Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

MCRGO Ferndale Lawsuit setback (Judicial Activism strikes, Ferndale CCW ban STANDS(for now))
Michigan Coalition for Responsible Gun Owners ^ | 6-12-02

Posted on 06/12/2002 10:47:05 PM PDT by Dan from Michigan

MCRGO members,

Today our lawsuit against the City of Ferndale was dismissed by Judge MacDonald of the Oakland County Circuit Court, despite us having valid Michigan law and even an Attorney General's opinion on our side. We cited the Michigan CCW law in which the legislature intended for all permit holders to be able to carry in all areas not set off-limits by the legislature, and we cited the pre-emption statute passed by the legislature in 1990 where they struck down all city and county gun bans identical to the one that ferndale passed. We even showed how the Michigan legislature considered banning firearms from city buildings but voted it down. By comparison, the City of Ferndale's attorney didn't make much of an argument at all and the judge had a written opinion and the dismissal order already prepared this morning before the arguments were even presented so it was obvious that the judge's mind was made up before we even got to court.

Of course MCRGO is going to appeal this case. We feel that our case is strong enough to warrant appellate review and we expect to win on the merits when we get before a state appellate panel instead of an elected judge. Of course we also can't afford not to appeal, because if we let Ferndale have this victory, many other local units of government will place their buildings off limits to every law-abiding CPL holder. So for our continued freedom to carry, we're going forward.

That said, we need more money to push the fight to the next level. If you can help out at all--even a few dollars--please send it to MCRGO Civil Rights Legal Defense Fund, P.O. Box 14014, Lansing, MI 48933

This is a fight that will shape your rights and your ability to carry, so please help us help you and send a donation as soon as you can!


TOPICS: Announcements; Breaking News; News/Current Events; US: Michigan
KEYWORDS: 2ndamendment; banglist; ccw; ferndale; guns; johnmcdonald; lawsuit; mcrgo
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last
This sucks. This judge either is an idiot, doesn't care about the law, or both.

The preemption act of 1990 says that gun control laws are a STATE issue. Cities can not have stricter gun laws than the state.

And this damn judge already made his mind up before it started from what we've seen here.

We ARE APPEALING this, and we SHOULD win.

Lastly, anyone in Oakland County - PLEASE vote against Judge McDonald.

1 posted on 06/12/2002 10:47:06 PM PDT by Dan from Michigan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan
Don't just vote against Judge McDonald - out him!

Do what scares any judge even thinking of following in his footsteps most - investigate Judge McDonald's "past" at your county courthouse (for messy divorces, paternity suits, "love children," DUIs, drug problems, or tax liens), and then blab your findings all over local talk radio and the Internet!

There is nothing a judge fears more than that his kid will hear about Daddy's dope problem or that his new wife will learn that he beat his last wife from talk radio or from classmates.

Larryflynt the guy.

Scandals of antigun politicians - with how-to guide to "outing!"

2 posted on 06/12/2002 10:55:34 PM PDT by glc1173@aol.com
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bang_list ; Jerrybob ; Chemist_Geek ; historian1944 ; Redbob ; technochick99 ; lazamataz
I can't believe this. I thought this was an open and shut case.

On to the Appeals Court.

3 posted on 06/12/2002 10:57:03 PM PDT by Dan from Michigan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan
"This judge either is an idiot, doesn't care about the law, or both."

Text of the Second Amendment
"A well regulated Militia
being necessary to the security of a free State,
the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."

Anyone who actually reads AND understands the 2nd Amendment
will see that there is no constitutional authority for any type of gun registration
and *there is no need for anyone to have to apply for a license to carry a gun.
*NOTE Vermont is the only state that understands this!
Any political party, politician, judge (etc), organization or individual who trys to convince you that:
1) you must register a firearm
2) you must pass a background check
3) you must wait (x) amount of days before you can get your firearm
4) you need to have a license to carry a gun
is either uneducated about OUR rights as citizens
OR is actively working to undermine OUR country.

How Did the Founders Understand the Second Amendment?

4 posted on 06/12/2002 11:05:52 PM PDT by 68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


5 posted on 06/12/2002 11:44:06 PM PDT by DoughtyOne
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #6 Removed by Moderator

To: Dan from Michigan
Sounds like this judge got imported from Kalifornia.

Any chance that he himself packs a pistol? That would be an interesting bit to pass around...


7 posted on 06/13/2002 4:22:32 AM PDT by Joe Brower
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan
Wouldn't this be like the City of Ferndale saying you can't drive in their city because a local law trumps a State Driver's license?
8 posted on 06/13/2002 6:20:03 AM PDT by FreeTally
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreeTally
Wouldn't this be like the City of Ferndale saying you can't drive in their city because a local law trumps a State Driver's license?

