Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 142

Thread: OC/CC in Wisconsin RIP

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,169

    Post imported post

    Well the final nail has been driven in the coffin of CC in the Badger state. It wasn't foul play - it died from neglect. The moribund WCCA always willing to take your cash didn't even have a new entry on its website since last March and that was about Nebraska.

    So now turning to open carry - what can we say? Despite Governor Doyle's flip remarks, OC for the most part will be squashed if attempted by individuals. I thought an open carry campaign a la Ohio would work or perhaps a declaratory judgement but I haven't seen a Wisconsin resident step forward to take the plunge. I suppose one of us visitors could do it but I don't think it would have the same horsepower and would certainly be more complicated.

    Anyway, take a few moments to say farewell to WI carry of any sort. It came close on more than one occasion but there just wasn't the fire in the belly movement that places like Minnesota and Kansas had.

  2. #2
    Accomplished Advocate
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Bedford, Texas, USA
    Posts
    834

    Post imported post

    i guess there is not enough support up there for an open carry walk?

  3. #3
    State Researcher lockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Elgin, Illinois, USA
    Posts
    1,202

    Post imported post

    Won't stop me from OC up in Vilas county.

    Party label aside, did the legislature increase or decrease its 2A freindly numbers?

  4. #4
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    The best thing WI folks can do for now is to exercise their right to carry openly on foot on an individual basis during normal activities.

  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    , Illinois, USA
    Posts
    778

    Post imported post

    Mike wrote:
    The best thing WI folks can do for now is to exercise their right to carry openly on foot on an individual basis during normal activities.
    as a practical matter, if one were to do this, the route would need to be carefully mapped out to avoid approaching a school zone. I doubt such a walk would constitute anything approaching "normal".

  6. #6
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    What is the Wisconsin state law restricting carry in a school zone, and what is that state based zone?

  7. #7
    State Researcher lockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Elgin, Illinois, USA
    Posts
    1,202

    Post imported post

    948.605(2)(a)
    (a) Any individual who knowingly possesses a firearm at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone is guilty of a Class I felony.


    The school zone exemption as applies to OC requires a permit issued by the state or any local subdivision (Which nothing is in place to do so). Otherwise must be cased and unloaded. The zone is 1000'.

    To violate the statute one must know or have reasonably known he was in a school zone.

    The language is almost a carbon of the federal law but has been altered to accommodate the state.



  8. #8
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    lockman wrote:
    To violate the statute one must know or have reasonably known he was in a school zone.
    This element of the state law is pretty important.

  9. #9
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    , Illinois, USA
    Posts
    778

    Post imported post

    Mike wrote:
    lockman wrote:
    To violate the statute one must know or have reasonably known he was in a school zone.
    This element of the state law is pretty important.
    It is pretty hard to argue one cannot see a school.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Houston, Texas, USA
    Posts
    180

    Post imported post

    Yes, but 1000 feet is a long ways, especially when in an area where other buildings are in the way.

    On the other hand, if the person is a resident of the town, I would think it wouldn't be difficult to prove in court that the person reasonably should have known he was within 1000 feet of a school.

  11. #11
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    , Illinois, USA
    Posts
    778

    Post imported post

    hirundo82 wrote:
    Yes, but 1000 feet is a long ways, especially when in an area where other buildings are in the way.

    On the other hand, if the person is a resident of the town, I would think it wouldn't be difficult to prove in court that the person reasonably should have known he was within 1000 feet of a school.
    1000 is roughly 2 blocks.






  12. #12
    Accomplished Advocate
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Bedford, Texas, USA
    Posts
    834

    Post imported post

    ilbob wrote:
    hirundo82 wrote:
    Yes, but 1000 feet is a long ways, especially when in an area where other buildings are in the way.

    On the other hand, if the person is a resident of the town, I would think it wouldn't be difficult to prove in court that the person reasonably should have known he was within 1000 feet of a school.
    1000 is roughly 2 blocks.


    not sure how long a block is anymore in IL, but 300 feet is a football field, thats about 1 block, maybe a bit longer.


  13. #13
    State Researcher lockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Elgin, Illinois, USA
    Posts
    1,202

    Post imported post

    This would be a good one to throw at the new Attorney General and get a good feel what the states stands on this position is. After all, the current governor stated that he does not want CC so if you must carry a gun carry it openly. Being the former state attorney general I am sure he new the legality of his suggestion.

  14. #14
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. Shotgun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Madison, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,668

    Post imported post

    I live in Madison and Doyle's re-election will not stop me from OC. If anything, it providesall the more motivation to open carry. I am hoping the new Attorney General, who is an NRA member and on record supporting concealed carry, will put an end to any misguided persecution (and prosecution!)of people who OC.

    As for so-called "school zones," one can easily be within 1000 feet of a school and not be aware of it. I am going to visit every school that's anywhere near where I will open carry with my GPS and save the location in it's memory. If stopped while open carrying I will have proof that I am well outside the "zone."

    Fortunately, as I've posted before, there is NO school anywhere close to downtown Madison. (Except the University of Wisconsin and Madison Area Technical College, and they don't qualify as "school zones.") I have long felt that the best political pressure we can put on to pass CC in Wisconsin is by practicing OC. The 'established' CC movement has not agreed with that, but their methods haven't worked.
    A. Gold

    Failure to comply may result in discipline up to and including termination.
    The free man is a warrior. - Nietzsche "Twilight of the Idols"

  15. #15
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. Shotgun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Madison, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,668

    Post imported post

    I might add, I was contacted a few days ago by someone from the Milwaukee area who has a group of individuals interested in participating in Open Carry Walks in the Madison area. It will happen.

    Unfortunately OC weather is drawing to a close in WI.... except for those withlong guns..... :P
    A. Gold

    Failure to comply may result in discipline up to and including termination.
    The free man is a warrior. - Nietzsche "Twilight of the Idols"

  16. #16
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    ilbob wrote:
    It is pretty hard to argue one cannot see a school.
    So at the point at which you "should have known" that the school was there, you presumably can made a good faith effort to turn around and cease the violation.

    The "should have known" requirement is a requirement to prosecute - the jury will see evidence of you path, and see that when you turned the corner and the school was obviously "there," you were already within 1,000 feet.

  17. #17
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    Shotgun wrote:
    I might add, I was contacted a few days ago by someone from the Milwaukee area who has a group of individuals interested in participating in Open Carry Walks in the Madison area. It will happen.

    Unfortunately OC weather is drawing to a close in WI.... except for those withlong guns..... :P
    Except in a mall, hotel,or shopping venter where they have heat.

  18. #18
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    Shotgun wrote:
    I live in Madison and Doyle's re-election will not stop me from OC. If anything, it providesall the more motivation to open carry. I am hoping the new Attorney General, who is an NRA member and on record supporting concealed carry, will put an end to any misguided persecution (and prosecution!)of people who OC.
    What "prosecutions" for open carry on foot? I think this be a myth unless somebody has an authority to show for this.

  19. #19
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    hirundo82 wrote:
    if the person is a resident of the town, I would think it wouldn't be difficult to prove in court that the person reasonably should have known he was within 1000 feet of a school.
    And ther contrary is that a resident of a town ought to be able to plan his route with confidence that he is not violating the state school zone.

    Presumably one could transport an unloaded handgungun in a locked trunk thru these zones to freedom of movement areas, yes?

  20. #20
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    Everybody in Wisconsin ought to carry this warrant from the Governor to present to anybody who questions there open carry legality:

    "If you want to carry a gun in Wisconsin, wear it on your hip," [highlight= #ffff88]Doyle[/highlight] said, patting his hip. (see http://tinyurl.com/y7r3dt).

    Folks might want to print this whole article ASAP - the originial article is no longer posted on the newspaper's web site...

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Baraboo, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    71

    Post imported post

    I carry everywhere and know many others that carry openly, they cannot do anything aside from give you a disorderly conduct. They will if someone calls and complains or it causes a problem but FIGHT IT. They can give a disorderly conduct for any reason period, or any citation for that matter. Its not the police officers job to interpret the law, that is for a court to decide. You will win in court MANY have and theres a pretty big case for a suit against them in return if any of your rights are violated. For the school zone issue it says knows or reasonable cause to believe its a school zone. If your not within view of a school or a sign saying drug free school zone theres no way you could possibly know.

    We need to grow a pair and stop playing games, people have bled and died for our rights, if more have to so be it. If we dont use our rights we will loose them and thats whats happened here, nothing but weakness. When is the march count me in, Id like to see people with rifles marching around the capital, you would see alot more people carrying if they actually knew what their rights are. We can never trade our open and carry for CCW but we need both..

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin, ,
    Posts
    836

    Post imported post

    minuteman wrote:
    I carry everywhere and know many others that carry openly, they cannot do anything aside from give you a disorderly conduct. They will if someone calls and complains or it causes a problem but FIGHT IT. They can give a disorderly conduct for any reason period, or any citation for that matter. Its not the police officers job to interpret the law, that is for a court to decide. You will win in court MANY have and theres a pretty big case for a suit against them in return if any of your rights are violated. For the school zone issue it says knows or reasonable cause to believe its a school zone. If your not within view of a school or a sign saying drug free school zone theres no way you could possibly know.
    I'm in law enforcement in Wisconsin. I need to see some cites for your claim that "many have won in court" on a DC gun charge. I want to go to the court house and read the files on those cases. I get into debates with other officers that open carry isn't DC, but if I had some actual cases of people winning in court it would help. All I need is a last name & maybe an approximate date [year] and I should be able to find the case on the open record computer.

    You do realize that Disorderly Conduct isn't always just a local ordinance citation with a small fine. It can be charged as a state crime and include jail time. That's why OC can be a risky proposition here until we get a clear authoritative ruling that it is NOT disorderly conduct by either an anppellate court, the State Supreme Court, or the new Attorney General.

  23. #23
    State Researcher lockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Elgin, Illinois, USA
    Posts
    1,202

    Post imported post

    After about an hour of online searches I could find nothing. There was plenty there, but they all pertained to other factors witch included carrying concealed, domestic abuse, drunkenness or prohibited persons. This is good; at least there is no public precedent that states you can be arrested (legally). It would be better to have the case citation in the affirmative for OC.



    You know LEO’s are wrong when they can not arrest you for what they claim you are doing. They resort to a completely different charge that does not even include elements pertaining to the original claimed offense.



    Elements of the charge of disorderly conduct under Wisconsin criminal laws:

    DISORDERLY CONDUCT

    • Defendant engaged in violent, abusive, indecent, profane, boisterous, unreasonably loud, or otherwise disorderly conduct
    • The conduct of the defendant, under the circumstances as they then existed, tended to cause or provoke a disturbance
    Maximum penalty - 90 days jail and $1,000 fine


    If an arrestwas made under the DC statute,soley on an LEO complaint, the arrest would not meet the criteara above.

  24. #24
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. Shotgun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Madison, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,668

    Post imported post

    I don't believe that it's necessary to search through case after case to support the idea that a disorderly conduct citation would be unconstitutional in Wisconsin. One only needs to look at the Hamdan opinion, which states:

    "Article I, Section 25 does not establish an unfettered right to bear arms. Clearly, the State retains the power to impose reasonable regulations on weapons, including a general prohibition on the carrying of concealed weapons. However, the State may not apply these regulations in situations that functionally disallow the exercise of the rights conferred under Article I, Section 25. The State must be especially vigilant in circumstances where a person's need to exercise the right is the most pronounced. If the State applies reasonable laws in circumstances that unreasonably impair the right to keep and bear arms, the State's police power must yield in those circumstances to the exercise of the right. The prohibition of conduct that is indispensable to the right to keep (possess) or bear (carry) arms for lawful purposes will not be sustained."

    This passage reflects a good portion ofthe oral argument in the case. Everyone present in the court, plus both sides (state Attorney General's office and Hamdan's lawyer) agreed that there MUST be at least ONEway to exercise the right to bear arms [i.e., either 1- concealed or 2- unconcealed]. If simply carrying a firearm openly was sufficient reason to arrest a person for disorderly conduct, it would "functionally disallow" the exercise of the right to bear arms. Even the AG's lawyer stated during this case that he considered a disorderly conduct charge for open carryto be "an unconstitutional misapplication of the disorderly conduct statute."

    I am sure there are many who would want to discourage open carry by perpetuating a myth that it is illegal and subjects one to a disorderly conduct charge, and I'm sure that there are even some LEO's out there who would happily try to act according to that myth and will issue a citation or make an arrest, but I do not believe such a charge, absent other factors that truly would make the arrest legal, would ultimately stand up in the courts. The best thing is to educate everyone, LEO's, the public, prosecutors, gun owners.... EVERYONE!
    A. Gold

    Failure to comply may result in discipline up to and including termination.
    The free man is a warrior. - Nietzsche "Twilight of the Idols"

  25. #25
    State Researcher lockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Elgin, Illinois, USA
    Posts
    1,202

    Post imported post

    Then one could reason under Hamdan [/i]that the imposition [/i]placed on bearing arms by the state’s gun free school zones act would “functionally disallow the exercise of the rights conferred under Article I, Section 25” as currently written.

Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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