H.B. 4982 special exemption

[Tallbear]

Standing Committee Meeting

Judiciary, Rep. Mark Meadows, Chair

Date: 03/24/2010

Time: 10:30 AM

Place: 521 House Office Building, Lansing, MI

Agenda:
HB 5744 (Kandrevas) Torts; defenses; openness and obviousness of condition; establish as issue of comparative fault only.

HB 5893 (Lemmons) Elections; judicial; option of paying filing fee in lieu of signatures; provide for judicial candidates to district court and circuit court.

For Referral to the Committee on Tourism, Outdoor Recreations and Natural Resources:

HB 4982 (Slezak) Weapons; concealed; exemption for certain prosecuting attorneys and assistant prosecuting attorneys from concealed weapons no-carry zones; provide for.

To view text of legislation go to
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/mileg.asp?page=Bills

[wishn-i-was-fishn]

Thanks for posting. I received yesterday and was going to post it.

Is anyone else besides me just a little bit irritated with our legislature continuing to create special classes of citizens in terms of the right carry a firearm for self-defense. Isn't it interesting that all of the special exemptions go to government employees???

[Roundballer]

Is anyone else besides me just a little bit irritated with our legislature continuing to create special classes of citizens in terms of the right carry a firearm for self-defense. Isn't it interesting that all of the special exemptions go to government employees???
That was my exact thought as I read this. :yeahthat:
Watch this one pass through both houses without even slowing down while HB 4334 (removal of PFZ's) was sent to Committee to die.

[appliancebrad]

We can kill this one if we try hard enough.

[Done Deal]

Why are lawyers any better than the rest of us?

[fbuckner]

Why are cops or judges?

[Quaamik]

Because we allowed them to put the no carry zones in the law.

We knew when the law was proposed that retired cops, judges, prosecutors, and other "civil servents" who had long been accustomed to easily getting a CPL with no restrictions (while ordinary people could not) would chafe under the restrictions. There were to groups of thought on the subject: the first) That these people, accustomed to carrying everwhere, would be newfound allies in the attempt to repeal the restrictions. the second) That these people would fight the "shall issue" law as soon as they realised the restrictions and then fight to get it repealed or to get special privlidges back for them alone.

Once shall issue was passed we could have fought hard to make sure the law didn't get altered to allow a "special class" of permits. But far to many were comfortable with the restrictions. Happy to allowed to carry at all, the restrictions were accepted as inconsequential. Many were willing to support the idea that retired police were somehow more trustworthy than the rest of us and could be trusted to carry where we could not. Even more were willing to concede that former police, due to thier line of work, were more likely to be targeted by criminals. And so we soon would up with 2 classes of permits: One that is "restricted" and one that is "un-restricted". Much the same as our old system with "general", "home, bank & business", and "hunting & target" permits.

Now we just have a less restricted, more easliy available version of the "home, bank & business" permits.