SB 0076 - 0078 of 2023 - Require license or background check for purchase of firearms

[10x25mm]

The authors of SB 76 of 2023 need to explain how further licensing will stop crime when the existing handgun licensing system did not stop the MSU shooter. He was convicted in 2019 of violating MCL 227c, a two year 'misdemeanor' which is disqualifying under 18 U.S. Code § 922(g)(9):

to ship or transport in interstate or foreign commerce, or possess in or affecting commerce, any firearm or ammunition; or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.

BATFE routinely uses this statutory authority to charge anyone found with a gun and/or ammunition, who has been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year, with a 10 year felony. They do it in Michigan all the time.

The media has been eerily silent on how the MSU shooter obtained his handguns after his 2019 plea to violating MCL 227c, implying that he did not register the handguns after purchasing them. The more important question is how he received authorization from LPD to make a clearly illegal purchase in violation of 18 U.S. Code § 922(g).

[Harrison]

It's a good question how further licensing would stop crimes like what happened at MSU, but a two year misdemeanor is not federally disqualifying.

18 USC 922(g)
(g)It shall be unlawful for any person—
(1)who has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;

18 USC 921(a)
(20)The term “crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year” does not include—
(A)any Federal or State offenses pertaining to antitrust violations, unfair trade practices, restraints of trade, or other similar offenses relating to the regulation of business practices, or
(B)any State offense classified by the laws of the State as a misdemeanor and punishable by a term of imprisonment of two years or less.

Also see the instructions on the ATF 4473.

EXCEPTION: A person is not prohibited from receiving or possessing a firearm
if that person: (1) has been convicted of any Federal or State offense pertaining to
antitrust violations, unfair trade practices, restraints of trade, or other similar offenses
relating to the regulation of business practices; (2) has been convicted of a State
misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment of two years or less; or (3) following
conviction of a felony or other crime for which the judge could have imprisoned the
person for more than one year, or a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, has
received a pardon, an expungement or set aside of the conviction, or has lost and
regained civil rights (the right to vote, sit on a jury, and hold public office) in the
jurisdiction in which the conviction occurred, AND the law of the convicting
jurisdiction does not prohibit the person from receiving or possessing firearms.
Also, a person who has no more than one conviction of a misdemeanor crime of
domestic violence against an individual in a dating relationship, and is not otherwise
prohibited under this chapter, is not prohibited if 5 years have elapsed from
conviction or completion of the person’s custodial or supervisory sentence,
whichever occurs later, and the person has not subsequently been convicted of any
other misdemeanor crime of violence, or any other offense that would disqualify the
person under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g). A person subject to any of these exceptions, or
who received relief from disabilities under 18 U.S.C. § 925(c), should answer “no”
to the applicable question.

[10x25mm]

It's a good question how further licensing would stop crimes like what happened at MSU, but a two year misdemeanor is not federally disqualifying.

18 USC 922(g)
(g)It shall be unlawful for any person—
(1)who has been convicted in any court of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year;

18 USC 921(a)
(20)The term “crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year” does not include—
(A)any Federal or State offenses pertaining to antitrust violations, unfair trade practices, restraints of trade, or other similar offenses relating to the regulation of business practices, or
(B)any State offense classified by the laws of the State as a misdemeanor and punishable by a term of imprisonment of two years or less.

Also see the instructions on the ATF 4473.

EXCEPTION: A person is not prohibited from receiving or possessing a firearm
if that person: (1) has been convicted of any Federal or State offense pertaining to
antitrust violations, unfair trade practices, restraints of trade, or other similar offenses
relating to the regulation of business practices; (2) has been convicted of a State
misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment of two years or less; or (3) following
conviction of a felony or other crime for which the judge could have imprisoned the
person for more than one year, or a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence, has
received a pardon, an expungement or set aside of the conviction, or has lost and
regained civil rights (the right to vote, sit on a jury, and hold public office) in the
jurisdiction in which the conviction occurred, AND the law of the convicting
jurisdiction does not prohibit the person from receiving or possessing firearms.
Also, a person who has no more than one conviction of a misdemeanor crime of
domestic violence against an individual in a dating relationship, and is not otherwise
prohibited under this chapter, is not prohibited if 5 years have elapsed from
conviction or completion of the person’s custodial or supervisory sentence,
whichever occurs later, and the person has not subsequently been convicted of any
other misdemeanor crime of violence, or any other offense that would disqualify the
person under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g). A person subject to any of these exceptions, or
who received relief from disabilities under 18 U.S.C. § 925(c), should answer “no”
to the applicable question.

