Michigan Open Carry, Inc.
Open Carry Specific => OC Experiences => Topic started by: jeffsayers on July 15, 2011, 07:21:35 PM
-
Took the family to the zoo today and was interupted by three of their security staff whilst paying for admissions. The gal that showed herself to be the "leader" of the group seemd pretty knowledgeable. First question was if I had a CPL which I affirmed. Next she stated that the zoo was a family facility and a firearm was not appropriate. I explained to her that it was my policy to provide for my family's security. At this point one of her associates chimed in and said it was illegal to bring a firearm in the park and quickly received admonition from the gal. She said to me that while there was no way to stop me they would really appreciate my leaving my firearm in my vehicle. She continued that a visitor brought a firearm in the park last week and they received many complaints. I explained to her that I was sorry but their request would violate my personal policy and that I can not be conerned with the unfounded fears of others. At this they left and I was finally able to complete my transaction at the gate.
The next part didn't really sink in on me until much later in the day. They approached me again as I was less than ten steps into the park and the gal announces to me that she needs to know if my firearm was registered as a concealed firearm or an open firearm. She continued that since my firearm was registered as a concealed firearm it must remain that way. (Don't know whyt she made that assertion.) I explained to her that firearms are not registered in such a way and that it made no difference. She tried the question again and I gave the same response. This time I continued further explaining to her that it would be illegal for me to conceal a firearm in the park. She made a comment about having their staff keeping an eye on me and I thanked her for her time as I walked away.
Thinking back, her first question to me was to verify if I had a CPL. Then she admitted she had no authority to stop me. She clearly knows a good deal about firearm law. So, was she actually under the impression that firearms get registered as concealed or otherwise? Or was she trying to trip me up and get me to conceal so she could prevent me from coming into the park by leaving in bracelets? I guess I will never know but it sure seems fishy in hindsight and thought I would put up a warning to everyone.
Oh and also, the T-Rex is pretty damn cool!
-
Took the family to the zoo today and was interupted by three of their security staff whilst paying for admissions. The gal that showed herself to be the "leader" of the group seemd pretty knowledgeable. First question was if I had a CPL which I affirmed. Next she stated that the zoo was a family facility and a firearm was not appropriate. I explained to her that it was my policy to provide for my family's security. At this point one of her associates chimed in and said it was illegal to bring a firearm in the park and quickly received admonition from the gal. She said to me that while there was no way to stop me they would really appreciate my leaving my firearm in my vehicle. She continued that a visitor brought a firearm in the park last week and they received many complaints. I explained to her that I was sorry but their request would violate my personal policy and that I can not be conerned with the unfounded fears of others. At this they left and I was finally able to complete my transaction at the gate.
The next part didn't really sink in on me until much later in the day. They approached me again as I was less than ten steps into the park and the gal announces to me that she needs to know if my firearm was registered as a concealed firearm or an open firearm. She continued that since my firearm was registered as a concealed firearm it must remain that way. (Don't know whyt she made that assertion.) I explained to her that firearms are not registered in such a way and that it made no difference. She tried the question again and I gave the same response. This time I continued further explaining to her that it would be illegal for me to conceal a firearm in the park. She made a comment about having their staff keeping an eye on me and I thanked her for her time as I walked away.
Thinking back, her first question to me was to verify if I had a CPL. Then she admitted she had no authority to stop me. She clearly knows a good deal about firearm law. So, was she actually under the impression that firearms get registered as concealed or otherwise? Or was she trying to trip me up and get me to conceal so she could prevent me from coming into the park by leaving in bracelets? I guess I will never know but it sure seems fishy in hindsight and thought I would put up a warning to everyone.
Oh and also, the T-Rex is pretty damn cool!
Why can't you conceal there with a CPL? Is it the liquor license angle? Has that been verified and would it apply to the entire zoo or a designated area within the zoo?
-
Actually that is a good and valid question. On the posted park rules, at the last line, their signage states something to the effect of "This facility has a seating capacity exceeding 2,500". I would venture the park, PD and prosecutor would consider the zoo an entertainment facility. If a courtroom would actually confer is another question. I am pretty sure that had I concealed I would have had the opportunity to find out.
-
I've OC'd there twice this year without incident. If I am questioned the next time I go, I'll report the details. Though I can give you the abridged version now. I won't be answering many(read any) questions. I'll tell them if they feel I'm breaking some law, call the cops...otherwise my wife, daughter and I will be on our way enjoying the public zoo seeing as we are paid yearly members.
-
:)+ 1 Carry On.
-
Detroit zoo owned by city of royal oak so they cannot ban OC or CC. It is also not listed as being banned on their site. My 2 cents
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detroit_zoo
FundingOn February 18, 2006, the Detroit City Council voted to shut down the zoo as part of budget cuts, being unable to reach an agreement with the Detroit Zoological Society to take over the park and a legislative grant having expired that day. An uproar ensued and the Council, on March 1, 2006, voted to transfer operations to the Detroit Zoological Society with a promised $4 million grant from the Michigan Legislature. The city retained ownership of the assets, including the Detroit Zoological Institute in Royal Oak and the Belle Isle Nature Zoo in Detroit. The Society is responsible for governance, management and operations, including creating a plan to raise the money needed to keep the facilities operating for generations to come. On August 5, 2008 voters in Macomb, Oakland, and Wayne counties overwhelmingly passed a zoo tax that will raise fifteen million dollars a year for the zoo, approximately half the zoo's budget.
http://www.detroitzoo.org/Visitors/D...o/Visitor_Info
Please!
• No feeding of animals.
• No bicycle riding, ball or frisbee playing, skate boarding, roller skating or in-line skating.
• No sneakers with wheels, e.g., Heelies, Rollies.
• No scooters, bicycles or tricycles.
• No Segways or similar upright assisted mobility devices.
• No balloons or inflatables.
• No pets on Zoo grounds.
• No distribution of printed literature of any kind in or at the Zoo.
• No radios or TVs.
After this event it gives more reason to carry,
Tiger escapes at S.F. Zoo, kills 17-year-old visitor
"300-pound Siberian tiger that killed a visitor escaped from its high-walled pen"
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22395368/
It is not my fault the sheep are taught to fear firearms as they grow up.
Maybe it is time to have a MOC picnic/gathering at the zoo? It would be a great family event.
-
Detroit zoo owned by city of royal oak so they cannot ban OC or CC.
The Detroit Zoo is actually owned by the City of Detroit, not the city Of Royal Oak.
The seating capacity is not applicable, I believe, as it is not an entertainment facility as described in the AG opinion that addressed the subject.
The park itself doesn't have a seating capacity, unless you count all of the park benches, either. Therefore, unless I enter an entertainment facility upon the park, I will carry as I wish without fear of lawful prosecution.
-
The Detroit Zoo is actually owned by the City of Detroit, not the city Of Royal Oak.
Yes that is what I meant not what I typed, In Royal Oak, owned by Detroit. Both places that have history of not being OC friendly
-
Detroit has came a long way to respect Open Carriers. Carry On Safely.
-
...After this event it gives more reason to carry,
Tiger escapes at S.F. Zoo, kills 17-year-old visitor
"300-pound Siberian tiger that killed a visitor escaped from its high-walled pen"
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22395368/ ...
Agreed, but for pete sakes I hope nobody verbalizes this to a zoo employee. Some things just don't necessitate discussion amongst certain companionship!
Anyway, I also have a membership and will be visiting a few more time this year. I'll try to keep my eyes open if anyone wants to start up a group outing.
-
Maybe you could carry a few copies of the Mi. State Police #86 update on cc and oc for whoever is confused. I always carry a copy for others to learn from.
-
I would probably be game for a group outing... I have never been and I my 6 and 3 year old would love it.
-
Maybe it is time to have a MOC picnic/gathering at the zoo? It would be a great family event.
I would love to have that, as I live only a couple miles away.
-
I would probably be game for a group outing... I have never been and I my 6 and 3 year old would love it.
So to be clear Carry at the zoo is a no go without a CPL? This is because they are claiming a 2,500 + seating capacity? This sounds just like Hart plaza trying the same thing at the Hoedown. Unless park benches are considered seating for an entertainment facility and I would think they would not under the AG opinion. How can they stop non CPL oc?
I'm confused on the CPL question to JeffSayers? Even if the zoo has a liquor license, there's no way it could cover the entire zoo grounds correct? If that's the case, unless he was trying to take his family into one of their "drinking area's" HIGHLY UNLIKELY, what is she talking about?
-
So to be clear Carry at the zoo is a no go without a CPL?
It is only as clear as saying riding a bicycle without a CPL is OK. Because the zoo bothered to list their capacity in the manner they did, it is being assumed by some (myself included) that the zoo believes they are a PFZ.
Now, whether or not a court would agree with this is another question entirely. However, common sense is evidently not common in Michigan court systems and therefor common sense dictates erring to caution. However, to each their own. And for what it's worth, when you tell the zoo security you do have a CPL, they themselves have no authority to demand verification as far as I know. But a prudent person would conjure that they could easily come up with a story to tell the PD giving reason for a LEO to demand verification.
Pat, what AG Opinion are you refering to? Either I have forgotten about it (as it wouldn't apply to me anyway) or wasn't aware of it. Of course, AG opinion says a firearm in a holster isn't brandishing, but again, the court may not agree.
-
http://www.ag.state.mi.us/opinion/datafiles/2000s/op10195.htm (http://www.ag.state.mi.us/opinion/datafiles/2000s/op10195.htm)
"A reading of all the words contained in section 5o(1)(f) of the Act supports the conclusion that the Legislature intended that the term "entertainment facility" constitute a structure or building that has a known seating capacity of 2,500 or more persons, or that has signs above each public entrance stating that the facility has a seating capacity of 2,500 or more persons. Since the Legislature has not required that an entertainment facility be totally self-enclosed, such a facility could consist of a bandshell, amphitheater, or similar structure, provided it has the required, known seating capacity noted above or has appropriate signage above each public entrance indicating a seating capacity of 2,500 or more. This reading of section 5o(1)(f) is supported by the legislative history of 2000 HB 4530, enacted as 2000 PA 231. Both House Legislative Analyses, HB 4530, June 8, 1999, and January 4, 2001, state that HB 4530 would "[p]rohibit a licensee from carrying a concealed weapon in certain public places, such as a school, theater, sports arena, library, or hospital." There is no mention in either bill analysis that an outdoor recreation park, by itself, would constitute a gun-free zone. It is appropriate to rely on the legislative history because of the ambiguity in the statutory language. Luttrell v Dep't of Corr, 421 Mich 93, 103; 365 NW2d 74 (1985).
While the Legislature could certainly have included municipal and other outdoor recreation parks within the Act's list of gun-free zones, it chose not to do so. An entertainment facility having a seating capacity of 2,500 or more persons clearly refers to a building or other structure. Accordingly, if an outdoor recreation park includes a band shell, amphitheater, or similar structure that has the required seating capacity, that portion of the park would constitute a gun-free zone under section 5o(f) of the Act."
-
Thanks for the copy Pat! Based on this this, I would concur that the signs are worth their weight in scrap metal. However, I would also say you can possess a firearm in a district library so what do I know? I am just glad I personally have a backup plan!
-
Detroit zoo owned by city of royal oak so they cannot ban OC or CC.
The Detroit Zoo is actually owned by the City of Detroit, not the city Of Royal Oak.
The seating capacity is not applicable, I believe, as it is not an entertainment facility as described in the AG opinion that addressed the subject.
The park itself doesn't have a seating capacity, unless you count all of the park benches, either. Therefore, unless I enter an entertainment facility upon the park, I will carry as I wish without fear of lawful prosecution.
Do you have an opinion number for that?
-
Detroit zoo owned by city of royal oak so they cannot ban OC or CC.
The Detroit Zoo is actually owned by the City of Detroit, not the city Of Royal Oak.
The seating capacity is not applicable, I believe, as it is not an entertainment facility as described in the AG opinion that addressed the subject.
The park itself doesn't have a seating capacity, unless you count all of the park benches, either. Therefore, unless I enter an entertainment facility upon the park, I will carry as I wish without fear of lawful prosecution.
Do you have an opinion number for that?
Never Mind.
-
I will be ocing during my visit to the zoo tomorrow
-
I will be ocing during my visit to the zoo tomorrow
I always do. No questions or issues to date.
-
Was just stopped by event staff walking from parking to gate stating I cannot carry due to entertainment facility with more than 2500 seats. He also stated his pistol classes were out of date
-
And what did you do?
-
Informed him the correct laws. Handed moc tri-fold and continued on my way into the zoo
-
Way to go!!!
-
any one up for a visit to the zoo tomorrow. i was planing on going today but had to work
-
At Detroit Zoo no issues all day. One woman just about fell as she tried to get the attention of her husband/boyfriend to let him know I was carrying. As I sat down on a bench the just stood there staring at me, until I stared back