a workable one.

I do think this is important to clarify, for anyone with any lingering confusion. Any resident of any state with any permit or license to carry concealed in any state can OC in Michigan's CEZ's. We are talking about the entirety of every permit holder in the united states. The fact that most people don't is not our problem, because it's their personal choice. Very much like so many people make the personal choice to CC in CEZ's anyway.

This bill in no way shape or form promotes freedom, and it's important that everyone understand that. Not only will it push out millions of people from eligability to carry, it will also push out residents who can't afford to take the added class, and these are indeed the sorts who often most need to carry.

It is definitely an evil move on the part of our state government. I won't quite call it treasonous, but certainly outrageous.
 
Last edited:

griffin

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Messages
871
Location
Okemos, MI
Case law sometimes has to be made, and it's not easy. Activist judges are a problem, but a workable one.

I agree. I personally wasn't worried about any liability in the OC in PFZ loophole, and was prepared to take it (and another scenario) to court if necessary. Others didn't want to chance it, and I understand that, too. I can't tell others how to carry, I can only control what I do and I wasn't worried about Aquilina.

But I think we must realize that all the MI gun groups wanted SB59 and our congresscritters were prepared to make compromises to get it. MOC got thrown under the bus, and the changes in the bill and its passage are both out of our hands.

I do NOT like the OC changes or the new, BS training requirement, but all we can do is make the best out of the situation we find ourselves in. There are good things in this bill that help everyone.
 

SpringerXDacp

New member
Joined
May 12, 2006
Messages
3,341
Location
Burton, Michigan
Case law sometimes has to be made, and it's not easy. Activist judges are a problem, but a workable one.

I do think this is important to clarify, for anyone with any lingering confusion. Any resident of any state with any permit or license to carry concealed in any state can OC in Michigan's CEZ's. We are talking about the entirety of every permit holder in the united states. The fact that most people don't is not our problem, because it's their personal choice. Very much like so many people make the personal choice to CC in CEZ's anyway.

This bill in no way shape or form promotes freedom, and it's important that everyone understand that. Not only will it push out millions of people from eligability to carry, it will also push out residents who can't afford to take the added class, and these are indeed the sorts who often most need to carry.

It is definitely an evil move on the part of our state government. I won't quite call it treasonous, but certainly outrageous.

If SB 59 is signed into law - I suspect it will - perhaps the leaders that be from MOC [RAP], could find it in their heart of hearts, to arrange a fundraiser type class like they did previously for CPL's to aid with the financial burden for many.

*Now heading to underground bunker*
 

Tucker6900

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2008
Messages
1,279
Location
Iowa, USA
If SB 59 is signed into law - I suspect it will - perhaps the leaders that be from MOC [RAP], could find it in their heart of hearts, to arrange a fundraiser type class like they did previously for CPL's to aid with the financial burden for many.

*Now heading to underground bunker*

Supporting this is just more of the same BS from the politicians to the people. Groups like MOC will always bow to the .gov. This bill is proof. The govenor didnt like the concealed carry, so they gave him open carry. And instead of leaving a very arguable legal carry option in play, they kiss the feet of the master. Im disappointed.

COMMENTS REMOVED BY ADMINISTRATOR: Attacks on another gun rights group
 
Last edited by a moderator:

scot623

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
1,421
Location
Eastpointe, Michigan, USA
Supporting this is just more of the same BS from the politicians to the people. Groups like MOC will always bow to the .gov. This bill is proof. The govenor didnt like the concealed carry, so they gave him open carry. And instead of leaving a very arguable legal carry option in play, they kiss the feet of the master. Im disappointed.

COMMENTS REMOVED BY ADMINISTRATOR: Attacks on another gun rights group"

CPL holders in MI...340,000+. MOC members 200+. Who do you think wins that fight?

This bill most likely gets passed without our support. So what do we gain by pi$$ing off 340,000 active gun owners/CPL holders?????

This had zero to do with "bowing to .gov" and everything to do with "bowing to the 98% of the gun owners in MI". OCers are but a minute fraction of MI gun owners and we need their support for other legislation we want passed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Michigander

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2007
Messages
4,818
Location
Mulligan's Valley
This had zero to do with "bowing to .gov" and everything to do with "bowing to the 98% of the gun owners in MI". OCers are but a minute fraction of MI gun owners and we need their support for other legislation we want passed.

That's easy for you to say. Less easy to accept for someone who was actually here since the very beginning, on this forum and open carrying, when that 98% dismissed us as crazy and bound to get arrested. I do not mean to belittle everything you've done, because you've done a whole lot more than most people, but I can't imagine any way in any context where any of us should feel the need to bow down and kiss the ass of CCing fuds who have NEVER helped us, not once. And oh boy does that include MCRGO, at least in terms of everything that has happened since their Ferndale case.
 
