Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 3/24/2006 2:16:10 PM EDT
Anyone else see this?

mcgro link

or

.gov link

My understanding is that it's now OK to let a spouse or VERY trusted friend to take you pistol to the range...assuming it is properly "safety inspected."

Don



Link Posted: 3/24/2006 2:49:57 PM EDT
YES-Not just the range though!!

Today, Governor Granholm signed into law H.B. 4642 sponsored by Rep. Rick Jones. The legislation, passed by the House 99-8 and the Senate 33-4 has immediate effect and becomes P.A. 75-06. This Bill will allow the owner of a pistol to loan their properly registered handgun to any person with a Concealed Pistol License. The borrower may then carry that pistol or use it in any legal manner. Previously, in order to comply with the letter of the law, one would have had to obtained a Permit to Purchase or completed an RI-60 form and then had the pistol registered (safety inspected) in their own name. The process would then have had to been repeated in reverse on the return of the pistol to it’s owner. P.A. 75-06 removes these tedious requirements.

Couples will now be able to share a single pistol when family economics do not allow for the purchase of more than one self defense handgun. A friend may now loan a hunting handgun to someone for a trip up north without them having to purchase one of their own. Another benefit is that it will now be legal for a wife to leave her pistol in a car with her CPL holding husband while she runs into the Post Office or for her husband to leave his in her care while he retrieves their daughter from preschool. Previously, the person left in the vehicle could have been charged with possessing an unregistered pistol.

SAFR has backed this Bill since it’s introduction in April of last year. Members of your Legislative Committee provided testimony in favor of the Bill in June of 2005 and have continued to push for it’s passage during their visits with members of the legislature. The overwhelming support in both House and Senate shows that our legislators are listening. Please let your Senator and Representative know that you appreciate their supporting this Bill.

In the next few days we hope to be able to report even more success in improving our rights to Keep and Bear Arms. Stay tuned.

SAFR Legislative Committee

Jenny has surprised me on the CPL issues for sure..

Brenden
Link Posted: 3/24/2006 5:22:25 PM EDT
Yeah - I saw this ATF open letter posted on the MCRGO website - but do you think they would have posted the ATF Michigan Machine Gun letter on Michigan AG Opinion 7183 that resides on the very same ATF webpage? NO. I wonder why? Not important to them I guess. Seems like if it ain't CPL / CCW or their idea it don't cut the ice.

In defense of MCRGO I will say they did have the Macomb Daily article posted for awhile on the news articles section for a period of time.




Link Posted: 3/25/2006 10:04:27 AM EDT

Originally Posted By BustOff:


In defense of MCRGO ...







I was a member for years, but I will not defend them on ANYTHING until Chuckie P. gets ousted.
Link Posted: 3/25/2006 10:37:40 AM EDT
My copy was an E-mail from the org SAFR..

I used to be a MCR-- member too,till all the BS..

It's good news anyways!!

Brenden
Link Posted: 3/25/2006 12:38:53 PM EDT
To tell you the truth MCRGO has become an arm of the state legislature and not much other than that.

I might also add that my MSN Hotmail account which was shutdown due to "objectionable" content based on a complaint was functioning for years. I certainly can't prove anything but the last people to be emailed of which I had not emailed in the past was the MCRGO leadership and the Bambery's. So that was like 5 or 6 people and after that - boom dead hotmail account!

This also means Michigan Gun Owners are not really represented by independant interests anymore. This also means I am contemplating a new grassroots gun owners group the foundation for which is being developed right now.
Link Posted: 3/25/2006 3:03:04 PM EDT

Originally Posted By BustOff:


This also means Michigan Gun Owners are not really represented by independant interests anymore. This also means I am contemplating a new grassroots gun owners group the foundation for which is being developed right now.



They haven't been since Chuckie shut up/out everyone with a brain or ambition. Even Felbeck was 100x better than Perricone.

There have been at least 2 others that I know of : GLSSA and SAFR. They seem to be doing a good job.
Link Posted: 3/25/2006 8:29:21 PM EDT
You guys mind filling me in on the issues you have with MCGRO? I'm not a member (did think about it), but just occasionally glance at their website as an informational source.

Don

Link Posted: 3/26/2006 5:10:31 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/26/2006 5:20:21 AM EDT by Garand06]

Originally Posted By BessonGuy:
You guys mind filling me in on the issues you have with MCGRO? I'm not a member (did think about it), but just occasionally glance at their website as an informational source.

Don




I had spelled it all out, but decided to remove it all. Don't need chuckie coming after me as he has done others.

Go to www.cpltrainer.com and you'll find all you need to know.
Link Posted: 3/26/2006 8:37:23 AM EDT

Originally Posted By BustOff:
...This also means Michigan Gun Owners are not really represented by independant interests anymore. This also means I am contemplating a new grassroots gun owners group the foundation for which is being developed right now.



I feel like there are already too many grassroots gun rights orgs in MI (MGO, SAFR, GLSSA). I long for the "pre-CP" days when almost everyone was behind one org, MCRGO, and we were a force to be reckoned with. I agree with the other posts though, I cannot support their current leadership. Anyway, just wish these other existing groups could unite as one and basically replace MCRGO. Anyway, can't blame you BustOff for wanting to start your own org, seems like you have been a one-man org on many issues, from the posts here! Thank you, thank you, thank you on the NFA work!! I had been posting links to some of your threads here on the MGO and cpltrainer.com forums.
Link Posted: 3/26/2006 8:58:24 AM EDT
Sierra Bravo Romeo
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 4:55:35 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/27/2006 4:55:50 AM EDT by jchewie]
SWEET!

This means that my wife can carry my pistols, or I can carry my wife's pistols, and we don't have to be holding hands!!!!!

It really is a blessing to not have to purchase pistols in duplicate - not that I don't want more guns, but prudent financial decisions would have me do otherwise.

And Jennie even signed it!
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 12:47:58 PM EDT

Originally Posted By BustOff:
Yeah - I saw this ATF open letter posted on the MCRGO website - but do you think they would have posted the ATF Michigan Machine Gun letter on Michigan AG Opinion 7183 that resides on the very same ATF webpage? NO. I wonder why? Not important to them I guess. Seems like if it ain't CPL / CCW or their idea it don't cut the ice.



Quite the contrary. MCRGO did post the AG Opinion 7183 regarding machine guns. It was poste in Jan, 2006 at the following link. Look before you leap http://www.mcrgo.org/mcrgo/view/news.asp?articleid=984&zoneid=100
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 12:54:08 PM EDT

There have been at least 2 others that I know of : GLSSA and SAFR. They seem to be doing a good job.


I've heard that SAFR is about to close it's doors, that was posted by the SAFR president on another forum about a month ago. And GLSSA is a 'for-profit' org that dosnt attrach many members cause it's membership dollars go straight into the pocket of its president who now lives out-or-state somewhere.
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 3:28:51 PM EDT
MCRGO Member - please re-read my post, the part where I said "In defense of MCRGO I will say they did have the Macomb Daily article posted for awhile on the news articles section for a period of time."

OK.

They certainly did not post the ATF position paper that resides on the same ATF webpage as the posted ATF open letter. Which is what we were talking about. This is entirely different from the AG's opinion or the Macomb Daily Article.

OK.

Link Posted: 3/27/2006 3:48:39 PM EDT
And another thing - who the hell fights for the NFA guys anyway? NOBODY. That's why it's taken 29 years to get it partially corrected. And, as I understand it, and I happen to know alot about it, the NFA issue has been put forth to numerous political leaders and pro-gun groups who have done nothing for the NFA guys. That's why it's taken 29 years for a correction.

Over the years everybody has got a little something like CPL, sunset of the AWB and got damnit - it's about time the NFA guys got theirs, and so they have got a small part of their freedom back and in turn all gunners now have a bit of freedom back should they choose to excercise it!

When it comes to gun rights - if you don't have the right to own a machine gun what gives you the right to own any gun? It's all gun rights or no gun rights, we should stand together and support each others gun rights all the time and not throw some unpopular gun rights to the back burner where they sit and stew for 29 years.

I too overlooked the NFA issues until I got introduced to them. Now I understand. Now I'm trying to make others understand - perhaps people like yourself and MCRGO and company! You need to take note there are other pro gun issues that are as important as carry issues.

