Ammo For Sale

« « Obama and guns | Home | Hyperlocal blogging without the hyper » »

In Michigan


Beginning Wednesday, Michigan will no longer require a post-purchase safety inspection of handguns purchased. Currently, every time a handgun is purchased in Michigan, whether it is a commercial sale or a private sale between two individuals, the purchaser must take the pistol to their local police department and present it for “safety inspection.” During these inspections, actual checks for safety really never took place. What was accomplished was that the make, model, caliber and serial number of the gun was registered to the purchaser. The Legislature has recognized the hypocrisy of this process and will now trust its citizens to send them the correct information regarding the handgun to be registered.

13 Responses to “In Michigan”

  1. Robb Allen Says:

    Good? Registration is good?

    I mean, yeah it’s nice that they admitted they were just using it as a front for something illegal, but I can’t see how continuing on with the registration scheme is a good thing.

  2. Tom Says:

    Was good enough for Heller.

  3. Mikee Says:

    I call shenanigans on this scheme.

    What are the penalties for not providing exact and proper information to the police? How easy is it to provide the required information? Is the info required to be in a legally defined format? If one puts down an abbreviation rather than writing out the full word, or misspells something, is that prosecutable? Does S&W pass or fail, does Smith and Wesson pass or fail, does Smith and Weson pass or fail, does 357 Magnum pass or fail, does .38 pass or fail, does 38 Spl pass or fail? Is that little number on the crane of my 38SPL the serial number, or is it on the frame under the grips?

    This seems a registration system ripe for abuse by authorities. Personally, I leave zero abbreviations or empty spaces on the federal 4473 forms when I buy guns, even down to writing out “not applicable” in all blank spaces to avoid any opportunity for later amending of the document.

    I can see this Michigan system catching many otherwise law-abiding citizens in technical violations, leading to revocations of their handgun licenses.

  4. Mikee Says:

    And Heller dis not address the constitutionality of registration, just the ban on handguns.

  5. Paul Price Says:

    I live in MI and do gun shows on weekends for a friend that owns a gun store. The process is that first we do a 4473 (new version, then a NICS check and now there is now a 4 part’handgun’ form. 1 stays with the dealer, 1 the dealer sends to the State Police. 1 goes with the customer to send to the State Police, and 1 he retains for his own records.

    If the customer does not send 1 of his copies to the State Police records division, he is subject to a $250 fine and possible (probable) confiscation of his handgun.

    This is indeed a better system than we have had, but obviously less than ideal.

  6. DirtCrashr Says:

    Registration is registration, always ripe for abuse, and even in California we don’t have to put up with this kind of police oversight and intervention.

  7. Micheal Says:

    This is my biggest dread about moving to Michigan(not my idea,the wife’s, who is from there). All this does is create a time saver, it is still unlawful registration and shows how little the state of Michigan trust its citizens. Then again, the state is ran by anti-gun liberals like Gov. Jennifer Granholm and the liberal unions who have vice-like grip on the state.

  8. Crucis Says:

    And for private sales too? Give me a break. No one in their right mind went in for that “safety check.”

  9. The Freeholder Says:

    “…send them the correct information…”? I. Don’t. Think. So.

    I do not register my guns. You want to know what I have? Read my blog. You want to know the particulars? Get a warrant.

  10. Nomen Nescio Says:

    Then again, the state is ran by anti-gun liberals like Gov. Jennifer Granholm

    the handgun registration scheme dates to the 1920’s, well before Granholm’s time. it would make marginally more sense (although still not much) to credit her for this small yet non-zero easing up of it than to blame her for its existence.

    sure, best of all would be if she were to preside over its dismantling and the burning of all the accumulated records. but the damn thing’s been in force over eighty years; it’ll take more political effort and pressure than any one person — even if she’s the governor — can take sole credit for to finally end it.

  11. JJR Says:

    Ugh, lesser evilism at work. End result is still horrid. Crossing off Michigan from my shrinking list of states I’d be willing to move to if I were ever tempted to leave Texas for a better job…

    (Already eliminated are any states that won’t accept my Texas CHL if I move and convert it to non-resident status)

  12. Nomen Nescio Says:

    what’s the difference between “lesser evilism” and “gotta fix this one bit at a time-ism” ?

  13. Rivrdog Says:

    It’s likely that the “safety inspection” would have fallen on it’s own, since actual inspections weren’t being done. If a malfunctioning firearm were to have made it though inspection, and later firing of it created a loss (injury), the police and the State could have been held liable for improper diligence in making the check.

    After settling such a case, Michigan would either have had to perform actual safety inspections, or give it up. since they would have had to certify all inspectors as gunsmiths, they would selected the give it up route.