• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

NOV 08 Milwaukee Magazine Open Carry Article is Out!

S

shernandez

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
189
Location
, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Lammie wrote:
Mike:
I'm not sure why your fur seems to be ruffled. It's true most journalism is aimed at selling articles and entertaining but some journalism is written to help furthur a cause. You posted a thread in May informing us Wisconsin members, especially those in the Milwaukee area, that Samantha was authoring an article supporting open carry, and that we should provide Samantha with our thoughts and experiences. Many members went out of their way to assist her. I'm sure they, as did most of us, anticipated that the benefit of the article was that it would finally give us a media outlet to promote our constitutional rights to keep and bear arms. I hope that back on May 16 those were also your thoughts. None of us expected it to be as entertaining as a dog and pony show and have to be read to the tune of here come the clowns. Let's face it, the story bombed.
Click to expand...
People are thinking and talking about open carry, and I for one see that as a victory. I appreciate every single person that came out and talked with me about the subject.
 
L

Lammie

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Feb 18, 2007
Messages
907
Location
, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Samantha:

My comments are not aimed at you. I'm sure your intentions were genuine. I think you are the victim of an editor that doesn't share your views and are a victim of his poetic license. No journalist with any experience could have spent the time on research and interviews as you did and made so many guffaws.
 
M

Mike

Site Co-Founder
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
8,706
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
imported post

Lammie wrote:
Mike:
I'm not sure why your fur seems to be ruffled. It's true most journalism is aimed at selling articles and entertaining but some journalism is written to help furthur a cause. You posted a thread in May informing us Wisconsin members, especially those in the Milwaukee area, that Samantha was authoring an article supporting open carry,
Click to expand...
huh? Not true.
 
M

Mike

Site Co-Founder
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
8,706
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
imported post

Lammie wrote:
When I referred to the requirement to give identification information during a "Terry stop" I was doing so in concert with Wisconsin statutes not the U.S Supreme Court opinion in Terry v Ohio which has become known as the "Terry Rule".

Wisconsin Statute:

968.24

Temporary questioning without arrest. After having identified himself or herself as a law enforcement officer, a law enforcement officer may stop a person in a public place for a reasonable period of time when the officer reasonably suspects that such person is committing, is about to commit, or has committed a crime, and may demand the name and address of the person and an explanation of the person's conduct. Such detention and temporary questioning shall be conducted in the vicinity where the person was stopped.

968.24 Annot.

A police officer performing a Terry stop and requesting identification could perform a limited search for identification papers when: 1) the information received by the officer was not confirmed by police records.; 2) the intrusion on the suspect was minimal; 3)the officer observed that the suspects pockets were bulging; and 4) the officer had experience with persons who claimed to have no identification when in fact they did. State v Black yr 2000.
Click to expand...
Whatever was meant by State v. Black, any claim to personal information or search powers beyond the duty of the person to state her namewas overruled by Hiibel - stop and ID statutes for Terry stops cannot constitutionally reach beyond the person's duty to state their name.
 
M

Mike

Site Co-Founder
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
8,706
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
imported post

Lammie wrote:
You posted a thread in May informing us Wisconsin members, especially those in the Milwaukee area, that Samantha was authoring an article supporting open carry, and that we should provide Samantha with our thoughts and experiences. Many members went out of their way to assist her.
Click to expand...
Did you and others disclose your real name and make comments on the record and agree to let the Milwaukee Magazine to public your likeness?
 
M

Mike

Site Co-Founder
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
8,706
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
imported post

Lammie wrote:
None of us expected it to be as entertaining as a dog and pony show and have to be read to the tune of here come the clowns. Let's face it, the story bombed.
Click to expand...
You gotta be kidding me - every official quoted is tap dancing around the issue - that's what government does when they are in the wrong.
 
M

Mike

Site Co-Founder
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
8,706
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
imported post

Doug Huffman wrote:
Mike wrote:
Did you and others disclose your real name and make comments on the record and agree to let the Milwaukee Magazine to public your likeness?
Click to expand...
My name and my willingness. Beyond that I was not asked. I suspect because I am not sufficiently hyperbolic in opinion or appearance.
Click to expand...
OK, good - the idea in these efforts is to flood the press with accurate comments from as mannhy state residents as possible. Photos are worth a thousand words of course - getting a photo of somebody shopping in safeway in Wisconsin with their family would help people understand what open carry is all about.
 
D

DKSuddeth

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
833
Location
Bedford, Texas, USA
imported post

shernandez wrote:
People are thinking and talking about open carry, and I for one see that as a victory. I appreciate every single person that came out and talked with me about the subject.
Click to expand...
And for that, we all thank you. Maybe my criticism isn't fair. I do think the article should have been more supportive of open carry, but that may be just because i'm on this side of the fence. For whatever it's worth, I do thank you for writing it.
 
A

apjonas

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2006
Messages
1,157
Location
, ,
imported post

Mike wrote: Whatever was meant by State v. Black, any claim to personal information or search powers beyond the duty of the person to state her namewas overruled by Hiibel - stop and ID statutes for Terry stops cannot constitutionally reach beyond the person's duty to state their name.
Click to expand...



Not necessarily. Hiibel only dealt with certains aspects of the issue. Any commentary not necessary to decide the case is dicta and not binding. While we can surmise how SCOTUS would rule on the WI statute, Hiibel does not provide definitive guidance. At this point it is a floor, not a ceiling. We know that you can be required to state your name. We don't know what else may be required.
 
