Author Topic: HB 5500 - Adds teeth to preemption  (Read 5507 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TheQ

  • Website Content Manager
  • MOC Lifetime Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4263
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc.
  • First Name (Displayed): Phillip
HB 5500 - Adds teeth to preemption
« on: April 30, 2014, 09:29:56 AM »
Introduced on: 4/29/2014
Sponsored by: Tom McMillin
House committee assigned to: Judiciary

MOC Email announcing the bill the bill
MOC White Paper
Bill Language
Link to Bill status on legislative site



If I heard correctly, the bill has 16 co-sponsors (including one Democrat).
« Last Edit: April 30, 2014, 03:17:29 PM by TheQ »
I Am Not A Lawyer (nor a gunsmith).

Offline detroit_fan

  • AmmoDump
  • *
  • Posts: 249
  • 2 chairs, no waiting
  • First Name (Displayed): Jason
Re: HB 5500 - Adds teeth to preemption
« Reply #1 on: April 30, 2014, 10:40:10 AM »
Love to see it happen, but don't see it with tricky ricky running the show

Offline bigt8261

  • MOC President
  • MOC Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1482
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc
  • First Name (Displayed): Tom
Re: HB 5500 - Adds teeth to preemption
« Reply #2 on: April 30, 2014, 01:50:52 PM »
By the way, a BIG thanks to gryphon for the final editing and styling on the white paper. Excellent job!

Offline Xpiatio

  • Posts: 409
  • First Name (Displayed): Benjamin
Re: HB 5500 - Adds teeth to preemption
« Reply #3 on: April 30, 2014, 01:57:17 PM »
By the way, a BIG thanks to gryphon for the final editing and styling on the white paper. Excellent job!

+1

Offline TheQ

  • Website Content Manager
  • MOC Lifetime Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4263
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc.
  • First Name (Displayed): Phillip
Re: HB 5500 - Adds teeth to preemption
« Reply #4 on: April 30, 2014, 03:13:41 PM »
OP updated -- there were 16 cosponsors.
I Am Not A Lawyer (nor a gunsmith).

Offline linux203

  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 706
  • First Name (Displayed): Daniel
Re: HB 5500 - Adds teeth to preemption
« Reply #5 on: April 30, 2014, 05:28:07 PM »
Proposed addition...

Sec. 4D. The amendatory act that added sections 4a, 4b, and 4c shall be known and may be cited as the "George Heartwell act".
When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own palace, his goods are in peace. Luke 11:21

Then He said to them, “But now, he who has a money bag, let him take it, and likewise a knapsack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one."  Luke 22:36

Offline gryphon

  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3945
  • First Name (Displayed): Dan
Re: HB 5500 - Adds teeth to preemption
« Reply #6 on: April 30, 2014, 06:32:42 PM »
 ;D

Offline gryphon

  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3945
  • First Name (Displayed): Dan
Re: HB 5500 - Adds teeth to preemption
« Reply #7 on: April 30, 2014, 06:40:46 PM »
"IF AN INDIVIDUAL OR ORGANIZATION IS ADVERSELY AFFECTED BY AN ORDINANCE OR REGULATION THAT VIOLATES THIS ACT, THAT INDIVIDUAL OR ORGANIZATION MAY BRING AN ACTION..."

What constitutes "adversely affected?"  If an ordinance is not enforced, and no one is arrested, are people still adversely affected?  I would argue "yes" because people might think it is a legal ordinance and modify their behavior.  However, I don't know that a court would agree.  There isn't a definition of what adversely affected means.  Outside of arrest it seems like a grey area.
« Last Edit: April 30, 2014, 06:46:34 PM by gryphon »

Offline TheQ

  • Website Content Manager
  • MOC Lifetime Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4263
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc.
  • First Name (Displayed): Phillip
Re: HB 5500 - Adds teeth to preemption
« Reply #8 on: April 30, 2014, 06:55:20 PM »
Proposed addition...

Sec. 4D. The amendatory act that added sections 4a, 4b, and 4c shall be known and may be cited as the "George Heartwell act".

Already thought about and joked about internally by the drafting team....
I Am Not A Lawyer (nor a gunsmith).

Offline TheQ

  • Website Content Manager
  • MOC Lifetime Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4263
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc.
  • First Name (Displayed): Phillip
Re: HB 5500 - Adds teeth to preemption
« Reply #9 on: April 30, 2014, 06:56:33 PM »
What constitutes "adversely affected?"

Great question.  I'll defer to Tom.  Maybe it is something we can iron out in committee....
I Am Not A Lawyer (nor a gunsmith).

Offline bigt8261

  • MOC President
  • MOC Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1482
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc
  • First Name (Displayed): Tom
Re: HB 5500 - Adds teeth to preemption
« Reply #10 on: April 30, 2014, 07:51:36 PM »
Great question.  I'll defer to Tom.  Maybe it is something we can iron out in committee....

Already in motion. I agree that an unenforced ordinance does adversely affect people, but we are already in the process of making sure the language is adequate.

Offline linux203

  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 706
  • First Name (Displayed): Daniel
Re: HB 5500 - Adds teeth to preemption
« Reply #11 on: April 30, 2014, 07:57:49 PM »
Great question.  I'll defer to Tom.  Maybe it is something we can iron out in committee....

Already in motion. I agree that an unenforced ordinance does adversely affect people, but we are already in the process of making sure the language is adequate.

This is a really tough point.  Personally, I believe even detention based on the illegal ordinance is adverse.  Arrest and/or prosecution is definitely adverse. I believe the presence of an illegal ordinance on a sign is adverse.  I believe the presence of an illegal ordinance in municipal code is adverse.

In Deffert's case, I recall assertion by the plaintiff of Grand Rapids' preempted ordinance.  Defendants response was to deny relevance of the ordinance to the action.  Basically, he wasn't detained based on RAS the preempted ordinance was violated.

One could argue, based on both current and proposed language, that municipalities are not required to remove preempted ordinances.  A local unit of government shall not impose special taxation on, enact or enforce any ordinance or regulation pertaining to...  Has the Grand Rapids City Commission imposed, enacted, or enforced the ordinance?  It was enacted, past tense, prior to the enactment of MCL 123.1102.  They are arguing in the Deffert case that they are not enforcing the ordinance.

Is Heartwell's position legally correct as long as the ordinance is not enforced?  I'm not defending the man's actions or statements in any way, shape, or form.  I think it is a point we need to think about as this bill moves forward.
When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own palace, his goods are in peace. Luke 11:21

Then He said to them, “But now, he who has a money bag, let him take it, and likewise a knapsack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one."  Luke 22:36

Offline bigt8261

  • MOC President
  • MOC Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1482
    • Michigan Open Carry, Inc
  • First Name (Displayed): Tom
Re: HB 5500 - Adds teeth to preemption
« Reply #12 on: April 30, 2014, 08:09:41 PM »
I've thought the same. Which is why I haven't spent my own money to file suit yet.

Offline jgillmanjr

  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 654
    • Freedom Forged Security Consulting
  • First Name (Displayed): Jason
Re: HB 5500 - Adds teeth to preemption
« Reply #13 on: May 01, 2014, 12:35:11 AM »
http://rightmi.com/ready-to-play-ball-now-heartwell/

I was a good boy and fought off the urge to go into Samuel L. Jackson mode.
IT Director
Deputy Treasurer
Legislative Aide

Offline MI_XD

  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 65
  • First Name (Displayed): Bob
Re: HB 5500 - Adds teeth to preemption
« Reply #14 on: May 09, 2014, 07:10:30 PM »
Heh heh.. "Snarky"!  :)

MI_XD
MI_XD
SW Michigan
I finally can be Proud of America, again!

Offline CitizensHaveRights

  • Posts: 983
  • First Name (Displayed): Mitch
Re: HB 5500 - Adds teeth to preemption
« Reply #15 on: January 22, 2015, 03:01:40 PM »
By the way, a BIG thanks to gryphon for the final editing and styling on the white paper. Excellent job!

Action on bill:
Introduced 4-30-14.
Referred to Judiciary Committee 4-30-14.
End of Action.

Wanted to read Danny's white paper but link seems to as dead as the bill.
"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: HB 5500 - Adds teeth to preemption
« Reply #16 on: January 22, 2015, 04:03:53 PM »
Sorry about the link, a lot of links broke when MOC moved to it's new site.

Here is the new link: http://cdn.media.miopencarry.org/publications/moc/Adding%20Teeth%20to%20Preemption.pdf

Yes the bill died, however, we are currently working on getting it reintroduced. Stay tuned.

Offline CitizensHaveRights

  • Posts: 983
  • First Name (Displayed): Mitch
Re: HB 5500 - Adds teeth to preemption
« Reply #17 on: January 22, 2015, 04:39:04 PM »
Thanks, Tom. Last year's bill sounds a lot like the one that was passed in PA.

I hadn't realized that there was already criminal statute on the books that could be applied. Of course, fat chance getting a city attorney to prosecute any other city employee for violating preemption. I think I need to look into what, if any, avenues exist for citizen prosecution in Michigan.
"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: HB 5500 - Adds teeth to preemption
« Reply #18 on: January 22, 2015, 04:56:17 PM »
Michigan is starting to fall behind when it comes to preemption enforcement. Hopefully this year, we will gain a bit more traction and if we're lucky, not have the bill vetoed.

Offline gryphon

  • MOC Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3945
  • First Name (Displayed): Dan
Re: HB 5500 - Adds teeth to preemption
« Reply #19 on: March 04, 2015, 10:17:18 AM »
we are currently working on getting it reintroduced. Stay tuned.

Any updates on a new 5500?