80% Handgun registration process question

[bigt8261]

Haynes v. Neshewat 477 Mich. 29, 729 NW2d 488 Mich, (2007)

To resolve the issue before us, we must interpret the CRA. The primary goal of statutory
interpretation is to give effect to the intent of the Legislature. Ford Motor Co. v. Woodhaven, 475
Mich. 425, 438, 716 N.W.2d 247 (2006). If the statute is unambiguous, this Court will apply its
language as written. Id. When a statute specifically defines a given term, that definition alone
controls. Tryc v. Michigan Veterans' Facility, 451 Mich. 129, 136, 545 N.W.2d 642 (1996).

[Jared1981]

tlagnhoj, if you are referencing something from the Firearms Act (1927 PA 372; MCL 28.421 et seq.) and you use the term "purchaser" or "seller" in any manner that does not comport with the following, then you are wrong.

MCL 28.421(1)(j)


MCL 28.421(1)(p)

Not much I can do when I list the subsection and he quotes the generic sections and goes off on a rampage. If he wants to stay stupid then that's his prerogative.

What concerns me is that MGO claims to be an "educational" forum and they actually let people go on about committing felonies. They should know better.

It's just sad that an educational forum thread is loaded with people telling others to commit perjury.

[Jared1981]

If you are able to read, please refer to the link I posted... The site is titled "Michigan Legislature Michigan Compiled Laws Complete Through PA 7 of 2018"

You do at least understand that MCL means "Michigan Compiled Laws", right??? Where you get MCI from is a mystery!!! Probably the same place you get your information about filling out forms... Rectal extraction I suppose.



And you haven't quoted one single thing from ANY source that even remotely pertaining to filling out a RI-10 or RI-60 form for a self made pistol. There is NO SUBSECTION! IT'S NOT IN THE LAW!!!

Jarod... How many times have you made a pistol and filled out the forms for a "self-made" pistol??? Zero, am I correct??? How many times have you asked a lawyer HOW to fill out one of these forms? ZERO obviously! How many times have you sought the guidance of the MSP with regard to filling out these forms for a "self-made" pistol??? ZERO, obviously.



So... after being told how wrong you are here and here: https://www.migunowners.org/forum/sh...I-have-a-CPL-) I'm shooting from the hip???

Okay smart guy... based on MCL 28.422(5) , which you quote in the above linked thread, WHO fills out the "purchaser" and "sellers" portions and signs it???? Clearly some has to!



ROTFLMAO!!!! You DON'T get it at all!!! THERE IS NO LAW THAT CLEARLY COVERS THIS TOPIC!!! However, MCL 28.422(1) makes it clear that "Except as otherwise provided in this act, a person shall not purchase, carry, possess, or transport a pistol in this state without first having obtained a license for the pistol as prescribed in this section."

Since you tell us there is no seller to complete the requirements of MCL 28.422(5), how do comply with MCL 28.422(1)???

Let me give you a hint... We have been down this road before... MANY TIMES! Quads, Nmadole, SteveS, Tlagnhoj... All give the same answer. Who's shooting from the hip??? Who's making **** up???



If you manufacture a pistol you ARE the manufacturer! Simple enough! Doesn't matter who the "purchaser" or "seller" is. You make it, you're the "manufacturer" One box down!

Clearly under MCL 28.422(5) the person who acquired the pistol is the "purchaser" It doesn't matter HOW you came to poses the pistol, ("If an individual purchases or otherwise acquires a pistol,"). You become the "purchaser". "The purchaser shall also sign his or her name in ink indicating the purchase or other acquisition of the pistol from the seller." (also from MCL 28.422(5)). I assume you understand the LEGAL meaning of the word "SHALL". It's not a pretty please with sugar on top. It is a COMMAND or REQUIREMENT, not a request.

