Repeal Permit to Purchase to be heard tomorrow 6/08/2010

[Yooper]

imported post

I can understand the man's position, we need to get rid of the permit to purchase, which will, as a negative side effect, get rid of OC in school zones without a CPL, but the whole point is moot if the registration scheme doesn't get a boot in its rear end too. And as of now, or at least the last I checked, there is no bill that would get rid of the registration.

 

[CoonDog]

imported post

I'm not happy with how the confluence of statutes would strengthen federal school zones in Michigan, but it's my opinion that we have to do everything we can here at home to eliminate state statutes.

 

[stainless1911]

imported post

There is a wrong way to do the right thing. That said, It is are job as learned gun owners, to point out discrepencies within the laws, and the proposed laws, and to correct and direct those servants within the legislature towards the proper courses of action.

In other words, we need to say no, youre doing this wrong, we will not sit by and allow further infringements on the rights of even a minority of our citizens. This proposal is unacceptable. We do need to get rid of this purchase permit system, and registration, but not at the expense, and peril of law abiding citizens. This school zone issue, as well as the other weapon free zones needs to be adressed and included before any further legislation is allowed to continue.

I cannot stand by any legislation that allows further infringements, even though I so strongly support abolishing this purchasing permit system.

 

[Venator]

imported post

bandersnatch wrote:

I had an email exchange will Joel Sheltrown today. He responded to an Email I sent last week. Then I responded to him on how I thought the bill was a gun control bill in disguise and he immediately responded back within five minutes:

"While I agree with you that the federal law would likely be found unconstitutional, I strongly disagree that this is a gun control bill in disguise. The number of people who open carry is minimal versus the number that purchase handguns. Even then, the ability to openly carry in the school zone can be remedied with a CPL (pursuant to the limit's in the state's CCW law). The elimination of the purchase permit and the elimination of handgun registration are the two top goals of Michigan's Second amendment advocates." Joel Sheltrown

In his first Email reply to me he said, "I anticipate voting on the bills and this possible amendment in committee later this month. I support the bills as introduced."

I have sent him (Sheltrown) his response above and tried again to explain the impact of this bill (again) and that I was disappointed in his elitist remark and lack of concern on the infringement of the right to bear arms.

 

[Bronson]

imported post

Bronson wrote:

those who OC without a CPL are a miniscule number of gun owners in MI...read that as politically insignificant. Whereas the majority of pistol owners in MIwould see the abolition of the License to Purchase as a positive thing...read that as politically beneficial.

Legislators will do whatever has the best chance of keeping them in office.

Joel Sheltrown wrote:

The number of people who open carry is minimal versus the number that purchase handguns.

Joel Sheltrown

Bronson

 

[Venator]

imported post

Joel's reply to me.

Brian,

What you're saying is that Michigan should keep its requirement that forces everyone without a CPL who wants to purchase a handgun to obtain a permit from their local law enforcement agency because eliminating that requirement would take away a loophole in federal law that benefits a small number of gun owners who openly carry in federal school zones?

You may want to consider that position, if made public, would likely be counter-productive in winning support of open carry among Michigan's gun owners. Over 95% of the people who have e-mailed me on these bills have written in support of them.

The NRA has expressed no concern with the bills over the open carry issue. I support open carry and I agree with you philosophically that the requirement to obtain a CPL to carry is elitist. But the overall benefit to gun owners from HB 5972 and HB 5973 far outweighs the cost.

Due to opposition to the bills from gun control advocates, it is possible the bills may not move forward or may be amended in a way to only exempt some purchases from the permit.

Joel

MY REPLY:

Joel,

I applaud the effort to eliminate handgun registration, I support that and the rest of the bill. I just wanted you to be aware of a very real concern and the consequences of it. IF this bill passes and we don't change the Michigan school zone aspect of the 1000' zone, then the right to open carry in large urban areas will be lost. As I have stated before draw a 1000' circle around every school, day care, private school, etc. in any large city. See how the overlapping and nearly overlapping circles creates a nightmare of gun free zones so gerrymandered that it would in essence destroy the right to bear arms for those without a CPL (which is the majority of people in the state).

Open this pdf for Milwaukee PD memo on OC and school zone maps. http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/attachment.php?id=6377

And by the way it's not a loophole in the federal law, it's to allow state control over the issue of gun free school zones. As I have suggested one way to address this concern is to have an amendment to the Michigan gun free school zone law that would allow people to OC without a CPL with any legal handgun. This would then reinforce the state's sovereignty over the Federal gun free school zone.

The NRA is no fan of open carry. I suspect they have not considered the point we are discussing.

Again thanks for all your efforts, I just wanted to bring this issue to your attention.

