HB 5574 right to transportation (parking lot bill)

[Tallbear]

HB 5574 of 2016 (http://www.legislature.mi.gov/mileg.aspx?page=getobject&objectname=2016-HB-5574)
Weapons; other; right to transportation and storage of firearms under certain circumstances; allow. Amends title of 1927 PA 372 (MCL 28.421 - 28.435) & adds secs. 1c & 16.
Last Action: 4/20/2016 bill electronically reproduced 04/19/2016

[MichiGUNDer]

HB 5574 of 2016 (http://www.legislature.mi.gov/mileg.aspx?page=getobject&objectname=2016-HB-5574)
Weapons; other; right to transportation and storage of firearms under certain circumstances; allow. Amends title of 1927 PA 372 (MCL 28.421 - 28.435) & adds secs. 1c & 16.
Last Action: 4/20/2016 bill electronically reproduced 04/19/2016


This looks like a bill we all need to get behind and make calls to our representatives.

[Tallbear]

HB 5574 of 2016
Weapons; other; right to transportation and storage of firearms under certain circumstances; allow. Amends title of 1927 PA 372 (MCL 28.421 - 28.435) & adds secs. 1c & 16.
Last Action: 4/20/2016 per Rule 41 referred to Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

[MI_XD]

Yes! This looks like a revival of HB 1028 from a previous year. Let's hope that the House can get something done on this, unlike 1028, which died in committee!

Hmmm... Must be an Election year??!

[Roundballer]

HB 5574 of 2016
Weapons; other; right to transportation and storage of firearms under certain circumstances; allow. Amends title of 1927 PA 372 (MCL 28.421 - 28.435) & adds secs. 1c & 16.
Last Action: 4/20/2016 per Rule 41 referred to Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
Is there any information as to why they did that?

The Judiciary Committee had about 4 of the sponsors on the committee, whereas there is only 2 in the Transportation Committee, and it is a larger committee.


Are they "setting this up" to fail?

[10x25mm]

Is there any information as to why they did that?

The Judiciary Committee had about 4 of the sponsors on the committee, whereas there is only 2 in the Transportation Committee, and it is a larger committee.

Are they "setting this up" to fail?

Bill was originally referred to Judiciary Committee on 19 April by the House, but Speaker Cotter changed the referral to the Transportation Committee on 20 April. He is allowed to do this without comment by House Rule 41 (5).

Original referral, Page 563:

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(iepsmyj2gmuawsegnresiuq2))/mileg.aspx?page=GetObject&objectname=2016-HJ-04-19-035

Cotter's redirection, Page 573:

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(iepsmyj2gmuawsegnresiuq2))/mileg.aspx?page=GetObject&objectname=2016-HJ-04-20-036

House Rule 41, Page 13:

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2015-2016/resolutionadopted/House/pdf/2015-HAR-0001.pdf

No information why Cotter redirected HB 5574 to Transportation, but it might affect the Motor Vehicle Code.

[luckless]

This must just be an election year thing. There are better bills that have been around longer and are getting nowhere.

[luckless]

Is there any information as to why they did that?

The Judiciary Committee had about 4 of the sponsors on the committee, whereas there is only 2 in the Transportation Committee, and it is a larger committee.


Are they "setting this up" to fail?
Maybe it is barter materiel. The transportation committee might need two more votes for the next tax hike, bike path, Detroit bussing, Ann Arbor Amtrak or roundabout boondoggle.

[Roundballer]

Is there any information as to why they did that?

No information why Cotter redirected HB 5574 to Transportation, but it might affect the Motor Vehicle Code.
So, you don't know either!


All of the rest of that had already been looked up, as well as comparing the make-up of the two different committees.


Maybe it is barter materiel. The transportation committee might need two more votes for the next tax hike, bike path, Detroit bussing, Ann Arbor Amtrak or roundabout boondoggle.
That is a possibility, I just wish there was some "openness" involved in this process. I know it will be ugly, but it would also be better to know. How else can we really judge what our representation is doing for us? If everything is a "backdoor deal", we only have the "look what I did for you" posturing of the campaign season.

But seriously, what does "transportation" have to do with storing in a parked vehicle?

[appliancebrad]

Michigan Chamber of Commerce, Michigan Manufacturers Association and the Utilities are all in opposition. Going to be a very uphill fight unless there are carve outs. And there should not be and I oppose carve outs. So it's probably going nowhere.

[bigt8261]

HB 5574 – Necessary Pro-Gun Protection, Or Ominous Pyrrhic Precedent

MOC's team put together an article detailing the debate that usually comes up with this type of bill.

http://248shooter.com/index.php/hb-5574-necessary-pro-gun-protection-ominous-pyrrhic-precedent/