Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: TMJ4 Reports Carry Illegal in Oconomowoc

  1. #1
    Regular Member wimwag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Doug
    Posts
    1,118

    TMJ4 Reports Carry Illegal in Oconomowoc

    http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2014/05...n-law.html?m=1

    After a viewer sent in a picture of a man openly carrying a handgun at a park, TMJ4 reported that it is against Oconomowoc city ordinances to carry in any manner on public property. I sent an email informing them of the error and they completely ignored the state law and insisted they were correct.

    I'll post the email in a minute because I cannot switch between apps on Windows 8 without losing my work.

  2. #2
    Regular Member wimwag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Doug
    Posts
    1,118
    Dear Mr. Pieters,


    Thank you for your note.


    We have double-checked our facts and have confirmed our report on Oconomowoc law and the open carry of firearms in city parks is correct.


    Both the city administrator and police chief confirm the following municipal code is in effect, and they believe, enforceable:


    9.02(2)(a) -- "May not openly possess a firearm on any land located in City parks or within any public building owned by the City, which is similar to 29.089(2) and 941.235, Wis. Stats."




    We're talking to the police chief today, along with Nik Clark from Wisconsin Carry. You can see what we've uncovered about this story, tonight on "Live at 5:00" and "Live at 10:00".




    --

    DIANE IRVING
    ASSISTANT NEWS DIRECTOR - TODAY'S TMJ4
    email: dirving@todaystmj4.com
    twitter: TMJ4DianeIrving

  3. #3

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    wisconsin
    Posts
    1
    Are there Judges in that county that go by their own rules too. I would hate to have to wake up to that very morning.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    popple butte
    Posts
    349
    300 mile away crusaders plus much closer steroid fans getting hysterical. A panic attack for naught. The problem will be corrected.
    Last edited by Franky; 05-07-2014 at 06:40 PM.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Cudahy, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    326

    This is what i sent, an this is what i got back..

    Sir, can you please be so kind, and pass this along too Mr. Steve Chamraz.

    Applicability to County Parks/Land
    As explained above, the Act permits a county to ban the carry of concealed weapons via posting in any buildings that are "owned, occupied or controlled" by the county. However, a state or local governmental unit generally may not prohibit a person with a concealed weapon from entering or remaining on the "grounds" of a publicly controlled building or on public land (including parks). The one possible exception is that the Act permits an entity (including a state or local governmental unit) to prohibit concealed weapons at a "special event." The Act creates trespassing liability for an individual who:
    While carrying a firearm, enters or remains at a special event if the organizers of the special event have notified the actor not to enter or remain at the special event while carrying a firearm or with that firearm. This subdivision does not apply, if the firearm is in a vehicle driven or parked in the parking facility, to any part of the special event grounds or building used as a parking facility. Wis. Stat. 943.13(1m)(c)(3).
    Like the exceptions discussed above, a state or governmental entity would still need to post approved signs to prohibit firearms at a special event. The Act defines "special event" as "an event that is open to the public, is for a duration of not more than 3 weeks, and either has designated entrances to and from the event that are locked when the event is closed or requires an admission." Id. at 943.13(1e)(h). While this definition of special event would appear to include functions like county fairs or related festivals where an admission is required, it would not cover free events (like concerts) that are given in parks or other outdoor spaces.
    Thus, if there was a "special event" going on in a county park, a county could prohibit concealed weapons during that event by posting approved signs. Absent these special circumstances, however, there does not appear to be a basis to prohibit concealed weapons on county land.
    Conclusion
    While 2011 Wisconsin Act 35 has changed the rules regarding concealed weapons, counties retain the right to prohibit concealed weapons in all county-owned buildings, and can exercise this right by posting appropriate notices at all entrances. By complying with the procedural prerequisites in the Act, counties can take additional steps to ensure the safety and security of their public buildings.
    NOTES:



    Dear Mr. Malachowski,


    Thank you for your note.


    We have double-checked our facts and have confirmed our report on Oconomowoc law and the open carry of firearms in city parks is correct.