Not exactly. Ownership of the roads is a complex issue, with the U.S., state, county, and local governments each owning some roads and being responsible for maintenance of other roads. For example, the main roads through Ferndale are probably county roads. On the other hand, if they tried to require a special license before driving on the city streets, that might be a good parallel. They're trying to prevent licensed CCW on their own property.

Since this is a city trying to prohibit licensed CCW, it's a violation of the preemption statute. If this were a private company, OTOH, it would be perfectly legal.

9 posted on 06/13/2002 6:47:19 AM PDT by Chemist_Geek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan
and the judge had a written opinion and the dismissal order already prepared this morning before the arguments were even presented

Dan, do you think that the opinion, and MCRGO's written arguments, will be available on the Web?

I have to re-check with the office; I never received the alert e-mail. I found out about the dismissal here.

10 posted on 06/13/2002 6:53:02 AM PDT by Chemist_Geek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Chemist_Geek
On the other hand, if they tried to require a special license before driving on the city streets, that might be a good parallel

Thats what I meant. I wasn't clear enough. The State law, I'm sure, is clear that the legislature makes laws concerning the issue of State Driver's license. Apparently, Michican has preemption laws like we do here in Florida. The Fendale law is null and void, no matter what the judge says. If there is a Michigan Statute that explicitly states all gun laws are to be made by the State lagislature, then its no difference than the City claiming they have a "City driver's license". No city or county LEO in this country would attempt to ticket a driver for not having a "city" driver's license.

Miami-Dade county wrote some type of law requiring guns to be locked up at all times with a trigger lock,(or something like that), but it was immediately tsruck down and no person was arrested under the law. It seems as if some brave sole in Ferndale is going to have to get caught carrying concealed in a manner legal by State law(which would technically be impossible) and point at the State law and see where it leads.

11 posted on 06/13/2002 6:58:36 AM PDT by FreeTally
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan
The right to carry a firearm is inalienable on your private property, or on public property. The only place you can be denied is on someone elses private property or while incarcerated for a crime.
12 posted on 06/13/2002 7:30:31 AM PDT by borntodiefree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreeTally
Right, we're in agreement. Michigan's preemption law makes this ordinance void. I quote below the operative section of the state law.

A local unit of government shall not impose special taxation on, enact or enforce any ordinance or regulation pertaining to, or regulate in any other manner the ownership, registration, purchase, sale, transfer, transportation, or possession of pistols or other firearms, ammunition for pistols or other firearms, or components of pistols or other firearms, except as otherwise provided by federal law or a law of this state.

13 posted on 06/13/2002 8:00:56 AM PDT by Chemist_Geek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Chemist_Geek
Is this within the Constitution of the State, or just a statute?
14 posted on 06/13/2002 8:12:33 AM PDT by borntodiefree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: borntodiefree
Never mind, found the answer... The question then comes first, are the counties/cities the subjects of the state, or is the state the hired assistants of the counties/cities?

Of course that has no bearing that all gun laws are immoral and wrong. The people have the inalienable right to carry hidden or not.
15 posted on 06/13/2002 8:19:11 AM PDT by borntodiefree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: borntodiefree
Well, the state preemption of local regulation is a statute, but, we also have in our Constitution of 1963 the following section:

Every person has a right to keep and bear arms for the defense of himself and the state.

I think that between the two, it's pretty clear that Ferndale's attempt to bar licensed CCW from public property will not stand. However, we need the lawsuit and lawyers to convince judges to smack the City Council back into its place. I'm confident that this ordinance (and its costly defense!) will be made an issue in the next Ferndale election...

16 posted on 06/13/2002 8:19:13 AM PDT by Chemist_Geek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan
Only open and shut within context of the law. It the newspaper piece it was said it was "an extension of the state law". When you just make it up, anything is possible.
17 posted on 06/13/2002 8:43:33 AM PDT by School of Rational Thought
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC

Donate Here By Secure Server

Or mail checks to
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794

or you can use

PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com

Thank you Registered!


18 posted on 06/13/2002 8:44:41 AM PDT by Mo1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Chemist_Geek
I didn't get the email either. I saw it on the message boards under legal issues.
19 posted on 06/13/2002 8:46:47 AM PDT by Dan from Michigan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan
Do you know how long it will be before this gets before the State Appeals Court? The Oakland County Circuit judge needs to be slapped and removed from his position for blatantly disregarding a State law.

This is just so silly, I can't believe it. This isn't even an area where it can be claimed the law is vague or something. It sounds like that there were other such laws in place in 1990, but were all slapped down when the preemption law was made.

I wonder if the State, once slapping down this judge, could allow the City to be sued by anyone arrested under this illegal law? I personaly would hold the judge liable in civil court, but our rulers will never allow that.

20 posted on 06/13/2002 8:58:22 AM PDT by FreeTally
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-30 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson