Open carry legal in Michigan


SSBN620Gold

New member
I have a CPL and consistently carry concealed when and were legal. Sometimes I get tired of large baggy clothing and just put the Glock on and go about my business. There are many reasons to get a CPL. I consider CPL holders part of the solution, not the problem.

Every LEO I have discussed open carry with has acknowledged they know it's legal. I read stories about LEO's using anything else to cause people open carrying problems. You need to be squeaky clean. A good one is tinted windows in your car, expensive and points. Respectfulness politeness and a cooperative attitude go a long way with every LEO I have ever met.

Golden Rule: It's difficult to treat a person that is polite, respectful and cooperative poorly.
 

Computerjunkie

New member
I do not own a gun, I'm actually looking to find out what the people on this forum feel about the 2 gentleman in this article that was printed in my hometown paper.

Link Removed

Read it and let me know if you feel about the situation.
 
W

wolfhunter

Guest
I do not own a gun, I'm actually looking to find out what the people on this forum feel about the 2 gentleman in this article that was printed in my hometown paper.

Link Removed

Read it and let me know if you feel about the situation.

Let's do a little experiment to remove possible hype from the story. Go back and read "guitar" in every place where the story mentions what the two guys were carrying. Now, who was in the wrong? The two guys legally carrying guitars, or the cops?
 

BradAnderson

New member
I have a CPL and consistently carry concealed when and were legal.

That's the problem: they give the state a carte blanche to DECIDE when and where it's legal.
Sometimes I get tired of large baggy clothing and just put the Glock on and go about my business. There are many reasons to get a CPL

Unless you CAN'T get one, for reasons that are entirely arbitrary on the part of the legislature-- which says that one person't life is NOT equal to another's.

I consider CPL holders part of the solution, not the problem.

No, they're part of the problem, because democracy MUST be based on the premise that all men are created equal. By turning basic rights into elite privilege, then CPL-holders are no longer equal, and thus society is no longer democratic-- i.e. these CPL-holders enjoy SPECIAL rights and privileges over others, and so they don't care about basic riights anymore,and won't fight for them; in fact, they will tend to ejoy their unfair advantage, and fight to KEEP it that way.
By refusing CPL licenses at whim, lawmakers turn democracy into elite aritocracy.

Every LEO I have discussed open carry with has acknowledged they know it's legal.

CPL-laws are NOT legal, since they violate the 2nd, 4th and 9th amendments concerning the right of the people to be scure in bearing arms on their persons without public scrutiny-- as well as the 10th Amendment regarding state-powers that are prohibted by the Constitution.

I read stories about LEO's using anything else to cause people open carrying problems. You need to be squeaky clean. A good one is tinted windows in your car, expensive and points. Respectfulness politeness and a cooperative attitude go a long way with every LEO I have ever met. Golden Rule: It's difficult to treat a person that is polite, respectful and cooperative poorly.

if you're a SLAVE-- which you ARE, if it makes any difference beyond the amount of cooperation required by law.

This is the clear pattern I mentioned above, when rights devolve into elite privilege: i.e. the trembling lackey blames the victim, having sold out his rights for elite privilege; and he thinks it can't happen to him, as long as he's a good little boy.
As Ben Franklin said, "trading liberty for securtiy, costs you both and gets you neither.
 

BradAnderson

New member
I do not own a gun, I'm actually looking to find out what the people on this forum feel about the 2 gentleman in this article that was printed in my hometown paper.

Link Removed

Read it and let me know if you feel about the situation.


This is just a SYMPTOM of what happens when you require a license to do something; i.e. it erodes the basic right associated with it. Again, CCW laws are purely unconstitutionall, and so when that right goes, others follow.

THere's a very strong, but subtle, political agenda behind all of this: i.e. they want to deprive the people of liberty and security, so the state can play Godfather and "make them offers they can't refuse" in exchange for protection- rather than simply respecing their rights.
 

Sheldon

New member
That's the problem: they give the state a carte blanche to DECIDE when and where it's legal.


Unless you CAN'T get one, for reasons that are entirely arbitrary on the part of the legislature-- which says that one person't life is NOT equal to another's.



