MI Pistol Law Changes: Eliminate/Repeal Registration and License To Purchase
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: MI Pistol Law Changes: Eliminate/Repeal Registration and License To Purchase

  1. #1

    MI Pistol Law Changes: Eliminate/Repeal Registration and License To Purchase

    I have been working on Michigan Legislation Changes to achieve the following goals:

    1. Repeal/Eliminate Pistol Registration.
    2. Repeal/Eliminate Pistol License To Purchase (LTP).
    3. Provide Optional Licensing to Cover Federal GFSZ Act Requirements of Licensing, Verification, and Background Checks. This is based upon working from Montana Law (MT-45-8-360).

    I believe that these changes are in order for the following reasons:

    A. Pistol Registration came about partially due to the Dr. Ossian Sweets Case, which injected racial issues into law (help to deny pistols to Black People). The Pistol LTP and CPL RI-60 forms still include Race as part of the form that is required to be filled out.

    B. This "pistol registration" was "smoothed over" as part of "Safety Inspection" to help the original law pass. The safety inspection part of the law was repealed in 2009.

    C. Michigan is one of a handful of States (California, New York, D.C., Michigan) that requires Pistol Registration. I believe this Pistol Registration Database solves few crimes.

    D. The Pistol License To Purchase Legal Language provides a "May Issue" type license as a Local Police Department can deny a Pistol License To Purchase to a person based upon subjective criteria. There are people who have been denied a Pistol License To Purchase who were able to obtain a Concealed Pistol License due to "Shall Issue", which negates the need for the Pistol License To Purchase.

    E. Due to recent US Supreme Court rulings in Heller v. DC and McDonald v. Chicago, the Right to Keep and Bear Arms and the Right to Self-Defense have been held to be Fundamental Rights, one that is most often secured by the use of a Pistol. A person exercises Rights without a License, as to do otherwise is requiring Exercise of Rights as a Privileged Activity by asking for Permission.

    I have attached the applicable MCL/ACT Changes in an Adobe PDF Format. Please find the attached Document that contains the changes I have undertaken to achieve stated Goals. The Deletions are marked with STRIKE-THROUGH, the Additions/Changes are marked with BOLD Text and Highlighted in YELLOW.

    I have asked the sponsor of HB 4009/4010 (Richard LeBlanc) to sponsor this bill as well.

    UPDATES:

    Version 20110105 Rev A: Initial Version.

    Version 20110119 Rev A: I have changed 750.223 (2) to include pistol and refined the language to be just firearm. H/T to RayMich (MGO) for finding an issue with this (Post #20).

  2.   
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Battle Creek Mi
    Posts
    1,853
    sounds good to me
    "The sword dose not cause the murder, and the maker of the sword dose not bear sin" Rabbi Solomon ben Isaac 11th century
    "Don't be so open minded that your brains fall out!" Father John Corapi.

  4. #3
    You'll have my vote!
    AL
    Proverbs 25:28 - A man without self control is like a city broken into and left without walls.

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    southwest Detroit
    Posts
    10
    Got my vote. I'm with you MOC (OCDetroit). Carry On.

  6. #5

    Reply Received - MI House Representative Richard LeBlanc (HB 4009/4010 Sponsor)

    Dear Mr. PDinDetroit: Thank you for your recent message regarding the regulation of firearms in the State of Michigan. I appreciated hearing from you.

    Thank you for your support of my House Bills 4009 and 4010. I agree that "pistol free zones" do not enhance public safety. That is why I introduced these bills in the previous legislative session and hope that similar legislation will be taken up this term.

    As a fervent defender of the second amendment I understand your concerns with the regulation of the right to bear arms. Unfortunately, public opinion is not currently in favor of the complete elimination of all regulations on the exercise of the second amendment. It is my hope that bills such as House Bills 4009 and 4010 will begin to bring Michigan law into compliance with the constitutional right we hold dear. While support does not currently exist to remove licensing restrictions and registration requirements in their entirety at this time, I believe that incremental steps over a period of time may better accomplish our goals.

    Again, thank you for your communication.

    Regards,
    Richard LeBlanc
    State Representative
    18th District (Westland)

  7. #6

    My Reply to Representative Richard LeBlanc

    Honorable Richard LeBlanc
    State Representative
    18th District (Westland)

    Dear Mr. LeBlanc,

    Thank you for the response to my assistance request.

    For your information, there is now an online petition for HB 4009/4010 that I was involved in reviews for the draft form (was released yesterday). Please see the following for more information: Michigan House Bills 4009 and 4010 Petition.

    We, in the firearm rights communities, were pleasantly surprised by the speed of introduction for HB 4009/4010. Quite frankly, we were unprepared for such an event and had to act quickly to garner support for such. We were not aware that Public Opinion was on the side of elimination of Pistol Free Zones (or Criminal Empowerment Zones as some call them). I believe that the House Judiciary Committee Members will now have received a few emails like what can be found at the following link: House Bills 4009 and 4010 of 2011 on-line petition

    While I can appreciate your take on Public Opinion, the Exercise of Rights ought never be subject to such or else a Person's Rights are subjected to "mob rule" and can be denied based upon subjective criteria (May Issue). If you truly believe in defending the Second Amendment of the US Constitution and Article I Section 6 of the MI Constitution, then the License to Purchase should be addressed at a minimum as it is "asking permission to exercise a Right" which then becomes a Privilege. I believe you will find the recent SCOTUS Decisions in Heller and McDonald held this to be a Fundamental Right. While it could be held that Background Checks would be within the realm of "reasonable restrictions", asking Permission to Exercise a Right would not be a "reasonable restriction".

    I humbly ask you to reconsider sponsoring this legislation. At a minimum, I hope you would lend support to and vote for such legislation changes when introduced.

    Thank you again for your response. Please contact me with any questions about this information.

    Sincerely,

    PDinDetroit

  8. #7
    I just signed, will need more than 700 sig's to get their attention. Need to get this out to more people. 255,000 CPL's in Mi.

  9. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by missoak View Post
    I just signed, will need more than 700 sig's to get their attention. Need to get this out to more people. 255,000 CPL's in Mi.
    Agreed. This is just the grass-roots effort in 1 day...

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast