Posted: 9/5/2011 9:14:42 AM EDT
|
Do you think the recent opinion gave us any momentum to try and push for legislation to remove the SBR, SBS ban?
MI SBR law PLEASE, IF YOU ARE READING THIS THREAD AND WANT SBR'S AND SBS'S IN MI, SEND A COPY OF THE LETTER I POSTED BELOW TO YOUR REPRESENTATIVES/SENATOR. EVERY VOICE COUNTS WITH THIS |
| The SBR law will requre a change in the law, not just an opinion. It will require a bill to be introduced (if there isnt one already), passing both committees and then both the House and Senate. Then the Gov signs it into law.The Reps could push this through but they are busy with economic reform. Not sure if they will bother with it. |
|
Contact your local State representatives, see what happens. I NEVER thought we would get anywhere with Silencers. Then again, I never thought that a LOT of the bills that have gone through would ever happen, either. Welfare reform in particular.
We have nothing to lose, and everything to gain. I didn't vote for Snyder; I voted for Mike Cox, as he cared about gun rights. But if Snyder is pissing off this many liberals, welfare rats, and UAW/union scumbags, hell, I have no beef with him. This is probably the best chance we have to get something like this through the legislature, as we control it... FOR NOW.... |
|
Quoted:
Contact your local State representatives, see what happens. Way ahead of you. I sent this out the other day. Representative Agema,
My name is ##########, and I am an active firearms enthusiast living in your district. As you may or may not be aware, recently, State Attorney General Bill Schuette filled opinion number 7260 concerning MCL 750.224 which regulated the manufacture, sale and possession of firearm silencers or mufflers. With this opinion, the door was opened for Federally controlled firearm sound suppressors to be obtained by law abiding Michigan residents willing to submit a $200 tax and undergo a lengthy (often 4-6 month) background check preformed by the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives. While gaining this freedom was a giant victory for Michigan firearm owners, there is one more law which currently prohibits residents from freedoms currently enjoyed by over 30 other states in our nation; making and transferring new manufacture short barreled rifles and shotguns (SBR and SBS respectively). MGL 750.224b currently addresses this issue, but only allows for SBR's and SBS's which are determined to be curio, relic or antique firearms to be owned by state residents, not new or recently manufactured SBR's and SBS's. This is where I, along with many others among the shooting community would like to ask for your support. We would like to see this law's exceptions parallel that of MGL 750.224 which allows for those who have been Federally licensed to obtain access to these types of firearms. Federally licensed meaning an individual or private corporation who have received permission from the BATFE on a form 5320.1 or 5320.4 to manufacture or transfer to ones possession a SBR or SBS. Note that these are the same forms currently used by Michigan residents to obtain other Federally controlled firearms and components such as machine guns and sound suppressors. The legalization of SBR's and SBS's is an issue that I, along with many other activists in the state take very seriously, and given the current political climate in Michigan's government, we feel that now is an excellent time to further our cause. Thank you for your time and I hope that we may count on your support in the future on this issue. Sincerely, ############# Is this something which would be best supported by a petition? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Contact your local State representatives, see what happens. Way ahead of you. I sent this out the other day. Representative Agema,
My name is ##########, and I am an active firearms enthusiast living in your district. As you may or may not be aware, recently, State Attorney General Bill Schuette filled opinion number 7260 concerning MCL 750.224 which regulated the manufacture, sale and possession of firearm silencers or mufflers. With this opinion, the door was opened for Federally controlled firearm sound suppressors to be obtained by law abiding Michigan residents willing to submit a $200 tax and undergo a lengthy (often 4-6 month) background check preformed by the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives. While gaining this freedom was a giant victory for Michigan firearm owners, there is one more law which currently prohibits residents from freedoms currently enjoyed by over 30 other states in our nation; making and transferring new manufacture short barreled rifles and shotguns (SBR and SBS respectively). MGL 750.224b currently addresses this issue, but only allows for SBR's and SBS's which are determined to be curio, relic or antique firearms to be owned by state residents, not new or recently manufactured SBR's and SBS's. This is where I, along with many others among the shooting community would like to ask for your support. We would like to see this law's exceptions parallel that of MGL 750.224 which allows for those who have been Federally licensed to obtain access to these types of firearms. Federally licensed meaning an individual or private corporation who have received permission from the BATFE on a form 5320.1 or 5320.4 to manufacture or transfer to ones possession a SBR or SBS. Note that these are the same forms currently used by Michigan residents to obtain other Federally controlled firearms and components such as machine guns and sound suppressors. The legalization of SBR's and SBS's is an issue that I, along with many other activists in the state take very seriously, and given the current political climate in Michigan's government, we feel that now is an excellent time to further our cause. Thank you for your time and I hope that we may count on your support in the future on this issue. Sincerely, ############# Is this something which would be best supported by a petition? Maybe, maybe not. We HAD a petition for Silencers on here... it failed miserably. I copied your email, and sent it to Jim Stamas. |
|
IIRC, there has already been some dialogue in Lansing about SBR's and SBS's. People who wrote about suppressors to their reps were including them and in turn the reps were at least mentioning to others who wrote that it was something they were conversant with.
Again, you get the .gov you deserve. They are there to work for you and not the other way around. If you want SBR's and SBS's then you need to contact your rep and tell them you would like them to streamline the state's firearm laws to reflect the same freedoms that other Americans enjoy. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Contact your local State representatives, see what happens. Way ahead of you. I sent this out the other day. Representative Agema, My name is ##########, and I am an active firearms enthusiast living in your district. As you may or may not be aware, recently, State Attorney General Bill Schuette filled opinion number 7260 concerning MCL 750.224 which regulated the manufacture, sale and possession of firearm silencers or mufflers. With this opinion, the door was opened for Federally controlled firearm sound suppressors to be obtained by law abiding Michigan residents willing to submit a $200 tax and undergo a lengthy (often 4-6 month) background check preformed by the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives. While gaining this freedom was a giant victory for Michigan firearm owners, there is one more law which currently prohibits residents from freedoms currently enjoyed by over 30 other states in our nation; making and transferring new manufacture short barreled rifles and shotguns (SBR and SBS respectively). MGL 750.224b currently addresses this issue, but only allows for SBR's and SBS's which are determined to be curio, relic or antique firearms to be owned by state residents, not new or recently manufactured SBR's and SBS's. This is where I, along with many others among the shooting community would like to ask for your support. We would like to see this law's exceptions parallel that of MGL 750.224 which allows for those who have been Federally licensed to obtain access to these types of firearms. Federally licensed meaning an individual or private corporation who have received permission from the BATFE on a form 5320.1 or 5320.4 to manufacture or transfer to ones possession a SBR or SBS. Note that these are the same forms currently used by Michigan residents to obtain other Federally controlled firearms and components such as machine guns and sound suppressors. The legalization of SBR's and SBS's is an issue that I, along with many other activists in the state take very seriously, and given the current political climate in Michigan's government, we feel that now is an excellent time to further our cause. Thank you for your time and I hope that we may count on your support in the future on this issue. Sincerely, ############# Is this something which would be best supported by a petition? I just sent that to him also. I know he was in favor of Suppressors, but didn't do anything active in the past to get them going. We will see if now we can get this one going. |
| I'm working right now to see if I can't set up some sort of appointment or phone conversation to speak with him personally. Please, everyone, feel free to copy/modify my letter and send it to all of your reps and your senator, the more attention they receive, the better. I just hope it doesn't all get drowned out by med. marijuana, pensions, etc.. |
|
Quoted:
I'm working right now to see if I can't set up some sort of appointment or phone conversation to speak with him personally. Please, everyone, feel free to copy/modify my letter and send it to all of your reps and your senator, the more attention they receive, the better. I just hope it doesn't all get drowned out by med. marijuana, pensions, etc.. What's the deal with all these pissed of potheads, anyway? |
|
I have mentioned this to my reps at different times and I think we have a great opportunity right now. While not perfect, the republicans control the houses and the executive positions. If the bill was drafted and partially spun as improving efficiency and redundancy (just follow the federal laws and not add layers) I think it would have a good chance.
If everyone would write/call their rep/senator you would be surprised at what can happen. I have mentioned these issues to them in the past and it did not require going to $100 banquets or other expensive activities. While I would liked to have been able to do that, financially that was not in the cards. A call or a written letter goes a long way and I know that some might find it intimidating but it gets really easy after you write the first one. Your rep/senator is a person just like you and might not have been exposed to firearms like many of us here have been. Educate them, invite them over for matches so they can see it is not a bunch of wackos that are asking for "dangerous short barreled weapons". Offer to help campaign for them or even just post a yard sign if they support your views. Simple things like this go a long way. The main thing is not to give up. There are many on this very board that fought hard for the opinion that was released last Friday. While I was not able to do everything that they did, I did what I could with my budget and time. Every little bit helps and look how far this state has come. Ten years ago we basically could not have anything NFA and we were just getting CCW. On the idea for SBR/SBS I am all for it. Maybe it would be a good idea for a group of supports to draft a bill and then present it to an open rep/senator. This way we could help avoid any pits falls or amend other laws that would impact this. |
| It's great to see some more people willing to get involved. Don't underestimate the power of motivated people in numbers. 8 years ago people thought it was impossible to get non C&R mgs in MI. 6 years ago people said it was impossible to get SBRs and SBS in MI. I proved that wrong by getting form 1s and safety inspecton cards for them in MI. 3 years ago people told me that what a few of us were doing to try to get silencers was a waste of time and money and look where we are now. Come up with a good plan to get the law changed and don't give up. Don't expect quick results, but don't give up. |
|
Quoted:
I have mentioned this to my reps at different times and I think we have a great opportunity right now. While not perfect, the republicans control the houses and the executive positions. If the bill was drafted and partially spun as improving efficiency and redundancy (just follow the federal laws and not add layers) I think it would have a good chance. If everyone would write/call their rep/senator you would be surprised at what can happen. I have mentioned these issues to them in the past and it did not require going to $100 banquets or other expensive activities. While I would liked to have been able to do that, financially that was not in the cards. A call or a written letter goes a long way and I know that some might find it intimidating but it gets really easy after you write the first one. Your rep/senator is a person just like you and might not have been exposed to firearms like many of us here have been. Educate them, invite them over for matches so they can see it is not a bunch of wackos that are asking for "dangerous short barreled weapons". Offer to help campaign for them or even just post a yard sign if they support your views. Simple things like this go a long way. The main thing is not to give up. There are many on this very board that fought hard for the opinion that was released last Friday. While I was not able to do everything that they did, I did what I could with my budget and time. Every little bit helps and look how far this state has come. Ten years ago we basically could not have anything NFA and we were just getting CCW. On the idea for SBR/SBS I am all for it. Maybe it would be a good idea for a group of supports to draft a bill and then present it to an open rep/senator. This way we could help avoid any pits falls or amend other laws that would impact this. You don't pay them $100 to buy their vote, you attend a fundraiser to reward a politician who doesn't assume an adversarial relationship with you as a constituent based on the fact that you are a gun owner. How many politicians would be MORTIFIED to know there was a table of gun people at one of their fundraisers, and worse would be afraid that word would get out that they were in bed with the Gun Lobby? Mike Cox was/is the real deal-if you had heard him speak at the 2nd Amendment March in Lansing, you would see that the man understands the 2nd Amendment and EXACTLY what it was designed to do for the American People. I don't know about you, but I'd rather like to see more politicians in office who understand that my owning a firearm is to protect me from politicians like himself and I'm damned sad he isn't governor right now. |
|
Reply from my rep.
Mr. mi650: Thank you for writing to me about this important issue. I support the rights of Michigan's firearm owners. I will be sure to check with my colleagues to see if a bill has been requested by any of them for this purpose. You may also be interested in some other bills which I have introduced to protect the rights of gun owners: HB 4124-4126 - These bills change the definition of a pistol to a firearm less than 26" in length. Current law sets the number at 30 inches. I have introduced these bills as some rifles with folding stocks are less than 30 inches, and so under Michigan law technically are subject to the same purchase and other restrictions as pistols. My bills would eliminate these restrictions. HB 4247 - This bill would protect a persons right to carry a pistol if the previous bills are enacted. Once again, thank you for bringing the issue with SBRs and SBSs to my attention. Sincerely, Douglas A. Geiss State Representative, 22nd District |