Michigan Governor Vetoes NRA-Backed Bill

Michigan missed out on enacting a true ‘shall-issue’ concealed carry law Thursday, thanks to the veto power of Gov. Rick Snyder.

S.B. 789 would have streamlined the issuance process for concealed carry applicants by removing county review boards from the equation, but last minute pressure from Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America may have swayed the Republican governor to not sign the bill.

As it came time to sign the bill, Moms began claiming that the measure would remove safeguards that keep guns out of the hands domestic abusers and stalkers — a narrative that Snyder ended up embracing.

“We simply can’t and won’t take the chance of exposing domestic abuse victims to additional violence or intimidation,” Snyder said.

“There are certainly some reforms that can improve the way Michigan issues concealed pistol licenses and we support the rights of law-abiding firearm owners, but it’s crucial that we leave in place protections for people who already have endured challenges and abuse,” he continued.

For Shannon Watts, the founder of the Bloomberg-financed gun-control organization, it was a decisive victory.

“After years of operating in state legislatures unchecked, the NRA’s agenda of putting gun manufacturers’ profits above the safety of women is now being defeated in state after state,” said Watts in a statement.

“A recent study of women killed by their intimate partners showed that one out of five women who had an active restraining order were killed within two days of receiving it,” said Watts. “Guns and domestic violence are a deadly combination that Governor Snyder rightfully rejected by vetoing this dangerous legislation. Michigan women and families will be safer for it.”

However, the National Rifle Association defended the bill, saying that opponents were making “false assertions.”

“Once again, national gun ban groups, led by billionaire Michael Bloomberg, are exploiting the issue of domestic violence to push their extreme agenda,” said Chris Cox, executive director of the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action. “Bloomberg and the other national anti-gun groups know that the only way they can further their agenda is to lie and try to scare people.”

In an article on NRA-ILA, the nation’s gun lobby addressed concerns:

“Simply put, if an individual is a domestic-abuser and has been charged or convicted as such, or a judge has made a determination that the individual should not be allowed to purchase or possess a firearm, that person will be prohibited from receiving a concealed pistol license under [the bill],” the NRA said. “No exceptions.”

The NRA said it would regroup, and work to reintroduce the bill into the Legislature ASAP.

{ 21 comments… add one }
  • MARCELINA FELDER August 28, 2015, 6:07 pm

    I`ve found a good online tool for PDF editing, before buying I`ve researched PDFfiller reviews and found this: http://dms.cioreview.com/vendor/2015/pdffiller

  • Jeremiah August 27, 2015, 12:22 pm

    Poor, misguided Rick Snyder. he will have many women’s blood on his hands due to his malfeasance. I hope the people of Michigan remind him of every woman’s death at each and every passing.

    How can a man, who is protected by people carrying guns to personally protect him, not understand what is good for the goose is also good for the gander?

  • DRWolfe January 24, 2015, 9:37 pm

    He’s term limited and cannot run for governor again.

  • Bob January 20, 2015, 10:15 am

    There are so many denied their right to bear arms by vengeful ex-spouses filing restraining orders as an act of revenge. Judges look at the person before them and judge the book by its cover. For example, a vindictive wife could not get an an order of protection, terrified her children into saying that they were in fear of their father. The ex-wife had a history of attacking her neighbors cars, verbal abuse and threatening to burn their houses down. While the ex-husband only major violation was driving without a license. The ex-husband can’t help that he is big and ugly. In my opinion and experience, Judges could care less.

  • Marc January 19, 2015, 7:23 pm

    The bill would have passed with no problems if the PPO portion was left off. It just made good media fodder letting the uniformed public think someone could get a CPL while under PPO. I’ve had a CPL for over 10 years and never seen a gun board (Wayne County). Michigan has made it easier to purchase handguns in recent years, no more purchase permits etc. but you still have to turn in the pistol sales record slip to the reigning LE agency who forwards it to the Michigan State Police.

    • Paul Davidson March 4, 2015, 1:24 pm

      Just in case anyone need to fill out a Pistol Sales Record form, I found a blank form in this link http://goo.gl/bznq1e. This site PDFfiller also has several related forms that you might find useful.

  • Rob Schwalm January 19, 2015, 12:25 pm

    As a CCW/CPL holder in Michigan since the law was changed to ‘Shall Issue’, I too, am disappointed in Gov. Snyder. I have 3 of my 4 sons who are Michigan State Troopers keep my finger on the pulse of all issues ‘gun’. My hope is that the State of Michigan will institute a system where we can renew our CPL’s just like we do our Driver Licenses and License plates. The anti-gunners seem to completely ignore all of the other forms of inducing physical harm on others, most importantly the motor vehicle…Michigan requires all motorists to have Personal Liability/Property Damage car insurance to obtain a license plate…after that they can drop it and take their chances with not getting pulled over…try getting tricky with a CPL and find out how fast it is taken away! We even have an ‘Unisured Motorist fee’ where we have to pay in to a fund for accident victims who get in an accident and DON’T have insurance…sorry for the tangent…the antigunners are just bound and determined to turn the U.S. into Japan, China or Russia…

  • Larry January 19, 2015, 12:18 pm

    It’s a sad day when an otherwise logically thinking “Repubic” & somewhat Conservative governor would sucumb to the hysterics of an anti US Constitutional, gun grabbing bunch of rabid fools. Too bad! Second Amendment freedom took a blow.

  • JimG January 19, 2015, 12:04 pm

    It is important to remember that keeping the guns out of the hands of the potential abusers, who would likely not pass any kind of background check, also keeps the guns out of the hands of the victims. Once again we have a situation where bowing to the political intimidation tactics of folks that have no dog in the fight, we have done more damage then good and further stacked the deck against the victim. Congrats Michigan and your political machine including your governor.

    • Cea January 19, 2015, 12:27 pm

      I can’t say for sure, but I didn’t read anywhere that the victim, the one that took out the PPO, can’t have a firearm/CPL.
      Where did you get that?

  • mikey January 19, 2015, 11:54 am

    Remember this guy in the primary and election

  • Cea January 19, 2015, 11:30 am

    I stand corrected, more than one county has a gun board. But like was mentioned in the video, a late amendment was added to allow persons with a PPO to still carry a gun. Unless is specifically listed as a dis-qualifier.
    So, I still agree that the veto was the correct action. Let them clean up the bill, keep the crazies out of the room when doing so, and we get the bill and law that is well needed.

  • Cea January 19, 2015, 11:07 am

    Well I live in Michigan, and from what I know about the gun boards is this, only one county, Macomb County, has the gun board. You only need to go before it once, when you get your first CPL. They ask 3 questions, then you get your license. Stupid? Very! But it doesn’t stop anyone that is not already a criminal. When you renew your license in five years, no need to go in front of the board again.
    So, if there was a last minute clause thrown in there to gum up the bill/law, that would allow the wrong people (or, not prohibit, a person with a PPO against them) to legally possess a firearm, then the veto was the right thing to do. Most people don’t know the whole story, then they make uneducated comments, not really their fault, as the media (even the NRA) never tells you the whole story. Sure, it sounds bad, but there was garbage tossed in to screw up what would have been a great change. They are now working to get rid of the garbage, and re-introduce the bill. But we all know what will happen, someone or some group will soil it up again, just to stop it.

    • Bill January 21, 2015, 1:38 am

      I believe in Michigan if there is a domestic violenece report made against a current CPL carrier they have to appear before the gun board for renewal.

