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 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 34
  1. #21
    Administrator G22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Macomb Co.
    Posts
    12,092
    Quote Originally Posted by Divegeek View Post
    Brady is the Executive Director of MCRGO. I think he would know if the board is or isn't supporting this. Now there may be members over there that are supporting this, but I believe him when he says that the board hasn't even discussed it yet.

    Edited to correct Brady's title
    Ummm... Official post on MCRGO Facebook:

    Michigan Coalition for Responsible Gun Owners
    March 7 at 11:27 AM ·

    Looking for an additional reason to become a CPL instructor? HB 4295 introduced yesterday would provide an exemption from many pistol free zones for CPL instructors who have been certified for at least two years and who have received additional weapons training from their county sheriff. See: http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?2019-HB-4295

    Three organizations provide CPL training in Michigan: MCRGO, USCCA, and the NRA. MCRGO's program is the only one tailored specifically for Michigan law under MCL 28.425j, is focused on carry outside the home, and is developed by instructors for instructors. You can apply to become a MCRGO instructor here: https://mcrgo.org/mcrgo-instructor-application/
    Sure sounds like support to me. Whether or not it's their official position to endorse the creation of another 'special' class of citizen, I guess we'll find out soon enough.
    The Constitution is NOT dead. It's just being held captive.

    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. #22
    MGO Member tarkataku's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Hemlock
    Posts
    307
    Thanks G22..... I am glad I am not the only one who saw it that way.

    Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
    Just tryin ta keep it real !!

  3. #23
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Posts
    16,971
    Quote Originally Posted by tarkataku View Post
    Clearly you have not see their FB posts....... They are promoting the Bill and claim to have the only program teaching Michigan law......

    Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
    Brady is the facebook moderator of MCRGO's page (though I don't think he's the only one).

  4. #24
    MGO Member luckless's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Sault Ste. Marie
    Posts
    5,102
    Quote Originally Posted by bradymsu View Post
    MCRGO and its president, Lake County Sheriff Rich Martin, had no involvement in drafting HB 4295. MCRGO's Board hasn't taken a position on the bill. It will be discussed at the regular quarterly Board meeting this coming Thursday.

    As for CPL instructors, one should be aware that some CPL instructors oppose permitless carry. MCRGO, which runs a very successful CPL training program, strongly supports permitless carry. Our guiding principle is John Lott's "More Guns, Less Crime."
    According to the sponsor's office, the Representative drafted this bill and it is supported by the NRA

    Quote Originally Posted by tarkataku View Post
    Clearly you have not see their FB posts....... They are promoting the Bill and claim to have the only program teaching Michigan law......

    Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
    I would suspect that there are some members in leadership that are very excited about this bill and that they plan to support it.

  5. #25
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Three Rivers, MI
    Posts
    2,545
    Quote Originally Posted by DrScaryGuy View Post
    Thank you, sir or ma'am. It can be hard to remain polite when people ask me what the difference is between MCRGO and MGO - when I'm volunteering my time to stand at a booth at an event.
    It's very easy to be polite, just let those asking know, we support the 2nd, as they carve out exemptions for "special" people that they approve of.

  6. #26
    MGO Member Forum User
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Dimondale
    Posts
    511
    Regardless of whoever wrote this, they clearly don't know Michigan law very well.

    The sheriff's posse exemption that currently exists under 28.425o(5)(f) would already allow sheriffs to authorize individuals to carry in cPFZs - regardless of the county they're in.

  7. #27
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Ann Arbor, MI
    Posts
    16,971
    Quote Originally Posted by jgillmanjr View Post
    Regardless of whoever wrote this, they clearly don't know Michigan law very well.

    The sheriff's posse exemption that currently exists under 28.425o(5)(f) would already allow sheriffs to authorize individuals to carry in cPFZs - regardless of the county they're in.
    I've long argued this. An activist sheriff could just end-around the current cPFZ law by making anyone who volunteers to be a member of the "Sheriff's Posse". Boom, exempted.

    Anyone in the "Sheriff's Posse" can be given no extra authority, no badges, no uniforms - just make them a pool of volunteers to be called upon in a time of need (with no obligation). The law doesn't define what a sheriff's posse is, and so each sheriff can determine who those people are and what they do. Some departments call their mounted division the "Sheriff's posse" and it is made up of Sheriff's Reserve Deputies or regular Deputy Sheriff's... but they don't have to be, and they don't have to be mounted on horses, either.

    Just a pool of volunteers, which could be called upon or not, with no obligation to serve.

  8. #28
    MGO Board of Directors

    President PhotoTom's Avatar


    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Wayne Co. MI
    Posts
    33,708
    Quote Originally Posted by zigziggityzoo View Post
    I've long argued this. An activist sheriff could just end-around the current cPFZ law by making anyone who volunteers to be a member of the "Sheriff's Posse". Boom, exempted.

    Anyone in the "Sheriff's Posse" can be given no extra authority, no badges, no uniforms - just make them a pool of volunteers to be called upon in a time of need (with no obligation). The law doesn't define what a sheriff's posse is, and so each sheriff can determine who those people are and what they do. Some departments call their mounted division the "Sheriff's posse" and it is made up of Sheriff's Reserve Deputies or regular Deputy Sheriff's... but they don't have to be, and they don't have to be mounted on horses, either.

    Just a pool of volunteers, which could be called upon or not, with no obligation to serve.
    You are absolutely correct.
    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.

  9. #29
    MGO Member CV67PAT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Detroit, MI
    Posts
    806
    MCRGO has advanced restrictions on gun owners carrying by demonizing other gun groups since the begining of the fight for Michigan's Shall Issue legislation.

    They demonized Brass Roots and their fight for unrestricted CPL as "irresponsible" hence they're the "responsible" gunowners.

    They ousted their own board members that were outspoken against that direction the leadership was taking.

    They demonize MGO as a bunch of malcontents.

    And they demonized MOC as a extremist fringe element group, because they saw MOC as a threat to their legislative stranglehold.

    MCRGO is nothing more than a checkbook activist group that has a BoD of gunbutters.
    "My gun is not illegal, it's just undocumented!"

  10. #30
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Grand Rapids
    Posts
    104
    MCRGO's Board of Directors voted this past Thursday to OPPOSE HB 4295.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 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