Michigan House passes concealed carry without a license - what's your opinion?
- Thread starter TBO773
- Start date
Good. I wish other states, cough cough, Nebraska, cough, would follow suit.
Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk
Michigan gun laws seems to get a lot better, including carrying concealed handguns. For example, last year, I got my CPL in 1 day, applied Tuesday, got O.K. letter Friday the same week, which technically means decision was made within 24 hours. It used to be a lot longer and a lot more complicated. If MI lets residents to buy handguns w/o permit to purchase, then CPL will lose its importance even more. At least for now, if Michiganders have CPL, no permit to purchase handgun is required. Still, having CPL is good, as it allows to carry concealed handguns in many other states.
Last edited:
The carrying of arms in public, be they hand or long arms, openly or concealed, should not be contingent upon government permission. Nor should the property "rights" of those open for business to the public (whether admission is charged or not) be used as justification to discriminate against someone's God given and constitutional right to carry any more than they can discriminate against someone over the color of their skin.
People should be required to get a permit to exercise their Constitutional right to bear arms, just like the press needs a permit to print a story and we need a permit to speak our minds. Oh, wait, never mind.
Common sense has finally made an appearance in Michigan. I'm glad to see things are moving in the right direction. Michigan even went red in the last election. Life is looking up in my home state.
Grew up in Michigan, bought my first pistol there. For a midwestern state the laws were archaic. The permit to buy, then the "safety inspection" at the sheriff's office. Seriously, I took my Glock in for this "safety inspection", and right in front of me, they simply logged the serial number and performed no such inspection. Registration, pure and simple.
For a long time, CCW was purely at the discretion of the local sheriff. Where I lived I never heard of someone getting turned down (rural county). In Washtenaw (Ann Arbor, liberal cesspool) it was either the sheriff himself or someone similar retired and was immediately denied a CCW. NOBODY got approved in liberal-leaning counties. At least that was solved and taken up to the state level a number of years ago, I believe.
If they go to the next step of no license, happy to see that. Here in Indiana at least it's a pretty painless process for a lifetime permit, I didn't really have an issue with the process. Pretty much a "shall issue" situation.
For a long time, CCW was purely at the discretion of the local sheriff. Where I lived I never heard of someone getting turned down (rural county). In Washtenaw (Ann Arbor, liberal cesspool) it was either the sheriff himself or someone similar retired and was immediately denied a CCW. NOBODY got approved in liberal-leaning counties. At least that was solved and taken up to the state level a number of years ago, I believe.
If they go to the next step of no license, happy to see that. Here in Indiana at least it's a pretty painless process for a lifetime permit, I didn't really have an issue with the process. Pretty much a "shall issue" situation.
We have a better chance of growing an extra dick than Illinois passing these laws.
Good for MI.
R
Good for MI.
R
You will still want a CPL if you are a Michigan resident that travels out of state...
Last edited:
The MI legislature needs to tackle this next.
1) Abolish the safety inspection
2) Ban any registration, in any way, by any government agency
3) Order all PDs and SDs to forthwith destroy all "safety inspection" records with felony penalties for the head of any agency that does not comply
Constitutional Carry......thats how it's done in Kansas as well, still keep the permit for when traveling to other states.
The problem I see is that our governor, while a Republican, is not a conservative. I frankly would be surprised if he signs it if it makes it to his desk.
While I agree with this on the constitutional grounds, it makes me nervous in the sense that an individual would be able to carry with absolutely no training or instruction in the law. Now before everyone jumps on me, yes, I know that the required training is minimal. And, depending on the class you take, the level of instruction will vary in quality. There are some classes that IMHO, just are set up to run a room full people paying however much per person through and make the money. But the sad fact is that there are so many people out there that do not take firearms training and safety as seriously as those of us on these forums do. Plus, the lack of instruction on the law, your responsibilities under the law, etc. Its a huge responsibility one is taking on and should not be taken lightly.
I've seen enough of the general public that we allow to use our club range for "deer rifle sight in" in the fall that obviously have had no firearms training except once a year when they pull that rifle out of the closet, or the guy that decided he's going hunting and just came from Cabela's with his new rig. Or the case of the three young guys that show up with their new AK clone from the gun show and don't have a clue of what they are doing. I've been swept more times than I care to remember and I fear we would be putting ourselves in a similar situation. We can control and educate on the range when we see that stuff, not so much in public.
We can't legislate common sense, but we can at least make sure that someone is at least aware of the responsibilities that go along with carrying a firearm.
ET
While I agree with this on the constitutional grounds, it makes me nervous in the sense that an individual would be able to carry with absolutely no training or instruction in the law. Now before everyone jumps on me, yes, I know that the required training is minimal. And, depending on the class you take, the level of instruction will vary in quality. There are some classes that IMHO, just are set up to run a room full people paying however much per person through and make the money. But the sad fact is that there are so many people out there that do not take firearms training and safety as seriously as those of us on these forums do. Plus, the lack of instruction on the law, your responsibilities under the law, etc. Its a huge responsibility one is taking on and should not be taken lightly.
I've seen enough of the general public that we allow to use our club range for "deer rifle sight in" in the fall that obviously have had no firearms training except once a year when they pull that rifle out of the closet, or the guy that decided he's going hunting and just came from Cabela's with his new rig. Or the case of the three young guys that show up with their new AK clone from the gun show and don't have a clue of what they are doing. I've been swept more times than I care to remember and I fear we would be putting ourselves in a similar situation. We can control and educate on the range when we see that stuff, not so much in public.
We can't legislate common sense, but we can at least make sure that someone is at least aware of the responsibilities that go along with carrying a firearm.
ET
Does this apply to Dearbornistan? Not that there is much regard for civil law to begin with
Glad a few more states are showing some slight cognitive abilities these days.
North Dakota just went to carry without a permit for residents. While see how well that one goes over I suppose.
Only took the BCI a solid two months to issue a Permit after mailing it in....such efficiency these days. Don't even mention ATF though, many months to go.
Glad a few more states are showing some slight cognitive abilities these days.
North Dakota just went to carry without a permit for residents. While see how well that one goes over I suppose.
Only took the BCI a solid two months to issue a Permit after mailing it in....such efficiency these days. Don't even mention ATF though, many months to go.
It's called personal responsibility. Hold people accountable for their actions. Many states, my current state of Indiana, have no training requirement. There is not a rash of NDs or bad shoots here compared to MI or other must-train states.
IMHO, required training is more another barrier to those of lesser means exercising their rights than it is a real safety mechanism. Look at Illinois...make training required, then make sure it's not available anywhere near Chicago so the poor victims living South Side can't afford the cost or transportation to execute their Constitutional rights...
The "mandatory training" and "mandatory licensing" guys never let the facts get in the way of their opinions
Similar threads
