Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 29

Thread: long gun contradiction

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    nowhere
    Posts
    631

    long gun contradiction

    so this past weekend, i was having a conversation with friends, and the topic of carrying long guns on motorcycles came up.
    well i thought we needed to STILL have them UNLOADED AND ENCASED.

    but others were saying that as long as it was UNLOADED, it did NOT NEED to be ENCASED, and that you could unload a longun and mount it across the handlebars to transport it wherever you were taking it.

    so i decided to read up on this again since i thought the new law did NOT affect the long guns. well now i found 2 DIFFERENT writings. can you help me understand this please.

    http://www.doj.state.wi.us/dles/cib/...ealedCarry.asp

    CCW FAQ http://www.doj.state.wi.us/dles/cib/...q-20111020.pdf

    If I have a CCW license can I transport the weapon on my person in a vehicle?
    Yes. Current law generally requires that firearms being transported in a vehicle be
    encased and unloaded, not hidden or concealed and not within reach. In regard to other
    weapons, they could not be carried concealed and within reach.
    Under the new CCW law, a person with a CCW license may carry a concealed
    weapon (handgun, knife, electric weapon or billy club) in a vehicle.
    However, long guns are still subject to the requirement of being fully encased and
    unloaded, not hidden and not within reach.



    If I do not have a CCW license how do I transport weapons in a vehicle?
    A. Handguns
    The law now allows a person to do the following without a CCW permit:
     place, possess, or transport a handgun in a vehicle without being
    unloaded or encased. Wis. Stats. § 167.31(2)(b).
     load a handgun in a vehicle. Wis. Stats. § 167.31(2)(c).
     operate an all-terrain vehicle (ATV) with a handgun in the operator‘s
    possession. Wis. Stat. § 23.33(3)(a).
     place, possess, or transport a handgun in or on a motorboat with the motor
    running without being unloaded or encased. Wis. Stats. § 167.31(2)(a), (b),
    (c).
     place, possess, or transport a handgun in or on a noncommercial aircraft.
    IMPORTANT NOTE: Persons who do not have a CCW license may still not
    carry weapons concealed. In a vehicle this means that the firearm cannot be
    hidden or concealed and within reach.
    B. Long guns
    The law has been changed regarding hand guns but the requirements for
    transporting long guns still remains. A long gun
    being transported in a vehicle,
    boat, or non-commercial aircraft must be unloaded and enclosed in a case that is
    completely zipped, snapped, buckled, tied or otherwise fastened with no part of
    the firearm exposed. Wis. Stat. § 167.31(2)(a), (b)







    but then you go to DNR ACT 51 FAQ http://dnr.wi.gov/org/es/enforcement/act51_faq.htm


    Q1: Do firearms still have to be in a case before they are placed in or on a motorized vehicle, including ATVs, UTVs, snowmobiles and farm implements?

    A: No. Effective Nov. 19, 2011 for rifles, shotguns and muzzleloaders, and Nov. 1, 2011 for handguns, firearms no longer have to be in a case in order to place them in or on a vehicle, or to transport them unloaded in or on a vehicle.
    then towards the bottom

    What has & has not changed:

    1. Vehicles, including ATV's, UTV's, Snowmobiles, Bicycles, Horse & Buggy, etc:

    BOWS & CROSSBOWS:
    NEW - It will be legal to possess and transport uncased bows and crossbows, however, bows may not have an arrow nocked and a crossbow may not be cocked unless it is unloaded and cased.
    FIREARMS (other than handguns):
    NEW - It will be legal to possess long guns such as rifles, shotguns and muzzleloaders in or on a vehicle in the following manner:

    When a vehicle is in motion, long guns can be uncased in or on the vehicle, but must still be unloaded.
    When a vehicle which is stationary, long guns can be uncased when placed in or on the vehicle, and can remain loaded when placed on top or against the exterior of the vehicle.
    A stationary vehicle can have the motor running. “Stationary” means not moving, regardless of whether the motor is running.
    It remains illegal to place a loaded firearm inside any vehicle, or to load or discharge a firearm in or from any moving or a stationary motorized vehicle. The exemption for certain disabled hunters with proper permits remains the same (no change).

    so i'm lost. how should i understand that??? so is it illegal or legal to carry a long gun WITHOUT a case as long as it's UNLOADED???

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Under your bed
    Posts
    542
    Its legal to transport a non-loaded long arm without a case as long it's not concealed. You also can't be in school zones.

    Case law says its concealed if its below the window line in an auto. On a motorcycle, as long as you can see it it should be fine. The CCL only allows handguns to be concealed as you pointed out.

    If you are in a school zone or traveling through one, your long gun needs to be cased or LOCKED in a gun rack. So if you built a gun rack with a lock for your motorcycle you will be good to go. If you just plan to lock the firearm to your handle bars I would ask a lawyer first.

    I bought a lock and intend on building a rack for my AR with the stock up past the window line but just got too busy. I have the Santa Cruz one that looks like a huge hand cuff, that style also would look good on a motorcycle I think.


    Sent from my DROID2 GLOBAL using Tapatalk
    Last edited by Jason in WI; 04-02-2012 at 12:32 PM.

  3. #3
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. Shotgun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Madison, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,668
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason in WI View Post

    If you are in a school zone or traveling through one, your long gun needs to be cased or LOCKED in a gun rack.
    Unless you are a licensee.
    A. Gold

    Failure to comply may result in discipline up to and including termination.
    The free man is a warrior. - Nietzsche "Twilight of the Idols"

  4. #4
    Regular Member bigdaddy1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southsider der hey
    Posts
    1,320
    So, can I carry my AK with the shoulder strap uncased on my bike then?
    What part of "shall not be infringed" don't you understand?

  5. #5
    Regular Member oliverclotheshoff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    mauston wi
    Posts
    849
    Quote Originally Posted by Shotgun View Post
    Unless you are a licensee.
    how does being a licensee bypass the GFSZ laws with a long gun????
    SCOTT

    "When guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns"

    "When seconds count police are minutes away"

    "Dialing 911 only takes seconds but waiting for help may take the rest of your life"

    http://g2-elite.com/phpbb/index.php Shed Hunting

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    nowhere
    Posts
    631
    but none of the replies have actually answered, how one part of the law says you can NOT, and a different part of the law (the DNR part) says you CAN.

    so which one do you listen to???

  7. #7
    Regular Member bigdaddy1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southsider der hey
    Posts
    1,320
    IANAL, but the DNR's authority is pretty much in state or federal parks and forests. I remember reading that the open riffle clause has to do with hunting and the use of boats and ATV's. Not so much automobiles on the US highway system. So in the case of a GFSZ I don't think any DNR regulations will take precidence.
    What part of "shall not be infringed" don't you understand?

  8. #8
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. Shotgun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Madison, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,668
    Quote Originally Posted by scorpio_vette View Post
    but none of the replies have actually answered, how one part of the law says you can NOT, and a different part of the law (the DNR part) says you CAN.

    so which one do you listen to???
    Well the DOJ didn't bother to update when the law changed, so theirs is simply old information.
    A. Gold

    Failure to comply may result in discipline up to and including termination.
    The free man is a warrior. - Nietzsche "Twilight of the Idols"

  9. #9
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. Shotgun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Madison, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,668
    Quote Originally Posted by oliverclotheshoff View Post
    how does being a licensee bypass the GFSZ laws with a long gun????
    Same way it works with a pistol. Nothing in the GFSZ law says the exceptions only apply to the weapons one is allowed to conceal with a CCL. The GFSZ law applies to "firearms" of all sorts.

    You have to separate two things: The license law tells you what you can conceal. The school zone law tells you what you can have in a school zone.
    A. Gold

    Failure to comply may result in discipline up to and including termination.
    The free man is a warrior. - Nietzsche "Twilight of the Idols"

  10. #10
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    Quote Originally Posted by scorpio_vette
    but none of the replies have actually answered, how one part of the law says you can NOT, and a different part of the law (the DNR part) says you CAN.
    so which one do you listen to???
    As Auric explained, the FAQ hasn't been updated to take Act 51 into account.
    Read the law, follow that, & it's harder for police to cause you problems. Or at least, to get away with it.
    A FAQ is not law, even when it's on the DOJ or DNR web page.

    Quote Originally Posted by bigdaddy1
    So, can I carry my AK with the shoulder strap uncased on my bike then?
    As long as you don't go through a school zone.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Ellsworth Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,213

    can't believe it

    When will all this confusion stop? Contradictory laws, what's new. Contradictory laws are in every area of justice to keep us confused lost and dazed, so we continue to be criminalized and need expensive lawyers to sort thru the legal world. All of our threads contain issues and never ending how why and what on gun laws. Wow! One thing I know, it will never end so I may have to retain a lawyer and even have him/her with me at all times. pro bono, when I CC or OC. Our government is contradictory. They have no moral bearings and thus cannot stick to the simple task of constitutional interpretations according to the founders voluminous writings on how to interpret that document and ours.

  12. #12
    Herr Heckler Koch
    Guest

    Picking out the pieces

    Wisconsin Statutes Chapter 175 Miscellaneous Police Provisions,
    §175.60 License to carry a concealed weapon. (1) DEFINITIONS. In this section:
    [ ... ]
    (j) “Weapon” means a handgun, ...

    https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/sta...tes/175/60/1/j

  13. #13
    Herr Heckler Koch
    Guest

    Picking out the pieces

    948.605  Gun-free school zones.
    [ ... ]
    (2) Possession of firearm in school zone.
    (a) Any individual who knowingly possesses a firearm at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is in or on the grounds of a school is guilty of a Class I felony. Any individual who knowingly possesses a firearm at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is within 1,000 feet of the grounds of a school is subject to a Class B forfeiture.
    (b) Paragraph (a) does not apply to the possession of a firearm by any of the following:
    1m. A person who possesses the firearm in accordance with 18 USC 922 (q) (2) (B) (i), (iv), (v), (vi), or (vii). 1r. Except if the person is in or on the grounds of a school, a licensee, as defined in s. 175.60 (1) (d), or an out-of-state licensee, as defined in s. 175.60 (1) (g).
    Last edited by Herr Heckler Koch; 04-02-2012 at 05:08 PM. Reason: make the 1m - 1r relation clearer maybe

  14. #14
    Herr Heckler Koch
    Guest

    Picking out the pieces

    18 USC 922 (q) (2)
    (A) It shall be unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm that has moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone.
    (B) Subparagraph (A) does not apply to the possession of a firearm—
    • (i) on private property not part of school grounds;
      [ ... ]
    • (iv) by an individual for use in a program approved by a school in the school zone;
    • (v) by an individual in accordance with a contract entered into between a school in the school zone and the individual or an employer of the individual;
    • (vi) by a law enforcement officer acting in his or her official capacity; or
    • (vii) that is unloaded and is possessed by an individual while traversing school premises for the purpose of gaining access to public or private lands open to hunting, if the entry on school premises is authorized by school authorities.

  15. #15
    Regular Member Interceptor_Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Law abider View Post
    When will all this confusion stop? Contradictory laws, what's new...
    The purpose of the WI Statutes regarding firearms is to tell you what you can NOT do. If you examine them in this perspective, they are not contradictory. If you examine them in the misguided perspective that they give you the authority to do something, you may eventually jump off of a roof due to the confusion and frustration. My advice is to examine them with the former perspective...

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by MKEgal View Post
    A FAQ is not law, even when it's on the DOJ or DNR web page.
    That certainly is true, if by "law" you mean binding on the public. But a FAQ could be binding on the state. If the state tells you something is legal, and you rely on it, and the state was wrong and then tries to prosecute you, that's entrapment. You ought to be acquitted. You may not beat the ride, but you should beat the time.

  17. #17
    Regular Member Interceptor_Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,839
    Quote Originally Posted by jrm View Post
    That certainly is true, if by "law" you mean binding on the public. But a FAQ could be binding on the state. If the state tells you something is legal, and you rely on it, and the state was wrong and then tries to prosecute you, that's entrapment. You ought to be acquitted. You may not beat the ride, but you should beat the time.
    Not only is it not "law", but a FAQ is not binding to anyone. Errors regarding long gun carry in the current DOJ FAQ are because the FAQ has not been updated. It is not intended to be a living document There is however a lot of wishful thinking and assuming going on by those who read it.

    Most FAQs have a disclaimer... This is from the DOJ FAQ
    DISCLAIMER: This document broadly discusses—in question-and-answer format—the laws and
    procedures governing licenses to carry concealed weapons in Wisconsin. Every effort has been made to
    be as accurate as possible. However, this document does not constitute either an informal or formal
    opinion of the Wisconsin Attorney General, does not constitute legal advice or guidance and does not
    create an attorney-client relationship
    Last edited by Interceptor_Knight; 04-03-2012 at 04:07 PM.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Ellsworth Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,213
    Quote Originally Posted by Interceptor_Knight View Post
    The purpose of the WI Statutes regarding firearms is to tell you what you can NOT do. If you examine them in this perspective, they are not contradictory. If you examine them in the misguided perspective that they give you the authority to do something, you may eventually jump off of a roof due to the confusion and frustration. My advice is to examine them with the former perspective...
    You are right The statutes tell us what we can NOT do. Thank interceptor. I was looking it from another prespective and felt that I really can't carry at all.

  19. #19
    Founder's Club Member bnhcomputing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,709
    Quote Originally Posted by scorpio_vette View Post
    but none of the replies have actually answered, how one part of the law says you can NOT, and a different part of the law (the DNR part) says you CAN.

    so which one do you listen to???
    The DOJ think was written referring to ACT 35, so as of it's writing, long guns had to be encased. Then act 51 was enacted (the DNR one) and long guns don't have to be now.

    We need to look at the actual law(s), not the out-of-date FAQ documents.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    nowhere
    Posts
    631
    Quote Originally Posted by bnhcomputing View Post
    The DOJ think was written referring to ACT 35, so as of it's writing, long guns had to be encased. Then act 51 was enacted (the DNR one) and long guns don't have to be now.

    We need to look at the actual law(s), not the out-of-date FAQ documents.
    i'm still confused as to how you can have 2 different departments writing law, and how do you know which one over-rides which??? i'm not sure why, but i was under the understanding/assumption that the DNR one applied to vehicles not on highways. i'm just having a hard time understanding and trying to prove to myself that one law is stronger than the other law.

    is there any writing that states that if one department brings in new law, that it automatically over-rides other departments, or what am i missing here??? why have 2 different law departments if their laws over-ride each other???

  21. #21
    Regular Member bigdaddy1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southsider der hey
    Posts
    1,320
    Here's a head scratcher, what about a brandishing charge? Since a long gone would not be in any type of holster wouldn't carrying that be considered brandishing? If you pull your sidearm out of its holster you risk such a charge.
    What part of "shall not be infringed" don't you understand?

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Under your bed
    Posts
    542
    Quote Originally Posted by bigdaddy1 View Post
    Here's a head scratcher, what about a brandishing charge? Since a long gone would not be in any type of holster wouldn't carrying that be considered brandishing? If you pull your sidearm out of its holster you risk such a charge.
    There is no law for "brandishing" in WI. You can pull your sidearm out all you want (please don't), its the totality of the circumstances that will decide if you broke any laws but "brandishing" will not be one if them

    With a long arm you may get disorderly conduct like they tried with early open carriers but, again barring other circumstances it may or may not stick.

    Im not going to post much more on long gun carry as its against the rules here except to say it is legal in WI, the same way open carry was before ACT 35.


    Sent from my DROID2 GLOBAL using Tapatalk
    Last edited by Jason in WI; 04-03-2012 at 12:22 PM.

  23. #23
    Regular Member Interceptor_Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,839
    Quote Originally Posted by scorpio_vette View Post
    i'm still confused as to how you can have 2 different departments writing law, and how do you know which one over-rides which??? i'm not sure why, but i was under the understanding/assumption that the DNR one applied to vehicles not on highways. i'm just having a hard time understanding and trying to prove to myself that one law is stronger than the other law.

    is there any writing that states that if one department brings in new law, that it automatically over-rides other departments, or what am i missing here??? why have 2 different law departments if their laws over-ride each other???
    There are 2 points which you are missing:

    1) There is no "DNR Law" regarding open or concealed carry. The DNR did not write any of the laws we are discussing.
    2) None of the current firearm laws we are discussing contradict each other. They say what we may not do, not what we may do.

    The DNR only has control over DNR Administrative Code and not WI State Statutes. WI State Statutes can trump Administrative Code. An example is where NR10 Admin Code prohibits shooting 24 hours before the 9 day rifle deer season and Statue Statute carves out an exception for land owners and their immediate family target practicing.

  24. #24
    Regular Member Interceptor_Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason in WI View Post
    There is no law for "brandishing" in WI. You can pull your sidearm out all you want (please don't), its the totality of the circumstances that will decide if you broke any laws but "brandishing" will not be one if them

    With a long arm you may get disorderly conduct like they tried with early open carriers but, again barring other circumstances it may or may not stick.

    Im not going to post much more on long gun carry as its against the rules here except to say it is legal in WI, the same way open carry was before ACT 35.
    Although there is no State Statute prohibiting "brandishing", there are municipalities which prohibit carrying a firearm in a threatening manner. With Act 35, State Statute reigns these in by stating that you may not be cited for the simple act of firearm carry.

  25. #25
    Herr Heckler Koch
    Guest
    §947.01(2)

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •