Elvis
New Member
Formerly BobHuckins
Posts: 233
|
Post by Elvis on Dec 17, 2014 7:08:32 GMT -5
I just watched the last minute of a news story about a new bill for airguns. They said a lot of changing the definition and possession laws of them. It is being very vague and I can not tell if it is in favor of airsofters or not in favor of airsofters. Here are a few articles about it: www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/dec/16/michigan-bills-okd-to-loosen-air-gun-regulations/woodtv.com/2014/12/16/michigan-bills-okd-to-loosen-air-gun-regulations/LANSING, Mich. (AP) — "Michigan lawmakers have approved legislation to loosen licensing restrictions on air guns and limit local governments’ ability to set their own regulations, except when the guns are being used by kids under age 16." I think this quote pretty much sums it up, however I see good in them "loosening" restrictions, but I can see the bad about the part being about "kids under 16," of course, like I said, they are being very un specific about what they plan on doing. What are you guys opinions?
|
|
|
Post by Stinger on Dec 17, 2014 22:03:58 GMT -5
I find this to be a good step. Airsoft guns were previously considered to be "unrestricted firearms" in Michigan, as they did not fall under the category of "air rifle" (they shoot projectiles larger than 0.117-caliber).
|
|
|
Post by Gunny87 on Dec 18, 2014 14:41:38 GMT -5
I'm not sure what to make of this. It seems like a step in the right direction, based on what the articles suggest but then I wouldn't be surprised if some legislation comes out after to make them look like toy guns too, and face similar legislation like what was passed in CA and is being proposed in other states like OH.
I don't trust politicians as far as I can throw them. So I'm waiting for their true intention to come to light.
|
|
|
Post by Squirrel on Dec 19, 2014 14:53:41 GMT -5
It worries me with Michigan's legislature getting into airsoft regulations. We have absolutely no industry to lobby our congress like they did in California. I have a feeling the 60 to 100 active voices we could get from the MIA community would do absolutely nothing to change opinions of the Congress. Evike and Airsoft GI had a hell of a time with the California legislature.
Lets hope they leave it as just defining what an airsoft gun is. For some reason I think they are going to define airsoft guns legally, and then make a second law to regulate color and transportation and whatnot.
If kids would learn basic gun safety we wouldn't have all these problems.
|
|
|
Post by Gunny87 on Dec 19, 2014 15:10:02 GMT -5
For some reason I think they are going to define airsoft guns legally, and then make a second law to regulate color and transportation and whatnot. This is exactly what I think could happen. Like you said earlier, the fact that they are even discussing regulating airsoft guns could spell trouble.
|
|
|
Post by Ogre on Dec 19, 2014 16:56:21 GMT -5
Like I've said before, they can try to regulate Airsoft all they want. It isn't going to stop people from playing. Good luck getting me to follow any color regulations.
|
|
|
Post by Mosin on Dec 19, 2014 17:20:45 GMT -5
It worries me with Michigan's legislature getting into airsoft regulations. We have absolutely no industry to lobby our congress like they did in California. and even with that pull that we'd expect the bigger businesses to have, the law was still passed. I spoke to John Lu about the color change and he said if anything it's going increase airsoft business, as they'll be able to sell aftermarket kits to change them back to what they were originally, and basically win twice off the consumers.
|
|
|
Post by snafu on Dec 19, 2014 21:07:46 GMT -5
Subtle I spoke to John Lu post?
|
|
|
Post by Gunny87 on Dec 30, 2014 15:38:50 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by luke213 on Dec 30, 2014 16:37:03 GMT -5
Just curious since most of you know I've been out of the loop for quite a while. Airsoft back 8ish years ago the theory was that airsoft wasn't a firearm and the reason was the wording in the law specified shortly after the rule about diameter that it fired a dangerous projectile. Since airsoft wasn't a dangerous projectile the theory went that it wasn't a firearm under Michigan law.
Since then I've been doing a little reading into this issue now and it seems like they are considered some sort of firearm. Looking around the forum I can't find much info on it, and the threads that are stickies in the legal stuff area of the forum are from back when I was active so they aren't much help shedding light.
So if anyone has some links or more information I'd appreciate it, I'd like to run through what the current legal situation is, or find something that says what changed and why. Just like to keep up with the legal side of any hobby that I'm playing;)
Take care!
Luke
|
|
|
Post by Gunny87 on Dec 31, 2014 13:57:48 GMT -5
All I know is as long as we treat and handle airsoft guns as we would with real guns and always keep them covered while transporting them and as long as we don't play in public areas, then we will have nothing to worry about. If you don't follow these rules, you only have yourself to blame. If anything, I do agree with Snyder's assessment to some extent, otherwise criminals will just continue to disguise real guns as toy guns..... So I can't say I blame LE treating anything that resembles a weapon as a threat to them and acting accordingly. whnt.com/2014/12/12/real-guns-disguised-to-look-like-toys-pose-new-threats-to-law-enforcement/
|
|
|
Post by luke213 on Dec 31, 2014 14:37:38 GMT -5
All I know is as long as we treat and handle airsoft guns as we would with real guns and always keep them covered while transporting them and as long as we don't play in public areas, then we will have nothing to worry about. If you don't follow these rules, you only have yourself to blame. If anything, I do agree with Snyder's assessment to some extent, otherwise criminals will just continue to disguise real guns as toy guns..... So I can't say I blame LE treating anything that resembles a weapon as a threat to them and acting accordingly. whnt.com/2014/12/12/real-guns-disguised-to-look-like-toys-pose-new-threats-to-law-enforcement/ I don't disagree with that as an idea, I've always been an advocate of transporting firearms and airsoft in the same manner. That said with handguns I've got a CPL, I always carry and sometimes open carry etc, so airsoft handguns are actually typically taken a little more lax approach myself. But I also support the whole treating them like firearms in pretty much all cases outside of games. That said though I'm more curious on the implied stuff I've been reading around saying that they are considered firearms in Michigan. I did some more research since my post and I'm finding tons of people making the off the cuff remark that they are considered firearms but no supporting evidence. Also if that were true how the heck can walmart sell AEG's. If that's true then a TM MP5k is a full auto class 3, and it's under the legal limit I didn't buy it from an FFL etc etc. Handguns they are saying in multiple places could be registered, well no unique serial numbers is just one problem with that idea. If that is true then how many unregistered "handguns" that are really airsoft guns are there around in Michigan? So my concern is just making sure I'm legal and on top of that when asked I can at least give a good idea what the law currently is. I'm a law abiding guy, and I take that pretty seriously since my business is firearms related, and I spend allot of time talking about firearms laws etc just because of it. So I'd really love to get to the bottom of this whole thing. Luke
|
|
|
Post by Stinger on Dec 31, 2014 17:51:16 GMT -5
If that's true then a TM MP5k is a full auto class 3, and it's under the legal limit I didn't buy it from an FFL etc etc. Handguns they are saying in multiple places could be registered, well no unique serial numbers is just one problem with that idea. If that is true then how many unregistered "handguns" that are really airsoft guns are there around in Michigan? I believe that they were considered "unrestricted firearms" as per Mich. Comp. Laws Ann. §§28.421a-422b; 28.425; 28.425b;28.425c-d; 28.425f-g; 28.425l; 28.425o; 28.429; 28.430; 123.1101; 750.224; 750.226; 750.227; 750.236; 750.324; 752.891.
|
|
|
Post by luke213 on Dec 31, 2014 18:53:12 GMT -5
I just poked through those laws and I'm no lawyer and I'm not even good at reading them but I did run through them and I don't see anything related to "unrestricted firearms" or any definition of it that I could find. And the only part that I found had a bearing would be the normal quote of a dangerous projectile over .177 caliber etc. In the last one there is mention of BB guns again but it mentions .177 caliber without the dangerous implication which means I don't believe it applies to airsoft in this case.
Is there a particular passage that you know of that would make it clearer?
Thanks Luke
|
|
|
Post by Stinger on Dec 31, 2014 22:49:08 GMT -5
After reading the thread I cite below (which concludes that, while the definition of an airsoft rifle is kinda ambiguous, per Michigan law it is a firearm), I asked a police officer with whom my family is friends and he answered it by saying that they consider it to be a firearm in the technical sense of the term. However, it is not restricted in the same manner that a traditional firearm would be. Thus "unrestricted firearm." I don't think there is any true law to back that up, but its my understanding that that is how the law has treated it so far. EDIT: Almost forgot to cite the thread (although you've probably already read it): miairsoft.proboards.com/thread/20977/michigan-law-pertains-airsoft
|
|