Ammo For Sale

« « Keep your booger hook off the bang switch | Home | On gun owners » »

Michigan Library OC Update

Judge rules the restraining order stands and expands it:

Ingham County Circuit Court Judge Rosemarie Aquilina today broadened an original restraining order that stated members of Michigan Open Carry or associated people were barred from openly toting firearms on the library’s grounds.

Seems weak to me. Does MOC have a membership base other than whoever chooses to post at their website? Still, it was to be expected when you carry a shotgun into a public library. Being right is not more important than winning.

26 Responses to “Michigan Library OC Update”

  1. John Smith. Says:

    This will flop on appeal… The broadening effect is completely useless. If you are banned from open carry in the library why did she specifically target a certain group with a repeat of the already implemented ban??? Can anyone say arbitrary? It is because the judge knows she is on shaky legal ground but is trying to avoid offending those who voted her in… State laws have preemption over library laws…

  2. ParatrooperJJ Says:

    It’s a flatly illegal order and should be overturned on appeal.

  3. KansasScout Says:

    If the previous comments are typical of Open carry radicals, then it seems that the delusions they suffer from remain.
    Radical open carry advocates are their own worst enemy. Carry a shotgun into a library and this WILL happen. Anyone who thinks they can act like this is a moron.
    Yes, the judges decision may well stand. I guarantee there will never be a time when carrying a shotgun into a library will be legal.
    There is no legal,or moral reason to do so.

  4. John Smith. Says:

    KansasScout… People like you also guaranteed there would never be any legal concealed carry either….

  5. Breda Says:

    Oh, great, here come the “if you don’t agree with us 100%, you must be a Fudd/part of the Brady campaign/as bad as japete” comments.

  6. Matt Says:

    uhh, well I can think of several scenarios where openly carrying any bullet launcher you have is okay, but most of those are under conditions that the libraries are closed/looted and the cops aren’t able to maintain order.
    Although I do agree with KansasScout’s first point that fringe groups (let’s not pretend that OC in MI is not a fringe group) don’t become mainstream by thumbing their nose at society-at-large.
    They are going to have to take a smoother approach that accentuates how much they have in common with the other people in the state.

  7. mike w. Says:

    Ok, I have to ask….how would they enforce such an order? It’s not like MOC has public membership lists, right? I mean is anyone who OC’s in or near the library going to get arrested for violating the restraining order.

    I may not agree with MOC’s tactics but the judge’s ruling is awful.

  8. comatus Says:

    Absolutely right. After what happened at Alexandria (twice!), no one should ever carry a weapon in a library. No one. Ever. Agreed.

    And that will include every Saint Hypatia of the Periodicals Stacks, nicht war? Otherwise, we’re talking about shushing, late-fee-assessing Only Ones.

  9. Dan Says:

    I don’t see how legitimate, legal carry being defeated in the courts is good for gun rights, but oh well.

  10. Matthew Carberry Says:

    Dan,

    You see, although anyone could have carried handguns openly yet discretely at the library all this time, perhaps using the threat of legal action as civil reinforcement when challenged, it is more important to protest, to push the edges of a legal activity into public view and get it restricted before having it become legal and unrestricted again months later.

    You know, for protest’s sake.

    Though admittedly the shotgun guy was a young man making an incredibly poor choice simultaneously, not part of the MI OC group per se.

  11. Kristopher Says:

    Matthew: Shotgun guy was a dumbassed kid. Dumbassed kids do dumbassed things. Groups that don’t curb dumbassery hurt themselves.

    If they had stuck to a pistol in a holster, they would have had their OC event, made some news and helped mainstream OC, and not caused all this crap to come down on us folks who want to actually win this politically.

    You don’t let kids make strategy for your group if you want to actually win.

  12. Matthew Carberry Says:

    The kid wasn’t part of the protest or the group as I understand it, and the group was engaged in talks with the Library administrators but held the protest when, again as I recall, they were told they couldn’t OC into the meeting about OC.

    They chose to protest, which is fine.

    It’s just that I think going in unarmed and then, if the library wouldn’t accede, threatening and actually filing a lawsuit, which would probably have been a winner as this appeal will probably be, would have avoided the restraining order and press.

    Meanwhile folks could continue to OC discretely and non-confrontationally per existing law, heck maybe with the suit pending the restraining order would have enjoined the -library- from enforcing its policy until the question was settled.

    But, again, I like winning and being right more than simply being right loudly.

