Author Topic: OC Codify HB 5091 & HB 5092  (Read 17838 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline bigt8261

  • MOC President
  • MOC Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1482
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc
  • First Name (Displayed): Tom
Re: OC Codify HB 5091 & HB 5092
« Reply #120 on: May 20, 2014, 01:59:54 PM »
Perhaps it'd help if we updated the OP?

I think they've been looking at the most recent version, but I updated the OP anyway.

Offline bigt8261

  • MOC President
  • MOC Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1482
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc
  • First Name (Displayed): Tom
Re: OC Codify HB 5091 & HB 5092
« Reply #121 on: May 20, 2014, 02:09:13 PM »
http://www.mlive.com/news/kalamazoo/index.ssf/2014/05/open_carry.html

Quote
Kalamazoo County Prosecutor Jeff Getting said brandishing is not defined by Michigan law, which can complicate matters for law enforcement.

“Because it’s not defined in the statute, it does make it a little more difficult to interpret what that means or what brandishing means in the law,” Getting said.

Quote
“It’s something less than a direct threat, but something more than openly carrying,” said the Kalamazoo County prosecutor, whose office has authorized seven charges for brandishing firearms since Jan. 1, 2012.

Quote
Getting, however, isn’t so sure the proposed definition of brandishing is going to make it easier for prosecutors to determine whether charges are warranted. The Kalamazoo County prosecutor said that despite similarities in language in HB 5092 and the 2002 attorney general's opinion on brandishing, he has concerns with the portion of the bill dealing with “intent to induce fear.”

“I don’t think brandishing should require an intent provision,” Getting said. “Brandishing is an action, but not one conducted with intent to induce fear. That’s already covered by the assault with dangerous weapon (law).

“I appreciate the Legislature making an effort to help to define what brandish means, but I think they are making it too difficult.”

Summary: the brandishing bills make it too hard for the Kalamazoo County Prosecutor to charge you with a crime, or a more significant crime.

I think we're on track.

Offline gryphon

  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3921
  • First Name (Displayed): Dan
Re: OC Codify HB 5091 & HB 5092
« Reply #122 on: May 20, 2014, 06:13:28 PM »

Offline Xpiatio

  • Posts: 409
  • First Name (Displayed): Benjamin
Re: OC Codify HB 5091 & HB 5092
« Reply #123 on: June 24, 2014, 08:37:23 PM »
out of curiosity, any updates on these two bills?

Offline bigt8261

  • MOC President
  • MOC Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1482
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc
  • First Name (Displayed): Tom
Re: OC Codify HB 5091 & HB 5092
« Reply #124 on: June 24, 2014, 09:53:00 PM »
Nope. Still stuck waiting for a vote from the Senate.  :(

Offline CitizensHaveRights

  • Posts: 966
  • First Name (Displayed): Mitch
Re: OC Codify HB 5091 & HB 5092
« Reply #125 on: August 08, 2014, 08:32:21 AM »
Been waiting for a Senate vote since May 23rd, after passing the House with a 20:1 supermajority and being recommended for immediate

It appears that our illustrious Senate leadership thinks it would be best for the RINO Party if these bills do not hit the Governor's desk before the November election. After vetoing a concealed carry reform bill (which passed both houses with a clear majority) in December 2012, this Governor deserves no favors.

I think it's time to lean on our personal Senators, as well as Calley, Richardville and Hildenbrand, and let them know we'd like a vote on 5091&5092 next week, and demand one by the end of September. I'm pointing out to my Senator that he's paid to work for the benefit of the People of the State of Michigan, not the benefit of the Michigan GOP, and suggesting he point out the same to Brian Calley.
"A well balanced breakfast being necessary to the start of a healthy day, the right of the people to keep and eat food shall not be infringed "  - Who has a right to keep and eat food, The People or A Well Balanced Breakfast?

Offline bigt8261

  • MOC President
  • MOC Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1482
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc
  • First Name (Displayed): Tom
Re: OC Codify HB 5091 & HB 5092
« Reply #126 on: August 08, 2014, 08:50:31 AM »
Good idea, only I suggest you wait a little while longer to put the pressure on. The Michigan Legislature is still on vacation. They won't be back till next month. When they come back is a great time to contact them and ask what is going on.

Offline CitizensHaveRights

  • Posts: 966
  • First Name (Displayed): Mitch
Re: OC Codify HB 5091 & HB 5092
« Reply #127 on: August 08, 2014, 12:20:43 PM »
Yeah, our part time senate will only be in session for a half day this month, starting at noon on the 13th.
If any of them show up, late morning might be a good time to talk to them.

I'm just afraid there's a standing order not to put any gun bills on Snyder's desk before the next election.
I sure don't want to give him ANY more opportunities to veto a pro gun bill on the eve of Christmas break.
"A well balanced breakfast being necessary to the start of a healthy day, the right of the people to keep and eat food shall not be infringed "  - Who has a right to keep and eat food, The People or A Well Balanced Breakfast?

Offline TheQ

  • Website Content Manager
  • MOC Lifetime Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4263
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc.
  • First Name (Displayed): Phillip
OC Codify HB 5091 & HB 5092
« Reply #128 on: August 08, 2014, 02:56:47 PM »


I'm just afraid there's a standing order not to put any gun bills on Snyder's desk before the next election.

Your fears are correct. Snyder is not a friend of guns not gun owners and I'd vote accordingly.
I Am Not A Lawyer (nor a gunsmith).

Offline CitizensHaveRights

  • Posts: 966
  • First Name (Displayed): Mitch
Re: OC Codify HB 5091 & HB 5092
« Reply #129 on: August 08, 2014, 03:25:23 PM »
If Calley would stick a pro-gun bill on the back burner as a favor to Snyder, then Calley is no friend of gun owners either.
"A well balanced breakfast being necessary to the start of a healthy day, the right of the people to keep and eat food shall not be infringed "  - Who has a right to keep and eat food, The People or A Well Balanced Breakfast?

Offline jgillmanjr

  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 654
    • Freedom Forged Security Consulting
  • First Name (Displayed): Jason
Re: OC Codify HB 5091 & HB 5092
« Reply #130 on: October 01, 2014, 02:10:20 PM »
Looks like the State House archives their committee meeting videos. Here is a clip of Phil and Tom offering testimony in support of these bills:

IT Director
Deputy Treasurer
Legislative Aide

Offline gryphon

  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3921
  • First Name (Displayed): Dan
Re: OC Codify HB 5091 & HB 5092
« Reply #131 on: October 01, 2014, 05:17:33 PM »
Very succinct and concise.  Excellent reasoning and I like the fact that Tom brought out that this doesn't break new ground.  That will hopefully persuade more people to support it who otherwise might not.  Who else spoke in favor of or against this bill and what organizations were they from, if any?

Offline bigt8261

  • MOC President
  • MOC Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1482
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc
  • First Name (Displayed): Tom
Re: OC Codify HB 5091 & HB 5092
« Reply #132 on: October 02, 2014, 09:28:12 AM »
It was a while ago but if I recall correctly, only the sponsors and MOC spoke. MSP handed in a card for neutral.

We must have done something right because the committee vote was unanimous.

Offline bigt8261

  • MOC President
  • MOC Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1482
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc
  • First Name (Displayed): Tom
Re: OC Codify HB 5091 & HB 5092
« Reply #133 on: October 02, 2014, 09:37:08 AM »
I will also add that this was one of my first time speaking in front of the committee and I was very nervous. I'm getting better.

We (Jason) are trying to find the video of my senate testimony which came later, as well as testimony Phil has given in the past. This is a good posterity project for MOC.

Offline CitizensHaveRights

  • Posts: 966
  • First Name (Displayed): Mitch
Re: OC Codify HB 5091 & HB 5092
« Reply #134 on: October 02, 2014, 12:15:52 PM »
It was a while ago but if I recall correctly, only the sponsors and MOC spoke. MSP handed in a card for neutral.

We must have done something right because the committee vote was unanimous.

Now all you have to do is depose the the despot, er, I mean Senate Majority Leader, and bring it to the floor for a vote.
I'd love to see ANYTHING on the 2A wish list land on Snyder's desk in October. Let's see how eager he is to veto our needs right before the election.
"A well balanced breakfast being necessary to the start of a healthy day, the right of the people to keep and eat food shall not be infringed "  - Who has a right to keep and eat food, The People or A Well Balanced Breakfast?

Offline jgillmanjr

  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 654
    • Freedom Forged Security Consulting
  • First Name (Displayed): Jason
Re: OC Codify HB 5091 & HB 5092
« Reply #135 on: October 02, 2014, 12:21:04 PM »
Looks like the Senate may not actually video their committee meetings. I'll need to do further research.
IT Director
Deputy Treasurer
Legislative Aide

Offline bigt8261

  • MOC President
  • MOC Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1482
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc
  • First Name (Displayed): Tom
Re: OC Codify HB 5091 & HB 5092
« Reply #136 on: January 06, 2015, 11:11:36 AM »
UPDATE

It's a long story but you should read it. Here is the full story on what happened with the brandishing bills.
--------------------------------------
Michigan Open Carry, Inc's attempt to define what it means to "brandish" in Michigan has resulted in a veto from Governor Snyder, though the situation is complicated and not as bad as it sounds. Read on for the full story.

http://www.miopencarry.org/news/2015/01/Brandishing-Bills-Vetoed
« Last Edit: January 06, 2015, 11:58:27 AM by bigt8261 »