2007 House Bill 4490 (Repeal pistol “safety inspection” law ) (Senate Roll Call 462)
Passed in the Senate (34 to 3) on June 27, 2008, to repeal the law that requires a person who acquires a pistol to present it to the local law enforcement agency for a “safety inspection." A person would still be required to obtain a license to acquire a pistol, and would have to send completed copies of the pistol sales record to the local police or sheriff, with violations subject to a $250 civil fine. These agencies would have enter the data into a State Police database, or send them to the State Police to be entered. [History, Amendments & Comments]
The vote was 34 in favor, 3 opposed, and 1 not voting
(Senate Roll Call 462 at Senate Journal 66)
[Comment on this vote | View others' comments]
|
|
|
Support
Oppose
Not Voting
Undecided
The following legislators supported 2007 House Bill 4490 (Repeal pistol “safety inspection” law ):
The following legislators opposed 2007 House Bill 4490 (Repeal pistol “safety inspection” law ):
| Brater (D) | Clark-Coleman (D) | Scott (D) |
The following legislators did not vote on 2007 House Bill 4490 (Repeal pistol “safety inspection” law ):
| Whitmer (D) |
Most Recent Comments
1) each and every [by Anonymous Citizen on April 28, 2008]NO vote on this bill came from DEMOCRATS.
each and every person who thought it would be a GOOD IDEA NOT TO VOTE was a DEMOCRAT.
is their no vote a PROTEST?
Reply
The Democrats never vote for gun rights? Maybe i'm bad at math, but i count about 40 of 'em voting in favor of both bills...?
Reply
behind the person in that shop COULDN'T have been a 'thug' as the background check when she got the 'permit to purchase' would have told the police all about him, wouldn't it?
now, she spent the time, all by herself, to sit in the 'cop shop' and fill out the permit to purchase. she had every opportunity to tell the nice officer there and then that 'some thug wants me to buy a gun for him, and i'm scared.'.
i'm sure that if the 'thug' really WAS a 'thug', then he is allergic to 'cop shops'.
then, at the gun shop, she could have told the nice guy behind the counter that the 'thug' was bothering her, and i'm sure the nice guy could have found some way to 'convince' him to stop.
now, if all this effort to stop what obviously ISN'T a big deal is being expended, why not put that effort into STOPPING CRIMINALS FROM STEALING GUNS. let's say... keeping them locked up, without benefit of pardon or parole, another ten or twenty years if they use a gun in a crime?
that should get their attention, shouldn't it?
Reply
View Full Conversation