Cheers,
Brian Jeffs

 

[stainless1911]

imported post

This is what I sent out to the legislature.

Although I strongly support these two bills, there is one thing that greatly concerns me. The licence to purchase allows a person under federal law to carry within 1000 feet of a school, this may not sound like a big deal, until you see the map that is contained in the link. This map is what convinced me to actually sit down and write this letter to you.



http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/attachment.php?id=6377



I would love to see this move forward, but Only if the gun free school zone is eliminated first. All shootings that have included more than 3 or 4 victims have happenned in gun free zones.



As it is currently written, this proposal is unacceptable. We cannot just accept something because we think it only infringes on the rights of a few. This assumption is incorrect. Although open carriers are in fact in the minority, the majority of the citizenry is without a CPL, and thus the truth is, that this actually infringes on the rights of the majority. We do need to get rid of this purchase permit system, and registration, but not at the expense, and peril of law abiding citizens. This school zone issue, as well as the other weapon free zones needs to be adressed and included before any further legislation is allowed to continue.

 

[stainless1911]

imported post

What could happen as a result of these bills and our responses to them, is that attension could be drawn to the gun free zones and could lead to their elimination. That would be a huge victory for the freedoms of all gun owners within the state, and could provide an exsample for otheer states to follow.

What do you all think of the possibility of our old licenses being exsempt from the school zones? There was no expiration date on the old licenses, and I have yet to see any evidence that would make them invalid. Only guns bought under the new laws would become subject to these zones.

 

[American Sheepdog]

imported post

Brothers and sisters,
Look how confusing this BS is! The question NOBODY is asking is, "Why are they making gun laws to begin with?" Federally "owned" school systems are 100% unconstitutional. Has anyone read the Constitution and the Bill of Rights lately? Find where the feds are allowed to own our schools or make laws restricting our rights to bear arms? It's not there, which tells us they CANNOT even address these issues. Maybe a refresher course on the 9th and 10th Amendments are in order.
Until EVERYONE recognizes that ANY LAW repugnant to the Constitution and Bill of Rights is Null and void, we will continue to debate what "seems" right when it comes to "Unalienable Rights."
Too many patriots are willing to swallow the small pill offered so that the minority (liberals and self serving Republicans) can have a voice. Our reps have us divided on these issues. Some don't mind the licensing program and some despise it. We are all over the map, and our enemy is speaking as one. How long do we think we are going to last if we can't even stick together on our principles?
A license is a privilege...period! What the government giveth, the government taketh away. The right to keep and bear arms is a God Given right which NO MAN can take away without our permission. How long will we continue to give our "servants" permission to tell the master who gets what at the expense of our wallets?
Just because some of my fellow patriots may succeed in further restricting my right to defend myself WITHOUT a "license" does not mean I cannot still carry without one. The Constitution IS the law of the land and that's what I obey. It is obvious from all the conversations that the patriot community does indeed FEAR their government so much, that they are willing to obey a law repugnant to the 2nd Amendment. It is "uncomfortable and fearful" to come out from among the crowd and do what is right in the face of tyranny. It MUST be done! Freedom is not free and it takes courage to go toe to toe with those who wish us dead. This IS the place for this kind of language!

November is coming. Anyone who is placing their hopes on a few politicians to represent the law of the land will be horribly disappointed. They will NOT become political martyrs for YOUR freedom! This duty is ours alone...and until we recognize this fact we will NOT see true freedom that our forefathers experienced.
Either we demand strict adherence to our founding documents, or ALL is lost!
Blessings brothers,
Thomas Matos
Lt. Gubernatorial Candidate

 

[dougwg]

imported post

These bills are 4 steps FORWARD and only 1 step backward.

I hate the fact that it will restrict non-CPL OC. As some of you know I fight for us all.

But I still think this is a step in the right direction.

Maybe next year we can all fight togather to get the Federal CEZ removed?:idea:

 

[Bikenut]

imported post

dougwg wrote:

These bills are 4 steps FORWARD and only 1 step backward.

I hate the fact that it will restrict non-CPL OC. As some of you know I fight for us all.

But I still think this is a step in the right direction.

Maybe next year we can all fight togather to get the Federal CEZ removed?:idea:

http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/attachment.php?id=6377

Yeah, I know that is Wisconsin but I strongly suspect that many areas in Michigan would resemble what Wisconsin looks like.

Anyone find a similar map for Michigan?

 

[American Sheepdog]

imported post

dougwg wrote:

These bills are 4 steps FORWARD and only 1 step backward.

I hate the fact that it will restrict non-CPL OC. As some of you know I fight for us all.

But I still think this is a step in the right direction.

Maybe next year we can all fight togather to get the Federal CEZ removed?:idea:

I see your point...But...
I live in a "school zone." I do not have a CPL. I am already hated by those who had to repeal the local ordinances I demanded they remove. Someone is just waiting for the law to change so my keester can be thrown in jail. Sadly, the proposed legislation is just enough for patriots to swallow, unaware that it disparages their own and may put them in jail.
The bills are a trade off! They are FORCING everyone who wishes to carry to give away their personal sovereignty and purchase a license. The whole scheme will be so successful that total gun registration will soon follow. Then what?
Remember, when you are registered (CPL), so is your gun! Where you are, so also is your gun!
All these bills do is force us to open our wallets, which are already empty, and buy our right. If we cannot afford our right, we don't get it. Is there a cap on how much a license can cost? No! Our reps are telling us this is good stuff, and that we would be foolish to reject it. If they were so worried about our rights, then why do they disparage me and my right to carry without a CPL? Only CPL holders are rewarded. In this day and age, we would be foolish to rely on the proposed good faith and judgment of our elected officials. I find it deplorable that they would replace one flawed law with another. I am glad that the gun registration scheme is possibly going away. But...the alternative quest accomplishes the same thing only with MORE regulation. Read through the alternative motives here and it becomes clear.
Blessings

 

[Michigander]

imported post

All they need to do is add something in to the bill to make people licensed to carry expressly for the purposes of the GFSZA, but in no way altering Michigan's own state laws on gun possession on school grounds. If our state law makers can't do that, and say they are pro gun rights, they are liars, plain and simple.

 

[American Sheepdog]

imported post

I never thought I would say this but it must be said.

Right now, the only thing registered of me is my handgun. If I move into another home in this State, I am still legal to carry...no further action is required on my part.

Now, what is being proposed is the removing of the gun registration in favor of the CPL. If I move into another home within this State, I MUST pay money and have my CPL updated to show "Where I reside."

In these times, it is no longer satisfactory for the Government to push for massive gun registrations. They have proven through their own agendas that registration has not given them the results they were seeking. But, now it is YOU who they want registered. Patriots have fought gun registration for years believing it was the road to total gun confiscation. I even bought into this years ago. But the scales fell off my eyes and I realized it was merely the road to "identity registration." It is YOU they want...along with your gun. Like I said before, wherever you are, so also is your gun. It matters not if your gun is registered...they will still get it along with you if they want to. Sure, I am well known around here and I am already pegged! But what about the 100,000 plus around the State who are not in the public eye? What defense do they have to remain off the databases of our government?
The smart ones resist registration. I don't need to quote history on this one. All I am saying here friends is to be vigilant in resisting your support for what the government wants you to take hook, line, and sinker. Always look down the road. If gun registration was bad, why do we not cry out when our body is? Which one is worse? Does anybody see what I see?
Blessings

 

[Bronson]

imported post

Joel Sheltrownwrote:

"...the ability to openly carry in the school zone can be remedied with a CPL (pursuant to the limit's in the state's CCW law). Joel Sheltrown

I could support this IF obtaining a CPL followed the current rules for obtaining a License to Purchase, i.e., free and with no required class.

As it stands now thisbill will serve to remove the ability of a person who cannot afford a CPL to effectively open carry a firearm in urban areas. Thisbill removes the right to bear fromALL people and gives it only tothose people who can afford to pay forit.

It doesn't matter how few people actually open carry sans CPL, what matters is that we, all of us, are able. If this bill passes it will remove actualabililty to carryfor the sake of some perceived convenience.

We will lose something while really gaining nothing for the loss. We will still have to register our firearms and we will still have to have a background check when purchasing firearms, this bill just moves that onus to the FFL dealer via the NIC system from the local PD via the LTP system currently in place. In talking to people in other states I've been told that it is common practice for a FFL to charge for the NICS check so that would be another thing we lose.This bill really gains usnothing and we still lose the ability toeffectively OC in urban areas.

I still think it's junk legislation that accomplishes nothing of worth.

Bronson

 

[Bronson]

imported post

American Sheepdog wrote:

Now, what is being proposed is the removing of the gun registration in favor of the CPL. If I move into another home within this State, I MUST pay money and have my CPL updated to show "Where I reside."

Not quite correct. They are proposing removing pistol LICENSING, not registration. They are separate things.

The current License to Purchase is what allows us to OC sans CPL in a school zone, NOT the registration of pistol ownership. Per this bill the state'spistol registration will remain but the requirement that a License to Purchase be obtained before purchasing a pistol will go away.

So the registration isn't being removed and it definitely isn't being replaced with the CPL. Rep. Sheltrown arrogantly stated that anybody who wanted/needed to carry in a school zone could just get a CPL. Perhaps he would volunteer to pay for yours if you asked him nicely.

Bronson

 

[Bikenut]

imported post

Bronson wrote:

Joel Sheltrownwrote:

"...the ability to openly carry in the school zone can be remedied with a CPL (pursuant to the limit's in the state's CCW law). Joel Sheltrown

I could support this IF obtaining a CPL followed the current rules for obtaining a License to Purchase, i.e., free and with no required class.

As it stands now thisbill will serve to remove the ability of a person who cannot afford a CPL to effectively open carry a firearm in urban areas. Thisbill removes the right to bear fromALL people and gives it only tothose people who can afford to pay forit.

It doesn't matter how few people actually open carry sans CPL, what matters is that we, all of us, are able. If this bill passes it will remove actualabililty to carryfor the sake of some perceived convenience.

We will lose something while really gaining nothing for the loss. We will still have to register our firearms and we will still have to have a background check when purchasing firearms, this bill just moves that onus to the FFL dealer via the NIC system from the local PD via the LTP system currently in place. In talking to people in other states I've been told that it is common practice for a FFL to charge for the NICS check so that would be another thing we lose.This bill really gains usnothing and we still lose the ability toeffectively OC in urban areas.

I still think it's junk legislation that accomplishes nothing of worth.

Bronson

But it does accomplish something of worth to those who wish to make OC'ing next to impossible.

The new strategy is not to attack any rights... just making exercising those rights almost impossible to do legally accomplishes the same thing as abolishing the right itself.

Be careful...... of government officials offering candy.

 

[American Sheepdog]

imported post

Bronson wrote:

American Sheepdog wrote:

Now, what is being proposed is the removing of the gun registration in favor of the CPL. If I move into another home within this State, I MUST pay money and have my CPL updated to show "Where I reside."

Not quite correct. They are proposing removing pistol LICENSING, not registration. They are separate things.

The current License to Purchase is what allows us to OC sans CPL in a school zone, NOT the registration of pistol ownership. Per this bill the state'spistol registration will remain but the requirement that a License to Purchase be obtained before purchasing a pistol will go away.

So the registration isn't being removed and it definitely isn't being replaced with the CPL. Rep. Sheltrown arrogantly stated that anybody who wanted/needed to carry in a school zone could just get a CPL. Perhaps he would volunteer to pay for yours if you asked him nicely.

Bronson

OOps...thanks for the correction bronson. It's actually worse than I thought!

EVERYBODY loses!:cuss:

 

[stainless1911]

imported post

American Sheepdog wrote:

Sure, I am well known around here and I am already pegged!

As someone who knows what they are talking about.

 

[Master Control]

imported post

American Sheepdog wrote:

Brothers and sisters,
Look how confusing this BS is! The question NOBODY is asking is, "Why are they making gun laws to begin with?" Federally "owned" school systems are 100% unconstitutional. Has anyone read the Constitution and the Bill of Rights lately? Find where the feds are allowed to own our schools or make laws restricting our rights to bear arms? It's not there, which tells us they CANNOT even address these issues. Maybe a refresher course on the 9th and 10th Amendments are in order.
Until EVERYONE recognizes that ANY LAW repugnant to the Constitution and Bill of Rights is Null and void, we will continue to debate what "seems" right when it comes to "Unalienable Rights."
Too many patriots are willing to swallow the small pill offered so that the minority (liberals and self serving Republicans) can have a voice. Our reps have us divided on these issues. Some don't mind the licensing program and some despise it. We are all over the map, and our enemy is speaking as one. How long do we think we are going to last if we can't even stick together on our principles?
A license is a privilege...period! What the government giveth, the government taketh away. The right to keep and bear arms is a God Given right which NO MAN can take away without our permission. How long will we continue to give our "servants" permission to tell the master who gets what at the expense of our wallets?
Just because some of my fellow patriots may succeed in further restricting my right to defend myself WITHOUT a "license" does not mean I cannot still carry without one. The Constitution IS the law of the land and that's what I obey. It is obvious from all the conversations that the patriot community does indeed FEAR their government so much, that they are willing to obey a law repugnant to the 2nd Amendment. It is "uncomfortable and fearful" to come out from among the crowd and do what is right in the face of tyranny. It MUST be done! Freedom is not free and it takes courage to go toe to toe with those who wish us dead. This IS the place for this kind of language!

November is coming. Anyone who is placing their hopes on a few politicians to represent the law of the land will be horribly disappointed. They will NOT become political martyrs for YOUR freedom! This duty is ours alone...and until we recognize this fact we will NOT see true freedom that our forefathers experienced.
Either we demand strict adherence to our founding documents, or ALL is lost!
Blessings brothers,
Thomas Matos
Lt. Gubernatorial Candidate

Yes Sir ^5