Introduced by Rep. Fulton Sheen (R) on January 27, 2005, to eliminate the fingerprinting requirement for those renewing an existing concealed pistol license (CPL).
Referred to the House Judiciary Committee on January 27, 2005.
Reported in the House on June 28, 2006, with the recommendation that the substitute (H-2) be adopted and that the bill then pass.
Substitute offered in the House on September 20, 2006, to replace the previous version of the bill with one that only eliminates the license renewal fingerprint requirement if the state police establish a fingerprint database and an individual's prints are in it. The substitute passed in the House by voice vote on September 20, 2006.
Passed in the House (106 to 1) on September 21, 2006, to eliminate the fingerprinting requirement for those renewing an existing concealed pistol license (CPL) if the state police establish a fingerprint database and a licensee's prints are in it. [Vote Details and Comments]
Received in the Senate on November 9, 2006.
Referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee on November 9, 2006.
Reported in the Senate on November 30, 2006, with the recommendation that the bill pass.
Passed in the Senate (37 to 0) on December 6, 2006, to eliminate the fingerprinting requirement for those renewing an existing concealed pistol license (CPL) if the state police establish a fingerprint database and a licensee's prints are in it. Michigan now has such a database. [Vote Details and Comments]
Signed by Gov. Jennifer Granholm on December 19, 2006.
1) CPL Renewal [by NSutliff on September 23, 2006] The bill's text states in part,"... that only eliminates the license renewal fingerprint requirement IF the state police establish a fingerprint database and an individual's prints are in it."
What do you mean IF? Is this an option with the MSP? Are you saying they DON'T have to establish a database? And IF they don't, then this whole bill is for naught?! We need better language here to clarify this. As well as a time frame to establish and implement this bill. Reply
2) CPL Renewal [by NSutliff on September 22, 2006] So what exactly does this mean? That, at present, there is no setup by the MSP for these files? Suppose they don't set one up? Suppose they drag their feet in getting this setup? Is there a time line that they have to have this completed by? Does this mean that our fingerprints are now going to be a permanent record of the MSP just like they are with the FBI? Why was this even a stipulation in getting our CPL renewed? By renewing, it is already known that we have been fingerprinted before and they were cleared! I think this is just another way for our legislators to sidestep this issue. When are they going to have the brass to stand up for our rights? There IS a 2nd Amendment! They should read it!!! Reply
3) Whatever [by Anonymous Citizen on June 3, 2006] You're so good with women Reply