Michigan Right To Carry A Gun

[sealybobo]

The michigan legislature is voting on doing away with the ccw law. I hope it passes. Why am I a felon if I'm carrying a gun just because I didn't take a stupid 2 day gun safety class? If I'm legal to own a gun I should be legal to carry it.

The criminals aren't detered by this law, only busy law abiding citizens.

You know the cops don't want everyone carrying. Shootings might go up and accidents will happen, but I don't want to take a 2 day class.

Stay tuned. Keep your fingers crossed. I always worry when I transport my guns up north hunting. And when I go to Detroit I'd love to take my gun

 

[Bob Blaylock]

The michigan legislature is voting on doing away with the ccw law. I hope it passes. Why am I a felon if I'm carrying a gun just because I didn't take a stupid 2 day gun safety class? If I'm legal to own a gun I should be legal to carry it.

That's how wrong-wing statists think.

They got it passed into federal law, that if you've ever been convicted of a felony, then you cannot possess a gun. Never mind that there is nothing in the Constitution that allows the government to discriminate among free citizens for any such reason with regard to essential Constitutional rights.

So now, they demand that you get government's permission to exercise an essential right, and if you exercise that right without such permission, then you're a felon.

They've created an intentional catch-22. By exercising a right, you fulfill their illegal excuse to deny you that right.

 

[sealybobo]

The michigan legislature is voting on doing away with the ccw law. I hope it passes. Why am I a felon if I'm carrying a gun just because I didn't take a stupid 2 day gun safety class? If I'm legal to own a gun I should be legal to carry it.

That's how wrong-wing statists think.

They got it passed into federal law, that if you've ever been convicted of a felony, then you cannot possess a gun. Never mind that there is nothing in the Constitution that allows the government to discriminate among free citizens for any such reason with regard to essential Constitutional rights.

So now, they demand that you get government's permission to exercise an essential right, and if you exercise that right without such permission, then you're a felon.

They've created an intentional catch-22. By exercising a right, you fulfill their illegal excuse to deny you that right.

They know that 2 day class is the only thing stopping us all from carrying, and I don't appreciate the obstacle.

Here's another one. In Michigan you can smoke weed but you have to go to a sham doctor (very simple), but you have to go lie to him and tell him you get back or head aches, he gives you the OK, you pay $200 and you get a 2 year card. You have to pay again in 2 years. The only reason I did it is my "caregiver" needs patients to grow as much weed as he does. He paid the $200 for me. Anyways, why should I have to go through all that?

 

[sealybobo]

The michigan legislature is voting on doing away with the ccw law. I hope it passes. Why am I a felon if I'm carrying a gun just because I didn't take a stupid 2 day gun safety class? If I'm legal to own a gun I should be legal to carry it.

That's how wrong-wing statists think.

They got it passed into federal law, that if you've ever been convicted of a felony, then you cannot possess a gun. Never mind that there is nothing in the Constitution that allows the government to discriminate among free citizens for any such reason with regard to essential Constitutional rights.

So now, they demand that you get government's permission to exercise an essential right, and if you exercise that right without such permission, then you're a felon.

They've created an intentional catch-22. By exercising a right, you fulfill their illegal excuse to deny you that right.

New legislation would allow concealed carry without a permit

 

[2aguy]

The michigan legislature is voting on doing away with the ccw law. I hope it passes. Why am I a felon if I'm carrying a gun just because I didn't take a stupid 2 day gun safety class? If I'm legal to own a gun I should be legal to carry it.

The criminals aren't detered by this law, only busy law abiding citizens.

You know the cops don't want everyone carrying. Shootings might go up and accidents will happen, but I don't want to take a 2 day class.

Stay tuned. Keep your fingers crossed. I always worry when I transport my guns up north hunting. And when I go to Detroit I'd love to take my gun

Some cops don't want people to carry...the majority don't mind.

And if someone had the resources they should take the 2 day training class to court...it is no different than when the democrats used Poll Taxes and literacy tests to keep blacks from voting.....

 

[2aguy]

The michigan legislature is voting on doing away with the ccw law. I hope it passes. Why am I a felon if I'm carrying a gun just because I didn't take a stupid 2 day gun safety class? If I'm legal to own a gun I should be legal to carry it.

That's how wrong-wing statists think.

They got it passed into federal law, that if you've ever been convicted of a felony, then you cannot possess a gun. Never mind that there is nothing in the Constitution that allows the government to discriminate among free citizens for any such reason with regard to essential Constitutional rights.

So now, they demand that you get government's permission to exercise an essential right, and if you exercise that right without such permission, then you're a felon.

They've created an intentional catch-22. By exercising a right, you fulfill their illegal excuse to deny you that right.

New legislation would allow concealed carry without a permit

I think this article points out how things should work...

Glenn Reynolds: How gun laws put the innocent on trial

ottrol noted that crimes like carrying or owning a pistol without a license are what the law has traditionally termed malum prohibitum — that is, things that are wrong only because they are prohibited. (The contrast is with the other traditional category, malum in se, those things, like rape, robbery, and murder, that are wrong in themselves.)

Traditionally, penalties for malum prohibitum acts were generally light, since the conduct that the laws governed wasn’t wrong in itself. But modern American law often treats even obscure and technical violations of gun laws as felonies and —Cottrol noted — prosecutors often go out of their way to prosecute these crimes more vigorously even than traditional crimes like rape or murder.


If it were up to me, I’d find it a violation of the due process clause to treat violation of regulatory statutes as a felony. Historically, only the most serious crimes — typically carrying the death penalty — were felonies.Nowadays, though, we designate all sorts of trivial crimes, such as possessing an eagle feather, as felonies. This has the effect of empowering police and prosecutors at the expense of citizens, since it’s easy to find a felony if you look hard enough, and few citizens have the courage of a veteran like Cort, who went to trial anyway. Most will plead to something.

Meanwhile, on the gun front, I think we need federal civil rights legislation to protect citizens who make innocent mistakes. Federal law already defines who is allowed to possess firearms. Under Congress’s civil rights powers (gun ownership and carrying, after all, are protected under the Second Amendment), I think we need federal legislation limiting the maximum penalty a state can assess for possessing or carrying a firearm on the part of someone allowed to own a gun under federal law to a $500 fine. That would let states regulate reasonably, without permitting this sort of injustice.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

I think this article points out how things should work...

Glenn Reynolds: How gun laws put the innocent on trial

·
·
·​

I think we need federal legislation limiting the maximum penalty a state can assess for possessing or carrying a firearm on the part of someone allowed to own a gun under federal law to a $500 fine. That would let states regulate reasonably, without permitting this sort of injustice.​

One has to wonder how much of a penalty Mr. Reynolds thinks a state should be allowed to impose on a resident for belonging to the wrong church, or expressing an opinion that the state does not like.

 

[jon_berzerk]

I think this article points out how things should work...

Glenn Reynolds: How gun laws put the innocent on trial

·
·
·​

I think we need federal legislation limiting the maximum penalty a state can assess for possessing or carrying a firearm on the part of someone allowed to own a gun under federal law to a $500 fine. That would let states regulate reasonably, without permitting this sort of injustice.​

One has to wonder how much of a penalty Mr. Reynolds thinks a state should be allowed to impose on a resident for belonging to the wrong church, or expressing an opinion that the state does not like.

be careful what you wonder about

wasnt too long ago that no one would have believed

that it is ok in the United States for the government

to force its citizens to buy a product from a private company

or face serious consequences

we are just a hop skip and a jump away from what you wonder

to become a reality