Posted: 6/27/2006 6:00:43 PM EDT
|
Okay, I have paid for my suppressor, its serial # is in and I have the forms awaiting signature. I have been told no sign off until the new opinion is issued. So far no opinion. Basicl y how long do I wait. The way I see it, there has been several sold but so far a no go. Should I get my money and wait till the opinion comes out and start over. the dealer has possesion of it and I can go there and shoot it but then you have a used suppressor that you cannot legally take possesion of. That would just muddy the waters if the opinion never comes. Suggestions?? Chinook3 |
|
Email Mike Cox and ask him to sign and release the opinion. Address to the attention of Attorney General Mike Cox in the subject line and send to: [email protected] |
Email sent! |
|
I know Mike Cox is a great guy and a friend of gun owners but I am getting the feeling that he is gonna table the silencer issue until after the election. The machine gun decision went through without much debate or contraversey (after words I mean, Im sure there was much debate before it was approved) because machine guns were all ready here, just as C&R only so it made sense to most people. Plus the gun grabbers had no reason to make an issue out of it at the time. However, silencers have the potental of becomming a political issue at a key Gov. election. The question may be has Devos's camp asked him to hold off until after the election? It would make more political sense to wait then to give the Dems one more piece of potential political ammo. There are fewer people temporarily impacted by waiting compaired to the potential number of people who may be jolted and scared by the dem. gun grabbers and thier lies about guns and gun crimes. Just my 2 cents. Ok, Im off my soap box now. PS- He's already got an email and letter from me to push this through asap. |
|
Your political analysis may have some validity but is mostly speculation unless you have insider information. It is logical to conclude Cox won't go out on a political limb and issue the silencer opinion just a few months before an election in which his career is on the line. I am sure the Cox campaign does not want any media attention that they themselves have not initiated which is what would probably happen if he released a silencer opinion. You are most likely correct in that Cox's political foes, the dems and the anti's would probably scream bloody murder and there would be attack ad's on prime time tv showing a silencer pointing in your face declaring Cox just silenced your life - know what I mean. Having said all that I'm sure Mike Cox himself is probably having some heartburn over the issue. If we are right and he thinks we're right and he has the opinion sitting there saying we're right and he does not want to deliver it then I'm sure that could be politically agonizing. I'm sure he'd like to give it to us but perhaps we may be waiting like you have said until later. Personally I have a $500+ dollar Gemtech Viper 45 can paid for sitting at my dealer that I can't transfer so I have a stake in all of this. And I'm out that money and that can until we get this thing straight and that's not to mention the $300 I have contributed to Cox's campaign so far and I intend to send him more even though I don't have all of what I want! In the end we can encourage Mike to sign and release the opinion. We can continue our financial support. We must get him re-elected and we must work for him and make it known why we support him. Now when it comes down to it a legislator has asked a question of law on our behalf and I still have some hope that Mike can find a way answer the question. |
| Would Cox be able to release a new opinion negating the previous AG's opinion about MI long-gun/pistol definitions? That is, anything with a 16" barrel but with an OAL between 26" and 30" is a pistol. I want to put a folder on my AK, but I'd have to register it. I had to register my PS90, and if I want to get a SIG 556 folder, FS2000, or XCR, they'd all have to be registered as pistols also. |
|
Yes Metro we have approached that subject with him. Kerry (Michman1) is also working on what the question might read like. The current Frank Kelly opinion is overly complicated. Getting the challenging question language to read understandably to Attorneys is no less challenging. But yes it is being studied. Do you have an angle you'd like to put forward? Please feel free to discuss ideas, it's how we did the mg opinion. |
|
I'm sure the intent of Frank Kelly's opinion was to somewhat regulate short rifles (due to folding/collapsible stocks) for whatever reason, but it might just be easier to follow the Federal regulations; that is, a non-SBR long-gun must have a 16" or longer barrel and measure more than 26" in overall length but registration shouldn't be required since it technically isn't a pistol. I'm not sure how helpful this is as you have a bunch of pros working on it. |
|
Hahahahaha - It's amazing how our minds think so much alike Kerry! I have been thinking the same thing. Perhaps we should direct some inquiry to the ATF after all they have officially said they formally requested an opinion on the subject. Perhaps we should all start asking ATF what the status is with their request! This is what they said right??? www.atf.treas.gov/firearms/030106mich_mg_position_paper.pdf "Please note that MCL 750.224 provides the prohibitions and exceptions for the manufacture, sale, offering for sale or possession of machineguns as well as mufflers, silencers and bombs. OAG No. 7183 however, only addresses the transfer and registration of a machinegun. ATF has formally requested clarification from the Michigan Attorney General on whether the rationale set forth in OAG No. 7183 also applies to other NFA firearms. Applications received by ATF from Michigan residents for items other than machineguns will be held until the requested clarification is received from the Michigan Attorney General." |