No, they're part of the problem, because democracy MUST be based on the premise that all men are created equal. By turning basic rights into elite privilege, then CPL-holders are no longer equal, and thus society is no longer democratic-- i.e. these CPL-holders enjoy SPECIAL rights and privileges over others, and so they don't care about basic riights anymore,and won't fight for them; in fact, they will tend to ejoy their unfair advantage, and fight to KEEP it that way.
By refusing CPL licenses at whim, lawmakers turn democracy into elite aritocracy.


CPL-laws are NOT legal, since they violate the 2nd, 4th and 9th amendments concerning the right of the people to be scure in bearing arms on their persons without public scrutiny-- as well as the 10th Amendment regarding state-powers that are prohibted by the Constitution.



if you're a SLAVE-- which you ARE, if it makes any difference beyond the amount of cooperation required by law.

This is the clear pattern I mentioned above, when rights devolve into elite privilege: i.e. the trembling lackey blames the victim, having sold out his rights for elite privilege; and he thinks it can't happen to him, as long as he's a good little boy.
As Ben Franklin said, "trading liberty for securtiy, costs you both and gets you neither.

Wrong.... So in analogy people that get drivers or pilots licenses have "Special Elite Privileges"? People who chose to CC get their "Special Privilege" by taking the time to (in most states that is, as some do not require certification and any can CC if they desire with out a permit) jump though hoops, get a FBI background check, just as a Drivers license must be earned so must a CC permit. Wouldn't it be interesting if we just threw every one the keys to the car and said go for it, you'll figure it out.... So don't fault the driver just because he chose to drive a car and not ride a bicycle.....

OC or CC... Carrying a gun may be a right (break the law and it becomes a privilage ask any ex con) but I sure feel a whole lot safer when I know they have been through some kind of training regimen first. I could eat up a heap of bandwidth here with stories of those that bought a gun and had no idea what they were doing but....

Me I do both as the occasion requires, there is a time a place for OC, and CC as I was faulting my son the other day. He has his CC but was going to walk into his place of work OC, and although it is a public business, and I have OC'd there I highly advised him not to....

Yeah ramble on all you want to but when your employer has a policy against employees not carrying guns on site, and although he was not on the clock, why push the issue, possibly loosing his job in todays high unemployment world?

Some states such a thing would only be considered SOP but not in Michigan, baby steps, baby steps, we fought for years to get our shall issue law, then fought more to have the CEZ removed and have been successful although slowly.
If you grab your gun and go for a walk around the block you will likely be OK, if you do it at a OC rally you will be OK, if you go for a motorcycle ride, (in most areas) you will be OK, but if you do so at the mall you may have problems it's called ground work. Trying to shove your rights down the throats of people that are less receptive will only serve to Piss them off, cause undue stress for all, and hurt the cause, so think before you cross the highway and look both directions first.
 

BradAnderson

New member
Wrong.... So in analogy people that get drivers or pilots licenses have "Special Elite Privileges"? .

NON-SEQUITUR analogy. Those licenses are issued to people who have demonstrated a required level of skill at what they're doing-- here, we're talking about concealing a firearm, what's so skillful about that? We've already established that open-carry is legal in Michigan, so why not CONCEALED carry? The only answer: HARASSMENT.

Likewise, they don't DENY driver's and pilot's licenses to people, based on arbitrary stigmas and public medieval hysteria which have NOTHING to do with their ability to drive or fly-- like they do with CPL's.

Finally, I don't see anything in the Constitution about "the RIGHT of the people to drive motor-vehicles on public roads."

You're comparing apples and atom-bombs, I won't take up that fool's argument.
 

Sheldon

New member
NON-SEQUITUR analogy. Those licenses are issued to people who have demonstrated a required level of skill at what they're doing-- here, we're talking about concealing a firearm, what's so skillful about that? We've already established that open-carry is legal in Michigan, so why not CONCEALED carry? The only answer: HARASSMENT.

Likewise, they don't DENY driver's and pilot's licenses to people, based on arbitrary stigmas and public medieval hysteria which have NOTHING to do with their ability to drive or fly-- like they do with CPL's.

Finally, I don't see anything in the Constitution about "the RIGHT of the people to drive motor-vehicles on public roads."

You're comparing apples and atom-bombs, I won't take up that fool's argument.

No skill hummm... So either you choose for personal reasons not to have a CC or have some issue in your past that disallows you from being issued one.... Hence you place blame on those that take the time to spend the time, money, take the training, and in some cases additional training the gain the skill sets needed to obtain and maintain their permit....

You know Brad pointing the fickle finger of blame at those that are of a like mind is not a real good way to move people to your side of an argument, after all those that are here are of a similar mind set, wanting basically the same thing when it comes to gun rights....

Just as with any permit if you mess up you will be denied, and a Drivers license (or Pilots for that matter) is no different, mess up, become a felon and you loose your gun rights... Not a US citizen, DUI, or multiple other criminal acts, no DL for you.....

As to being able to drive a vehicle in public not being a right, just for giggles look up the laws WRT interstate commerce, and you will find a group that is of very similar issue but their point is with government issued licenses to drive a vehicle. They strongly feel that it is indeed a right and will post a very similar argument should you disagree.

So it is not apples to A bombs, it may be a good idea for you to increase your knowledge base to properly influence a good discussion, and spend some quality book time.... Should you have the time I also recommend a visit here The Constitution Society and have a read of the founding documents with special attention to the Federalist papers, a very enlightening read.
 

BradAnderson

New member
No skill hummm... So either you choose for personal reasons not to have a CC or have some issue in your past that disallows you from being issued one....

The STATE disallows people from it. It has NOTHING TO DO with anything in anyone's past.

Hence you place blame on those that take the time to spend the time, money, take the training, and in some cases additional training the gain the skill sets needed to obtain and maintain their permit....

Get a load of this.

This shows the arrogance of the CPL-law, i.e. it makes CPL-recipients feel superior for earning a privilege, when it's actually a RIGHT.

And he thinks it takes time, money, and training, simply to CONCEAL something?
Ok: the ONLY difference between CPL and open-carry, is CONCEALING it. Is that REALLY so hard to understand?
Does he NOT REALIZE that Open-carry is legal in Michigan? Or can't he even READ the title of the thread he's posting in?

Yep-- there we have it, folks-- dummies get CPL's, but rational people get barred.
And so, we see the subtle hand of dictatorship at work.


J
Just as with any permit if you mess up you will be denied, and a Drivers license (or Pilots for that matter) is no different, mess up, become a felon and you loose your gun rights... Not a US citizen, DUI, or multiple other criminal acts, no DL for you.....


Now he's the CPL-Nazi: "NO CPL FOR YOU!"

He still doesn't even realize the principle at work: that we're talking about a RIGHT, here... and yet he thinks that it can be justifiably subjected to arbitrary whim and caprice of the state.
It just doesn't register with his kind, what kind of FIRE he's playing with-- his opinion is just as I said: that CPL-holders are superior, and that everyone else is a 2nd-class citizen.

THIS is why CPL holders are the problem-- they blame the victim rather than the state, and feel that they DESERVE their elite privileges to carry concealed weapons while others are forced to open-carry.

THIS is the elitist-mindset at work: it compromises equality, by giving elite privilege to some, and turning the rest into second-class citizens.
Look how he BRAGS about how he supposedly EARNED the privilege by "taking the time, money, training" etc-- while totally dishing those who are DENIED it, calling them "mess-ups."
Such arrogance is always how the dictators divide and conquer the people, by making the elite faction feel superior to the oppressed... and clearly, they start with the less intelligent members who can't figure it out:

First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me--
and there was no one left to speak out for me.

--Franklin H. Littell


As to being able to drive a vehicle in public not being a right, just for giggles look up the laws WRT interstate commerce, and you will find a group that is of very similar issue but their point is with government issued licenses to drive a vehicle. They strongly feel that it is indeed a right and will post a very similar argument should you disagree

And now, for the grand finale of irrationalism, he compares an fringe-group opinion, with plainly written and guaranteed RIGHTS in the state and federal Constitutions, as well as established state and federal LAW.
This is why I don't take up a fool's argument: only a fool would.
 

Sheldon

New member
The STATE disallows people from it. It has NOTHING TO DO with anything in anyone's past.



Get a load of this.

