H.B. 5249 Rifle in shotgun zone

[Tallbear]

HB 5249 of 2012 (http://www.legislature.mi.gov/mileg.aspx?page=getobject&objectname=2012-HB-5249)
Natural resources; hunting; use of certain firearms during firearm deer season; allow. Amends sec. 43526 of 1994 PA 451 (MCL 324.43526).
Last Action: 1/17/2012 referred to Committee on Natural Resources, Tourism, and Outdoor Recreation

[stroo]

The sponsor is Rep. Matt Lori. Everybody is fixed on the state of the state address right now then will be focused on the budget. After that they will be focused on stumping for re-election so there probably will not be much legislation passed this year. We need to keep on the committee members to get this done and contact Rep. Lori to let him know there is a lot of support out there for this.

My two cents.

[buckey]

I would think every gun shop in southern Mich would help push this, so far don't think too many are aware of the increased sales they may have because of a change in the law. With that said, don't be afraid to ask your local gun shop for their support and a phone call to their state rep.

[RayMich]

Here we go again. :facepalm:

A 9mm pistol, a .38 special revolver, a .40 caliber pistol, a .45 ACP pistol and even a .380 ACP pistol can be legally used to hunt deer under this bill as long as the gun holds no more than 9 rounds, but a rifle chambered for these same calibers is against the law, simply because the case length is shorter than 1.16". Can someone please tell me how does that make any sense? :x

Also, why the 9-round restriction for a pistol, when there isn't one for a rifle?

And WHY the straight wall case requirement? It can't be to reduce the power, since a .45-70 rifle would qualify and is way more powerful than most of the others.

Who in the world drafts these bills?

[45/70fan]

Here we go again. :facepalm:

A 9mm pistol, a .38 special revolver, a .40 caliber pistol, a .45 ACP pistol and even a .380 ACP pistol can be legally used to hunt deer under this bill as long as the gun holds no more than 9 rounds, but a rifle chambered for these same calibers is against the law, simply because the case length is shorter than 1.16". Can someone please tell me how does that make any sense? :x

Also, why the 9-round restriction for a pistol, when there isn't one for a rifle?

And WHY the straight wall case requirement? It can't be to reduce the power, since a .45-70 rifle would qualify and is way more powerful than most of the others.

Who in the world drafts these bills?

Mich Ray, the process is: The Legislative bureau (lawyers) writes the bills based on what the representative/senator tells them they want in the bill. The legislators come up with the ideas from their constitutents: That would be you and I, that is where these bills come from in an ideal world. The real source of the wording and ideas for bills comes from lobbiest, state agencies and other major campaign donors.

[Quack Addict]

Here we go again. :facepalm:

A 9mm pistol, a .38 special revolver, a .40 caliber pistol, a .45 ACP pistol and even a .380 ACP pistol can be legally used to hunt deer under this bill as long as the gun holds no more than 9 rounds, but a rifle chambered for these same calibers is against the law, simply because the case length is shorter than 1.16". Can someone please tell me how does that make any sense? :x

Also, why the 9-round restriction for a pistol, when there isn't one for a rifle?

And WHY the straight wall case requirement? It can't be to reduce the power, since a .45-70 rifle would qualify and is way more powerful than most of the others.

Who in the world drafts these bills?


Uh, 45-70 has a case length of about 2.1" so it would not qualify.

Maybe what's needed to get this off center is to leave the pistol rules as they are and add a specific list of what cartridges would be legal in rifles in the 'restricted firearm zone'... kind of like Indiana.

[buckey]

I don't expect to get a perfect law the first time or to make every one happy. But instead of butting heads with each other and wasting another year with nothing to show for it lets get something to build on. Lets quit acting like congress and move this forward!

[Quack Addict]

I don't expect to get a perfect law the first time or to make every one happy. But instead of butting heads with each other and wasting another year with nothing to show for it lets get something to build on. Lets quit acting like congress and move this forward!


:yeahthat:

[RayMich]

Uh, 45-70 has a case length of about 2.1" so it would not qualify.

