Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 70

Thread: IT IS ILLEGAL TO CARRY IN MILWAUKEE,

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    25

    Post imported post

    I don't know what you are all talking about. There is a municipal statute in milwaukee that outlaws anyone but a cop from carrying concealed OR OPENLY carrying a weapon.

    Municipal Ordinance: 105.34: "...it shall be unlawful for any person to go armed with any firearm on or about their person within the city, unless the firearm is both unloaded and enclosed within a carrying case"

    This ordinance is SEPERATE from the conceal carry ordinance.

    If you try to open carry in milwaukee the police CAN and WILL arrest you under this statute.

    Don't be stupid.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    arlington,va, ,
    Posts
    387

    Post imported post

    yagoo wrote:
    I don't know what you are all talking about. There is a municipal statute in milwaukee that outlaws anyone but a cop from carrying concealed OR OPENLY carrying a weapon.

    Municipal Ordinance: 105.34: "...it shall be unlawful for any person to go armed with any firearm on or about their person within the city, unless the firearm is both unloaded and enclosed within a carrying case"

    This ordinance is SEPERATE from the conceal carry ordinance.

    If you try to open carry in milwaukee the police CAN and WILL arrest you under this statute.

    Don't be stupid.
    Responded in the other thread that this post was also posted to. For consistency I will repost it here as well:

    Wisconsin has Preemption, which prohibits all municipalities from creating gun laws,so it seems that ordinance is illegal. See the preemption at . Wisconsin Statutes § 66.0409(2). I am not a lawyer, so maybe someone who is more versed in Wisconsin law will chime in.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    25

    Post imported post

    Please note: it is illegal to carry in just about every other city within 300 miles of milwaukee. Please reference your city's municipal code before carrying.

    As a law student who is currently working for a law firm, I wanted to get a process server/private investigator license to better help in my daily tasks...when I read the municipal ordinances against carrying...I changed my mind. Even private investigators cannot carry in most circumstances.



  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    arlington,va, ,
    Posts
    387

    Post imported post

    yagoo wrote:
    Please note: it is illegal to carry in just about every other city within 300 miles of milwaukee.* Please reference your city's municipal code before carrying.

    As a law student who is currently working for a law firm, I wanted to get a process server/private investigator license to better help in my daily tasks...when I read the municipal ordinances against carrying...I changed my mind.* Even private investigators cannot carry in most circumstances.

    *
    You may need to read more law then. What say you about 66.0409 ? Has that been changed? I am reading it off of nxt.legis.state.wi.us

  5. #5
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. Shotgun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Madison, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,668

    Post imported post

    Oh boy, here we go again. Is Bunker using another name?

    Yes, read the preemption statute, then report back to us. Thanks
    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"

  6. #6
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. Shotgun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Madison, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,668

    Post imported post

    Oh, and you might want to read the statements I posted from Assisant Attorney General Kassel on page 17 of the "Intent to open carry in Milwaukee" posting...
    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"

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    25

    Post imported post

    here is point 4a of your pre-emption statute:

    "4)(a) Nothing in this section prohibits a political subdivision from continuing to enforce an ordinance or resolution that is in effect on November 18, 1995, and that regulates the sale, purchase, transfer, ownership, use, keeping, possession, bearing, transportation, licensing, permitting, registration or taxation of any firearm or part of a firearm, including ammunition and reloader components, if the ordinance or resolution is the same as or similar to, and no more stringent than, a state statute."


    the state constitutiuon is NOT a state statute...that is why 4a allows municipalities to regulate open carry. I am not telling you my politics...but from reading some of the posts here, people are mis-informed about the law so I am just giving warning.



  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Waukesha, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    721

    Post imported post

    I think cities like MKE keep this on the books to try to stop the casual carrier.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    arlington,va, ,
    Posts
    387

    Post imported post

    yagoo wrote:
    here is point 4a of your pre-emption statute:

    "4)(a) Nothing in this section prohibits a political subdivision from continuing to enforce an ordinance or resolution that is in effect on November 18, 1995, and that regulates the sale, purchase, transfer, ownership, use, keeping, possession, bearing, transportation, licensing, permitting, registration or taxation of any firearm or part of a firearm, including ammunition and reloader components, if the ordinance or resolution is the same as or similar to, and no more stringent than, a state statute."


    the state constitutiuon is NOT a state statute...that is why 4a allows municipalities to regulate open carry.* I am not telling you my politics...but from reading some of the posts here, people are mis-informed about the law so I am just giving warning.

    *
    Read it. It proves you are wrong.
    "if the ordinance or resolution is the same as or similar to, and no more stringent than, a state statute."

    No carry would be more stringent than state statute.

  10. #10
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. Shotgun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Madison, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,668

    Post imported post

    yagoo wrote:
    here is point 4a of your pre-emption statute:

    "4)(a) Nothing in this section prohibits a political subdivision from continuing to enforce an ordinance or resolution that is in effect on November 18, 1995, and that regulates the sale, purchase, transfer, ownership, use, keeping, possession, bearing, transportation, licensing, permitting, registration or taxation of any firearm or part of a firearm, including ammunition and reloader components, if the ordinance or resolution is the same as or similar to, and no more stringent than, a state statute."


    the state constitutiuon is NOT a state statute...that is why 4a allows municipalities to regulate open carry. I am not telling you my politics...but from reading some of the posts here, people are mis-informed about the law so I am just giving warning.

    Okay, then point out the state statute that these ordinances are "the same as or similar to, and no more stringent than, a state statute." I'll wait patiently.
    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"

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    25

    Post imported post

    thats what i JUST SAID. the state constitution is what you are going off of saying you have a right to carry...NOT a state statute...the pre-emption law says that a municipality can't regulate if the regulation is more stringent than a STATE STATUTE....NOT THE STATE CONSTITUTION.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    25

    Post imported post

    thats what i JUST SAID. the state constitution is what you are going off of saying you have a right to carry...NOT a state statute...the pre-emption law says that a municipality can't regulate if the regulation is more stringent than a STATE STATUTE....NOT THE STATE CONSTITUTION.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Waukesha, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    721

    Post imported post

    yagoo wrote:
    here is point 4a of your pre-emption statute:

    "4)(a) Nothing in this section prohibits a political subdivision from continuing to enforce an ordinance or resolution that is in effect on November 18, 1995, and that regulates the sale, purchase, transfer, ownership, use, keeping, possession, bearing, transportation, licensing, permitting, registration or taxation of any firearm or part of a firearm, including ammunition and reloader components, if the ordinance or resolution is the same as or similar to, and no more stringent than, a state statute."


    the state constitutiuon is NOT a state statute...that is why 4a allows municipalities to regulate open carry. I am not telling you my politics...but from reading some of the posts here, people are mis-informed about the law so I am just giving warning.

    This is the key:

    is the same as or similar to, and no more stringent than, a state statute.

    There is no state statue against OC, so a locality's law against carrying a gun is more stringent! Therefore unenforceable!

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Waukesha, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    721

    Post imported post

    The state constitution makes no statements of law regulating guns or bearing arms that I am aware of.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    25

    Post imported post

    You are missing my whole point...

    You can read all of "Chapter 941. Crimes Against Public Health and Safety" and you won't find any laws regarding open carry. (you will obvioiusly find ones against conceal carry"

    Therefore, a municipality is not regulating more stringent than any state statute with regard to open carry because there IS NO state statute regarding allowing carry.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    25

    Post imported post

    that is incorrect:

    Article I, Section 25

    The people have the right to keep and bear arms for security, defense, hunting, recreation or any other lawful purpose.


  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    25

    Post imported post



    Smithman,

    you said: "There is no state statue against OC, so a locality's law against carrying a gun is more stringent! Therefore unenforceable!"

    That is not how federalism works my friend....if there is no state law against something, it is left to the municipalities and counties...just as where there is no federal law, it is assumed to be left to the states.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    arlington,va, ,
    Posts
    387

    Post imported post

    yagoo wrote:
    You are missing my whole point...

    You can read all of "Chapter 941. Crimes Against Public Health and Safety" and you won't find any laws regarding open carry. (you will obvioiusly find ones against conceal carry"

    Therefore, a municipality is not regulating more stringent than any state statute with regard to open carry because there IS NO state statute regarding allowing carry.
    So you think that since there is no law allowing OC, that preemption allows for a locality to make a ordinance banning OC, even though pre-emotion law says:

    66.0409(4)(b)
    (b) If a political subdivision has in effect on November 17, 1995, an ordinance or resolution that regulates the sale, purchase, transfer, ownership, use, keeping, possession, bearing, transportation, licensing, permitting, registration or taxation of any firearm or part of a firearm, including ammunition and reloader components, and the ordinance or resolution is not the same as or similar to a state statute, the ordinance or resolution shall have no legal effect and the political subdivision may not enforce the ordinance or resolution on or after November 18, 1995.

    Which to me reads, if there is no state ordinance that the local law is similar to, the law has no effect.
    So OC would be unable to be banned.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    25

    Post imported post

    Again...read the post I made previous to this one...the whole point of the state law that you are pointing to is so that if the state legislature so chooses, they can "overrule" municipal regarding guns. However, there are NO laws regarding open carry in the state legislature for a reason. If the state legislature wanted to enact a law that said "all citizens may open carry.." then the pre-emption would kick it. That is not the case, however.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Waukesha, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    721

    Post imported post

    yagoo wrote:

    Smithman,

    you said: "There is no state statue against OC, so a locality's law against carrying a gun is more stringent! Therefore unenforceable!"

    That is not how federalism works my friend....if there is no state law against something, it is left to the municipalities and counties...just as where there is no federal law, it is assumed to be left to the states.
    In most cases stuff is left for the municipalities, but firearms are specifically protected in the statutues from more stringent locality laws. There should be no debate over this. Firearms are a special class of weapon in the state laws, and they are specifically protected against unreasonable and unenforceable municipality laws.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Waukesha, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    721

    Post imported post

    yagoo wrote:
    Again...read the post I made previous to this one...the whole point of the state law that you are pointing to is so that if the state legislature so chooses, they can "overrule" municipal regarding guns. However, there are NO laws regarding open carry in the state legislature for a reason. If the state legislature wanted to enact a law that said "all citizens may open carry.." then the pre-emption would kick it. That is not the case, however.
    The premption law wouldn't touch this, since allowing somebody to do something which is NOT Prohibited is NOT more stringent.

    Please read some more forum posts on the subject, your credibility is already suffering as Bunker's has.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    arlington,va, ,
    Posts
    387

    Post imported post

    yagoo wrote:
    Again...read the post I made previous to this one...the whole point of the state law that you are pointing to is so that if the state legislature so chooses, they can "overrule" municipal regarding guns. However, there are NO laws regarding open carry in the state legislature for a reason. If the state legislature wanted to enact a law that said "all citizens may open carry.." then the pre-emption would kick it. That is not the case, however.
    I think you should read the statute more carefully. Please point out where my logic is wrong.

    "If a political subdivision has in effect on November 17, 1995, an ordinance or resolution that regulates the sale, purchase, transfer, ownership, use, keeping, possession, bearing, transportation, licensing, permitting, registration or taxation of any firearm or part of a firearm, including ammunition and reloader components"

    So lets assume a locality has an ordinance banning OC. Does it fall in the realm of an ordinance that regulates the use,keeping,possession,or bearing of a firearm?

    To me, it does.

    Ok. So lets look at the second part of the statute:

    "and the ordinance or resolution is not the same as or similar to a state statute, the ordinance or resolution shall have no legal effect and the political subdivision may not enforce the ordinance or resolution on or after November 18, 1995."

    So, if the law is "not the same as or similar to a state statute" the ordinance has no legal weight.

    So show me the law that the local ordinance banning OC is similar to.

    It seems to me, with close reading of the law, you are wrong. So you will have to cite to me, why you are right.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    25

    Post imported post

    I agree they are un-reasonable...but they are NOT unenforceable...thats the only point i am trying to make.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    25

    Post imported post

    I agree they are un-reasonable...but they are NOT unenforceable...thats the only point i am trying to make.

  25. #25
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. Shotgun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Madison, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,668

    Post imported post

    So, you're saying the city attorney of Milwaukee was WRONG when he acknowledged that the city's ordinance regarding the licensing of people selling guns was unenforceable because there is no state licensing? And you're saying Assistant Attorney General Jeff Kassel was WRONG when, before the Wisconsin Supreme Court, he said, during three separate cases, that is was perfectly legal to carry a gun down State Street in Madison and Wisconsin Ave. in Milwaukee?
    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"

Page 1 of 3 123 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
  •