You need cleo sign off on silencers,also m.guns and aows/dd?

Quoted: That is excellent.  However, the opinion letter does not address the issue of silencers.  Without going back and looking at the text of the existing law, I assume that they were outlawed in a similar manner as MGs were (must be "licensed", but no state licensing mechanism).  If that is the case, this opinion should set precedence to cover silencers as well.  But until I see something official, I would be somewhat leery of simply sauntering into the state with them. Anyone know anything more concrete?

The section of law that was used to overturn the previous AG's decision states

(3) Subsection (1) does not apply to any of the following:

(c) A person licensed by the secretary of the treasury of the United States or the secretary's delegate[[2]] to manufacture, sell, or possess a machine gun, or a device, weapon, cartridge, container, or contrivance described in subsection (1). [Emphasis added.]

Subsection 1 states:

Sec. 224. (1) A person shall not manufacture, sell, offer for sale, or possess any of the following:

(a) A machine gun or firearm that shoots or is designed to shoot automatically more than 1 shot without manual reloading,
by a single function of the trigger.

(b) A muffler or silencer.

By implication this ruling includes silencers.

Quoted: You need cleo sign off on silencers,also m.guns and aows/dd?

Yup

Quoted: You need cleo sign off on silencers,also m.guns and aows/dd?

Yes you do.  

One way around that is to form a corporation and have the corp buy the stuff.  No prints/signoff for corps.  However, footnote [1] of the AG's opinion letter states that it only applies to "private individuals... not ...other classes of persons..."  The corp. issue may need to be clarified.

I currently live in another state, but may be moving to MI in the near future.  I already have my toys, and just have to file "travel papers" with the ATF.  No signoff involved

Quoted: By implication this ruling includes silencers.

Yeah buddy!  

Quoted: That is excellent.  However, the opinion letter does not address the issue of silencers.  Without going back and looking at the text of the existing law, I assume that they were outlawed in a similar manner as MGs were (must be "licensed", but no state licensing mechanism).  If that is the case, this opinion should set precedence to cover silencers as well.  But until I see something official, I would be somewhat leery of simply sauntering into the state with them. Anyone know anything more concrete?

The AG's opinion is based on MCL 750.224 which is:

750.224 Weapons; manufacture, sale, or possession as felony; exceptions; “muffler” or “silencer” defined. Sec. 224. (1) A person shall not manufacture, sell, offer for sale, or possess any of the following: (a) A machine gun or firearm that shoots or is designed to shoot automatically more than 1 shot without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger. (b) A muffler or silencer. (c) A bomb or bombshell. (d) A blackjack, slungshot, billy, metallic knuckles, sand club, sand bag, or bludgeon. (e) A device, weapon, cartridge, container, or contrivance designed to render a person temporarily or permanently disabled by the ejection, release, or emission of a gas or other substance. (2) A person who violates subsection (1) is guilty of a felony, punishable by imprisonment for not more than 5 years, or a fine of not more than $2,500.00, or both. (3) Subsection (1) does not apply to any of the following: (a) A self-defense spray device as defined in section 224d. (b) A person manufacturing firearms, explosives, or munitions of war by virtue of a contract with a department of the government of the United States. (c) A person licensed by the secretary of the treasury of the United States or the secretary’s delegate to manufacture, sell, or possess a machine gun, or a device, weapon, cartridge, container, or contrivance described in subsection (1). (4) As used in this chapter, “muffler” or “silencer” means 1 or more of the following: (a) A device for muffling, silencing, or deadening the report of a firearm. (b) A combination of parts, designed or redesigned, and intended for use in assembling or fabricating a muffler or silencer. (c) A part, designed or redesigned, and intended only for use in assembling or fabricating a muffler or silencer. History: 1931, Act 328, Eff. Sept. 18, 1931;—CL 1948, 750.224;—Am. 1959, Act 175, Eff. Mar. 19, 1960;—Am. 1978, Act 564, Imd. Eff. Dec. 29, 1978;—Am. 1980, Act 346, Eff. Mar. 31, 1981;—Am. 1990, Act 321, Eff. Mar. 28, 1991;—Am. 1991, Act 33, Imd. Eff. June 10, 1991. Constitutionality: The Michigan supreme court held that the statute was not unconstitutionally vague as applied to the defendant in People v. Lynch, 410 Mich. 343, 301 N.W.2d 796 (1981). Former law: See section 3 of Act 372 of 1927, being CL 1929, § 16751; and Act 206 of 1929. 87 FIREARMS LAWS OF MICHIGAN — STATUTES §750.224

The AG opinion says that an approved Form 4 from the BATF satisfies Section 3(c) in terms of licensing. Therefore MCL 750.224 does not apply if you are duly licensed (approved form 4) so you can therefore legally possess:

(a) A machine gun or firearm that shoots or is designed to shoot automatically more than 1 shot without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger. (b) A muffler or silencer. (c) A bomb or bombshell. (d) A blackjack, slungshot, billy, metallic knuckles, sand club, sand bag, or bludgeon. (e) A device, weapon, cartridge, container, or contrivance designed to render a person temporarily or permanently disabled by the ejection, release, or emission of a gas or other substance.

Quoted: Quoted: By implication this ruling includes silencers. Yeah buddy!

Now I just have to wait until I'm 21 to add a can and a happy switch to my AR-15 by way of a RDIAS if there are any left to be had.

Quoted: Now I just have to wait until I'm 21 to add a can and a happy switch to my AR-15 by way of a RDIAS if there are any left to be had.

RDIAS are difficult to come by at the present.  When they can be found, they are going for over $10K.  Sendra and Olympic RR guns are somewhat less expensive in the $8500-$9500 range.

Quoted: Quoted: Now I just have to wait until I'm 21 to add a can and a happy switch to my AR-15 by way of a RDIAS if there are any left to be had. RDIAS are difficult to come by at the present.  When they can be found, they are going for over $10K.  Sendra and Olympic RR guns are somewhat less expensive in the $8500-$9500 range.

*chokes*  Ok, so scratch the RDIAS, I'll go for the can.

I thought that RDIAS's were the "cheaper" option.

Sorry to say it Lumpy, but we were way ahead of you on that one.  (another shameless attempt to inflate my post count).

Now we just need to get some more Class III dealers in Michigan.

Quoted: *chokes*  Ok, so scratch the RDIAS, I'll go for the can. I thought that RDIAS's were the "cheaper" option.

You can get a "steal" on a Lightning Link in the $7000 +/- range.  

ETA: the least expensive MG you will likely find will be a MAC10 or M11.  They start in the $2.5k range if you look around a bit.  Stemples can be had NIB in the 3.5k range.  Everything else goes up from there.

Quoted: Quoted: *chokes*  Ok, so scratch the RDIAS, I'll go for the can. I thought that RDIAS's were the "cheaper" option. You can get a "steal" on a Lightning Link in the $7000 +/- range.

Wow, I think I'll go right out and grab one while the gettin's good.

I REALLY want that F'ing NFA to go away, forever.

So i guess you could (before you spend money and do the forms) go down and talk to your cleo and see how he feels on the matter?

OK
Now a couple ?'s here which I hope someone can help me with...

1)  AOW & MG, I know I need to file the federal paperwork with the BATF and also I need to get my CLEO to sign off.  Is there anything else I am missing?  Are the CLEO's usually pretty good about things like this?  (I am in Farmington Hills, and have a good relationship with the local PD & Chief due to my business here.)

2)  When you have a FFL (I know you do not need an FFL to have an AOW or MG with this law and I will NOT be getting a FFL) but with an FFL the BATF can just show up at your door if they wish (not that they do) during your business hours to search if they feel the need without a warrant or anything, do you open yourself up to this same thing when you have a AOW or MG with the proper forms?

3)  If I go through all the paperwork and everything and get lets say a very short shotgun can I carry this in the back of my car?  I do have a CPL IF that even matters.

Lastly, what do I need to do now to get the ball rolling for me to get a super short shotgun or a MG?

Thank you!

Quoted: As for the C3 dealers in Michigan..........They are out there. They just need to let me know and i will gladly list them in the tacked thread, in fact, I added one today.

Copied from subgun dealer list

Great Lakes Arms South East Michigan

Bay Arms Northern Michigan

Sheridan Armaments Northern Michigan

Title 2 Services West Michigan

Midland Arms (me) Northern Michigan,,,tri city area

Damn, this sounds like good news.

May be time to move out of the metro area.

Quoted: So i guess you could (before you spend money and do the forms) go down and talk to your cleo and see how he feels on the matter?

No guessing about it. Unless you are incorporated, you need that CLEO signature on the form before you send it to the ATF.

Quoted: OK Now a couple ?'s here which I hope someone can help me with... 1)  AOW & MG, I know I need to file the federal paperwork with the BATF and also I need to get my CLEO to sign off.  Is there anything else I am missing?  Are the CLEO's usually pretty good about things like this?  (I am in Farmington Hills, and have a good relationship with the local PD & Chief due to my business here.) 2)  When you have a FFL (I know you do not need an FFL to have an AOW or MG with this law and I will NOT be getting a FFL) but with an FFL the BATF can just show up at your door if they wish (not that they do) during your business hours to search if they feel the need without a warrant or anything, do you open yourself up to this same thing when you have a AOW or MG with the proper forms? 3)  If I go through all the paperwork and everything and get lets say a very short shotgun can I carry this in the back of my car?  I do have a CPL IF that even matters. Lastly, what do I need to do now to get the ball rolling for me to get a super short shotgun or a MG? Thank you!

1) You're on the right track as far as procedure goes, I live in Bloomfield hills and when i originally went to the CLEO to get a signature for a C&R machine gun i was buying, he didnt want anything to do with it, he didnt know the laws and straight out told me it was illegal to buy machine guns, after several visits to him with paper work from the state and from the ATF he finally gave in and signed, after that he signed every form i asked him to. We'll see what happens when i go in to get a signature on a suppressor.

2) I dont have a real clear answer for you on this nor do i think anyone will here in Michigan, ask this same question on the NFA board over in the armory section of this site. With an FFL you are subject to searches by the ATF without notice. It never happened to me ever. I dont think they woyuld be allowed to search you without cause, they would need a warrant to do so i would think, you could ask a laywer who is well versed within gun laws to get a definate answer.

3) The answer to your last question is absolutely NO! A short barreled shotgun or rifle is not a pistol, you can only carry a pistold with a CPL! Its a very touchy subject on what you can carry and a lot of people think that because its a pistol you can carry it (ie) rifles and shotguns that are registered as "pistols" because they are under 30 inches but over 26. If you get caught carrying an AK47 that is 27 inches long and is registered as a pistol you are subjecting yourself to jail time, same as AOW's and SBR's

Quoted: OK Now a couple ?'s here which I hope someone can help me with... 1)  AOW & MG, I know I need to file the federal paperwork with the BATF and also I need to get my CLEO to sign off.  Is there anything else I am missing?  Are the CLEO's usually pretty good about things like this?  (I am in Farmington Hills, and have a good relationship with the local PD & Chief due to my business here.) 2)  When you have a FFL (I know you do not need an FFL to have an AOW or MG with this law and I will NOT be getting a FFL) but with an FFL the BATF can just show up at your door if they wish (not that they do) during your business hours to search if they feel the need without a warrant or anything, do you open yourself up to this same thing when you have a AOW or MG with the proper forms? 3)  If I go through all the paperwork and everything and get lets say a very short shotgun can I carry this in the back of my car?  I do have a CPL IF that even matters. Lastly, what do I need to do now to get the ball rolling for me to get a super short shotgun or a MG? Thank you!

1. You've got the broad strokes. Most CLEOs in Michigan aren't real familiar with ATF signoffs because the only ones they encountered were people buying C&R guns up until now. I'm sure there is going to be an 'adjustment' period as the current CLEOs get accustomed to the new ruling.

2. Nobody has the right to search your premises because you own an NFA item as an individual.

3. I wouldn't, but its legal to have a firearm in your trunk. How do you think people get to the range? It just has to be unloaded and you have to be on the way to go shooting :)

OK well the Shotgun I was look it has an OAL of 23 in, does that change anything?
Also, as I said I would not CCW this but keep it in my truck.  As far as I understand that is still CCWing it though

Frow what I understand, if it is under 26 it is not a SBR but an AOW.

Quoted: 3) The answer to your last question is absolutely NO! A short barreled shotgun or rifle is not a pistol, you can only carry a pistold with a CPL! Its a very touchy subject on what you can carry and a lot of people think that because its a pistol you can carry it (ie) rifles and shotguns that are registered as "pistols" because they are under 30 inches but over 26. If you get caught carrying an AK47 that is 27 inches long and is registered as a pistol you are subjecting yourself to jail time, same as AOW's and SBR's

Quoted: OK well the Shotgun I was look it has an OAL of 23 in, does that change anything? Also, as I said I would not CCW this but keep it in my truck.  As far as I understand that is still CCWing it though Frow what I understand, if it is under 26 it is not a SBR but an AOW. Quoted: 3) The answer to your last question is absolutely NO! A short barreled shotgun or rifle is not a pistol, you can only carry a pistold with a CPL! Its a very touchy subject on what you can carry and a lot of people think that because its a pistol you can carry it (ie) rifles and shotguns that are registered as "pistols" because they are under 30 inches but over 26. If you get caught carrying an AK47 that is 27 inches long and is registered as a pistol you are subjecting yourself to jail time, same as AOW's and SBR's

If its loaded in your car (anywhere), you are CPLing it. If it isn't a PISTOL you can't CPL it! You are incorrect in thinking that if it is under 26" OAL its an AOW instead of a SBR.

Take some time and read past posts hear and ATF / MI Laws its been hashed out a number of times.

I said under 30 inches or over 26 inches i never said anything about it being under 26 inches

edit; An AOW is a pen gun, a knife gun a short little shot gun, A Short barreled rifle is that any rifle or shotgun that is less than 26inches thats exactly what i said, reread my post.

Quoted: So i guess you could (before you spend money and do the forms) go down and talk to your cleo and see how he feels on the matter?

Yes you could.  I would reccommend having the forms and bringing them along anyway.  Even if you don't have a specific firearm purchased, you can fill out your personal info.  While it is unlikely for the CLEO to sign a blank form, it is not out of the relm of possibility.  It woudn't hurt just to bring the forms along to let the Chief know what they look like, and what is required.

I was successful in getting a signoff in a historically un-friendly (relating to NFA signoffs) area a year or so ago.  I attempted to arrange for a meeting with the chief, but was unsuccessful.  I finally just went down to the sheriff's office, but I came prepared.  

I had my completed forms with me (I had already purchased the item in question, so I had the seller's info, S/N, etc.) .  I had also prepared a cover letter stating my intentions.  I noted the procedure, that I had to submit photos and fingerprints, and the ATF would conduct a complete background check.

In my case, I also noted that I have a C&R FFL (I noted the FFL #.  The Sheriff's office already had this info, as I had to send a copy of the application to them when I applied for the FFL), and that the gun I was buying qualified as a C&R.  

I noted that I needed both copies of the paperwork with original signatures returned to me, but that the SO could keep copies (as I was sure they would).  I also asked that my paperwork be returned to me, even if the Sheriff declined to sign.  (These copies were already signed by the seller, and I did not want him to have to send me another set.)  I included a self-addressed envelope, so it would be easier for them to return my papers.  I also included contact info.

I brought my paperwork in and explained to the officer behind the counter that I had a firearms application that I needed the sheriff to sign.  She looked it over, and then looked shocked when she figured out what it was.  She conferred with another officer for a while, and then went to the back and was on the phone for a while.  Finally, she came back and said that she would give my paperwork to the Lt. who is in charge of the gun permit department.  He was not in at the time, but she gave me his card so I could call him directly if needed.

He called me back the next day, and I explained what I wanted to do.  I noted that this was a formality, and that if the Sheriff did not want to sign, that there were a number of other people who could sign for me.  He told me that he was not worried about law-abiding people like me, and that he would not have a problem with letting me get the gun, but that he needed to forward it to the Chief.  

I should have included a copy of the instructions that come with the paperwork.  This was a very large Sheriff's Dept. and the Chief is pretty busy.  The instructions say that the CLEO or his designee could sign.  I thought about explaining that, but figured I'd wait and see what the Chief had to say.  

I called back a week later and the Lt. told me that the Chief still had the paperwork.  He called me back later that day and told me that he had the signed paperwork back.  He mailed it out that day.  I think it took me right at 2 weeks to get the sig.  

Hopefully, some of these things will help others get signoffs.

Thanks GarrettJ ...

Quoted: ...(I am in Farmington Hills, and have a good relationship with the local PD & Chief due to my business here.)...

