Michigan Firearm and Self Defense News

[DeSchaine]

So, we all know that the bills for "constitutional carry" are hung up in committee. A while back, I sent an email to Sen. Margaret O'Brien urging her to urge her fellow senators on the committee to move them along. Here's the response I got today in the mail.

I hate form letters.

 

[DeSchaine]

https://www.saf.org/saf-sues-michigan-agency-over-civil-rights-violations-against-foster-parents/

The Second Amendment Foundation has filed suit in federal court against the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services after caseworkers and a Gogebic County Court judge told William and Jill Johnson that “If you want to care for your grandson you will have to give up some of your constitutional rights.” The Johnsons live in Ontanogan, a town on the northern edge of the U.P.

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...lations-against-foster-parents-300489298.html

http://canadafreepress.com/article/...civil-rights-violations-against-foster-parent

Oddly enough, nothing mentioned about this on MLive. Go figure.

 

[Grapeshot]

https://www.saf.org/saf-sues-michigan-agency-over-civil-rights-violations-against-foster-parents/

The Second Amendment Foundation has filed suit in federal court against the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services after caseworkers and a Gogebic County Court judge told William and Jill Johnson that “If you want to care for your grandson you will have to give up some of your constitutional rights.” The Johnsons live in Ontanogan, a town on the northern edge of the U.P.

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-rele...lations-against-foster-parents-300489298.html

http://canadafreepress.com/article/...civil-rights-violations-against-foster-parent

Oddly enough, nothing mentioned about this on MLive. Go figure.

"...alleging civil rights violations under color of law for enforcing restrictions on the Second Amendment rights of people who want to be foster or adoptive parents.."

 

[DeSchaine]

A PDF of the actual lawsuit filing.

http://freebeacon.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/MICHIGAN-1-Complaint.pdf

Honestly, it seems that the MDHHS caseworker and the Gogebic County judge can't even read let alone follow the law. According to the filing, even the section dealing with firearms says NOTHING about removing or confiscating weapons.

R 400.9415 Hazardous materials. Rule 415. (1) A foster parent shall follow the agency’s hazardous materials policy. (2) Dangerous and hazardous materials, objects, weapons, chemicals, medication, or equipment that may present a risk to children placed in the foster home shall be stored securely and out of the reach of children, as appropriate for the age and functioning level of the children. (3) Firearms are subject to the following conditions: (a) Stored in a locked metal or solid wood gun safe or (b) Triggerlocked and stored without ammunition in a locked area. (c) Ammunition shall be stored in a separate locked location. (d) A handgun shall be registered. Documentation of the registration of the handgun shall be available for review. History: Eff. January 1, 2001, Am. Eff. January 5, 2015.

It's straight out of the rulebook.

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdhhs/CWL-PUB-10_502652_7.pdf

 

[DeSchaine]

https://www.clickondetroit.com/news...trying-to-steal-his-gun-on-detroits-west-side

A 16 yr old kid tried to rob a 61 yr old man in a Detroit corner store. As the teen tried to take his gun, the gentleman turned, drew and shot the teen in the stomach. Kid is in the hospital facing several charges as an adult.

 

[Grapeshot]

https://www.clickondetroit.com/news...trying-to-steal-his-gun-on-detroits-west-side

A 16 yr old kid tried to rob a 61 yr old man in a Detroit corner store. As the teen tried to take his gun, the gentleman turned, drew and shot the teen in the stomach. Kid is in the hospital facing several charges as an adult.

You should post this to True Tales of Self Defense
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?136-True-Tales-of-Self-Defense

 

[DeSchaine]

An interesting article here. But first, take the quiz.

http://www.bridgemi.com/public-sect...chigan-its-complicated-how-much-take-our-quiz

http://www.bridgemi.com/public-sect...weapons-are-there-your-county-interactive-map

 

[Hevymetal]

Excellent teaching device.

Unfortunately their quiz did not take into account the ability to OC in a conceal free zone with a CPL. Other then that good info. I like the county map

 

[DeSchaine]

Holland State Park gathering makes MLive. Not a bad article.

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rap...ry_gun_owners_to_gathe.html#incart_river_home

Also, MOC v. Harbor Beach will be heard in Huron County Court on September 8th at 9am. Bad Axe, MI. The case stems from the city banning employees from carrying to protect themselves, specifically woman working as a crossing guard. The city cited "insurance" reasons and then made outrageous fee demands for the resulting FOIA request from MOC.

 

[DeSchaine]

Arlan Meekhof is apparently a spineless weasel, politically speaking.

http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2017/09/timing_isnt_right_for_permitle.html

"Timing isn't right yet?" Meekof, stop living up to the first part of your last name and grow a pair! We the people don't care what you think is or isn't the right time for a bill. We don't care that you're "sensing his reluctance" even though you haven't discussed the issue with Snyder. GET THE BILLS PASSED! Worry about his signature later. Better yet, plan to OVERRIDE A VETO! The senate can do that!

 

[DeSchaine]

And we have another installment in the "Judicial Idiocy" category. The MOC v. Harbor Beach hearing was today, and was summarily tossed out by Judge Prill. Among the myriad of stupid reasons was that MOC "had not paid Harbor Beach's deposit, and therefore are not entitled to challenge the fees in court."

Of course, MOC's lawyers have already drafted and filed a motion for rehearing. Found here: https://media.miopencarry.org/litig...uit/2017-09-08 Motion for Reconsideration.pdf

 

[DeSchaine]

Came across an interesting page on the MSP website while looking up some information.

CPL Annual Reports

These reports are VERY detailed and contain a wealth of information suitable for use in Pro 2nd Amendment arguments. It breaks down the applications, suspensions and revocations, and reasons for each. It also shows revenue and expenditures from the CPL application process, and shows the actual cost by county per application processed. Spoiler: it's probably a lot less than what you paid.

Also included is the latest monthly report which is less clear in it's data set but nonetheless carries in it some impressive numbers.

 

[DeSchaine]

MGO/Wong v Ann Arbor and MOC/Herman v Clio have been granted leave to argue their cases to the Michigan Supreme Court. Cases will be heard on the same day, but have not yet been scheduled.

http://publicdocs.courts.mi.gov:81/SCT/PUBLIC/ORDERS/155204_43_01.pdf

 

[OC4me]

R 400.9415 Hazardous materials. Rule 415. (1) A foster parent shall follow the agency’s hazardous materials policy. (2) Dangerous and hazardous materials, objects, weapons, chemicals, medication, or equipment that may present a risk to children placed in the foster home shall be stored securely and out of the reach of children, as appropriate for the age and functioning level of the children. (3) Firearms are subject to the following conditions: (a) Stored in a locked metal or solid wood gun safe or (b) Triggerlocked and stored without ammunition in a locked area. (c) Ammunition shall be stored in a separate locked location. (d) A handgun shall be registered. Documentation of the registration of the handgun shall be available for review. History: Eff. January 1, 2001, Am. Eff. January 5, 2015.
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdhhs/CWL-PUB-10_502652_7.pdf

I believe that 'stored' as used in 3(a, b, c) above ought to be interpreted not as an outright ban on 'using' said firearm (i.e. carrying for self-defense is a 'use', just as is hunting, target practicing, cleaning - all 'uses' seemingly allowed even by the statute) but merely requirements for how the firearm/ammo must be 'stored' (when not in 'use'). This was my personal conclusion arrived at some time ago when I looked into the possibility of my family being foster parents. Of course, the state bureaucrats would naturally adopt the most prohibitive interpretation, such is the nature of those in power. Does anyone think that my more liberal interpretation of the same rule is a colorable argument?

After all, could it be said that the regulation prohibits the 'use' of household chemicals and prescription medications? Obviously not, so logic would have it that firearms needn't always be 'stored', hence the regulation is more reasonably read as requirements for how the listed items must be stored when not in use and not as an outright ban on the lawful carry of firearms for self-defense as contemplated in Article I, Sec. 6 of our State Constitution.