# Bill introduced to eliminate "NO Carry" zones



## JimP (Feb 8, 2002)

Bill introduced yesterday to eliminate "NO Carry" zones:

*HOUSE BILL No. 4009* 

January 13, 2011, Introduced by Rep. LeBlanc and referred to the Committee on Judiciary.



A bill to amend 1927 PA 372, entitled



"An act to regulate and license the selling, purchasing, possessing, and carrying of certain firearms and gas ejecting devices; to prohibit the buying, selling, or carrying of certain firearms and gas ejecting devices without a license or other authorization; to provide for the forfeiture of firearms under certain circumstances; to provide for penalties and remedies; to provide immunity from civil liability under certain circumstances; to prescribe the powers and duties of certain state and local agencies; to prohibit certain conduct against individuals who apply for or receive a license to carry a concealed pistol; to make appropriations; to prescribe certain conditions for the appropriations; and to repeal all acts and parts of acts inconsistent with this act,"
by amending section 5c (MCL 28.425c), as amended by 2002 PA 719; 
and to repeal acts and parts of acts.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN ENACT:

Sec. 5c. (1) A license to carry a concealed pistol shall be in 
a form, with the same dimensions as a Michigan operator license, prescribed by the department of state police. The license shall contain all of the following:
(a) The licensee's full name and date of birth. 
(b) A photograph and a physical description of the licensee.
(c) A statement of the effective dates of the license.
(d) An indication of exceptions authorized by this act applicable to the licensee.
(e) An indication whether the license is a duplicate.

(2) Subject to section 5o and except Except as otherwise provided by law, a license to carry a concealed pistol issued by the county concealed weapon licensing board authorizes the licensee to do all of the following:
*
(a) Carry a pistol concealed on or about his or her person anywhere in this state.*
(b) Carry a pistol in a vehicle, whether concealed or not concealed, anywhere in this state.
Enacting section 1. Section 5o of 1927 PA 372, MCL 28.425o, is 
repealed.


http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(qq...g.aspx?page=getobject&objectname=2011-HB-4009


----------



## cgwright (Mar 31, 2008)

I wonder if this would include private property, such as at work. It does state "anywhere", but I don't know that it allows restrictions on private properties.

At any rate, it's about time something like this was proposed.


----------



## JimP (Feb 8, 2002)

(2) Subject to section 5o and except Except as otherwise provided by law, a license to carry a concealed pistol issued by the county concealed weapon licensing board authorizes the licensee to do all of the following:"

The strikeout (Red) doesn't show up in this copy and I neglected to modify it. The link does show the exact verbage.
The new version of "Except" probably refers to _*other*_ Federal or State laws RE: Courthouses, Corporation exemptions, private entities etc. not written in 5o.

Still need a Senate introduction and Passage by both houses, Gov. Signature...uphill, but our letters/calls of support can make the difference.


----------



## Petronius (Oct 13, 2010)

cgwright said:


> I wonder if this would include private property, such as at work. It does state "anywhere", but I don't know that it allows restrictions on private properties. At any rate, it's about time something like this was proposed.


2) *Subject to section 5o and except* This part is to be eliminated. The new bill should state:
(2) *Except as otherwise provided by law, a license to carry a concealed pistol issued by the county concealed weapon licensing board authorizes the licensee to do all of the following:*

(a) Carry a pistol concealed on or about his or her person anywhere in this state.
(b) Carry a pistol in a vehicle, whether concealed or not concealed, anywhere in this state.
Enacting section 1. Section 5o of 1927 PA 372, MCL 28.425o, is repealed.

What this would do is eliminate the Pistol Free Zones. There is nothing in the bill that states you have the right to carry on private property if the owner or manager restricted this.


----------



## JimP (Feb 8, 2002)

Better said, thanks.


----------



## mudvr1212 (Nov 3, 2008)

We need to get this passed!!! Call, e-mail your reps and then do it again. There are a bunch of people on the OCDO website that are going to be calling Thursday...


----------



## bsf (Jan 18, 2011)

HB 4009 and 4010 were referred to the Judiciary Committee. I strongly support passage of both. I and others have links at other forums for Judiciary Committee member contact information, but I cannot provide them here as I am a new member. Can someone go to one of the following and grab the info, including all my links to the Judiciary Committee Member websites? Thanks.

ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=8&f=39&t=438497
thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=567860


In the interim, here is the contact information in non-linked format

*MI House Judiciary Committee*


Rep. John Walsh - 517.373.3920 - Chairman - Republican - District 19
Rep.Kurt Heise - 517.373.3816 - Majority Vice Chair - Republican - District 20
Rep. Jud Gilbert - 517.373.1790 - Republican - District 81
Rep. Ken Horn - 517.373.0837 - Republican - District 94
Rep. Paul Scott - 517.373.1780 - Republican - District 51
Rep. Kurt Damrow - 517.373.0476 - Republican - District 84
Rep. Paul Muxlow - 517.373.0835 - Republican - District 83
Rep. Brad Jacobsen - [email protected] - Republican - District 46
Rep. Peter Pettalia - 517.373.0833 - Republican - District 106
Rep. Patrick Somerville - 517.373.0855 - Republican - District 23
Rep. Mark Meadows - 517.373.1786 - Minority Vice Chair - Democrat - District 69
Rep. Bob Constan - 517.373.0849 - Democrat - District 16
Rep. Stacy Oakes - 517.373.0152 - Democrat - District 95
Rep. Lisa Brown - 517.373.1799 - Democrat - District 39
Rep. Jeff Irwin - 517.373.2577 - Democrat - District 53
Rep. Phil Cavanagh - 517.373.0857 - Democrat - District 17
Rep. John Olumba - 517.373.0144 - Democrat - District 5
This is going nowhere without support, and lots of it. Similar bills have been introduced previously and went no where. The same will be said for this bill if everyone does nothing.


----------



## mudvr1212 (Nov 3, 2008)

Here is a mock up of an e-mail...

To make it easier here are their emails and a sample letter. Modify as you feel fit.


[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; 
[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]


Dear Committee Chairman:

I am in favor of rescinding all gun-free zones in Michigan and support HB-4009 . Gun-Free zones do not prevent crime or violence; in fact they encourage just the opposite. I'm asking you to forward this bill on to the House.

Gun-free zones are killing zones. Criminals intent on harm ignore gun-free zones and see them as a place to commit their atrocities with little chance of being harmed by law-abiding citizens. Why, because law-abiding gun owners follow the law? Studies have shown that lawful gun-owners are among the most law-abiding segment of society, committing fewer crimes than even law enforcement officers. 

In this country the most heinous and largest mass killings occur in gun free zones i.e., schools, churches, Military Bases and Malls to name a few. What you dont see are mass murders in gun stores, police stations and gun ranges or other places people are allowed to bear arms. What differentiates these places is that in one law abiding citizens are denied the inalienable right to bear arms. Criminals are not going to plan an attack of mass murder in a place where people have a reasonable chance of defending themselves. 

The murderous and devastating experiment of gun-free zones has run its course. They do not work. Decades of mass murders have proved this time and time again. The time has come to once again give law-abiding citizens the means necessary to take on the responsibility of defending themselves and their loved ones against evil in all public places. Please remove Gun-free zones in Michigan. It's the right thing to do.

Sincerely, 

​


----------



## bsf (Jan 18, 2011)

There is now an online petition for passage of HB 4009 and 4010. This petition will be submitted to all members of the Michigan State Legislature and to the Governor. I urge people to sign this petition and send the link to others.

http://www.petitiononline.com/MIHB4009/petition.html

I do not believe an online petition is even remotely as important as calling legislators offices or speaking with them face to face, though. Please support the petition IN ADDITION to contacting your reps directly and fostering grass roots support. Please discuss this issue with others likely to support this, assisting them if necessary in contacting our legislators. Thank you.


----------



## bsf (Jan 18, 2011)

I believe clean passage of HB 4009 & 4010 would be a huge step forward for responsible gun owners. It will not happen without your support. This is not a one day, one week, or even a one month fight. Achieving success will require a sustained effort.


----------



## Hammer62 (Oct 20, 2010)

There's a story about this on the front page of the Free Press online and a petition on petitiononline.com that supposedly will help in the enabling of the passage of this bill. FYI. I'm all for it, gives the criminals something to think about....They know where we're not allowed to carry, no doubt.!


----------



## bsf (Jan 18, 2011)

Senator Mike Green, Republican, District 31, has introduced the Senate version, which is identical to HB 4009: SB 58.


----------



## dansjeep2000 (Dec 27, 2005)

Lets keep this fresh, sign the petition if you haven't anget your pro gun, family and freinds to do so as well, post it to Facebooe, Myspace, ect...your hot rod Forum, email it to everyone on your email list.


----------



## scandog (Apr 28, 2005)

We all need to support this. Maybe now they can just put an endorsment on our drivers license and we won't have to carry a seperate piece of identification that doesn't fit in a wallet.


----------



## bsf (Jan 18, 2011)

Bump and recap. SB 57 = HB 4010. SB 58 = HB 4009. AFAIK, no action has been taken on any of these bills, all of which still are in the House and Senate Judiciary Committees. There is no organized effort as of yet to move these bills cleanly through committee to the House and Senate floors for a vote. In the mean time, feel free to contact the House Judiciary Committee members and ask that they support these bills should they be scheduled for hearings. House Judiciary Chair, Rep. John Walsh especially needs to know there is considerable support for this legislation. I will be creating a separate contact list for the Senate Judiciary Committee when I get time, unless someone else does it first.



scandog said:


> We all need to support this. Maybe now they can just put an endorsment on our drivers license and we won't have to carry a separate piece of identification that doesn't fit in a wallet.


I do not support any add-on amendments to this legislation that would further imperil clean passage. I am not all that politically savvy, but I believe it best to tackle the reform you suggest separately.


----------



## sullyxlh (Oct 28, 2004)

scandog said:


> We all need to support this. Maybe now they can just put an endorsment on our drivers license and we won't have to carry a seperate piece of identification that doesn't fit in a wallet.


Dumb idea
I don't want anything on my DL indicating I'm carrying or can carry.

I'm willing to write and call these people but will not do it _mainstream_ nor will I do it where I know they won't see it and will only respond with a blanket reply
Post up hm ph's or cel's and hm addresses of these _puppets_ to where we could actually make headway and I'm all for it.


----------



## bsf (Jan 18, 2011)

sullyxlh said:


> &#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..I'm willing to write and call these people but will not do it _mainstream_ nor will I do it where I know they won't see it and will only respond with a blanket reply. Post up hm ph's or cel's and hm addresses of these _puppets_ to where we could actually make headway and I'm all for it.


Is this a joke? First off, I think that is an incredibly bad idea. I did not like getting political robo-calls on my home landline. I am certain our elected officials would be equally dismayed. Second, if you believe in this legislation, you would not condition your assistance on others doing work for you. If you do not want to help, just keep your thumbs up your anal sphincter and your fingers off the keyboard.


----------



## Petronius (Oct 13, 2010)

bsf said:


> [/COLOR]
> Is this a joke? First off, I think that is an incredibly bad idea. I did not like getting political robo-calls on my home landline. I am certain our elected officials would be equally dismayed. Second, if you believe in this legislation, you would not condition your assistance on others doing work for you. If you do not want to help, just keep your thumbs up your anal sphincter and your fingers off the keyboard.



I I agree 100%. I was going to respond to him but I couldn't think of a polite way to say it. You got it right though.


----------



## bsf (Jan 18, 2011)

The CPL PFZ elimination legislation will be discussed on Off the Record Friday, February 11. Senator Mike Green, sponsor of SB 57 & 58, the Senate versions of HB 4010 and 4009 respectively, will be the guest. The program should be available online ~noon Friday, and should be televised two or three times over the weekend. Check your local PBS station for television listings.


----------



## Nick Adams (Mar 10, 2005)

jimp said:


> THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN ENACT:
> 
> Sec. 5c. (1) A license to carry a concealed pistol shall be in
> a form, with the same dimensions as a Michigan operator license, prescribed by the department of state police. The license shall contain all of the following:
> ...


What strikes me is that while we gun owners (in general) consider gun registration to be problematic, many of you apparently consider gun owner registration to be a good thing, or at least an acceptable thing in some cases.

-na


----------



## bsf (Jan 18, 2011)

Nick, while I agree, that is a separate topic. This threads topic is CPL PFZ elimination, currently through passage of HB 4009, HB 4010, SB 57, and SB 58.


----------



## bsf (Jan 18, 2011)

Everything I have heard so far points to these bills being scheduled for committee hearings later in the year, if at all. Governor Snyder had made it perfectly clear the budget is Priority 1, 2, and 3, and I do not necessarily disagree. The situation is very bad. IMO, that does not mean we do nothing now concerning concealed pistol license (CPL), pistol free zone (PFZ) elimination. Take the time to actually read the bills. Familiarize yourself with the process, at least as far as it reads on paper.

How does a Bill become a Law?

How Committees Work

The relevant bills this session for PFZ CPL elimination are SB 57, SB 58, HB 4009, and HB 4010. SB stands for Senate Bill. HB stands for House Bill. In this case, SB 57 and HB 4010 are identical; same for SB 58 and HB 4009. When you read the bills, understand text to be added to Michigan Compiled Laws (MCL) is in bold, and text to be eliminated is struck through. Essentially, SB 57 and HB 4009 would repeal MCL 28.425o, Premises on which carrying concealed weapon prohibited; premises defined; exceptions to subsection (1); violation; penalties. SB 58 and HB 4010 would remove text from MCL that lists and classifies the felony specified in MCL 28.425o for carrying concealed in a PFZ.

The PFZ list in 28.425o contains the following.


A school or school property.
A public or private child care center or day care center, public or private child caring institution, or public or private child placing agency.
A sports arena or stadium.
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
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.
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.
A hospital.
A dormitory or classroom of a community college, college, or university.

Notice that casinos are not included. Casinos are a PFZ, but the text addressing them is found elsewhere in MCL. They are not addressed by this legislation. Private property could still be posted as weapon/gun/pistol/firearm free zones, with a penalty of trespass. Furthermore, this proposed legislation does not repeal the prohibition of general firearm possession by non-CPL holders in the locations specified in MCL 750.234d, Possession of firearm on certain premises prohibited; applicability; violation as misdemeanor; penalty. This is an entirely different firearm free zone list that existed prior to MI becoming shall issue for CPLs in July 2001. This list would remain under the proposed legislation. It does not apply to CPL holders, though. This list contains the following locations.


A depository financial institution or a subsidiary or affiliate of a depository financial institution.
A church or other house of religious worship.
A court.
A theatre.
A sports arena.
A day care center.
A hospital.
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.

Please consider this very important fact. 28.425o, which creates the CPL PFZs, only applies to concealed carry of a pistol. The exact text is this: shall not carry a concealed pistol on the premises.. It does not prohibit the open carry of firearms in those locations by those who possess a CPL. Some people are using this information in their arguments for elimination of the CPL PFZs.

Finally, ponder these statistics. Michigan has an estimated population of ~10 million, but only ~250000 (1/4 million) CPL holders. CPL holders are a minority. Most of the MI population does not understand this issue well. You, the person reading this post may or may not be all that familiar with concealed carry, concealed pistol licensing, or the issue of PFZs. Education and recruitment of new political activists will be necessary if this legislation is to become law. If you have any concerns about the wisdom of this proposed legislation, feel free to contact me through this forum. I would love to discuss the issue in detail with you. If you understand and support the legislation, please reach out to others in an attempt to enlist their support. There is no major effort currently organized by any of the major pro-RKBA groups to move this legislation forward as it is still early. Until then though, we can lay the groundwork for a powerful movement of support by educating ourselves and others. Thanks.


----------



## Godfather20 (Mar 30, 2011)

BSF: I am a reporter in Mid-Michigan and was wondering if you would be willing to speak on the record about SB 58 for an article?


----------



## tallbear (May 18, 2005)

Also keep in mind; before 2001 when "shall issue" became law, there where NO prohibited areas for concealed carry in Michigan (with the exception of federal bldg's).


----------

