Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Man arrested in Eau Claire for obstructing and DC. GFSZ

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    northern wis
    Posts
    3,202

    Man arrested in Eau Claire for obstructing and DC. GFSZ

    Eau Claire news looks like it happen in Somerset



    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3047181/posts


    Man carrying loaded guns around school arrested
    Thursday, July 25, 2013 10:52:46 AM · by Sopater · 36 replies
    WQOW Eau Claire ^ | Jul 24, 2013
    Somerset (WQOW) - A man carrying two loaded guns was arrested near a western Wisconsin school Tuesday. Crossing guards near the Somerset Middle School called police around noon. Officers found a 23-year-old man with an AR-15-style rifle slung across his back and a pistol in a holster on his hip. Police said both guns had high-capacity magazines and were loaded. Officers also said there were kids in the building at the time. It's illegal to have guns within 1,000 feet of a school unless someone falls under certain exceptions, but police say the man refused to identify himself or state
    Last edited by Firearms Iinstuctor; 07-25-2013 at 02:48 PM.
    Personal Defensive Solutions professional personal firearms, edge weapons and hands on defensive training and tactics pdsolutions@hotmail.com

    Any and all spelling errors are just to give the spelling Nazis something to do

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Maybe he was on private property ... he'd be OK then.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,166

    Man carrying loaded guns around school arrested, not charged.

    "It's illegal to have guns within 1,000 feet of a school unless someone falls under certain exceptions, but police say the man refused to identify himself or state his intentions, saying only he was within his rights.

    Police say because he wouldn't talk, they were unable to determine if he fell under one of the exceptions. He was then arrested for obstructing an officer and disorderly conduct. It will now be up to the district attorney whether charges are filed."

    http://www.wqow.com/story/22926128/m...chool-arrested

    The man, later identified as 23-year-old Mark J. Hoffman, was arrested for obstructing an officer and disorderly conduct. He was taken to the county jail, then released and his case will go to the St. Croix District Attorney.
    http://www.guns.com/2013/07/25/wisco...from-a-school/

    The reference to the DA is for investigation and preliminary hearing on recommended charges. The St. Croix County district Attorney is Eric Johnson, whom I recall making controversially strong pro-2A statements.
    Last edited by Nightmare; 07-25-2013 at 04:35 PM.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,166
    "Since the original reported location of the man was within 1,000 feet of a school, officers determined that Hoffman was in violation of state statutes. Officers responding to the emergency call found Hoffman near the intersection of Oak Street and Sunrise Drive."

    http://www.rivertowns.net/content/so...s-near-schools
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  5. #5
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    1) The victim has already been in touch with Nik of Wisconsin Carry. An open records request is already underway.

    2) If you don't watch the news you're uninformed, if you watch it you're misinformed.

    3) Since the WI Supreme Court has ruled that it is NOT obstruction to refuse to give your name, or to remain silent, that charge is bogus & should never have been filed.

    4) Since the law says that it is not disorderly conduct to go armed (openly or concealed, loaded or not), and that law does not specify a type of firearm, that charge is bogus & should never have been filed.

    5) They have to prove that he was knowingly within 1000' of a school, and on public property.

    6) If he was within 1000', and was on public property, the rifle could be problematic.

    7) If they believed that he was within 1000', and knew it, they should have arrested him for having a rifle in a school zone, not for the bogus obstruction & DC charges.

    8) Wisconsin law has no such thing as "high-capacity magazine".

    9) If there were children nearby, even in a school, has nothing to do with being armed in a school zone.
    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 MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    BTW:
    Police say because he wouldn't talk, they were unable to determine if he fell under one of the exceptions.
    They have to prove that he does not.
    He does not have to prove that he does.

    The only thing mentioned in that article is "Somerset Middle School".
    Can anyone find info about where exactly they claim he was?
    From the school, it looks like there's a housing area to the east, and a park to the northeast, both possibly within 1000'. Other than that, it looks like a very open area.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Maverick9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Mid-atlantic
    Posts
    1,507
    Quote Originally Posted by MKEgal View Post
    1) The victim has already been in touch with Nik of Wisconsin Carry. An open records request is already underway.

    2) If you don't watch the news you're uninformed, if you watch it you're misinformed.

    3) Since the WI Supreme Court has ruled that it is NOT obstruction to refuse to give your name, or to remain silent, that charge is bogus & should never have been filed.

    4) Since the law says that it is not disorderly conduct to go armed (openly or concealed, loaded or not), and that law does not specify a type of firearm, that charge is bogus & should never have been filed.

    5) They have to prove that he was knowingly within 1000' of a school, and on public property.

    6) If he was within 1000', and was on public property, the rifle could be problematic.

    7) If they believed that he was within 1000', and knew it, they should have arrested him for having a rifle in a school zone, not for the bogus obstruction & DC charges.

    8) Wisconsin law has no such thing as "high-capacity magazine".

    9) If there were children nearby, even in a school, has nothing to do with being armed in a school zone.
    Oh, my, Gawd, YOU act like officials are required to do things, required to make charges based on applicable law.

    They are not and never have been!!!11

    They are only required to do something related to their own laws if a JUDGE orders them to. Otherwise they can just MSU (Make shite up).

    It's called the MSU and HNON (hope no one notices) law.

    HTH.

    (note the sarcasm in the above post).

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,166
    Quote Originally Posted by Maverick9 View Post
    Oh, my, Gawd, YOU act like officials are required to do things, required to make charges based on applicable law..
    No charges have been filed. Hoffman was arrested and released pending his preliminary hearing. At the preliminary hearing a determination is made of the sufficiency of evidence to sustain any charge, not just the ones recommended by the cops.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Milwaukee Wisconsin
    Posts
    542
    An interesting aspect of this situation as known so far, has to do with the requirement to display a CCL upon request of a LEO.

    Here is a portion of the statute:

    https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/sta...atutes/948/605

    175.60(2g) Carrying a concealed weapon; possession and display of license document or authorization.

    175.60(2g)(a) A licensee or an out-of-state licensee may carry a concealed weapon anywhere in this state except as provided under subs. (15m) and (16) and ss. 943.13 (1m) (c) and 948.605 (2) (b) 1r.

    175.60(2g)(b) 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 shall have with him or her his or her license document and photographic identification card and an out-of-state licensee shall have with him or her his or her out-of-state license and photographic identification card at all times during which he or she is carrying a concealed weapon.

    175.60(2g) 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 of the law enforcement officer while the law enforcement officer is acting in an official capacity and with lawful authority.
    If this person was NOT carrying a concealed weapon, the statutes do NOT require him to display a CCL to a LEO.

    --------------------------------------------

    Also, remember the Wisconsin Firearms in a School Zone statute, applies to firearms, not just handguns.

    https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/sta...atutes/948/605

    948.605  Gun-free school zones.

    948.605(1)  Definitions. In this section:

    948.605(1)(a) "Encased" has the meaning given in s. 167.31 (1) (b).

    948.605(1)(ac) "Firearm" does not include any beebee or pellet-firing gun that expels a projectile through the force of air pressure or any starter pistol.

    948.605(1)(am) "Motor vehicle" has the meaning given in s. 340.01 (35).

    948.605(1)(b) "School" has the meaning given in s. 948.61 (1) (b).

    948.605(1)(c) "School zone" means any of the following:

    948.605(1)(c)1. In or on the grounds of a school.

    948.605(1)(c)2. Within 1,000 feet from the grounds of a school.

    948.605(2) Possession of firearm in school zone.

    948.605(2)(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.
    948.605(2)(b) Paragraph (a) does not apply to the possession of a firearm by any of the following:

    948.605(2)(b)1m. A person who possesses the firearm in accordance with 18 USC 922 (q) (2) (B) (i), (iv), (v), (vi), or (vii).

    948.605(2)(b)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).
    It seems to me if this person has a Wisconsin CCL or an accepted Out-of-state CCL, he has not broken any Wisconsin statutes with regard to the circumstances presented in this news story.
    Last edited by E6chevron; 07-26-2013 at 03:04 PM.
    Wis. CCL #5x Springfield XDM 3.8 Compact .40 S&W, Utah CFP

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin, ,
    Posts
    836
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    The St. Croix County district Attorney is Eric Johnson, whom I recall making controversially strong pro-2A statements.
    BZZZ! Wrong again, Nightmare!

    Johnson is a RINO who made outrageous anti-Second Amendment statements.

    http://www.riverfallsjournal.com/con...our-protection

  11. #11
    Regular Member Interceptor_Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,839
    Quote Originally Posted by MKEgal View Post
    6) If he was within 1000', and was on public property, the rifle could be problematic.

    7) If they believed that he was within 1000', and knew it, they should have arrested him for having a rifle in a school zone, not for the bogus obstruction & DC charges. .
    Why would the rifle be problematic? The GFSZ exception for a Licensee is not just for a handgun. The exception applies to all firearms.

    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).

  12. #12
    Regular Member Superlite27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    God's Country, Missouri
    Posts
    1,279
    I signed in at WQOW just to drop this gem:

    "Police said both guns had high capacity magazines. Officers also said there were kids in the building at the time."....Sounds dangerous! I wonder: Did the officers say this while wearing firearms loaded with high capacity magazines and kids were in the building at the time?

  13. #13
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,274
    Did he get his firearms back once he was released?

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,166
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    Did he get his firearms back once he was released?
    Good question. Not mentioned in any media reports, nor has the DA or Sheriff issued any sort of press release on this case.

    I'll bet not.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  15. #15
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    Quote Originally Posted by IK
    Why would the rifle be problematic? The GFSZ exception for a Licensee is not just for a handgun. The exception applies to all firearms.
    I was going by the fact that a carry license does not cover long guns,
    and the federal code quoted requires long guns to be unloaded & in a locked case or rack when in a school zone (except for special programs approved by the school).
    But the WI "GF"SZ statute doesn't specify a type of gun & simply says "licensee", not "licensee in possession of a pistol".
    Huh. Interesting "loophole" I hadn't noticed before.


    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...

  16. #16
    Regular Member Interceptor_Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,839
    Quote Originally Posted by MKEgal View Post
    I was going by the fact that a carry license does not cover long guns,
    and the federal code quoted requires long guns to be unloaded & in a locked case or rack when in a school zone....
    What Federal Code are you referring to? The code regarding GFSZ does not specify handguns but obviously we are not licensed to carry long guns. WI Statutes are our primary concern.

    18 USC Part I › Chapter 44 ›§ 922 - Unlawful acts
    (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;
    (ii) if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by the State in which the school zone is located or a political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license;
    (iii) that is—
    (I) not loaded; and
    (II) in a locked container, or a locked firearms rack that is on a motor vehicle;

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Ellsworth Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,213
    Quote Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
    BZZZ! Wrong again, Nightmare!

    Johnson is a RINO who made outrageous anti-Second Amendment statements.

    http://www.riverfallsjournal.com/con...our-protection
    Yeah He is a RINO! Friends of the NRA and myself wrote letters to the editor to refute his nonsense. By the way Sheriff Shilts os St Croix county where DA Johnson works was a speaker at the second amendment gatherings at the Kilkarney golf club in River Falls and is a pro second amendment guy.
    Last edited by Law abider; 07-26-2013 at 08:38 PM.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Ellsworth Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,213
    As I said on WINWAG's post on the same topic:The law enforcement system is trying to take act 35 down either that or some don't accept it nor 2A for citizens. OC is not DC unless other circumstances, which seem in this case to be nil. (2009 advisory memorandum) nor is it obstruction. It is a way for cops to arrest him and take away his weapons by making up a charge.

  19. #19
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    Because the officers could not verify that he was permitted under law to possess weapons within the 1000' radius, he was subsequently arrested for obstruction and disorderly conduct.
    As has been said before, "How do I know you are (or aren't) _____" is NOT the same thing as "I can reasonably suspect you are ______."
    Last edited by Fallschirmjäger; 12-11-2013 at 06:06 PM.

Posting Permissions

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