Michigan Open Carry, Inc.
Open Carry Specific => OC Experiences => Topic started by: dlgeorge on April 19, 2011, 11:02:26 AM
-
Saturday I was alone riding my bicycle around the block, which is a 3 mile ride since I live in the country. I was open carrying my Ruger P90. I was passed by several cars including this white unmarked SUV.
I didn't think anything of it until he turned around. He stopped in front of me and the lights went on. I don't think he was responding to a call, because he was wearing a K9 police uniform. I think he was just driving by and stopped and turned around because he saw the gun holstered on my hip. He directed me to the side of the road and asked me why I was carrying a gun. I said for personal protection. He said, and I am paraphrasing, "I know you are just excercising your right, but people get nervous when they see a gun". I said that may be true, but I'm not breaking any law. "I know you're not, but people aren't used to seeing someone riding their bike carrying a gun. I don't know you and I need to check out someone carrying a gun in public." Again, I said I'm not breaking any law by doing so.
When he asked for ID, I then asked if the only reason he was pulling me over was because of the gun. When he said yes, I said, "then you know that I'm not required to show you ID. He said "I know, but I'm asking you please to produce some ID. If you have a CPL, then I will know there are no warrants on you and we'll be done". At that point I had to make a decision. Should I take the hardline, or show him ID to get it over with? I showed him my DL and CPL and was on my way immediately. I know, here is where some of you will criticise me for not standing firm, but the guy was very polite, and was not one of those anti-gun dirty harry types, so I showed it to him. He was being polite and understanding, so I in turn was as well. After all, it is not only about "our" perception of the LEO's, but there perception of us as well.
Anyway, the encounter went well I thought, and lasted about 3 minutes and I was on my way, still open carrying all the way home.
-
Did you inform him you had a CPL and were carrying as you're required to do by law when you in a "vehicle"?
-
Seems fine to me if someones polite there's less reason to not give them your ID. If an officer ever stopped me and was polite about it he would get to see my name my age on my ID and the picture because to be honest I have a baby face and I'm only 19. If he were rude then I would accept the 12 or 15 minute terry stop and be on my way.
-
I would have provided the ID as well, and think you did great. The officer made it clear he understood your rights, understood you did not have to provide ID or a CPL, and even said if you showed him your CPL he would know you were a law abiding citizen. Sounds like he respected your rights, the act of getting a CPL, and treated you with respect the entire time. I have no problem working with officers like this, it is the ones looking for any reason to jam you up with I am uncooperative with, and it is typically obvious which ones are which.
-
I would have provided the ID as well, and think you did great. The officer made it clear he understood your rights, understood you did not have to provide ID or a CPL, and even said if you showed him your CPL he would know you were a law abiding citizen. Sounds like he respected your rights, the act of getting a CPL, and treated you with respect the entire time. I have no problem working with officers like this, it is the ones looking for any reason to jam you up with I am uncooperative with, and it is typically obvious which ones are which.
Most people know where I stand on this. I'm sure many people are polite before, during and after they violate your rights.
Most officers are polite, UNTIL you refuse to give them ID, then they change quickly. No reason to be impolite when the sheep do what you say.
Complying with requests just reinforces the mentality that you must comply with the police, even when not required to. Then when someone does stand up for their rights, the police get upset because they are used to the sheep complying. It's negative reenforcement
-
We shall continue to agree to disagree respectfully venator.
-
I could understand if this was his first LEO Encounter. If not I feel the Officer should have learned something else, and or tell me that he knows this also. You would have asked him did he read the Michigan State Police's Update I think it's #86. If i am going to asked you questions u say u already know that i am not breaking any laws thenyou are just holding me up from going about my daily business. Am I being detained?. If not buy. Carry ON. :)
-
I would have provided the ID as well, and think you did great. The officer made it clear he understood your rights, understood you did not have to provide ID or a CPL, and even said if you showed him your CPL he would know you were a law abiding citizen. Sounds like he respected your rights, the act of getting a CPL, and treated you with respect the entire time. I have no problem working with officers like this, it is the ones looking for any reason to jam you up with I am uncooperative with, and it is typically obvious which ones are which.
Most people know where I stand on this. I'm sure many people are polite before, during and after they violate your rights.
Most officers are polite, UNTIL you refuse to give them ID, then they change quickly. No reason to be impolite when the sheep do what you say.
Complying with requests just reinforces the mentality that you must comply with the police, even when not required to. Then when someone does stand up for their rights, the police get upset because they are used to the sheep complying. It's negative reenforcement
It amazes me how often officers say I know you're just exercising your rights...oh by the way now I'm going to violate them. WTF? If you hold your ground you may be hassled but if it goes longer than the allowed time under Terry v. OHIO you will win a law suit period! This is the only way these type of folks seem to learn. If an officer was polite and asked your wife to strip because he thinks she may be hiding coconuts under her shirt would you take it off for him? NO! How is this any different? If you are not breaking any laws then it's none of his damned business who you are, where you are going etc... Now be advised that in the past very polite officers have asked for IDs / CPLs and been given them by legally gathered OCers. What did they do with that info? They wrote letters to local gun boards trying to get the CPLs of those individuals revoked. Rest assured there is a LEIN entry about your bicycle travels now in the system. :'(
-
Here's what else they probably did: wrote the OCers info down and a note in the agency's Database that doesn't exist and you can't FIOA because no one knows about it...
