Beware Oakland County Gun Board

[Garbo]

Nobody is saying it doesnt happen. He tries to justify it. He comes on here now and again and spews some crap that he knows will get a rise out of everyone and when the thread starts cooling off you'll get another brilliant reply as you did here. You notice there has been no significant detail offered in any of his threads. Just mindless babble. Its still unclear exactlyt what it was he claimed they were not teling the truth on.

[hopeitsfast]

I have been on and around boats my entire life,alchohol has never been involved,never saw a need to mix the two,same with cars,hunting,guns,atv's,chainsaws,bicycles,lawnmow ers,ect. I never knew or would hang around anyone who would BUI either. certain things just don't mix period.

Which is the correct mindset. But a lot of folks don't follow those rules.

[hopeitsfast]

Nobody is saying it doesnt happen. He tries to justify it. He comes on here now and again and spews some crap that he knows will get a rise out of everyone and when the thread starts cooling off you'll get another brilliant reply as you did here. You notice there has been no significant detail offered in any of his threads. Just mindless babble. Its still unclear exactlyt what it was he claimed they were not teling the truth on.

Oh, i know. He's got some more wonderful tidbits in some other threads also.

[dpgperftest]

http://www.michigan.gov/msp/0,1607,7...0926--,00.html

credit to "that guy" in my thread about minor crimes preventing folks from getting a CCW.

I brought it up because another member said he was in a fight over ten years ago and believes WACO stalled or tabled his application.

It makes perfect sense if you just got busted for drunk driving or boating that your permit would be in danger. It sounds like that person has drinking issues, and likely would be a danger if drunk, and would carry in a bar, etc and be statistically more like by a very very substantial % to commit acts of total and epic jack-assary. It speaks to ones self control.

A fight one can make a case for defense. No one gets in a car drunk or boat drunk, especially fall over crash into shore, or crash your car into a tree drunk, with out having drinking problem 1, and 2 self awareness problems, and 3 respect for the law.

They want to mitigate the likelyhood that anyone that is approved will act out.

Look at the national incidents per year of total gun crimes, and gun crimes from folks with CCW. Statistically it virtually never happens. Thats cause if you are mental, retarded, a druggie, a spouse abuser, and a host of other character and control flaws, you dont get one.

By doing this it makes CCW folks as a lot look like golden boy angels. The ones that pass the criteria, are as a lot, as good as you get, law abiding, honest folks.

If you approve anyone and everyone, then i would wager millions of CCW folks would have committed crimes, as the same kid that steals cars at 17, and sells drugs at 18, applies for a CCW at 21 and robs banks. It makes perfect sense.



Concealed Pistol License Requirements

A. State Requirements
Applicants for a Michigan Concealed Pistol License must:

1. Be at least 21 years of age

2. Be a citizen of the United States or an alien lawfully admitted into the United States

3. Be a resident of the State of Michigan for at least 6 months prior to application. An applicant is a state resident if one of the following applies:

The applicant possesses a valid, lawfully obtained Michigan driver's license or state identification card
The applicant is lawfully registered to vote in Michigan
The applicant is on active duty status with the United States Armed Forces and stationed outside of Michigan, but Michigan is the home of record
The applicant is on active duty status with the United States Armed Forces and is permanently stationed in Michigan, but the home of record is another state
Note: The 6-month residency requirement may be waived by the concealed pistol licensing board for new residents licensed by another state.

4. Have successfully completed a pistol safety training course

5. Not be subject to any of the following:

An order requiring involuntary hospitalization or alternative treatment
An order finding legal incapacitation
A finding of not guilty by reason of insanity
6. Not be subject to a conditional bond release prohibiting purchase or possession of a firearm

7. Not be subject to a personal protection order

8. Not be prohibited from possessing, using, transporting, selling, purchasing, carrying, shipping, receiving, or distributing a firearm under MCL 750.224f

9. Have never been convicted of a felony in Michigan or elsewhere

10. Have no felony charge pending in Michigan or elsewhere

11. Have not been dishonorably discharged from the United States Armed Forces

12. Have not been convicted of one of the following misdemeanors in the 8 years immediately preceding the date of application:

