Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: 'Open carry' and 'castle doctrine' at issue in Aaron Ols' gun return appeal.

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,161

    'Open carry' and 'castle doctrine' at issue in Aaron Ols' gun return appeal.

    "Police arrested Ols and seized his gun. After Ols' plea to the municipal violation, he petitioned to get his gun back through Milwaukee County's monthly "gun return court."

    In May 2013, Circuit Judge J.D. Watts heard from Ols, who appeared without a lawyer and was not put under oath. Two months later, Watts denied the petition and refused to return the gun.

    In his appeal, Ols contends the argument in the park and the trespass on Ols' property were two separate events, and Watts should have not considered them together in their entirety. Ols contends he committed no crime in either location, since he was merely wearing his gun in the first, and had a right to draw it when threatened on his own property in the second.

    State Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen has clarified that openly wearing a gun, by itself, is not disorderly conduct.

    Ols argues the city had the burden of showing, at an evidentiary hearing, that the gun was used in the commission of a crime.

    http://www.jsonline.com/news/crime/o...260695761.html

    Aaron Ols' WCCA rap sheet is linked in the article. The first time I recall such. I am pleased to see prejudicial and prior charges made public.

    The comments at the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel suggest the weight of our burden to remove anti-gun hysteria.
    Last edited by Nightmare; 05-27-2014 at 08:37 AM.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    popple butte
    Posts
    349
    Anyone who checks out his entire rap sheet on WCCA can figure this guy out in a Wisco heartbeat. Geez, I just adore the WCCA website.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    The man got belligerent. Ols used profanity. from link

    Hey,,,, I get belligerent .... I use profanity ..... this mean I cannot have a gun?

    Just going to the park to confront the family, while wearing his gun, was a crime, too, according to the city, because Ols knew the sight of his gun would be intimidating. from link

    Does WS have the crime of intimidation ~ some midwestern states have this .. I see 940.42, etc..dealing with witnesses.

    But I don't think that simply wearing a gun can be grounds for intimidation.

    Court records show the incident wasn't Ols' first involving a gun. He was charged with a intentionally pointing a firearm at someone in April 2011. That misdemeanor was later dismissed after prosecutors could not find the victims to testify, according to records.
    from link

    Well, he's not guilty of that, right?

    Innocent until proven guilty is dead in WS?

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,161

    There is a hint in the MJS article comments that the report may be in error,

    that the gun was concealed until Ols was confronted in his curtilage. There may have been no gun presented in the initial confrontation in the park from which Ols withdrew.

    This may have been largely fabricated by the anti-gun prejudiced MJS and MPD. We'll see.

    StayFocused - Today at 2:32 PM - Report Abuse
    11
    This article is completely inaccurate. Speaking from close knowledge of the matter, he was not "openly" carrying a firearm, he was "concealed" carrying the firearm. Secondly, does it state anywhere, that the man in question, also worked for the park and recreation department of Milwaukee Public Schools for over 23 years, and that his knowledge of park rules and regulations, as well as many chronicled events at the park(playground), should be factored in making an educated comment? There was no knowledge of any firearm until the man was threatened, on his own property, where a weapon was drawn under threat of death by a trained government killing machine. No 'crime' was ever committed. If anything, to verbal acts of disorderly conduct were committed by both parties and are offset. Thus ending any and all scrutiny of any vigilante justice and crime being committed. Period.
    Last edited by Nightmare; 05-27-2014 at 05:54 PM.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

Posting Permissions

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