Michigan Gun Rights Activists Win In Court!

[Smokepole]

Information on donating to the MGO legal fund is at the bottom of this article.

Michigan Gun Rights Activists Win In Court



By Kerry Picket
Daily Caller
May 27th. 2017

A Michigan circuit judge ruled in favor of concealed gun rights activists Friday deciding that it was unlawful for local event venues to restrict the carrying of firearms, Mlive reports.

Supporting the claims of gun rights groups Michigan Open Carry Inc. and Michigan Gun Owners Inc., Kent County Circuit Judge Joseph Rossi stated the Grand Rapids-Kent County Convention/Arena Authority’s weapons rule violated Michigan’s firearms laws.

“Hopefully, my ruling inspires them to adjust their policy,” Rossi said. “The court disagrees with the language… I’ll let the CAA determine its policy, as long as it fits the law.”

The lawsuit was filed after a March 2016 incident when officials told three exhibitors with holstered firearms at the West Michigan Women’s Expo at DeVos Place that they must not enter the site with their guns, or else be charged with trespassing.

According to MLive, the exhibitors were there to give information about self-defense choices. One exhibitor exited the area and the other two disarmed themselves.

The owner of the DeVos Place property does not allow concealed carry, but does allow for lawful open carry as per Michigan state law and the wishes of any group that leases the property.

The gun rights activists argued that management cannot ban firearms on the properties and requested to preclude them from “enforcing invalid attempts at firearm legislation/regulation which is preempted by state law.”

Donate to MGO

LEGAL DEFENSE FUND:


Thank you for your interest in donating to the MGO Legal Defense fund! Your generous donation will help our fight to defend the second amendment rights of the gun owners of Michigan.
Donate Here

[DrScaryGuy]

Isn't the ruling because the city owns the place and can't overrule gun preemption?
If that is the case somebody should notify the author that they are way off on the reasoning, and that saying no venue can set policy is a dangerous mistake

[JasonJ]

Isn't the ruling because the city owns the place and can't overrule gun preemption?
If that is the case somebody should notify the author that they are way off on the reasoning, and that saying no venue can set policy is a dangerous mistake

An important distinction....

And if this is because the city owns the convention center, that brings this full circle to a complaint I had last summer about the Tall Ships festival in Bay City... the park where it took place is owned by the city/the people... like a convention center rented out or licensed for an event, I would presume (perhaps incorrectly) that ultimately as a municipal property open to the public, state preemption would apply.

Nonetheless, a good ruling that should have a trickle-down effect to other venues.

[partdeux]

And if this is because the city owns the convention center, that brings this full circle to a complaint I had last summer about the Tall Ships festival in Bay City... the park where it took place is owned by the city/the people...

did you file a lawsuit against the city to correct this?

[JasonJ]

did you file a lawsuit against the city to correct this?

Negative. I posed the question here in the Legal forum and the consensus, including input from the actual lawyers was that it was a valid and legal restriction due to the way the city "leased" or "licensed" use of the park to a private company for a ticketed event. The idea being that it then became NOT public property (or municipal) and instead was considered a private event subject to the event owners discretion on weapons restrictions. I even had to take my pepper spray and SAK back to the car... which was a long walk away. I certainly made a scene, and later when the group needed to open a package and a small knife would have been useful, I made it publicly known how ironic that was.

I disagree with the conversion of a normally public park into what is essentially private property. However, I was consulted in such a way that it was not something I could challenge in court. If that is not the case (especially after this recent ruling) I'll consider an official protest or file suit in the future.

[10x25mm]

Gongwer News Service ran a headline yesterday which indicates that a court (Michigan Court of Appeals?) overturned this Circuit Court ruling:

https://www.gongwer.com/programming/index.cfm

Court Overturns Ruling Striking Down DeVos Place Gun Policy

The rest of the story is behind Gongwer's very expensive paywall.