Am I reading this right? Loophole to avoid pistol registration?

[s_a_c]

Not sure if I'm reading this right, but it looks like if you have an out of state CPL you don't have to register your pistols, even if you live in Michigan.  This is not about carrying, Michigan still only recognizes resident permits, but this is just an exception to registration, and just says an out of state license, and does not say resident or non resident, or that it doesn't apply to Michigan Residents.  Am I reading this right?  If you go get an out of state permit, do you no longer have to register your pistols?

MCL 28.432

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/%28S%28gjgwwxeytlldje45eksnkx3a%29%29/mileg.aspx?page=GetObject&objectname=mcl-28-432

FIREARMS (EXCERPT)
Act 372 of 1927


28.432 Inapplicability of MCL 28.422; amendatory act as “Janet Kukuk act”.

Sec. 12.

(1) Section 2 does not apply to any of the following:

(a) A police or correctional agency of the United States or of this state or any subdivision of this state.

(b) The United States army, air force, navy, or marine corps.

(c) An organization authorized by law to purchase or receive weapons from the United States or from this state.

(d) The national guard, armed forces reserves, or other duly authorized military organization.

(e) A member of an entity or organization described in subdivisions (a) through (d) for a pistol while engaged in the course of his or her duties with that entity or while going to or returning from those duties.

(f) A United States citizen holding a license to carry a pistol concealed upon his or her person issued by another state.

(g) The regular and ordinary possession and transportation of a pistol as merchandise by an authorized agent of a person licensed to manufacture firearms or a licensed dealer.

(h) Purchasing, owning, carrying, possessing, using, or transporting an antique firearm. As used in this subdivision, "antique firearm" means that term as defined in section 231a of the Michigan penal code, 1931 PA 328, MCL 750.231a.

(i) An individual carrying, possessing, using, or transporting a pistol belonging to another individual, if the other individual's possession of the pistol is authorized by law and the individual carrying, possessing, using, or transporting the pistol has obtained a license under section 5b to carry a concealed pistol or is exempt from licensure as provided in section 12a.

(2) The amendatory act that added subsection (1)(h) shall be known and may be cited as the "Janet Kukuk act".


History: 1927, Act 372, Eff. Sept. 5, 1927 ;-- CL 1929, 16761 ;-- CL 1948, 28.432 ;-- Am. 1964, Act 216, Eff. Aug. 28, 1964 ;-- Am. 2000, Act 381, Eff. July 1, 2001 ;-- Am. 2004, Act 99, Imd. Eff. May 13, 2004 ;-- Am. 2006, Act 75, Eff. July 1, 2006 ;-- Am. 2008, Act 195, Eff. Jan. 7, 2009 ;-- Am. 2010, Act 209, Eff. Feb. 15, 2011
Popular Name: CCW
Popular Name: Concealed Weapons
Popular Name: CPL
Popular Name: Right to Carry
Popular Name: Shall Issue

[Bronson]

Attorney General's Opinion 6798 deals with a MI resident attempting to carry concealed with a non-resident, out of state permit.

While not exactly the same situation as you have described I think the same conclusion would be found as in the last paragraph of the above opinion.

It is inconceivable that the Legislature, after crafting these statutory requirements for obtaining a concealed pistol license, intended to permit Michigan residents to avoid them by obtaining a concealed pistol license in another state that may not impose many of the Michigan requirements. That construction of the statute would result in the absurd consequence that a Michigan resident could avoid the legislatively imposed requirements for obtaining a concealed pistol license in Michigan by obtaining that type of license in another state without having to meet the Michigan requirements. Thus, it must be concluded that a Michigan resident with a concealed pistol license obtained in another state may not carry a concealed pistol in Michigan unless the resident first obtains a concealed pistol license in Michigan by meeting the requirements for obtaining the license imposed by Michigan law.

I believe that the courts would come to the same conclusion about the License to Purchase/Posses & registration.  That the legislative intent of 28.432 was not to allow MI residents a work around for the registration of their pistols, and you'd end up on the stinky end of the stick.

Bronson