NOTE: not the definition given in MCL 28.421(1)(j). However, well within the letter and spirit of MCL 28.422(5) and clearly within the intent of the law. All of which are issues that would be looked at. And if you had anything meaningful to add to a strategy meeting on the AA and Clio cases you would understand that legislative INTENT is a BIG issue. Laws often don't cover every eventuality, you know. Sometimes the words "Public Schools" get left out of definitions too!

The last thing to deal with is the "seller". Since MCL 28.422(5) make him/her libel to sign the form "the seller shall fill out the license forms describing the pistol, together with the date of sale or acquisition, and sign his or her name in ink indicating that the pistol was sold to or otherwise acquired by the purchaser.". Note the word "SHALL" again. It's not a pretty please with sugar on top here either! Who "SHALL" sign the form here??? Great Aunt Martha??? The next door neighbor??? Drooling Doug from work??? ... Blah, blah, blah, blah... see above.

Syster, SteveS... Non-binding legal opinion please!

I've tried to help, but you've been an ass since your first post, you don't know the difference between a section and subsection and you have no idea that intent isn't used to replace the plain meaning.

Since you keep going off on hysterical tangents, insulting like a child, and saying nonsense, I give up.

You are honestly just simply stupid to understand any of this and your temperament is out of line.

It's just amazing that a FUDDsmith can bandy about telling people to commit felonies. You don't comply with 28.422(5) because you aren't required to you don't just change the legally defined words Purchaser and Seller to manufacturer.

[Jared1981]

<deleted>

WOW.... talk about zero integrity. You slammed me for telling people what the law says, name called, and flipped out. So instead of admitting you were incorrect and telling people to commit felonies, you deleted your account and scurried off.

I’m used to it here. The MOC legislative team tells people what the law says, many people flip out and utter nonsense, then they realize it’s right.

There are some good people on here, but if people are this resistant to education, then this forum sadly serves no purpose. It gets old.

OC in PFZ’s = fight fight fight.
Registration exemptions = fight fight fight.
Don’t commit perjury = fight fight fight.

[tlagnhoj]

Tired of fighting stupid... Your opinion here Is one of the worst examples I have seen here. Those of us who actually do, KNOW how it's done.

Good luck keeping out of jail!

[Jared1981]

Tired of fighting stupid... Your opinion here Is one of the worst examples I have seen here. Those of us who actually do, KNOW how it's done.

Good luck keeping out of jail!

I don’t give opinions, I state what the law says. You were the one insane enough to tell people to commit a felony and then you deleted all your comments. How cowardly and pathetic. The fact that you still argue shows you are unstable.

Cowards delete all their posts instead of admitting they were wrong. So sad and yet so pathetic.

You deleted your comments because not because you “KNOW”.... what kind of low IQ logic is that? You deleted 5 of your comments because you want to stay out of prison. Please don’t project on me in anger because of your stupidity.

[bigt8261]

Tired of fighting stupid... Your opinion here Is one of the worst examples I have seen here. Those of us who actually do, KNOW how it's done.

Good luck keeping out of jail!

Translation: I don't want to admit I'm wrong so I'm going home.

[tlagnhoj]

Translation: I don't want to admit I'm wrong so I'm going home.

Nope... Tired of stupid. I'm sweeping up and leaving you to burn the clubhouse down if that's what you want. But I'll have no part of this.

By your legal theory AA and Clio are properly decided because the law DOES NOT preempt public schools. You can't have it both ways!!!


Your advice is DANGEROUSLY WRONG.

[Jared1981]

By your legal theory AA and Clio are properly decided because the law DOES NOT preempt public schools. You can't have it both ways!!!


Your advice is DANGEROUSLY WRONG.

Wrong.... try field preemption and direct contravention. Statutory preemption doesn’t mean jack for schools, but that’s all over your head.

[jgillmanjr]

Nope... Tired of stupid. I'm sweeping up and leaving you to burn the clubhouse down if that's what you want. But I'll have no part of this.

By your legal theory AA and Clio are properly decided because the law DOES NOT preempt public schools. You can't have it both ways!!!


Your advice is DANGEROUSLY WRONG.

ohDKCIO.jpg