Failing to stop when involved in a personal injury accident, MCL 257.617a
Operating while intoxicated, second offense, MCL 257.625(9)(b)
Drunk driving, commercial vehicle, MCL 257.625m(4)
Reckless driving, MCL 257.626
Driving while license suspended or revoked, second or subsequent offense, MCL 257.904
Operating aircraft while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a controlled substance with prior conviction, MCL 259.185
Hindering or obstructing certain persons performing official weights and measures duties, MCL 290.629
Hindering, obstructing, assaulting, or committing bodily injury upon director or authorized representative, MCL 290.650
Operating an ORV under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a controlled substance, second or subsequent offense, MCL 324.81134(5)-(6)
Operating a snowmobile under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a controlled substance, second or subsequent offense, MCL 324.82127 punishable under section MCL 324.82128(1)(b) or (c)
Operating a vessel under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a controlled substance, second or subsequent offense, MCL 324.80176 punishable under MCL 324.80177(1)(b)
Possessing a controlled substance, controlled substance analogue, or prescription form, MCL 333.7403.
Operating a locomotive under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a controlled substance, or while visibly impaired, MCL 462.353(4)
Displaying sexually explicit matter to minors, MCL 722.677
Assault or domestic assault, MCL 750.81
Aggravated assault or aggravated domestic assault, MCL 750.81a
Breaking and entering or entering without breaking, MCL 750.115
Fourth-degree child abuse, MCL 750.136b
Accosting, enticing, or soliciting a child for immoral purposes, MCL 750.145a
Vulnerable adult abuse, MCL 750.145n
Solicitation to commit a felony, MCL 750.157b
Impersonating a peace officer or medical examiner, MCL 750.215
Illegal sale of a firearm or ammunition, MCL 750.223
Illegal use or sale of a self-defense spray, MCL 750.224d
Sale or possession of a switchblade, MCL 750.226a
Improper transportation of a loaded firearm, MCL 750.227c
Failure to have a pistol inspected, MCL 750.228
Accepting a pistol in pawn, MCL 750.229
Failure to register the purchase of a firearm or a firearm component, MCL 750.232
Improperly obtaining a pistol, making a false statement on an application to purchase a pistol, or using false identification to purchase a pistol, MCL 750.232a
Intentionally aiming a firearm without malice, MCL 750.233
Intentionally discharging a firearm aimed without malice, MCL 750.234
Possessing a firearm on prohibited premises, MCL 750.234d
Brandishing a firearm in public, MCL 750.234e
Possession of a firearm by an individual less than 18 years of age, MCL 750.234f
Intentionally discharging a firearm aimed without malice causing injury, MCL 750.235
Parent of a minor who possessed a firearm in a weapon-free school zone, MCL 750.235a
Setting a spring gun or other device, MCL 750.236
Possessing a firearm while under the influence of intoxicating liquor or a drug, MCL 750.237
Weapon-free school zone violation, MCL 750.237a
Indecent exposure, MCL 750.335a
Stalking, MCL 750.411h
Fourth-degree criminal sexual conduct, MCL 750.520e
Reckless, careless, or negligent use of a firearm resulting in injury or death, MCL 752.861
Careless, reckless, or negligent use of a firearm resulting in property damage, MCL 752.862
Reckless discharge of a firearm, MCL 752.863a
Note: The applicant must not have violated a law of the United States, another state, or a local unit of government of this state or another state substantially corresponding to a violation described above.

13. Have not been convicted of one of the following misdemeanors in the 3 years immediately preceding the date of application:

Operating under the influence, MCL 257.625
Refusal of commercial vehicle operator to submit to a chemical test, MCL 257.625a
Ignition interlock device reporting violation, MCL 257.625k
Circumventing an ignition interlocking device, MCL 257.625l
Operating a commercial vehicle with alcohol content, MCL 257.625m(3)
Operating an aircraft under the influence, MCL 259.185
Operating an ORV under the influence, MCL 324.81134
Operating an ORV while visibly impaired, MCL 324.81135
Operating a snowmobile under the influence, MCL 324.82127
Controlled substances, MCL 333.7401 to 333.7461
Operating a locomotive under the influence, MCL 462.353(3)
Disorderly person, MCL 750.167
Embezzlement, MCL 750.174
False pretenses with intent to defraud, MCL 750.218
Larceny, MCL 750.356
Second-degree retail fraud, MCL 750.356d
Larceny, vacant building, MCL 750.359
Larceny, by conversion, MCL 750.362
Larceny, defrauding lessor, MCL 750.362a
Malicious destruction of property, MCL 750.377a
Malicious destruction of real property, MCL 750.380
Receiving stolen property, MCL 750.535
Malicious use of telephones, MCL 750.540e
Note: The applicant must not have violated a law of the United States, another state, or a local unit of government of this state or another state substantially corresponding to a violation described above.

14. Have not been found guilty but mentally ill of any crime and has not offered a plea of not guilty of, or been acquitted of, any crime by reason of insanity

15. Have never been subject to an order of involuntary commitment in an inpatient or outpatient setting due to a mental illness

16. Not have a diagnosed mental illness at the time the application is made, regardless of whether he or she is receiving treatment

17. Not be under a court order of legal incapacity in this state or elsewhere

18. Not be detrimental to the safety of his or her self or any other person if issued a Concealed Pistol License

B. Federal Requirements

Pursuant to MCL 28.426, a Concealed Pistol License may not be issued to a person prohibited under federal law from possessing or transporting a firearm. The federal requirements to possess or transport a firearm include that the applicant:

1. Not have been convicted in any court of, or under indictment for, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year (i.e. felony, or any misdemeanor punishable by more than 2 years)

2. Not be a fugitive of justice

3. Not be an unlawful user of, or addicted to, any controlled substance, as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 802)

4. Not be adjudicated as a mental defective or who has been committed to a mental institution

5. Not be an alien who is illegally or unlawfully in the United States

6. Not be discharged from the United States Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions

7. Not have renounced his or her citizenship

8. Not be subject to a court order prohibiting harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of such intimate partner or from engaging in other conduct that would place the partner or child in reasonable fear of bodily injury.

9. Not be convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence.

what a joke whats next jay walking

[Garbo]

See trying to justify

Rejection of Cass Lake sandbar rules upheld


Brooke MeierAugust 05, 2009 - The Michigan Natural Resources Commission (NRC) has upheld a state Department of Natural Resources (DNR) denial of special watercraft rules for a Cass Lake sandbar that were requested by the city of Keego Harbor — the first such appeals hearing decision in the state.

The decision was made following a hearing during a July 9 NRC meeting.

"The commission voted unanimously to uphold the DNR's decision on Cass Lake," said Mary Dettloff, public information officer for the DNR. "Commissioner Mary Brown did most of the talking for the NRC and said that the department followed the process under the law and arrived at the conclusion that any reasonable person would arrive at."

According to Dettloff, Keego Harbor can pursue the matter in circuit court.

"The NRC met for less than one hour to hear oral arguments from the DNR and the city of Keego Harbor," said Keego Harbor City Manager Dale Stuart. "Immediately upon conclusion of the hearing, without any discussion by the commission on the merits of the appeal, the commission voted unanimously to uphold the decision of the DNR on the request of the city of Keego Harbor for special rules for the Cass Lake sandbar.

"The city of Keego Harbor is disappointed that the entire appeals process took an inordinate amount of time," he added. "It's clear to the city that the DNR and the commission don't understand the severity of the problem that exists on the Cass Lake sandbar."

City officials and [a few] Cass Lake riparian residents waited more than a year to have the appeal heard before the NRC.

A letter written by DNR Law Enforcement Division Lt. Andrew Turner, dated May 8, formally denied the city's proposed special watercraft regulations for the sandbar.

"(Watercraft controls) are authorized only when necessary to assure compatible use and to protect public safety where enforcement of existing statutes cannot," the letter stated. "Ongoing safety problems for Cass Lake have not been documented at this time. The concerns regarding user conflict as they relate to marine safety issues can be addressed with the existing boating laws currently in place."

The special rules the city asked the DNR to authorize included a channel/buoy system that would allow east shore property owners to navigate their boats onto the main portion of the lake unimpeded. Other ideas included limiting the number of boats allowed to anchor at the mile-long sandbar, and breaking up the sandbar in a few places to create openings with deeper waters.

The sandbar is located off the northeast shore of Cass Lake, between Cass-Elizabeth and Orchard Lake roads. Portions of the lake are also situated within Waterford and West Bloomfield townships and Orchard Lake Village.

"People are out there drinking all day long," Stuart said of the need for sandbar rules, adding that sometimes there are between 200 and 500 boats anchored and tied up at the sandbar. "There is a danger of drowning. There is a danger of other safety issues. Last year, we had a lady who lost her finger out there, and it was very difficult to get her into shore because of the scramble of boats.

"The city has no problem with people who are out there with their families to enjoy the shallow water," Stuart said. "But it's not fair to have anybody expect that they have to sit on every nice weekend and listen to vulgarity and loud music."

Turner's rejection letter stated, "Cass Lake receives more marine enforcement and public safety attention than any other inland lake in the entire state."

Under legislation passed two years ago, if the DNR determines there to be a need for special watercraft rules, the department proposes a local ordinance for municipal adoption. If watercraft controls aren't recommended, the municipality is notified of the reasons for coming to that conclusion. Such a determination, under the PA 237 of 2006, can be appealed to the NRC.

"To have special local regulations you have to meet certain criteria, and in this case our officer felt that they weren't meeting the criteria," Dettloff said. "If there's been ongoing safety problems on the lake they've not been documented. The current existing concerns with the user conflicts, as they relate to marine safety, can be addressed with the existing boating laws that are in place."

"In the last few years there was legislation in the state House that would allow for a certain procedure to ask for special rules on bodies of water where the existing rules didn't satisfy and (local watercraft controls) were needed to solve the problem," Stuart said. "The city took advantage of that and asked for a public hearing by the DNR to determine what kinds of special rules are necessary. We prepared a resolution and sent that to them, and they held a hearing and then issued an opinion (stating no need for local watercraft controls)."

Keego Harbor's appeal is one of two to have been filed since the 2006 law was enacted. The other is a case from Traverse City that will be heard before the NRC later this year.

Because Keego Harbor's appeal was the first in the state, a process had to be put in place by the NRC to ensure a fair hearing of the city's appeal. It was drafting that appeals policy that delayed a decision on the city's appeal for more than a year.

In December 2008, Stuart expressed his frustration with the process, stating "This is a new procedure for the NRC based on a new statute, but this is ridiculous. There should be some scheduling or something put together. To hear nothing for months is inexcusable. I'm frustrated that they are not dealing with it, but what can we do? We've filed everything we are supposed to file; we have to wait for them to do the scheduling."

"This is something, procedurally, that hasn't been done in awhile, if ever, so there are some procedural things they need to clarify first," Dettloff said of the need for an NRC appeals policy.

In June 2009, an appeals policy finally was adopted by the NRC.

Dettloff said the new policy will make future appeals easier because the steps to appeal are clearly defined.

"We didn't have a policy on the books," she said. "Now that people are wanting to appeal, we need one. The policy will give an appeals process that they can go through when they don't agree with DNR decisions on permits, etc. It also gives the NRC a process to follow. There are two basic policies, one that the NRC can conduct a hearing, gather evidence and make a decision. The other is, if the NRC chooses, it can refer the appeal to an administrative judge if they feel it's a complex legal issue."

The policy preamble states, "Certain decisions made by the DNR may be appealed to the NRC under the authority of Part 11 of the Natural Resources Environmental Protection Act (NREPA), 1994, PA 451, [MCL 324.1101] as follows: 1. The issuance, denial, suspension, revocation, annulment, withdrawal, recall, cancellation, or amendment of a permit or operating license issued as defined by Part 13 of the NREPA; 2. Special Watercraft control determinations made under authority of Part 801 of the NREPA."

According to the policy, the procedure for an appeal before the NRC varies depending on whether a contested case hearing was conducted before the DNR made it's decision; or the NRC chooses to refer the matter to an administrative law judge to conduct a contested case hearing and prepare a Proposal for Decision (PFD).

In order to appeal a DNR decision the appellant must submit a notice of appeal. The notice must be in writing and sent to the NRC. The following must be included in the appeal notice: the decision being appealed; the grounds for the appeal; the basis of the appellant's standing to appeal; and the action that the appellant is asking the NRC to take.

Then, the NRC assistant who receives the appeal will open a file on the appeal; provide to the appellant written acknowledgement of receipt of the appeal; provide information regarding the date, time, and location of the NRC's review of the appeal; and publish information regarding the appeal to the agenda of an NRC meeting and to the department calendar.

Once these steps are completed the NRC steps in.

The NRC begins its role by reviewing written arguments received from the appellant and the DNR. This review is based on the record and statutory criteria governing the DNR's decision as stated in the applicable statues, according to the policy. The commission may then hear oral arguments; determine if additional information is needed from either party (if so an extension is granted); and may request and consider advice from legal counsel to the NRC on legal and procedural matters pertaining to the appeal.

A decision will then be released based on a majority vote of the commission. The decision will be issued in writing.

Patricia Spitzley, chief of the DNR's Office of Legal Services, said the policy dictates that each side in an appeals case will have a total of 15 minutes for oral arguments before the NRC. The DNR will argue first, followed by the municipality's attorney. If either side wishes to respond to the other's arguments, they must reserve a portion of their 15 minutes for rebuttal.

"Each side submits briefs supporting their position," Spitzley said. "After the arguments, the NRC can ask some questions, but really the NRC has three options — they can affirm the department's decision, overturn the decision, or remand it back to the department because there isn't enough information."

An NRC decision can be made directly after the appeal hearing or at a later time. The only other option for the city, if the DNR's denial decision is upheld, is to file a lawsuit.

Two weeks after the adoption of this policy the NRC scheduled a hearing for the Cass Lake sandbar case.

"The process has been very slow, and it's unfortunate that the state took this long to get through the process," Keego Harbor's Stuart said. "We hoped the NRC would see that a case was adequately made and allow us to take care of a situation that's difficult for the residents that live there."

According to Stuart, any further action by the city of Keego Harbor will depend on whether there are problems at the sandbar this summer like there have been in the past.

"Lt. Dan Toth held this position prior to me and dealt with most of the Cass Lake sandbar issues," said Sgt. Matt Snyder, commander of the Oakland County Sheriff's Department Marine Division. "What we've done in the past and what we continue to do is not single out anybody — we deal with each incident separately. You're dealing with a lot of crowds out there and a lot of drinking. Even though you have that, there may be only a few individual problems. Our goal is to have a presence and educate people to deal with their problems individually."

As of July 1, Snyder said there hadn't been any problems reported at the Cass Lake sandbar.

"It's been fairly quiet, but on Sundays it can get quite busy," he said. "What we're doing is adjusting our patrols based on the amount of activity there."

From January 2008 through December 2008 there were 1,183.5 Marine Division patrol hours recorded on Cass Lake. During that time there were four boat accidents, 1 fatal accident [not alcohol related], 112 violations cited, 325 warnings issued, 42 complaints received, 400 safety inspections conducted, 45 boater assists recorded, 17 search and rescue hours logged, and 32 body recovery hours recorded [body dumped in lake].
The majority of the violations were moving violations that included reckless operation, no observer while towing and operation while under the influence of alcohol, according to statistics from the Oakland County Sheriff's Department.

While the Keego Harbor appeal was denied, Stuart said "It's too early to tell what the city will do now, but we will explore all of our options."

[edub]

See trying to justify

Um, wrong. That is called proof. By all accounts there are hundreds of boats and everyone drinking. If you do the math it amounts to thousands of drunk boating hours every weekend. And yet, there were only 4 accidents recorded during the entire year and none were listed as alcohol related

What more proof do you need that it isn't dangerous. Don't buy the BS Government hype about the sky falling and advocate for your own loss of liberty.

Have you ever heard the term "useful idiot"? Do you know what it means?

[drs]

I have been on and around boats my entire life,alchohol has never been involved,never saw a need to mix the two,same with cars,hunting,guns,atv's,chainsaws,bicycles,lawnmow ers,ect. I never knew or would hang around anyone who would BUI either. certain things just don't mix period.

Bicycles and lawn mowers WOW. I'm not saying getting trashed and driving a boat is good but I don't know many people that fish with out beer.

[edub]

Bicycles and lawn mowers WOW. I'm not saying getting trashed and driving a boat is good but I don't know many people that fish with out beer.

Neither does anyone else here - they are just lying hypocrites that like to act holier than thou.

I'd bet every last one of them gets drunk while hunting - oh but that's different.

[CyborgWarrior]

Um, wrong. That is called proof. By all accounts there are hundreds of boats and everyone drinking. If you do the math it amounts to thousands of drunk boating hours every weekend. And yet, there were only 4 accidents recorded during the entire year and none were listed as alcohol related

What more proof do you need that it isn't dangerous. Don't buy the BS Government hype about the sky falling and advocate for your own loss of liberty.

Have you ever heard the term "useful idiot"? Do you know what it means?

Just to clarify, you are advocating Boating Under the Influence of alcohol?

[dpgperftest]

edub

[deleted].[/QUOTE]

+1


I agree, thare is alot of them out here a frakin lot, WACO AND oakland are the worst