Last edited:

TheQ

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2010
Messages
3,379
Location
Lansing, Michigan
If you don't wish to address what I said, I'm having a hard time understanding your reason behind commenting.

You bring it up every few weeks. It's hard for any if us to forget how wonderfully brave you are!

I'm unsure why you feel the need to constantly mention it.
 
Last edited:

Michigander

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2007
Messages
4,818
Location
Mulligan's Valley
You bring it up every few weeks. It's hard for any if us to forget how wonderfully brave you are!

I'm unsure why you feel the need to constantly mention it.

If you'd read what I was getting at, rather than trying to use it as a chance to insult me, (and you sure love to insult people, quite a bit more often than you're accusing me of bragging, by the way) you'd have comprehended the point, which is that saying we should be concerned for the happiness of fuds who have never helped us, is ridiculous. It is also ridiculous by the way, to imply in any way that I would question the bravery of the majority of regulars here, certainly including scot623. Bravery is not an issue here in the slightest, apart from the extent you may choose to make it one.

Protecting and expanding freedom and liberty should be our goal. Though I am somewhat content with the idea of the general population becoming more skilled at shooting and avoiding conflicts altogether, I do feel that we owe absolutely nothing to people who have persistently turned their back on us, and worse. Nor do I feel that this would be good at gaining credibility with other gun organizations, or for gaining traction with laws, considering that not even the mighty AZCDL has been able to get the must CC law repealed in terms of businesses where alcohol is sold for on site consumption. I have a feeling it will end up being a whole lot easier to give away than to take back.
 
Last edited:

Shadow Bear

Michigan Moderator
Joined
Dec 17, 2010
Messages
1,004
Location
Grand Rapids
Everybody who TRULY feels that this is a bad thing, call your representative first thing Monday morning. Seriously.

Understand, though, that with your call, its one more nail in OC; I have no doubt that if there is much opposition, they'll kill the bill, and introduce a new one closing the OC in a PFZ 'loophole', a loophole which may not even really exist except in our fevered imaginations.

As for me, I completely agree with MOC's position that it is the best that can be hoped for, under the circumstances, and worthy of support.

Now, as moderator, if we don't stop the personal sniping, I'll lock this thread up.
 

Michigander

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2007
Messages
4,818
Location
Mulligan's Valley
Understand, though, that with your call, its one more nail in OC; I have no doubt that if there is much opposition, they'll kill the bill, and introduce a new one closing the OC in a PFZ 'loophole', a loophole which may not even really exist except in our fevered imaginations.

If the possibility of a "loophole closing" law can be verified in the form of confirmed votes from the house and senate, I do believe that 19 in 20 people here will agree that we NEED to push for this bill to pass.

The issue is that without proof of this, it cannot be substantiated, and there will be significant debate. I would venture to guess that it's less likely than some would think, because if this bill, largely seen as pro gun by the public, is getting ready to pass, I have a hard time seeing why they would pass a law blatantly anti gun, with no other values other than to be anti gun. That would piss some people off, maybe not like a state wide klinton style ban, but it would still be a slap in the face to gun owners from politicians who claim to be pro gun. Seems at least a bit far fetched, in my mind, but I am open to being wrong. And if I can be proven wrong, I will help you guys lobby to pass 59.
 
Last edited:

griffin

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Messages
871
Location
Okemos, MI
That's easy for you to say. Less easy to accept for someone who was actually here since the very beginning, on this forum and open carrying, when that 98% dismissed us as crazy and bound to get arrested.

Michigander, first let me personally thank you for being in the forefront of OC in Michigan, and I am not saying that simply because of the above. I have only been open carrying for about 16 months, but I have publicly thanked those of you that have gone before me, paving the way, twice here in OCDO-Michigan in those 16 months. If this site's search feature was any good I would link them for you. Suffice it to say that I really do appreciate what you and others have gone through in Michigan for all of us. I have watched all the youtube videos and listened to the audio recordings of LEO encounters. I have read the posted descriptions of LEO confrontations and downloaded court transcripts. I have more recently been witness to events unfold in court cases such as CADL, Birmingham, and Warren. I have seen people denied the right to vote while lawfully open carrying. But I have also seen newspapers and public figures declare that OC is legal, even in such places as K-12 schools, and that police are abusing the rights of open carriers.

This is huge.

And this is entirely due to people like you who knew the law and exercised your rights when others would not. Thank you.

In light of your history I understand your zeal and steadfastness, but I would ask you to temper it with reason and pragmatism. This is not easy, and I can speak from experience.

