Is Michigan an open carry gun state?

Is Michigan an open carry gun state?

Michigan is an open carry state. There is no law that says it is illegal to do so.

The Michigan State Police legal update describes Michigan’s open carry  law as follows:

In Michigan, it is legal for a person to carry a firearm in public as long as the person is carrying the firearm with lawful intent and the firearm is not concealed. You will not find a law that states it is legal to openly carry a firearm. It is legal because there is no Michigan law that prohibits it; however, Michigan law limits the premises on which a person may carry a firearm.

Prohibited premises:

  • Schools or school property but may carry while in a vehicle on school property while dropping off or picking up if a parent or legal guardian
  • Public or private day care center, public or private child caring agency, or public or private child placing agency.
  • Sports arena or stadium
  • A tavern where the primary source of income is the sale of alcoholic liquor by the glass 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 allow concealed weapons
  • An entertainment facility that the individual knows or should know has a seating capacity of 2,500 or more
  • A hospital
  • A dormitory or classroom of a community college, college, or university
  • A Casino

Anyone with a concealed pistol license (CPL) may carry a non-concealed firearm in the above listed premises. And it’s important to note a CPL holder is not required by law to carry a pistol concealed. A CPL holder may carry a pistol concealed or non-concealed.

Private Property

A private property owner has the right to prohibit individuals from carrying firearms on his or her property, whether concealed or otherwise, and regardless of whether the person is a CPL holder.

If a person remains on the property after being told to leave by the owner, the person may be charged with trespassing.

Schools

Michigan schools are allowed to make their own rules about guns. The Michigan Court of Appeals ruled school districts are allowed to ban guns from their buildings and ask anyone with a gun to leave. Trespassing charges can be pursued if the person does not leave the school when asked.

M I C H I G A N S T A T E P O L I C E
LEGAL UPDATE

O C T O B E R 2 6 , 2 0 1 0

FIREARMS LAW

As more and more police officers are encountering citizens who are openly carrying firearms in Michigan, the Michigan State Police offers this special edition of the Update to assist officers in familiarizing themselves with Michigan laws regarding both open and concealed carrying of firearms.

Open carry of firearms

In Michigan, it is legal for a person to carry a firearm in public as long as the person is carrying the firearm with lawful intent and the firearm is not concealed.

You will not find a law that states it is legal to openly carry a firearm. It is legal because there is no Michigan law that prohibits it; however, Michigan law limits the premises on which a person may carry a firearm.

MCL 750.234d provides that it is a 90 day misdemeanor to possess a firearm on the premises of any of the following:

  • A depository financial institution (e.g., bank or credit union)
  • A church or other place of religious worship
  • A court
  • A theater
  • A sports arena
  • A day care center
  • A hospital
  • An establishment licensed under the Liquor Control Code

The above section does not apply to any of the
following:

  • The owner or a person hired as security (if the firearm is possessed for the purpose of providing security)
  • A peace officer
  • A person with a valid concealed pistol license
  • (CPL) issued by any state
  • A person who possesses on one of the above
  • listed premises with the permission of the owner
  • or owner’s agent

Officers must be aware of the above exemption for valid CPL holders as many of the citizens who openly carry firearms possess valid CPLs.

An individual with a valid CPL may carry a non-concealed firearm in the above listed premises.

A CPL holder is not required by law to carry a pistol concealed. A CPL holder may carry a pistol concealed or non-concealed.

A private property owner has the right to prohibit individuals from carrying firearms on his or her property, whether concealed or otherwise, and regardless of whether the person is a CPL holder.

If a person remains on the property after being told to leave by the owner, the person may be charged with trespassing (MCL 750.552).

MCL 750.226 states it is a felony for a person to carry a dangerous weapon, including a firearm, with the intent to use the weapon unlawfully against another person.

Possession of firearms in public by a minor is addressed in MCL 750.234f.

Brandishing firearms

MCL 750.234e provides that it is a 90-day misdemeanor for a person to knowingly brandish a firearm in public. Brandishing is not defined in
Michigan law and there are no reported Michigan cases that define the term.

Attorney General Opinion No. 7101 provides guidance and states, “A person when carrying a handgun in a holster in plain view is not waving or displaying the firearm in a threatening manner. Thus, such conduct does not constitute brandishing a firearm….”

In the absence of any reported Michigan appellate court decisions defining “brandishing,” it is appropriate to rely upon dictionary definitions. People v Denio, 454 Mich 691, 699; 564 NW2d 13 (1997). According to The American Heritage Dictionary, Second College Edition (1982), at p 204, the term brandishing is defined as: “1. To wave or flourish menacingly, as a weapon. 2. To display ostentatiously. –n. A menacing or defiant wave or flourish.” This definition comports with the meaning ascribed to this term by courts of other jurisdictions. For example, in United States v Moerman, 233 F3d 379, 380 (CA 6, 2000), the court recognized that in federal sentencing guidelines, “brandishing” a weapon is defined to mean “that the weapon was pointed or waved about, or displayed in a threatening manner.”

Transporting firearms

Michigan law details how firearms may be transported in a vehicle. MCL 750.227c and MCL 750.227d discuss the transportation of firearms, other than pistols, in vehicles. MCL 750.227(2) makes it a felony for a person to transport a pistol anywhere in a vehicle unless the person is licensed to carry a concealed pistol.

Exceptions to the above statute are found in MCL 750.231a.

One such exception allows for transportation of pistols in a vehicle for a “lawful purpose.”

A lawful purpose includes going to or from any one of the following:

  • A hunting or target area
  • A place of repair
  • Moving goods from a home or business to another home or business
  • A law enforcement agency (for a safety inspection or to turn the pistol over to the agency)
  • A gun show or place of sale or purchase
  • A public shooting facility
  • Public land where shooting is legal
  • Private property where a pistol may be lawfully
  • used.

MCL 750.231a also provides that a pistol transported for a “lawful purpose” by a person not licensed to carry a concealed pistol must be all of the following:

  • Unloaded
  • In a closed case designed for firearms
  • In the trunk (or if the vehicle has no trunk, it must not be readily accessible to the occupants)

There is no way to “open carry” a pistol in a vehicle. An individual, without a CPL or otherwise exempted (e.g., a police officer), who transports a pistol in a vehicle to an area where he or she intends to “open carry” may be in violation of MCL 750.227.

Carrying concealed weapons

MCL 750.227 also makes it a felony for a person to carry a concealed pistol on or about his or her person unless the person is exempt under MCL
750.231
or MCL 750.231a.

Complete invisibility is not required.

The carrying of a pistol in a holster or belt outside the clothing is not carrying a concealed weapon.

Carrying a pistol under a coat is carrying a concealed weapon.

Op. Atty. Gen. 1945, O-3158. According to the Court of Appeals in People v. Reynolds, a weapon is concealed if it is not observed by those casually
observing the suspect as people do in the ordinary course and usual associations of life. 38 Mich App. 159 (1970).

Firearms Act

MCL 28.422 provides that a person shall not purchase, carry, possess, or transport a pistol in Michigan without first having obtained a License
to Purchase and registering the pistol.

The statute contains exemptions for certain persons and additional exemptions are located in MCL 28.422a and in MCL 28.432.

A person with a valid Michigan CPL does not have to obtain a License to Purchase; however, he or she still has to register the pistol after he or she purchases or otherwise acquires it using a Pistol Sales Record (MCL 28.422a). Violation is a state civil infraction.

Gun Belongs To Another Person?

Additionally, a person with a valid CPL can carry, possess, use, or
transport a properly registered pistol belonging to another (MCL 28.432).

Gun Records

Pistol buyers are required to have in their possession their copy of the License to Purchase or Pistol Sales Record when carrying, using, possessing, and transporting the pistol for 30 days after they acquire the pistol. These
records are commonly referred to as Registration Certificates or Green Cards.

Officers are reminded that after 30 days, there is no requirement to have either record in their possession or to keep either record.

CPL (Where It Get Confusing)

MCL 28.425o provides that a person with a valid CPL shall not carry a concealed pistol in a pistol free zone.

The following is a list of the premises (excluding parking lots) included in the statute:

First offense is a state civil infraction.

  • School or school property, except a parent or legal guardian who is dropping off or picking up a child and the pistol is kept in the vehicle
  • Public or private day care center
  • Sports arena or stadium
  • A bar or tavern where sale and consumption of liquor by the glass is the primary source of income (does not apply to owner or employee of the business).
  • Any property or facility owned or operated by a
  • church, synagogue, mosque, temple, or other
  • place of worship, unless authorized by the presiding official
  • An entertainment facility that has a seating capacity of 2,500 or more
  • A hospital
  • A dormitory or classroom of a community college, college, or university
  • A casino (R 432.1212, MCL 432.202)

Note, the above statute applies to CPL holders carrying a concealed pistol. If the CPL holder is carrying a non-concealed pistol, the statute does not apply. As noted above, the unlawful premises listed in MCL 750.234d do not apply to persons with a valid CPL. Therefore, a person with a valid CPL may carry a non-concealed pistol in the areas described in MCL 28.425o and MCL 750.234d.

Additionally, the above listed pistol-free zones for CPL holders do not apply to the following individuals when they are licensed to carry a concealed weapon:

  • Retired police officers
  • Persons employed or contracted by a listed entity to provide security where carrying a concealed pistol is a term of employment
  • Licensed private detectives or investigators
  • Sheriff’s department corrections officers
  • State police motor carrier officers or capital security officers
  • Members of a sheriff’s posse
  • Auxiliary or reserve officers of a police or sheriff’s department
  • Parole or probation officers of the department of corrections
  • Current or retired state court judges

Out-of-state residents

Non-residents may legally possess a firearm more than 30 inches in length in Michigan.

In order for a non-resident to possess a pistol in Michigan, he or she must either be licensed to carry a concealed pistol or be licensed by his or
her state of residence to purchase, carry, or transport a pistol.

The ownership of property in Michigan does not qualify a non-resident to
possess a pistol in Michigan.

Non-resident concealed pistol possession.

MCL 750.231a makes it legal for a non-resident of Michigan with a valid CPL issued by his or her state of residence to carry a concealed pistol in Michigan as long as the pistol is carried in conformance with any and all restrictions appearing on the license.

Individuals with out of state CPLs are subject to Michigan laws that
govern Michigan CPL holders. As many states issue CPLs to out of state residents, officers should verify that the person actually resides in
the state that issued the license.

If the person does not reside in the state that issued the license, Michigan does not recognize the CPL and the person may not carry a concealed pistol
in Michigan.

Possession of pistols by non-residents

MCL 28.432 makes it legal for non-residents of Michigan who hold valid CPLs issued by another state to possess a non-concealed pistol in
Michigan without complying with Michigan’s pistol registration requirements.

Additionally, MCL 28.422 exempts residents of other states from Michigan’s pistol registration requirements therefore, allowing them to possess a pistol in Michigan, if all of the following requirements are met:

  • The person is licensed by his or her state of residence to purchase, transport, or carry a pistol,
  • The person is in possession of the license while in Michigan,
  • The person owns the pistol possessed in Michigan,
  • The person possesses the pistol for a lawful purpose as defined in MCL 750.231a, and
  • The person is in Michigan less than 180 days and does not intend to establish residency here.

A non-resident must present the license issued by his or her state of residence to a police officer upon demand. Failure to do so is a 90-day
misdemeanor.

When transporting a firearm in Michigan, non-residents must transport pistols in compliance with MCL 750.231a (discussed above in the Transporting Firearms section), unless they have a concealed pistol license
issued by their state of residence.

Officers are reminded that the Fourth Amendment protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures.

Carrying a nonconcealed firearm is generally legal.

Officers may engage in a consensual encounter with a person carrying a non-concealed pistol; however, in order to stop a citizen, officers are required to have reasonable suspicion that crime is afoot.

For example, officers may not stop a person on the mere possibility the person may be carrying an unregistered pistol. Officers must possess facts rising to the level of reasonable suspicion to believe the person is carrying an unregistered pistol.

Officers are also reminded there is no general duty for a citizen to identify himself or herself to a police officer unless the citizen is being stopped for a Michigan Vehicle Code violation.

Here is the link to the Michigan State Police Legal Update from where the information was obtained. Please Note: Laws change so please consult an attorney for any legal questions.

You Won’t Lose Your Gun Just For Smoking Recreational Marijuana

You Won’t Lose Your Gun Just For Smoking Recreational Marijuana

You Won’t Lose Your Gun Just For Smoking Recreational Marijuana – In Illinois.  11,000 marijuana conviction  expungements on 2020 new years day – In Illinois.  One database fills while another “empties”.

Rumors that Illinois gun owners will lose their firearms if they use cannabis under the state’s new legalization mandate are false.

That’s according to multiple authorities after major news outlets published stories claiming gun owners who purchase adult-use cannabis in Illinois would be placed into a database banning them from buying firearms.

The Illinois State Police said Dec. 31 it will not revoke Firearm Owner Identification Cards based solely on someone’s marijuana usage.

Illinois State Rifle Association lobbyist Ed Sullivan said cannabis dispensaries cannot share identifying information with law enforcement agencies unless the customer authorizes it.

But Sullivan notes the federal government still considers marijuana a Schedule I narcotic.

He said this allows the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) to obtain the records of medical cannabis users and potentially restrict their ability to buy guns from Federal Firearms License (FFL) dealers.

“If you intend to use cannabis and own a firearm taking the recreational cannabis route has less potential, detrimental effects on your 2nd Amendment rights than the medical cannabis route,” Sullivan said.

What about Michigan… Is anybody out there? Hello?…………………..What about Michigan?

Read the Rest of the Story Here

Recent Posts

The Michigan Supreme Court has ruled they have the right to ban guns

The Michigan Supreme Court has ruled they have the right to ban guns

July 27, 2018 – The Michigan Supreme Court has ruled that the Ann Arbor and Clio school districts have a right to ban guns from their schools

 

In a very much watched case that deals a blow to gun rights advocates who argued state law prohibits schools from enacting those policies.

 

Both districts had adopted the policies that barred the possession of guns on school property or at a school-sponsored event.

 

They each were sued by different groups. One was Michigan Gun Owners with parent Ulysses Wong, sued the Ann Arbor Public Schools. Michigan Open Carry with parent Kenneth Herman filed suit against the Clio Area Schools.

 

On Friday July 27, 2018, The 4-3 ruling upheld a 2016 ruling by the Michigan Court of Appeals which came to the same conclusion.

 

Jim Makowski, the attorney for Michigan Gun Owners and Wong, said the decision saddens him because he believes it will do nothing to improve school safety.

 

“Now criminals can be confident that most school districts are not going to allow firearms on property,” Makowski said. “Now we’ve just created a whole bunch of soft targets that are not going to be protected by an individual with a firearm.”

 

“Safety is our first and our primary duty, even before our critical mission of teaching and learning,” said Ann Arbor Public Schools Superintendent Jeanice Swift:.

 

That’s why the district, and its board, pushed the policy.

 

See the Supreme Court Document

Medical Marijuana, Gun Ownership, and CPLs in Michigan

Medical Marijuana, Gun Ownership, and CPLs in Michigan

It is a complex and changing area of law. We know that federal law (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3)) makes it a felony for an “unlawful user of … any controlled substance” to “possess … any firearm or ammunition.”

Marijuana is classified as a Schedule I controlled substance, so it is a felony for a user of marijuana to possess a firearm or ammunition. Juxtapose this with the fact that 28 states and the District of Columbia have now passed laws legalizing the medicinal and/or recreational use of marijuana.

The main question we get is: “I have a MMMA Card, can I still get a CPL and own and possess firearms?”

To get a License to Purchase a pistol or a Concealed Pistol License in Michigan, you must also pass a federal background check (NICS check). This brings federal law into the Michigan scheme of licensing. The ATF takes the position that anyone with a MMMA card is probably using and therefore they are not allowed to possess a firearm until 12 months after their last use. So, even having a card is a prohibitor in the eyes of the federal government.

Some argue that this may be a leap as a person with a MMMA card may not use marijuana the same as a CPL holder may not ever carry a pistol. The federal law has been challenged and been upheld so far. Courts have, without any real empirical evidence, assumed a connection between marijuana use and gun violence.

