PDA

View Full Version : HB 5500 provide penalties to local government



Tallbear
05-01-2014, 09:25 AM
HB 5500 of 2014 (http://www.legislature.mi.gov/mileg.aspx?page=getobject&objectname=2014-HB-5500)
Local government; other; prohibition of local ordinances dealing with pistols and other firearms; clarify, and provide penalties. Amends title of 1990 PA 319 (MCL 123.1101 - 123.1105) & adds secs. 4a, 4b & 4c.
Last Action: 4/30/2014 referred to Committee on Judiciary

TheQ
05-01-2014, 09:42 AM
The bill has 16 cosponsors, tying it for the bill that has the most cosponsors this session.

3 of those 16 cosponsors are on the judiciary committee.

Here's a white paper (http://miopencarry.org/moc_files/legislative/2013-14/Adding%20Teeth%20to%20Preemption.pdf) MOC wrote on this bill.

dmd7765
05-01-2014, 09:51 AM
The bill has 16 cosponsors, tying it for the bill that has the most cosponsors this session.

3 of those 16 cosponsors are on the judiciary committee.

Here's a white paper (http://miopencarry.org/moc_files/legislative/2013-14/Adding%20Teeth%20to%20Preemption.pdf) MOC wrote on this bill.

Great Work!!

bigt8261
05-01-2014, 12:45 PM
I think it's the most cosponsors for a gun bill. Some of the FOIA bills had 15, but that's the most that I could find.

That's particularly impressive to me because the bill was available to cosponsors for a very abbreviated period of time.

Divegeek
05-01-2014, 12:51 PM
Love it. I'll be writing my reps this week.

G22
05-01-2014, 02:42 PM
<edit> I read the bill and it answered my question about personal liability

Divegeek
05-01-2014, 02:51 PM
Where does the money come from to "pay" for these "penalties to local government"?

Because if it's from you and I (the taxpayers), then the bill is focused in the wrong direction. The accountability needs to be on the personal individual level.

If some mayor, or some clerk in the local government takes it upon themselves to thumb their nose at preemption, THEY need to be personally held liable and subject to the fine.

The teeth in this bill seem to take a bite out of taxpayers.

I would rather see the individual held in contempt of a court order than make the taxpayers pay the fine for the same end result.

The last section of the proposal states:


*(3) EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE REQUIRED BY LAW, PUBLIC FUNDS SHALL

*

NOT BE USED TO DEFEND OR REIMBURSE AN ELECTED OR APPOINTED OFFICIAL

*

OF A LOCAL UNIT OF GOVERNMENT WHO IS DETERMINED TO HAVE KNOWINGLY

*

AND WILLFULLY ENACTED OR ENFORCED AN ORDINANCE OR REGULATION IN

*

VIOLATION OF THIS ACT.
I read that as saying they are on their own for paying the fines and their lawyer to defend them.



Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

G22
05-01-2014, 02:59 PM
All except the reimbursement to the original plaintiff which would be paid by the taxpayer if they sued an entity, not an individual.

<edit>
At least that reimbursement is for a cause I believe in.

I will definitely support this bill.

mtnbikinbryno
05-02-2014, 08:55 AM
Great law. Take the legs out from underneath pompous Mayor Heartwell.

Roundballer
05-05-2014, 04:14 PM
I wonder how this amendment could be applied to my County Sheriff, who requires a monitored alarm system and an inspection of your storage, to sign off on an NFA item? He is certainly adding regulations above the State requirements for such items.

Divegeek
05-05-2014, 06:32 PM
I would say that yes it would apply to your sheriff on this instance.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

METL
05-06-2014, 11:21 AM
I sooooooooooo hope this is passed... I can't wait to see the look on Mayor Heartwell's face... I might have to make a trip to GR to attend a meeting with Mr. Lambert....

Marcus
05-07-2014, 09:03 AM
I contact my Rep as I just moved into the area and he was not one of the co-sponsers:




Dear Mr. MacGregor,
Good Afternoon! I recently moved into your district. Rep Tom Hooker was my recent rep and I contacted him often. He is a good guy.

I wanted to notifiy you about HB 5500, the bill from Rep. Tom McMillin (R-Rochester Hills) has been officially introduced.

HB 5500 forces local units of government to pay for damages as well as fees associated with violating Michigan's preemption law. It also specifies punishments for individual officials who knowingly and willingly violate the law.

Preemption is about protecting citizens as they exercise their gun-bearing rights. Knowing and willful violations of these protections should not be simply excused, and we should not be further punishing taxpayers when they are not the ones who refuse to follow the law.

HB 5500 managed to gain 16 cosponsors, making it the most cosponsored gun legislation of the current legislative session:

Lisa Posthumus Lyons Mike Shirkey
Bob Genetski Hugh Crawford
Thomas Hooker Bill Rogers
Joel Johnson Rob VerHeulen
Ken Yonker Scott Dianda
Andrea LaFontaine Greg MacMaster
Mike Callton Ken Goike
Klint Kesto Ed McBroom

This bill is important and relevant to me, because I am a current CPL holder and carry a legal pistol lawfully to protect myself and my family. Grand Rapids currently has illegal ordinances Mayor Heartwell refused to address because of his personal bias against the pro-2A crowd. I don't want the ris

I do not know your stance on the issue, but wanted to drop you a note to find out. I am a small-business owner and active in grassroots freedom preserving campaigns. Please consider the bill and support it.

Thank-you.

Mr. Marcus


Mr. Marcus,

First and foremost, welcome to the Rockford area. I’ve lived here for many years and it’s been a great place to live and raise a family. I hope you are enjoying the area. Thank you for taking the time to contact me and share your thoughts regarding House Bill 5500. I always appreciate the input I receive from my constituents.

I support HB 5500. You will be happy to learn that I am a strong supporter of our citizens’ Right to Bear Arms under the Second Amendment. I am a sportsman and a CPL holder myself. I have earned the endorsement of the National Rifle Association on multiple occasions.

Again, thank you for taking the time to contact me and share your thoughts. I look forward to hearing from you again in the future. Again, welcome to the area! If I can ever be of any service to you in the future, please don’t hesitate to contact me again.

Sincerely,

Peter MacGregor
State Representative
73rd District

SteveS
05-07-2014, 09:49 AM
I would say that yes it would apply to your sheriff on this instance.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

How do you think this applies?

I am not sure it is as clear cut as you think. Not only are we dealing with a federal law, but we are not dealing with an ordinance or a regulation.

I think it is an excellent question.

Divegeek
05-07-2014, 09:57 AM
Steve, what federal law are you referring to? Under state law I would think that an unsecured lobby to a police department office would fall under preemption.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

DP425
05-07-2014, 10:35 AM
Steve, what federal law are you referring to? Under state law I would think that an unsecured lobby to a police department office would fall under preemption.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

He's responding to the issue of the sheriff requiring monitored alarm, safe and inspections to sign off on the CLEO block for NFA firearms.

Whats funny is his reply is to your comment that this bill would apply to Roundballer's sheriff issues. Are you that easily mixed up?? lol

Divegeek
05-07-2014, 12:51 PM
He's responding to the issue of the sheriff requiring monitored alarm, safe and inspections to sign off on the CLEO block for NFA firearms.

Whats funny is his reply is to your comment that this bill would apply to Roundballer's sheriff issues. Are you that easily mixed up?? lol
You're right, I was mixing up the threads.

I would still think the preemption law would cover it as he is requiring more than the state, which requires the federal tax stamp/license.

TheQ
05-09-2014, 12:23 PM
"I am a sportsman and a CPL holder myself. I have earned the endorsement of the National Rifle Association on multiple occasions."

I'm not saying your guy is a FUDD, but many FUDDs say this. My Rep, Andy Schor, tells me he owns guns. *puke*

Marcus
05-09-2014, 12:32 PM
"I am a sportsman and a CPL holder myself. I have earned the endorsement of the National Rifle Association on multiple occasions."

I'm not saying your guy is a FUDD, but many FUDDs say this. My Rep, Andy Schor, tells me he owns guns. *puke*

This was important too:



Thank you for taking the time to contact me and share your thoughts regarding House Bill 5500. I always appreciate the input I receive from my constituents. I support HB 5500.

TheQ
05-09-2014, 12:34 PM
...except he didn't cosponsor it.

Marcus
05-09-2014, 12:48 PM
...except he didn't cosponsor it.

Hmm...I don't enough about the process to know what is relevant. If I need to write a scathing email (or many) in the future i will.

TheQ
05-09-2014, 12:50 PM
A cosponsor puts his name on legislation at the time it's introduced. Your guy didn't.

Co sponsoring = going on record.

bigt8261
05-09-2014, 02:33 PM
It's good to see MacGregor support the bill. It should be noted that he is the only Republican from the GR area that didn't cosponsor. If he had cosponsored, then there would have been a complete circle around GR.

Divegeek
05-09-2014, 03:31 PM
It was my understanding that there was a abnormally short period for co-sponsors to sign on for this bill. Something to do with it being released at the rally.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk