Welcome to MGO's Internet Discussion Forums…Please Consider Becoming a Dues-Paying Member of the ORG…Click >>>>>HERE<<<<< for more info…………****DONATIONS**** can also be made toward MGO's Legal Defense Fund and/or MGO's Forums >>>>>HERE<<<<<

KROGER

Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 122
  1. #21
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    sw michigan
    Posts
    5,095
    Quote Originally Posted by Roundballer View Post
    And 584, 585 have been passed the committee with an S-1 substitute that takes as much as it gives.

    They NEED to DIE!
    If you could give the Cliff Note version so I can make those points to my Senator, I'd appreciate it.

  2. #22
    MGO Board of Directors

    President PhotoTom's Avatar


    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Wayne Co. MI
    Posts
    33,706
    As drafted in S1:

    (11) AN INDIVIDUAL LICENSED UNDER THIS ACT TO CARRY A CONCEALED PISTOL, OR WHO IS EXEMPT FROM LICENSURE UNDER SECTION 12A(H), SHALL NOT INTENTIONALLY DISPLAY OR OPENLY CARRY A PISTOL ON THE PREMISES LISTED IN SUBSECTION (1)(A) TO (H) UNLESS 1 OF THE FOLLOWING APPLIES:
    (A) THE INDIVIDUAL OWNS THE PREMISES DESCRIBED IN SUBSECTION (1).
    (B) THE INDIVIDUAL IS EMPLOYED OR CONTRACTED BY THE OWNER OR OTHER PERSON WITH CONTROL OVER THE PREMISES DESCRIBED IN SUBSECTION (1) AND THE POSSESSION OF THE PISTOL IS TO PROVIDE SECURITY SERVICES FOR THE PREMISES OR IS OTHERWISE IN THE SCOPE OF THE INDIVIDUAL'S OFFICIAL DUTIES.
    (C) THE INDIVIDUAL IS ACTING WITH THE EXPRESS WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE OWNER OF THE PREMISES OR AN AGENT OF THE OWNER OF THE PREMISES.
    (12) (6) An individual who violates this section is responsible for a state civil infraction or guilty of a crime as follows:
    (a) Except as provided in subdivisions (b) and (c), the individual is responsible for a state civil infraction and may be fined not more than $500.00. The court shall order the individual's license to carry a concealed pistol suspended for 6 months.
    (b) For a second violation, the individual is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than $1,000.00. The court shall order the individual's license to carry a concealed pistol revoked.
    (c) For a third or subsequent violation, the individual is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 4 years or a fine of not more than $5,000.00, or both. The court shall order the individual's license to carry a concealed pistol revoked.
    That will screw-over LEO's that have CPL's…especially reserve/auxiliary officers.
    That will also screw-over anyone that accidentally allows their firearm to be seen.
    Does "printing" count? If not, how "thick" or "opaque" must the fabric be?

    Not good...
    Don't let yesterday use up too much of today - Will Rogers
    DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed in my posts are my own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, or official policies of Michigan Gun Owners.

  3. #23
    MGO Member luckless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Sault Ste. Marie
    Posts
    5,102
    Quote Originally Posted by Flash-hider View Post
    If you could give the Cliff Note version so I can make those points to my Senator, I'd appreciate it.
    It is important that we call on this. It is getting quickly rammed through while the Senators are stuck in the Lansing echo chamber. They need to hear from more citizens than just "Meekhof".

  4. #24
    MGO Board of Directors

    President PhotoTom's Avatar


    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Wayne Co. MI
    Posts
    33,706
    The NRA-ILA is urging members to SUPPORT these bills…

    If you follow their lead, this is the auto-generated letter that will be sent (you CAN edit it, though):


    As a law-abiding Second Amendment supporter in your district, I urge you to please support SB 0527, SB 0584, SB 0585, and SB 0586.

    SB 0527 ensures that anti-gun bureaucrats do not prevent loving and supporting homes from caring for foster children just because prospective foster parents choose to exercise their Second Amendment rights. Foster parents are like any other parents who simply want to care for their children, including exercising their Second Amendment rights in order to protect their families. The needs of foster children should be placed above any gun control agenda.

    So called gun-free zones leave law-abiding citizens defense while doing nothing to address criminals who carry firearms illegally. Senate Bills 0584, 0585, and 0586 will reform gun-free zones to ensure that law abiding citizens who are licensed to carry firearms are not left defenseless once they cross arbitrary thresholds into certain areas.

    Again, please consider voting for SB 0527, SB 0584, SB 0585, and SB 0586. Thank you.
    Don't let yesterday use up too much of today - Will Rogers
    DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed in my posts are my own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, or official policies of Michigan Gun Owners.

  5. #25
    MGO Member Divegeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Dundee
    Posts
    2,746
    And there is a section that kills any chance of getting to carry on university campuses: "(10) NOTHING IN THIS SECTION PROHIBITS A COLLEGE OR UNIVERSITY THAT HAS THE AUTONOMOUS AUTHORITY UNDER THE STATE CONSTITUTION OF 1963 TO ENACT AND ENFORCE AN ORDINANCE REGULATING THE POSSESSION, CARRYING, USE, OR TRANSPORTATION OF A PISTOL FROM ENACTING OR ENFORCING SUCH AN ORDINANCE."

  6. #26
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Roseville
    Posts
    3,795
    Quote Originally Posted by PhotoTom View Post
    The NRA-ILA is urging members to SUPPORT these bills…

    If you follow their lead, this is the auto-generated letter that will be sent (you CAN edit it, though):
    so is mcrgo. I saw MOC was testifying about this, do we know if they were testifying for or against?

  7. #27
    MGO Member luckless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Sault Ste. Marie
    Posts
    5,102
    Quote Originally Posted by fozzy71 View Post
    so is mcrgo. I saw MOC was testifying about this, do we know if they were testifying for or against?
    MOC is against, as I understand it. Remember, when Meekhof says that MCRGO favors his bill, it is the same thing as saying, "Meekhof favors Meekhof's bill."

  8. #28
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    sw michigan
    Posts
    5,095
    Thank you Tom!

  9. #29
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Galesburg
    Posts
    5,360
    Quote Originally Posted by PhotoTom View Post
    In the nutshell, if an individual completes an additional 8 hours of training (in addition to the current training requirements) and that class includes range time with at least 94 rounds fired…the individual can simply request to be exempted from the no concealed carry zones.

    If they do so when initially applying or renewing, no additional charge. If done prior to renewal time, a $20 fee applies.

    SB 0585 is just housekeeping following the above changes.
    Trying to wrap my head around this extra training requirement. What would be taught that we don't already know and have been trained for?

  10. #30
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    438
    Quote Originally Posted by ChaneyD View Post
    Trying to wrap my head around this extra training requirement. What would be taught that we don't already know and have been trained for?
    A good question... probably just "more restraint". I can't imagine what would be taught that would make any difference.

    I like the idea of these bills, except for the part where it makes open carry a criminal offense, and strengthens a college/university's ability to restrict. Those are no good. Otherwise, I see it as a stepping stone. If we had this, where CPL holders could carry into current PFZ's, and after a few years of no incidents, where nothing happens.. we can point and say "See? Concealed carriers aren't the problem." For whatever that's worth. And it may open the door to more firearms freedoms.

Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
only search Michigan Gun Owners Forums
MGO's Facebook MGO's Twitter