# Michigan Gun Owners takes on Lansing



## tallbear (May 18, 2005)

*For immediate Release*


*Michigan Gun Owners takes on Lansing*
*
*
On March 8th., the Ingram County Circuit Court will hear argument on the restraining order filed by the Capital Area District Library against Michigan Open Carry &#8220;to protect its patrons&#8221; from someone that isn&#8217;t breaking any laws as evident by the police not arresting anyone.


Michigan Gun Owners, a statewide non-profit organization, could not stand by and let this injustice go unchallenged. They too will be in court on March 8th. to stand with Michigan Open Carry in defending the rights of ALL gun owners in Michigan. 



The Capital Area District Library needs to use some of the books on its own shelves. Look in the law section to find the state laws that cover where a person can lawfully carry a firearm before wasting the cities money and the city police department&#8217;s valuable time.


When the Lansing area library wanted the civil right to open carry to mean &#8220;not here&#8221;, it became obvious to gun owners in Michigan that they didn&#8217;t know the law. 



When they called the Lansing police to stop those following the law to be arrested for open carrying, it was obvious the library didn&#8217;t know the law. 



When the Lansing police stopped coming to their call about someone lawfully open carrying at the library, that same library filed a restraining order in court to keep those &#8220;obeying the law&#8221; from entering the library for any reason.


&#8220;Michigan Gun Owners throughout the state will stand united in protecting the right to bear arms protected by our state constitution&#8221; says Mike Thiede, Public Relations Director for Michigan Gun Owners. &#8220;When local units of government try to take our rights from us, they will find themselves on the wrong side of the law and find Michigan Gun Owners on the right side of the law&#8221;.




_Michigan Gun Owners was established in 2002 with the mission to educate the public and encourage grass roots activism on a state-wide level through various outreach programs and a popular community forum on the Internet. Michigan Gun Owners has become Michigan&#8217;s fastest growing, grass roots gun rights advocacy organization. 

To learn more about Michigan Gun Owners, please visit http://www.migunowners.org ._


----------



## Bucket-Back (Feb 8, 2004)

tallbear said:


> *For immediate Release*
> 
> 
> *Michigan Gun Owners takes on Lansing*
> ...


Not mentioned is the part of "Lil Freak" open carrying a shotgun into the library , Michigan Open Carry members open carrying holstered pistols in the children's section freaking out the soccer Mom's . All this while a bill is being considered to eliminate Pistol Free Zones 's , which has lost most of it's chance for passing since this BS Childs play.
Then the lawyers who advocate pushing the envelope , and telling people to do their part and contribute and make a sacrifice and donate money for the cause . They are not making a sacrifice and representing the cause pro-bono , but are getting rich and say don't discuss the case in public , but say send me more money , because everyone else has to pay for someones else Fudge Up and the lawyers give advice designed to make them wealthy


----------



## tallbear (May 18, 2005)

Bucket-Back said:


> Not mentioned is the part of "Lil Freak" open carrying a shotgun into the library , Michigan Open Carry members open carrying holstered pistols in the children's section freaking out the soccer Mom's . All this while a bill is being considered to eliminate Pistol Free Zones 's , which has lost most of it's chance for passing since this BS Childs play.


The police responded to a number of calls from the library and DID NOT arrest anyone, so who was REALLY in the wrong?



> Then the lawyers who advocate pushing the envelope , and telling people to do their part and contribute and make a sacrifice and donate money for the cause . They are not making a sacrifice and representing the cause pro-bono , but are getting rich and say don't discuss the case in public , but say send me more money , because everyone else has to pay for someones else Fudge Up and the lawyers give advice designed to make them wealthy


Unless you have discussed this with the attorneys in the case you have no idea what the fee is or if some of their time is volunteered. I do and won't discuss it on a public forum. But, thanks for bring up these valuable points.


----------



## Bucket-Back (Feb 8, 2004)

All the legal fees should be donated , as they are part of the situation IMHO


----------



## tallbear (May 18, 2005)

Bucket-Back said:


> All the legal fees should be donated ,* as they are part of the situation* IMHO


Sorry, I'm not following you on that one.


----------



## alex-v (Mar 24, 2005)

I think that Bucket is saying that lawyers caused the problems so they should donate their time and experience in compensation.



> All this while a bill is being considered to eliminate Pistol Free Zones 's , which has lost most of it's chance for passing since this BS Childs play.


This is based on what??


----------



## Bucket-Back (Feb 8, 2004)

alex-v said:


> I think that Bucket is saying that lawyers caused the problems so they should donate their time and experience in compensation.
> 
> 
> This is based on what??


My Gut , good to see others can read my feelings


----------



## jlcrss (May 17, 2006)

MGO open carry people/Michigan Open carry are nothing but a bunch of morons. They are doing nothing to help gun rights. They are actually making it worse.


----------



## beervo2 (May 7, 2006)

jlcrss said:


> MGO open carry people/Michigan Open carry are nothing but a bunch of morons. They are doing nothing to help gun rights. They are actually making it worse.


I agree, get a permit & quit attracting attention to yourself..JMO..

Mike


----------



## mvd (Apr 9, 2010)

2nd that. Get a permit. Nobody cares how tough you think you are because your broadcasting the fact you have a gun. I guess I dont understand why it is so important to have it out for the whole world to see unless your trying to look the part?

_OutdoorHub Mobile, the information engine of the outdoors_


----------



## dogjaw (Nov 8, 2000)

Why get a permit for something that is legal and permitted specifically in the Michigan Constitution. As a permit holder, you give up rights, not gain any.


----------



## mudvr1212 (Nov 3, 2008)

What about the time when you're under 21 but over 18? Are they not allowed to defend themselves? Why should their rights be taken away?