A number of years ago I divorced my starter wife. I wanted to be fair. I even bent over backward where it was quite unfair for me. One day in the court building (but not in court) I reached the tipping point. I had given and given and I would not give any more. I immediately adopted a "scorched earth" policy, fifty feet from a judge who would now decide my fate within the hour. I won a Pyrrhic victory that day. Afterward, on the street near the capitol, I asked my attorney why he didn't stop me. I was too emotionally involved, and I paid him to be my legal adviser. I fired him on the spot on that street corner.**

I see that happening here. Some people are so personally invested in the trench warfare history of open carry in Michigan (and I mean that in a good way) that they see any compromise as a retreat and a betrayal, and I can't blame you, not one little bit. I found it hard to see the bigger picture when I was personally attacked over and over again, and I don't blame you if you do as well.

And because of my anger what I closed my eyes to were the real realities, neither of which were the reality that I wanted, the reality that was at least somewhat fair and right. I never clearly saw my "real" two choices, both of which sucked. I should have chosen the one that sucked less. I would have come out better myself, but I let my anger rule me and I personally lost more. Of course, so did my ex. I made her pay, but it cost me dearly as well.

That's what we have here. We are not going to get a clean PFZ-elimination bill. We have two choices: either support the bill in its current form, which overall--even though flawed with unnecessary training and costs and the restriction of OC in PFZs--is a large win for the Michigan firearms community as a whole and is supported by them, or oppose the bill, endure the enmity of the Michigan firearms community and lose their goodwill that we will need in the future, and still not get what we want. Do we want to go scorched earth on this? We will make them pay, but we will lose as well. We're going to lose PFZ OC either way. The question is, do you want to alienate the rest of the firearms community or do you want to support them in extending the rights (or at least privileges) of all CPL owners?

Either way we do not get what we want.

I humbly ask you to consider this. Thank you.

Dan

** My divorce wasn't final, but I finished it myself. I got the judge to release my attorney. I wrote my own pleadings and went back to court to finalize my divorce. I negotiated the terms of my children's custody. And I wrote my own QDROs (Qualified Domestic Relations Orders). Two of them.
 

Michigander

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2007
Messages
4,818
Location
Mulligan's Valley
Griffin, I do appreciate your insight and kind words, and feel the need to bring up a couple points. While I believe it's important to keep things in historic context, I do not believe in or care for any seniority structure, real or imagined, in so far as the gun rights community is concerned. The website always has been a powerful tool, when used as a rallying point where no one is required too or prohibited from doing anything. It's a community of people with ideas seeking volunteers, and that is the extent to which we should define ourselves.

This is an incredibly tough issue for everyone, and it is inevitably going to cause dismay, stress and anger. Rational opinions in times like these are very hard to formulate, and indeed after draining my phone's battery multiple times yesterday talking to other activists from this forum, I still mostly come back to feeling anger and dismay when I reflect on the implications of this bill as a whole.

The big picture, for me, interestingly, is a MCRGO magazine I may still have somewhere, from around 2000. It was bashing the very idea of open carry as something that would get you beat up and arrested, then sent to prison. Years later, with the help of many great people here, MCRGO was proven very wrong, well, for the most part. To come full circle, to then help them ban open carrying, that is quite a big picture turn around, and it is going to push a lot of people's buttons, no doubt mine.

The game of politics is a tricky, sleazy, underhanded game, and it's hard to say what will happen years down the road, other than knowing the government will rarely concede power unless a huge effort is thrown at them to make them do it. Regardless of what happens with this bill, we need a singularly focused pro gun coalition much stronger than MCRGO and it's affiliate gun clubs if we wish to experience progress. Progress for the liberty we all want will be hard to gain in Michigan, and apparently our fearless nerd leader is going to make it tougher.

In short, this ******* sucks.
 
Last edited:

griffin

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Messages
871
Location
Okemos, MI
Michigander, I can't address the checkered past of MCRGO. I wasn't even aware of them until the last year. I just used to CC and mind my own business. I wasn't even aware of MCRGO or MGO or MOC. Somehow I became aware of OCDO, though, and this woman convinced me to OC.
OCDO_Sidebar.jpeg

Where was I? Oh, yeah, I have only recently become aware of some of the past history of MCRGO (recent meaning the last 48-72 hours). I can't adequately address any concerns with MCRGO or even other groups. However, your recounting of how MCRGO cried wolf and seemingly threw lawful carriers under the bus does resonate with me on several levels. Speaking of crying wolf, maybe this will lighten your mood somewhat. I posted this thread on MOC earlier tonight about when CNN manufactured another firearms crisis. You might find it amusing.

http://forums.michiganopencarry.org/index.php/topic,2389.0.html
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top