Michigan Saftey Check Over?

[Gray Peterson]

Lemme say from the outset that I don't like the idea of registration. A lot of people are angry and upset at registration staying in the bill. Lemme give you a real life example of how this bill could have helped.

About 5 or so years ago, Angel Shmaya, the founder of KeepAndBearArms.com was arrested for possessing unregistered pistols in Michigan without going through a safety inspection. The previous law could have put in prison for over a YEAR (he possessed several pistols) due to the 90 day sentence possibly running consecutively. He plead out.

If the same thing happened in January of 2009, he would have been fined $250 in CIVIL FINES for each pistol. He would have never been subjected to any sort of jailtime whatsoever, and he would not have lost his handguns.

I don't see how this is a downside. Granted, the registration still exists. It sucks that it does. Given the above facts, what did we really lose with this bill?

 

[Trebor]

The early drafts of this bill were much better. At one point there was a proposal to eliminate the the purchase permit and safety inspection totally.

Unfortunately, there was not the political support to get that bill passed. Compromises were made to get a bill that would pass with the goal to at least eliminate the requirement to have to bring the gun back to the PD for the "Safety Inspection."

Personally, I think too much was given away during the process and the people working on the bill and supporting the bill should have stopped at some point and said, "No, there have been too many things added and we can't support this bill anymore." But, when you are that close to the process it's hard to just walk away, and I think they took what they could get, even though that may have been a mistake.

Obviously, the people who worked to get rid of the "Safety Inspection" requirement disagree and saw that goal as being worth the changes. I don't think it was worth it this time around, personally.

 

[Trebor]

I don't see how this is a downside. Granted, the registration still exists. It sucks that it does. Given the above facts, what did we really lose with this bill?

If all the bill did was eliminate having to bring the gun in for the "Safety Inspection" and it STOPPED there, it would be a good bill. Granted, it wouldn't be everything we ever wanted, and the whole Michigan pistol registration scheme would still be pretty intact, but it WOULD be an improvement over the current situation and we could try to get rid of the "purchase permit" at some future date. That's called an incremental improvement and it would be fine by me.

The *problem* with this bill is that it didn't stop at just eliminating the requirement to bring the gun in for a "safety inspection." Instead they added a bunch of new burdens to gun owners in the process. Up until now there has NEVER been any law that required a pistol owner to carry his "Green card" with him with the pistol. Now it is required for the first 30 days. That's a step back.

Also, the creation of the database is a step back.

Not to mention that now we evidently have to tell *security guards* we are armed! WTH is up with that!

So, while I agree that you can't always get everying in one big change (like eliminating the whole purchase permit and safety inspection completely) and that small steps are necessary and do work, in this particular case the steps were STEPS IN THE WRONG DIRECTION.

They put in so much unpalitable stuff in this bill that anyone who supported the concept originally should have stepped back and said, "Whoa, this is not what we wanted and we can no longer support this." In my opinion that didn't happen because the people who worked to get "registration reform" passed did work very hard for an improvement and then got so involved in the process and so close that they couldn't get the distance they needed to realize that the final result was a BAD BILL and that we would have been better off with nothing then with this law. Granted, I'm sure the people who worked on this have a different opinion, as is their right, but I'm calling it like I see it.

 

[bobbarker]

I just don't understand I guess. My 'Safety' inspection and Registration (One and the same!) happened at the same time. Same amount of trips, same amount of time. This Bill changes NOTHING, with the exception of being able to Mail in your registration. This feels about 10% away from Pointless to me.

 

[Tyris]

I recall making a trip to get the purchase permit, and another for the "inspection".

That is 2 trips.

Now it is one. Are things done differently in your neck of the woods?

-T

 

[Gunnerpalace]

Now it is required for the first 30 days.

Some of the posters here (from what I read) carry the receipts of their firearms they take to the range in case they get pulled over by the cops,

I am starting to think it was worthless for me to post this.

 

[Gray Peterson]

Not to mention that now we evidently have to tell *security guards* we are armed! WTH is up with that!

You imply that a mall security guard can flat out ask you for your CPL and/or pistol registration. The only security guards that are considered peace officers under that statute are security officers who are EMPLOYED BY THE STATE, only in the cities of Lansing and Windsor Township. Probably state building security guards.

The registration database already existed in a different form.

The fine for not doing the registration is a $250 civil fine, instead of 90 days in jail plus $1000 in fines for each pistol.

I'll be posting an analysis of the bill in more thorough detail later. Again, I don't really have a personal dog in this fight because I'm a Washingtonian, but I don't like it when inaccurate information about a law spreads.

 

[Prince Yamato]

A safety check wouldn't pass in light of Heller, registration does.

 

[Trebor]

Yep, I'll admit that I didn't know the details about the "security guard" part of the bill earlier.

Still, I live in this state, this bill really does not help us as much as it should for the other changes it contains.