-
Here's what else they probably did: wrote the OCers info down and a note in the agency's Database that doesn't exist and you can't FIOA because no one knows about it...
You are correct many local PDs maintain their own databases to which only they have access. When FOIA's are submitted the response is always no such data exists. How can this be? The law is only useful as long as those enforcing them obey them...and we all know how that goes these days [see CADL vs. MOC]. :o
-
Here's what else they probably did: wrote the OCers info down and a note in the agency's Database that doesn't exist and you can't FIOA because no one knows about it...
You are correct many local PDs maintain their own databases to which only they have access. When FOIA's are submitted the response is always no such data exists. How can this be? The law is only useful as long as those enforcing them obey them...and we all know how that goes these days [see CADL vs. MOC]. :o
They say it don't exist. You say it does. They say, "prove it" -- and then the lawyers get rich.
-
It amazes me how often officers say I know you're just exercising your rights...oh by the way now I'm going to violate them. WTF? If you hold your ground you may be hassled but if it goes longer than the allowed time under Terry v. OHIO you will win a law suit period! This is the only way these type of folks seem to learn. If an officer was polite and asked your wife to strip because he thinks she may be hiding coconuts under her shirt would you take it off for him? NO! How is this any different? If you are not breaking any laws then it's none of his damned business who you are, where you are going etc... Now be advised that in the past very polite officers have asked for IDs / CPLs and been giving them by legally gathered OCers. What did they do with that info? They wrote letters to local gun boards trying to get the CPLs of those individuals revoked. Rest assured there is a LEIN entry about your bicycle travels now in the system. :'(
LMAO!!! Smuggling coconuts... haha.. I can't argue with that logic... I can't say I'd have the balls just now to put the officer on the spot.. but I certainly agree that just because they are being polite about violating your rights doesn't mean that you should go along with it...
I definatley agree.. that if he's an anti or just one of those officers that thinks you can only carry if you are COP... then you can get yourself into some BS when/if they get your name and information...
As they say.. once you get into the system... (I know we had the talk about already being in the system...) I try to stay out of it as much as I can.
I think this would be a point to remain VERY calm and VERY polite and state "I know you're just doing your job officer, and I completely respect that, however, I must respectfully decline your request for ID under the pretenses you have no reasonable suspicion to request it and I am not breaking any laws and open carry as you know is not a reason to stop and detain and ID" and ask if you are being detained and if he says no, haul ass.
-
I would not have shown I'd or cpl in this case. The officer admitted the only reason he was stopped was for him carrying openly. Ok you may all say he is operating a vehicle but where is the RAS for the stop? Cops cannot pull over every car following the law to see if it is registered or insured. The officer in this case did not have ANY RAS to stop a person lawful & legally riding his bike.
-
"May I see your papers, please.
I'm sorry. Your papers are not in order.
You will have to come with me.
I am putting these handcuffs on you for your protection as well as mine.
Please don't resist. I am only doing my job."
OC on a bicycle has been hashed out repeatedly. A MSP letter of opinion has also been issued. A CPL is not required to OC on a bicycle. I would cit e a law that says you can do it, but just as there is no law requiring a permit to OC itself, none exists requiring a permit to OC on a bicycle.
As far as this stop is concerned, the officer knew he had no lawful basis to request ID, yet he did so nonetheless. To provide ID in light of this is... acknowledgement of servitude.
-
Ok, time for me to weigh in on this now. It sounds like this thread started off as "I did the right thing", then quickly reversed itself.
You are right, I should have held my ground and refused the ID. This was my first stop by police, and I was a little nervous and essentially caught off guard. I have learned a great deal from reading everyone's comments and I plan to continue riding my bike with my holstered gun openly on my hip. The next encounter with Police will go differently, you can count on it.
As far as any database, I neither agree nor disagree that one exists. I can only tell you that he looked at my ID very breifly and handed them back. He didn't take them to his vehicle nor did he write anything down. Unless he has a photographic memory or something, I will continue to assume he was telling the truth and only checking for the presence of a CPL. I know now that even that seemingly innocent gesture was a violation of my rights, and like I said, the next time will be different. That is why I come here guys, to listen and learn.
Thank you all for your wisdom.
-
Another thing to ponder...
Since there is no requirement to posess ID while riding a bicycle, what would have the rider done if he had none to produce?
-
halfway off topic.... that NAzi guy in Inglorious Basterds sure was a polite and gentlemanly fellow... right up till the point where he was telling the soldiers to murder everyone and when he pounced on that actress and killed her... just sayin...
-
I have never had an LEO encounter but can imagine how nervous I might be and the nerves you were feeling. Regardless, at least you were polite. Good job! Now we both are educated for the next time!
-
:)+1 Carry On.
-
Good job. I've not shown ID, and shown ID. Either way works.
-
I wish you the best on your future bike rides. I suggest you contact your local city council / mayor's office. Inform them of this stop & why it violated your civil rights. Ask them to speak with the chief of police and request that training be provided to the departments officers regarding OC. Refer them to MSP legal updates [particularly #86]. By doing this you are being proactive, this also takes away their ability to claim ignorance in the future. Be sure to note that should these kind of stops continue it may leave the city liable in civil lawsuits in the future.
www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/MSP_Legal_Update_No._86_2_336854_7.pdf (http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/MSP_Legal_Update_No._86_2_336854_7.pdf)
Kind regards,
G9OS
-
when i was approached on foot by a polite oakland county deputy my encounter went well, quick and professional when i produced ID and info about myself. when i had my first, one and only negative LEO encounter at the same spot only the other side of the road and another jurisdiction they somehow knew ALL about me the minute they got out of the car. i of course KNOW they shared my info with EVERYBODY. when i informed the officer is was former LEO he said "yeah. we know. you said you were a cop in houston". i said "no i didn't tell you. who told you that?" he backpedaled and lied "your neighbors told me that"..no they didn't. they DO share and spread your info. don't think they don't.
-
"May I see your papers, please.
I'm sorry. Your papers are not in order.
You will have to come with me.
I am putting these handcuffs on you for your protection as well as mine.
Please don't resist. I am only doing my job."
OC on a bicycle has been hashed out repeatedly. A MSP letter of opinion has also been issued. A CPL is not required to OC on a bicycle. I would cit e a law that says you can do it, but just as there is no law requiring a permit to OC itself, none exists requiring a permit to OC on a bicycle.
As far as this stop is concerned, the officer knew he had no lawful basis to request ID, yet he did so nonetheless. To provide ID in light of this is... acknowledgement of servitude.
Now you have me confused I thought the law said vehicle and mentions nothing about whether it is motorized or not. Therefore a bicycle would be included.
-
I think maybe it's more a bicycle COULD be included...
/talkin out of my ace though....
-
I sent an email to the Monroe county sheriff through the Sheriff's website describing the incident. tellthesheriff@monroemi.org
I would post the letter here, but I don't need another 15 or 20 replies ripping it apart. I'll let you know what he says if/when he replies.
-
"May I see your papers, please.
I'm sorry. Your papers are not in order.
You will have to come with me.
I am putting these handcuffs on you for your protection as well as mine.
Please don't resist. I am only doing my job."
OC on a bicycle has been hashed out repeatedly. A MSP letter of opinion has also been issued. A CPL is not required to OC on a bicycle. I would cit e a law that says you can do it, but just as there is no law requiring a permit to OC itself, none exists requiring a permit to OC on a bicycle.
As far as this stop is concerned, the officer knew he had no lawful basis to request ID, yet he did so nonetheless. To provide ID in light of this is... acknowledgement of servitude.
Now you have me confused I thought the law said vehicle and mentions nothing about whether it is motorized or not. Therefore a bicycle would be included.
If you're stopped on a vehicle (bicycle, motorcycle) you best disclose -- as silly as that sounds. They should be able to see it on your hip. Disclose anyhow.
-
8) +1 Oh only reason you stopped me is for OC'ing? I'm i being detained? No ok i'm leaving, have a good day. Carry On. :)
-
"May I see your papers, please.
I'm sorry. Your papers are not in order.
You will have to come with me.
I am putting these handcuffs on you for your protection as well as mine.
Please don't resist. I am only doing my job."
OC on a bicycle has been hashed out repeatedly. A MSP letter of opinion has also been issued. A CPL is not required to OC on a bicycle. I would cit e a law that says you can do it, but just as there is no law requiring a permit to OC itself, none exists requiring a permit to OC on a bicycle.
As far as this stop is concerned, the officer knew he had no lawful basis to request ID, yet he did so nonetheless. To provide ID in light of this is... acknowledgement of servitude.
Now you have me confused I thought the law said vehicle and mentions nothing about whether it is motorized or not. Therefore a bicycle would be included.
If you're stopped on a vehicle (bicycle, motorcycle) you best disclose -- as silly as that sounds. They should be able to see it on your hip. Disclose anyhow.
If riding a bicycle, why? I can and do agree on the motorcycle. But in light of all the previous information discussed and revealed, prior to your having come to the party Q, there is no know basis for doing so whilst riding a bicycle.
If you want to pull that gray area rabbit out of you hat, I will have to relent. But as far as I am concerned, there is no gray are that requires disclosure while riding a bicycle. What would be the basis of disclosure in the first place if the rider doesn't even have a CPL?
-
I sent an email to the Monroe county sheriff through the Sheriff's website describing the incident. tellthesheriff@monroemi.org
I would post the letter here, but I don't need another 15 or 20 replies ripping it apart. I'll let you know what he says if/when he replies.
Good on you dlgeorge for following up on this. No one here [myself included] should be ripping any of your posts apart. You did what seemed to be right for you at the time. No one is faulting you for that. It was a learning experience for you & us ;) Maybe it is just a matter of laxed training on your PD's part? I know when I took my CPL class the person running it was from Monroe Co Sheriff's office & they were completely clueless to OC and gave lots of outdated & just plain wrong info regarding it (OC). :o
-
If you want to pull that gray area rabbit out of you hat, I will have to relent. But as far as I am concerned, there is no gray are that requires disclosure while riding a bicycle. What would be the basis of disclosure in the first place if the rider doesn't even have a CPL?
If he has no CPL then he could face felony CCW.
-
cite?
-
cite?
MCL 750.227
-
cite?
MCL 750.227
wrong
-
cite?
MCL 750.227
wrong
Cite
-
cite?
MCL 750.227
wrong
Cite
MCL 750.227
-
And Pat lobs it back to the Q. Stay tuned Folks, this promises to be a epic battle of wills here...on the order of Borg v. McEnroe. :P
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ik-Tc-1AC48 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ik-Tc-1AC48)
-
Really, this one has been researched extensively. Mikesilly did an exemplary job of providing information and background and analysis about the lawfulness as to the open carry of a pistol on a bicycle without a CPL prior to his Warren bicycle rally/picnic. Not a single person was stopped during the miles upon miles ridden prior to the picnic. All of the info was checked, rechecked and validated far in advance. Taxwhat and Ventilator also had a hand in the compilation of verifiable information that was disseminated. I would post it all here, but it was all lost by OCDO during its forum upgrade.
Does anyone have a copy of the Michigan State Police Legal Liason's, I believe the Trooper's name was Deasley, response to the question of a CPL being required to possess a loaded firearm while riding a bicycle?
The statute cited by q references a vehicle. As used in that statute, bicycle is not a vehicle.
I can't provide a case law to defend my position, because none exists to prove the q's.
As lame as it may seem, it is the best I can do. I can't prove a negative.
-
CV67PAT is correct, MICHIGAN Moter Veh code bike is bike ,even at this time battery powered are just bike.NO CPL NEEDED.Lighting round over.
-
This may be different, but can't you get an OUIL on a bike?
-
This may be different, but can't you get an OUIL on a bike?
Yes you can also get charged with OUIL on a horse, a lawnmower, a rickshaw and many others. Different statute... different definitions.
-
This may be different, but can't you get an OUIL on a bike?
Yes you can also get charged with OUIL on a horse, a lawnmower, a rickshaw and many others. Different statute... different definitions.
That's what I was wondering... similar to the definition including cities, towns, villages, AUTHORITIES, but being in a different statute. :(
-
I've seen bikes rigged up with weed whacked motors, is that still "just a bike"?
-
I've seen bikes rigged up with weed whacked motors, is that still "just a bike"?
Yes OUIL is unlawful on bikes rigged up with weed whacked motors.
-
I've seen bikes rigged up with weed whacked motors, is that still "just a bike"?
Yes OUIL is unlawful on bikes rigged up with weed whacked motors.
What about the need for a CPL?
-
I've seen bikes rigged up with weed whacked motors, is that still "just a bike"?
Yes OUIL is unlawful on bikes rigged up with weed whacked motors.
What about the need for a CPL?
I think the weed whacked motor will have to be hashed out in court.
-
Saturday I was alone riding my bicycle around the block, which is a 3 mile ride since I live in the country. I was open carrying my Ruger P90. I was passed by several cars including this white unmarked SUV.
Well, everyone else has weighed in, I might as well also. Honestly, I would most likely have done the same thing. Specially if I didn't feel up to starting a potential argument or creating a scene on the side of the road as I refuse to produce ID, and the deputy calls for back up, a supervisor and whatever other help he thinks he might need.
-
I agree Al.
Look at all the crap your little freak buddy caused.
And that Rosa Parks. She should have shut up and sat down in the back of the bus. Look at the mess that caused.
-
I agree Al.
Look at all the crap your little freak buddy caused.
And that Rosa Parks. She should have shut up and sat down in the back of the bus. Look at the mess that caused.
I don't agree with everything Lil_freak does, or how he does it. I certainly don't agree with carrying a shotgun into the library, lawful or not. But that is simply my opinion.
As for Rosa Parks, was she packing when she refused to go to the back of the bus?
-
I don't agree with everything Lil_freak does, or how he does it. I certainly don't agree with carrying a shotgun into the library, lawful or not. But that is simply my opinion.
As for Rosa Parks, was she packing when she refused to go to the back of the bus?
Mark the calendars!!! BGA & I have formed an alliance on this island.
I had to throw Rosa out there. Someone posted a Rosa statistic as it relates to forums. So I figured this thread had run long enough and needed a Rosa post. I do think she was packing, though. Some junk in the trunk if I recall.
-
I may have announced that alliance too hastily. And without research...
Actually, maybe more to the point, what does it matter who was carrying a long gun in the library. I though MOC was about Open Carry of all firearms. Did that change, since Venator is no longer president of MOC?
-
Not so much. So far, long arm carry IS still lawful in Michigan. It doesn't mean I agree with it. I do not, unless you're out hunting. I've always thought the idea of lawful OC for self defense should be for handguns only. I myself, would never carry a long arm, unless it was part of a political statement, and most likely part of a march downtown.
Now, I'll grant there will be some people who will take the position that while OCing a handgun is lawful, that doesn't make it right either. To which I would simply respond, carrying ANY firearm is not just lawful, it is a right, guaranteed by the US and Michigan Constitutions. Our problem is in educating the sheeple that it is a right, and that they should not be frightened by the mere sight of a firearm. However, as it has been pointed out before in the past, and in other places, baby steps are the way to go. Baby steps would be getting the public at large used to seeing HANDGUNS carried openly first. Assuming we can ever get that done, the next step could be long arms. But frankly, for purposes of self defense, I don't see it.
When I go out and about doing my business, I don't need to worry about whether or not I can fit through a door way because of the length of the barrel on my OCed long arm. And I certainly don't want to try to go through the doorway of any business with a 30" barreled goose gun, where I have to bend over so far to get it through the door, I end up sweeping everyone in the room with the business end.
Those of you who disagree with me, are free to do so, as I am free to disagree with you. But my basic stance is, unless you're out hunting, you don't need a long arm for self defense. Specially in down town areas of cities and towns. Legal? Yes it is, doesn't make it the right thing to do though, or the intelligent thing either. For now, anyway.
Oh, and I did find out, MOC did change it's basic philosophy, and no longer supports long arm OC. That became pretty obvious when they removed the long arm OC sub forum. ;)
-
The discussion to distance itself from the LG OC was done 2 days after Ponderossa. During that meeting is where I made my flip flop from supporting it to not. Thanks primarily to Ghostrider, Taxwhat, Wardog, and Generaldet.
-
I've never considered LG OC to be a good idea, but as has been pointed out, it is legal. It just seems to me that OCing a handgun is one thing, specially when you consider that a lot of people just don't notice. But, a long arm? You can't help but see an AR15 or some other rifle strapped to someone's back, or slung on their shoulder. I'll grant, there are times when it might work as a political statement, such as in a parade/march or other political demonstration, but not breakfast/lunch/brunch/dinner. Specially when the manager/owner has agreed thinking it's gonna be handguns only.
If you want to do long arm OC at some place like Ponderosa or Big Boy, I'd clear it with management first. It will cut way down on any misunderstandings.
But as I've said before, I won't do it.
-
Really, this one has been researched extensively. Mikesilly did an exemplary job of providing information and background and analysis about the lawfulness as to the open carry of a pistol on a bicycle without a CPL prior to his Warren bicycle rally/picnic. Not a single person was stopped during the miles upon miles ridden prior to the picnic. All of the info was checked, rechecked and validated far in advance. Taxwhat and Ventilator also had a hand in the compilation of verifiable information that was disseminated. I would post it all here, but it was all lost by OCDO during its forum upgrade.
Does anyone have a copy of the Michigan State Police Legal Liason's, I believe the Trooper's name was Deasley, response to the question of a CPL being required to possess a loaded firearm while riding a bicycle?
The statute cited by q references a vehicle. As used in that statute, bicycle is not a vehicle.
I can't provide a case law to defend my position, because none exists to prove the q's.
As lame as it may seem, it is the best I can do. I can't prove a negative.
This has been discussed to death. My opinion is that a prosecutor could argue successfully that a bicycle is a vehicle as defined via a dictionary, since a vehicle is NOT defined in the pistol statute. Just because no one has been charged yet doesn't mean it can't/wont happen. All I'm saying is it is not concrete and there is some gray in there. I think an anti-gun prosecutor could jam someone up on this.
From OCDO:
(Not from me)
It is legal to openly carry a pistol on a bicycle. Michigan law (MCL 750.227) makes it illegal to carry a pistol in a vehicle without a CPL. Since a person rides on (not in) a bicycle, a pistol is not concealed if carried openly by the rider.
Sincerely,
Sgt. Thomas Deasy
Michigan State Police
Executive Resource Section
714 S. Harrison Rd.
East Lansing, MI 48823
(517) 336-6441
(From Me)
Mr. Jeffs,
I don't think the issue is whether bicycles are vehicles - I think they are. The question is whether a person carrying a visible pistol while riding a bicycle is carrying the pistol IN a vehicle as prohibited by MCL 750.227; in order to be guilty of carrying a concealed pistol, a non-CPL holder must be carrying the pistol IN the vehicle.
The Penal Code does not define "in" so I checked a couple dictionaries and found that as an adverb 'in' generally means "on the inside" or "within." Thus, I don't think a person carrying a plainly visible pistol (e.g., housed in a hip-holster) on a bicycle - or motorcycle - is carrying the pistol in a vehicle, so they're not guilty of violating MCL 750.227. Contrast that with a person transporting a pistol inside a storage compartment attached to a bicycle or motorcycle - in that case they are carrying the pistol IN the vehicle. I think my analysis is supported by the Court's opinion in People v. Nimeth, 236 Mich. App. 616 (1999) (discussing a pistol hidden IN a motorcycle).
Further, the purpose of MCL 750.227 "is to protect quarreling persons from being injured by an adversary who might suddenly draw and use a concealed weapon without notice." People v. Emery, 150 Mich. App. 657, 663 (1986). Charging a person on a bicycle or motorcycle would hardly be within the purpose of the statute; after all, openly carrying a pistol serves notice that the person is in possession of a pistol.
That said, I am simply relaying our position on the matter. As I've mentioned to you before, the MSP cannot give legal opinions that bind another police agency. So, if someone is concerned about overzealous officers, they should probably play it safe and not openly carry on a bicycle or motorcycle, or they should get a Concealed Pistol License.
Regards,Sgt. Thomas Deasy
Michigan State Police
Executive Resource Section
714 S. Harrison Rd.
East Lansing, MI 48823
(517) 336-6441
-
Considering the fact that LEO's,DA's and Judges can charge you for anything they want,and they know this,that it will be up to the one charged to pay a lawyer,a bond if arrested,in order to prove his or her innocence!It doesn't cost them a dime to put someone through such an incident,unless they're sued,and nothing comes out of they're pocket 99% of the time!Rights control by unconstitutionaly written vague laws!I know this.I'm still paying cash for a vague law 16 years after an incident.I'm still paying to receive my freedom from the slavery this unconstitutional government has imposed on me.Thats the simple explanation of it all!
-
750.227d Transporting or Possessing Firearm in or Upon Motor Vehicle or Self-Propelled Vehicle Designed for Land Travel; Conditions; Violation as Misdemeanor; Penalty.
Sec. 227d.
(1) Except as otherwise permitted by law, a person shall not transport or possess in or upon a motor vehicle or any self-propelled vehicle designed for land travel a firearm, other than a pistol, unless the firearm is unloaded and is 1 or more of the following:
(a) Taken down.
(b) Enclosed in a case.
(c) Carried in the trunk of the vehicle.
(d) Inaccessible from the interior of the vehicle.
(2) A person who violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor, punishable by imprisonment for not more than 90 days, or a fine of not more than $100.00, or both.
-
So:
bike + pistol = yes
Bike + bazooka = no!
amirite?
-
yarite
-
Outstanding Guys, Carry On Safely.
-
750.227 (http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(2mgze1ew3xwaalywhubhi3e2))/mileg.aspx?page=getobject&objectname=mcl-750-227&query=on&highlight=pistol)
This is the one that applies to pistols in a vehicle.
(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.
No mention of motor vehicle.
Bronson
-
Really felt good outside today. I jumped on the ten speed and OC'd two miles from my home to Livernois & Michigan. Then took the new bike trail (Line) that's next to the parking lane all the way to Michigan Ave. and Trumbull, back home. I stopped at all traffic lights. Cars passing on my left side (strong side), no words out loud, no problem. Carry On.
-
GR8T
As you were.
-
So:
bike + pistol = yes
Bike + bazooka = no!
amirite?
just to clarify, I meant with no CPL...
-
750.227 (http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(2mgze1ew3xwaalywhubhi3e2))/mileg.aspx?page=getobject&objectname=mcl-750-227&query=on&highlight=pistol)
This is the one that applies to pistols in a vehicle.
(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.
No mention of motor vehicle.
Bronson
My opinion is OC on a pedal bike is legal because... well all those points have been made here and elsewhere but I'd like to take this in a new direction.
We've had the discussions that MI has 2 licenses, a License to Purchase and Carry (LPC) and a Concealed Carry License (CPL). Now why do we assume that in 750.227 where it says "License" it means CPL?
"(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."
Notice the word "concealed is not there.
I think it could easily be argued that we can open carry in any vehicle with a LPC. It might be hard to argue that we can open carry in a vehicle with doors but we can oc in a building with doors. :D
-
Saturday I was alone riding my bicycle around the block, which is a 3 mile ride since I live in the country. I was open carrying my Ruger P90. I was passed by several cars including this white unmarked SUV.
