Michigan Votes Forum

Discuss issues, ideas and legislation related to the Great Lake State.
Welcome to Michigan Votes Forum Sign in | Join | Help
in Search
Latest post 02-14-2008 7:17 AM by Anonymous Citizen. 15 replies.
Page 1 of 1 (16 items)
Sort Posts: Previous Next
  • 01-01-2001 12:00 AM

    2007 House Bill 5039 (Revise pistol licensure procedures )

    Introduced in the House on July 19, 2007

    Click here to view bill details.
  • 07-24-2007 10:51 AM In reply to

    Quit playing games

    "they could seize it until the person shows that he or she is ineligible." Is that what you really meant? Why not change the wording to eliminate the "Safety inspection" and call it what it really is-a registration scheme. Quit playing word games.
  • 07-24-2007 10:51 AM In reply to

    Quit playing games

    "they could seize it until the person shows that he or she is ineligible." Is that what you really meant? Why not change the wording to eliminate the "Safety inspection" and call it what it really is-a registration scheme. Quit playing word games.
  • 07-24-2007 11:35 AM In reply to

    don't they

    TRUST us with weapons? why not? maybe they don't think they would be able to GET AWAY with so much if we were all ALLOWED to be armed. maybe it's a RACIAL THING. it has been for a hundred years.
  • 07-24-2007 12:32 PM In reply to

    This will die

    Rep. Rick Jones, safety inspections are not a means to "license" a pistol. It is registration pure and simple. A "license to possess a particular pistol" sounds like a law from a different country. You say "allow the person to apply for the regular license." what is that? This is another law that means NOTHING to the folks you are trying to target. They will not bring the gun in. If someone does, there already are laws to address your concern.
  • 07-25-2007 5:16 AM In reply to

    Sorry...

    ...but this is unconstitutional. Art 1, Sec 6 is very clear on this matter: "Every person has a right to keep and bear arms for the defense of himself and the state." Nowhere above does it mention any "qualifications" to this basic right.
  • 07-25-2007 8:21 AM In reply to

    nor does it

    mention a price schedule for BUYING BACK YOUR RIGHTS. in other words, the "permit" for carrying a concealed weapon is already written in the constitiution. it's free. why do we allow ourselves to be CHARGED for the RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS??? because the racist leftist legislators don't trust the citizenry to sit back and allow them to take all our rights away.
  • 02-13-2008 3:52 PM In reply to

    "Safety Inspections" need to go

    These inspections are B.S., pure and simple. They waste the time of both police and citizens. 1. Safety inspections have NEVER solved a crime. 2. Safety inspections don't find flaws in faulty guns, making the term a misnomer. 3. Inspections DO create a database, so the government knows what you've got and where it is, giving them a virtual shopping list if they ever decide your rights to keep and bear arms aren't your rights anymore. These inspections need to go. This is a BAD BILL, and a waste of time.

    "If guns cause crime, all mine are defective." - Ted Nugent

  • 02-13-2008 4:06 PM In reply to

    Religious Control License

    New bill allowing citizens to register menorahs, crosses, korans, torahs, bibles and other religions artifacts at their local police department. Courts say that this does not restrict or inhibit freedom of religion. It is only a registration scheme done by the state of Michigan to make sure that people are free to practice religion. The police department inspects the religious articles and those that are approved by the state are registered and returned. Once the state is sure that the citizen is entitled to practice religious freedom (no Mormons, pagans, Radical Muslims or devout Roman Catholics), that is. The state is only exercising it's proper oversite of citizens to make sure that true religion is being practiced.

     

  • 02-13-2008 4:22 PM In reply to

    Where is H-1?

    We are told that the Committee has approved substitute bill H-1, but the State's website does not allow us access to that. Just how are we expected to comment on a bill that is passed, essentially in secret, by a committee? This also applies to HB 5040.

     

  • 02-13-2008 4:45 PM In reply to

    substitute H-1

    needs to go back to committee and be voted on, agree with, colated, shipped off, shipped back, buried in soft peat for six years and THEN it might have some chance of being brought to the public.
  • 02-13-2008 4:53 PM In reply to

    why don't we just

    comply with the constitution? it says nothing about permits, or licenses. it just says that the people may keep and bear arms for defense of themselves and the state.
  • 02-13-2008 5:40 PM In reply to

    Infringement on rights

    What part of shall not be infringed don't you people in Lansing understand??
  • 02-13-2008 5:42 PM In reply to

    don't you understand

    that this legislature and governor don't want you armed? if you are armed, you are dangerous. if you are dangerous, it's difficult for them to stuff stupid laws like these down our throats. citizens with guns don't need nannies, subjects do.
  • 02-13-2008 5:45 PM In reply to

    your rights don't mean

    anything to the current legislators. they have been making sport of taking them away for years now.
  • 02-14-2008 7:17 AM In reply to

    Only A

    government educated moron would even think about registering a handgun that they inherited. How stupid do they think we are?
Page 1 of 1 (16 items)
Powered by Community Server (Commercial Edition), by Telligent Systems