Welcome to MGO's Internet Discussion Forums…Please Consider Becoming a Dues-Paying Member of the ORG…Click >>>>>HERE<<<<< for more info…………****DONATIONS**** can also be made toward MGO's Legal Defense Fund and/or MGO's Forums >>>>>HERE<<<<<

KROGER

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 37
  1. #21
    You're exactly right, but, that would simply make too much sense.

  2. #22
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    523
    Quote Originally Posted by Yance
    This sounds great and all...but you still need a CPL to carry in your vehicle. The drafting of this was pretty much a waste of tax payer dollars because you can still do what you could do before, it just made it less wordy. What we need is for this to be ammended to allow the lawful CARRY of a firearm in your vehicle even if you do not possess a CPL.

    Waste of time in my opinion.
    Actually it should be the lawful "possession" of a firearm in and on a vehicle without a CPL.

    You aren't "carrying" it in the glove compartment.

  3. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    523
    Is Michigan Gun Owners taking any action on this one?

  4. #24
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Lincoln Park
    Posts
    11,437
    Standing Committee Meeting

    Judiciary, Rep. John Walsh, Chair

    Date: 05/17/2012

    Time: 10:30 AM

    Place: 521 House Office Building, Lansing, MI

    Agenda:
    HB 5225 (Opsommer) Weapons; firearms; certain procedures for purchase and possession of pistols; revise.

    HB 5282 (Rendon) Weapons; other; transportation of firearms for lawful purpose; expand.

    SB 760 (Green) Weapons; firearms; definition of pistol; modify.

    SB 761 (Kowall) Weapons; firearms; definition of pistol; modify.

    SB 762 (Robertson) Weapons; firearms; definition of pistol; modify.

  5. #25
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Kzoo
    Posts
    297
    Passed 10-1-4 (for-against-pass).

    There was a lot of talk about how there were no prosecutions due to this law.

    One of the democrats even assured me I have nothing to fear since no one has been prosecuted under this statute yet. He voted against the bill.

    Very uneventful and surprising about the lack of opposition at the committee.

  6. #26
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Lincoln Park
    Posts
    11,437
    HB 5282 of 2012
    Weapons; other; transportation of firearms for lawful purpose; expand. Amends sec. 231a of 1931 PA 328 (MCL 750.231a).
    Last Action: 5/17/2012 referred to second reading

  7. #27
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Lincoln Park
    Posts
    11,437
    HB 5282 of 2012
    Weapons; other; transportation of firearms for lawful purpose; expand. Amends sec. 231a of 1931 PA 328 (MCL 750.231a).
    Last Action: 5/31/2012 transmitted

  8. #28
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    The Hills
    Posts
    7,249
    Thanks for keeping us updated Tallbear. This is one I was not receiving updates on.

  9. #29
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Lincoln Park
    Posts
    11,437
    HB 5282 of 2012
    Weapons; other; transportation of firearms for lawful purpose; expand. Amends sec. 231a of 1931 PA 328 (MCL 750.231a).
    Last Action: 6/5/2012 REFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY

  10. #30
    MGO Member luckless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Sault Ste. Marie
    Posts
    5,102
    Wouldn't it be quicker and easier to just seek and opinion from the Attorney General to clarify the law?

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
only search Michigan Gun Owners Forums
MGO's Facebook MGO's Twitter