Protests
Senator Runestad , under his constitutional right of protest (Art. 4, Sec. 18), protested against the passage of Senate Bill Nos. 331 and 332 and moved that the statement he made during the discussion of Senate Bill No. 331 be printed as his reasons for voting “no.”
The motion prevailed.
Senator Runestad’s statement is as follows:
These bills are a misguided attempt to regulate so-called “ghost guns,” but they ultimately punish responsible gun owners rather than address the root causes of gun violence. This legislation does nothing to stop black market firearms sales, reduce crime, or enhance public safety. Instead, it burdens law-abiding citizens with excessive regulation and fuels fear over the erosion of their Second Amendment rights.
Under this legislation, over a million firearms in Michigan would be rendered illegal overnight, forcing their owners into a costly bureaucratic reserialization process. This would not only create confusion and fear among hobbyists and collectors, but would also flood the already-overwhelmed public agencies with new administrative responsibilities. Michigan has millions of legal gun owners, yet this Democratic-led effort would impose firearm restrictions even more so than federal law, disregarding the constitutional rights of citizens. The role of the Legislature is to uphold and to defend these rights, not to undermine them in pursuit of a political agenda.
This legislation sets a dangerous precedent. It discourages lawful self-protection, criminalizes ordinary Michiganders, and overburdens our law enforcement agencies with enforcement duties unrelated to actual public safety. For these reasons, I will be voting “no” on Senate Bill Nos. 331 and 332, and strongly urge my colleagues to do the same.
The following bill was read a third time:
House Bill No. 4090, entitled
A bill to authorize the state administrative board to convey state-owned property in Wayne County; to prescribe conditions for the conveyance; to provide for powers and duties of state departments, agencies, and officers regarding the property; and to provide for disposition of revenue derived from the conveyance.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows: