by Steve Dulan
The Michigan State Police publishes an electronic newsletter called “Legal Update” which is meant to keep personnel informed regarding Michigan law. While it is generally authoritative, it is not the final word on the issues it covers. The disclaimer at the bottom of the page says it all: “This update is provided for informational purposes only. Officers should contact their local prosecutor for an interpretation before applying the information contained in this update.” That said, I have yet to find a factual error or legal interpretation that I would disagree with after several years of reading Legal Update on a more or less regular basis. The latest Legal Update deals with several firearms-related issues. My brief commentary follows each subject:
Open carry of firearms
Subject to MCL 750.234d, it is legal to carry a visible pistol in public.
MCRGO has not adopted an official position on this subject. My personal opinion is that while this is true, I agree with Ted Nugent and many others that it is a bad idea in almost every situation. Tactically, you are giving up the element of surprise should you face a deadly force situation. Furthermore, you run the risk of being called in to 911 as a “man with a gun.” I have been on police ride-alongs when this call comes over the radio. It creates a very dangerous situation for all concerned. I do not carry openly. I have a CPL and take care to choose a gun and holster that, along with appropriate clothing, allow me to keep my gun concealed until/unless I need it to save a life.
Possession of a pistol belonging to another
Per MCL 28.432, a person with a Concealed Pistol License (CPL) may legally possess a properly registered pistol belonging to another. The owner need not be present.
MCRGO has not adopted an official position on this subject. I do not lend or borrow pistols except from/to family members or friends I would trust with my life. My thinking is that a gun is a dangerous tool and if there is any chance whatsoever that it might be misused by the person handling it, I don’t lend it. This legal point does make things more convenient for married couples who “borrow” each other’s carry guns when they both have CPL’s.
Possession of pistols by non-residents
A resident of another state may possess a pistol in Michigan if they have a CPL issued by their state of residence (MCL 28.432 & MCL 28.432a). Without a CPL, a non-resident may not have a pistol in Michigan.
This one is self-explanatory. There are legislators looking into a change that would make it more convenient for non-CPL holders to come in to Michigan for hunting and competitions with their handguns.
Safety Inspection Certificates
Michigan law does not require a person to have a copy of their certificate with their pistol after it has been registered; nor does the law require that a person keep a copy.
However, it is a good idea to keep your “green cards.” In fact, I keep a photocopy of the green card for my carry gun in my wallet. It might come in handy if I ever run into one of the very small number of police officers who is anti-gun if he/she makes an issue out of “checking the registration.” Not a very likely scenario but, as an old Boy Scout, I like to be prepared.
Transporting ammunition and long-guns
MCL 750.227d describes the lawful way to transport a shotgun or rifle. While they must be unloaded, they may be transported in the same case as ammunition (including loaded magazines).
The actual language of the statute is: Sec. 227d. (1) Except as otherwise permitted by law, a person shall not transport or possess in or upon a motor vehicle or any self-propelled vehicle designed for land travel a firearm, other than a pistol, unless the firearm is unloaded and is 1 or more of the following:
(a) Taken down.
(b) Enclosed in a case.
(c) Carried in the trunk of the vehicle.
(d) Inaccessible from the interior of the vehicle.
CPL holders – required notifications
The notification requirements of MCL 28.425f only apply when a CPL holder is actually carrying a concealed pistol. Nothing in Michigan law allows an officer to search a CPL holder to determine whether they are carrying a pistol.
In other words, merely being the possessor of a CPL is not “probable cause.” I teach that there is no reason not to discuss the CPL issue if stopped by a police officer, even when you are not carrying. I suggest that you simply say, “Officer, I have a Concealed Pistol License, but I am not carrying today.” Disclosure in that situation is not required. However, I can think of no reason not to disclose the fact and neither can my law enforcement friends. We all agree that it might defuse a rare situation where an officer has already determined that you have a CPL and is waiting for the disclosure, or lack thereof. Remember that when you are carrying, you must immediately disclose that fact to any officer who stops you. I recommend that you do so in a calm, reassuring tone for obvious reasons. Massad Ayoob recommends that you simply hand over your CPL with your license and avoid the word, “gun” altogether because that is an alarm word for police officers. Saying something like, “Officer, I have a Concealed Pistol License and I am carrying todat,” seems to work well.
The full text of the June Legal Update can be found at MSP Legal Update. (.pdf)
Steven W. Dulan is an attorney in private practice in East Lansing ( www.StevenWDulan.com ) , as well as a member of the MCRGO Board of Directors and the Board of Trustees of the MCRGO Foundation. He teaches firearms law as an adjunct professor at The Thomas M. Cooley Law School and is a volunteer long-range marksmanship instructor for pre-deployment troops under the auspices of the Civilian Marksmanship Program in cooperation with the Army Marksmanship Unit.
July 12, 2008 at 2:26 am
Having lived in Arizona where it is legal to openly carry a firearm there was never a problem with “calls to 911″. Actually, a concealed weapon is more dangerous due to the “Surprise” nature of discovering that the person next to you is armed, you have no way of knowing if that person is in legal possession or not. I do not believe a citizen has the right to demand proof of a CCW permit so how would one know? In Arizona the option of open carry gives the criminal types notice up front that the carrier is no one to be attacked as there is clear proof the carrier of such weapon is armed and ready to defend life and property. The result is the criminal type leaves as they do not want to have to face possible death for an unknown amount of loot (they like their fights to be one sided in their favor). It has been said “an armed society is a polite society. I’m am in no way against the CCW license, but I have seen first hand how well open carry works. What would be needed is a publicized education program explaining open carry and how it works to help eliminate the 911 “man with gun” calls. I believe random violent attacks would drop dramatically of the perpetrator could “see” that his intended victim could end his career of crime immediately!