House Bill 4975 of 2019 - Michigan Legislature
www.legislature.mi.gov
I haven't searched the forum to see if this story was posted anywhere else, but I do not see it posted in this subforum.
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Michigan Bill Seeks To Hold Government and Businesses Liable For Shootings in Gun Free Zones
- Thread starter protias
- Start date
www.legislature.mi.gov
I haven't searched the forum to see if this story was posted anywhere else, but I do not see it posted in this subforum.
OC for ME
Regular Member
Lawmaker Wants To Make Gun-Free Zones Liable If Someone Hurt
Bills would remove governmental immunity, make private zone owners responsible for securitywww.michigancapitolconfidential.com
Reads like a "defend the bureaucracy at all cost" piece of legislation. Also, research "unfunded mandate."
No criminal penalty for not complying with the law. "Adequate" is not defined. This will increase the cost of doing business in
I suppose it is a good first step in the right direction if you think holding individuals liable for infringing upon our inalienable rights is the correct path vs. working to repeal prior restraints on our inalienable rights.
...though...irony? The sovereign to hold the sovereign accountable...good luck with that. The sovereign ignores the "law of the land" now, what makes anyone think another law will change this.
Why does the government exempt itself from this proposed law?
Sec. 6b. The immunity provided by this act does not apply to 1liability of a governmental agency relating to a gun-free or 2weapon-free zone under section 40 of 1846 RS 66, MCL 554.140.
Sec. 6b. The immunity provided by this act does not apply to 1liability of a governmental agency relating to a gun-free or 2weapon-free zone under section 40 of 1846 RS 66, MCL 554.140.
OC for ME
Regular Member
I suspect that, without gaining any success navigating MI's crappy website for RS and MCLs, court houses, cop shops, jails and juvies are exempt...I could be wrong...
color of law
Accomplished Advocate
Will this make Michigan purer?
Ken56
Regular Member
You have the right to NOT patronize.....that is the fly in this ointment.
. The opposite fly is often one does not have the ability or choice not to patronize, which pretty much eliminates fly no 1 from the jar.
Notice how the government entities are exempt? How are you able to not "patronize" those entities?
Ken56
Regular Member
Both observations are correct and I can agree with that. Sometimes we have no choice because there are no other options. So, do you conceal and keep your mouth shut when patronizing a private business? That is a personal choice but I usually obey the law myself, conduct my business quickly and get out. Government is unique because well, it's the government. Right or wrong they are exempt. Bottom line is those who post gun free zones in private businesses will never be held responsible like this bill wishes to do.
this nation's citizen's are and have been completely estranged as we can't hold any politician, jurist, or LE responsible for their action(s)...abrogated away little by little...why in the world would businesses not enjoy those same privileges?