The Michigan database on who has a MMMA card does not talk to the State or Federal databases that are used for background checks. So, unless the person admits they have the card there is no real way for anyone to find out.

But you must fill out certain forms when you apply for a License to Purchase or CPL and you are stepping into a grey area when the marijuana question must be answered. Hopefully, we will get some clarity from new legislation or court cases in the future to make this interaction between laws more sensible.

More information about medical marijuana and firearms ownership can be found HERE.

About MCRGO:

The Michigan Coalition for Responsible Gun Owners is a non-profit, non-partisan organization. Formed from just eight people in 1996, we now have thousands of members and numerous affiliated clubs across the state. We’re growing larger and more effective every day.

Our mission statement is: “Promoting safe use and ownership of firearms through education, litigation, and legislation” Visit: www.mcrgo.org.

Read more: http://www.ammoland.com/2016/12/michigan-medical-marijuana-gun-ownership-cpls/#ixzz4SUjTbrTP

US court upholds ban on selling guns to marijuana card holders

US court upholds ban on selling guns to marijuana card holders

SAN FRANCISCO — A federal ban on the sale of guns to medical marijuana card holders does not violate the Second Amendment, a federal appeals court said Wednesday.

The ruling by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals applies to the nine Western states that fall under the court’s jurisdiction, including California, Washington and Oregon.

It came in a lawsuit filed by S. Rowan Wilson, a Nevada woman who said she tried to buy a firearm for self-defense in 2011 after obtaining a medical marijuana card. The gun store refused, citing the federal rule banning the sale of firearms to illegal drug users.

Marijuana remains illegal under federal law.

Wilson said she was not a marijuana user, but obtained the card in part as an expression of support for marijuana legalization.

She challenged guidance issued by the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives in 2011 that said gun sellers should assume people with medical marijuana cards use the drug and not sell them firearms.

It’s illegal for a licensed firearm dealer to sell a gun to an Oregon medical or recreational marijuana consumer, said Portland lawyer Leland Berger. He noted that the ruling is focused on sales and doesn’t affect medical marijuana consumers who already have guns.

The 9th Circuit in its 3-0 decision said it was reasonable for federal regulators to assume a medical marijuana card holder was more likely to use the drug.

The court also said Congress had reasonably concluded that marijuana and other drug use “raises the risk of irrational or unpredictable behavior with which gun use should not be associated.”

“The notion that cannabis consumers are violent people is absurd,” Berger said, calling the notion that classifying medical card holders who use marijuana to treat debilitating medical conditions as violent people is “even more absurd.”

Paul Armentano, deputy director of NORML, a nonprofit that works to reform marijuana laws, called on Congress to “amend cannabis’ criminal status in a way that comports with both public and scientific opinion, as well as its rapidly changing legal status under state laws.”

“Responsible adults who use cannabis in a manner that is compliant with the laws of their states ought to receive the same legal rights and protections as do other citizens,” he said in a statement published on the nonprofit’s website.

Wilson’s attorney, Chaz Rainey, said there needs to be more consistency in the application of the Second Amendment. He planned to appeal the decision and his options include submitting the appeal to the same panel of judges that issued the ruling, a larger panel of the circuit court or the U.S. Supreme Court.

“We live in a world where having a medical marijuana card is enough to say you don’t get a gun, but if you’re on the no fly list your constitutional right is still protected,” he said.

The 9th Circuit also rejected other constitutional challenges to the ban that were raised by Wilson, including her argument that her gun rights were being stripped without due process.

Armentano said the idea that marijuana users were more prone to violence is a fallacy.

“Responsible adults who use cannabis in a manner that is compliant with the laws of their states ought to receive the same legal rights and protections as other citizens,” he said.

Alex Kreit, a marijuana law expert at Thomas Jefferson School of Law in San Diego, said the ruling was significant — but may not be the last time the 9th Circuit addresses medical marijuana and gun rights.

“It seems like the court did not foreclose the possibility of a challenge by actual medical marijuana users that they shouldn’t be lumped with other drug users in terms of concerns about violence,” he said.

— The Associated Press

September 01, 2016