Detroit Zoo OC

[FatboyCykes]

imported post

Anyone OC at the Detroit Zoo in Royal Oak yet?

Nothing on their website, that I can find banning them, not sure even if it is legal for them to ban them.

I don't see where it would fall under a pistol free zone, as I don't have my CPL.

Any input would be great, asap as the wife wants to go now

 

[FatboyCykes]

imported post

Well, everything looked on the up and up until I got to the front gate. At the very bottom of the "rule" sign, the very last line says: This venue has a seating capacity greater than 2500.

As I understand it, this means the concealed carry is unlawful, and open carry is only lawful as a CPL holder.

I'll have to wait a few months

 

[SpringerXDacp]

imported post

FatboyCykes wrote:

Well, everything looked on the up and up until I got to the front gate. At the very bottom of the "rule" sign, the very last line says: This venue has a seating capacity greater than 2500.

As I understand it, this means the concealed carry is unlawful, and open carry is only lawful as a CPL holder.

I'll have to wait a few months

Just recently, this discussion came up over at MGO.The Zoo is subject to preemption and the folks running it are aware of this while they maintain the 2500 seating capacity on the sign. IIRC, there was some question about entering buildings or some such.

 

[zigziggityzoo]

imported post

The seating capacity of 2500 only applies to an "entertainment facility". Whether or not a Zoo qualifies as an entertainment facility is one thing. Whether or not the Zoo actually has a seating capacity of 2,500 or more is another.

Really, though, a venue can have a seating capacity of 20, and still post a sign stating that it has seating of greater than 2,500, and still have concealed carry statutorily prohibited, as the law does not state that they must have seating AND a sign, it states that they must have the seating OR a sign.

So what it boils down to is this: Is a Zoo an entertainment facility? I say yes.

So you may OC there, whether or not you have a CPL, as the "2,500 rule" only exists in the concealed-carry CEZ list
(http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-28-425o ) and not the Open carry CEZ list (http://legislature.mi.gov/doc.aspx?mcl-750-234d )

 

[SpringerXDacp]

imported post

Ifanyone thinks the Zoo is considered to be an entertainment facility, then per Section 5o, if it has a seating capacity of 2500 or more, then it's a CPZ. Therefore, per Section 5o, it's illegal to CC at the Zoo. And, if you do not have a CPL, then per Section 234d, it's illegal to OC.

 

[FatboyCykes]

imported post

SpringerXDacp wrote:

Ifanyone thinks the Zoo is considered to be an entertainment facility, then per Section 5o, if it has a seating capacity of 2500 or more, then it's a CPZ. Therefore, per Section 5o, it's illegal to CC at the Zoo. And, if you do not have a CPL, then per Section 234d, it's illegal to OC.

That's where I'm coming from, I'm pretty sure it would be considered as such, if not, I think the little notice at the end of the sign would be enough to suffice. Why else put up the arbitrary number of 2500. I'm sure it was done as to not overtly ban them, but those who know the laws, would know what that number means.

 

[SpringerXDacp]

imported post

FatboyCykes wrote:

SpringerXDacp wrote:

Ifanyone thinks the Zoo is considered to be an entertainment facility, then per Section 5o, if it has a seating capacity of 2500 or more, then it's a CPZ. Therefore, per Section 5o, it's illegal to CC at the Zoo. And, if you do not have a CPL, then per Section 234d, it's illegal to OC.

That's where I'm coming from, I'm pretty sure it would be considered as such, if not, I think the little notice at the end of the sign would be enough to suffice. Why else put up the arbitrary number of 2500. I'm sure it was done as to not overtly ban them, but those who know the laws, would know what that number means.

This is the same reason why parks in Michigan that are subject to preemption still maintain their posted no weapons (firearms) signs. Except of course, those that have been challenged by MOC members to have the ordinances changed. And, even those local units of Government that admitted the signs were invalid still maintain their posted prohibition.

 

[FatboyCykes]

imported post

SpringerXDacp wrote:

FatboyCykes wrote:

SpringerXDacp wrote:

Ifanyone thinks the Zoo is considered to be an entertainment facility, then per Section 5o, if it has a seating capacity of 2500 or more, then it's a CPZ. Therefore, per Section 5o, it's illegal to CC at the Zoo. And, if you do not have a CPL, then per Section 234d, it's illegal to OC.

That's where I'm coming from, I'm pretty sure it would be considered as such, if not, I think the little notice at the end of the sign would be enough to suffice. Why else put up the arbitrary number of 2500. I'm sure it was done as to not overtly ban them, but those who know the laws, would know what that number means.

This is the same reason why parks in Michigan that are subject to preemption still maintain their posted no weapons (firearms) signs. Except of course, those that have been challenged by MOC members to have the ordinances changed. And, even those local units of Government that admitted the signs were invalid still maintain their posted prohibition.

The exception being that in those situations preemption applies, whereas with the zoo, I do believe a CPL will be necessary to OC. So, as there is a three month turn-around time in Macomb county...who want's to picnic at the DZ in August/Sept.?

Three months! Balls!

 

[DrTodd]

imported post

The issue has been discussed in AG Opinion No. 7120 December 4, 2002.

Link: http://www.ag.state.mi.us/opinion/datafiles/2000s/op10195.htm

 

[FatboyCykes]

imported post

DrTodd wrote:

The issue has been discussed in AG Opinion No. 7120 December 4, 2002.

Link: http://www.ag.state.mi.us/opinion/datafiles/2000s/op10195.htm

Thank you Dr.T. I figured as much, pursuant to my understanding of the law, but I appreciate the citation!

 

[Venator]

imported post

SpringerXDacp wrote:

Ifanyone thinks the Zoo is considered to be an entertainment facility, then per Section 5o, if it has a seating capacity of 2500 or more, then it's a CPZ. Therefore, per Section 5o, it's illegal to CC at the Zoo. And, if you do not have a CPL, then per Section 234d, it's illegal to OC.

Why is OC illegal? Entertainment facility is not in .234d. And if you have a CPL then OC is legal due to the exception in .234d.

 

[DrTodd]

imported post

Do any of the structures have a seating capacity over 2500? I guess that would be the real question. And, I would also add that, at least according to the wording of the the law, each of those structures would need to have signage indicating the +2500 seating capacity if they intended the signage alone to prohibit concealed carry.

A while back I posted that there was a movie theater in the City of Wyoming that attempted to prohibit concealed carry by posting a seating capacity of 2500 on each of their entrances. Many people seemed to disagree with my opinion that they could do this even if the seating capacity was much less. IMHO, a previous writer is correct that, at least as far as the law is concerned, by posting the signage on an entrance, concealed carry would be prohibited; even if the actual capacity was less than the 2500. It seams that it was a "round about" way to get cpl holders to forgo CCing their firearms.

 

[DrTodd]

imported post

Venator,

You are correct, OC appears to be legal.

 

[SpringerXDacp]

imported post

Venator wrote:

SpringerXDacp wrote:

Ifanyone thinks the Zoo is considered to be an entertainment facility, then per Section 5o, if it has a seating capacity of 2500 or more, then it's a CPZ. Therefore, per Section 5o, it's illegal to CC at the Zoo. And, if you do not have a CPL, then per Section 234d, it's illegal to OC.

Why is OC illegal? Entertainment facility is not in .234d. And if you have a CPL then OC is legal due to the exception in .234d.

If it's considered to be an entertainment facility....

We don't know for sure at this time if it is or isn't. I know this subject has been beaten to death over at MGO over the years and many who CC are relying on OAG 7120 for lawful carry.

 

[FatboyCykes]

imported post

DrTodd wrote:

Venator,

You are correct, OC appears to be legal.

With, and only with a CPL though.

 

[FatboyCykes]

imported post

SpringerXDacp wrote:

Venator wrote:

SpringerXDacp wrote:

Ifanyone thinks the Zoo is considered to be an entertainment facility, then per Section 5o, if it has a seating capacity of 2500 or more, then it's a CPZ. Therefore, per Section 5o, it's illegal to CC at the Zoo. And, if you do not have a CPL, then per Section 234d, it's illegal to OC.

Why is OC illegal? Entertainment facility is not in .234d. And if you have a CPL then OC is legal due to the exception in .234d.

If it's considered to be an entertainment facility....

We don't know for sure at this time if it is or isn't. I know this subject has been beaten to death over at MGO over the years and many who CC are relying on OAG 7120 for lawful carry.

It seems, according to the posted AG opinion, that signage that includes language that includes a phrase regarding seating capacity over 2500 falls into the Pistol Free Zone language.

 

[SpringerXDacp]

imported post

FatboyCykes wrote:

SpringerXDacp wrote:

Venator wrote:

SpringerXDacp wrote:

Ifanyone thinks the Zoo is considered to be an entertainment facility, then per Section 5o, if it has a seating capacity of 2500 or more, then it's a CPZ. Therefore, per Section 5o, it's illegal to CC at the Zoo. And, if you do not have a CPL, then per Section 234d, it's illegal to OC.

Why is OC illegal? Entertainment facility is not in .234d. And if you have a CPL then OC is legal due to the exception in .234d.

If it's considered to be an entertainment facility....

We don't know for sure at this time if it is or isn't. I know this subject has been beaten to death over at MGO over the years and many who CC are relying on OAG 7120 for lawful carry.

It seems, according to the posted AG opinion, that signage that includes language that includes a phrase regarding seating capacity over 2500 falls into the Pistol Free Zone language.

Therein lies the problem, some feel they post the seating capacity to deter carry knowing it's covered by preemption. And others, feel it's a CPZ and think it's illegal to carry.

The question remains; Is it an entertainment facility or not. There is an attorney in Michigan that does not know...how would I or anyone else for that matter.

 

[DrTodd]

imported post

FatboyCykes wrote:

SpringerXDacp wrote:

Venator wrote:

SpringerXDacp wrote:

Ifanyone thinks the Zoo is considered to be an entertainment facility, then per Section 5o, if it has a seating capacity of 2500 or more, then it's a CPZ. Therefore, per Section 5o, it's illegal to CC at the Zoo. And, if you do not have a CPL, then per Section 234d, it's illegal to OC.

Why is OC illegal? Entertainment facility is not in .234d. And if you have a CPL then OC is legal due to the exception in .234d.

If it's considered to be an entertainment facility....

We don't know for sure at this time if it is or isn't. I know this subject has been beaten to death over at MGO over the years and many who CC are relying on OAG 7120 for lawful carry.

It seems, according to the posted AG opinion, that signage that includes language that includes a phrase regarding seating capacity over 2500 falls into the Pistol Free Zone language.

IMHO, If they post it on the buildings yes, if it at the entrance to the zoo itself, no.

 

[DrTodd]

imported post

SpringerXDacp wrote:

FatboyCykes wrote:

SpringerXDacp wrote:

Venator wrote:

SpringerXDacp wrote:

Ifanyone thinks the Zoo is considered to be an entertainment facility, then per Section 5o, if it has a seating capacity of 2500 or more, then it's a CPZ. Therefore, per Section 5o, it's illegal to CC at the Zoo. And, if you do not have a CPL, then per Section 234d, it's illegal to OC.

Why is OC illegal? Entertainment facility is not in .234d. And if you have a CPL then OC is legal due to the exception in .234d.

If it's considered to be an entertainment facility....

We don't know for sure at this time if it is or isn't. I know this subject has been beaten to death over at MGO over the years and many who CC are relying on OAG 7120 for lawful carry.

It seems, according to the posted AG opinion, that signage that includes language that includes a phrase regarding seating capacity over 2500 falls into the Pistol Free Zone language.

Therein lies the problem, some feel they post the seating capacity to deter carry knowing it's covered by preemption. And others, feel it's a CPZ and think it's illegal to carry.

The question remains; Is it an entertainment facility or not. There is an attorney in Michigan that does not know...how would I or anyone else for that matter.

Where are the signs located?

 

[DrTodd]

imported post