Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Wisconsin lawmakers clash on gun policy after Madison East Towne Mall shooting

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

    Wisconsin lawmakers clash on gun policy after Madison East Towne Mall shooting

    A Wisconsin state lawmaker's call for residents to arm themselves and be prepared "to shoot center mass" after a shooting inside a Madison mall prompted a swift rebuke from another legislator.

    Wisconsin Reps. Bob Gannon (R-Slinger) and Chris Taylor (D-Madison) clashed in news releases issued Monday after a 19-year-old man was shot Saturday afternoon inside East Towne Mall.

    "Wisconsin does not have a death penalty law, but with significant practice and careful aim, law abiding citizens can help clean our society of these scum bags," Gannon said in the news release, Hole Shot into Gun Free Zone Theory
    http://www.thewheelerreport.com/whee...1gannon_01.pdf

    In her own news release, Taylor described Gannon as calling "for a vigilante uprising" and using "dangerous rhetoric."
    Today, Representative Bob Gannon released a statement saying, “Wisconsin does
    not have a death penalty law, but with significant practice and careful aim, law abiding citizens
    can help clean our society of these scum bags.”
    http://www.thewheelerreport.com/whee...1221taylor.pdf

    http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepo...363163841.html
    Last edited by Nightmare; 12-21-2015 at 05:06 PM.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    northern wis
    Posts
    3,202
    I wouldn't expect any thing less from a Representative from Madistan.

    Maybe we can get some more improvements to wis law. from Bob Gannon
    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

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Ellsworth Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,213
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    A Wisconsin state lawmaker's call for residents to arm themselves and be prepared "to shoot center mass" after a shooting inside a Madison mall prompted a swift rebuke from another legislator.

    Wisconsin Reps. Bob Gannon (R-Slinger) and Chris Taylor (D-Madison) clashed in news releases issued Monday after a 19-year-old man was shot Saturday afternoon inside East Towne Mall.

    "Wisconsin does not have a death penalty law, but with significant practice and careful aim, law abiding citizens can help clean our society of these scum bags," Gannon said in the news release, Hole Shot into Gun Free Zone Theory
    http://www.thewheelerreport.com/whee...1gannon_01.pdf

    In her own news release, Taylor described Gannon as calling "for a vigilante uprising" and using "dangerous rhetoric."
    http://www.thewheelerreport.com/whee...1221taylor.pdf

    http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepo...363163841.html
    Seems like Rep Taylor has not given the whole truth. Right doesn't make might. Let me present the entire paragraph from the decision from which Rep Taylor quotes. They use historical precedence like they should. But for them to say It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose IMHO is wrong. Where is IT PONTIFICATED IN THE CONSTITUTION OR THE WRITINGS OF THE FOUNDERS?? They are human and humans get it wrong many times. I can't even fathom where they conjured that from. The weapons "in common use at the times" 18th century and today are so far apart that they couldn't even be completely superimposed over each other. Common today AR15 etc..., AK47 etc... semi auto hand guns etc... I am going to read the entire decision to see if they quote only past historic cases only or they also quote the founding fathers. That will tell me a whole lot.
    The examples they give, I don't believe completely support their statement below.

    1. Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited.It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose:For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of fireČarms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.
    Last edited by Law abider; 12-22-2015 at 04:39 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
  •