The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 28, 2011, 05:19 PM   #1
Colvin
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 15, 2011
Posts: 127
My letter to the Michigan governor

Quote:
Governor Snyder,

I understand the difficulty of having my voice heard by your office, and I hope you or one of your employees will reply. I email you today to ask for your action in securing an additional firearm right for the state of Michigan. As you know, Michigan has relatively strict gun laws compared to many other states. I wholeheartedly believe that many of the current restrictions are doing a great deal to keep citizens safer, but there are some things I'd like to be allowed more leeway on.

Attorney General Mike Cox superseded a previous AG opinion when he allowed the sale of fully automatic weapons in accordance with the National Firearms Act.

http://www.ag.state.mi.us/opinion/da...0s/op10259.htm

This does not make it easy for law abiding citizens to purchase or possess machine guns, and I do not advocate the possession of such weapons- I believe there to be very little legitimate "need" for them. However, Mr. Cox did not address the legalization of suppressors (or silencers) in his opinion.

My father is gradually losing his hearing, even with ear protection. Our favorite thing to do together is shooting guns, a hobby that is one of the few things we use to connect with each other. However, firearms are obviously loud, and advanced ear protection can still damage hearing ability. If we could, as law abiding gun owners, have suppressors- well, you get the picture. Things would be a lot easier and a lot more fun to use.

Gun rights supporters helped elect you, and I believe now is the time where we will expect you to act. I believe a move to legalize suppressors- keep in mind, it would still be difficult to get them and there are hefty taxes to acquire them- I believe a move to do that would greatly contribute to your upcoming campaign.

I ask that you pose an official question to Attorney General Shuette, asking for an AG opinion on the legalization of suppressors, and do whatever is in your power to help your constituents out. We are the heart of your supporters. I sincerely hope you can help with this or reply.
I understand the likeliness of actually getting through to him... but who knows, right? If you are a Michigan constituent, I ask you send one to his office as well. I will be sending them to other elected officials asking the same thing.

Also, I removed certain parts about myself in there- sounds a bit choppy, I know!
Colvin is offline  
Old August 28, 2011, 05:39 PM   #2
shootniron
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 16, 2011
Posts: 1,147
Quote:
I wholeheartedly believe that many of the current restrictions are doing a great deal to keep citizens safer
You lost me there...I did not read the remainder.
shootniron is offline  
Old August 28, 2011, 05:57 PM   #3
jgcoastie
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 15, 2009
Location: Kodiak, Alaska
Posts: 2,112
Colvin, you're living in a fairly land...

And the political mindset of the majority of voters in this state will never allow it to stand... And even if it happens, it'll be repealed after the next voting cycle...

I wish I didn't have to get a permission slip from the cops to buy a handgun... And I'm not even a resident of this state!!! This wretched state was forced upon me by my assignment officer... This ridiculous state with it's ridiculous "safety inspection/registration" of handguns.

Can you tell me of any crime that was prevented by using the handgun registration in Michigan? How exactly has it reduced crime? How exactly has it made anyone safer?

How exactly would you propose a legalization of suppressors, when you still have to get a permission slip from "nanny state" to buy a handgun in the first place?!?!

shootniron +100%
__________________
"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them." -Richard Henry Lee, Virginia delegate to the Continental Congress, initiator of the Declaration of Independence, and member of the first Senate, which passed the Bill of Rights.
jgcoastie is offline  
Old August 28, 2011, 06:22 PM   #4
Colvin
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 15, 2011
Posts: 127
Shootniron, by many I mean some. Gov Snyder isn't really in to those laws, so I just wanted to sound like his definition of sane.

And I didn't mean state laws, I meant federal ones. Like... restricting rocket launchers.

Also, the safety inspection is no more. And the voters don't really count because it's an AG opinion.
Colvin is offline  
Old August 28, 2011, 07:58 PM   #5
jgcoastie
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 15, 2009
Location: Kodiak, Alaska
Posts: 2,112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colvin
And I didn't mean state laws, I meant federal ones. Like... restricting rocket launchers.
Then you failed to make that point, in fact, you made the implication of the opposite... Let's revisit, shall we?

(all emphasis in all quotes are mine)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Colvin
As you know, Michigan has relatively strict gun laws compared to many other states. I wholeheartedly believe that many of the current restrictions are doing a great deal to keep citizens safer, but there are some things I'd like to be allowed more leeway on.
You specifically pointed out MI's strict laws, then said they make citizens safer. You said nothing of federal laws keeping people safe, you said that of MI state law. And I wonder just how safe the residents of MI actually are... You know as well as I do that Detroit and Flint are rough and getting rougher... How exactly has the handgun registration been effective in keeping people safe? How many shootings/murders/etc. have been solved because of the registration???

