Michigan Legislative Update: Important Message to Michigan Hunters
Mi. Supreme Court ruling of June 20, 2007 says cities have a right to effectively ban hunting.
“Astonishingly, the court has said that Michigan’s citizens who own land or choose to hunt close to their homes within city limits do not have that right,” MUCC interim director Donna Stine said. “This ruling … essentially is a green light to ban hunting,” she added. “There simply was no reason for the Supreme Court to make such a radical statement with statewide implications.” — news source
MCRGO Director Senator Randy Richardville, R-17, Senate President Pro-Tem, made the following statement on the Senate floor Thursday vowing to work with the hunting community to find a solution:
 |
Yesterday the Michigan Supreme Court issued an opinion in the Czymbor v. City of Saginaw case that has caused the hunting community in this state to be greatly concerned. The opinion, which further chips away at the rights of hunters and fishermen, is seen as a setback by those in the conservation community. This decision truly has the impact to further threaten our hunting rights in the state of Michigan. A recent survey by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service shows hunting and fishing participation down in the region and nationally, and we don’t need further discouragement of the sport.
Mr. President and members, I rise today to make sure that sportsmen and women |
know that I and many members of this legislative body will stand with them and fight for their rights and our state’s great outdoor recreational heritage. Hunters and fishermen in this state need to know that we have their backs covered.
Just last month, the Senate ushered in Michigan Conservation Week. We recognized Michigan’s great hunting and fishing heritage and the important role the sportsmen and women have in conserving the natural resources of our state now and for future generations. We also passed a four-bill package that protects the rights of hunting and fishing for Michigan residents. With the issuing of this opinion yesterday, we may now need to revisit the issue and make sure that further legislative recommendations will ensure that our recreational heritage remains strong.
I join many members of this body in saying that we will work with groups like the Michigan United Conservation Clubs on a solution that helps to protect these important rights here in Michigan.
– State Senator Randy Richardville,
(Primary Sponsor of Senate Bill 0370; to eliminate the post-purchase pistol safety inspection.)
 |
Q: Are silencers legal?
A: While silencers, also known as sound suppressors or sound moderators, are legal in many other states and are legal under federal so long as certain specific requirements are met, as of now, Michigan law prohibits silencers. Silencers are more properly referred to as suppressors or moderators because they do not render the firearms truly silent, they merely reduce the overall noise to an acceptable level, similar to wearing ear plugs or muffs. Silencers have much in common with car mufflers in terms of design. In fact, they were originally intended by their designer, Hiram Maxim, back in the 1800’s as a safety device to preserve the hearing of soldiers and others using firearms. Much of current firearms law activity in Michigan revolves around noise issues, both in terms of violations of noise ordinances and in civil litigation surrounding gun noise as nuisance. The record of the thousands of suppressor owners in other states has been similar to that of registered machine gun owners: they are almost never used in crimes. In fact, the federal requirements for purchase of a machine gun and purchase of a “silencer” are identical: full fingerprinting and background check and a $200 tax. However, we in Michigan could be found to be in violation of Michigan law if we possess, sell, buy, or manufacture a “silencer.” |
This information is provided by The Law Offices of Steven W. Dulan, PLC (www.stevenwdulan.com) These answers are intended as general information and should not be relied upon as legal advice for any specific situation or case. The facts of each case vary and you should consult an attorney whenever you have specific questions.
