Repeal Michigan "Weapons Free" Zones….

Over the weekend in Grand Rapids, the body of a woman was found on the campus of Grand Rapids Community College (GRCC), murdered.

GRCC is one of the many so-called "weapons free" or "gun free" zones that dot the city.

The irony?

The stated reason for declaring the campus "weapons free" was for the SAFETY of employees, students, and the general public.

Here is their written policy: 

"III. Policy Statement
Possession or use of firearms, explosives or weapons or anything that is intended to be construed as a weapon is not permitted on College property.

IV. Reason for the Policy
To prohibit the possession or use of firearms, explosives or weapons on College property, as defined herein, FOR THE SAFETY OF ITS EMPLOYEES, STUDENTS, CUSTOMERS AND THE GENERAL PUBLIC. [emphasis added]

V. Entities Affected by this Policy
Employees, students, vendors, visitors to the campus and the general public…

iX. Definitions
“College property” includes but is not limited to property owned, operated, managed, licensed to or leased by the College. At GRCC, all college property is used for classroom purposes.

“Weapons” shall mean any type of firearm, knife, dagger, dirk, stiletto, a double-edged non-folding stabbing instrument, taser, brass knuckles, any other type of instrument which could be used as a weapon and any type of explosive, chemicals or objects or instruments possessed for use of fighting or attacking.

“Firearms” shall mean any weapon or device from which is propelled any missile, projectile, bullet, shot, pellet or other mass by means of explosives, compressed air or gas or by means of springs, levers or other mechanical device which weapon or device shall be capable by the discharge of any such propelled missile, projectile, bullet, shot, pellet or other mass of inflicting personal injury or death upon any person.

...How to handle a situation where you see someone with a gun or other weapon?

They should immediately contact the Campus Police at extension 4010 and advise them of what they have seen. The dispatcher will ask the caller to provide him/her with a clothing description of the person they suspect. They will be asked for the last place they saw the individual and whether this person was walking, getting into a car, etc. If the person is walking, the dispatcher will want to know what direction they were moving in. If they were in a vehicle and on the street, the dispatcher will ask the same thing, what direction were they traveling?"

The stated purpose of this policy is safety.  It prohibits all weapons, INCLUDING NONLETHAL, DEFENSIVE ITEMS SUCH AS  PEPPER SPRAY, MACE, TASERS OR STUN GUNS.  The only recourse offered to anyone on campus per the policy is calling campus security - and HOPING that help arrives in time.

I have been saying this for years: ANY ORGANIZATION THAT TAKES IT UPON ITSELF TO DENY INDIVIDUALS THEIR GOD-GIVEN, CONSTITUTIONALLY-PROTECTED RIGHT TO SELF DEFENSE USING ANY AND ALL MEANS AT THEIR DISPOSAL SHOULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR ALL INJURY OR DEATH ARISING FROM THAT POLICY.

Between the college campuses and medical mile, much of the downtown Grand Rapids area is designated as "weapons free," yet in recent years there have been numerous attacks on disarmed individuals in parking structures or other property relating to these organizations.  Obviously, criminals 1) don't care about such designations, 2) see them as fertile grounds on which to carry out their attacks, and 3) know that it takes time for police to arrive on the scene - by which time the damage is done and they are long gone.

So-called "weapon free", "gun free", or "pistol free" zones protect no one.  It's time to stop pretending otherwise, and it is time for the state legislature to take the following steps:

1) Eliminate so-called "weapon free" or "gun free" zones
2) Give Michigan's pre-emption law TEETH, specifically stating that schools, colleges, and universities are subject to pre-emption, and designating penalties for violating the pre-emption law
3) Hold any business/organization that takes it upon itself to enforce a "weapon free" or "gun free" policy - whether on the public OR their employees - civilly liable for any death or injury arising from the enforcement of such policy. 

4) Indemnify businesses/organizations from civil prosecution arising from lawful, defensive weapons carry and use.

And a final note to Michigan Governor Rick Snyder:  you are against the public carry of firearms because of something that happened while you were still a student at the University of Michigan.  You were a residence director in a dormitory when a man illegally carrying a firearm entered the dormitory and killed a fellow residence director, or so the story goes.  That person violated a gun free zone in order to commit a crime.

Bt what if things had been different?  What if your fellow student's right to defend himself had not been taken from him?  Might he still be alive today?  While having a firearm or mace might not have prevented his death, it would also have given him the chance to fight for his life.

Stop punishing lawful firearms carriers for the actions of a criminal.

Michigan - Requiring Sales Through Dealerships...

What gives our legislature the right to require manufacturers to sell through dealerships instead of directly to the customer - a model that would have the effect of significantly lowering the prices of new automobiles? I though we believed in free enterprise in this country.

And yes, I understand that the law prohibiting a manufacturer from selling directly to customers went into effect in 1981 with Act 118 of 1981:

"445.1574 Prohibited conduct by manufacturer.
Sec. 14.
(1) A manufacturer shall not do any of the following: […] (i) Sell any new motor vehicle directly to a retail customer other than through its franchised dealers, unless the retail customer is a nonprofit organization or a federal, state, or local government or agency. This subdivision does not prohibit a manufacturer from providing information to a consumer for the purpose of marketing or facilitating the sale of new motor vehicles or from establishing a program to sell or offer to sell new motor vehicles through the manufacturer's new motor vehicle dealers."

So, once again, we see the government setting up conditions under which IT may make purchases at greatly reduced prices, while REQUIRING its citizens to pay inflated prices.

If the ability of the government to make purchases at greatly reduce prices is a good thing, and government supposedly exists for the benefit of THE PEOPLE, then it stands to reason that THE PEOPLE would ALSO benefit from a reduction in the price of automobiles.

An Open Letter To Gov. Rick Snyder Regarding His Participation In The Upcoming Islamic Society of North America Convention...

Governor Snyder,

You are slated to participate in the upcoming convention for the  Islamic Society of North America (ISNA).

The ISNA  was listed as an unindicted co-conspirator and member of the Muslim Brotherhood in the Holy Land Foundation Trial, a trial that focused on fund raising efforts by the Holy Land Foundation on behalf of Hamas to facilitate "... a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and 'sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands ... so that ... God's religion [Islam] is made victorious over all other religions," http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/printgroupProfile.asp?grpid=6181. 

Another unindicted co-conspirator named in the trial, Jamal Badawi, is also slated to speak at the upcoming convention convention. 

The Holy Land Foundation was shut down by the government as a result of that trial.

In addition, another speaker for the convention, Siraj Wahhaj, was named in the trial for his involvement in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center.

Governor, let me be direct: what business does the governor of the State of Michigan have involving himself, and by extension, ALL of the citizens of Michigan whom you were elected to represent AND DEFEND, in a convention where the primary actors have been directly connected to terrorism and the funding of terrorist organizations?

Let me also be direct in my response to that question:  YOU HAVE NO BUSINESS PARTICIPATING IN THAT CONVENTION.

The stated goal of Hamas, ISIS, and other islamic terrorist organization is clear - to destroy the United States and Israel.  As Governor of Michigan, as required by the Constitution of Michigan, you took the following Oath of Office:

 "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the constitution of this state, and that I will faithfully discharge the duties of the office of Governor according to the best of my ability."

Explain to us, sir, how participation in a convention with those who have sworn to strive for our destruction is defending the Constitutions of the United States and the State of Michigan.  I submit that there is no acceptable explanation.  Your participation, in fact, constitutes a violation of that oath of office.

I am writing to urge you to remove yourself from participation.  

Sincerely,

Michigan Governor Exempted From Freedom of Information Act - An Open Letter….

Members of the Michigan Senate and House of Representatives:

A May 11, 2014 report by WZZM regarding gifts received by the governor (“Gov. Snyder receives over 1,100 gifts since 2011,” Governor Snyder accepts 1,110 gifts since 2011) noted that the governor’s office is exempted from Michigan’s Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)- something that comes as a bit of a surprise for most people.

The governor, like all other officials elected by the people of the State of Michigan, is supposed to be accountable to the electorate, yet MCL 15.232(d)(i) removes that accountability by specifically exempting the governor, the lt. governor, and their employees from compliance with the FOIA:

“(i) A state officer, employee, agency, department, division, bureau, board, commission, council, authority, or other body in the executive branch of the state government, but does not include the governor or lieutenant governor, the executive office of the governor or lieutenant governor, or employees thereof.”

The FOIA makes ample provision to protect certain kinds of information from disclosure, and both the Michigan Senate and House of Representatives are governed by the FOIA; there is no compelling reason why the governor, lt. governor, and their respective employees should be exempted from this expectation of transparency.

Therefore, I propose the following change to MCL 15.232(d)(i):

“(i) A state officer, employee, agency, department, division, bureau, board, commission, council, authority, or other body in the executive branch of the state government, but does not include the governor or lieutenant governor, the executive office of the governor or lieutenant governor, or employees thereof.”  

We have been promised transparency time and again by our elected officials.  It is time to make that a reality.