Maybe what's needed to get this off center is to leave the pistol rules as they are and add a specific list of what cartridges would be legal in rifles in the 'restricted firearm zone'... kind of like Indiana.
OK, my bad on the .45-70. But I bet that if you had a pistol that shoots .45-70 ammo, it would be legal to use, but according to the case length restrictions, you can't use that caliber in a rifle. My point being that they are banning cartridges in rifles that are perfectly legal in a handgun, for no legitimate reason at all.

They could simply state that a pistol caliber rifle that uses the same ammunition that is legal for pistol hunting, is legal and leave it at that. They already have ammo restrictions for pistols, why not just make it the same for rifles.

What happens is that you get people who have to get their lawyerees ( <-- probably not a word ;-) ) into the text of the bill in order to impress the public with their language prowess, who really have little if any knowledge about the act they are tring to legislate and end up mucking it up for everyone.

If a round is legal to use in a pistol, it should be legal to use in a rifle. How difficult can that be?

Paragraph (D) should read as follows"

(D) A .35 CALIBER OR LARGER RIFLE LOADED WITH STRAIGHT-WALLED CARTRIDGES.
And leave the case restrictions out of it.

Although I still see no sense in the "STRAIGHT WALL" restriction.

[northkid]

...............

[northkid]

...............

[buckey]

We still need SOME THING to build on. So lets work TOGETHER, get a law on the books, even if all we get is the use of the .44 mag and .357 mag in southern Mich. Once we get that we can do as other states have done and expanded on what can be used. First lets show them that it's safe, Then it won't be a problem to open up for other choices.

LETS GET A BASE LAW FIRST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Roundballer]

We still need SOME THING to build on. So lets work TOGETHER, get a law on the books, even if all we get is the use of the .44 mag and .357 mag in southern Mich. Once we get that we can do as other states have done and expanded on what can be used. First lets show them that it's safe, Then it won't be a problem to open up for other choices.

LETS GET A BASE LAW FIRST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That is not the way it works. They pass a piece of crap law, and then when we complain, or ask for revisions, we get ignored. We have a RIGHT to address government for redress of grievances.

This piece of crap is word for word the same as Senate Bill #775. (http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2011-2012/billintroduced/Senate/htm/2011-SIB-0775.htm) There is a 60 post thread on that one: MGO Thread on SB 0775 (http://www.migunowners.org/forum/showthread.php?t=153917)

This bill needs to be fixed before it gets put into law. If either the Senate or House bill has any changes to it from the present forms, then they will have to be "reconciled" before they go to the Governor.

The law is seriously flawed as written. We all need to write to our Congress-critters and express our individual opinions. Maybe even suggest that they find a ballistics expert for testimony, and stop listening to the DNR. The DNR is only expressing a self-interest for an easy job, in this matter they have had a free hand in making "rules" as they see fit, and now it will be placed into law where they can't as readily effect an arbitrary change at will.

This is OUR Government and WE need to TELL THEM what we want. :argue:

[Tallbear]

That is not the way it works. They pass a piece of crap law, and then when we complain, or ask for revisions, we get ignored. We have a RIGHT to address government for redress of grievances.

This piece of crap is word for word the same as Senate Bill #775. (http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2011-2012/billintroduced/Senate/htm/2011-SIB-0775.htm) There is a 60 post thread on that one: MGO Thread on SB 0775 (http://www.migunowners.org/forum/showthread.php?t=153917)

This bill needs to be fixed before it gets put into law. If either the Senate or House bill has any changes to it from the present forms, then they will have to be "reconciled" before they go to the Governor.

The law is seriously flawed as written. We all need to write to our Congress-critters and express our individual opinions. Maybe even suggest that they find a ballistics expert for testimony, and stop listening to the DNR. The DNR is only expressing a self-interest for an easy job, in this matter they have had a free hand in making "rules" as they see fit, and now it will be placed into law where they can't as readily effect an arbitrary change at will.

This is OUR Government and WE need to TELL THEM what we want. :argue:

DNR has not been involved in this or the Senate bill. The last I talked to them about this issue, they were NOT in favor of doing this.

This and the Senate bill are here in part because someone contacted their Rep. and expressed a need for it; AND their Rep. listened.

If you want the bill (s) to say something different, contact the writer and supporters. Tell them the changes you believe work better and ask for the change.

Testify before the committee and tell them what's wrong with the bill (s) and ask for a change.

It called "grassroots activism"...... And contrary to some beliefs, it DOES work.

[Cedmonds]

What about .30 carbine case length(1.290 in), i thought it had similar stopping power to a .45.. I wish they could have wrote this round into it :(, not to complain about a good thing or anything but i suppose i should try to contact the writers/supporters and see if their is any particular reason to exclude this round..

(b) A .35 caliber or larger pistol capable of holding no more than 9 shells at 1 time in the barrel and magazine combined and loaded with straight-walled cartridges.
(d) A .35 caliber or larger rifle loaded with straight-walled cartridges with a minimum case length of 1.16 inches and a maximum case length of 1.80 inches.


.30 carbine AMT III
http://world.guns.ru/userfiles/images/handguns/usa/4/1287746888.jpg

.30 carbine Taurus revolver
http://home.comcast.net/~massbackwards/hunter.jpg

.30 carbine ruger black hawk
http://picturearchive.gunauction.com/129204511/9739859/008_edited-2.jpg_thumbnail1.jpg

[durus5995]

I share your concerns Cedmonds. I just sent Rep Lori an email though his site about the 30 carbine and perhaps taking another look at the potential calibers the bill would authorize. I am not sure if its to late or not to be amended before it gets assigned to a committee or not.

I urge every one to potentially drop Representative Lori a email.

http://www.gophouse.com/contact.asp?District=59

[bone]

its not so much rifle in shotgun zone as pistol caliber carbine in shotgun zone.

what i dont like is neither of my 92 winchesters would be legal. 38-40 and
44-40 both have slight bottleknecks

[45/70fan]

its not so much rifle in shotgun zone as pistol caliber carbine in shotgun zone.

what i dont like is neither of my 92 winchesters would be legal. 38-40 and
44-40 both have slight bottleknecks

Both will be added to house and senate versions as amendments.

[Cedmonds]

I share your concerns Cedmonds. I just sent Rep Lori an email though his site about the 30 carbine and perhaps taking another look at the potential calibers the bill would authorize. I am not sure if its to late or not to be amended before it gets assigned to a committee or not.

I urge every one to potentially drop Representative Lori a email.

http://www.gophouse.com/contact.asp?District=59


is that whom id want to ask about possibly adding the .30 carbine round? or are their other people that it would be better to contact?

I've heard of people dropping deer effectively where the deer stand with 110 grain 30 carbine from anything under 300 yards. My eyes will be on this bill as it works its way through legislative system

[durus5995]

is that whom id want to ask about possibly adding the .30 carbine round? or are their other people that it would be better to contact?

I've heard of people dropping deer effectively where the deer stand with 110 grain 30 carbine from anything under 300 yards. My eyes will be on this bill as it works its way through legislative system

Well he was the one that wrote the bill. I am not sure at this point and time who exactly it can make the changes to it but, on the Michigan Pistol bill I think they made some changes based on some concerns people brought up.

[Tallbear]

Well he was the one that wrote the bill. I am not sure at this point and time who exactly it can make the changes to it but, on the Michigan Pistol bill I think they made some changes based on some concerns people brought up.

The bill author is the correct person to contact about changes.

[Tallbear]

Natural Resources, Tourism, and Outdoor Recreation, Rep. Frank Foster, Chair

Date: 05/15/2012

Time: 9:00 AM

Place: 307 House Office Building, Lansing, MI

Agenda:
HB 5249 (Lori) Natural resources; hunting; use of certain firearms during firearm deer season; allow.

[buckey]

Tallbear, At this point in time, do you think this bill will pass in some form?

[Dansjeep2000]

Tallbear, At this point in time, do you think this bill will pass in some form?
This is a very good question.

[Tallbear]

Tallbear, At this point in time, do you think this bill will pass in some form?

We need to get it out of committee and move it on to the Senate. It does have a chance "IF" we can keep it moving.