I didn't think anything of it until he turned around. He stopped in front of me and the lights went on. I don't think he was responding to a call, because he was wearing a K9 police uniform. I think he was just driving by and stopped and turned around because he saw the gun holstered on my hip. He directed me to the side of the road and asked me why I was carrying a gun. I said for personal protection. He said, and I am paraphrasing, "I know you are just excercising your right, but people get nervous when they see a gun". I said that may be true, but I'm not breaking any law. "I know you're not, but people aren't used to seeing someone riding their bike carrying a gun. I don't know you and I need to check out someone carrying a gun in public." Again, I said I'm not breaking any law by doing so.
When he asked for ID, I then asked if the only reason he was pulling me over was because of the gun. When he said yes, I said, "then you know that I'm not required to show you ID. He said "I know, but I'm asking you please to produce some ID. If you have a CPL, then I will know there are no warrants on you and we'll be done". At that point I had to make a decision. Should I take the hardline, or show him ID to get it over with? I showed him my DL and CPL and was on my way immediately. I know, here is where some of you will criticise me for not standing firm, but the guy was very polite, and was not one of those anti-gun dirty harry types, so I showed it to him. He was being polite and understanding, so I in turn was as well. After all, it is not only about "our" perception of the LEO's, but there perception of us as well.
Anyway, the encounter went well I thought, and lasted about 3 minutes and I was on my way, still open carrying all the way home.
I didn't read this whole thread, so this may have been said already, but I can't help but say something...
Yes, the cop was polite, and I wasn't there so I have to believe you that he wasn't an "anti-gun dirty harry type"... but really he was much worse than that. Pulling you over and insisting you submit to his arbitrary decisions in the name of soothing the public nerves is really worse than the anti-gun brady bunch (http://www.bradycampaign.org/), for a number of reasons.
First, there is an implication that carrying a gun is a negative thing. It isn't, but by submitting to these kinds of stops you are really implicitly agreeing with the officer and supporting this frame of mind. This has been allowed to happen a lot over the last 150 years, and it is the primary foothold the anti-gunners have against us. That is, even the people carrying guns submit to police because even they know guns are bad and need to be controlled, right? Wrong.
Its really a cyclical problem. People are nervous, so you allow the cop to [nicely] step on you. People see you gladly submitting to the cops, and thus see your implication that guns are bad. Because of the implications, people get nervous around guns. Then it goes around again, and again, and again... until it becomes so compounded that we begin losing our rights again.
Secondly, you have an absolute legal right to refuse. And how does the saying go, "a right unexercised is a right lost"? If we submit to these kinds of "informal reviews" by police officers, we begin to form de facto law. Or, in practice, we make it okay for cops to investigate guns as they are seen. We already know this isn't true, somebody else can quote the law, but we'd had to allow it to gradually move to that situation.
Finally, the worst parts of our government have been established on the foundation of greater security. It is the unfortunate trend of our era, and the Patriot Act is its poster child. Whether it involves firearms or not, we should stand against any attempt to compromise our freedom in the name of security.
If I have to choose between a Brady Campaign zealot, standing on his soapbox and shouting for strict laws and enforcement, throwing money at our leaders and spewing propaganda to support his cause; and the calm, polite police officer, admitting that you are right but asking for your concessions, just this one time, for the safety of the people.... I'll take the zealot every time. I know him, I know his strategy, and I know his goals.
Far worse is the man that soothes your ego while he plunges a knife in your back, than the man who faces you across the battlefield with an army.
I'm not suggesting you single-handedly caused the breakdown of society with this one incident, just throwing in my two cents. I think of the big picture when I see these small snippets. And don't forget: There is always a polite way to handle these situations and handle them in your favor.
-
We've had the discussions that MI has 2 licenses, a License to Purchase and Carry (LPC) and a Concealed Carry License (CPL). Now why do we assume that in 750.227 where it says "License" it means CPL?
Odd, I thought of that the other day too.
Bronson
-
Just the way the guy handled the LEO when he crossed the parking lot and was carrying sterile... LEO: Need to see ID. GUY: I'm sorry officer, but that's not a legal requirement, but out of respect, I'd be happy to give you my first name. etc...
-
One thing I've learned, there are some encounters I'm NEVER going to mention in this group. They way everyone dissects the encounter, based on personal bias, even though THEY weren't there.
Nope, not gonna do it.
-
But that is the precise reason to post them here.
The critiques can often times assist others in formulating their own responses.
-
:) +1 Carry On Safely.
-
But that is the precise reason to post them here.
The critiques can often times assist others in formulating their own responses.
Perhaps, but it just seems to me that some of the critques are a bit too critical.
Maybe we need a subcategory, specifically letting all posters know their "encounter" will be dissected to the nth degree. The only reason I say this, I've noticed more than a few getting ticked off at the way they are criticized for their responses. For that matter, some of us have been criticized for announcing our opinions that sometimes support the "bad" responses.
I always looked at the "OC Experience" as a way to announce our success at making OC more common place. Sure, sometimes we are "approached" by LEOs and questioned, but I think we all know that's just one of the "perks" of OC. The possibily of increased interaction with our public servants.
I guess I was slightly mistaken.
-
From a "noob" point of view, I agree with Gay...(hehe) Constructive critisizm should be meant to build, not tear down! I learned some things from this post, but, I would feel like I had been attacked by the majority if this had been me. I would like to think that if/when I have my first LEO encounter I will stand my ground to the fullest of my rights (if that makes sense), but when the moment of truth is at hand, who can really say? Each of us are left to our own knowledge and level of comfort while out on our own. I think that the important thing is that each of us use integrity while ocing and this man displayed that and left a good impression on this officer.
Thanx man for representing what we do in a positive light! Thanx for representing me in a positive way!
Daniel
-
I didn't get the impression that anyone was tearing the OP down... I def. felt they were pointing out his mistakes and presenting different ways to handle it.. I don't think that anyone was saying he screwed up or even that they would have had the nuts to do things differently... but just giving suggestions on how to handle it if it happens again, OR, more importantly so OTHER people can evaluate teh situation and know what TO and NOT TO do if it happens to them...
-
If you cannot take advice don't post he exsperience... many people on here while gruff will give sound advice that just might save your bacon the next time.
Sent from my Droid Flipside using Tapatalk
-
While I think the majority of the responses were constructive, if any of you don't think that ANY of them were hyper-critical, I suggest you go to page 2 and read response #24 by the OP.
-
While I think the majority of the responses were constructive, if any of you don't think that ANY of them were hyper-critical, I suggest you go to page 2 and read response #24 by the OP.
Yes, I admit it, Many of the replies were slightly intimidating to me. However, I can take it in this case. It is the best way to learn. The letter I wrote to the sherriff is a different story. What I mean is, what happened to me, and all of your replies are constructive and I appreciate them 100%.
On the other hand, the letter I sent, which was very much a complaint to the Sherriff and was very pointed, need not be scrutinized in the same way. Negative responses to my letter, by their very nature would be more of a personal attack on me and my writing style. It would serve no purpose nor would it be a positive addition to this thread.
The Sherriff has not yet replied to my letter, but if he does, at that time both my letter and his reply can be posted together for the education of all here. Only then, when both pieces are together can we be educated by it.
Thanks again all,
PS, I'm still open carrying on my bycicle!! :D ;)
-
Open Carry on Donald!
I do it also, on my road bike and on my mountain bike down here in SW Michigan, and Northern Indiana. Most of the time my bicycle OC is in an ankle holster.
-
While I think the majority of the responses were constructive, if any of you don't think that ANY of them were hyper-critical, I suggest you go to page 2 and read response #24 by the OP.
Yes, I admit it, Many of the replies were slightly intimidating to me. However, I can take it in this case. It is the best way to learn. The letter I wrote to the sherriff is a different story. What I mean is, what happened to me, and all of your replies are constructive and I appreciate them 100%.
Proper criticism should not be intimidating at all. I was bothered by some of them myself, and it wasn't even my thread! Some go without saying. I know where Venator stands on the subject. He's never made a secret of it, and I can respect that. But I think some of the responses could have been a little less harsh in their execution.
Granted, tone is sometimes a difficult thing to deduce from the type written word, but there are ways. Smiley faces for one. :) I tend to sprinkle them in my messages, so that people don't think I'm trying to chastise them.
FYI, I consider this constructive criticism in constructive criticism. :D
-
Glad to hear you weren't put off DLgeorge... I don't think anyone was trying to rip you up.. I think they were all just trying to help and figure out better ways to respond to the situation.. not like you made some critical error or something.. the situation could have been handled differently, but you didn't get thrown in jail or anything...
thanks for posting the experience and the follow up. I hope you hear back from the sheriff.. I would follow up with him and ask where you response is.
-
8) Here Here. 8) Let's keep up the good work guys and gals Carry On Safely. ;).
-
8) Here Here. 8) Let's keep up the good work guys and gals Carry On Safely. ;).
also a side note.... some of those hard core riders on $2,000 composite bikes i wouldn't blame them for OC in Detroit :D
-
Necropost, anyone?
-
Ok, I didn't read the whole thread, so maybe that's my fault. But I gotta ask, when you handed over your ID, did the officer run them, or just look at them and hand them back? IF he just looked, and handed them back, that's ok. On the other hand, if he ran them through NCIC, I'd be a little upset.
Last Summer, I had a Leslie cop show up at my home in Mason, asking if I was the one seen OCing in town. Everything stopped when he was informed that I have a CPL. He didn't even ask to see it, which shocked me to no end. Once he was told I had a CPL, that was it as far as he was concerned, investigation was over.
LOL, never mind. I just looked at the date of the original post. :)
-
I don't think the OP posts here anymore.
-
Yes, I still lurk here, just haven't posted in a while. Sorry about that. In answer to your question, he only looked at them, he didn't run them.