Opinion No. 6015 November 30, 1981 WEAPONS: Peace officers possessing automatic weapons A peace officer may acquire and possess, without a license, an automatic weapon provided that the employer of the peace officer does not adopt a rule or policy prohibiting the acquisition or possession of such automatic weapons. Honorable Dan L. DeGrow State Representative State Capitol Building Lansing, Michigan You have requested my opinion on whether peace officers may possess automatic weapons. The Michigan Penal Code, 1931 PA 328, c xxxvii, Sec. 224(1), as last amended by 1980 PA 346; MCLA 750.224; MSA 28.421, provides: 'A person shall not manufacture, sell, offer for sale, or possess a machine gun or firearm which shoots or is designed to shoot automatically more than 1 shot without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger; a muffler, silencer, or device for deadening or muffling the sound of a discharged firearm; a bomb or bombshell; a blackjack, slungshot, billy, metallic knuckles, sand club, sand bag, or bludgeon; or any type of device, weapon, cartridge, container, or contrivance designed for the purpose of rendering a person either temporarily or permanently disabled by the ejection, release, or emission of a gas or other substance. A person who violates this section is guilty of a felony, punishable by imprisonment for not more than 5 years, or a fine of not more than $2,500.00, or both.' (Emphasis added.) OAG, 1977-1978, No 5210, p 189 (August 10, 1977), concluded that it is unlawful for a private citizen to acquire or possess, without a license, a machine gun or a weapon with a silencer. In 1931 PA 328, c xxxvii, Sec. 231; MCLA 750.231; MSA 28.428, the Legislature has provided an exception to the restrictions of 1931 PA 328, c xxxvii, Sec. 224, supra, as follows: 'Sections 224 and 227 do not apply to any peace officer of a duly authorized police agency of the United States or of the state or any subdivision thereof who is regularly employed and paid by the United States or the state or such subdivision, nor to any person regularly employed by the state department of corrections, and authorized in writing by the director of corrections to carry a concealed weapon while in the official performance of his duties or while going to or returning from such duties, nor to any member of the army, air force, navy or marine corps of the United States when carrying weapons in line of or incidental to duty, nor to organizations authorized by law to purchase or receive weapons from the United States or from this state, nor to members of the national guard, armed forces reserves or other duly authorized military organizations when on duty or drill, or in going to or returning from their places of assembly or practice by a direct route or otherwise, while carrying weapons used for purposes of the national guard, armed forces reserves or other duly authorized military organizations.' (Emphasis added.) A plain reading of 1931 PA 328, c xxxvii, Sec. 231, supra, indicates that the proscriptions contained in 1931 PA 328, c xxxvii, Sec. 224, supra, have no application to peace officers who are regularly employed and paid by the State of Michigan or any subdivision thereof. The Legislature has imposed no conditions upon the peace officer exemption other than the requirements that the peace officer be regularly employed and paid by the state or any subdivision thereof. On the other hand, persons employed by the Department of Corrections are exempted from 1931 PA 328, c xxxvii, Sec. 224, supra, only if that person has authorization in writing to carry a concealed weapon and only 'while in the official performance of his duties or while going to or returning from such duties.' Similarly, members of the Army, Air Force, Navy or Marine Corps are exempt only 'when carrying weapons in the line of or incidental to duty.' Likewise, members of the National Guard, Armed Forces Reserves or other duly authorized military organizations are exempt 'when on duty or drill,' in transportation of these weapons by direct route or otherwise, or while carrying such weapons for purposes arising out of their military duties. If a statute is clear and unambiguous, judicial construction or interpretation is unwarranted. Nordman v Calhoun, 332 Mich 460; 51 NW2d 906 (1952). Moreover, because 1931 PA 328, c xxxvii, Secs. 224 and 231, supra, are penal in nature, they must be strictly construed. People v Lockwood, 308 Mich 618, 622; 14 NW2d 517, 518 (1944); People v Reynolds, 71 Mich 343, 348; 38 NW 923, 925 (1888). 1931 PA 328, c xxxvii, Sec. 231, supra, is clear and unambiguous. Unlike employees of the Department of Corrections or military personnel, no conditions are attached to the exemption as it relates to peace officers regularly employed and paid by the state or any subdivision thereof. While the wisdom of a public policy permitting peace officers to acquire automatic weapons is open to doubt, I am constrained to conclude that the Legislature has permitted regularly employed and paid peace officers to acquire and possess automatic weapons without a license. However, there is nothing in 1931 PA 328, c xxxvii, Sec. 231, supra, which would prevent or limit the director of the Department of State Police, county sheriffs, local chiefs of police, or other police supervisory councils from placing restrictions upon the acquisition and possession of such weapons. In Eaton County Deputy Sheriffs Associations v Eaton County Sheriff, 37 Mich App 427; 195 NW2d 12 (1971), the court held that a sheriff has the authority to prohibit his deputies from carrying their own service revolvers while off duty notwithstanding the statutory exemption for peace officers contained in 1931 PA 328, c xxxvii, Sec. 231, supra. In its opinion, the court noted: 'We find that the exemption of peace officers from obtaining licenses to carry concealed weapons in no way limits the power inherent in the office of sheriff to promulgate rules and regulations pertaining to the employment of deputies. MCLA Sec. 750.231 (Stat Ann 1971 Cum Supp Sec. 28.428) merely provides that Secs. 224 and 227 do not apply to peace officers. Therefore, the officers may carry concealed weapons without being guilty of a felony. 'However, in our opinion, MCLA Sec. 750.231 in no way limits the power of the sheriff to make rules and regulations which, in his opinion, improve the quality of law enforcement and increase the safety of the citizens in the community. We therefore hold that the trial court was correct in dismissing the plaintiff's complaint.' It also should be observed that 1935 PA 59, Sec. 9; MCLA 28.9; MSA 4.439, vests the director of the Department of State Police with authority to adopt rules and regulations for the control, discipline and conduct of members of the department; 1895 PA 3, c vii, Sec. 45; MCLA 67.45; MSA 5.1329, authorizes the village council to make all necessary rules for the government of the village police department; and 1951 PA 181, Sec. 5; MCLA 41.855; MSA 5.2640(35), empowers the township board of any township to establish rules and regulations for the operation of the township police department and its officers, detectives and employees. As to cities, the Michigan Supreme Court has held that members of a city police department subject themselves to reasonable rules and regulations adopted by the board of control of the department. Aller v Detroit Police Department Trial Board, 309 Mich 382; 15 NW2d 676 (1944). It is my opinion, therefore, that peace officers in Michigan may possess, without a license, machine guns or other automatic weapons, subject to restrictions placed upon such acquisition or possession by their supervisory board or official, as the case may be. Frank J. Kelley Attorney General