OC and "disturbing the peace"

[indianajones]

Been reading the opencarry forums a lot recently, and got to wondering how LEO's are able to charge you with a crime while you are doing something perfectly legal. I look at them giving out disturbing the peace is like starting your car in the morning to go to work. you dont want to attract attention to yourself by starting it, but you cant help the noise they make. its gonna piss someone off. perfectly legal, but its part of it.

That was the best analogy I could come up with. How would this stand up in court? you cant break one law by following another.

[fbuckner]

Im not boned up on Open Carry fact is I am Ignorant as some have put it. But here is what I believe to be true.

OC is not illegal and I dont think a disturbing the peace charge would stick at all as far as carry.

I also believe your other posted question about arrest ! I dont think unless they held you for more than 24 hours you would have any financial gain coming to you. A 4 hour rest in a interogation room wouldnt cause enough distress to warrent any monitary gain.

[1-2many]

A 4 hour rest in a interogation room wouldnt cause enough distress to warrent any monitary gain.

I don't know. If I missed a new episode of Judge Judy while sitting in an interrogation room, somebody would have hell to pay.:laughing:

[Venator12]

Im not boned up on Open Carry fact is I am Ignorant as some have put it. But here is what I believe to be true.

OC is not illegal and I don't think a disturbing the peace charge would stick at all as far as carry.

I also believe your other posted question about arrest ! I don't think unless they held you for more than 24 hours you would have any financial gain coming to you. A 4 hour rest in a interogation room wouldnt cause enough distress to warrent any monitary gain.

This is not true, law suits have been won in state and federal courts for arrests for legal OC. Some of these people were not jailed at all, just handcuffed, their weapon seized and charged and released. Some have won big others just a few $10,000. So you can sue and win without being in jail. Chris Fetters is in the process of suing Grand Haven and he wasn't put in jail. Based on other cases around the country he has a good chance to win a settlement. It's not just about being in jail, it's about being denied your rights, 1st, 2nd, and 4th amendments. If more people stood up for their rights, I feel this country would be much better off.

Here are just a few of the many cases out there.

http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum66/15891.html
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum26/12851.html
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum46/12320.html

[fbuckner]

I am betting this will be the last case in Michigan that will be heard. The word is spreading and most departments are as OK as they will get about OC.

[who dat]

I am betting this will be the last case in Michigan that will be heard. The word is spreading and most departments are as OK as they will get about OC.
I wish that were true, unfortunately there are too many who think the law doesn't apply to them.

[dougwg]

ADVISORY NOTE: Though this section on disturbing the peace does not deal with firearms, due to the nature of this code, this law has been cited by officers to suppress or discourage lawful open carry. Since a person who is not licensed to carry concealed MUST open carry their firearms on foot in order to avoid criminal charge, nor is there any duty for anyone licensed to conceal their handgun, open carry is not disorderly conduct. The open carrying of firearms is not by itself threatening, nor does it cause a hazardous or physically offensive condition.

BRANDISHING Opinion No. 7101 February 6, 2002: …In the absence of any reported Michigan appellate court decisions defining "brandishing," it is appropriate to rely upon dictionary definitions…..the term brandishing is defined as: "1. To wave or flourish menacingly, as a weapon. 2. To display ostentatiously. A menacing or defiant wave or flourish." This definition comports with the meaning ascribed to this term by courts of other jurisdictions…the court recognized that in federal sentencing guidelines, "brandishing" a weapon is defined to mean "that the weapon was pointed or waved about, or displayed in a threatening manner." Applying these definitions to your question, it is clear that a reserve police officer, regardless whether he or she qualifies as a "peace officer," when carrying a handgun in a holster in plain view, is not waving or displaying the firearm in a threatening manner. Thus, such conduct does not constitute brandishing a firearm in violation of section 234e of the Michigan Penal Code. It is my opinion, therefore, that…by carrying a handgun in a holster that is in plain view, does not violate section 234e of the Michigan Penal Code, which prohibits brandishing a firearm in public.

http://www.ag.state.mi.us/opinion/datafiles/2000s/op10176.htm

[skunkworks]

Can you OC in a bar?

[dougwg]

With permission from the owner of the bar, Yes.

[skunkworks]

With permission from the owner of the bar, Yes.

Hey that is good to know. Can the bar owner also grant you permission to conceal carry if you have a CPL.

[Venator12]

Hey that is good to know. Can the bar owner also grant you permission to conceal carry if you have a CPL.

That's not clear, the only thing I found stated that you could have a firearm in a bar with the owners permission, nothing mentions concealing it. But since it states in the CPL law section 5o that you can't carry concealed in a bar and makes no exceptions for owner permission my spin is that you would have to carry openly in the bar to be covered. Others may know more.

Section 234d of the Michigan Penal Code, 1931 PA 328, MCL 750.1 et seq. That statute prohibits certain persons from possessing firearms on certain types of premises as follows:
Sec. 234d (1) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (2), a person shall not possess a firearm on the premises
of any of the following:
a) A depository financial institution or a subsidiary or affiliate of a depository financial institution.
b) A church or other house of religious worship.
c) A court.
d) A theatre.
e) A sports arena.
f) A day care center.
g) A hospital.
h) An establishment licensed under the Michigan liquor control act,…
(2) This section does not apply to any of the following:
a) A person who owns, or is employed by or contracted by, an entity described in subsection (1) if the possession
of that firearm is to provide security services for that entity.
b) A peace officer.
c) A person licensed by this state or another state to carry a concealed weapon.
d) A person who possesses a firearm on the premises of an entity described in subsection (1) if that possession is with the permission of the owner or an agent of the owner of that entity.

[Venator12]

I am betting this will be the last case in Michigan that will be heard. The word is spreading and most departments are as OK as they will get about OC.

This is far from true. We almost daily get reports of some Chief or sheriff stating OC is illegal or they have an ordinance against it. The Macomb County sheriff's office has stated on several occasions that they would arrest you for OCing. We know of no arrest made in Macomb county and often what the PDs say they will do and what they do do can be two very different things.

So while the OC education is growing in Michigan it is still needed.

[Dansjeep2000]

Section 234d of the Michigan Penal Code, 1931 PA 328, MCL 750.1 et seq. That statute prohibits certain persons from possessing firearms on certain types of premises as follows:
Sec. 234d (1) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (2), a person shall not possess a firearm on the premises
of any of the following:
a) A depository financial institution or a subsidiary or affiliate of a depository financial institution.
b) A church or other house of religious worship.
c) A court.
d) A theatre.
e) A sports arena.
f) A day care center.
g) A hospital.
h) An establishment licensed under the Michigan liquor control act,…
(2) This section does not apply to any of the following:
a) A person who owns, or is employed by or contracted by, an entity described in subsection (1) if the possession
of that firearm is to provide security services for that entity.
b) A peace officer.
c) A person licensed by this state or another state to carry a concealed weapon.d) A person who possesses a firearm on the premises of an entity described in subsection (1) if that possession is with the permission of the owner or an agent of the owner of that entity.

these are the CEZ zones right? So this is how its legal to OC in these areas with a CPL?

[fbuckner]

This is far from true. We almost daily get reports of some Chief or sheriff stating OC is illegal or they have an ordinance against it. The Macomb County sheriff's office has stated on several occasions that they would arrest you for OCing. We know of no arrest made in Macomb county and often what the PDs say they will do and what they do do can be two very different things.

So while the OC education is growing in Michigan it is still needed.


Then why dont the OC folks in that area contact Hackle and set him straight. He is not an unreasonable man.

Nevermind I sent him an Email myself.

[Venator12]

these are the CEZ zones right? So this is how its legal to OC in these areas with a CPL?
Well that's the opinion of the AG and the MSP. And it's a logical interpretation of the two laws. Doesn't mean you wouldn't be arrested for it, but you would have a valid defense.

[TAC]

This is far from true. We almost daily get reports of some Chief or sheriff stating OC is illegal or they have an ordinance against it. The Macomb County sheriff's office has stated on several occasions that they would arrest you for OCing. We know of no arrest made in Macomb county and often what the PDs say they will do and what they do do can be two very different things.

So while the OC education is growing in Michigan it is still needed.


That's interesting. The MCS web site has an email link called: "Ask The Sheriff" Last Spring I sent an email inquirning about OC in Macomb County. I received a reply from them that is was perfectly legal. I wished I would have saved the email. Try it and see how they respond.

[TAC]

Keep in mind that just because OC is not illegal, doesn't mean your immune from other laws and ordinances. Some of the OC stories and video's I've seen, the guy is just asking from trouble, and often gets it.

[Venator12]

Keep in mind that just because OC is not illegal, doesn't mean your immune from other laws and ordinances. Some of the OC stories and video's I've seen, the guy is just asking from trouble, and often gets it.

What other laws and ordinances are you referring to? Preemption makes local ordinances restricting firearm possession illegal. As for asking for it. The LEO has a choice in deciding to bother someone lawfully OCing. If the LEO just left the OCer alone, then the person OCing would not have to "ask for trouble". Simple really. No interaction...no confrontation.

[TAC]

What other laws and ordinances are you referring to? Preemption makes local ordinances restricting firearm possession illegal. As for asking for it. The LEO has a choice in deciding to bother someone lawfully OCing. If the LEO just left the OCer alone, then the person OCing would not have to "ask for trouble". Simple really. No interaction...no confrontation.

I'm not talking about the act of OC. But if while doing so you act in a way that your actions themselves are disturbing the peace, than you can be charged with doing so. It will have nothing to do with the fact that you're OC'ing.

[halfacop]

Hey that is good to know. Can the bar owner also grant you permission to conceal carry if you have a CPL.

Yes......

[One of Many]

Originally Posted by Venator12
Section 234d of the Michigan Penal Code, 1931 PA 328, MCL 750.1 et seq. That statute prohibits certain persons from possessing firearms on certain types of premises as follows:
Sec. 234d (1) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (2), a person shall not possess a firearm on the premises
of any of the following:
a) A depository financial institution or a subsidiary or affiliate of a depository financial institution.
b) A church or other house of religious worship.
c) A court.
d) A theatre.
e) A sports arena.
f) A day care center.
g) A hospital.
h) An establishment licensed under the Michigan liquor control act,…
(2) This section does not apply to any of the following:
a) A person who owns, or is employed by or contracted by, an entity described in subsection (1) if the possession
of that firearm is to provide security services for that entity.
b) A peace officer.
c) A person licensed by this state or another state to carry a concealed weapon.d) A person who possesses a firearm on the premises of an entity described in subsection (1) if that possession is with the permission of the owner or an agent of the owner of that entity.
these are the CEZ zones right? So this is how its legal to OC in these areas with a CPL?

This is a different set of prohibited areas than those listed in the Concealed Pistol License law, which is more restrictive in some locations, and less restrictive in others. A CPL holder can carry openly or concealed in areas that non-CPL holders can not under the section of law listed above. There are restricted areas listed in the CPL law where no carry is allowed even with the CPL, unless one is a LEO.

[Venator12]

This is a different set of prohibited areas than those listed in the Concealed Pistol License law, which is more restrictive in some locations, and less restrictive in others. A CPL holder can carry openly or concealed in areas that non-CPL holders can not under the section of law listed above. There are restricted areas listed in the CPL law where no carry is allowed even with the CPL, unless one is a LEO.

Where are these areas? With a CPL you can carry in more places than someone without a CPL (that's the opinion of the AG and the MSP. And it's a logical interpretation of the two laws.). See above, the CPL law deals with CONCEALED carry only. With a CPL you can carry openly in the areas mentioned in both your CPL (.5o) and in .234d. Pretty simple.

[Done Deal]

Today, 03:37 PM #20
halfacop
Senior Participant
Associate Member


Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: MI
Posts: 208 Quote:
Originally Posted by skunkworks
Hey that is good to know. Can the bar owner also grant you permission to conceal carry if you have a CPL.


Yes......__________________
If God carried a gun - it would be a 1911

Vice President: QuickCoop Dog Loft


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


That advice may be an overgeneralization that could get somebody in trouble.

Where does it say that just because you are buds with the owner of a bar doesn't mean that you can carry concealed?

[dougwg]

I'm not talking about the act of OC. But if while doing so you act in a way that your actions themselves are disturbing the peace, than you can be charged with doing so. It will have nothing to do with the fact that you're OC'ing.

TAC,

I think your point is or atleast should be a given.

Just like saying if someone is OC'ing and beating his wife he can be charged with domestic abuse and it will have nothing to do with OC'ing.

..... it's a bit of a "duh" statement.

[TAC]

TAC,

I think your point is or atleast should be a given.

Just like saying if someone is OC'ing and beating his wife he can be charged with domestic abuse and it will have nothing to do with OC'ing.

..... it's a bit of a "duh" statement.


It's in direct response to the original post, and the original topic.


"OC and "disturbing the peace"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Been reading the opencarry forums a lot recently, and got to wondering how LEO's are able to charge you with a crime while you are doing something perfectly legal. I look at them giving out disturbing the peace is like starting your car in the morning to go to work. you dont want to attract attention to yourself by starting it, but you cant help the noise they make. its gonna piss someone off. perfectly legal, but its part of it. "

[dougwg]

TAC,

Ok, I understand why you posted that.

[warlockmatized]

Then why dont the OC folks in that area contact Hackle and set him straight. He is not an unreasonable man.

Nevermind I sent him an Email myself.

I have sent several emails as well as several registered snail mails and have YET to receive a response from Hackel or anyone over there. It has been months.

I did however have a conversation with Sgt. Willis on the phone after an officer threatened me with arrest on my own property. I had called them out to take a vandalism/damage report on one of my out buildings for my ins company. All was fine for the first 15 - 20 mins until the officer FINALLY noticed i was OC'ing. It was at that point he threatened me with arrest, said that it would cost me upwards of 5g's to defend myself in court...etc etc etc.

While on the phone with Sgt Willis, I had him go to the MSP website, I had him read along with me about OC being legal. He said he would print it al out and let the "training officer" know. I am STILL having issues in Macomb County...

[who dat]

I have sent several emails as well as several registered snail mails and have YET to receive a response from Hackel or anyone over there. It has been months.

I did however have a conversation with Sgt. Willis on the phone after an officer threatened me with arrest on my own property. I had called them out to take a vandalism/damage report on one of my out buildings for my ins company. All was fine for the first 15 - 20 mins until the officer FINALLY noticed i was OC'ing. It was at that point he threatened me with arrest, said that it would cost me upwards of 5g's to defend myself in court...etc etc etc.

While on the phone with Sgt Willis, I had him go to the MSP website, I had him read along with me about OC being legal. He said he would print it al out and let the "training officer" know. I am STILL having issues in Macomb County...Pretty stupid cop if he didn't know you can carry any way you want on your own property.

[Venator12]

Then why dont the OC folks in that area contact Hackle and set him straight. He is not an unreasonable man.

Nevermind I sent him an Email myself.

Any word back in this regard? It would be interesting to read what he has to say. Keep us posted.
Thanks.

[ghostrider]

Today, 03:37 PM #20
halfacop
Senior Participant
Associate Member


Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: MI
Posts: 208 Quote:
Originally Posted by skunkworks
Hey that is good to know. Can the bar owner also grant you permission to conceal carry if you have a CPL.


Yes......__________________
If God carried a gun - it would be a 1911

Vice President: QuickCoop Dog Loft


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


That advice may be an overgeneralization that could get somebody in trouble.

Where does it say that just because you are buds with the owner of a bar doesn't mean that you can carry concealed?
That would be MCL 750.234d, subsection 2(d)


THE MICHIGAN PENAL CODE (EXCERPT)
Act 328 of 1931


750.234d Possession of firearm on certain premises prohibited; applicability; violation as misdemeanor; penalty.
Sec. 234d.
(1) Except as provided in subsection (2), a person shall not possess a firearm on the premises of any of the following:
(a) A depository financial institution or a subsidiary or affiliate of a depository financial institution.
(b) A church or other house of religious worship.
(c) A court.
(d) A theatre.
(e) A sports arena.
(f) A day care center.
(g) A hospital.
(h) An establishment licensed under the Michigan liquor control act, Act No. 8 of the Public Acts of the Extra Session of 1933, being sections 436.1 to 436.58 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.
(2) This section does not apply to any of the following:
(a) A person who owns, or is employed by or contracted by, an entity described in subsection (1) if the possession of that firearm is to provide security services for that entity.
(b) A peace officer.
(c) A person licensed by this state or another state to carry a concealed weapon.
(d) A person who possesses a firearm on the premises of an entity described in subsection (1) if that possession is with the permission of the owner or an agent of the owner of that entity.
(3) A person who violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than 90 days or a fine of not more than $100.00, or both.

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(c5p3l455nd0b2rurfo5om255))/mileg.aspx?page=getObject&objectName=mcl-750-234d


Unless your asking about concealed carry, which would be prohibited.

[fbuckner]

Any word back in this regard? It would be interesting to read what he has to say. Keep us posted.
Thanks.


Not a Peep Probably because i am from Livingston county?