[buckey]

Thank You Sir,

[langenc]

That is not the way it works. They pass a piece of crap law, and then when we complain, or ask for revisions, we get ignored. We have a RIGHT to address government for redress of grievances.

This piece of crap is word for word the same as Senate Bill #775. (http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2011-2012/billintroduced/Senate/htm/2011-SIB-0775.htm) There is a 60 post thread on that one: MGO Thread on SB 0775 (http://www.migunowners.org/forum/showthread.php?t=153917)

This bill needs to be fixed before it gets put into law. If either the Senate or House bill has any changes to it from the present forms, then they will have to be "reconciled" before they go to the Governor.

The law is seriously flawed as written. We all need to write to our Congress-critters and express our individual opinions. Maybe even suggest that they find a ballistics expert for testimony, and stop listening to the DNR. The DNR is only expressing a self-interest for an easy job, in this matter they have had a free hand in making "rules" as they see fit, and now it will be placed into law where they can't as readily effect an arbitrary change at will.

This is OUR Government and WE need to TELL THEM what we want. :argue:


Read the last line above several times. Then add and "they are our employees" and we should tell them not ask.. They work for US or are supposed to!! If you have ever visited the capitol when the house was in session you know that it dont alwys go that way--out fault.

[Tallbear]

HB 5249 of 2012 (http://www.legislature.mi.gov/mileg.aspx?page=getobject&objectname=2012-HB-5249)
Natural resources; hunting; use of certain firearms during firearm deer season; allow. Amends sec. 43526 of 1994 PA 451 (MCL 324.43526).
Last Action: 5/22/2012 referred to second reading

[Tallbear]

HB 5249 of 2012 (http://www.legislature.mi.gov/mileg.aspx?page=getobject&objectname=2012-HB-5249)
Natural resources; hunting; use of certain firearms during firearm deer season; allow. Amends sec. 43526 of 1994 PA 451 (MCL 324.43526).
Last Action: 7/12/2012 Analysis File Added

[RSF]

HB 5249 of 2012 (http://www.legislature.mi.gov/mileg.aspx?page=getobject&objectname=2012-HB-5249)
Natural resources; hunting; use of certain firearms during firearm deer season; allow. Amends sec. 43526 of 1994 PA 451 (MCL 324.43526).
Last Action: 7/12/2012 Analysis File Added


Mike you think this will make it in time for this season

[Tallbear]

Mike you think this will make it in time for this season

NOPE....

[Cackler]

NOPE....


Dang, same as last year.

Well, guess I will keep the Ruger .44 mag carbine in the safe another year.

[longshotbml]

Mike, what's your gut feeling on this one. I'd love to see this pass but it's been stuck in comitee for two years now. Will the DNR ever let it come to a vote?

[mechredd]

No .450 upper for me this year.

[buckey]

What seems to be the problem here? What makes a .44mag with a 15 inch barrel safe and a .44mag with A 18 Inch barrel a PROBLEM?

[Roundballer]

Never mind, it is not worth it.

[45/70fan]

What seems to be the problem here? What makes a .44mag with a 15 inch barrel safe and a .44mag with A 18 Inch barrel a PROBLEM?

Perception and an attitude from DNR that they control everything.

[fbuckner]

swamp nazi's anyways

[MSGT]

What seems to be the problem here? What makes a .44mag with a 15 inch barrel safe and a .44mag with A 18 Inch barrel a PROBLEM?

or a .308 for coyote on Nov 14th but not for deer on Nov 15th

[buckey]

When the hunters find out how few deer are left in Ionia county after EHD, and license sales are lagging watch the DNR come up with a great Idea, make straight walled cart. rifles legal for deer in sothern Mi. !

[Tallbear]

HB 5249 of 2012 (http://www.legislature.mi.gov/mileg.aspx?page=getobject&objectname=2012-HB-5249)
Natural resources; hunting; use of certain firearms during firearm deer season; allow. Amends sec. 43526 of 1994 PA 451 (MCL 324.43526).
Last Action: 9/27/2012 REFERRED TO COMMITTEE ON OUTDOOR RECREATION AND TOURISM

[Tallbear]

Time to make some calls and send emails on this one. It passed the house and can pass the senate before the end of the year.

[Tallbear]

Here's the Committee members ....

Committee Members:
Goeff Hansen (http://www.misenategop.com/senators/Hansen.asp?District=34) (R) Committee Chair, 34th District
Dave Hildenbrand (http://www.misenategop.com/senators/Hildenbrand.asp?District=29) (R) Majority Vice Chair, 29th District
Arlan Meekhof (http://www.misenategop.com/senators/Meekhof.asp?District=30) (R) 30th District
Tom Casperson (http://www.misenategop.com/senators/Casperson.asp?District=38) (R) 38th District
John Moolenaar (http://www.misenategop.com/senators/Moolenaar.asp?District=36) (R) 36th District
John J Gleason (http://gleason.senatedems.com) (D) Minority Vice Chair, 27th District
Coleman Young II (http://young.senatedems.com) (D) 1 District

[buckey]

Any word on this bill for this year? If not any chance for coming up next year.

[45/70fan]

Nothing pro gun will pass the senate unless and until Richardville-R is replaced.

[art]

Nothing pro gun will pass the senate unless and until Richardville-R is replaced.
Here is an invitation for Mr. Richardville to join this thread, and other threads, to explain why he is listening to the governor and state police instead of us on these issues.

[tc scout]

I suppose this bill will ride off into the sunset just like before.
Another year of just taking my rifle to the range, wishful thinking.

POLITICIANS

[Tallbear]

We are putting out this action alert on our website/Facebook page today on HB 5249:

http://www.mucc.org/2012/11/legislation-to-allow-some-rifles-in-the-shotgun-zone-lame-duck-or-dead-duck/

If you could share this with interested folks, we need to drum up some grassroots action to get this done before session ends in a couple of weeks.


Amy Trotter, Resource Policy Manager
and Michigan Out-of-Doors University Manager
Michigan United Conservation Clubs

[45/70fan]

We are putting out this action alert on our website/Facebook page today on HB 5249:

http://www.mucc.org/2012/11/legislation-to-allow-some-rifles-in-the-shotgun-zone-lame-duck-or-dead-duck/

If you could share this with interested folks, we need to drum up some grassroots action to get this done before session ends in a couple of weeks.


Amy Trotter, Resource Policy Manager
and Michigan Out-of-Doors University Manager
Michigan United Conservation Clubs

WHY?? Nothing will come of it except a waste of our time.

[art]

Any inclination to reintroduce this?

[45/70fan]

It would be nice if it were but I don't hold much hope for this legislature doing much for moving the gun legislation forward while Snydle remains governor.

[sasquatchpa]

We need a reboot on this one. Safety would be increased. I believe this exists to our near south.

[t-greenman]

sure makes sense to me

[45/70fan]

We need a reboot on this one. Safety would be increased. I believe this exists to our near south.

North and South of us. Those of us in the middle are not capable of making our own decisions.

[art]

This needs to get reintroduced early, and acted on in time for this season....

[IraqVet1982]

This needs to get reintroduced early, and acted on in time for this season....

Agreed, but I believe (and think most agree) that it should read:

(4) A PERSON HUNTING DEER DURING THE REGULAR FIREARM DEER SEASON IN THE LIMITED FIREARMS AREA MAY ONLY USE THE FOLLOWING FIREARMS:
(A) A SHOTGUN WITH A SMOOTH OR RIFLED BARREL.
(B) A .35 CALIBER OR LARGER PISTOL CAPABLE OF HOLDING NO MORE THAN 9 SHELLS AT 1 TIME IN THE BARREL AND MAGAZINE COMBINED AND LOADED WITH STRAIGHT-WALLED CARTRIDGES.
(C) A MUZZLE-LOADING RIFLE OR BLACK-POWDER PISTOL LOADED WITH BLACK-POWDER OR A COMMERCIALLY MANUFACTURED BLACK-POWDER SUBSTITUTE.
(D) A .35 CALIBER OR LARGER RIFLE LOADED WITH STRAIGHT-WALLED CARTRIDGES WITH A MINIMUM CASE LENGTH OF 1.16 INCHES AND A MAXIMUM CASE LENGTH OF 1.80 INCHES.

[sasquatchpa]

Iraq.....I'm with You

[tc scout]

I have pretty much given up on this one ever being passed in my lifetime. As long as these decisions are left up to politicians who don't even know which end the bullet comes out of or prudent knowledge of ballistics its not going to happen.
Sold my 357 max rifle, bought another Contender pistol barrel. For the sake of others I hope it does pass, but I'm not putting my eggs in that basket any longer.

[Quaamik]

Agreed, but I believe (and think most agree) that it should read:

(4) A PERSON HUNTING DEER DURING THE REGULAR FIREARM DEER SEASON IN THE LIMITED FIREARMS AREA MAY ONLY USE THE FOLLOWING FIREARMS:
(A) A SHOTGUN WITH A SMOOTH OR RIFLED BARREL.
(B) A .35 CALIBER OR LARGER PISTOL CAPABLE OF HOLDING NO MORE THAN 9 SHELLS AT 1 TIME IN THE BARREL AND MAGAZINE COMBINED AND LOADED WITH STRAIGHT-WALLED CARTRIDGES.
(C) A MUZZLE-LOADING RIFLE OR BLACK-POWDER PISTOL LOADED WITH BLACK-POWDER OR A COMMERCIALLY MANUFACTURED BLACK-POWDER SUBSTITUTE.
(D) A .35.30 CALIBER OR LARGER RIFLE LOADED WITH STRAIGHT-WALLED CARTRIDGES WITH A MINIMUM CASE LENGTH OF 1.16 INCHES AND A MAXIMUM CASE LENGTH OF 1.80 INCHES.

I agree, except I think the bold part should be changed and the restriction on bottlenecked cartridges in pistols should be eliminated as well.
I see no reason that .357 SIG (in a pistol) or .30 carbine (in a rifle) should not be legal in zone 3 for deer hunting. The .35 cal or larger bottlenecked rifle cartidges, in single shot pistols, are uncommon to the point that I doubt there could be a safety issue.

If we are going to change things, lets go as far as we can.

[art]

I see this didn't get on the 2013 legislative list-actually didn't know if it was on the 2012 list, but does mgo consider this of any importance? Mr Barrettone?

[Walther]

Glad others have pointed out the .30 Carbine. I have never understood why it's legal to use that cartridge in a handgun in Zones 1 and 2, but not Zone 3.

The bill makes no sense. A 35 caliber round in a handgun that holds no more than 9 rounds means I can take my LCP deer hunting, but not my Blackhawk.

This,
http://ruger.com/products/lcp/images/3701.jpg



But not this:
http://ruger.com/products/newModelBlackhawkBlued/images/0505.jpg

[45/70fan]

Glad others have pointed out the .30 Carbine. I have never understood why it's legal to use that cartridge in a handgun in Zones 1 and 2, but not Zone 3.

The bill makes no sense. A 35 caliber round in a handgun that holds no more than 9 rounds means I can take my LCP deer hunting, but not my Blackhawk.

This,
http://ruger.com/products/lcp/images/3701.jpg



But not this:
http://ruger.com/products/newModelBlackhawkBlued/images/0505.jpg

No you can't use the LCP, the case isn't long enough to meet the minimum required length.

[Roundballer]

No you can't use the LCP, the case isn't long enough to meet the minimum required length.
He can if he was hunting under the law as it stands.

He is pointing out one of the ID10T points in current law, the .380 makes the cut, insufficient load, the .30 carbine doesn't make the cut, actually a better round. Under the what was proposed, neither makes the cut, but then again 9x19 wouldn't make the cut and it is a sufficient round.
:facepalm: :banghead: :slap: :boxing:

[Walther]

He can if he was hunting under the law as it stands.

