Mike Borders Memorial Raffle - Dan Wesson Valor 9mm CLICK——>>HERE<<—CLICK 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<<<<<
Join MGO at the Second Amendment March Wednesday June 20, 2018 10am-2pm Lansing State Capitol BuildingCLICK——>>HERE<<—CLICK

Advertise With MGO

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: HB 6066 of 2018 - Allow certain individuals possession of self-defense spray or foam in a school

  1. #1
    Administrator PhotoTom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Wayne Co. MI
    Posts
    21,655

    HB 6066 of 2018 - Allow certain individuals possession of self-defense spray or foam in a school

    HB 6066 of 2018
    Crimes; weapons; possession of self-defense spray or foam in a school; allow by certain individuals. Amends sec. 237a of 1931 PA 328 (MCL 750.237a).
    Last Action: 5/24/2018 bill electronically reproduced 05/23/2018

    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.

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by PhotoTom View Post
    HB 6066 of 2018
    Crimes; weapons; possession of self-defense spray or foam in a school; allow by certain individuals. Amends sec. 237a of 1931 PA 328 (MCL 750.237a).
    Last Action: 5/24/2018 bill electronically reproduced 05/23/2018
    I was recently told by several MGO members that self defense sprays and foams in gun-free-zones are NOT banned in Michigan. So, if that is the case, then WHY are the changes in this bill needed?

    Possession of pepper spray in gun free zones
    https://www.migunowners.org/forum/sh...gun-free-zones
    - Ray -

    "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." - Attributed to Thomas Jefferson

  3. #3
    Administrator PhotoTom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Wayne Co. MI
    Posts
    21,655
    Quote Originally Posted by RayMich View Post
    I was recently told by several MGO members that self defense sprays and foams in gun-free-zones are NOT banned in Michigan. So, if that is the case, then WHY are the changes in this bill needed?

    Possession of pepper spray in gun free zones
    https://www.migunowners.org/forum/sh...gun-free-zones
    Very good point, at face value, this bill is unnecessary. On a first, quick read, I believe, if I'm not mistaken, that this bill actually allows (perhaps inadvertently, perhaps intentionally) teachers to carry firearms on school property, even without a CPL…as long as they are carrying self-defense spray or foam (of any concentration) at the same time!

    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.

  4. #4
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    michigan
    Posts
    449
    I know they don't like it, and it might be illegal, but keep a can of wasp spray handy. The one that shoots a stream like 20'. Could also be used if wasps, bees or hornets get in.

  5. #5
    MGO Member Roundballer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    I/C "Gateway to the Thumb" Lapeer County
    Posts
    18,239
    Quote Originally Posted by RayMich View Post
    I was recently told by several MGO members that self defense sprays and foams in gun-free-zones are NOT banned in Michigan. So, if that is the case, then WHY are the changes in this bill needed?

    Possession of pepper spray in gun free zones
    https://www.migunowners.org/forum/sh...gun-free-zones
    Possession of the sprays etc is not against the laws, but deploying them can be, depending on circumstance. And the law that this bill would amend is only about penalty enhancement for being in a "weapon free school zone" and limiting the penalty for teachers etc.


    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.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Roundballer View Post
    Possession of the sprays etc is not against the laws, but deploying them can be, depending on circumstance. And the law that this bill would amend is only about penalty enhancement for being in a "weapon free school zone" and limiting the penalty for teachers etc.
    OK! - Now I'm REALLY confused.

    Are you saying that even though it is not against the law to carry self defense spray into a "weapon free school zone", but if one is forced to use it in defense of self or others, he can be charged with a law violation and face penalty enhancements, even though the use of such spray for self defense would otherwise be legal?

    These damned politicians have a bad habit of making laws even MORE confusing every time they claim they are "fixing" something.
    - Ray -

    "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." - Attributed to Thomas Jefferson

  7. #7
    MGO Member Roundballer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    I/C "Gateway to the Thumb" Lapeer County
    Posts
    18,239
    Yes, more or less.

    MCL 750-224d subsections 2 + 3 spell out the crime, subsection 5 gives the use for defense exemption for 2.

    This bill bars the "weapon free school zone" penalty enhancement of MCL 750-237a from being applied to teachers etc. I don't think that this is needed, if the teacher was in the right, there would be nothing to charge him/her with, much less apply any "enhancement".


    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.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by PhotoTom View Post
    Very good point, at face value, this bill is unnecessary. On a first, quick read, I believe, if I'm not mistaken, that this bill actually allows (perhaps inadvertently, perhaps intentionally) teachers to carry firearms on school property, even without a CPL…as long as they are carrying self-defense spray or foam (of any concentration) at the same time!
    WOW! You re right! This bill DOES allow a teacher or other school employee to carry a firearm even without a CPL as long as he is also carrying self defense spray.

    (4) Except as provided in subsection (5), an individual who possesses a weapon in a weapon free school zone is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by 1 or more of the following:

    [...]

    (5) Subsection (4) does not apply to any of the following:

    (G) A TEACHER OR OTHER SCHOOL EMPLOYEE CARRYING A SELF-DEFENSE SPRAY OR FOAM DEVICE IN THE SCHOOL WHERE THAT TEACHER OR OTHER SCHOOL EMPLOYEE IS EMPLOYED.
    Other than that, this bill is really NOT needed.

    What they should do is to repeal weapon free zones. That would take care of a lot of these problems and would cause much less confusion.
    - Ray -

    "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." - Attributed to Thomas Jefferson

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by RayMich View Post
    WOW! You re right! This bill DOES allow a teacher or other school employee to carry a firearm even without a CPL as long as he is also carrying self defense spray.
    I'm guessing that the author/sponsors are desperate to DO SOMETHING! They didn't think this through at all. Now while this bill would allow teachers to carry a gun/weapon in school if they also carry OC spray, they would have to open carry said gun since the prohibition on carrying concealed would most likely still apply.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by RayMich View Post
    I was recently told by several MGO members that self defense sprays and foams in gun-free-zones are NOT banned in Michigan. So, if that is the case, then WHY are the changes in this bill needed?

    Possession of pepper spray in gun free zones
    https://www.migunowners.org/forum/sh...gun-free-zones
    I think because while technically not illegal to carry self defense sprays or foams, many of those locations still employ policies which ban the possession or use. MCL 750.224d I don’t see it explicitly mentioning GFZs but I may have missed something.

    I cannot find it now (it’s been some years...), but I recall it being written into school policy that student or other visitor, employee or otherwise not there for the specific purpose of law enforcement, were not permitted to carry self defense mace or pepper sprays.

Page 1 of 2 12 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