HB 5535 of 2018
Weapons; other; purchase and possession of stun guns; allow for individuals over age 21. Amends sec. 224a of 1931 PA 328 (MCL 750.224a).
Last Action: 2/13/2018 bill electronically reproduced 02/08/2018
HB 5535 of 2018
Weapons; other; purchase and possession of stun guns; allow for individuals over age 21. Amends sec. 224a of 1931 PA 328 (MCL 750.224a).
Last Action: 2/13/2018 bill electronically reproduced 02/08/2018
Don't let yesterday use up too much of today - Will RogersDISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed in my posts are my own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, or official policies of Michigan Gun Owners.
This one is pretty good. All it does is say that a "stun gun" is legal for anyone 21 or over and defines what is a "stun gun".
BUT, I also see that it has just a single sponsor. That means that this is most likely a campaign move, and is expected to go no where and even the sponsor won't push it very much. Yet, she will be able to point at it as her support of us.
Life Member, NRA, Lapeer County Sportsmen's Club Disclaimer: I Am Not A Lawyer. Opinions expressed are not representative of any organization to which I may belong, and are solely mine. Any natural person or legal entity reading this post accepts all responsibility for any actions undertaken by that person or entity, based upon what they perceived was contained in this post, and shall hold harmless this poster, his antecedents, and descendants, in perpetuity.
I could see it gaining traction if it were "sold" as a viable alternative to carrying a gun. I'm sure there are a LOT of folks that would NOT carry a gun…ever…but would be very happy to see this bill passed so they can carry a "stun gun" legally.
Problem is, it can also backfire…"on the fence" legislators pointing to it saying, "we already gave you this…why do we need to continue to loosen gun laws further now?
Don't let yesterday use up too much of today - Will RogersDISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed in my posts are my own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, or official policies of Michigan Gun Owners.
Stun guns were already legalized by People v Yanna. It’s statewide precedent and it said the ban on stun guns and the ban on openly carrying stun guns was unconstitutional.
The problem is some prosecutors pretend Yanna doesn’t exist and when it’s brought up, they offer plea deals that clients don’t want to say no to.
Where is the Attorney General on this? Why doesn’t he pursue action against these prosecutors?
Oh, that’s right, he’s asleep at the wheel like he is on everything, except when the tobacco lobby needs an opinion in 5 minutes. It’s unfortunate that Michigan elects AG’s, but that’s another story.