Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Advice.

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Baraboo WI
    Posts
    2

    Advice.

    Deleted until all this is over. I will update as I find more out.

    Thank you for the Support and help.

    Alexander
    Last edited by palmprep; 01-29-2013 at 02:38 PM.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    9
    ...

    I got nothing...

    File charges and call a lawyer?

    Hope you get your sidearm back. Please keep us posted.

    --Archtus

  3. #3
    Founder's Club Member protias's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    SE, WI
    Posts
    7,322
    IANAL, but you have good grounds for self defense. They took you out of your car at gun point, which they have no reason to, and then have the audacity to put you in jail.

    Two people you should contact, Nik Clark (Nik@WisconsinCarry.org), which he'll most likely forward to Joe Olson (jlolson@michaelbest.com).
    No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. Thomas Jefferson (1776)

    If you go into a store, with a gun, and rob it, you have forfeited your right to not get shot - Joe Deters, Hamilton County (Cincinnati) Prosecutor

    I ask sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few politicians. - George Mason (father of the Bill of Rights and The Virginia Declaration of Rights)

  4. #4
    Regular Member sharkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    1,066
    Have her spend the night at your place from now on.

    I would have drawn too but it gets murky when you're in that situation. Hopefully he admitted mouthing off and coming at you, otherwise he could claim he thought you were a BG since it was his residence.

    Talk to a lawyer.
    "Public opinion and votes have nothing to do with this. The challenge of the Court is not what they're going to do with votes. The challenge-- of the Court is are they going to protect people's rights." - Al Sharpton


  5. #5
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    Alex, don't listen to the troll, currently incarnated as "terry lou".
    He's been banned probably 10 times now.
    As for his claim that the instructor can be held liable, that's wrong.
    The law says that an instructor cannot be held liable.
    See 175.60(21)(d)
    A person providing a firearms training course in good faith is immune from liability arising from any act or omission related to the course if the course is one described in sub. (4) (a).

    And your questions would be best answered by a lawyer. I strongly suggest you do as Protias suggests & contact both Nik Clark & Joe Olson.
    From what you have described, I think your actions were reasonable. But I'm not on your jury.
    Yes, the DA can delay charging you. AMHIK.

    What the police were probably referring to was 939.24, titled criminal recklessness.
    http://docs.legis.wi.gov/statutes/statutes/939/I/24

    Or 941.20, endangering safety by use of a dangerous weapon
    http://docs.legis.wi.gov/statutes/statutes/941/III/20

    941.30 recklessly endangering safety
    http://docs.legis.wi.gov/statutes/statutes/941/IV/30

    But they're completely ignoring 939.48 which is the self-defense & castle doctrine statute
    http://docs.legis.wi.gov/statutes/statutes/939/III/48
    Since he was coming at you, threatening to harm you, then left the apartment with the stated purpose of getting a shotgun & killing you, I can't see how you could be in any trouble in this.
    In fact, the police & DA should have arrested him, instead of or at least in addition to you.
    Last edited by MKEgal; 01-29-2013 at 11:23 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by MLK, Jr
    The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort & convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge & controversy.
    Quote Originally Posted by MSG Laigaie
    Citizenship is a verb.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 27:12
    A prudent person foresees the danger ahead and takes precautions.
    The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 31:17
    She dresses herself with strength and makes her arms strong.

  6. #6
    Regular Member sharkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    1,066
    Quote Originally Posted by Terry Lou View Post
    Alexander, my cite is legit. Certain people on this forum tend to conveniently leave out information that they deem unfavorable to them. Seek out an attorney of your choice.
    Your own cite said what she said

    Then it made up it's own law and said there may be circumstances outside the scope of the document.
    Last edited by sharkey; 01-29-2013 at 11:54 AM.
    "Public opinion and votes have nothing to do with this. The challenge of the Court is not what they're going to do with votes. The challenge-- of the Court is are they going to protect people's rights." - Al Sharpton


  7. #7
    Founder's Club Member protias's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    SE, WI
    Posts
    7,322
    Quote Originally Posted by sharkey View Post
    Your own cite said what she said

    Then it made up it's own law and said there may be circumstances outside the scope of the document.
    Well, a FAQ is not law...As for the troll, just report it.
    No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. Thomas Jefferson (1776)

    If you go into a store, with a gun, and rob it, you have forfeited your right to not get shot - Joe Deters, Hamilton County (Cincinnati) Prosecutor

    I ask sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few politicians. - George Mason (father of the Bill of Rights and The Virginia Declaration of Rights)

  8. #8
    Regular Member Trip20's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Wausau Area
    Posts
    527
    Deleted for benefit of your pending legal stuffs.

    But I meant what I said!!!


    JJC -- might want to scrap your quote of me as well...
    Last edited by Trip20; 01-30-2013 at 09:24 AM.

  9. #9
    Regular Member HandyHamlet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Terra, Sol
    Posts
    2,779
    Quote Originally Posted by JJC View Post
    Palmprep,

    Delete this thread until this is all over. Your not out of the woods yet. Talk to these people privatly.

    JJC
    Ditto, delete or edit to just keep us updated on what lawyer you have procured, court dates and the like until this is over. We know for a fact these forums are watched by a host of unusual suspects for various reasons.

    And if the good people on this forum identify a troll by it's stench then it is a troll for sure.
    "Don't interfere with anything in the Constitution. That must be maintained, for it is the only safeguard of our liberties."
    Abraham Lincoln

    "Some time ago, a bunch of lefties defied the law by dancing at the Jefferson Memorial, resulting in their arrests. Last week, a bunch of them pulled the same stunt and - using patented Lefist techniques - provoked the Park Police into having to use force to arrest them."
    Alexcabbie

  10. #10
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426

    I don't know why I bother...

    Stop misleading & misinforming the newbies.

    Quote Originally Posted by Troll
    according to Wisconsin Department of Justice FAQ concerning firearms instructors, the trainer may possibly have legal liability or responsibility for the conduct of persons provided training.
    Quote Originally Posted by Troll
    Certain people on this forum tend to conveniently leave out information that they deem unfavorable to them.
    Quote Originally Posted by Troll
    She conveniently left out the Wis DOJ information on possible liability issues for a firearms instructor on my cite.
    The only bit in those 56 pages which says anything about instructors being penalized is 4 not-complete lines (bottom of p.47) and has to do with false swearing - saying that a student has had training when s/he hasn't.
    Firearms instructor intentionally submitting false documentation indicating that a person has met the CCW training requirements.
    We've caught the DOJ in everything from misstatements of fact (just like you, troll) to deliberately misleading statements (just like you, troll) to outright lies (just like you, troll).
    The DOJ FAQ won't stand up in court. The statutes will.
    The law says that if an instructor provides training, s/he isn't liable for acts or omissions.
    Quote Originally Posted by 175.60(21)(d)
    A person providing a firearms training course in good faith is immune from liability arising from any act or omission related to the course if the course is one described in sub. (4) (a).
    Besides: Paul already knows this, and Paul isn't an instructor.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Ellsworth Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,213
    Quote Originally Posted by MKEgal View Post
    Stop misleading & misinforming the newbies.




    The only bit in those 56 pages which says anything about instructors being penalized is 4 not-complete lines (bottom of p.47) and has to do with false swearing - saying that a student has had training when s/he hasn't.


    We've caught the DOJ in everything from misstatements of fact (just like you, troll) to deliberately misleading statements (just like you, troll) to outright lies (just like you, troll).
    The DOJ FAQ won't stand up in court. The statutes will.
    The law says that if an instructor provides training, s/he isn't liable for acts or omissions.

    Besides: Paul already knows this, and Paul isn't an instructor.
    Even I the WI blog bozo knows that. I believe even homeowners who have invited a CCL holder and have an incident where the CCL holder goes beserk are immune from prosecution Further WI is also a state where if stopped does not have to declare his CCL as the DOJ says we should automatically. They believe we should automatically bec it is safer Right MKE???
    Last edited by Law abider; 02-04-2013 at 09:46 PM.

  12. #12
    McX
    Guest
    interesting
    Last edited by McX; 02-04-2013 at 10:36 PM.

  13. #13
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    Quote Originally Posted by Law abider
    WI is also a state where if stopped does not have to declare his CCL as the DOJ says we should automatically. They believe we should automatically bec it is safer Right MKE???
    Safer for whom?
    Follow me here...
    Officer stops someone for some reason which to him seems like RAS.
    Officer asks if the person is armed.
    1) person is a citizen, is not armed, says he's not armed
    2) person is a citizen, is armed, says he's armed
    3) person is a criminal, is not armed, says he's not armed
    4) person is a criminal, is armed, says he's not armed

    The only one of those which could harm the officer is #4. (Potentially #3, but less likely.)
    I'm willing to bet that the only one which would raise the stress level is #2.

    Only a citizen (one who hasn't had a bad experience with LEO) would admit to being armed.
    How does that make a LEO safer?
    I have heard the argument that it makes me safer because if they see it they won't go crazy on me, but that supposes that officers are idiots who can't read body language & would fire on someone with a holstered pistol. Even with what I've been through, I wouldn't make that generalization.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Ellsworth Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,213
    Quote Originally Posted by MKEgal View Post
    Safer for whom?
    Follow me here...
    Officer stops someone for some reason which to him seems like RAS.
    Officer asks if the person is armed.
    1) person is a citizen, is not armed, says he's not armed
    2) person is a citizen, is armed, says he's armed
    3) person is a criminal, is not armed, says he's not armed
    4) person is a criminal, is armed, says he's not armed

    The only one of those which could harm the officer is #4. (Potentially #3, but less likely.)
    I'm willing to bet that the only one which would raise the stress level is #2.

    Only a citizen (one who hasn't had a bad experience with LEO) would admit to being armed.
    How does that make a LEO safer?
    I have heard the argument that it makes me safer because if they see it they won't go crazy on me, but that supposes that officers are idiots who can't read body language & would fire on someone with a holstered pistol. Even with what I've been through, I wouldn't make that generalization.
    Now according to US handgun law website, it states: Must Inform Officer by Law: NO. However as I scroll down, it states: 175.60 (2g) (c) Unless the licensee or out-of-state licensee is carrying a concealed weapon in a manner described under s. 941.23 (2) (e), a licensee who is carrying a concealed weapon shall display his or her license document and photographic identification card and an out-of-state licensee who is carrying a concealed weapon shall display his or her out-of-state license and photographic identification card to a law enforcement officer upon the REQUEST by the law enforcement officer while the law enforcement officer is acting in an official capacity and with lawful authority. I seem to understand that only when requested by officer to present the CCL or if he asks are you armed should you say yes as opposed to the DOJ FAQ which states that you should AUTOMATICALLY present the CCL even if not asked.

    You are right on #2, but unlike you I have not experienced a whacked out leo encounter yet. I will not disclose unless asked. Besides I plan to have a good criminal lawyer who I can hire if I am arrested for nothing. any advice on a good lawyer??? Thanks for being patient with me. Must hit the sack
    Last edited by Law abider; 02-04-2013 at 11:37 PM.

  15. #15
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    175.60 (2g) (c)
    Unless the licensee or out-of-state licensee is carrying a concealed weapon in a manner described under s. 941.23 (2) (e), a licensee who is carrying a concealed weapon shall display his or her license document and photographic identification card ... to a law enforcement officer upon the request by the law enforcement officer while the law enforcement officer is acting in an official capacity and with lawful authority.
    That section of 941.23 is the "dwelling, business, land you own, lease, or legally occupy" exception.

    only when requested by officer to present the CCL or if he asks are you armed should you say yes as opposed to the DOJ FAQ which states that you should AUTOMATICALLY present the CCL even if not asked
    You are required to show your licenses IF the officer asks and IF the officer had RAS to stop you in the first place. Note the underlined part above.
    If you're sitting at Starbuck's or Culver's with a bunch of your crazy gun-toting friends, & you're cc while they're OC, and a platoon of police cars descends upon you & the officers demand ID & cc licenses from you all, they don't have RAS because they don't have any reason to suspect you're cc, and OC doesn't need a license, esp. on private property.
    Minus the cc, that's what got the Madistan PD into trouble at Culver's.

    You can have a conversation about any topic with any person you choose. If you want to tell the Nice Officer that you're lawfully armed (just like he is) that's your choice.
    If you don't want to have a conversation, you don't have to.
    I have informed once voluntarily when I was OC in the car* (I'd called 911 on a dangerous driver), and since I was in a sensible part of the state absolutely nothing happened. The cop on my side of the car didn't even take my cc license from my hand.
    The one on the passenger side was more or less leaning in the window & grinning at me. He was kinda cute. Wish I'd thought to get his name/phone.
    *I was cc too, but they had no way to know that.

    any advice on a good lawyer?
    For criminal defense, I've worked with Rebecca Coffee. Craig Mastantuono is also a partner in the firm (it's named after him) & I know both are experienced with defending gun cases.
    There are 2 other lawyers in the firm; I've not met them & don't know their strengths or experience.
    They work all around the state, but are based in Milwaukee. This is the firm that won the pizza guy case.
    http://www.milwaukeecriminallawyers.com/
    414 276 8662
    866 645 2558

    For the civil rights issues, there are several people on the WI forum who will second my recommendation of John Monroe. He's based in GA but handles cases across the country.
    Last edited by MKEgal; 02-05-2013 at 01:06 PM.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Ellsworth Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,213
    Quote Originally Posted by MKEgal View Post
    That section of 941.23 is the "dwelling, business, land you own, lease, or legally occupy" exception.


    You are required to show your licenses IF the officer asks and IF the officer had RAS to stop you in the first place. Note the underlined part above.
    If you're sitting at Starbuck's or Culver's with a bunch of your crazy gun-toting friends, & you're cc while they're OC, and a platoon of police cars descends upon you & the officers demand ID & cc licenses from you all, they don't have RAS because they don't have any reason to suspect you're cc, and OC doesn't need a license, esp. on private property.
    Minus the cc, that's what got the Madistan PD into trouble at Culver's.

    You can have a conversation about any topic with any person you choose. If you want to tell the Nice Officer that you're lawfully armed (just like he is) that's your choice.
    If you don't want to have a conversation, you don't have to.
    I have informed once voluntarily when I was OC in the car* (I'd called 911 on a dangerous driver), and since I was in a sensible part of the state absolutely nothing happened. The cop on my side of the car didn't even take my cc license from my hand.
    The one on the passenger side was more or less leaning in the window & grinning at me. He was kinda cute. Wish I'd thought to get his name/phone.
    *I was cc too, but they had no way to know that.


    For criminal defense, I've worked with Rebecca Coffee. Craig Mastantuono is also a partner in the firm (it's named after him) & I know both are experienced with defending gun cases.
    There are 2 other lawyers in the firm, but I've not met them & don't know their strengths or experience.
    They work all around the state, but are based in Milwaukee. This is the firm that won the pizza guy case.
    http://www.milwaukeecriminallawyers.com/
    414 276 8662
    866 645 2558

    For the civil rights issues, there are several people on the WI forum who will second my recommendation of John Monroe. He's based in GA but handles cases across the country.
    Agreed on the law: Do not disclose unless asked by leo if stopped on highway. I see why Van Hollen gave that memo in 2009 for those OCing. At Culvers there was no reason to demand ID bec no Disorderly conduct was taking place. Thanks for the attorney info. I need to retain one for that day. However I may need to buy insurance so when I use them they can be paid.

Posting Permissions

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