Jump to content

Michigan AG has ruled suppressors legal in MICHIGAN!!!


Recommended Posts

I was one of the guys who petitioned to get the ruling... we can shake the same cages. Just contact your State senator and house member.

 

 

I really isn't hard.

 

Dear Mr. Hixxxxx:

 

 

 

Thank you for your e-mail urging my office to request an Attorney General's Opinion regarding Michigan law 750.224 as it relates to sound suppression devices and other National Firearms Act regulated items. Specifically, you are requesting a ruling as it pertains to an individual's right to manufacture a firearm or a suppression device under the National Firearms Act.

 

 

 

I certainly appreciate your interest in this issue. You will be pleased to learn that State Representative

 

Mark Meadows has already requested an Attorney General's Opinion on this exact issue. I have contacted Rep. Meadows' office to request a copy of the opinion when it is received in that office.

 

 

 

Thanks again for taking the time to contact me on this issue. I always appreciate hearing from my constituents.

 

 

 

Sincerely,

 

 

 

Sean McCann

 

State Representative

 

60th District

 

 

>>> Heath Hixxxxx <mail@change.org> 8/6/2011 5:10 PM >>>

Greetings,

 

We request you, as the Michigan Attorney General, provide a ruling regarding Michigan law 750.224 as it pertains to sound suppression devices and other NFA regulated items. Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox issued Opinion 7183, stating that in his opinion possession of automatic weapons did not violate Michigan state law provided the weapon was properly registered under the National Firearms Act (NFA) registration procedure (BATFE Form 5320.4). No ruling was made regarding this same law as it pertains to sound suppressors or other NFA regulated items.

 

Regarding Opinion 7183 an excerpt reads "Although the application and registration scheme provided for under the federal laws and regulations discussed above do not result in the issuance of a document labeled "license,"[3] the Form 4 application and resulting approval process bears all the hallmarks of licensure. The permission granted by the Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to transfer and possess a machine gun is the official authority required in order to avoid the federal proscription.” While AG opinion 7183 explicitly states "machine guns" it neglects to mention sound suppression devices; wouldn't the opinion that approval under Form 4 constitutes a license also apply to legal possession of a suppressor or other NFA regulated items under Form 4 'licensing'?

 

Furthermore, we request a ruling on the above law as it pertains to an individual’s right to manufacture a firearm or related device (suppression device) under the National Firearms Act. Does approval of BATFE Form 5320.1 constitute 'licensure' to construct a firearm or related device? If it does in fact constitute a license then, would not under state law (part 3© of MCL 750.224), an individual be legally allowed to both construct and possess a firearm or related device(i.e. sound suppressor) under proper approval of Form 5320.1?

 

--

 

You as the state legislature have the ability to change our unclear laws. You as the legislature can make our laws simpler for your constituency by simply recognizing BATFE registration as proper and legal licensure in the state of Michigan. Suppressors are legal in Ohio, Indiana and more than 35 other states. In those states automatic weapons are legal as well because they realize that registration and indeed licensing by the BATFE if applied to automatic weapons must also apply to suppressors. Only 1 state allows automatic weapons but not suppressors. It is clear that our laws need to be refined to allow for approval of registration under the BATFE and NFA regulations to constitute a legal license in the state of Michigan. Please recognize that the citizens of this state and elsewhere want and need our laws to not only be clear but also to conform to the intentions when originally drafted. It is clear to most people that section 3c of 750.224 is intended to provide an exception in the case of licensure from the federal government. More than 37 other states recognize the BATFE authority in authorizing possession of NFA items, shouldn't ours? Those of us who legally abide by the law and practice our second amendment rights sincerely ask for your help in bringing Michigan up to date.

 

Thank You,

Edited by Heath_h49008
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Chatbox

    Load More
    You don't have permission to chat.
×
×
  • Create New...