Michigan's Universal Background Checks - Please Explain

[Cliff Roberts]

I understand this may only be directed to a minority of THR users and nothing in this post should be used as legal advice. So, with that said, I ask for someone who is smarter than me to please explain the new Universal background check system that has been recently signed into Michigan State Law as it pertains to private transfers and CPL holders. After reading the bill, it looks like FFL transfers remain unchanged (as verified by some ffl buddies). In regard to private sales, it would appear that non CPL holders are required go to the county clerk/sheriff's office to submit to a NICS check and obtain a notorized purchase permit for any private-party purchase of a legally defined pistol (no change from before), shotgun, any-other-weapon (like a Shockwave), or rifle. This is to be used within 30 days of it's aquisition or a new one will have to be acquired. If purchasing a pistol, it would appear an RI-060 still needs to be filled and turned into the local sheriff's office (or county clerk or MSP depending on your county) like it always has. From what I read (and where I need further clarification), it would appear that a CPL still acts as a defacto purchase permit for private party transfers. Does this look correct to anyone else who has read the new law? It looked to have some new verbiage regarding "antique" firearms as well as tasers. Does anyone know how this will affect the sale/transfer of muzzle loaders and EMDDs?

 

[Japle]

My question about private sales is, how would anyone other than the people involved in the sale ever know it took place?
Police get involved when there's been a complaint or when they see a crime being committed. In the case of a private sale, who's going to complain? Who's going to report the "crime".
Are all guns registered in Michigan? If a gun isn't registered, how would the police know the sale took place?

 

[Cliff Roberts]

That's kinda the rub, isn't it? One of the reasons why I wanted to seek some clarification is because some of these actions seem like a "scout's honor" scenario. Obviously, with pistols, it's easy enough to check to see if a purchaser has a concealed pistol license (CPL) or if the had a NICS recently performed (assuming it's not a straw purchase and the purchaser turned in his or her CI-060). However, if you purchase a rifle privately, it doesn't seem like there's a whole lot to prove that a purchase was made unless you're expected to ALSO fill out a firearm sales receipt for a rifle and the state government intends to place the owness of record maintenance on the purchaser and seller. And to answer the latter question, only pistols are required to register. That said, I assume the end goal for the current powers is to require registration for all legally defined firearms soooo.... yeah.

 

[bigpower491]

That's kinda the rub, isn't it? One of the reasons why I wanted to seek some clarification is because some of these actions seem like a "scout's honor" scenario. Obviously, with pistols, it's easy enough to check to see if a purchaser has a concealed pistol license (CPL) or if the had a NICS recently performed (assuming it's not a straw purchase and the purchaser turned in his or her CI-060). However, if you purchase a rifle privately, it doesn't seem like there's a whole lot to prove that a purchase was made unless you're expected to ALSO fill out a firearm sales receipt for a rifle and the state government intends to place the owness of record maintenance on the purchaser and seller. And to answer the latter question, only pistols are required to register. That said, I assume the end goal for the current powers is to require registration for all legally defined firearms soooo.... yeah.

It is a bit tough to understand how they're going to go about it. Back a few yrs ago I know that we had to go to our local LEA and get a purchase permit for a pistol. Sometime after 2012 they scrapped that, and you just went to your LGS, did your background check, and took your sales record back to your local agency. The way I'm seeing it, you now(actually, next yr, as they didn't have enough support in the legislature for it to take effect in 90 days) have to do this to purchase from a private citizen, both pistol and long gun, and I believe that is going to apply to CPL holders too for private pistol purchase. But you bring up very good points. Handguns have had to be registered since the early 70s(I believe), where as our long guns have not. So yes, that begs the question, how do they track all of that for something that was never registered in the first place, and yes, their end game is total registration for everything.
Reckon we'll see how it plays out, but as far as I understand it today, this won't happen til after the first of the yr. Someone feel fee to correct me if I'm wrong on any of this

 

[Bartojc]

Here is a "cheat sheet" I found on MGO. Also a link for a downloadable copy

https://www.migunowners.org/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=121018&d=1681671308

 

[Cliff Roberts]

@Bartojc this is a ridiculously useful resource and you, sir, are greatly appreciated for sharing it! As a CPL holder, I don't think I'm a fan of relying on the seller to turn in the pistol sales record. I feel like that is my obligation as a purchaser and, moreover, I don't always trust that the seller (at least in a private transaction) will complete this in a timely fashion. Although, I guess I'm a little spoiled as I work right across the street from the sheriff's office - I can take my fat stack of 060s over on a lunch break. All that being said, if you're a firearms aficionado (or at least do a lot of buying and selling), it looks like there's never been a better time to get your CPL

 

[F-111 John]

As a CPL holder, I don't think I'm a fan of relying on the seller to turn in the pistol sales record. I feel like that is my obligation as a purchaser and, moreover, I don't always trust that the seller (at least in a private transaction) will complete this in a timely fashion.

I believe this change was made to the "Universal Background Check" bill after it was learned that the Michigan State University gunman Anthony Dwayne McRae had legally purchased the handgun he used in the shootings, but failed to turn in the registration form to law enforcement for processing.

I fail to see what difference it would have made had he fully complied with the Michigan handgun registration process, since he did pass a NICS check at an FFL prior to the sale. But because he didn't turn in his completed registration form to local police, the legislators changed the requirement to put the burden on the seller (who in most cases will be an FFL and supposedly more trustworthy to perform this task?)

 

[Spats McGee]

Anyone got a link to the actual statute or bill? That would help this discussion a lot.

 

[Cliff Roberts]

I believe this was the resource I was using: http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(ny...g.aspx?page=GetObject&objectname=2023-HB-4138

 

[F-111 John]

Anyone got a link to the actual statute or bill? That would help this discussion a lot.

Here is the MI House Bill 4138 which tracks its iterations:

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(5l...g.aspx?page=GetObject&objectname=2023-HB-4138

The bill as introduced said:

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2023-2024/billintroduced/House/pdf/2023-HIB-4138.pdf

The purchaser shall sign the record. The seller may retain 1 copy of the record. The purchaser shall receive 2 copies of the record and, if the firearm is a pistol, forward 1 copy to the police department of the city, village, or township in which the purchaser resides, or, if the purchaser does not reside in a city, village, or township having a police department, to the county sheriff, within 10 days following the purchase or acquisition. The purchaser shall return of the copy to the police department or county sheriff may be made in person or may be made by first-class mail or certified mail sent within the 10-day period to the proper address of the police department or county sheriff.
​

The bill as passed by the House said:

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2023-2024/billengrossed/House/pdf/2023-HEBH-4138.pdf

The purchaser shall sign the record. The seller may retain 1 copy of the record, . The purchaser shall receive 2 copies shall provide a copy of the record to the purchaser, and, if the firearm is a pistol, shall forward 1 copy to the police department of the city, village, or township in which the purchaser seller resides, or, if the purchaser seller does not reside in a city, village, or township having a police department, to the county sheriff, within not later than 10 days following the purchase or acquisition. The seller shall return of the copy to the police department or county sheriff may be made in person or may be made by first-class mail or certified mail sent within in the 10- day period to the proper address of the police department or county sheriff.​

And the bill as signed by the governor read:

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2023-2024/publicact/pdf/2023-PA-0019.pdf

The purchaser shall sign the record. The seller may retain 1 copy of the record, shall provide a copy of the record to the purchaser, and, if the firearm is a pistol, shall forward 1 copy to the police department of the city, village, or township in which the seller resides, or, if the seller does not reside in a city, village, or township having a police department, to the county sheriff, not later than 10 days following the purchase or acquisition. The seller shall return the copy to the police department or county sheriff in person or by first-class mail or certified mail sent in the 10-day period to the proper address of the police department or county sheriff.
​

 

[JumboJVT]

So, under these Rules, why would anyone transfer a firearm other than through an FFL? Nothing like setting the table for non-compliance.