Link Posted: 3/27/2006 4:10:20 PM EDT
So this is now in effect? I can take my wifes pistol to the range tomorrow if I want? Sweet!!
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 6:19:03 PM EDT
Hey, MCRGO:
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 6:20:46 PM EDT
Hey, MCRGO: forgot to ask above: How's the kool-aid taste?

Tim W
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 6:29:53 PM EDT

Originally Posted By shop_rat45:
So this is now in effect? I can take my wifes pistol to the range tomorrow if I want? Sweet!!



I believe this legislation will be in effect July 1st 2006. I took that from this link
http://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/2005-2006/publicact/htm/2006-PA-0075.htm
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 6:31:08 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Garand06:
Hey, MCRGO: forgot to ask above: How's the kool-aid taste?

Tim W



hey Tim, I'm drinking a Milwalkee Best right now, hows your koolaid?
Link Posted: 3/27/2006 6:35:41 PM EDT

Originally Posted By MCRGO:

Originally Posted By Garand06:
Hey, MCRGO: forgot to ask above: How's the kool-aid taste?

Tim W



hey Tim, I'm drinking a Milwalkee Best moose piss right now, hows your koolaid?



If you don't know what I'm referring to, you aint' been around long enough to make an informed decision on whether or not MCRGO is to be defended.
Link Posted: 3/29/2006 9:02:58 PM EDT
I guess I am confused. Before I had a CHL, I used to take my wife's .22 pistol to the range for my daughter to shoot when she was younger. My wife often did not accompany us.

And now that I have the CHL, you are saying that it would have been illegal for me to carry her lawfully owned handgun with my license? I thought there was no limitations to what gun I could carry with my license?

No Expert
Link Posted: 3/30/2006 4:53:06 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/30/2006 4:54:24 AM EDT by jchewie]

Originally Posted By No_Expert:
I guess I am confused. Before I had a CHL, I used to take my wife's .22 pistol to the range for my daughter to shoot when she was younger. My wife often did not accompany us.

And now that I have the CHL, you are saying that it would have been illegal for me to carry her lawfully owned handgun with my license? I thought there was no limitations to what gun I could carry with my license?

No Expert



It is illegal to possess a pistol that is registered to someone else without the someone else being there. I couldn't, for example borrow my dad's Single action Rugers for a weekend and go to a Cowboy Action shoot without the green cards being in my name. I also could not borrow my wife's 22 and go squirrel hunting. After July 1 if I have a CPL I will be able to.
Link Posted: 3/30/2006 7:16:55 PM EDT
.
Link Posted: 3/31/2006 2:07:36 AM EDT

Originally Posted By jchewie:

Originally Posted By No_Expert:
I guess I am confused. Before I had a CHL, I used to take my wife's .22 pistol to the range for my daughter to shoot when she was younger. My wife often did not accompany us.

And now that I have the CHL, you are saying that it would have been illegal for me to carry her lawfully owned handgun with my license? I thought there was no limitations to what gun I could carry with my license?

No Expert



It is illegal to possess a pistol that is registered to someone else without the someone else being there. I couldn't, for example borrow my dad's Single action Rugers for a weekend and go to a Cowboy Action shoot without the green cards being in my name. I also could not borrow my wife's 22 and go squirrel hunting. After July 1 if I have a CPL I will be able to.



Wow.... that was insane. I would have thought marital property and all that. I mean, since the registration is supposedly only a "safety inspection".

Glad they got it changed.

No Expert
Link Posted: 3/31/2006 5:41:39 PM EDT

Originally Posted By MCRGO:

Originally Posted By Garand06:
Hey, MCRGO: forgot to ask above: How's the kool-aid taste?

Tim W



hey Tim, I'm drinking a Milwalkee Best right now, hows your koolaid?



Well I guess this isn't Chuckie!!

Since he is making the money,I would assume he drinks scotch!!

MCRGO has ran off all of the "ground floor" activists,and only care about the upper crust of the legislative branch..

It will not do any good when they are without funds,and without "friends"

We do need a voice of "one" but MCRGO is not it at this time of history!!

Top Top