Quote:
Originally Posted by Colvin
This does not make it easy for law abiding citizens to purchase or possess machine guns, and I do not advocate the possession of such weapons- I believe there to be very little legitimate "need" for them.
I don't believe there is a "legitimate need" clause in the Second Amendment... If "legitimate need" were a prerequisite for RKBA, then who would then make that determination of what is legitimate? What is needed??? You? SCOTUS? Brady Bunch? Why do you "need" a .338 Lapua? Why do you "need" a handgun, or any gun, that holds more than 5 rounds? Once gun owners start talking about "legitimate need", it will come back to bit all of us in the rear. It is a slippery slope, which is already slippery enough as it is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Colvin
Also, the safety inspection is no more.
You're right, it is no more... Because they morphed the safety inspection into a registration... Now that they have the registration via "License to Purchase", they don't need a safety inspection (which had become a de facto registration itself).
__________________
"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them." -Richard Henry Lee, Virginia delegate to the Continental Congress, initiator of the Declaration of Independence, and member of the first Senate, which passed the Bill of Rights.
jgcoastie is offline  
Old August 28, 2011, 10:45 PM   #6
raisitup
Member
 
Join Date: January 2, 2010
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 56
As a former resident of Michigan I believe the "safety inspection" racket should be the next thing to change in the mitten state. I would think easing the silencer restriction would be an intermediate level fight.

Ryan
raisitup is offline  
Old August 29, 2011, 09:45 AM   #7
RAnb
Junior member
 
Join Date: July 20, 2008
Location: WA, USA
Posts: 447
Colvin,

I would be surprised if the AG responds in a positive manner (or at all) to your letter. The best thing to do is to get your Senator or other legislator to write something similar to the AG. Convince your Senator to ask the AG for a formal opinion on the law. Most AG's only respond to legislative and other government employee requests, not from voters.

I did this to request an opinion on suppressors in WA and it worked. Make an appointment to speak with your Senator, this works better than a letter. Good luck.

Ranb
RAnb is offline  
Old August 29, 2011, 09:53 AM   #8
MLeake
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 15, 2007
Location: Outside KC, MO
Posts: 10,128
jgcoastie pretty much summed up my feelings, Colvin; your attempts to sound "sane" sounded more to me like throwing other gun enthusiasts under the bus.

I may not practice Open Carry (except in great outdoors settings, assuming it's legal), but I endorse the rights of others to do so. I may not have any interest in jumping through the hoops required to get any NFA or full-auto gear, but I endorse the rights of others to do so.

Arguments such as you made help the antis to divide and conquer, and provide them with ammo. "See, even a (self-professed) gun rights guy agrees that we need controls on these things!"
MLeake is offline  
Old August 29, 2011, 10:14 AM   #9
shortwave
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 17, 2007
Location: SOUTHEAST, OHIO
Posts: 5,936
If you've ever had any dealings with the media, it doesn't take very long to learn that if you don't want what you say to be turned around to mean something totally different, you better state what you've got to say directly, to the point and in a way it cannot be mis-interpreted.

Same goes for speaking/ writing to gov't leaders.

I've also got to agree with jgcoastie, Colvin.

Although your letter may have had the best intentions , I can see how it could be turned by the anti-gun politico's to be used against us.
shortwave is offline  
Old August 29, 2011, 11:31 AM   #10
NJgunowner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 13, 2009
Location: NJ
Posts: 1,093
You lost me when your entire concern is getting suppressors. There are so many other things to fix first.
__________________
Sig 1911 Traditional reverse two tone, Sig p226 .40, Sig 556 Swat patrol, Baby Eagle/jerico steel .45
NJgunowner is offline  
Old August 29, 2011, 12:45 PM   #11
Colvin
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 15, 2011
Posts: 127
Thanks for the input. I typed this in between loads of work and in less than five minutes, and now I realize that it doesn't meet the standards of an effective letter.

Provided I get no response, I'll revise it and make it good. Thanks.
Colvin is offline  
Old August 29, 2011, 12:45 PM   #12
Tom Servo
Staff
 
Join Date: September 27, 2008
Location: Foothills of the Appalachians
Posts: 10,399
Quote:
You lost me when your entire concern is getting suppressors. There are so many other things to fix first.
That was my thought as well.

Colvin, these things don't start with the governor. The ball has to get rolling in the legislature first. Have you approached your Senator or Representative? Do you have a rough draft of a bill you'd like submitted? Have you talked with the MRPA or NRA on the matter yet?

Quote:
Gun rights supporters helped elect you, and I believe now is the time where we will expect you to act. I believe a move to legalize suppressors (...) would greatly contribute to your upcoming campaign.
Without the things I mentioned, this is all bark and no bite. Even if Snyder has some interest in your concerns, his office gets dozens of letters like this a day, on any number of issues*. Most of these are skimmed by staffers and thrown out. To get handed up the chain, something in it would have to really stand out.

How would legalizing suppressors contribute to his re-election? How big of a factor is it to him, really? Who's there to put pressure on him to do so?

* I've seen the mail a state Senator gets, and it's truly surreal. I doubt rock stars get such weird and varied correspondence. At a certain point, the noise overwhelms the signal, and mail is treated as a nuisance.
__________________
Sometimes it’s nice not to destroy the world for a change.
--Randall Munroe
Tom Servo is offline  
Old September 11, 2011, 08:39 AM   #13
RDak
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 17, 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 734
I am confused by this thread.

Our AG recently approved the purchase of sound suppressors.
RDak is offline  
Old September 11, 2011, 12:00 PM   #14
hogdogs
Staff In Memoriam
 
Join Date: October 31, 2007
Location: Western Florida panhandle
Posts: 11,069
Just another "half measures" "fare weather friend" of the second amendment...

If it ain't a weapon the thread starter feels is pertinent to his needs, he is fine with banning them...

as for the letter... I see little that doesn't agree with the draconian laws of Michigan and the Federal laws...

Brent
hogdogs is offline  
Reply

Tags
gun , laws , machine , michigan , suppressors

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.09273 seconds with 9 queries