  13. Bubblehead Les Says:

    I’m waiting on the Appeal, but something tells me that the OC people better have the “Stick-to-itness” of the Civil Rights Marchers. Took about 11 years from the Brown Ruling to the Passage of the Civil Rights Act in ’65. Also, they varied their targets on a city-by-city and State-by-State Case (sometimes Lunch Counters, sometimes the Bus, sometimes the Schools, etc.). Personally, I’d like them to see if they could enter the City Council Chambers w/o having to disarm. Just something about the Taxpayers Employees telling their Bosses they can’t use their Constitutional Rights when the Gooberment Employees are feeding from the shrinking payrolls of Private Citizens…..

  14. Chris Says:

    comatus:

    So what you are saying is that those that choose to obey the law shouldn’t carry.

    We all know that criminals do not follow the law so by extension banning all guns from libraries would ensure that only criminals would be the ones carrying in them. Congratulations, that creates a situation where if someone wants to do harm in a library with a firearm, they are guaranteed to encounter no resistance.

  15. Matthew Carberry Says:

    Why protest at all if they are in fact right on the law (which I believe they are)? Just sue and win.

    Protesting for the sake of protesting is a waste of time and effort and risks blowback. In the end it’ll probably end up in Court anyway.

    Why do it?

    If you win in Court you win and you’re done, if you lose in Court THEN you can protest and go for Legislative fixes.

  16. Matthew Carberry Says:

    If I’m reading the story right the judge was addressing the lack of clarity on who was in the MOC by extending the ban to everyone, associated or not.

    While MOC was, with the best of intentions, standing up for all MI OC-er’s; in practice they have now cost everyone who may have still done so discretely the ability to OC there at all.

    And now it’s going to Court anyway.

  17. Gerry Says:

    Let me get this right.

    I don’t open carry, but I have friends that belong to MOC. I am now banned from the library?

    Quick call CDC, there has been an outbreak of stupid!

  18. James Nelson Says:

    Michigan has a very strict preemption law. Given the current make up of the state legislature, there is no chance of it being overturned. Under Michigan law the judge’s order is illegal and will not stand. This is not the first time such things have been tried here and not one of them have stood legal challenge. Unless you know something about Michigan’s laws, you should probably restrain yourself from gratuitous comments.
    You may all return to your grandstanding now. JN

  19. Matthew Carberry Says:

    JN,

    That sorta makes the point.

    The law being what it is, this need never have gotten to the point where there -was- a protest.

    1) Library makes illegal policy

    2) Bring illegality to library admin’s attention with attorney’s letter citing legal issues involved

    3) wait a week or so for a response (as they check with their legal counsel)

    then;

    4) they come to their senses and rescind the policy and you’re done

    or,

    5) they refuse to change the policy and you file a winning suit, asking the judge, as the plaintiffs, to enjoin the library’s policy in the meantime as it involves a fundamental right and state statute

    6) win in Court and you’re done

    Where in that process does a protest -help-?

  20. John Smith. Says:

    A protest tears away the libraries oh so innocent facade… It attracts the attention of people who otherwise would not have noticed or known anything was going on…

    Never could understand people who break the law in order to get people to believe they are right… It is like law dyslexia.

  21. Justthisguy Says:

    All I have to say is, why do some people write “discretely” when they obviously meant to write “discreetly”?

  22. ScottWebb Says:

    No protests were ever held at the library. The individual who OCed a shotgun is not a member of MOC. Remember the library filed this against MOC while MOC was in discussions with library officials. During the first hearing the library director clearly stated his ultimate goal is to ban all firearm carry not just OC. This is just their first step in their attempts to accomplish banning all firearms.

  23. **** Says:

    @ScottWebb:

    Scottwebb has it.

  24. bob r Says:

    “1) Library makes illegal policy”

    The policy uses the phrase “to the fullest extent of the law”. I would say that the *policy* is unambiguously NOT illegal — regardless of what the law allows regarding firearms. The interpretation of the policy by library personnel seems to be “firearms are prohibited” and that the law allows that. This interpretation of what state law allows is the root of the problem — not the policy itself.

  25. mike Says:

    Maybe these delusional OC radicals can go OC at playground when all the kindergartners are there next. With friends like these, who needs enemies?

  26. MHinGA Says:

    I practiced law in MI for twenty years or so. While I don’t have any experience with this judge, I can tell you that top-to-bottom the Michigan state judiciary leaves a lot to be desired. Much of this has to do with the politics involved in being elected to a judicial position in MI.

    I’m just saying don’t hold your breath waiting for evident reason to prevail in the state courts; it isn’t so evident to most of the judges there.