So I got this friend..

[fsr402]

No really it is a friend and not me.. :-)
Anyways, he does not have a CPL but he owns and operates two food trucks on the east side. He asked me the other day about if he should OC or not.
Being he does not have a CPL I think he's in a vortex of laws. He can't OC in a vehicle but his place of business is his vehicle.
Would his rights as a business owner and being allowed to OC/CC on/in his business supersede the can't CC on a vehicle without a CPL or would it be the other way around?
   

[Golden Eagle]

"(2) A person shall not carry a pistol concealed on or about his or her person, or, whether concealed or otherwise, in a vehicle operated or occupied by the person, except in his or her dwelling house, place of business, or on other land possessed by the person, without a license to carry the pistol as provided by law and if licensed, shall not carry the pistol in a place or manner inconsistent with any restrictions upon such license."

Hum...  Myself and everyone will say don't do it but this might be a interesting discussion.

[fitrah]

Hi.

First understand the difference between "carry" and "transport".

Then the issues is "place of business" in respect of OC in a vehicle. I think the meaning of the law is the exception is if you are driving around in the parking lot or walking anywhere on your own property.

In this case his car is on his majesty's high way - he cannot carry in a vehicle without a licence. 

But he can transport the firearm to the location, then OC outside of the car (keeping in mind weapons free areas).

[part deux]

just go get the CPL

An interesting argument, but my non lawyer brain screams out FAIL with his logic

[Jeff]

just go get the CPL

Just pray you don't live in Macomb County or you will be waiting close to 5 months.

and YES, just go get the CPL

[TheQ]

Getting a CPL is, of course, the safest route.  Anything else and he will be taking a risk.

I had a trucker call me a month of two ago and tell me he got popped for CCW without a license in his truck.  I stopped him in the middle of his story and referred him to a few lawyers.

[linux203]

Just pray you don't live in Macomb County or you will be waiting close to 5 months.

and YES, just go get the CPL

Praying won't help if you are in Macomb.  Moving will.

[fsr402]

I did tell him to get a cpl and gave him all the information he needed to do so. Now if he does or not I have no idea.  Sadly I think it would come down to the officer and how he deals with it. I think that if he transported it as the law says to then once he was parked and open for business he would be fine. As long as he doesn't get a dickhead cop.

I asked that if he did oc without a cpl and does end up in court that he takes it all the way to the top so it sets a president.  He did not find that humorous.

[drtodd]

No really it is a friend and not me.. :-)
Anyways, he does not have a CPL but he owns and operates two food trucks on the east side. He asked me the other day about if he should OC or not.
Being he does not have a CPL I think he's in a vortex of laws. He can't OC in a vehicle but his place of business is his vehicle.
Would his rights as a business owner and being allowed to OC/CC on/in his business supersede the can't CC on a vehicle without a CPL or would it be the other way around?
 

Your friend will most likely lose...

See People v Wallin 1988 172 Mich App 748, app den (1989) 432 Mich 910.

Excerpt:

Defendant contended that, because he was in the business of delivering produce, his van was his "place of business" for purposes of the concealed weapons statute.
MCL 750.227; MSA 28.424 provides:
[A] person who shall carry a pistol concealed on or about his person, or, whether concealed or otherwise, in a vehicle operated or occupied by him, except in his dwelling house or place of business or on other land possessed by him, without a license to so carry the pistol as provided by law ... shall be guilty of a felony, punishable by imprisonment in the state prison for not more than 5 years, or by fine of not more than 2,500 dollars. [Emphasis added.]
This Court has held, contrary to plaintiff's position, that the words "other land" indicate the legislative intent to limit the place of business exception to business property on land. (People v Brooks)... To adopt defendant's reasoning would render the statutory prohibition inapplicable to any traveling business person who wishes to carry a concealed weapon. This was certainly not the legislative intent.

*edited due to the addition of smiley faces when the years of the cases were entered.