S

S.E.WI

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2008
Messages
137
Location
Racine, Wisconsin, ,
imported post

I don't see that this article did any good. There is just too much information missing. Poorly written but better than I expected so no apology for my prior concerns.
 
S

shernandez

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2008
Messages
189
Location
, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

S.E.WI wrote:
I don't see that this article did any good. There is just too much information missing. Poorly written but better than I expected so no apology for my prior concerns.
Click to expand...

It's only poorly written in the eyes of those who expected a completely pro-second amendment piece. Which I never promised. The good that the article is doing is that people are talking about the issue. People are now wanting a clarification of things.

I've runthis storyby several editors and none of them were wanting for more information.

Though on a side note: I did think it was interesting that West Milwaukee has no gun ordinances. That's just me though. Possibly more on that later.
 
S

S.E.WI

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2008
Messages
137
Location
Racine, Wisconsin, ,
imported post

shernandez wrote:
S.E.WI wrote:
I don't see that this article did any good. There is just too much information missing. Poorly written but better than I expected so no apology for my prior concerns.
Click to expand...

It's only poorly written in the eyes of those who expected a completely pro-second amendment piece. Which I never promised. The good that the article is doing is that people are talking about the issue. People are now wanting a clarification of things.

I've runthis storyby several editors and none of them were wanting for more information.

Though on a side note: I did think it was interesting that West Milwaukee has no gun ordinances. That's just me though. Possibly more on that later.
Click to expand...

"People are now wanting a clarification of things."

What people? Who are they? What kind of talk?

There was a real opportunity for MM to inform people about the oppression and deprivation of constitutional rights. MM could have got people thinking about the rights they enjoy and how they can lose them because elected officials refuse to honor their oath and Article VI of the U.S. Constitution. Law enforcement, elected officials and judges are breaking the "Supreme Law Of The Land" known as the Constitution. Your editors should have been thinking ahead to when elected officials deprive them of the First Amendment because they didn't like what was printed.

The elected officials in Racine were trying to pass an ordinance to inspect rental property every 1 to 2 years. Aren't you free from searches in your home? Do you think it is okay to be forced to let people into your home without a warrant?

You did do better than I expected though and will thank you for that.
 
G

GJD

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2008
Messages
236
Location
Kenosha, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Its nice that the article was about an actual case of Parabelum open carrying., but the article made him seem like he is crazy. I'm not sure that it was well written.
 
W

WIG19

Regular Member
Joined
May 27, 2008
Messages
248
Location
, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

FWIW, Mr. Murphy at the magazine did publish my Letter to the Editor regarding the piece. It can be found here and then scroll down to The Firing Line.

We had a bit of a go-'round (but a cordial one) initially via email where he asked me:

"We say the supreme court has never addressed open carry, which is also what legal experts told us, and you reference two concealed carry cases. How does that prove the court has addressed the issue of open carry?

And where in the 25[suP]th[/suP] amendment does it say open carry is legal?

Whereupon I gave him a couple of things (short version here):

1. Hamdan and Vegas which show the state considers OC as a reasonable alternative to CC, thus not an overarching infringement of the 25th Amendment, and they did this in the midst of arguing for CC violations. I also gave him some background on the PPA struggles and the impact the SC almost had on 941.23 when the court came just short of repealing it. (Can you imagine the gnashing of teeth over a Vermont-style situation.) :D

2. I quoted for him the correct language in the 25th Amendment, and reminded him that this is a Democratically-elected Republic and OC is legal because there is no law against it. Our form of government does not need laws to grant permission; the absence of a prohibiting statute is what garners legality. (I also had occasion to reference 66.0409 again and invited him to check it but said he probably didn't need to because Ms. Hernandez got it right.)

 
W

WIG19

Regular Member
Joined
May 27, 2008
Messages
248
Location
, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Parabellum wrote:
Did Vegas go to the supreme court? Wasnt that done in circuit court?
Click to expand...
You're absolutely correct re Vegas' venue. I've synopsized here, but my point to him was that in both cases the argument was made by the state that OC is a non-intrusive alternative to 941.23, and the case was made in the Circuit, citing Hamdan.

:)
 
L

Lammie

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Feb 18, 2007
Messages
907
Location
, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

WIG19:
In regards to your letter to the editor of Milwaukee Magazine; good job. I doubt however that you will receive any satisfaction from Mr. Murphy in regards to his obvious anti-gun mentality. He accomplished his objective by taking a well meant and researched article of information and morphed it into an article that depicts open carry advocates as a bunch of militant rebels. So goes the power of the editors pencil and eraser. I doubt that anything in your editorial comments will manifest a retraction from him. Politicians and the Media care not if what they say to furthur their cause, is true or not. They are aware it is known that if you tell an outright lie to 100 people 20 of them will accept it as gospel and spread it as true. I hope I speak for every member of the forum when I say thank you for taking Mr. Murphy to task and for trying to hold him accountable.
 
Shotgun

Shotgun

Wisconsin Carry, Inc.
Joined
Aug 23, 2006
Messages
2,668
Location
Madison, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Lammie wrote:
I hope I speak for every member of the forum when I say thank you for taking Mr. Murphy to task and for trying to hold him accountable.
Click to expand...
I'll second that! Excellent letter to the ed!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top