Letters

Letters 08-31-2015

Inalienable Rights This is a response to the “No More State Theatre” in your August 24th edition. I think I will not be the only response to this pathetic and narrow-minded letter that seems rather out of place in the northern Michigan that I know. To think we will not be getting your 25 cents for the movie you refused to see, but more importantly we will be without your “two cents” on your thoughts of a marriage at the State Theatre...

Enthusiastically Democratic Since I was one of the approximately 160 people present at when Senator Debbie Stabenow spoke on August 14 in Charlevoix, I was surprised to read in a letter to Northern Express that there was a “rather muted” response to Debbie’s announcement that she has endorsed Hillary Clinton for president...

Not Hurting I surely think the State Theatre will survive not having the homophobic presence of Colleen Smith and her family attend any matinees. I think “Ms.” Smith might also want to make sure that any medical personnel, bank staff, grocery store staff, waiters and/or waitress, etc. are not homosexual before accepting any service or product from them...

Stay Home I did not know whether to laugh or cry when I read the letter of the extremely homophobic, “disgusted” writer. She now refuses to patronize the State Theatre because she evidently feels that its confines have been poisoned by the gay wedding ceremony held there...

Keep Away In response to Colleen Smith of Cadillac who refused to bring her family to the State Theatre because there was a gay wedding there: Keep your 25 cents and your family out of Traverse City...

Celebrating Moore And A Theatre I was 10 years old when I had the privilege to see my first film at the State Theatre. I will never forget that experience. The screen was almost the size of my bedroom I shared with my older sister. The bursting sounds made me believe I was part of the film...

Outdated Thinking This letter is in response to Colleen Smith. She made public her choice to no longer go to the State Theater due to the fact that “some homosexuals” got married there. I’m not outraged by her choice; we don’t need any more hateful, self-righteous bigots in our town. She can keep her 25 cents...

Mackinac Pipeline Must Be Shut Down Crude oil flowing through Enbridge’s 60-yearold pipeline beneath the Mackinac Straits and the largest collection of fresh water on the planet should be a serious concern for every resident of the USA and Canada. Enbridge has a very “accident” prone track record...

Your Rights To Colleen, who wrote about the State Theatre: Let me thank you for sharing your views; I think most of us are well in support of the first amendment, because as you know- it gives everyone the opportunity to express their opinions. I also wanted to thank Northern Express for not shutting down these types of letters right at the source but rather giving the community a platform for education...

No Role Model [Fascinating Person from last week’s issue] Jada quoted: “I want to be a role model for girls who are interested in being in the outdoors.” I enjoy being in the outdoors, but I don’t want to kill animals for trophy...

Home · Articles · News · Other Opinions · Guns on campus...
. . . .

Guns on campus what‘s behind the debate?

Steven Dulan - November 30th, 2009
Guns on Campus What‘s behind the debate?
By Steven Dulan
House Bill 5474, co-sponsored by over two dozen Michigan legislators, would extend firearms preemption to college
campuses.
(“Preemption” means the law would make it impossible for universities to apply their own set of restrictions on firearms in lieu of the laws established by the State. - ed.)
This bill, widely viewed as a simple “clean-up” to clarify law statewide, has elicited some heated opposition. The bill would amend MCL Secs. 123.1101, 123.1102, and 123.1103 by adding “Institution of Higher Education” to the list of bodies prohibited from making their own gun law. Current law prevents any “Local unit of government” from making any laws taxing, or regulating “...the ownership, registration, purchase, sale, transfer, transportation, or possession of pistols or other firearms...”
There has been some debate in the courts regarding whether a college or university would fall within the definition of “local unit of government.” There are other Michigan statutes that do include colleges and universities in the definition of “local unit of government.” But, it has not been completely clear that colleges and universities are prevented from regulating guns under the preemption statute that has been in place since 1990.
The theory behind preemption is simply the idea that it is unfair to create a crazy quilt of patchwork gun laws across the state that could easily result in criminal prosecution of a well-meaning and otherwise law-abiding citizen simply for crossing an invisible line at the border of a county, township, or city. The thought is that a uniform statewide gun policy should be set by the Michigan legislature.
Several arguments have been raised in favor of allowing colleges and universities the right to make their own gun laws.

1. The Michigan Constitution gives colleges the right to control their own campuses and the educational environment.
This argument means that the colleges feel that their authority is stronger than the counties, townships, and cities that have been prohibited from making gun law since the current preemption statute was enacted in 1990.

2. The campus police won’t know who is a ‘good guy’ and who is a ‘bad guy’ if they encounter someone with a gun.
The rules on disclosure when an armed citizen encounters a police officer are clear and police officers across the state continue to be trained on how to deal with armed citizens. There is nothing new about this issue and no difference between the college environment and the rest of the state in this regard.

3. College campuses are unique because of the large number of young adults and the massive alcohol consumption that results. We fear alcohol-related accidents and crimes.”

This argument fails because, as anyone who have ever attended college or spent time near one, knows, most alcohol is consumed off campus in bars and private residences. Those off-campus areas are already controlled by current Michigan law, not whatever rules any given college has created. The current campus regulations are of no effect off campus. No one has been heard to argue that there is a disproportionate rate of alcohol-related accidents or crimes in off-campus areas frequented by college students.
In short, the police chiefs of a few campuses, and some administrators, are rolling out the same old anti-gun arguments that have been proved wrong by nearly a decade of success with armed citizens in Michigan.
Responsible gun owners, even younger ones, are simply not a threat. In fact, according to research, even a relatively small number of armed citizens tend to serve as a deterrent to criminal activity.
The Board of Trustees at Michigan State University agrees. They voted recently to allow Michigan law to apply on the campus of MSU.
During the debate, the Michigan Constitution was cited. The trustees did not want to have campus rules in conflict with the Michigan Constitution, or create a constitutional crisis by taking a position directly opposite of Michigan law. So, far, the dire predictions of the anti-gunners have not come true.
As expected, campus life continues as before, with the exception that those of us who drive through campus while lawfully armed are no longer in danger of being prosecuted under an obscure university ordinance.

Steve Dulan is an attorney in private practice in East Lansing and an instructor of the legal portion of CPL classes around the state. He is a current member of the Board of Directors of MCRGO and a member of the Board of Trustees of the MCRGO Foundation and the MCRGO Foundation Firearms Civil Defense Fund.

 
  • Currently 3.5/5 Stars.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
 
 

 

 
 
 
Close
Close
Close