Chief Dwyer?  I am not sure, but he isn't exactly the most gun friendly police chief around.  Based on the way both Farmington and Farmington Hills handle gun permits, I don't see many, if any, signoffs in the future.  Keep us posted though if you do or don't.  If you don't let us know if you go to an alternate and are able to get a signoff that will satisfy BATF.  I would love to get in on this while the gettting's good.

Guys - I am impressed with your understanding of the new AG's opinion and how it relates with the Michigan statute MCL 750.224!

It does not look like I need to even chime in here except to say - I am thrilled.

This whole deal has probably taken 2 years to achieve. Probably 1.5 years of cross communication on various scenario's with a group of fanatic NFA'ers ... LOL not really fanatics and this past half year formulating the proper question terminology, submission through State Rep Leon Drolet's office and then into the AG's Office.

Two days after Christmas I received the formal opinion............JACK POT I YELLED!

Its been a lot of persistent hard and challenging work to get and keep the ball moving. But we did it! The key movers of this work are yours truly and an Attorney friend of mine who probably does not want to be recognized all that much but he helped to develop the proper legal question to ask the AG. Believe me it has been difficult and time consuming and now hopefully rewarding

I think we have gotten over the top of the hill and its all down hill from here. I am in the process of putting the package together that State Rep Leon Drolet will send to the Director of BATFE. After they receive the package we shall see what happens.

If everything works out the way I think it will then we will have two state officials that will deserve our thanks and praise and they are Attorney General Mike Cox and my good friend State Representative Leon Drolet. Leon will be term limited out at the end of this year and he will find other things to do. Perhaps we can take him out to the pit and let him have some FA trigger time!

As it stands right now I believe AG Mike Cox IS THE MAN!

This really is good news... First CPL and now we get to help out our ammo mills

Oh, and tag.

Quoted: Guys - I am impressed with your understanding of the new AG's opinion and how it relates with the Michigan statute MCL 750.224! It does not look like I need to even chime in here except to say - I am thrilled. This whole deal has probably taken 2 years to achieve. Probably 1.5 years of cross communication on various scenario's with a group of fanatic NFA'ers ... LOL not really fanatics and this past half year formulating the proper question terminology, submission through State Rep Leon Drolet's office and then into the AG's Office. Two days after Christmas I received the formal opinion............JACK POT I YELLED! Its been a lot of persistent hard and challenging work to get and keep the ball moving. But we did it! The key movers of this work are yours truly and an Attorney friend of mine who probably does not want to be recognized all that much but he helped to develop the proper legal question to ask the AG. Believe me it has been difficult and time consuming and now hopefully rewarding I think we have gotten over the top of the hill and its all down hill from here. I am in the process of putting the package together that State Rep Leon Drolet will send to the Director of BATFE. After they receive the package we shall see what happens. If everything works out the way I think it will then we will have two state officials that will deserve our thanks and praise and they are Attorney General Mike Cox and my good friend State Representative Leon Drolet. Leon will be term limited out at the end of this year and he will find other things to do. Perhaps we can take him out to the pit and let him have some FA trigger time! As it stands right now I believe AG Mike Cox IS THE MAN!

THANK YOU!!!

You have NO idea how good it feels to see that Freedom CAN increase. I will be writing a thank you to the AG and to State Rep Leon Drolet.

You deserve an out of this world salute!

Quoted: Yo Bustoff........... I think this calls for a celebration shoot in lapeer!

I vote for the weekend after next.

Opinion #7183
No mention of silencers. It seems like all he did was take Michigan out of the MG regulation business. If it's okay with Uncle Sam, it's okay with Michigan.

STATE OF MICHIGAN

MIKE COX, ATTORNEY GENERAL

FIREARMS:

MICHIGAN PENAL CODE:

Possession and transfer of a machine gun


A person in Michigan may only possess a machine gun if it was lawfully possessed before May 19, 1986, and is properly registered under federal law.  A person in Michigan may only transfer possession of a machine gun if authorized to do so by the federal Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

Opinion No.  7183

December 27, 2005

Honorable Leon Drolet
State Representative
The Capitol
Lansing, Michigan 48909

            You have asked whether a person[1] in Michigan may transfer possession of a federally registered machine gun.

            Possession of a machine gun by a person in Michigan is controlled by section 224 of the Michigan Penal Code, MCL 750.224:

           (1)  A person shall not manufacture, sell, offer for sale, or possess any of the following:

           (a)  A machine gun or firearm that shoots or is designed to shoot automatically more than 1 shot without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.

* * *

           (3)  Subsection (1) does not apply to any of the following:

           (a)  A self-defense spray device as defined in section 224d.

           (b)  A person manufacturing firearms, explosives, or munitions of war by virtue of a contract with a department of the government of the United States.

            (c)  A person licensed by the secretary of the treasury of the United States or the secretary's delegate[[2]] to manufacture, sell, or possess a machine gun, or a device, weapon, cartridge, container, or contrivance described in subsection (1).  [Emphasis added.]

Of greatest relevance to your question is the exception stated in subsection 3(c) above.  Michigan law, therefore, prohibits the possession of a machine gun by a person unless that person has been "licensed" by the United States Government to manufacture, sell, or possess the weapon.

To determine how one becomes "licensed" by the federal government, the governing provision is subsection (o) of section 922 of the federal Firearms Owners' Protection Act of 1986 (FOPA), 18 USC 922(o).  That subsection states in relevant part:

              (1)  Except as provided in paragraph (2), it shall be unlawful for any person to transfer or possess a machinegun.  

               (2)  This subsection does not apply with respect to--

                                                                                        * * *

               (B)  any lawful transfer or lawful possession of a machinegun that was lawfully possessed before the date this subsection takes effect [effective May 19, 1986].  [18 USC 922(o)(1) and (2)(B).]

After enactment of the FOPA, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives promulgated implementing regulations permitting private ownership of a machine gun under specified circumstances.  One of those regulations, 27 CFR 479.105, provides:

               (a)  General.  As provided by 26 U.S.C. 5812 and 26 U.S.C. 5822, an application to make or transfer a firearm shall be denied if the making, transfer, receipt, or possession of the firearm would place the maker or transferee in violation of
law. . . .

                (b)  Machine guns lawfully possessed prior to May 19, 1986.  A machine gun possessed in compliance with the provisions of this part prior to May 19, 1986, may continue to be lawfully possessed by the person to whom the machine gun is registered and may, upon compliance with the provisions of this part, be lawfully transferred to and possessed by the transferee.

Thus, under federal law, a person may possess a machine gun if that person lawfully possessed it before May 19, 1986, or if the person is one to whom a person in lawful possession lawfully transferred possession after that date.  Another regulation, 27 CFR 479.84, generally prohibits the transfer of a firearm "unless an application, Form 4 (Firearms), Application for Transfer and Registration of Firearm, in duplicate, executed under the penalties of perjury to transfer the firearm and register it to the transferee has been filed with and approved by the Director [of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives]."  The regulation further requires that the application provide a complete description of the firearm and detailed identification of both parties to the transfer.  Under the current Form 4 (copy attached), the transferee is required to certify whether the transferee has been convicted of or is facing criminal felony charges, whether the transferee is a fugitive, illegal alien, addicted to controlled substances, subject to a domestic relations restraining order, has received a military dishonorable discharge, has been adjudicated mentally defective, or has been convicted of domestic violence.  An affirmative answer to any of these questions results in a denial of the application.  Another regulation, 27 CFR 479.85, requires that the application include the transferee's photograph and set of fingerprints.  The application must also be certified by the appropriate state or local law enforcement official as to whether the official has any information indicating that the machine gun will be used for other than a lawful purpose or that possession of the gun by the transferee would be in violation of state or federal law.  27 CFR 479.85.  The Form 4 application is then reviewed by the Director and, if approved, is returned to the transferor who may then transfer the weapon.  The transferee is required to retain the approved Form 4 application as proof that the firearm is properly registered.  27 CFR 479.86.

In light of this federal regulatory background, it must next be determined whether this federal approval process culminates in the issuance of a "license" for purposes of the exception to the prohibition on the possession of a machine gun found in MCL 750.224.    

The foremost rule in construing a statute is to discern and give effect to the intent of the Legislature.  Nastal v Henderson & Associates Investigations, Inc, 471 Mich 712, 720; 691 NW2d 1 (2005).  The first step in ascertaining that intent is to review the language of the statute.  The plain meaning of the critical word itself as well as its placement and purpose in the statutory scheme must be considered.  Sun Valley Foods Co v Ward, 460 Mich 230, 236-237; 596 NW2d 119 (1999).

The concept of licensure was discussed in Bostrom v Jennings, 326 Mich 146, 167; 40 NW2d 97 (1949) (Boyles, J. concurring):

               [A] license means "to confer on a person the right to do something which otherwise he would not have the right to do."  33 Am Jur, "Licenses," § 2, p 325.

               "The object of a license is to confer a right that does not exist without a license."  Chilvers v. People, 11 Mich 43, 49.

               "The popular understanding of the word license undoubtedly is, a permission to do something which without the license would not be allowable. . . ."  Youngblood v. Sexton, 32 Mich 406, 419 (20 Am Rep 654).

               The general understanding of a license is stated in Webster's New International Dictionary (2d ed), p 1425, as follows:

               "License, license, n * * * Authority or liberty given to do or forebear any act; permission to do something.  

Although the application and registration scheme provided for under the federal laws and regulations discussed above do not result in the issuance of a document labeled "license,"[3] the Form 4 application and resulting approval process bears all the hallmarks of licensure.  The permission granted by the Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to transfer and possess a machine gun is the official authority required in order to avoid the federal proscription.  Absent such approval, a person possessing a machine gun would be subject to serious sanctions, including prosecution and incarceration under both federal and state law.  See 18 USC 924 and MCL 750.224(2).

Moreover, there is no indication in the plain text of MCL 750.224 that the Legislature intended the word "license" to have a meaning other than its ordinary meaning as described by the Court in Bostrom.  Its purpose in the statutory scheme appears to be to assure that only those persons receiving the proper authorization from the appropriate federal officials are allowed to manufacture, sell, or possess a machine gun.  The statute does not focus on the particular title or name given to that authorizing instrument.  Accordingly, the authorization provided under the federal regulatory scheme embodied in 18 USC 922(o) and related regulations constitutes a "license" within the meaning of MCL 750.224.[4]  

It is my opinion, therefore, that a person in Michigan may only possess a machine gun if it was lawfully possessed before May 19, 1986, and is properly registered under federal law.  A person in Michigan may only transfer possession of a machine gun if authorized to do so by the federal Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

MIKE COX
Attorney General

[1] Because your request only concerns private individuals, this opinion does not address any other classes of persons, such as law enforcement officers and military personnel.

[2] The historical responsibility of the Secretary of Treasury of the United States to regulate firearms through the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives was transferred by Congress to the United States Attorney General by Public Law No 107-296, Title XI, Subtitle B, § 1112(f)(4), (6), 116 Stat 2276 (2002).

[3] Compare 18 USC 923 (providing for the licensure of manufacturers, importers, dealers, and collectors).

[4] OAG, 1977-1978, No 5210, p 189 (August 10, 1977), reached the opposite conclusion on this question.  However, at the time that opinion was issued, MCL 750.224 allowed a person to possess a machine gun if the person was "duly licensed to manufacture, sell, or possess any machine gun."  As that opinion noted, when MCL 750.224 was amended in 1959, the Legislature considered a companion bill to license the possession of machine guns.  The opinion concluded that the failure to enact the bill was evidence that no law existed to allow for the possession of a machine gun.  The opinion further noted that then existing federal law only provided for the registration and not the licensing of machine guns.  As discussed above, Congress subsequently enacted legislation authorizing the Director of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to formally approve the possession of certain machine guns.  Moreover, soon after the issuance of OAG No 5210, the Legislature amended MCL 750.224 by 1978 PA 564 to specifically recognize an exception for a license issued by the United States Government.  The Attorney General was also quick to recognize that with the amendment, the machine gun prohibition in MCL 750.224 did not apply to a person duly licensed by the Secretary of Treasury of the United States or the Secretary's delegate to possess a machine gun.  Letter opinion of the Attorney General to Phillip Price, Chief, National Firearms Act Branch, United States Department of Treasury, dated April 25, 1979.  Accordingly, OAG No 5210 is superseded by this opinion.  

Att.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://opinion/datafiles/2000s/op10259.htm    
State of Michigan, Department of Attorney General
Last Updated 01/04/2006 04:00:18

Quoted: Lotsa stuff

re-read the thread. The suppressor issue has been discussed and why they will be allowed.

Quoted: Guys ...

Thanks Bustoff and tell your attorney friend thanks also.  I never would have thought ...

Boy, wait till the media get ahold of this issue. The streets will be awash with kids with machine guns and assasins with silencers.

Quoted: Boy, wait till the media get ahold of this issue. The streets will be awash with kids with machine guns and assasins with silencers.

This one wasn't too terrible ---> linkey

(I swiped this from the link Bustoff provided on Subguns.com)

Hey, anyone know if it is legal to hunt with silencers in MI?  

NO!  It is NOT legal to hunt with a silencer.  It is not legal to put a silencer on a gun while carrying it either, these are only legal to own and shoot with.  You will not be able to carry a silencer, AOW or MG.  

I was in Target Sports today and 2 people came in saying the wanted to buy a Full Auto.  MAN did I feel bad for the guys working there, these people who came in has NO clue how to go about buying one and what the actual cost is.

One of the guys who came in was "Pissed the F off" as he could not come in and walk out with it right awat and when the store told them what price range a M16 would be the guy told them they were crazy and didnt know what they were talking about...  

Quoted: Hey, anyone know if it is legal to hunt with silencers in MI?

Yeah they have a MP5 which you can rent there and the look on the owners face when the guy said he had  "Tree G Cash Dawg"  (three thousand but thats how he prononced it) was priceless...

Hell, 3G for an MP5.....  Put me down for 5 of em!

Don't we wish.
Myself, I think I will pass on buying any full auto toys.  Just rather get things I can actually carry.
If they were a couple grand I would buy one to have it but to tie up 10-20G to buy something Id like and to only be able to shoot it at a range...  Just not for me...  Id rather pay someone to rent their toys and play with em like you can do in the desert in Vegas.

AOW...  I cant carry the 23 in shotgun so why bother...

Silencers...  Useless yes!  But I have to get a couple....

Just my 2 cents.  I am sure many others will be buying them.  Many think they are good invetments and in a way are but Id be better off putting that money into other things at this point...  If I hit the lotto???  WATCH OUT!!  Ill have one of every toy haha  I hope some guys get some nice stuff and start to do rentals like in Vegas!  When you do let me know, Ill be first in line!

Quoted: NO!  It is NOT legal to hunt with a silencer.  It is not legal to put a silencer on a gun while carrying it either, these are only legal to own and shoot with.  You will not be able to carry a silencer, AOW or MG.

Bummer.  It's legal in some states.  It is nice to be able to hear what is going on around you, but not worry about blasting out your eardrums when you go to shoot.

Well, I read the opinion and I didn't see anything about supressors.  I also read the thread and though there seems to be logic behind the inclusion of supressors I'm waiting for official word.  Actually I'm hoping...praying...salivating.  

2006 is looking up!

Quoted: Well, I read the opinion and I didn't see anything about supressors.

Go back and read this whole thread.  It has been covered already, and yes - it appears that silencers are good to go.

I hope suppressers are allowed it might help keep some ranges open for a while longer. I now I'm getting one just for the noise issue.

I hope suppressers are allowed it might help keep some ranges open for a while longer. I now I'm getting one just for the noise issue.

So, does anyone have any experience with CLEO signoff in Macomb County?

The Sheriff and Prosecuter in Macomb have always been pretty pro gun.

After doing some onlne checking it seems that transferrable M16 rifles sell at prices between 10 and 20 thousand dollars.

www.autoweapons.com/products/products.html

For horsepower to dollar value I think this site's M14 priced at $13,500 might be worth a trip to my credit union's loan officer. Ruger's AC556 is a close second in my preference at a mere $6,995.

Yup, it's time to drool.....

I have a buddy that lives in Macomb Twp and he has several, like 8,  NFA pieces. Never had a problem with a CLEO signature.

Quoted: After doing some onlne checking it seems that transferrable M16 rifles sell at prices between 10 and 20 thousand dollars. www.autoweapons.com/products/products.html For horsepower to dollar value I think this site's M14 priced at $13,500 might be worth a trip to my credit union's loan officer. Ruger's AC556 is a close second in my preference at a mere $6,995. Yup, it's time to drool.....

A .308 shoulder fired rifle gets old FAST!
I had a FAL (full auto - I am a dealer) and BOY did it suck to shoot.
Only shoulder fired .30 cal I'd buy is an M60.....or M240 if I had the scratch$$!
Perhaps I am a puss.

Autoweapons has a very impressive inventory but they are priced a little high in my opinion....you pay for the selection I guess.