Permits...you guys are funny! A few more that think our right is still a right although you have to PAY for it.


----------



## Bucket-Back (Feb 8, 2004)

mudvr1212 said:


> What about the time when you're under 21 but over 18? Are they not allowed to defend themselves? Why should their rights be taken away?
> 
> Permits...you guys are funny! A few more that think our right is still a right although you have to PAY for it.


This isn't the "Open Carry" forum , you're lost and the Soccer Moms are scared , and we pay the price also


----------



## jlcrss (May 17, 2006)

Bucket-Back said:


> This isn't the "Open Carry" forum , you're lost and the Soccer Moms are scared , and we pay the price also


I agree with you. This whole open carry argument is lost on me. The only people it seems to draw is the nuts. If I am carrying I don't advertise it. Its not necessary.


----------



## tallbear (May 18, 2005)

Does it make any sense that the "library" is the one breaking the law, and the "gun owners" are the ones being prosecuted? Take the "emotions" out of it and look at the "law".


----------



## Supa Roosta (Jul 1, 2003)

I've visited the Open Carry forum a couple of times to see what it offered.

The one thing that became glaringly apparent were there were several on there that seemed to have an agenda.
The agenda was to push the limit of "Open Carry" to the point of confrontation.
Once this was accomplished the "Victims" would promptly post their experience as some sort of victory, and call to arms anyone who would be dumb enough to follow.

My final impression was the site was soiled by a several whacko's who had more false bravado than sense.

I see these morons as a liability, rather than Freedom Fighters as they portray themselves as....


----------



## mudvr1212 (Nov 3, 2008)

tallbear said:


> Does it make any sense that the "library" is the one breaking the law, and the "gun owners" are the ones being prosecuted? Take the "emotions" out of it and look at the "law".


Ding Ding Ding! Follow the law, not your emotions!

Let me guess though, I'm the one that's lost...:help:


----------



## Rootsy (Nov 1, 2006)

I wish to carry for my personal protection and that of my family. I am sure a lot of others do also. With the economy the way it is I just cannot afford the $300 or so it is going to cost me to become a card carrying "Good Guy". Maybe you fellows who are CPL only proponents would be willing to pay my way to exercise a God given right? I am sure I can put together a good list of others you can fund also. 

Maybe every hunter that wishes to carry a sidearm should also be "permitted" and forced to carry concealed. Wouldn't want to upset the bunny rabbits... 

FUDDS... 

This reply in no way condones some of the OC activities... Just pointing out the absurdity of the CPL "pay to play" system.


----------



## mudvr1212 (Nov 3, 2008)

Rootsy said:


> I wish to carry for my personal protection and that of my family. I am sure a lot of others do also. With the economy the way it is I just cannot afford the $300 or so it is going to cost me to become a card carrying "Good Guy". Maybe you fellows who are CPL only proponents would be willing to pay my way to exercise a God given right? I am sure I can put together a good list of others you can fund also.
> 
> Maybe every hunter that wishes to carry a sidearm should also be "permitted" and forced to carry concealed. Wouldn't want to upset the bunny rabbits...
> 
> ...


 
Amen friend! Paying for a "right" doesn't sound like much of a right to me...BUT atleast the women and children won't get scared!


----------



## jlcrss (May 17, 2006)

Rootsy said:


> I wish to carry for my personal protection and that of my family. I am sure a lot of others do also. With the economy the way it is I just cannot afford the $300 or so it is going to cost me to become a card carrying "Good Guy". Maybe you fellows who are CPL only proponents would be willing to pay my way to exercise a God given right? I am sure I can put together a good list of others you can fund also.
> 
> Maybe every hunter that wishes to carry a sidearm should also be "permitted" and forced to carry concealed. Wouldn't want to upset the bunny rabbits...
> 
> ...


Ok so start fighting the costs of having a pistol permit. Go after the legislation for requirements of CPL. Don't go wearing your six shooter looking for a confrontation. Thats not how things get done. The open carry folks are having an adverse affect on people's views regarding gun ownership/carry. They are making it look like we are nothing but a bunch of nuts.


----------



## jlcrss (May 17, 2006)

Supa Roosta said:


> I've visited the Open Carry forum a couple of times to see what it offered.
> 
> The one thing that became glaringly apparent were there were several on there that seemed to have an agenda.
> The agenda was to push the limit of "Open Carry" to the point of confrontation.
> ...


Completely agree.


----------



## JimP (Feb 8, 2002)

Parading around exhibiting your right is impractical for the actual exercising of that right for it's intended purpose...defense.

IMO, the best defense is a covert offence...
Hence "Concealed carry".

When/if your opportunity presents itself - you have the advantage of surprise...
You know what you have, what you're going to do and when, the bad guy doesn't.
You can assess cover, timing, innocents, and look for misdirection.
If the bad guy is withdrawing without harm, no need to escalate _at that time._
Open carry, makes you the first target and object of attention and/or disarming...giving the bad guy another weapon. You have escalated the situation...and are less likely to have any opportunity at all, once they've got to drop on you.


----------



## mudvr1212 (Nov 3, 2008)

jimp said:


> Parading around exhibiting your right is impractical for the actual exercising of that right for it's intended purpose...defense.
> 
> IMO, the best defense is a covert offence...
> Hence "Concealed carry".
> ...


Would you happen to have a cite to prove that this is true? Or would it be just your opinion? I'm pretty sure there are many hundreds of thousands of people that openly carry their weapon daily and I haven't heard or seen a story that John Q Citizen had this happen to them.


----------



## NoWake (Feb 7, 2006)

The more people abuse a right with all of this in your face nonsense, the more likely we will all lose that same right. 

If an open carry event doesn't draw enough of a spectacle with just holstered handguns, it seems they have to amp it up with ARs and AKs on their shoulders. They keep pushing until they get the confrontation they want. Eventually it will put us all in an epic fight for our freedoms which could have been avoided with a little common sense.


----------



## alex-v (Mar 24, 2005)

To attack a gun right is the first step to taking the same side as the anti-gun group.

The anti-gun crowd wants more restrictions until they get their ultimate goal. Start with getting rid of open carry and then work on making concealed carry more restrictive. Why join their side just because you do not like open carry.


----------



## jlcrss (May 17, 2006)

alex-v said:


> To attack a gun right is the first step to taking the same side as the anti-gun group.
> 
> The anti-gun crowd wants more restrictions until they get their ultimate goal. Start with getting rid of open carry and then work on making concealed carry more restrictive. Why join their side just because you do not like open carry.


I don't think anyone is attacking the right to open carry. I don't want any rights that gun owners have taken away. I think the consensus is that the in your face confrontational attitude is doing more harm than good. If someone wants to open carry that is certainly their right, however they keep taking the extremist mentality they are going to shoot themselves in the foot. No pun intended.


----------



## Supa Roosta (Jul 1, 2003)

alex-v said:


> To attack a gun right is the first step to taking the same side as the anti-gun group.
> 
> The anti-gun crowd wants more restrictions until they get their ultimate goal. Start with getting rid of open carry and then work on making concealed carry more restrictive. Why join their side just because you do not like open carry.


If you started policing your own and point out their flawed practices you'd more than likely have the entire gun community behind you.

As it stands, I wouldn't back these jackwagons...

A sporting a Shotgun in a public place, such as a Library is absolutely asinine....


----------



## tallbear (May 18, 2005)

If you look at the court case, you'll see it has less to do with open carry versus concealed carry and everything to do with what is "lawful" in the Lansing library.

Brings to mind that old saying......_'I don't agree with what you say (or do), but I will defend to the death you "right" to say it (or do it).'_

That's where I'm at with this issue. Don't agree with some of the things that have happened, but I believe whole heartedly in what the law says is legal. And whoever tries to take away my rights will find themselves on the wrong side of the law. In this case it is the Lansing Library. Time will prove me right and the Library short a large amount of money used unwisely prosecuting a case on emotion and not the law.


----------



## Supa Roosta (Jul 1, 2003)

tallbear said:


> If you look at the court case, you'll see it has less to do with open carry versus concealed carry and everything to do with what is "lawful" in the Lansing library.
> 
> Brings to mind that old saying......_'I don't agree with what you say (or do), but I will defend to the death you "right" to say it (or do it).'_
> 
> That's where I'm at with this issue. Don't agree with some of the things that have happened, but I believe whole heartedly in what the law says is legal. And whoever tries to take away my rights will find themselves on the wrong side of the law. In this case it is the Lansing Library. Time will prove me right and the Library short a large amount of money used unwisely prosecuting a case on emotion and not the law.


On the opposite side of the coin, Yes, You may win this battle, but the price may come at a higher cost.

You have to understand that every faction has it's fringes.
Whether it be right, or wrong.
You just can't help it.
But what you do with those on the fringe can be the lynch pin in your cause.

Take the Shotgun in a Library scenario.
Joe O/C comes into a Library carrying a Shotgun.
John CC is in the back with his daughter looking at childrens books.
Both are advocates to the extreme for their perspective rights.
Each is equally highly wired to "Protect" themselves, and their rights.
John spots Joe and immediately thinks, what person in their "right mind" would carry a Shotgun into a Public Library?
He draws, and orders Joe to drop the weapon.
Joe thinking, "Screw You, I have every right to carry my weapon as long as I don't conceal it", refuses.
John, double taps and sends him to the ground...

Who is the winner????


----------



## JimP (Feb 8, 2002)

mudvr1212 said:


> Would you happen to have a cite to prove that this is true? Or would it be just your opinion? I'm pretty sure there are many hundreds of thousands of people that openly carry their weapon daily and I haven't heard or seen a story that John Q Citizen had this happen to them.


It is only an opinion, but forged from every day articles and dashboard video in the news. There are over 700,000 police officers in the US.
Dozens of these TRAINED and situation wary LEO's are shot every year, some with their own weapons...
Most by desperate bad guys doing everything they can to protect themselves.

Hypothetically, What happens if Joan Q Citizen assumes that an open carry individual is an LEO and seeks help from them instead of calling 911...is time wasted, are two now at risk?


----------



## tallbear (May 18, 2005)

jimp said:


> It is only an opinion, but forged from every day articles and dashboard video in the news. There are over 700,000 police officers in the US.
> Dozens of these TRAINED and situation wary LEO's are shot every year, some with their own weapons...
> Most by desperate bad guys doing everything they can to protect themselves.
> 
> Hypothetically, What happens if Joan Q Citizen assumes that an open carry individual is an LEO and seeks help from them instead of calling 911...*is time wasted*, are two now at risk?



You kidding right???? Can you give me the "average" response time to a 9-1-1 call in Lansing? Do "you" trust your life to a 9-1-1 call?? You do know "it's the law" the police are NOT responsible for protecting you as decided by the U.S. Supreme Court???


----------



## tallbear (May 18, 2005)

Let me see if I understand what you're saying here.

Because you don't agree with what was done by someone that "no one" has defended (long gun guy), you wish this case to be won by the anti-gun group?




Supa Roosta said:


> On the opposite side of the coin, Yes, You may win this battle, but the price may come at a higher cost.
> 
> You have to understand that every faction has it's fringes.
> Whether it be right, or wrong.
> ...


----------



## Supa Roosta (Jul 1, 2003)

tallbear said:


> Let me see if I understand what you're saying here.
> 
> Because you don't agree with what was done by someone that "no one" has defended (long gun guy), you wish this case to be won by the anti-gun group?


WHAT???

Where'd you get that from.
If you can't comprehend the obvious, then you are part of the problem...


----------



## mudvr1212 (Nov 3, 2008)

jimp said:


> It is only an opinion, but forged from every day articles and dashboard video in the news. There are over 700,000 police officers in the US.
> Dozens of these TRAINED and situation wary LEO's are shot every year, some with their own weapons...
> Most by desperate bad guys doing everything they can to protect themselves.
> 
> Hypothetically, What happens if Joan Q Citizen assumes that an open carry individual is an LEO and seeks help from them instead of calling 911...is time wasted, are two now at risk?


Assuming would be their mistake, not mine but wouldn't you help someone in trouble? Maybe I am more helpful than others...

Police are often targeted by criminals due to the criminal already being caught in the act and are in a fight or flight mind state and they attempt to get out no matter what. I'm still just wondering if you've seen just a regular citizen have this happen to them?


I may not agree with where or how the kid carried but being a supporter of gun rights, I am behind this and will contribute however I can. That, to me, is being a true supporter of rights.


With the whole What If John and Joe blah blah...you're sounding just like the anti's with that statement...The streets will be filled with bloooooood.....the WILD WEST. Come on!!!


----------



## tallbear (May 18, 2005)

Supa Roosta said:


> WHAT???
> 
> Where'd you get that from.
> If you can't comprehend the obvious, then you are part of the problem...


Thanks for clearing that up for me. The bashing of open carry was so prevalent, I was getting lost as to where you stand on gun rights in Michigan.


----------



## alex-v (Mar 24, 2005)

mudvr1212 said:


> I may not agree with where or how the kid carried but being a supporter of gun rights, I am behind this and will contribute however I can. That, to me, is being a true supporter of rights.
> 
> With the whole What If John and Joe blah blah...you're sounding just like the anti's with that statement...The streets will be filled with bloooooood.....the WILD WEST. Come on!!!


These two paragraphs pretty much put it all into one nutshell as the saying goes. My feelings are that you support gun rights or you do not.

BTW, I have looked through the entire Michigan Sportsman message board and nowhere do I find a forum on Open Carry. There are so many forums and sub-forums already on here that it is hard to keep track. Where is this Open Carry forum? Or, is it a message board found somewhere else?


----------



## JimP (Feb 8, 2002)

tallbear said:


> You kidding right???? Can you give me the "average" response time to a 9-1-1 call in Lansing? Do "you" trust your life to a 9-1-1 call?? You do know "it's the law" the police are NOT responsible for protecting you as decided by the U.S. Supreme Court???


I know 911 is just for taking the report after the incident.

So, Mr. Untrained open carry now has 2 choices, get involved in say, a Domestic Quarrel, and without any legal authority possibly put them self or the antagonists in a deadly situation? Many an LEO will say DQ's are the most dangerous.
The other choice, to NOT get involved, is what has wasted time.

My whole point to begin with was my opinion on the impracticality and pitfalls of open carry for defense.
Now an AR or 12 gauge 24/7 is a whole nudder kettle 'o fish.

Public opinion eminating from the Library BS could adversely affect the gains we're getting close to making in eliminating no carry zones, opening up dorm rooms and campuses, public/employee parking lots of businesses.


----------



## Supa Roosta (Jul 1, 2003)

tallbear said:


> Thanks for clearing that up for me. The bashing of open carry was so prevalent, I was getting lost as to where you stand on gun rights in Michigan.



At what point did I bash O/C in it's entirety?

Because I don't subscribe to carrying Shotguns into Public Libraries?

Remember what I said about the "Fringe" on both side of the issue?

You sir, are making my case for me...


----------



## alex-v (Mar 24, 2005)

It sounds to me that Tallbear is actually in agreement that some of the Open Carry fanatics are going a bit overboard. He is stating that we, as pro gun individuals, have to stop the potential loss of gun rights even if we are not interested in the minor issue (Open Carry in this case). If no one steps up to stop the library now then what is to stop other municipal bodies from coming up with their own interpretations of state law.

Remember that saying, "We stand together or we will hang separately."


----------



## brock_gingery86 (Mar 15, 2011)

jlcrss said:


> MGO open carry people/Michigan Open carry are nothing but a bunch of morons. They are doing nothing to help gun rights. They are actually making it worse.


Ok, first off. In some areas people find it very hard to get permits. Certain polital Law enforcement officers still commonly find meaningless ways to tell someone, "Sorry, You really don't need a CCW permit by how I see it." Open carry is often a way for lower income people who can't shell out the money for classes and then the money for 250-300+ rounds of ammunition. Many times they are paying for housing, kids, so forth and so on. Open carry gives them the ability to arm and defend themselves in a legal manner. They Follow the law! Now due to open carry being "Open", there are some people who will abuse it. Some are even plants from the Anti-Gun side of the issue trying to cause problems that will cause for more restrictions and stripping of lawful rights.

I will say this last part to point something out. Back when I was in Highschool I was in a production and during the performance, Guess what? My father is a Law Enforcement officer. Had been since he graduated High School. He worked third shift so he was in his full uniform, gun, badge, and all in the school auditorium. A girl from my class was sitting beside him in the Audience and just about freaked out because there was "A strange guy with a gun" next to her. It didn't matter that he was in his full uniform, She freaked out. 

Many people are idiots, including her, but most people who carry do so responsibly. When I mentioned that My father was also wearing his full uniform to her, she asked "Why does he need the Gun though?". Trying to explain that the firearm was part of a uniform, and difference between standard Officer's uniforms and plain-clothes where the gun is out of sight or not required as an actual part of the uniform was like talking to a rock. 

Instead of Demonizing and Criminalizing a group of people for following the law and acting within their rights, maybe people should start focussing on going after the idiots trying to go after those people. 

For You Concealed-carry only people, Just remember, Concealed Carry Causes problems too. If you have a permit, and are carrying concealed, if your coat flaps open and someone barely sees the butt of your handgun for only half a second, that half second can get you arrested and hauled into court. There are also people out there who will claim that You took the Gun out and flashed it around, even pointed it at them.. JUST TO GET YOU IN TROUBLE. CCW people, Remember that Open Carry helps protect you too!


----------



## jlcrss (May 17, 2006)

brock_gingery86 said:


> Ok, first off. In some areas people find it very hard to get permits. Certain polital Law enforcement officers still commonly find meaningless ways to tell someone, "Sorry, You really don't need a CCW permit by how I see it." Open carry is often a way for lower income people who can't shell out the money for classes and then the money for 250-300+ rounds of ammunition. Many times they are paying for housing, kids, so forth and so on. Open carry gives them the ability to arm and defend themselves in a legal manner. They Follow the law! Now due to open carry being "Open", there are some people who will abuse it. Some are even plants from the Anti-Gun side of the issue trying to cause problems that will cause for more restrictions and stripping of lawful rights.
> 
> I will say this last part to point something out. Back when I was in Highschool I was in a production and during the performance, Guess what? My father is a Law Enforcement officer. Had been since he graduated High School. He worked third shift so he was in his full uniform, gun, badge, and all in the school auditorium. A girl from my class was sitting beside him in the Audience and just about freaked out because there was "A strange guy with a gun" next to her. It didn't matter that he was in his full uniform, She freaked out.
> 
> ...



Not quite sure what you are trying to say. I never said they should stop open carry. I made the above statement because of personal experiences with those folks. I was making a statement that because of their bad decisions and radical way of handling themselves, they are doing more harm than good.


----------



## mudvr1212 (Nov 3, 2008)

alex-v said:


> These two paragraphs pretty much put it all into one nutshell as the saying goes. My feelings are that you support gun rights or you do not.
> 
> BTW, I have looked through the entire Michigan Sportsman message board and nowhere do I find a forum on Open Carry. There are so many forums and sub-forums already on here that it is hard to keep track. Where is this Open Carry forum? Or, is it a message board found somewhere else?


Obviously I am for gun rights. I don't need to always agree with the actions of others but I will support them if the need arises. This situation for instance. I'm not thrilled with how the person carries himself and his appearance (clothes and look) doesn't help him out at all. 

There is no "Open Carry" sub-forum just like there isn't a "Concealed Carry" sub-forum. This is the ONLY forum that involves firearms, so if the shoe fits... 

By the way, sorry for talking about a topic that you obviously can not stand and that you find to be completly ridiculous.

If your concealed permit got revoked and open carry was your only option, would you still carry? Or would you cowar to the anti's and leave it at home?


----------



## mudvr1212 (Nov 3, 2008)

alex-v said:


> It sounds to me that Tallbear is actually in agreement that some of the Open Carry fanatics are going a bit overboard. He is stating that we, as pro gun individuals, have to stop the potential loss of gun rights even if we are not interested in the minor issue (Open Carry in this case). If no one steps up to stop the library now then what is to stop other municipal bodies from coming up with their own interpretations of state law.
> 
> Remember that saying, "We stand together or we will hang separately."


That is EXACTLY what TallBear and I are saying! 

What a lot of people do not know about the OC crowd is that they have gone to many different cities and fought hard to get illegal city, county municipality laws into line with Preemption. Most of the OC crowd are CPL holders but if you read laws, there are places where you can ONLY OC so it's your only option.


----------



## brock_gingery86 (Mar 15, 2011)

jlcrss said:


> Not quite sure what you are trying to say. I never said they should stop open carry. I made the above statement because of personal experiences with those folks. I was making a statement that because of their bad decisions and radical way of handling themselves, they are doing more harm than good.


In a Nutshell, some people are idiots and will react for reasons of attention or lack of knowledge. The most common tactic is that of targetting peoples' emotions, followed by skewed logic. Plain and simple. However, Instead of Targetting Nut Jobs themselves on both sides of the issue, and going after the lawful activity or tool used, We are shooting ourselves in the foot. Remember Zumbo's comment about the AR rifle being a "Terrorist Weapon"?

In anycase, In a nationally syndicated magazine in the past recent history, a column by a respected firearms and law enforcement authority discussed a man who routinely goes out in a state with an AK style gun. He paints the muzzle and things to make it seem like a Airsoft weapon, and then bloggs about it somewhere online, talking about how he wants cops to come and try and stop him as he parades through the park. He is a suspected plant for the Anti Gun Groups trying to get attention so as to ruin the Rights of others. While you may have had some bad experiences, Don't let that sully your judgement. GO after the People, the Nutjobs. If they Screw up, Then they loose their rights. But if you reference those people to the entire issue or activity, then you are shooting everyone else in the foot, including yoruself. 

That is basically the point I was trying to make, And I did not mean any offense to anyone reading this. So, anyone who wishes can ask this Question. What is the difference between an Open Carry and a Concealed carry person if they do it for the same reasons. Self Protection for them, their spouse, Kids, safety? How are they different?


----------



## PITBULL (May 23, 2003)

Rootsy said:


> I wish to carry for my personal protection and that of my family. I am sure a lot of others do also. With the economy the way it is I just cannot afford the $300 or so it is going to cost me to become a card carrying "Good Guy". Maybe you fellows who are CPL only proponents would be willing to pay my way to exercise a God given right? I am sure I can put together a good list of others you can fund also.
> 
> Maybe every hunter that wishes to carry a sidearm should also be "permitted" and forced to carry concealed. Wouldn't want to upset the bunny rabbits...
> 
> ...


You could open carry along side the road and pick up bottles and cans
maybe even some scrap metal, within a year you probably would have enough to pay for the class and permit. If your realy good you might have enough for a couple boxes of ammo too.


----------



## PITBULL (May 23, 2003)

One thing that would make me wonder is if I saw some one in the Walmart parking lot get out of a car, Open the trunk, pull out a handgun, load it, Holster it, then proceed to wander inside. :16suspect

:idea:I think a CPL is probably the best way to go.


----------



## jlcrss (May 17, 2006)

I'm not anti gun. I am anti idiot. The law is already there. So what are you trying to prove. The whole I am too poor to get a cpl argument is lost on me. 

_OutdoorHub Mobile, the information engine of the outdoors_


----------



## mudvr1212 (Nov 3, 2008)

jlcrss said:


> I'm not anti gun. I am anti idiot. The law is already there. So what are you trying to prove. The whole I am too poor to get a cpl argument is lost on me.
> 
> _OutdoorHub Mobile, the information engine of the outdoors_


When you're 18-21 you can't get your CPL so how else are you supposed to carry? It's a right...


----------



## jlcrss (May 17, 2006)

mudvr1212 said:


> When you're 18-21 you can't get your CPL so how else are you supposed to carry? It's a right...


Join the military. You can carry all you want. Not to mention most 18-21 year olds I know are too busy chasing women to worry about that. If they weren't I would be concerned about them carrying in the first place.


----------



## mudvr1212 (Nov 3, 2008)

jlcrss said:


> Join the military. You can carry all you want. Not to mention most 18-21 year olds I know are too busy chasing women to worry about that. If they weren't I would be concerned about them carrying in the first place.


Sure sounds like you're ALL FOR gun rights. More like you're all for them as long as it's in the form you see fit. Isn't there a word for that...FUDD?


----------



## Bucket-Back (Feb 8, 2004)

PITBULL said:


> One thing that would make me wonder is if I saw some one in the Walmart parking lot get out of a car, Open the trunk, pull out a handgun, load it, Holster it, then proceed to wander inside. :16suspect
> 
> :idea:I think a CPL is probably the best way to go.


Its not a good idea to OC without a CPL where alcohol is sold ,even being in a parking lot of that establishment with a unloaded pistol without CPL will get you in trouble and contributing to a lawyer's retirement program . So maybe we should fix those (PFZ's) laws first and then move on the the shottie's in the kiddie section after getting more public support.


----------



## brock_gingery86 (Mar 15, 2011)

jlcrss said:


> I'm not anti gun. I am anti idiot. The law is already there. So what are you trying to prove. The whole I am too poor to get a cpl argument is lost on me.
> 
> _OutdoorHub Mobile, the information engine of the outdoors_


 
Ok, Then Figure $300 for the Class, plus at least $150 for just the Ammunition required by you to take the class. There is also a Suitable Holster that you must aquire for the range sessions, $50+, At least 2 extra Clips or speedloaders for another $60. Now not figuring in Taxes we are already over the $500 dollar mark and more than half way on the way to $600 and climbing. Not everyone has a $40,000 a year job. Someone making Close to minimum wage with a wife/girlfriend, 1 or 2 kids, and trying to pay for a vehicle, gas, Housing, medical responsibilities, food. That 500 bucks might as well be 5 million. 

Too many people take what they have for granted nowdays. The Fact is that for a lot of people a CCW permit is out of the question, and if they manage to save up just enough for a handgun after a year and a half or two years, who has the right to tell them they should have to wait another two years till they can spend that much again just to get a CCW permit? While there are a Few who manage to get a Firearm, I know many who carry knives because they can't afford a Handgun, and I've even helped someone look for a collapsable police style baton. Whether you are lost on the argument or not doesn't change these peoples' lives.


----------



## NoWake (Feb 7, 2006)

tallbear said:


> Thanks for clearing that up for me. The bashing of open carry was so prevalent, I was getting lost as to where you stand on gun rights in Michigan.


I hope you don't think anything I said was bashing open carry, because that isn't the case at all. I know for a fact that you (TallBear) has spent countless hours promoting gun rights in a responsible way. All I am meaning is that it's a shame that this issue has been brought to trial because of an 'in your face' activist. 

In my eyes it has huge potential to be a lose - lose situation. On one hand there's a chance that the letter of the law won't be upheld and it will have to be challanged in a higher court costing more and more money for the gun supporters. Then there's still a chance of losing. 

On the other hand even if the court case is a win, public opinion is going to be incredibly swayed because of the bad press this has gotten. This stunt unnecessarily put all gun supporters on the defense in a time when we were making positive strides with public opinion and education. Now, instead of john Q public realizing most firearm owners are responsible enough that it would be a good idea to eliminate pistol free zones, he's likely thinking 'maybe there are way too many wackos with guns out there'. 

Positive public perception is what will advance gun rights. You will never get that by parading long guns in libraries and day care facilities. In my opinion slow and small baby steps of education and exposure is the best way to promote positive public perception.


----------



## jlcrss (May 17, 2006)

brock_gingery86 said:


> Ok, Then Figure $300 for the Class, plus at least $150 for just the Ammunition required by you to take the class. There is also a Suitable Holster that you must aquire for the range sessions, $50+, At least 2 extra Clips or speedloaders for another $60. Now not figuring in Taxes we are already over the $500 dollar mark and more than half way on the way to $600 and climbing. Not everyone has a $40,000 a year job. Someone making Close to minimum wage with a wife/girlfriend, 1 or 2 kids, and trying to pay for a vehicle, gas, Housing, medical responsibilities, food. That 500 bucks might as well be 5 million.
> 
> Too many people take what they have for granted nowdays. The Fact is that for a lot of people a CCW permit is out of the question, and if they manage to save up just enough for a handgun after a year and a half or two years, who has the right to tell them they should have to wait another two years till they can spend that much again just to get a CCW permit? While there are a Few who manage to get a Firearm, I know many who carry knives because they can't afford a Handgun, and I've even helped someone look for a collapsable police style baton. Whether you are lost on the argument or not doesn't change these peoples' lives.



So why not fight the costs associated with the CPL? What does carrying a shotgun into a library have anything to do with anything? We already have a law that allows for open carry. What does this in your face mentality going to solve? Quite frankly the course isn't just a requirement or hurdle. When the class is done correctly it will actually teach a lot of people things about getting into a deadly force encounter and how to survive it. There is a lot more involved than just strapping on a gun and going down the street. Quite frankly there are a lot of hot heads out there that have no business carrying a gun. Those are the people that upset me the most because they give the rest of the law bidding folks a bad name and as a result cost them their rights.


----------



## JimP (Feb 8, 2002)

jimp said:


> ......................
> Public opinion eminating from the Library BS could adversely affect the gains we're getting close to making in eliminating no carry zones, opening up dorm rooms and campuses, public/employee parking lots of businesses.



I guess some of us can say "I told you so"...
OC antics are doing more harm than good.

*Two bills were introduced yesterday: *HB 4439 and HB 4438.
(Some portions redacted to compact)

The first adds libraries to the banned list for other than concealed carry, meaning open carry:

*THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN ENACT:*


Sec. 234d. (1) Except as provided in subsection (2), a person 
shall not possess a firearm on the premises of any of the following:

(a) A depository financial institution or a subsidiary or 
affiliate of a depository financial institution.
(b) A church or other house of religious worship.
(c) A court.
(d) A theatre.
(e) A sports arena.
(f) A day care center.
(g) A hospital.
(h) An establishment licensed under the Michigan liquor 
control act, Act No. 8 of the Public Acts of the Extra Session of 1933, being sections 436.1 to 436.58 of the Michigan Compiled Laws code, 1998 PA 58, MCL 436.1101 to 436.2303.

(i) A public library as defined in section 2 of 1977 PA 89, 
MCL 397.552.(2) This section does not apply to any of the following:
(a) A person who owns, or is employed by or contracted by, an 
entity described in subsection (1) if the possession of that 
firearm is to provide security services for that entity.
(b) A peace officer.
(c) A person licensed by this state or another state to carry 
a concealed weapon.
(d) A person who possesses a firearm on the premises of an 
entity described in subsection (1) if that possession is with the 
permission of the owner or an agent of the owner of that entity.
(3) A person who violates this section is guilty of a 
misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than 90 days or 
a fine of not more than $100.00, or both.


The second *includes* concealed carry:

*THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN ENACT:*


Sec. 5o. (1) Subject to subsection (4), an individual licensed 
under this act to carry a concealed pistol, or who is exempt from 
licensure under section 12a(1)(f), 12a(1)(h), shall not carry a 
concealed pistol on the premises of any of the following:
(a) A school or school property except that a parent or legal 
guardian of a student of the school is not precluded from carrying 
a concealed pistol while in a vehicle on school property, if he or 
she is dropping the student off at the school or picking up the 
child from the school. As used in this section, "school" and 
"school property" mean those terms as defined in section 237a of 
the Michigan penal code, 1931 PA 328, MCL 750.237a.
(b) A public or private child care center or day care center, 
public or private child caring institution, or public or private child placing agency.
(c) A sports arena or stadium.
(d) A bar or tavern licensed under the Michigan liquor control 
code of 1998, 1998 PA 58, MCL 436.1101 to 436.2303, where the 
primary source of income of the business is the sale of alcoholic 
liquor by the glass and consumed on the premises. This subdivision 
does not apply to an owner or employee of the business. The 
Michigan liquor control commission shall develop and make available 
to holders of licenses under the Michigan liquor control code of 
1998, 1998 PA 58, MCL 436.1101 to 436.2303, an appropriate sign 
stating that "This establishment prohibits patrons from carrying 
concealed weapons". The owner or operator of an establishment 
licensed under the Michigan liquor control code of 1998, 1998 PA 
58, MCL 436.1101 to 436.2303, may, but is not required to, post the 
sign developed under this subdivision. A record made available by 
an establishment licensed under the Michigan liquor control code of 
1998, 1998 PA 58, MCL 436.1101 to 436.2303, necessary to enforce 
this subdivision is exempt from disclosure under the freedom of information act, 1976 PA 442, MCL 15.231 to 15.246.
(e) Any property or facility owned or operated by a church, 
synagogue, mosque, temple, or other place of worship, unless the 
presiding official or officials of the church, synagogue, mosque, temple, or other place of worship permit the carrying of concealed 
pistol on that property or facility.
(f) An entertainment facility with a seating capacity of 2,500 
or more individuals that the individual knows or should know has a 
seating capacity of 2,500 or more individuals or that has a sign 
above each public entrance stating in letters not less than 1-inch 
high a seating capacity of 2,500 or more individuals.
(g) A hospital.
(h) A dormitory or classroom of a community college, college, or university.

(i) A public library as defined in section 2 of 1977 PA 89, 
MCL 397.552.

So what was gained if the "anti" activists get enough public opinion to get either of these passed?


----------



## Bucket-Back (Feb 8, 2004)

brock_gingery86 said:


> Ok, Then Figure $300 for the Class, plus at least $150 for just the Ammunition required by you to take the class. There is also a Suitable Holster that you must aquire for the range sessions, $50+, At least 2 extra Clips or speedloaders for another $60. Now not figuring in Taxes we are already over the $500 dollar mark and more than half way on the way to $600 and climbing. Not everyone has a $40,000 a year job. Someone making Close to minimum wage with a wife/girlfriend, 1 or 2 kids, and trying to pay for a vehicle, gas, Housing, medical responsibilities, food. That 500 bucks might as well be 5 million.
> 
> Too many people take what they have for granted nowdays. The Fact is that for a lot of people a CCW permit is out of the question, and if they manage to save up just enough for a handgun after a year and a half or two years, who has the right to tell them they should have to wait another two years till they can spend that much again just to get a CCW permit? While there are a Few who manage to get a Firearm, I know many who carry knives because they can't afford a Handgun, and I've even helped someone look for a collapsable police style baton. Whether you are lost on the argument or not doesn't change these peoples' lives.


NRA -Personal Protection in The Home $100
Rent .22 with ammo $ 20
CPL app fee $105
_______
$ 225
Where can I get a Carry Concealed Weapon permit? My permit says CPL, meaning Concealed Pistol License
No clips ,magazine , pistol stays on bench until RO says load and shoot.Whether you were lost in Math & English class or not isn't helping people either . There are lots of city folk spend more on entertainment in a week than $225 . S & W 642 38's are $385 OTD , pocket holster is $20,ammo $35 @ 100, which you need any way with or without permit


----------



## brock_gingery86 (Mar 15, 2011)

jlcrss said:


> So why not fight the costs associated with the CPL? What does carrying a shotgun into a library have anything to do with anything? We already have a law that allows for open carry. What does this in your face mentality going to solve? Quite frankly the course isn't just a requirement or hurdle. When the class is done correctly it will actually teach a lot of people things about getting into a deadly force encounter and how to survive it. There is a lot more involved than just strapping on a gun and going down the street. Quite frankly there are a lot of hot heads out there that have no business carrying a gun. Those are the people that upset me the most because they give the rest of the law bidding folks a bad name and as a result cost them their rights.


 
True, But if you don't protect a freedom even for the Idiots, then it can be stripped away. Even in the case of the Westborough Baptist church recently. Yes they are a vile group of people who are not true christians, but they still have a first ammendment right. A right applies to everyone until somebody breaks the Law. At that point that Right can be stripped of that person after a conviction. Yes the guy with a shotgun is an idiot. But If he is still making sure to obey the law, then he can proceed. The law has to be applied equally for all, reguardless of someone's lacking of brain matter.

CPL or CCW Costs are basically in place to compensate outside instructors, range fees, licensing paperwork, backround checks, so forth and so on. There is a reason it costs what it does. The other costs, such as a Firearm, magazines or speedloaders, a holster, and ammo are up to the user to try and find the lowest cost. It is still a lot of money, and not something a lot of people can go out and do if they have other committments. Especially now days. Ammunition prices, gas prices, everything is going up due to inflation and other circumstances. It's one thing to say "Go after the Prices", but another thing to actually find a way to actually do that.


----------



## brock_gingery86 (Mar 15, 2011)

Bucket-Back said:


> NRA -Personal Protection in The Home $100
> Rent .22 with ammo $ 20
> CPL app fee $105
> _______
> ...


 
CCW stands for "Concealed Carry Weapon". It is Similar to your CPL if not the same thing. However different localities have different standards. That is why there is some disparity between states recognizing other state carry holders' permits. If they feel that it does not measure up to their states standards, some states have been known to refuse to recognize any permit from that other state. Currently though, there is legislation being introduced to allow for federal Reciprol recognition, as in all states recognizing other states CCW permits.


----------



## jlcrss (May 17, 2006)

brock_gingery86 said:


> True, But if you don't protect a freedom even for the Idiots, then it can be stripped away. Even in the case of the Westborough Baptist church recently. Yes they are a vile group of people who are not true christians, but they still have a first ammendment right. A right applies to everyone until somebody breaks the Law. At that point that Right can be stripped of that person after a conviction. Yes the guy with a shotgun is an idiot. But If he is still making sure to obey the law, then he can proceed. The law has to be applied equally for all, reguardless of someone's lacking of brain matter.
> 
> CPL or CCW Costs are basically in place to compensate outside instructors, range fees, licensing paperwork, backround checks, so forth and so on. There is a reason it costs what it does. The other costs, such as a Firearm, magazines or speedloaders, a holster, and ammo are up to the user to try and find the lowest cost. It is still a lot of money, and not something a lot of people can go out and do if they have other committments. Especially now days. Ammunition prices, gas prices, everything is going up due to inflation and other circumstances. It's one thing to say "Go after the Prices", but another thing to actually find a way to actually do that.



Well you more or less just made my point. If they continue to carry long guns into libraries or look for confrontations, then this discussion will be going a different way. If you want to keep a freedom especially as volatile as gun rights are, be a little more responsible about it. Just saying.


----------



## tallbear (May 18, 2005)

jlcrss said:


> If you want to keep a freedom *especially as volatile as gun rights* are, be a little more responsible about it. Just saying.


WOW...... I haven't found the _*right*_ to own and carry a firearm "_*volatile*_" at all.


----------

