Author Topic: SB 789  (Read 20064 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline gryphon

  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3942
  • First Name (Displayed): Dan
SB 789
« on: February 21, 2014, 10:18:36 PM »
This should be moved to Legislative Lighthouse.  SB 789 eliminates county gun boards.  Introduced by Mike Green, it is in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

https://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2013-2014/billintroduced/Senate/pdf/2014-SIB-0789.pdf

Offline CV67PAT

  • MOC Charter Member
  • Posts: 2615
Re: SB 789
« Reply #1 on: February 21, 2014, 10:50:05 PM »
"Immediate disclosure when stopped" is changed to disclosure upon request by a LEO. That's good.

Quote
3) An individual licensed under this act to carry a concealed
pistol and who is carrying a concealed pistol or a portable device
that uses electro-muscular disruption technology and who is stopped
by a peace officer shall immediately
UPON REQUEST BY THAT PEACE
OFFICER
disclose to the peace officer that he or she is carrying a
pistol or a portable device that uses electro-muscular disruption
technology concealed upon his or her person or in his or her
vehicle.

But the training cert is only good for 5 years. Looks like renewal training is going to be required for renewal of permit. Am I reading that correct?

 
Quote
Sec. 5j. (1) A pistol training or safety program described in
section 5b(7)(c) meets the requirements for knowledge or training
in the safe use and handling of a pistol only if the program
consists
TRAINING WAS PROVIDED WITHIN 5 YEARS PRECEDING THE DATE OF
APPLICATION AND CONSISTED
of not less than 8 hours of instruction
and all of the following conditions are met:
Want to keep informed of events in your area? Go to http://www.miopencarry.org/update

Offline CV67PAT

  • MOC Charter Member
  • Posts: 2615
Re: SB 789
« Reply #2 on: February 21, 2014, 11:01:02 PM »
Found it...

No new cert if renewing....
Quote

6)
(8) The educational requirements under section 5b(7)(c)
23
for an applicant who is applying for a renewal of a license under
24
this act are waived except that the applicant shall certify that he
25
or she has completed at least 3 hours' review of the training
26
described under section 5b(7)(c) and has had at least 1 hour of
27
56
04178'13 KHS
firing range time in the 6 months immediately preceding the
1
subsequent application.
THE EDUCATIONAL AND FIRING RANGE
2
REQUIREMENTS OF THIS SUBSECTION ARE MET IF THE APPLICANT CERTIFIES
3
ON THE RENEWAL APPLICATION FORM THAT HE OR SHE HAS COMPLIED WITH
4
THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS SUBSECTION. THE LICENSING AUTHORITY SHALL
5
NOT OTHERWISE REQUIRE VERIFICATION OF THE STATEMENTS MADE UNDER
6
THIS SUBSECTION AND SHALL NOT REQUIRE AN APPLICANT TO OBTAIN A
7
CERTIFICATE OR UNDERGO TRAINING OTHER THAN AS REQUIRED BY THIS
8
SUBSECTION.
Want to keep informed of events in your area? Go to http://www.miopencarry.org/update

Offline TheQ

  • Website Content Manager
  • MOC Lifetime Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4263
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc.
  • First Name (Displayed): Phillip
SB 789
« Reply #3 on: February 22, 2014, 07:29:29 AM »
I haven't read the bill yet, but I have talked to the sponsors office about it. It is basically 213 without the pistol Freezone removal, yes?

I am not overly excited about it without the PFZ removal. Your thoughts?
I Am Not A Lawyer (nor a gunsmith).

Offline CV67PAT

  • MOC Charter Member
  • Posts: 2615
Re: SB 789
« Reply #4 on: February 22, 2014, 08:54:58 AM »
I haven't read the bill yet, but I have talked to the sponsors office about it. It is basically 213 without the pistol Freezone removal, yes?

I am not overly excited about it without the PFZ removal. Your thoughts?
PFZ removal in any bill won't go anywhere with Snyder in office. That has to be our first objective this fall... Removal of Snyder.
Want to keep informed of events in your area? Go to http://www.miopencarry.org/update

Offline part deux

  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 683
Re: SB 789
« Reply #5 on: February 22, 2014, 08:56:02 AM »
I haven't read the bill yet, but I have talked to the sponsors office about it. It is basically 213 without the pistol Freezone removal, yes?

I am not overly excited about it without the PFZ removal. Your thoughts?
I haven't read it yet...  If the other provisions of the bill are good, just doesn't have the PFZ removal, I'd say we should support it under the theory of baby steps.

Offline CV67PAT

  • MOC Charter Member
  • Posts: 2615
Re: SB 789
« Reply #6 on: February 22, 2014, 09:02:44 AM »
I haven't read it yet...  If the other provisions of the bill are good, just doesn't have the PFZ removal, I'd say we should support it under the theory of baby steps.
This is a bit more significant that just "baby steps."
Getting "gun control" assigned to the MSP and away from a political "board" is actually quite big. Time frames are delineated with a temporary permit to be issued if they aren't adhered to.

I am meeting with the Macomb Republicans on Monday. And I will be discussing this Bill and some other firearm related topics.
Want to keep informed of events in your area? Go to http://www.miopencarry.org/update

Offline detroit_fan

  • AmmoDump
  • *
  • Posts: 249
  • 2 chairs, no waiting
  • First Name (Displayed): Jason
Re: SB 789
« Reply #7 on: February 22, 2014, 11:28:59 AM »
it's watered down version, but it's something. of all the GOP govs elected in 2010 i think we got the only one who has vetoed a 2A Rights bill. snyder is garbage, and his refusal to eliminate registration, cez's, his anti-OC stance and his tax increases will prevent me from ever voting for that man.

Offline casper

  • Posts: 120
Re: SB 789
« Reply #8 on: February 22, 2014, 11:31:41 AM »
Does this mean the State police decides, or the county clerk decides on issuing permits ? Also if it's the county clerk that decides, does it have to be the county clerk's office in the county you live in ?

Offline m.marino

  • Posts: 113
  • First Name (Displayed): Michael
Re: SB 789
« Reply #9 on: February 22, 2014, 12:32:13 PM »
Okay so what is being done to remove him? I hope to be back in Michigan by the up coming election. Who is there that can be put forward as a candidate that stands a real chance of getting elected? What groups can we work with that would aid in getting a candidate that would work towards true Civil Rights (as the 2A is but part of that).

Just some questions as we are working towards moving back and have put a bit of money where our mouth (My Wife and I) is and gotten membership in MOC (We also have 5 wonderful kids). Look forward to meeting folks in the hopefully not to far future and best wishes in moving forward with this. Any help  I can give, I will. -Michael
Tuebor Libertatus

Offline detroit_fan

  • AmmoDump
  • *
  • Posts: 249
  • 2 chairs, no waiting
  • First Name (Displayed): Jason
Re: SB 789
« Reply #10 on: February 22, 2014, 01:09:31 PM »
Okay so what is being done to remove him? I hope to be back in Michigan by the up coming election. Who is there that can be put forward as a candidate that stands a real chance of getting elected? What groups can we work with that would aid in getting a candidate that would work towards true Civil Rights (as the 2A is but part of that).

Just some questions as we are working towards moving back and have put a bit of money where our mouth (My Wife and I) is and gotten membership in MOC (We also have 5 wonderful kids). Look forward to meeting folks in the hopefully not to far future and best wishes in moving forward with this. Any help  I can give, I will. -Michael
no chance of beating him in a primary imo. He has the backing ($) of the establishment gop and business.

Offline CV67PAT

  • MOC Charter Member
  • Posts: 2615
Re: SB 789
« Reply #11 on: February 22, 2014, 10:21:47 PM »
Then I will endeavor to have him defeated in the general election. Snyder has got to go!!!
Want to keep informed of events in your area? Go to http://www.miopencarry.org/update

Offline part deux

  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 683
Re: SB 789
« Reply #12 on: February 23, 2014, 08:32:44 AM »
Then I will endeavor to have him defeated in the general election. Snyder has got to go!!!
Maybe Kwame will be available to run as gov.  Or maybe the pro gun mayor of Lansing.

Offline bigt8261

  • MOC President
  • MOC Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1482
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc
  • First Name (Displayed): Tom
Re: SB 789
« Reply #13 on: February 23, 2014, 08:37:16 AM »
https://www.legislature.mi.gov/%28S%281vfrplvbydh0rnjrth4ejdiu%29%29/mileg.aspx?page=getobject&objectname=2014-SB-0789

Here's a better link. You can sign up to receive updates, though you'll probably hear about the updates here first.

My biggest worry is not what's in the bill now, but how the bill will turn out. SB 59 started off very similar, just it moved everything to the SoS instead of the county clerk.
« Last Edit: February 23, 2014, 08:44:04 AM by bigt8261 »

Offline CV67PAT

  • MOC Charter Member
  • Posts: 2615
Re: SB 789
« Reply #14 on: February 23, 2014, 09:33:36 AM »
https://www.legislature.mi.gov/%28S%281vfrplvbydh0rnjrth4ejdiu%29%29/mileg.aspx?page=getobject&objectname=2014-SB-0789

Here's a better link. You can sign up to receive updates, though you'll probably hear about the updates here first.

My biggest worry is not what's in the bill now, but how the bill will turn out. SB 59 started off very similar, just it moved everything to the SoS instead of the county clerk.
Actually SB59 moved everything to the county sheriffs. That is where a major part of that bill's opposition occurred. MSA cried that they didn't get enough money to fund CPL processing.
Want to keep informed of events in your area? Go to http://www.miopencarry.org/update


Offline bigt8261

  • MOC President
  • MOC Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1482
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc
  • First Name (Displayed): Tom
Re: SB 789
« Reply #16 on: February 23, 2014, 10:35:17 AM »
Actually SB59 moved everything to the county sheriffs. That is where a major part of that bill's opposition occurred. MSA cried that they didn't get enough money to fund CPL processing.

SB 59 as originally introduced: http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2011-2012/billintroduced/Senate/pdf/2011-SIB-0059.pdf

Everything went to SoS. The bill was severely altered at the behest of Snyder.

Offline TheQ

  • Website Content Manager
  • MOC Lifetime Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4263
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc.
  • First Name (Displayed): Phillip
SB 789
« Reply #17 on: February 23, 2014, 11:25:08 AM »

Maybe Kwame will be available to run as gov.  Or maybe the pro gun mayor of Lansing.

If Virg B was the governor of Michigan, Michigan would be a constitutional carry stay by now because the super Majority republican legislature last session would have done it just to rub his face.
I Am Not A Lawyer (nor a gunsmith).

Offline CV67PAT

  • MOC Charter Member
  • Posts: 2615
Re: SB 789
« Reply #18 on: February 23, 2014, 11:34:40 AM »
SB 59 as originally introduced: http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2011-2012/billintroduced/Senate/pdf/2011-SIB-0059.pdf

Everything went to SoS. The bill was severely altered at the behest of Snyder.
By the time it got to the committee hearings I testified before, it had already been changed from sos to sheriffs. Sorry you're correct about it's introduction.
Want to keep informed of events in your area? Go to http://www.miopencarry.org/update

Offline 91 whiskey

  • Posts: 69
Re: SB 789
« Reply #19 on: February 26, 2014, 02:46:26 PM »
I need some clarification on this part.

"(2) A person may lawfully own, possess, carry, or transport as
a pistol a firearm greater than 26 inches in length if all of the
following conditions apply:

   (a) The person registered the firearm as a pistol under
section 2 or 2a before January 1, 2013.

   (b) The person who registered the firearm as described in
subdivision (a) has maintained registration of the firearm since
January 1, 2013 without lapse.

   (c) The person possesses a copy of the license or record
issued to him or her under section 2 or 2a."

Isn't a firearm greater then 26 inches considered a long gun?   Under what circumstances would one need to register a gun longer then 26 inches as a pistol?
Elephants and Asses
Screwing The Masses.