Results 1 to 21 of 21

Thread: Wisc court rules that taking your License to carry is no big deal ...

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838

    Wisc court rules that taking your License to carry is no big deal ...

    Attachment 11605

    Pg56 of court decision in case:

    http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bi...:N:1342808:S:0

    Federal 7th Appellate case

    Court found that the taking of the gun was wrong, but it's OK !

    What a crock of chit this decision is...a twisted path to nowheresville.

    And the court holds the RBKA as valueless.

  2. #2
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426

    We're appealing to SCOTUS

    Here's the fundraising thread:
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...ling-to-SCOTUS

    And yes, I'm plenty peeved about their decision, for many reasons.
    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.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Richmond, Tx
    Posts
    326
    I'm a little curious as to how the heck Wisconsin cops had ANY authority to take her carry permits issued by another state?
    Lower the crime rate by lowering the criminal survival rate!
    When people say 'God Bless America' I'm sure He says, "I gave you Texas!"

  4. #4
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,278
    Quote Originally Posted by mark-in-texas View Post
    I'm a little curious as to how the heck Wisconsin cops had ANY authority to take her carry permits issued by another state?
    Probably because of agreements between states. No offense but this is what happens when a privilege is preferred over a right. It can be taken away at the whim of government.
    It is well that war is so terrible otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    nj
    Posts
    3,277
    Very disturbing.

    Police can violate a citizens rights if said citizen COULD be a danger to himself/herself? Folks that MAY HAVE mental issues have NO rights?

    I await all comments and opinions on this ruling.

    CCJ
    " I detest hypocrites and their Hypocrisy" I support Liberty for each, for all, and forever".
    Ask yourself, Do you own Yourself?

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    popple butte
    Posts
    349
    Quote Originally Posted by countryclubjoe View Post
    Very disturbing.

    Police can violate a citizens rights if said citizen COULD be a danger to himself/herself? Folks that MAY HAVE mental issues have NO rights?

    I await all comments and opinions on this ruling.

    CCJ
    When you tell your psychiatrist you are going home and blow your brains out you better believe something is gonna go down. As per the statements in the 7ths ruling.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,158

    Wisconsin Statutes Chapter 905 Evidence -- Privileges. Subchapter 905.04 Physician ..

    Long and with lots of case law annotated.
    905.04 Physician−patient, registered nurse−patient, chiropractor−patient, psychologist−patient, social worker−patient, marriage and family therapist−patient, podiatrist−patient and professional counselor−patient privilege.
    https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/doc...utes/ch.%20905

    For instance

    The psychotherapist-patient privilege does not automatically or absolutely foreclose the introduction of a therapeutic communication. When a therapist had reasonable cause to believe a patient was dangerous and that contacting police would prevent harm and facilitate the patient's hospitalization, the patient's statements fell within a dangerous patient exception to the privilege. State v. Agacki, 226 Wis. 2d 349, 595 N.W.2d 31 (Ct. App. 1999), 97-3463
    .
    Last edited by Nightmare; 05-18-2014 at 07:24 PM.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  8. #8
    Regular Member WalkingWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    12,278
    MKE I hope you win out in this, but please be careful in the future of how a liberal can twist what you say. Unfortunately sometimes it does not matter if you say anything though. We had a girlfriend who went through something similar. But there was no doctor involved.

    A boyfriend of hers wanted her out of the house, soooo he had his brother call a wellness check on her. The Harnett swat arrived and she locked herself in her bathroom with her two dogs, for fear they would shoot them. After a standoff she agreed to voluntary evaluation, big mistake, she lost her CHP. And in NC because she cannot get a PPP she cannot buy a handgun for open carry. The whole deal became unraveled when it was found it was a false police report, a ruse. In fact all the guns in the house belonged to the boyfriend and since a order of protection was issued for her, he could not return to his house and he cannot get his guns back. But since she volunteered to be evaluated she cannot get her CHP back, without taking it to court.
    It is well that war is so terrible otherwise we would grow too fond of it.
    Robert E. Lee
    The patriot volunteer, fighting for country and his rights, makes the most reliable soldier on earth.
    Thomas Jonathan "Stonewall" Jackson
    What separates the winners from the losers is how a person reacts to each new twist of fate.
    President Donald Trump

  9. #9
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,883
    interestingly, i wonder if due process IAW WI 51.15 was followed, especially provisions of (1)(ag)3 or (1)(ar)1.

    as mentioned, i believe civil suit should be brought against the doctor who instigated the initial problem.

    best wishes on your challenge

    ipse
    Last edited by solus; 05-18-2014 at 08:21 PM.
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    nj
    Posts
    3,277
    Quote Originally Posted by Franky View Post
    When you tell your psychiatrist you are going home and blow your brains out you better believe something is gonna go down. As per the statements in the 7ths ruling.
    How about if one tells their bartender or baker the same information, should their rights still be violated? Or only information from a medical person applies?

    Regards

    CCJ
    " I detest hypocrites and their Hypocrisy" I support Liberty for each, for all, and forever".
    Ask yourself, Do you own Yourself?

  11. #11
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,216
    Quote Originally Posted by countryclubjoe View Post
    How about if one tells their bartender or baker the same information, should their rights still be violated? Or only information from a medical person applies?

    Regards

    CCJ
    Family counts. So your wife/husband calls and say you said your going to hurt someone or yourself then your getting a visit. The further the person is away from knowing you then the less inherent veracity there is from the "witness".

    Don't need to be a doctor to report that someone said a statement. That's just adding to the case when a attained doctor can say it AND throw a diagnosis or history in there.

    Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
    "The wicked flee when no man persueth: but the righteous are as bold as a lion" Proverbs 28:1

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    nj
    Posts
    3,277
    Quote Originally Posted by Primus View Post
    Family counts. So your wife/husband calls and say you said your going to hurt someone or yourself then your getting a visit. The further the person is away from knowing you then the less inherent veracity there is from the "witness".

    Don't need to be a doctor to report that someone said a statement. That's just adding to the case when a attained doctor can say it AND throw a diagnosis or history in there.

    Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
    There was no 'Someone" mentioned, only" ones self" was mentioned. Or did I miss something?

    I could understand the violation of rights, if the police believed that other people were being held against their will in the home however from the case information that is not an issue.

    My .02

    Stay safe Primus,

    CCJ
    " I detest hypocrites and their Hypocrisy" I support Liberty for each, for all, and forever".
    Ask yourself, Do you own Yourself?

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    Long and with lots of case law annotated. https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/doc...utes/ch.%20905

    For instance

    .
    Like a lawyer ... you can tell a lawyer anything you did in the past ... but talk about future illegal activities and he just might spill the "beans".

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,158
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Like a lawyer ... you can tell a lawyer anything you did in the past ... but talk about future illegal activities and he just might spill the "beans".
    Interesting observation. Rather than spill the beans, a lawyer would demand a cut and the title consigliere.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    here
    Posts
    266
    Quote Originally Posted by WalkingWolf View Post
    please be careful in the future of how a liberal can twist what you say.
    correct. there's a whole army of paid dirtbags that look for things to make gun owners look bad and give the media 'hints/cheat sheets' as to what's going on to 'help them'. this is why we firearms owners should be the best representatives for our sector and not give our enemies ammunition and free, cheap shots at us.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Ellsworth Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,213
    Quote Originally Posted by countryclubjoe View Post
    How about if one tells their bartender or baker the same information, should their rights still be violated? Or only information from a medical person applies?

    Regards

    CCJ
    The troll Doug aka franky doesn't care if your rights are violated by everyone. Don't talk to him too much. I am waiting when they come after his guns and then see what he writes on this blog.

  17. #17
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,883
    to quantify, CCJ, you used the word medical person when it should be correctly stated a metal health professional, this includes social workers, counselors, therapists, shrinks (can't spell psychicartist), at least trained to the master's level and appropriately licensed, or allowed by state statutes, etc.

    at this time i am not aware of any state whose statutes allows a plain olde ordinary medical doctor, GP, skin, baby, surgeon, etc., to recommend or be able to put anyone on a mental health hold as they are not appropriately trained in mental health protocols to facilitate such an action.

    and no the persons you referenced do not have a duty to report the mental health professional does, even if they are not in their licensed state but it is an ethical situation not a legal stance. but take the bartender position you referenced, in some states they have a mandatory duty to quit serving customers 'if in the bartender's opinion' the customer is hammered.

    ipse
    Last edited by solus; 05-19-2014 at 03:30 PM.
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,158

    51.15 Emergency detention. Anyone is not liable for any actions taken in good faith.

    Quote Originally Posted by countryclubjoe View Post
    How about if one tells their bartender or baker the same information, should their rights still be violated? Or only information from a medical person applies? Regards CCJ
    Quote Originally Posted by solus View Post
    [ ... ]at this time i am not aware of any state whose statutes allows a plain olde ordinary medical doctor, GP, skin, baby, surgeon, etc., to recommend or be able to put anyone on a mental health hold as they are not appropriately trained in mental health protocols to facilitate such an action. [ ... ]
    51.15 Emergency detention.
    (1) BASIS FOR DETENTION;
    [ ... ]
    b) The officer’s or other person’s belief shall be based on any of the following:
    1. A specific recent overt act or attempt or threat to act or omission by the individual which is observed by the officer or person.
    2. A specific recent overt act or attempt or threat to act or omission by the individual which is reliably reported to the officer or person by any other person, ...
    [ ... ]
    (11) LIABILITY. Any individual who acts in accordance with this section, including making a determination that an individual has or does not have mental illness or evidences or does not evidence a substantial probability of harm under sub. (1) (a) 1., 2., 3. or 4. [sub. (1) (ar) 1., 2., 3. or 4.], is not liable for any actions taken in good faith. The good faith of the actor shall be presumed in any civil action. Whoever asserts that the individual who acts in accordance with this section has not acted in good faith has the burden of proving that assertion by evidence that is clear, satisfactory and convincing.
    Last edited by Nightmare; 05-19-2014 at 05:36 PM.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  19. #19
    Regular Member solus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    here nc
    Posts
    6,883
    please see 455, 457, and for the life of me i lost the reference which defined psychiatrist as physican with six months specialized residency.

