HB 5357 Eliminate permit requirement to carry and transport

[Tallbear]

HB 5357 of 2016 (http://www.legislature.mi.gov/mileg.aspx?page=getobject&objectname=2016-HB-5357)
Weapons; concealed; permit requirement to carry and transport a concealed pistol; eliminate for certain individuals. Amends sec. 12a of 1927 PA 372 (MCL 28.432a).
Last Action: 2/17/2016 bill electronically reproduced 02/16/2016

[Roundballer]

Sec. 12a. (1) The requirements of this act for obtaining a license to carry a concealed pistol do not apply to any of the following:

<-snip->

(l) An individual who is 21 years of age or older and who is not otherwise prohibited from possessing a firearm.



(2) An individual who is carrying a concealed pistol under subsection (1)(l) and who does not have a license to carry a concealed pistol shall, when stopped by a peace officer, immediately disclose to the peace officer that he or she is carrying a pistol concealed upon his or her person or in his or her vehicle.

(3) If a peace officer stops an individual and that individual is carrying a concealed pistol under subsection (1)(l), the peace officer may detain the individual temporarily to determine if the individual is prohibited from possessing a firearm.


(4) An individual who violates subsection (2) is responsible for a state civil infraction and shall be fined not more than $500.00.


They have to throw that disclosure crap in there, and now without a CPL at the ready, they will be able to detain without RAS while they "check you out".

This is hogwash. And don't give me that "pass it and we can "fix" it later" crap. That NEVER happens.

[luckless]

I'll bet this rep claims to be pro gun during election time.

[Leader]

They have to throw that disclosure crap in there, and now without a CPL at the ready, they will be able to detain without RAS while they "check you out".

This is hogwash. And don't give me that "pass it and we can "fix" it later" crap. That NEVER happens.

Why even bother, this is going no where.
And no chance they will take out the notify or stop & detain for no reason.

I just wonder what other crap they will add before it gets forgotten.

[langenc]

They have to throw that disclosure crap in there, and now without a CPL at the ready, they will be able to detain without RAS while they "check you out".

This is hogwash. And don't give me that "pass it and we can "fix" it later" crap. That NEVER happens.

Kinda like my rep and special groups (carveouts) getting special privileges. He says "let all the special groups get theirs and then it will be one step for everyone else." We have been at it 15 yrs now and that is no where in sight. I guess I need to ask him when he will write that bill??

[Roundballer]

We have been at it 15 yrs now and that is no where in sight. I guess I need to ask him when he will write that bill??
It won't happen before he is term-limited out. That is a reason not to believe in any "long-term" plans that they might come up with, and they need to be told that!

[AxlMyk]

(2) An individual who is carrying a concealed pistol under subsection (1)(l) and who does not have a license to carry a concealed pistol shall, when stopped by a peace officer, immediately disclose to the peace officer that he or she is carrying a pistol concealed upon his or her person or in his or her vehicle.
Does this mean licensed persons don't have to declare a weapon? That will never fly.

[DEVIL DOG]

I know my 67 year old brain is pretty tired, but how can someone over 21 WITHOUT a CPL carry concealed ? Am I missing the obvious here? Are they hoping to do away with CPL's ?

[DP425]

I know my 67 year old brain is pretty tired, but how can someone over 21 WITHOUT a CPL carry concealed ? Am I missing the obvious here? Are they hoping to do away with CPL's ?

This whole bill is to make MI constitutional carry so CPLs are optional

[DP425]

Does this mean licensed persons don't have to declare a weapon? That will never fly.

No, it references back to the CPL law that requires notification.

[luckless]

I believe that the introduction of this bill identifies our obstacle in the House Judiciary Committee.

[Roundballer]

I believe that the introduction of this bill identifies our obstacle in the House Judiciary Committee.

Nope, this just identifies a Representative that has had almost nothing passed this term and needs to "appeal" to his constituents as if he is working for us. This is an election year and these guys will be putting up a bunch of stuff that they will not work to even get heard. This and his other bill: HB 5358 (http://www.migunowners.org/forum/showthread.php?349770-HB-5358-Allow-transportation-and-possession) are just a show that he is putting on.

[ninjatoth]

The problem here is the disclosure clause. Disclosure is required even without a CPL which means, if interacting with LE a CPL holder can calmly mention "CPL" and "am carrying", but the non-CPL holder more or less has to just come out and disclose -"GUN".

It just seems a bit problematic to my common sense despite my support of all things constitutional carry related.