    Both the city administrator and police chief confirm the following municipal code is in effect, and they believe, enforceable:


    9.02(2)(a) -- "May not openly possess a firearm on any land located in City parks or within any public building owned by the City, which is similar to 29.089(2) and 941.235, Wis. Stats."




    We're talking to the police chief today, along with Nik Clark from Wisconsin Carry. You can see what we've uncovered about this story, tonight on "Live at 5:00" and "Live at 10:00".

  7. #7
    Regular Member wimwag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Doug
    Posts
    1,118
    Form letter. Definitely shows willful ignorance and contempt for the law. Plan a protest?

  8. #8
    Regular Member wimwag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Doug
    Posts
    1,118
    I'm not an activist by a long shot but when the media blatantly lies to try to convince the public what is legal is not, then we all must stand up. This is another attempt to cause pain and suffering to gun owners.

  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member protias's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    SE, WI
    Posts
    7,322
    I'm not sure how they can ignore 66.0409.
    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)

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,161
    Quote Originally Posted by protias View Post
    I'm not sure how they can ignore 66.0409.
    It appears that their illogic is that the city ordinance is somehow similar to ss29.089(2) No person may have in his or her possession or under his or her control a firearm on land located in state fish hatcheries unless the firearm is unloaded and enclosed within a carrying case. Their parks are more like state fish hatcheries than state parks.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Ellsworth Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,213
    Quote Originally Posted by wimwag View Post
    http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2014/05...n-law.html?m=1

    After a viewer sent in a picture of a man openly carrying a handgun at a park, TMJ4 reported that it is against Oconomowoc city ordinances to carry in any manner on public property. I sent an email informing them of the error and they completely ignored the state law and insisted they were correct.

    I'll post the email in a minute because I cannot switch between apps on Windows 8 without losing my work.
    There are two situations:1) they know the law and are ignoring it. 2) they are all bozos and didn't read the law, act 35 or senate bill92. This situation needs nipping in the bud before other local municipalities get bold and start enforcing nullified local codes.

  12. #12
    Regular Member wimwag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Doug
    Posts
    1,118
    Greetings in Freedom,

    Yesterday Wisconsin Carry sent an email describing a local media report about an area municipality attempting to enforce a "preempted" ordinance that would ban open carry from Oconomowoc Parks.

    For more information on the message from yesterday see this link:

    http://www.wisconsincarry.org/news/r...ournalism.aspx

    I'm pleased to relay that I received a call from the Oconomowoc Police Chief today who let me know that he has reviewed their local ordinance banning open carry in parks and realized it no longer fell within state law. He said he will be asking the city council to remove the ordinance at the next meeting. In the meantime, it will not be enforced.

    Thank-you to everyone who picked up a phone, sent an email, re-tweeted a tweet, or shared the situation with friends and family. Your actions resulted in the local station, who's initial report mis-represented state law and the carry-rights of law-abiding Wisconsinites,doing a follow up story to focus attention on Oconomowoc's unenforceable (preempted by state law) ordinance.

    That renewed focus prompted Oconomowoc to revisit their ordinance and agree with WCI's contention that it was unenforceable.

    In short "good work"! The power of patriots, who are willing to stand for their constitutionally guaranteed rights, is noteworthy!

    Carry on!

    Nik Clark
    Chairman/President - Wisconsin Carry, Inc.
    www.wisconsincarry.org
    nik@wisconsincarry.org
    I guess that's that. We will see how the city council responds.

  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 wimwag
    Form letter. Definitely shows willful ignorance and contempt for the law. Plan a protest?
    There was one planned, but when the city announced that it had reviewed the law and admitted they were wrong, the protest was turned into a celebration.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare
    It appears that their illogic is that the city ordinance is somehow similar to ss29.089(2) No person may have in his or her possession or under his or her control a firearm on land located in state fish hatcheries unless the firearm is unloaded and enclosed within a carrying case.
    Except that that's no longer the law.
    You forgot the rest of it.

    No person may have in his or her possession or under his or her control a firearm on land located in state fish hatcheries unless the firearm is unloaded and enclosed within a carrying case.
    This subsection does not apply to any of the following:
    ,,,
    (d) A licensee ... or an out-of-state licensee ... if the firearm is a handgun.

Posting Permissions

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