    additionally, i believe you have jumped to after the initial call has been made and it now the police's duty to carry out the retrieval of the individual identified by the mental health professional but will investigate further upon return.

    ipse
    I'm only human; I do what I can; I'm just a man; I do what I can; Don't put the blame on me; Don't put your blame on me ~ Rag'n'Bone Man.

    Please do not get confused between my personality & my attitude. My personality is who I am ~ my attitude depends on who you are and how you act.

    Remember always, do not judge someone because they sin differently than you do!

    Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please. Mark Twain

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,158
    Quote Originally Posted by solus View Post
    please see 455, 457, and for the life of me i lost the reference which defined psychiatrist as physican with six months specialized residency. additionally, i believe you have jumped to after the initial call has been made and it now the police's duty to carry out the retrieval of the individual identified by the mental health professional but will investigate further upon return. ipse
    The point of my 51.15 citation is that licensure or professional status is not needed or required. In the hypothetical limit are the all too common SWAT standoffs called by a family member to prevent a suicide' "blowing my brains out."
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  21. #21
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,216
    Quote Originally Posted by solus View Post
    to quantify, CCJ, you used the word medical person when it should be correctly stated a metal health professional, this includes social workers, counselors, therapists, shrinks (can't spell psychicartist), at least trained to the master's level and appropriately licensed, or allowed by state statutes, etc.

    at this time i am not aware of any state whose statutes allows a plain olde ordinary medical doctor, GP, skin, baby, surgeon, etc., to recommend or be able to put anyone on a mental health hold as they are not appropriately trained in mental health protocols to facilitate such an action.

    and no the persons you referenced do not have a duty to report the mental health professional does, even if they are not in their licensed state but it is an ethical situation not a legal stance. but take the bartender position you referenced, in some states they have a mandatory duty to quit serving customers 'if in the bartender's opinion' the customer is hammered.

    ipse
    I'll also add a state that doesn't require you to be a Doctor to detain on a Mental Evaluation.

    https://malegislature.gov/Laws/Gener...r123/Section12

    Section 12. (a) Any physician who is licensed pursuant to section 2 of chapter 112 or qualified psychiatric nurse mental health clinical specialist authorized to practice as such under regulations promulgated pursuant to the provisions of section 80B of said chapter 112 or a qualified psychologist licensed pursuant to sections 118 to 129, inclusive, of said chapter 112, or a licensed independent clinical social worker licensed pursuant to sections 130 to 137, inclusive, of chapter 112 who, after examining a person, has reason to believe that failure to hospitalize such person would create a likelihood of serious harm by reason of mental illness may restrain or authorize the restraint of such person and apply for the hospitalization of such person for a 3-day period at a public facility or at a private facility authorized for such purposes by the department. If an examination is not possible because of the emergency nature of the case and because of the refusal of the person to consent to such examination, the physician, qualified psychologist, qualified psychiatric nurse mental health clinical specialist or licensed independent clinical social worker on the basis of the facts and circumstances may determine that hospitalization is necessary and may apply therefore. In an emergency situation, if a physician, qualified psychologist, qualified psychiatric nurse mental health clinical specialist or licensed independent clinical social worker is not available, a police officer, who believes that failure to hospitalize a person would create a likelihood of serious harm by reason of mental illness may restrain such person and apply for the hospitalization of such person for a 3-day period at a public facility or a private facility authorized for such purpose by the department. An application for hospitalization shall state the reasons for the restraint of such person and any other relevant information which may assist the admitting physician or physicians. Whenever practicable, prior to transporting such person, the applicant shall telephone or otherwise communicate with a facility to describe the circumstances and known clinical history and to determine whether the facility is the proper facility to receive such person and also to give notice of any restraint to be used and to determine whether such restraint is necessary.


    I've bolded the first section that shows what you've been referenicing, the need for it to be a licensed Dr. to assign to a mental hold. I then bolded the second portion where it shows that a police officer can also apply for the same hold if it's an emergency and the other personnel are not present.

    So everyone is on same page just different sections of it. It does require a Dr. to make the final decision. But in some states (as others have posted) a non medical person can initiate the detaintment and process.

Posting Permissions

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