Michigan Votes Forum

Does this address a problem or a real potential problem?

 it addresses a real problem but doesn't go far enough. there is no purpose to license a handgun. we have a right to own and bear it, guaranteed by two constitutions, not just one. a license is simply state permission.

This bill make a whole lot of sense to me considering the fact in order to get a CCW you have to train at a gun range and need to take your gun to learn how to use it. 

 When did Michigan start "licensing" pistols? I know we have to get a "license" to purchase a pistol and have a registration system that hides under the guise of a "safety inspection" , but didn't know we licensed pistols. I thought all pistols had to be "safety inspected" within 10 days of purchase, so what would anyone be doing  carrying an "unlicensed" pistol? If the person is carrying a pistol registered to another person, and that person is carrying proof of registration of the pistol by the owner, that should be enough. I think the law forbids loaning of the weapon to an unlicensed individual, but maybe that's what needs to be revised.

 The purchase permit is the regisration of the gun.It's been going on since the sixties, at least,when the Anti-gun folks decided to take over more control of our God Given rights to self defense.They decided they would take responsibilty for our protection,since we're not grown up enough or responsible enough to do it ourselves!

I don't claim to be an authority on the the Bible, but when exactly did God give us the right to firearms?

I remember from my youth Jesus saying to turn the other cheek, the meek shall inherit the earth, and love thy neighbor. And I think it was somewhere in the Old Testament it said if you live by the sword, you will die by the sword.

Just saying....

 god didn't grant the right to bear arm,our forefathers did,as they recognized the need to defend themselves against natives,wolves,bears,tyranny,and,ultimately, whatever form of government they might create that might get too big and/or powerful for it's own good,which,imo,has happened! When small groups of vocal people can impose their religious beliefs,health concerns and financial policies on the majority because of political correctness or 'security' concerns,i have to say our system is broken and/or corrupt to the point that we,as a species,may at some point have to defend ourselves against police for,say,having a cigarette in your front yard or eating a big mac in your car! i see it happening all too often,common sense is gone and fear and dependence on the gov't for 'security and safety' has replaced it! ...oooppps,sorry,guess i shoulda took this outside! lol. Well,guys,let me have it!

I agree, the constitution did grant us the right to own and bear arms, for the neccesity of having a well regulated militia. And I also agree we have an inate right to defend ourselves. More like a law of nature than a right.

But I am miles away from thinking that owning a firearm is the way to influence my government. A much better way is what we are doing now; expressing opinions, voting, and staying informed. If individual citizens were to take up arms to protest every rule or regulation passed by a democratically elected government they didn't agree with, it would be anarchy.

Just a note, I do believe policemen are of the same species we are.

 i don't know,some of 'em seem awfully cold-blooded to me! i never said i would use a weapon to influence gov't,merely that i would when gov't infringes on my rights as a property owner when i've broken no laws!

mark.s:

i don't know,some of 'em seem awfully cold-blooded to me!

Can't argue with that.

mark.s:

i never said i would use a weapon to influence gov't,merely that i would when gov't infringes on my rights as a property owner when i've broken no laws!

What constitutes your opinion of property rights may not be the same as another's. Therein lies the need for a democratically elected government, where everyone's opinions are heard.