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 4 of 11 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 102
  1. #31
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Posts
    16,971
    Quote Originally Posted by DEVIL DOG View Post
    Private sales would also require a BGC
    Nope. Private sales would just require the registration process, same as before.

  2. #32
    MGO Board of Directors

    President PhotoTom's Avatar


    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Wayne Co. MI
    Posts
    33,707
    Quote Originally Posted by DEVIL DOG View Post
    Private sales would also require a BGC
    Quote Originally Posted by Leader View Post
    Why?

    Private sales aren't federally regulated.

    Nothing in the state laws says the lifetime license doesn't qualify for in state sales.
    Quote Originally Posted by alinc100 View Post
    See posts #12 & 15. I questioned BGC for private sales .
    Agreed, this bill would have no effect on private sales of handguns in the State of Michigan.
    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. #33
    MGO Member JLHOG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Wayland, MI
    Posts
    716
    Are they doing this because they may do away with licensing all together in the future? Collect more money while they can and them tell us we don't need a license to carry.
    Join MGO Date 07-25-2007
    AMAC Member

  4. #34
    MGO Board of Directors

    President PhotoTom's Avatar


    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Wayne Co. MI
    Posts
    33,707
    Quote Originally Posted by JLHOG View Post
    Are they doing this because they may do away with licensing all together in the future? Collect more money while they can and them tell us we don't need a license to carry.
    Personally, I think it is the opposite…I think this bill is intended to appease the Constitutional Carry folks so they quit pushing for doing away with the CPL process altogether. If so, they are banking on the "I've got mine" mentality since any "I've got mine" folks will never have to apply for another CPL again (unless they repeal this later).
    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. #35
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    sw michigan
    Posts
    5,095
    Quote Originally Posted by brass hat View Post
    I'd rather go through the background check for sales than the hassle and expense of the cpl renewals.
    I would agree. Even with a CPL 95% of my purchases that have been through an FFL have been run through the background check. The side benefit of have a CPL is that I don't have to run to the Sheriff's Dept. in order to purchase a pistol. Of course that has led to several impulse purchases.

  6. #36
    MGO Member DEVIL DOG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    NEAR METRO AIRPORT
    Posts
    7,012
    Quote Originally Posted by zigziggityzoo View Post
    Federal law / ATF Regulations only allows for a permit to substitute for a NICS check if the permit requires a background check/renewal every 5 years. That's why MI CPL is NEVER valid for more than 5 years exactly to the day.
    This is the part that makes me think a lifetime license would require getting another BGC every 5 years.
    ΥΣΜΧ SEMPER FIDELIS !

    LIFE MEMBER OF THE WORLD'S LARGEST FRATERNITY

    71 AND COUNTING

  7. #37
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Posts
    16,971
    Quote Originally Posted by DEVIL DOG View Post
    This is the part that makes me think a lifetime license would require getting another BGC every 5 years.
    The easy solution is to do what Indiana did - which is to make the lifetime license separate and then the feds just won't recognize it. I assume this is what is going to happen. The law doesn't provision for repeated background checks for the lifetime license - if you want that, get the regular license.

  8. #38
    MGO Member luckless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Sault Ste. Marie
    Posts
    5,102
    Quote Originally Posted by PhotoTom View Post
    Personally, I think it is the opposite…I think this bill is intended to appease the Constitutional Carry folks so they quit pushing for doing away with the CPL process altogether. If so, they are banking on the "I've got mine" mentality since any "I've got mine" folks will never have to apply for another CPL again (unless they repeal this later).
    This doesn't seem to address the problem with expiring/forfeiting training certificates and still requires gun owners to put their fingerprints into AFIS, forever, like criminals. There is also the tax involved. I can't think of another civil right that requires a $165 price tag.

    I don't see this appeasing Constitutional Carry folk.
    Last edited by luckless; 01-22-2018 at 05:58 AM.

  9. #39
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Downriver
    Posts
    756
    Quote Originally Posted by luckless View Post
    I don't see this appeasing Constitutional Carry folk.
    It doesn't. Mainly because of this:

    Quote Originally Posted by bgreed View Post
    So how about drop all the asking permission to exercise your rights nonsense and just go with what Michigan's version of the US 2nd amendment says.
    That you have the right to keep and bear arms for the defense of yourself and the state. There is no mother may I clause nor with the permission and approval of clause.
    And there's this:

    Quote Originally Posted by luckless View Post
    I can't think of another civil right that requires a $165 price tag.
    You nailed it.

  10. #40
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Howell
    Posts
    11,687
    Quote Originally Posted by luckless View Post
    I can't think of another civil right that requires a $165 price tag.
    I believe the right to keep and bear arms is a constitutional right, not a civil right. The former comes from one of our founding documents, while the latter come from the various bills passed into law by Congress (e.g., ADA passed in 1990, FHA passed in 1968, Civil Rights Act passed in 1964, Voting Rights Act of 1965, etc.)

Page 4 of 11 FirstFirst 12345678 ... 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