Thanks. I have found several other online digital restatements of 18 U.S. Code § 922(a)(20)(B) which also omit "....(other than one involving a firearm or explosive)...." which appears immediately after "(B) any State offense...." in the original text of the Gun Control Act of 1968 (P.L. 90-618), as originally published in the October 22, 1968 (page 1,216) Congressional Record and also the Federal Register of October 22, 1968.

I can not find any record of P.L. 90-618, § 922(a)(20)(B), having ever been amended. There may be a typographic error here.

[Harrison]

Looks like the change happened in 1986—Pub. L. 99–308, §107(b), May 19, 1986. See link below, starting on the bottom of page 1:

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/...449.pdf#page=3

I found the statute with lists of amendments at https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/...rtI-chap44.htm

[10x25mm]

Looks like the change happened in 1986—Pub. L. 99–308, §107(b), May 19, 1986. See link below, starting on the bottom of page 1:

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/...449.pdf#page=3

I found the statute with lists of amendments at https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/...rtI-chap44.htm

Thanks.

[PhotoTom]

SB 0076 of 2023
Weapons: firearms; license or background check for purchase of firearms; require. Amends secs. 2, 2a, 2b, 12 & 14a of 1927 PA 372 (MCL 28.422 et seq.).
Last Action: 3/14/2023 REFERRED TO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE WITH SUBSTITUTE (S-2)

SB 0077 of 2023
Weapons: firearms; references to pistol in penal code; update. Amends secs. 223 & 232a of 1931 PA 328 (MCL 750.223 & 750.232a). TIE BAR WITH: SB 0076'23
Last Action: 3/14/2023 REFERRED TO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

SB 0078 of 2023
Weapons: firearms; references in sentencing guidelines; update. Amends secs. 11b & 16m, ch. XVII of 1927 PA 175 (MCL 777.11b & 777.16m). TIE BAR WITH: SB 0076'23
Last Action: 3/14/2023 REFERRED TO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

[Scandiacus]

The version recommended out of committee would remove the exception for CPL holders.

[PhotoTom]

The version recommended out of committee would remove the exception for CPL holders.

Yep, CPL would have no bearing on purchasing a firearm anymore...even though a CPL holder is already vetted BEYOND the criteria for a LTP (RI-010) and is CONSTANTLY monitored for ANY violations that would have DQ'd the licensee from obtaining a CPL in the first place.

It is conceivable that a CPL holder could have their CPL revoked/suspended well before the violation shows-up in NICS (if ever).

This is just another step towards making obtaining a firearm as inconvenient/difficult as possible for law abiding citizens.

[PhotoTom]

SB 0076 of 2023
Weapons: firearms; license or background check for purchase of firearms; require. Amends secs. 2, 2a, 2b, 12 & 14a of 1927 PA 372 (MCL 28.422 et seq.).
3/14/2023 REPORTED FAVORABLY WITH SUBSTITUTE (S-2)
3/14/2023 COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED IMMEDIATE EFFECT
3/14/2023 REFERRED TO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE WITH SUBSTITUTE (S-2)

SB 0077 of 2023
Weapons: firearms; references to pistol in penal code; update. Amends secs. 223 & 232a of 1931 PA 328 (MCL 750.223 & 750.232a). TIE BAR WITH: SB 0076'23
3/14/2023 REPORTED FAVORABLY WITHOUT AMENDMENT
3/14/2023 COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED IMMEDIATE EFFECT
3/14/2023 REFERRED TO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

SB 0078 of 2023
Weapons: firearms; references in sentencing guidelines; update. Amends secs. 11b & 16m, ch. XVII of 1927 PA 175 (MCL 777.11b & 777.16m). TIE BAR WITH: SB 0076'23
3/14/2023 REPORTED FAVORABLY WITHOUT AMENDMENT
3/14/2023 COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED IMMEDIATE EFFECT
3/14/2023 REFERRED TO COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE


New analysis files added for all 3 bills (above):

REVISED SUMMARY OF INTRODUCED BILL IN COMMITTEE (Date Completed: 3-14-23)
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/docume...SFA-0076-G.pdf

SUMMARY OF BILL REPORTED FROM COMMITTEE (Date Completed: 3-14-23)
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/docume...SFA-0076-F.pdf

[parastoo]

Hi,
When would these go into effect if passed and signed?
Thanks