This shows the arrogance of the CPL-law, i.e. it makes CPL-recipients feel superior for earning a privilege, when it's actually a RIGHT.

And he thinks it takes time, money, and training, simply to CONCEAL something?
Ok: the ONLY difference between CPL and open-carry, is CONCEALING it. Is that REALLY so hard to understand?
Does he NOT REALIZE that Open-carry is legal in Michigan? Or can't he even READ the title of the thread he's posting in?

Yep-- there we have it, folks-- dummies get CPL's, but rational people get barred.
And so, we see the subtle hand of dictatorship at work.


J


Now he's the CPL-Nazi: "NO CPL FOR YOU!"

He still doesn't even realize the principle at work: that we're talking about a RIGHT, here... and yet he thinks that it can be justifiably subjected to arbitrary whim and caprice of the state.
It just doesn't register with his kind, what kind of FIRE he's playing with-- his opinion is just as I said: that CPL-holders are superior, and that everyone else is a 2nd-class citizen.

THIS is why CPL holders are the problem-- they blame the victim rather than the state, and feel that they DESERVE their elite privileges to carry concealed weapons while others are forced to open-carry.
THIS is the elitist-mindset at work: it compromises equality, by giving elite privilege to some, and turning the rest into second-class citizens.
Look how he BRAGS about how he supposedly EARNED the privilege by "taking the time, money, training" etc-- while totally dishing those who are DENIED it, calling them "mess-ups."
Such arrogance is always how the dictators divide and conquer the people, by making the elite faction feel superior to the oppressed... and clearly, they start with the less intelligent members who can't figure it out:

First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--
because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me--
and there was no one left to speak out for me.

--Franklin H. Littell




And now, for the grand finale of irrationalism, he compares an fringe-group opinion, with plainly written and guaranteed RIGHTS in the state and federal Constitutions, as well as established state and federal LAW.
This is why I don't take up a fool's argument: only a fool would.

So now you get rude, which I have to believe proves my point you have in your past committed some minor infraction and cannot get a CC if you wanted one....

No having my CC does not make me feel superior, but it does give one a sense of accomplishment, kind of like when you graduated from high school, or learned to ride your first bicycle, you stuck with it, you took the time, and yes any moron can CC but not legally or safely, it does take a skill set, one apparently you refuse to acknowledge or attempt.

But if you want to see the real problem here for the OC people go look in a mirror, you are not helping the cause any with your extremest paranoia attitude, spinning off on a rant, blaming everyone and thing except where the blame actually lies.

I will agree with you on one point though, if we could be like AZ, Vermont or Alaska where no permit is required for firearms other than a state DL, it would be a very nice thing indeed, however the political mind set is not open to this line of reasoning at present, it took several other states passing shall issue legislation, proving that there were no shoot outs in the streets, that there was an actual benefit in a reduction of crime by honest law abiding citizens carrying firearms and several tries with good pro gun legislators before we were successful so......

If you want change, you must get politically active, get to know your Representative on a first name basis, volunteer your time, but big hint here, as I said above do not try and shove your rights down the throats of others, all you will end up doing is alienating them and creating an enemy, one that will wine and cry like a Democrat during the Bush, Gore election.

So age up a bit there lad, learn some lessons for it is said "it is a wise man that learns from another's mistakes" but a fool goes off and makes his own over and over again, your line of argument only creates animosity not Allies.
 

BradAnderson

New member
Obviously, my point stands; the idiot ADMITS that he blames the victim, validates the state, and exalts himself as having EARNED something which is expressly stated as a RIGHT in the Constitution.

Again, I won't take up a fool's argument-- and every word proves him to be a fool indeed. And since there's no fool like an old fool, from his talk then he must be 100.

And his best line of all?

yes any moron can CC but not legally

Again, note the thread-title: "open carry legal in Michigan". So he's claiming that simply CONCEALING a carried gun, takes some special skill that should require making it illegal without a permit.

And he calls OTHERS "morons..." irony of ironies.

This, people, is the mentality behind CCW laws. I guess he thinks the Jews in the Holocaust weren't "politically active" enough either... fools never learn.
 

Sheldon

New member
Obviously, my point stands; the idiot ADMITS that he blames the victim, validates the state, and exalts himself as having EARNED something which is expressly stated as a RIGHT in the Constitution.

Again, I won't take up a fool's argument-- and every word proves him to be a fool indeed. And since there's no fool like an old fool, from his talk then he must be 100.

And his best line of all?



Again, note the thread-title: "open carry legal in Michigan". So he's claiming that simply CONCEALING a carried gun, takes some special skill that should require making it illegal without a permit.

And he calls OTHERS "morons..." irony of ironies.

This, people, is the mentality behind CCW laws. I guess he thinks the Jews in the Holocaust weren't "politically active" enough either... fools never learn.

So again you resort to insults, again proving my point, you can live with the guilt of the past and never obtain a CC or you can learn to live with it and move on.

You add words that I did not post, misconstrue sentences, and rewrite my posting to suit your paranoia, and ignore the rest. you are sounding more and more like a crybaby democrat with every reply.

OK now son go sit in the corner, calm down for a bit and pay attention, this old guy is trying to teach you a life lesson that can help, that is if you will actually listen for once and stop your rant.

History lesson with an analogy: Once upon a time there was a group called the Michigan Melita, and they were of a rapidly growing number. Their leadership got kind of radical, and they held marches in open places like malls, shopping centers, parks, they would dress up in full battle attire and march about trying to shove their right to be a Melita down the throats of others, they were breaking no laws and did as they please. Needless to say this made soccer moms, and the elderly uneasy, and in the eye of the press it was a feeding frenzy.

I had a chance discussion with their leader at one local event, and in the course of our conversation said that he had a good idea but his method of promoting the group were a little radical and in need of toning down a bit, T shirts and hats were more friendly and less intimidating to the public, that their always showing up in full dress was a bit over the edge. He thanked me but continued along his line of promotion. So today they still exist but are a small, and somewhat ostracized group, shunned by many, and for the most mislabeled as extremest.


Lesson Continues: Back when there were more anti than pro gunners in charge of the state there was what was called the "General permit" coveted by many, but so rare that it bordered on unbend legend. Virtually obtainable unless you were a licensed PI, Judge, were related too or real close friends with everyone on the gun board.

For a great many years many attempted to rectify this but were thwarted at every turn, and then Florida broke the mold with their flagship shall issue law, but still MI resisted with determination. At the peak of the fight there was an incident that made the news, at least in the pro gun sector in a big way. A local gal that was in fear of her life had applied for one of the general carry permits, stating her fear of her ex, of the useless restraining order, how he stalked her, how the police had been called (over 13) multiple times, but was refused as not having sufficient grounds. What happened next you can guess, her ex one night after work hunted her down, kidnapped, brutally raped and murdered her.
This tragedy helped to spur on those that wanted a more fair and just system of issuing permits to the citizens, and yes you could have argued until the cows came home that it was a right via the US Constitution but then that line of reasoning would have left us where we were and not where we are.

We succeeded though political processes, having grass roots groups having meetings and getting to know our candidates and their stand, through getting to know our Representatives, helping them on their election campaigns, through posting adds in local papers, writing articles, letters to the editor, through peacefull demonstrations promoting, through the sweat and efforts of those that wanted a more just system. No we did not rant, rave or insult. No we did not try and alienate those of the gun world that did not march with us.

The tricky part and rest of the lesson so pay attention: At the time of the "general" permit system OC simply was not accepted, if you attempted this you would end up in jail, plain and simple, and yes someone in the BC area tried it. If you did so and were not on your own property you were legally out there by yourself and no one would step up to help. if you want to see the article you will need to go to the Library and look up the Enquire and News story on MICRO FISH, date was in the summer of either 70 or 71.

As CC slowly became accepted by the public at large, the OC crowd came forth with more legal backing, and the proof that citizens can responsibly carry guns, that there were no records of issues with law abiding citizens wishing to either OC or CC.

lessons learned: That you must not try and offend in your mission to promote what is a right or you will create more friction than your cause needs and that makes you a huge part of the problem and not the solution, that yes you may or may not be right in what ever your endeavor however....
Remember you can slide a lot further on Bull Shit than you can on sand. So again baby steps, for if you go forth with insuilts, rants and a this is my right learn to live with it attitude, you could very well end up loosing that right in a future legislative session, pressed by those that you offended with your shove it down their throats attitude.

"it is a wise man that learns from the mistakes of others" but a fool goes forth and makes his own, over and over.....
 

SSBN620Gold

New member
Sheldon,
You are correct about the evolution of our gun rights in Michigan. I remember appearing before the Oakland County Licensing Board attempting to get a Non-Restricted CCW. Nothing in my history disqualified me for that permit, however I'm sure you know the results. I received a permit for "hunting and target". In those days you needed that permit to legally remove the gun from your house to go hunting or to the range.

Mr. Anderson,

I have taken a little time to respond to your insults. I think a little more Michigan history is in order.

Prior to the passage of MCL 123.1102, Michigan Firearm Laws Preemption Act, in 1990 every local unit of Govt. had the right to create any firearm laws they wanted. Open Carry was a guarantied trip to prison, CCW's were impossible to get if you were not politically connected.

During the 80's the City of Ferndale would only process "Applications to Purchase a Pistol" about 2 hours per week. Every city had it's own rules.

Until the A.G. Opinion from Jennifer M. Granholm in February of 2002 that carrying a firearm open in a holster was not "brandishing a firearm in public" That was just another trip to jail for the brave attempting to OC.

The point about Florida changing the laws to "shall issue" opened the door. They issued 100k permits and nothing bad occurred. Concealed carry in Florida had a dramatic effect on crime. Criminals started picking on those they knew would not be armed, remember all the tourists being carjacked and shot leaving the airport in rental cars. This was occurring so often that laws were passed prohibiting any markings on rental cars rented in Florida. The next time you rent a car in Florida look for the labels, they don't exist.

The Politicians that passed Florida's new laws understood what was at stake. They didn't just pass a law allowing anybody to CC. They established reasonable restrictions in an attempt to avoid an occurrence that would have doomed the movement for many years.

You seem to have a problem with people that followed the process to get a CPL. Describing CPL holders as part of the problem is ridiculous. Does it sound like the CPL holders on this site don't take the responsibility of carrying a firearm seriously? Most of us are aware of the political consequences of our actions and how we represent our cause. It is this responsibility that continues to provide ammunition for the continued loosening of the firearm laws that violate our rights of self defense.

I think an endorsement on our DL would serve the same purpose. All a CPL represents is you are not disqualified from legally CC a firearm. Just think about what a hassle an LEO encounter could be without the CPL process. How about LEO's performing back round check while you wait on the side of the road.

I don't know and don't care about the reasons you don't get a CPL. The restrictions generally follow the same restrictions for the purchase of firearms. In my eyes those restrictions don't seem unreasonable. If you think they should be different then become politically involved. We live in a society that all opinions count, not just ours.

Your rants don't change anybodies mind.
 

ricbak

New member
Sheldon,
You are correct about the evolution of our gun rights in Michigan. I remember appearing before the Oakland County Licensing Board attempting to get a Non-Restricted CCW. Nothing in my history disqualified me for that permit, however I'm sure you know the results. I received a permit for "hunting and target". In those days you needed that permit to legally remove the gun from your house to go hunting or to the range.

Mr. Anderson,

I have taken a little time to respond to your insults. I think a little more Michigan history is in order.

Prior to the passage of MCL 123.1102, Michigan Firearm Laws Preemption Act, in 1990 every local unit of Govt. had the right to create any firearm laws they wanted. Open Carry was a guarantied trip to prison, CCW's were impossible to get if you were not politically connected.

During the 80's the City of Ferndale would only process "Applications to Purchase a Pistol" about 2 hours per week. Every city had it's own rules.

Until the A.G. Opinion from Jennifer M. Granholm in February of 2002 that carrying a firearm open in a holster was not "brandishing a firearm in public" That was just another trip to jail for the brave attempting to OC.

The point about Florida changing the laws to "shall issue" opened the door. They issued 100k permits and nothing bad occurred. Concealed carry in Florida had a dramatic effect on crime. Criminals started picking on those they knew would not be armed, remember all the tourists being carjacked and shot leaving the airport in rental cars. This was occurring so often that laws were passed prohibiting any markings on rental cars rented in Florida. The next time you rent a car in Florida look for the labels, they don't exist.

The Politicians that passed Florida's new laws understood what was at stake. They didn't just pass a law allowing anybody to CC. They established reasonable restrictions in an attempt to avoid an occurrence that would have doomed the movement for many years.

You seem to have a problem with people that followed the process to get a CPL. Describing CPL holders as part of the problem is ridiculous. Does it sound like the CPL holders on this site don't take the responsibility of carrying a firearm seriously? Most of us are aware of the political consequences of our actions and how we represent our cause. It is this responsibility that continues to provide ammunition for the continued loosening of the firearm laws that violate our rights of self defense.

I think an endorsement on our DL would serve the same purpose. All a CPL represents is you are not disqualified from legally CC a firearm. Just think about what a hassle an LEO encounter could be without the CPL process. How about LEO's performing back round check while you wait on the side of the road.

I don't know and don't care about the reasons you don't get a CPL. The restrictions generally follow the same restrictions for the purchase of firearms. In my eyes those restrictions don't seem unreasonable. If you think they should be different then become politically involved. We live in a society that all opinions count, not just ours.

Your rants don't change anybodies mind.

SS~Gold, Good post. I got my 6 Gun in '89 and had to watch what, where I was. Mich is not perfect, and there is room for improvement, So get involved with groups like this, MGO, MCRGO Let Lansing (Or what ever other state capital is for where you live) know what your thoughts are...

Happy Fathers Day all
 

Sheldon

New member
SS~Gold, Good post. I got my 6 Gun in '89 and had to watch what, where I was. Mich is not perfect, and there is room for improvement, So get involved with groups like this, MGO, MCRGO Let Lansing (Or what ever other state capital is for where you live) know what your thoughts are...

Happy Fathers Day all

Indeed +1
 

BradAnderson

New member
Sheldon,
You are correct about the evolution of our gun rights in Michigan. I remember appearing before the Oakland County Licensing Board attempting to get a Non-Restricted CCW. Nothing in my history disqualified me for that permit, however I'm sure you know the results. I received a permit for "hunting and target". In those days you needed that permit to legally remove the gun from your house to go hunting or to the range.

Mr. Anderson,

I have taken a little time to respond to your insults.

I didn't insult you, so that's one fact you should get straight. As for the rest:

I think a little more Michigan history is in order.

Prior to the passage of MCL 123.1102, Michigan Firearm Laws Preemption Act, in 1990 every local unit of Govt. had the right to create any firearm laws they wanted.

No, they didn't. There's something called the federal Constitution Supremacy clause, which means that state laws can't violate federal law. Likewise, the Michigan Constitution expressly guarantees the right of every person to keep and bear arms. So don't try this at home, kids-- I'm a professional.

Open Carry was a guarantied trip to prison, CCW's were impossible to get if you were not politically connected.

Bull, the law is plain and clear. If people don't know the law, that's their problem not mine. The point is that people who knew the law, coudl get permits-- so it was a moot point. Now it's become a plebiscite of mob-rule, where almost ANYONE can get a permit, if they don't have a stigma attached to them which has NOTHING to do with their fitness to carry or not, but which simply pleases the public hysteria against "mental illness--" again, REGARDLESS of whether someone is a proven threat to themselves or others. Of course this is 100% unconstitutional, but it's one of those witch-hunts which doesn't matter since no one wants to martyr themselves in court to challenge it.
Perhaps you like living under mob rule-- which just shows how stupid you are; of course when the fickle mob turns round on you, you'll squeal like a baby big on the slaughter.

You seem to have a problem with people that followed the process to get a CPL.

No, I have a problem with REQUIRING a CPL, when the law is clear that people DON'T NEED ONE, since they have the RIGHT to bear arms for self-defense (Michigan Constitution, Article I, section 6), and to do it in a manner which doesn't subject to them to public scrutiny (US Constitution, 9th Amendment, right of Privacy). In other words, they don't NEED a permit to carry a concealed firearm.
Second, since they can already carry openly without a license, then the only thing the license does is allow them to CONCEAL it-- and only an idiot would think that this is any more dangerous than carrying openly. So it's clear that you people are idiots.

And yes, I have a problem with Peiople who EMBRACE laws that turn Constitutional rights into elite privileges, while denying them to others based on medieval stigmas-- like Shelly-boy. Get your facts straight, your head outta your ass, and learn to read English. (Yes I know that's faulty parallel structure, but I doubt that YOU know it so the point's moot).

Describing CPL holders as part of the problem is ridiculous. Does it sound like the CPL holders on this site don't take the responsibility of carrying a firearm seriously?

HELLO, I was talking about the RIGHT to carry them-- which is being VIOLATED by the law; and Shelly's just jiggy with it. So are you. This is the problem-- i.e. when the most intelligent people are denied rights are are made into elite privileges enjoyed by morons like you and Shelly. This is a social trend of dictatorship which obviously flies over your little head with your low IQ's and failed abstract-thinking ability.

Your rants don't change anybodies mind.

Speak your yourself idjit, A is A-- not that you know that THAT means, either, since you don't even realize that "anybodies" isn't even a word. Stupid.
 

BradAnderson

New member
SS~Gold, Good post. I got my 6 Gun in '89 and had to watch what, where I was. Mich is not perfect, and there is room for improvement, So get involved with groups like this, MGO, MCRGO Let Lansing (Or what ever other state capital is for where you live) know what your thoughts are...

Happy Fathers Day all

That's like saying "Nazi Germany is not perfect, and there is room for improvement, So get involved with groups like the Fifth Colum, the Underground Resistance, let Berlin (or whatever state capital is for where you live) know what your thoughts are..."

It's really easy to say that when you're one of the elite-- but incredibly arrogant and offensive to those who aren't.
 
W

wolfhunter

Guest
BradA - I've read your rant through this thread. I understand you feel the Constitution codifies your right to carry. I even agree with you on that point. However, in the reality of today's world the state and Federal Supreme Courts are currently allowing gun laws such as the requirement for a permit to CCW to stand. Until we can get the courts to rule the laws are unconstitutional, or get Congress (or state legislators) to repeal these laws many have determined to follow existing laws as we work to reverse them.

I hope that your discussions with the Anti-gun crowd is more rational and less insulting than what you've posted here.
 

BradAnderson

New member
BradA - I've read your rant through this thread.

It's not a "rant," it's a response to idiots who don't have a clue.

I understand you feel the Constitution codifies your right to carry.

No, I don't "feel it," I KNOW it-- can't you read the thread-title, either? What part of "OPEN CARRY LEGAL IN MICHIGAN," do you NOT understand?
I even agree with you on that point. However, in the reality of today's world the state and Federal Supreme Courts are currently allowing gun laws such as the requirement for a permit to CCW to stand.

No. You're confusing the right to carry, with the right to PRIVACY.

It would be different, if the state didn't allow the RIGHT to open-carry-- but it DOES. So the right to privacy also stands, under federal law-- thus yielding the right to carry CONCEALED as well. End of discussion. I can't help if you can't understand that.

I hope that your discussions with the Anti-gun crowd is more rational and less insulting than what you've posted here.

The truth is always rational by definition, and It's not an insult if it's true. These idiots are telling me that they should have elite privielges of self-defense that I don't have; this implies that their lives are more important than mine-- and that's about as serious an insult as you can get. If you want to sit there and take that, go ahead-- but don't expect me to.

Likewise, only an idiot would trade liberty for security-- and that's exactly what they're doing by embracing CCW laws. But they're trying to trade MY liberty for THEIR security, to soothe their paranoid hysteria-- which is not a very good way to get into my good graces.
Anyone with any REAL knowledge of history, knows that this is how society disarms the people in order to oppress them... obviously they either don't know, or don't care, but either way they're idiots. Like Shelly says "I feel safer if.... " well too bad, rights come before paranoia.
Their ignorance about freedom and tyranny is so thick you can cut it with a knife; they want to give up rights, as long as it only applies to OTHER people, thinking it won't ever affect THEM-- and that's WRONG, both morally and factually.
 

New Threads

Members online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
49,628
Messages
627,026
Members
74,753
Latest member
russvb
Top