  • Cea January 19, 2015, 11:06 am

    Well I live in Michigan, and from what I know about the gun boards is this, only one county, Macomb County, has the gun board. You only need to go before it once, when you get your first CPL. They ask 3 questions, then you get your license. Stupid? Very! But it doesn’t stop anyone that is not already a criminal. When you renew your license in five years, no need to go in front of the board again.
    So, if there was a last minute clause thrown in there to gum up the bill/law, that would allow the wrong people (or, not prohibit, a person with a PPO against them) to legally possess a firearm, then the veto was the right thing to do. Most people don’t know the whole story, then they make uneducated comments, not really their fault, as the media (even the NRA) never tells you the whole story. Sure, it sounds bad, but there was garbage tossed in to screw up what would have been a great change. They are now working to get rid of the garbage, and re-introduce the bill. But we all know what will happen, someone or some group will soil it up again, just to stop it.

  • Russ Newkirk January 19, 2015, 9:52 am

    I grew up in Michigan. The gun laws were bad. I moved to Washington state and they just passed this 1-594 to paper ALL transactions, just like Oregun and Kalifornia. Yup, let’s make it harder for the American Citizen to get a gun, unless he is a criminal, that is. No delays or permits for the gang bangers, just the folks trying to defend their RIGHTS! I will not comply. Google Gun Show Bandit to see what your “gubmint” is up to these days. Treat gun thieves just like child molesters, shoot them while trying to escape, save the taxpayers some dough!

  • Vernon Rosa January 19, 2015, 8:07 am

    I don’t live in MI, so I don’t have a dog in your fight, but the comments by Shannon Watts require us to buy into the premise insinuated by her statement. It seems to say that allowing a male to have a CWP makes it easier for him to kill his girlfriend, spouse, significant other who got a protection order or restraining order against him. Really? How so? Does anyone really think a person bent on killing someone is worried about whether or not it is legal for him to carry his gun concealed? I don’t believe I’ve ever arrested an armed criminal who had a concealed weapon permit. Clearly, your Governor caved to liberal pressure.

    • Dale January 19, 2015, 9:52 pm

      Amen!! I have a brother in-law who is against CCW’s because he believes it allows felons the ability to legally carry a gun. I tried to explain that felons aren’t allowed to posses firearms, and in no way can they qualify for a CCW. Not sure if he understands the concept that CRIMINALS don’t care about obeying the law, it’s the law abiding that needs the option to carry concealed. I also live in state that allows for OPEN carry, and that STILL does not allow a felon to be in possession of a firearm. I tried.

    • Russ January 20, 2015, 2:27 am

      I’m thinking like you Vernon. and like you, I no dog in the fight, being here in the gun hellhole of California.
      Your so right about; “Bent on killing”
      A murderer will use poison, a bat, their hands and feet, a car or maybe even stuff a Barbie down the victims throat.
      It really doesn’t matter if they have a gun or not.
      A dammed crazy murderer will still commit the crime.
      Was the law going to allow a criminal to own a firearm?
      Or just cut away red tape in the form of review boards?
      Did I miss something?
      Criminals can’t own a firearm.
      Or am I misinformed?

  • Richard Smith January 19, 2015, 6:57 am

    Again, the mega rich are working their evil ways upon us. How can we eliminate their power over our elected legislators? The only thing that comes to mind is taking the profit out of being a legislator. It seems the vast majority of elected officials are susceptible to corruption. I recall President Eisenhower warning us of the military-industrial complex. I can offer no solutions, only raise the questions.

  • Duane January 19, 2015, 2:57 am

    As a resident of Michigan who will be turning 21 in April I am definitely disappointed by Gov. Snyder’s spineless decison to lie supinely on his back for the anti-gun shills. Obviously they haven’t even considered that this would actually be good for women…it would make it easier for them to obtain a CPL to protect themselves against violent husbands and boyfriends. However while I am disappointed, I am not surprised. Despite the GOP talking a good game with gun rights, to a point, a lot of it’s members are just as anti-gun as the Democrats, and they often go for gun control. After all they can’t allow the plebeians to own and carry guns every single day! They might just recognize the politicians for the spineless, conniving, petty tyrannts and thieves they are!

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend