HB 4876 Prohibit flamethrower

[Tallbear]

HB 4876 of 2015 (http://www.legislature.mi.gov/mileg.aspx?page=getobject&objectname=2015-HB-4876)
Weapons; other; sale or possession of flamethrowers; prohibit. Amends sec. 224 of 1931 PA 328 (MCL 750.224).
Last Action: 9/17/2015 referred to Committee on Judiciary

[DP425]

Why? Because there have been so many flame thrower attacks? So many forest fires started by flame throwers?

[Kaeto]

It does more than ban flamethrowers. It also bans Silencers as well as legally owned Full Autos.

[DP425]

It does more than ban flamethrowers. It also bans Silencers as well as legally owned Full Autos.

No, it does not.

All it does is change the items already there from listed via comma to listed via number... and adds flame thrower. It doesn't change anything concerning suppressors. The law is for all purposes, identical to this bill in regards to suppressors as it stands now

[Kaeto]

No, it does not.

All it does is change the items already there from listed via comma to listed via number... and adds flame thrower. It doesn't change anything concerning suppressors. The law is for all purposes, identical to this bill in regards to suppressors as it stands now

Sec. 224. (1) A person shall not manufacture, sell, offer for

sale, or possess any of the following:

(a) A machine gun or firearm that shoots or is designed to

shoot automatically more than 1 shot without manual reloading, by a

single function of the trigger.

(b) A muffler or silencer.

(c) A bomb or bombshell.

(d) A blackjack, slungshot, billy, metallic knuckles, sand

club, sand bag, or bludgeon.

(e) A device, weapon, cartridge, container, or contrivance

designed to render a person temporarily or permanently disabled by

the ejection, release, or emission of a gas or other substance.

(f) A flamethrower.


That kind of says that it bans them period. As well as banning pepper spray.

[Divegeek]

Continue reading down and you will see:
(3) Subsection (1) does not apply to any of the following:

(a) A self-defense spray or foam device as defined in section

224d.

(b) A person manufacturing firearms, explosives, or munitions

of war by virtue of a contract with a department of the government

of the United States.

(c) A person licensed by the secretary of the treasury of the

United States or the secretary's delegate to manufacture, sell, or

possess a machine gun, or a device, weapon, cartridge, container,

or contrivance described in subsection (1).

Only the parts that are in bold in the the link are new. The rest of the language is existing. If this passes, nothing will change for silencers, full auto, or self defense sprays.

Now, I think people are just in a panic about a Michigan based company that recently started manufacturing and selling flamethrowers. The even advertise on this very message board. Personally I have no problem with people owning flame throwers. If they cause damage or injuries, there are already laws on the books that can handle it.

Edited to add the company that probably set these pants wetting Dems in to action is XM42.com

[DP425]

That kind of says that it bans them period. As well as banning pepper spray.

I guess I shouldn't assume people are well informed, or even inclined to read the full law.


That part where it mentions EXCEPT by license? That is how all of those items are legal. That is how suppressors are legal in MI; the AG decided that the tax stamp serves as a license. Obvious downside to this is, your next AG could simply issue an opinion over-turning the current one, turning thousands of suppressor owners into criminals overnight.

[partdeux]

Where is the need to ban flame thrower?

[Roundballer]

Where is the need to ban flame thrower?
It is a matter of keeping up with the "Jones". The neighboring city (Warren), through direct pressure of their idiot mayor, just passed similar "law". Warren just placed the ordinance in the books, to take effect in 30 days, to ban all of this "flamethrower" stuff. That directly affects the company XM42.com, they are located in Warren, and now they will have to find new facilities.

Now the State Rep, Sarah Roberts (D-St. Claire Shores) the neighboring district feels the need to take this "ban" State wide. She has the likes of Jim Townsend joining her in this legislation, and they don't care about anything except asserting their will on this subject. It doesn't matter that there are no instances of crimes committed with these devices, and that they are not regulated on a Federal level.

It should be plain and simple, if there is no history of using these devices in a criminal manner, there should be no need or reason to restrict or ban them.

Sawzalls, cutting torches, and various types of tool bars can be and are used for criminal activities too, but they are not banned. Were is the "common sense" in this legislation?

[solarguy]

This is classic nanny state panic. Just because they don't think the general public can be trusted with anything remotely dangerous, doesn't give them the right to impose their world view and incorrect assumptions on free people.

It is a solution in search of a problem.

[[ion] C2]

Warren Mayor: “This is a potential terrorist weapon waiting to be used and we should stop it now before it gets wide distribution.”

A box cutter was used by terrorist as a weapon. How many things can you claim as being “potentially” a weapon? You can do great bodily harm with household items or even your bare hands. Just because this device looks spectacular and scary to an uninformed politician, the fear-mongering goes unchecked. It’s a showpiece, it’s a tool. It’s designed for fun and for doing work. If you’re afraid of it, don’t buy it. But don’t prevent my ability to own it out of your own fear and lack of understanding.

People have had flamethrowers for years without issue. There are countless YouTube videos on making your own with rudimentary items. The XM42 is designed to be safe in its operation. Scared politicians think it's going to make everyone all of a sudden turn into arsonists. Quit blaming the tools and blame the person if they misuse something and cause harm.

[oil dripper]

So my Zippo will be illegal?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/97/Zippo-Slim-1968-Lit.jpg

[Kaeto]

I think it would also end up prohibiting those propane ice melting, and weed burning torches.

37342

[Roundballer]

So my Zippo will be illegal?

No, I don't think that the Zippo would meet the definition. That is simply because it has a wick.


(a) "Flamethrower" means any portable device designed or intended specifically to emit or propel a burning stream of combustible or flammable liquid as a projectile.


I think it would also end up prohibiting those propane ice melting, and weed burning torches.

Because it requires: "emit or propel a burning stream of combustible or flammable liquid", most "lighters" and things like propane or acetylene torches would not fall into the definition. They don't "squirt" out a liquid.