La Crosse County Sheriff Responds to Open Carry Letter

imported post

Pointman wrote:

bnhcomputing wrote:

It would also be helpful if a citizen legally planning to open carry would contact our Department. That would allow the patrol deputies to be aware of the situation in the event there citizen complaints.

Click to expand...

In WI, that's excellent. Call them every time you're going anywhere, and several times along the way when you'll be in a new area you didn't previously intend to visit. (Don't call to be obnoxious, just to keep them posted.) The $5 in phone charges are way cheaper than 30 detentions, and after a while they'll get sick of hearing from you and ask you to stop calling. You'll have avoided one or more possible arrests AND educated an entire police force. If two of your friends did the same, they'd tire of the courtesy calls that much sooner.

Click to expand...

:lol::lol: Yes, it's a case of "careful what you wish for...."

imported post

I thought the same thing about some of the summer festivals. As long as you don't go into an area where a temporary liquor license has been issued, you should be fine. I thought I remembered drinking in the UW-Madison student union. I'm probably wrong on that - maybe it was coffee or something - I just remember being intoxicated and watching a band play... :lol:

imported post

Pointman wrote:

bnhcomputing wrote:

It would also be helpful if a citizen legally planning to open carry would contact our Department. That would allow the patrol deputies to be aware of the situation in the event there citizen complaints.

Click to expand...

In WI, that's excellent. Call them every time you're going anywhere, and several times along the way when you'll be in a new area you didn't previously intend to visit. (Don't call to be obnoxious, just to keep them posted.) The $5 in phone charges are way cheaper than 30 detentions, and after a while they'll get sick of hearing from you and ask you to stop calling. You'll have avoided one or more possible arrests AND educated an entire police force. If two of your friends did the same, they'd tire of the courtesy calls that much sooner.

Click to expand...

Pointman:

I was waiting/hoping you would chime in on this one. I also thought this was a GOOD response compared to some others I’v read on here. I would like to send a follow up email to the sheriff thanking him for his support of our constitutional rights, just thought I would post our exchange here first, and get some feedback.


I am not quite ready to carry in a crowd (mall, etc.) yet, as I need to take a good personal protection class and get training in weapons retention first, but when out walking the various bike trails and such in our area, I now feel I have SOME support from LEO. We've had some bear, bobcat, and yote issues in our area, so carrying for security and defense are both valid.

imported post

bnhcomputing wrote:

I am not quite ready to carry in a crowd (mall, etc.) yet, as I need to take a good personal protection class and get training in weapons retention first, but when out walking the various bike trails and such in our area, I now feel I have SOME support from LEO.

Click to expand...

I think the key in Wisconsin is to be "reasonable" when openly carrying. The police aren't used to open carry, and a man-with-a-gun call usually involves something illegal. OCing a stainless .44 magnum in a mall isn't going to be a positive experience.

imported post

Bottom line, all the guy said is "it would be helpful". People, he didn't say you must call the police department to get permission. Though I have to admit Pointmans suggestion is also a great one.

OK. This is great. An LEO who gets it. Whenver I am in La Crosse I WILL OC.

edit: added pointman comment

imported post

Lets back off a little folks. Instead of picking at the technicalities and precision of excersising constitutional rights lets recognize that sheriff Helgeson appears to be on our side of the open carry issue. Let's give him the benefit of the doubt and await the response from the district attorney. It is the district attornie's opinion that is of most importance. He is the one that by state statute has the authority to file charges. The sheriff's department can only detain, issue citations and arrest. It will be interesting to see if his opinion conincides with the sheriff's. In any event file copies of sheriff Helgeson's email. They could end up being of importance as defense material.

imported post

Shotgun wrote:

My devious mind likes to ponder carrying in the UW-Madison Memorial Union.... which, I believe, is not owned by the state, but by a non-profit organization.

(Although I'd recommend verifying this belief BEFORE acting.)

Click to expand...

But it is leased by the state, which still counts if I remember correctly. Also, there is atleast one bar in the MU making it off limits in Wisconsin




Why not call the police station every time you OC? You shouldn't have to, but after a while perhaps they will get tired of citizens calling in to say they are OCing and take other pro-gun measures like traning dispatchers, etc. It probably also increases their awareness as the people who you talk to would have to be told that OCing is legal. Just the other side of it, i think.

imported post

smithman wrote:

Bottom line, all the guy said is "it would be helpful". People, he didn't say you must call the police department to get permission. Though I have to admit Pointmans suggestion is also a great one.

OK. This is great. An LEO who gets it. Whenver I am in La Crosse I WILL OC.

edit: added pointman comment

Click to expand...

Hold on there smithman. I specifically said La Crosse County. The actual CITY falls under different jurisdiction as well as the many villages in the county as each has their own police force.I started with the sheriff, and like Lammie said, I think we should waitfor the DA.

I am also waiting for a reply from the city, as they have one of those ONLY LEO can carry unenforceable ordinances on the books, but I haven't received a reply yet. I get this is our RIGHT, but I agree with Lammie, and pointman.As my posts show, I'm a newbie and I want to tread lightly so I don't screw things up, thus baby steps. I will continue to work the LEO and DA angle, so we know exactly where they stand.

imported post

Brigdh wrote:

Shotgun wrote:

My devious mind likes to ponder carrying in the UW-Madison Memorial Union.... which, I believe, is not owned by the state, but by a non-profit organization.

(Although I'd recommend verifying this belief BEFORE acting.)

Click to expand...

But it is leased by the state, which still counts if I remember correctly. Also, there is atleast one bar in the MU making it off limits in Wisconsin




Why not call the police station every time you OC? You shouldn't have to, but after a while perhaps they will get tired of citizens calling in to say they are OCing and take other pro-gun measures like traning dispatchers, etc. It probably also increases their awareness as the people who you talk to would have to be told that OCing is legal. Just the other side of it, i think.

Click to expand...

If it's leased, then stay out. As far as the bar, I suppose you'd just have to stay out of that portion of the building... like you would at a hotel with a bar.

imported post

I think that is a very reasonable response. He sounds like he understands the legality.

I think his concern is for YOU, because he realizes that not many people know that it is legal, and may call 911 with an unreasonable report.

He is trying to save you a felony stop, if a person says something like "there is this guy walking around with a gun!"

The dispatcher may ask what the man is doing, and the person might respond, I can't tell, but he looks suspicious!

Obviously you may be actually totally normal, but the caller may not portray it that way. The LEOs assume from the 911 call that it's something valid.

The Sheriff is giving you one option to prevent that from happening... if they can get a description from the 911 caller, and already know you are out there, they can tell the person they already know, and that there is no danger... and even explain it to them.

Anyhow, that's my 2c. I'd treat the man as an ally.

imported post

bnhcomputing wrote:

I am also waiting for a reply from the city, as they have one of those ONLY LEO can carry unenforceable ordinances on the books, but I haven't received a reply yet. I get this is our RIGHT, but I agree with Lammie, and pointman.As my posts show, I'm a newbie and I want to tread lightly so I don't screw things up, thus baby steps. I will continue to work the LEO and DA angle, so we know exactly where they stand.

Click to expand...

It seems to me that alot of localities have these unenforcable laws still on the books. bnh how did you find this out? I need to check this in Waukesha.

imported post

La Crosse happens to have their ordinances on line, but not easily searchable.

I had to do a LOT of reading. Sorry, that wasn't much help.

imported post

smithman wrote:

bnhcomputing wrote:

I am also waiting for a reply from the city, as they have one of those ONLY LEO can carry unenforceable ordinances on the books, but I haven't received a reply yet. I get this is our RIGHT, but I agree with Lammie, and pointman.As my posts show, I'm a newbie and I want to tread lightly so I don't screw things up, thus baby steps. I will continue to work the LEO and DA angle, so we know exactly where they stand.

Click to expand...

It seems to me that alot of localities have these unenforcable laws still on the books. bnh how did you find this out? I need to check this in Waukesha.

Click to expand...

http://www.ci.waukesha.wi.us/Code_Book/index.html

http://www.ci.waukesha.wi.us/Code_Book/11.130.pdf

That's what I found doing a quick check. I'd also suggest checking "parks" ordinances, because we have municipalities here in La Crosse county that have unenforceable ordinances that prohibit carrying firearms in the city/village parks and those ordinances aren't listed in their firearms section, but the parks section.

imported post

Personally I applaud the reasonableness of Sheriff Helgeson's response and bnhcomputing's approach.

Yes, many communities (large & small) have a variety of ordinances rendered unenforceable by statute at the state level.

I'm long past thinking that things should be the way I want them simply because I wish them so, so am not likely to get into alot of the hyperbole of bangingNikita's shoe on the podium. Fact is, absent some sweeping legal change we'd all like to see, a little proactive behavior works more quickly to gradually get things as they should be whether it be 1:1 interactions with local LE conducted civilly or well-structured resolutions for support by a county board. On a personal level I'm primarily concerned with carrying in my AO the most; most other times I'm out of state and that obnoxious stack of non-resident stuff in my wallet takes over and the gun goes under.

I will approach my local County SO with bnhcomputing's method (fellow I know and voted for and he knows it) and see what happens.This particular Sheriff I'd already queried before the last election to ascertain whether he'd allow his office's name to be used as one of those "We're supported by Chiefs of Law Enforcement" whinings that Doyle likes to make. Answer was most decidedly in the negative and he fully supports the WI Constitution and has supported the PPA each time it's been up.

mtf


Edited to correct spelling of Sheriff Helgeson's name.

imported post

Feel bad for my nieghbors in WI who can't CC Regarding notifying the local agency regarding open carry... Small towns are very small. Here we have to goto the local boys and get our safety inspection. My last safety inspection after starting reading here frequently I mentioned and questioned the town police officer who was very friendly to the idea and for being the single cop in a town, was well informed on our rights regarding open carry. Not saying anyone should call the cops before open carrying as it's not required, but the next time you are chatting with one you could simply mention it as conversation. Least then they are familiar with you and that you plan on open carrying legally in the area.

The next time I saw that officer while at my work, wal-mart, he made a joke that he recalled our conversation, but does not typically open carry off duty but had just spenthis entire timein the store OCing, as apparently his shirt was caught behind the holster the entire time, and none said a thing.

imported post

I finally got a response from the La Crosse County DA. Again, the exchange is a little lengthy, but I want to post everything and then hopefully get some feed back from those with more experience than I have, so here goes

The DA's initial response:

There is no way to "guarantee" that people won't be investigated,
arrested, or charged with a crime should they possess a weapon. This
e-mail talks about "open carry" but every situation would have to be
assessed on it's own facts before any determination can be made as to
whether or not any law would be violated.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court has determined that in given circumstances,
people may in fact carry a concealed weapon, but those circumstances are
limited to when a person has a legitimate need for self-defense. Law
enforcement and the courts would have to look to the totality of
circumstances to determine whether or not sufficient cause existed for
someone to claim self-defense to carry a weapon concealed.

As to openly carrying a firearm, there are many situations where a
person could not carry a weapon; in a vehicle, in a tavern, public
building, while intoxicated, and so on. Therefore, it's hard to imagine
where a gun could be carried openly legally without violating a state or
municipal law of some kind.

I know this isn't crystal clear, but I believe there are so many
variables and situations to consider we can't guarantee any one scenario
where law enforcement could grant a blessing to carry either concealed
or openly without any response.

Tim Gruenke
District Attorney

Click to expand...

Then I sent:

Sheriff Helgeson forwarded your response to me, and I would like to thank you for taking the time to respond. The response however left me concerned about the district attorney's position regarding ones constitutional right to bear arms.

As you stated, in only very narrow circumstances is carrying a concealed weapon allowed, and my question was not about concealed carry, but rather open carry.



In State vs. Hamdan (2003) the Supreme Court ruled that in order for the state to remain in compliance with Article I, Section 25 of the Wisconsin State Constitution, the state must allow the individual a way to reasonably keep/possess and bear/carry arms for lawful purposes. I draw your attention specifically to paragraphs (41, 42, and 71). Since concealed carry of a firearm is for the most part, prohibited, openly carrying of a firearm (holstered, visible, and in a non-threatening and peaceful manner) is the only way for an individual to exercise this right.



I understand there are state statutes that specify areas where carrying is restricted, as you cited, (vehicle, tavern, school zones, etc.) but that certainly would not include all of La Crosse County. Further, the states firearms preemption statutes (66.0409(2), 66.0409(4)(b)) specify that no local municipality may have an enforceable ordinance more strict than state law pertaining to the possession or carrying of a firearm. To that end, there would be no municipal law that could apply.



Should the Sheriff's department receive a call, I would expect them to respond. My question to Sheriff Helgeson was more along the lines of, once it has been determined that an individual is not in violation of any state statutes specific to carrying of a firearm, why would it be necessary to detain/charge them?



I would like to thank you again for you initial reply and look forward to your comments on the information provided.

Click to expand...

And got a second reply:

As I understand your question it is, "once it has been determined that an individual is not in violation of any state statutes specific to carrying of a firearm, why would it be necessary to detain/charge them?" The answer to this simple question is obvious, if there is no violation of statute of course no law enforcement officer can arrest and no District Attorney can charge. The difficulty I am trying to express is in the determination of when there is a violation of a statute and when there isn't. And unfortunately I don't believe it is possible to proactively list all the situations when a crime may be committed and when there is no crime without considering any number of variables and circumstances. A gun being displayed in one scenario may be perfectly legal and appropriate, but the same person with the same weapon openly displayed in another situation may be illegal and inappropriate. I believe the courts have generally tried to set out the parameters of illegal conduct, but law enforcement and prosecutors are charged with the duty to consider cases on an individual basis and use their professional judgment in deciding whether or not a given fact scenario violates any particular statute.

[align=left]So I can't give a definitive answer to fit every scenario, but it appears you havegood understanding of the relevant statutes and case law that would prohibit either concealed or openly carrying a weapon, and when such behavior would usually not be prohibited by statute or ordinance. If you have any specific questions I can try to answer further, but I don't know if any answer I give will be correct every time, regardless of the surrounding circumstances.[/align]
[align=left][/align]
[align=left]Tim Gruenke[/align]

Click to expand...

Open to comments

imported post

As an aside, I received the following email from the City of Eau Claire today.

Thank you for your well considered e-mail. I was asked to provide a brief response.

The City of Eau Claire is aware of s. 66.0409, Stats. The law allows local regulation of firearms to the extent such local regulation "is the same as or similar to, and no more stringent than, a state statute."

As I'm sure you know, state law does include numerous restrictions on the use, possession, transport, etc of firearms. I will not try to list them here, but just note that local regulations with state corollaries are permitted. Eau Claire Code s. 9.32.040 is partially supported by similar statutory restrictions.

However, I acknowledge that the restriction contained in Eau Claire Code s. 9.32.040 F. is not supported by any similar state statute and therefore unenforceable. I do not wade into the deeper issue of whether such a restriction is possible under the Wisconsin or United States Constitutions as it presently is unnecessary absent statutory authorization. Section 66.0409 (4) (b) directs that such provisions of local code may not be enforced, and to the best of my knowledge this section of city code has not been enforced since November 18, 1995.

I again thank you for your interest in this important matter.

Stephen C. Nick
City Attorney, City of Eau Claire
203 S. Farwell Street, P.O. Box 5148
P: (715) 839-6006 F: (715) 839-6177
IMLA Local Government Fellow

Click to expand...

Again, comments welcome

imported post

bnhcomputing, the reply from Mr. Nick of Eau Claire (also far more candid than one would normally hope for) is a gem you have plucked for all to see. (I believe Mr. Gruenke is LSE is also a mayoral candidate, no?)

But the City of Eau Claire's response is what's nice to see, and a candid recognition of outdated law being trumped by WI statute (66.0409) - AND, refreshingly, no whining about it.

I believe we understand the LSE DA's correct assessment, but I also welcome that it would appear that, county-wide anyway, he understands and supports an officer's judgement on the scene, taking totality of circumstances. Painful as it may be at moments, such open-dialogue will hopefully cause a small part of the education that is needed.

If this forum software has the capability, I'd recommend this thread be 'stickied' so it might encourage others to post their specific experiences in contacting LE and their local DAs.

Well done; if you have occasion again please thank Sheriff Helgeson for me.

imported post

WIG19 wrote:

... (I believe Mr. Gruenke is LSE is also a mayoral candidate, no?)...

Click to expand...

As reported in the May 17, La Crosse Tribune,the DA was NOT a candidate for Mayor.

imported post

bnhcomputing wrote:

The DA's initial response:

... As to openly carrying a firearm, there are many situations where a
person could not carry a weapon; in a vehicle, in a tavern, public
building, while intoxicated, and so on. Therefore, it's hard to imagine
where a gun could be carried openly legally without violating a state or
municipal law of some kind.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Wow, he doesn't have much of an imagination. Ok, let me help him.... imagine a person openly carrying a firearm who is NOT in a vehicle, NOT in a public building, NOT intoxicated... in other words, the majority of situations...

... and maybe somebody ought to mention the municipal law preemption to him...