Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If it wasn't happening why would they pass two laws to prevent it?
Thats a laughable question seeing as we have laws on the books to stop Sharia Law which isnt happening either, but i will answer your question in full.
A law that would stop POTENTIAL(key word) political arbitrary decisions from being made, is not the same as there actual politically arbitrary decisions being made.
if you have proof that it was happening, provide it.
Michigan and has been, a shall-issue state since 2001. Any person who provides a valid Michigan photo ID, completes a CCW safety class, passes a background check, and pays the fee then gets a CCW permit. The county boards didn't have the ability to reject applicants out of hand. They could only review that the applicant complied with the above requirements and then the boards issued the permits.
What the new laws accomplishes, among other things, is that it abolishes the rubber-stamp county boards and puts that rubber stamp in the hand of some clerks at the Michigan State Police.
I know that the narrative of 'another victory for true American patriots' pumps up the chest-thumping of the NRA lobby, but this looks more like a government cost cutting move.
I know that the narrative of 'another victory for true American patriots' pumps up the chest-thumping of the NRA lobby, but this looks more like a government cost cutting move.
That is all, plain and simple. Cost cutting.
Nothing was gained, nothing was lost.
It's not even possible for a resident of Vermont to legally possess a handgun in MI. We don't need nor have licenses here for carry of handguns, and a non-resident can't legally have a handgun in MI unless they have a license issued by their home state. That little violation of the second amendment needs to be addressed. The same applies to states like NY.
It's not even possible for a resident of Vermont to legally possess a handgun in MI. We don't need nor have licenses here for carry of handguns, and a non-resident can't legally have a handgun in MI unless they have a license issued by their home state. That little violation of the second amendment needs to be addressed. The same applies to states like NY.
You may not be required to have a license in VT. but I'm betting they have a licensing scheme set up anyway just for this purpose.
Take Alaska for example, you don't need to have a license to carry within the state, but they do issue licenses for the purpose of reciprocity with other states.
You may not be required to have a license in VT. but I'm betting they have a licensing scheme set up anyway just for this purpose.
Take Alaska for example, you don't need to have a license to carry within the state, but they do issue licenses for the purpose of reciprocity with other states.
There's not and never will be.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
