FYI open carry in Michigan gun free zones not so cut and dried

This is a discussion on FYI open carry in Michigan gun free zones not so cut and dried within the Open Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; While it has apparently been allowed to open carry in restricted zones provided you have a valid Michigan CPL or one recognized by Michigan, be ...

Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: FYI open carry in Michigan gun free zones not so cut and dried

  1. #1
    VIP Member Array TedBeau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Bay City
    Posts
    2,265

    FYI open carry in Michigan gun free zones not so cut and dried

    While it has apparently been allowed to open carry in restricted zones provided you have a valid Michigan CPL or one recognized by Michigan, be aware that not all prosocuters and judges agree.

    http://www.ammoland.com/2010/07/26/w...-what-it-says/

    What really needs to happen is they need to clarify both sections of code that can eb interpeted as being in conflict so that it makes it clear that CPL holders can carry in a gun free zone, and it actually makes more sense to allow concealed carry there. Why would they actually want open carry in schools anyways.
    Even better just do away with the gun free zones completely. If you are legal to carry a gun and not using it for illegal purposes, why restrict it at all.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    Distinguished Member Array Spec's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Metro Detroit Area
    Posts
    1,716
    I think the AG's opinion on this is quite clear and local judges may not take the law into their own hands... just my $0.02 I will be looking into this more clearly.
    NRA Certified Rifle/Pistol Instructor
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G18CFw0lnD8

    Accuracy ALWAYS WINS! So carry what you can hit with.

    If you find yourself in a fair fight your tactics stink.

  4. #3
    Distinguished Member Array Knightrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    1,316
    Quote Originally Posted by Spec View Post
    I think the AG's opinion on this is quite clear and local judges may not take the law into their own hands... just my $0.02 I will be looking into this more clearly.
    x2. It is also clearly stated in the law that the only people that are exempt from OCing in a other wise PFZ is a LEO and some one that as a permit to carry a gun. I would find it but I'm too lazy for that LOL
    Glock: G22 .40 S&W and G23 .40 S&W Sig Sauer: P938 9mm Smith and Wesson: Model 437 .38 Spl and Sigma SW9VE 9mm

  5. #4
    Senior Member Array Al Lowe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Mason, MI, USA
    Posts
    574
    Well, it actually is pretty well cut and dried, but the anti-self defense types who think they know better than us, think they can impose their opinions even in the face of state law.

  6. #5
    Senior Moderator
    Array Tangle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    9,647
    Actually, as I understand it, the AG's opinion is just that, an opinion based on his interpretation of the issues and law. His opinion(s) does not define law, the courts do that. If the AG could simply state an opinion and it becomes law because it is his opinion, then something is really wrong somewhere. No one man is suppose to be able to speak his opinions into law.
    I'm too young to be this old!
    Getting old isn't good for you!

  7. #6
    Senior Member Array Al Lowe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Mason, MI, USA
    Posts
    574
    Quote Originally Posted by Tangle View Post
    Actually, as I understand it, the AG's opinion is just that, an opinion based on his interpretation of the issues and law. His opinion(s) does not define law, the courts do that. If the AG could simply state an opinion and it becomes law because it is his opinion, then something is really wrong somewhere. No one man is suppose to be able to speak his opinions into law.
    Actually, if you read the opinion, from then AG Granholm, you'll see it's based on how the law was written. http://www.ag.state.mi.us/opinion/da...0s/op10188.htm

    To wit, the relevant section she refers to states:

    (1) Except as provided in subsection (2), a person shall not possess a firearm on the premises of any of the following:

    (a) A depository financial institution or a subsidiary or affiliate of a depository financial institution.

    (b) A church or other house of religious worship.

    (c) A court.

    (d) A theatre.

    (e) A sports arena.

    (f) A day care center.

    (g) A hospital.

    (h) An establishment licensed under the Michigan liquor control act, Act No. 8 of the Public Acts of the Extra Session of 1933, being sections 436.1 to 436.58 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.

    This language is significantly broader than that employed by section 5o of the Concealed Pistol Licensing Act. By its express terms, section 234d(1) of the Penal Code applies to firearms generally, not merely to pistols, and applies to firearms whether concealed or not. Subsection (2) of this provision creates several specific exceptions to this prohibition, two of which are germane to your inquiry. It provides, in pertinent part that:

    (2) This section does not apply to any of the following:

    * * *

    (b) A peace officer.

    (c) A person licensed by this state or another state to carry a concealed weapon.
    And so far, the current AG agrees, as does the Michigan State Police.
    Last edited by Al Lowe; August 30th, 2010 at 12:57 PM. Reason: cause I effing felt like it.

  8. #7
    Senior Member Array Al Lowe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Mason, MI, USA
    Posts
    574
    One other thing, that I think has bearing on the case, was mentioned in the comments section of the link from the original post.

    You leave out that it was on MSU property, and UNFORTUNATELY they CAN make their own fire arm laws (and have) because they are not considered a “local unit of government”. Please see MCL 123.1102…
    So the client listed was in fact in violation of law, no matter how BS it was…
    Hopefully you win on appeal and we will have case law, and then MSU, UofM, and WSU will then be considered a local unit of government and will not then be able to make BS “laws” as they call them.
    IANAL – this is my opinion
    That can have significant impact on what is or isn't covered.

Links

Posting Permissions

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

Similar Threads

  1. GOOD: Wisconsin Carry, Inc Sues Over Gun Free School Zones
    By logan in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: January 9th, 2010, 01:00 PM
  2. Open carry in Michigan National Forests? (Merged)
    By chains1240 in forum Open Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: April 24th, 2009, 01:38 PM
  3. Michigan bill to remove "gun free zones"
    By spartywrx in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: March 19th, 2009, 11:53 AM
  4. Open carry in Michigan?
    By DerbyGirl in forum Open Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: November 11th, 2008, 05:02 PM
  5. Michigan Bill to remove no carry zones
    By Sheldon J in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: August 14th, 2007, 09:08 PM

Search tags for this page

can you open carry in a school in michigan

,
can you open carry in michigan schools
,
michigan gun free zones
,
michigan open carry gun law
,
michigan open carry gun laws
,
michigan open carry in pistol free zones
,

michigan open carry in schools

,
michigan open carry law 2011
,
michigan open carry pistol free zones
,
michigan pistol free zones
,

open carry in michigan schools

,
open carry michigan schools
Click on a term to search for related topics.