He is pointing out one of the ID10T points in current law, the .380 makes the cut, insufficient load, the .30 carbine doesn't make the cut, actually a better round. Under the what was proposed, neither makes the cut, but then again 9x19 wouldn't make the cut and it is a sufficient round.
:facepalm: :banghead: :slap: :boxing:


I believe that may be incorrect as well. As I read the bill, it surrounds the use of these cartridges in a rifle or carbine. It doesn't change the rules of using a handgun. It still says a .35 caliber or larger capable of holding no more than 9 rounds.

The limitations on round min-max length are in the rifle description portion of the bill.

Thus, I shall be taking my LCP deer hunting this year. While it's true I'd have to climb on its back and ride it like a mule in order to get e clean shot, like any good sportsman, I'll just consider it more of a challenge....

[IraqVet1982]

Agreed, but I believe (and think most agree) that it should read:

(4) A PERSON HUNTING DEER DURING THE REGULAR FIREARM DEER SEASON IN THE LIMITED FIREARMS AREA MAY ONLY USE THE FOLLOWING FIREARMS:
(A) A SHOTGUN WITH A SMOOTH OR RIFLED BARREL.
(B) A .35 CALIBER OR LARGER PISTOL CAPABLE OF HOLDING NO MORE THAN 9 SHELLS AT 1 TIME IN THE BARREL AND MAGAZINE COMBINED AND LOADED WITH STRAIGHT-WALLED CARTRIDGES.
(C) A MUZZLE-LOADING RIFLE OR BLACK-POWDER PISTOL LOADED WITH BLACK-POWDER OR A COMMERCIALLY MANUFACTURED BLACK-POWDER SUBSTITUTE.
(D) A .35 CALIBER OR LARGER RIFLE LOADED WITH STRAIGHT-WALLED CARTRIDGES WITH A MINIMUM CASE LENGTH OF 1.16 INCHES AND A MAXIMUM CASE LENGTH OF 1.80 INCHES.


The goal of this is to allow "pistol caliber rifles" in the current "shotgun" zone. Per the DNR (http://www.michigan.gov/dnr/0,4570,7-153-10366_37141_37706-31578--,00.html) the current law permits:
---
All Firearm Deer Seasons - Shotgun Zone
In the shotgun zone, all hunters afield from Nov. 15-30, and all deer hunters in this zone during other deer seasons, must abide by the following firearm restrictions or use a crossbow or a bow and arrow. Legal firearms are as follows:

A shotgun may have a smooth or rifled barrel and may be of any gauge.
A muzzleloading rifle or black powder handgun must be loaded with black powder or a commercially manufactured black powder substitute.
A conventional (smokeless powder) handgun must be .35 caliber or larger and loaded with straight-walled cartridges and may be single- or multiple-shot but cannot exceed a maximum capacity of nine rounds in the barrel and magazine combined

---

While I don't believe this is perfect, it's a step in the right direction. As President Reagan said, "I have always figured that a half a loaf is better than none, and I know that in the democratic process you’re not going to always get everything you want."

[Roundballer]

I believe that may be incorrect as well. As I read the bill, it surrounds the use of these cartridges in a rifle or carbine. It doesn't change the rules of using a handgun. It still says a .35 caliber or larger capable of holding no more than 9 rounds.

The limitations on round min-max length are in the rifle description portion of the bill.

Thus, I shall be taking my LCP deer hunting this year. While it's true I'd have to climb on its back and ride it like a mule in order to get e clean shot, like any good sportsman, I'll just consider it more of a challenge....
I was pointing out to 45/70fan that the LCP CAN be used, he said it can't.

The .30 in a pistol, down here, CAN'T be used.

And the other portion of what I said was that neither would be allowed in a rifle under the new bill.

Nothing I said was incorrect, if taken in context.

It doesn't matter either way, THIS BILL IS DEAD!

[LibertyOak]

This is how special interests get things in. Let's vote in something imperfect and then perfect it. FAIL.

Write and call and get it fixed FIRST.

[Quaamik]

THIS BILL IS DEAD!

I thought there was talk of getting it reintroduced (yet again).

If so, maybe the people who talk to legislatures could cull this thread (and the pages of thread from last year) to see the arguements brought up by members and commentors and <gasp> get a feel for what people likel / don't like / want in the bill.