Carrying firearms at relatives residence.

[DrTodd]

Why is everyone making this question so difficult to answer? The OP says his wife would like to conceal the firearm; she does not have a CPL. Michigan law treats that differently than possessing the pistol, so Michigan law concerning possessing the pistol is not germane to what the OP asked. In order to conceal the firearm without a CPL she would need to have a possessory interest in the property. So, if the OP wishes to do that, renting a bed for a dollar would seem to work...as would providing anything else of nominal value.

Purpose of exemptions to concealed weapons statute concerning certain areas “possessed” by person in question is to allow such person to defend those areas in which he has possessory interest. People v Alexander (1978) 82 Mich App 486, 266 NW2d 489.

Purpose of concealed weapons statute exempting carrying weapon in dwelling house, place of business or other land
possessed by actor was to allow persons to defend area in which they had possessory interest. People v Gatt (1997) 77
Mich App 310, 258 NW2d 212.

 

[22Luke36]

Snail mail might also help establish residency.

 

[DrTodd]

Snail mail might also help establish residency.

The law does not seem to require "residency".

 

[22Luke36]

Why is everyone making this question so difficult to answer? The OP says his wife would like to conceal the firearm; she does not have a CPL. Michigan law treats that differently than possessing the pistol, so Michigan law concerning possessing the pistol is not germane to what the OP asked. In order to conceal the firearm without a CPL she would need to have a possessory interest in the property. So, if the OP wishes to do that, renting a bed for a dollar would seem to work...as would providing anything else of nominal value.

Purpose of exemptions to concealed weapons statute concerning certain areas “possessed” by person in question is to allow such person to defend those areas in which he has possessory interest. People v Alexander (1978) 82 Mich App 486, 266 NW2d 489.

Purpose of concealed weapons statute exempting carrying weapon in dwelling house, place of business or other land
possessed by actor was to allow persons to defend area in which they had possessory interest. People v Gatt (1997) 77
Mich App 310, 258 NW2d 212.

The law does not seem to require "residency".

It says "possessed" however. That raises a question. Since she could CC in her car if it were on her own property, could she CC in her car on the grandparents property. i.e. if she were to be OC at grandparents property and we know that is legal, what happens if she were to go get something out of her car while OC? In any other place, this would be illegal.

 

[DrTodd]

It says "possessed" however. That raises a question. Since she could CC in her car if it were on her own property, could she CC in her car on the grandparents property. i.e. if she were to be OC at grandparents property and we know that is legal, what happens if she were to go get something out of her car while OC? In any other place, this would be illegal.

If the car is parked on property in which she can show a "possessory interest", it would be legal. If she can't show a "possessory interest", it would be illegal.

possessory interest n. in real estate, the intent and right of a person to occupy and/or exercise control over a particular plot of land. A possessory interest is distinguished from an interest in the title to property, which may not include the right to immediately occupy the property.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/possessory+interest

 

[fozzy71]

It says "possessed" however. That raises a question. Since she could CC in her car if it were on her own property, could she CC in her car on the grandparents property. i.e. if she were to be OC at grandparents property and we know that is legal, what happens if she were to go get something out of her car while OC? In any other place, this would be illegal.

cite please

 

[DrTodd]

cite please

MCL 750.227

http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-750-227

 

[22Luke36]

If the car is parked on property in which she can show a "possessory interest", it would be legal. If she can't show a "possessory interest", it would be illegal.

possessory interest n. in real estate, the intent and right of a person to occupy and/or exercise control over a particular plot of land. A possessory interest is distinguished from an interest in the title to property, which may not include the right to immediately occupy the property.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/possessory+interest

I was trying to see if the posessory interest would be extended to the car since she owns it.

 

[fozzy71]

MCL 750.227

http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-750-227

I guess I was remembering that wrong. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[DrTodd]

I guess I was remembering that wrong. Thanks for the clarification.

No problem.
Before I had a CPL, I had an officer come to my car as I was in my driveway carrying a holstered pistol in my hand. I had just just gone to my trunk because I had just had my pistol "inspected" (remember that part of the old law?). I pulled my pistol case out, opened it and put the pistol in a holster I had, and went to the passenger area to get the registration card I had left on my passenger seat.

The officer had pulled in behind me, walked up to me while I was leaning into my car, and asked if I had seen my neighbor lately... I think he wanted to follow up a previous accident report. The officer started to get all excited when I stood up and turned around with the holstered pistol... until I told him it was legal. I told him I hadn't seen my neighbor for a few days. He thanked me and returned to his car, sat for about 2-3 minutes, then rolled down his window and stuck his head out and said, "You are right. I just called my dispatcher and she passed along that it is legal to have a pistol in your passenger compartment as long as you are on your property. Have a great day!" He then backed out and waved as he drove away.

 

[Rusty Young Man]

No problem.
Before I had a CPL, I had an officer come to my car as I was in my driveway carrying a holstered pistol in my hand. I had just just gone to my trunk because I had just had my pistol "inspected" (remember that part of the old law?). I pulled my pistol case out, opened it and put the pistol in a holster I had, and went to the passenger area to get the registration card I had left on my passenger seat.

The officer had pulled in behind me, walked up to me while I was leaning into my car, and asked if I had seen my neighbor lately... I think he wanted to follow up a previous accident report. The officer started to get all excited when I stood up and turned around with the holstered pistol... until I told him it was legal. I told him I hadn't seen my neighbor for a few days. He thanked me and returned to his car, sat for about 2-3 minutes, then rolled down his window and stuck his head out and said, "You are right. I just called my dispatcher and she passed along that it is legal to have a pistol in your passenger compartment as long as you are on your property. Have a great day!" He then backed out and waved as he drove away.

Lin

No problem.*
Before I had a CPL, I had an officer come to my car as I was in my driveway carrying a holstered pistol in my hand. I had just just gone to my trunk because I had just had my pistol "inspected" (remember that part of the old law?). I pulled my pistol case out, opened it and put the pistol in a holster I had, and went to the passenger area to get the registration card I had left on my passenger seat.*

The officer had pulled in behind me, walked up to me while I was leaning into my car, and asked if I had seen my neighbor lately... I think he wanted to follow up a previous accident report. The officer started to get all excited when I stood up and turned around with the holstered pistol... until I told him it was legal. I told him I hadn't seen my neighbor for a few days. He thanked me and returned to his car, sat for about 2-3 minutes, then rolled down his window and stuck his head out and said, "You are right. I just called my dispatcher and she passed along that it is legal to have a pistol in your passenger compartment as long as you are on your property. Have a great day!" He then backed out and waved as he drove away.

Except for the fact that he looked into the law to see if he could detain/question you (or maybe worse), this read like a good educational moment in the life of an LEO.

That is correct. To carry openly *(legally) in * MI, one *must be the registered owner of the pistol. The exception *being a CPL holder who may carry any legal pistol even if not registered in their name. Supposedly, according to MSP, registration stops gun crimes. I say: if that was true - then how come states with no gun registration and *more laxed gun laws have far lower rates of violent gun crime? See AZ crime statistics. Time it is *called what it is - just another way to keep people from carrying guns, place as many hurdles as possible in the way and hope people don't educate themselves.

ETA - there's a good reason the Brady campaign gives MI a passing grade of a "C" on their report card of gun control states. I and the good people of AZ are happy to have received a big fat 0 / "F" from them.

Also, just wanted to clarify ONE thing said by FreeInAZ: I am not happy with the score we received, I am content.
I feel like we were cheated out of a perfect NEGATIVE score ("G-"?) from the Brady bunch.

 

[DrTodd]

I would argue that, as a CPL holder in Michigan, I can carry more places than someone in Arizona can. So, for me, Michigan's pretty good. But yes, in terms of the general gun owner, AZ isn't too bad.

 

[22Luke36]

No problem.
Before I had a CPL, I had an officer come to my car as I was in my driveway carrying a holstered pistol in my hand. I had just just gone to my trunk because I had just had my pistol "inspected" (remember that part of the old law?). I pulled my pistol case out, opened it and put the pistol in a holster I had, and went to the passenger area to get the registration card I had left on my passenger seat.

The officer had pulled in behind me, walked up to me while I was leaning into my car, and asked if I had seen my neighbor lately... I think he wanted to follow up a previous accident report. The officer started to get all excited when I stood up and turned around with the holstered pistol... until I told him it was legal. I told him I hadn't seen my neighbor for a few days. He thanked me and returned to his car, sat for about 2-3 minutes, then rolled down his window and stuck his head out and said, "You are right. I just called my dispatcher and she passed along that it is legal to have a pistol in your passenger compartment as long as you are on your property. Have a great day!" He then backed out and waved as he drove away.

An oathkeeper wouldn't have checked.

 

[DrTodd]

An oathkeeper wouldn't have checked.

Perhaps that is true, but having dealt with some representatives of the Walker PD, I believe that an "oathkeeper" who really is truly an "oath keeper" would not apply for a job there. But, my point was only to relate what happened in the context of the law regarding possession in a vehicle on one's property, not to say I thought his behavior was honorable.

I actually have a question regarding "oathkeepers". Is the interpretation of what is "Constitutional" left to the officer, or the officer's department, etc? Who decides?

 

[22Luke36]

Since the oath is taken by the individual as a personal commitment and a contract between that person and (us?) I would have to say that it is very much up to the individual. That honor brings a responsibility with it to educate ones self on what the oath means, what it means to swear, why the oath exists, and what it really says.

 

[22Luke36]

It's off topic and a really long read, but I have laid out some of my best positions here in this thread. It's one of the best I have been on in a very very long time. http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...situtional-Weed&highlight=constitutional+weed

sorry OP not trying to go too far OT.

 

[Jared]

She does not need a CPL to possess a handgun that is not registered to her. If she is a U.S. citizen and she has a permit to carry from any other state she meets the exemption set forth in 28.432(f)

 

[SpringerXDacp]

THE MICHIGAN PENAL CODE (EXCERPT)
Act 328 of 1931


750.234d Possession of firearm on certain premises prohibited; applicability; violation as misdemeanor; penalty.
Sec. 234d.

(1) Except as provided in subsection (2), a person shall not possess a firearm on the premises of any of the following:

(a) A depository financial institution or a subsidiary or affiliate of a depository financial institution.

(b) A church or other house of religious worship.

(c) A court.

(d) A theatre.

(e) A sports arena.

(f) A day care center.

(g) A hospital.

(h) An establishment licensed under the Michigan liquor control act, Act No. 8 of the Public Acts of the Extra Session of 1933, being sections 436.1 to 436.58 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.

(2) This section does not apply to any of the following:

(a) A person who owns, or is employed by or contracted by, an entity described in subsection (1) if the possession of that firearm is to provide security services for that entity.

(b) A peace officer.

(c) A person licensed by this state or another state to carry a concealed weapon.

(d) A person who possesses a firearm on the premises of an entity described in subsection (1) if that possession is with the permission of the owner or an agent of the owner of that entity.

(3) A person who violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than 90 days or a fine of not more than $100.00, or both.

Wouldn't this exception D allow for this?

The law needs to add others residents also if you cannot conceal there. Otherwise I would argue that there is no such law that prevents you from carrying concealed at a relatives house.

Yes, providing she will open carry. According to the OP this is about concealed carry.

 

[22Luke36]

Yes, providing she will open carry. According to the OP this is about concealed carry.

No, Subsection 1 lists the infringements specifically. Grandparents house didn't make the list.

 

[OneForAll]

No, Subsection 1 lists the infringements specifically. Grandparents house didn't make the list.

This is what I was thinking. I figured it like this, we can open carry without a CPL because there is no law that says we cannot. So.... in my opinion, my wife would be allowed to conceal carry (at my grandparents) because there is no law that says you cannot at family residents.