Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Madison PD weigh in on AG's memo

  1. #1
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. Shotgun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Madison, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,668

    Post imported post

    Madison PD's website contains this entry in the Spring 2009 "Legal Update"

    http://www.cityofmadison.com/police/...Spring2009.pdf

    Disorderly Conduct—Visible Weapons
    Wisconsin’s Attorney General recently released an advisory
    memorandum discussing the applicability of the disorderly
    conduct statute to individuals openly carrying firearms. The
    central point of the memorandum was: “mere open carry of a
    firearm, absent additional facts and circumstances, should
    not result in a disorderly conduct charge.” Many have asked
    what impact, if any, this has on MPD officers’ decisions
    when confronted with these types of situations. The short
    answer is that this does not change the way in which MPD
    officers respond to reports of people openly carrying
    firearms. A few points:
    First, it is important to realize that the memorandum is
    advisory only, and is for “educational and informational”
    purposes. It does not in any way restrict the legal authority
    of officers to take action or of individual prosecutors to
    pursue charges.
    Second, the memo only addressed the applicability of the
    disorderly conduct statute to the open carrying of a firearm.
    It did not in any way address any other firearm-related
    statutes.
    Third, the memo confirms that officers in most
    circumstances can stop a person openly carrying a firearm in
    public to investigate possible criminal activity.
    Finally, a close reading of the memo makes it clear that the
    Attorney General’s position is simply that a disorderly
    conduct charge is not automatically appropriate anytime
    someone is openly carrying a firearm. The examples
    provided by the memo illustrate this:
    • “a hunter openly carrying a rifle or shotgun on his property
    during hunting season while quietly tracking game should not
    face a disorderly conduct charge. But if the same hunter
    carries the same rifle or shotgun through a crowded street
    while barking at passerby, the conduct may lose…its
    protection.”
    • “A person openly carrying a holstered handgun on his own
    property while doing lawn work should not face a disorderly
    conduct charge…if, however, a person brandishes a handgun
    in public, the conduct may lose its…protection.”
    So, MPD officers responding to reports of an individual
    openly carrying a firearm should continue to respond as was
    the case prior to this memo’s release. The suspect should
    generally be detained, using proper tactics to ensure officer
    and community safety. Officers should then conduct an
    investigation to determine whether an arrest is appropriate.
    To support a disorderly conduct charge it will continue to be
    necessary to show that the carrying of the firearm—under
    those particular circumstances—was the type of behavior
    that caused, or tends to cause, a disturbance. The location of
    the incident, the behavior of the suspect and the reactions of
    witnesses will all be relevant to this determination.
    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"

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

    Post imported post

    Having observed the last "Nazi rally" held in Madison at the state capitol building, I note that the Nazi's drew a crowd of thousands of angry and upset people. As far as I am aware no Nazi's were cited for disorderly conduct as a result of that crowd reaction. So, are we safe to assume that the "reactions of witnesses" must exceed that of the thousands of angry people on that day in order to be worthy of a d/o/c charge in Madison?
    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"

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    323

    Post imported post

    I am absolutely appalled at how few police officers know about the 4th and 14th amendments and what the U.S. Supreme court's opinions are in those regards. Madison is looking to be sued as well I see. I wonder of they teach anything about the constitution at police academies?

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    The Northwoods, lakeland area, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,170

    Post imported post

    That "Legal Update" is the biggest bunch of crap I have read recently.



    They seemd to have thought out their wording to say "That if a single person is offended by you exercising your right to keep and bear arms, you are guilty of disorderly conduct and will be arrested under that charge". isn't this exactly reasonthat the AG put out the memo , to saythat carrying a firearm by itself is not disorderly conduct and therefore the citizen should not be charged.

    Has anyone sent a copy of this bullschit to the Ag yet? Boy oh boy are they in for a big surprise when they start arresting people for simply carrying a firearm. does it say who authored this "legal Update"? are they in an actionable position for telling the police to harrass and arrest people for carrying a firearm?

    I think the Madison taxpayers are in for a world of hurt when the police start arresting people for carrying. I feel sorry for them.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    323

    Post imported post

    Forget the arrest, lacking reasonable suspicion of a crime, they do not even have the power to detain without looking at the possibility of a federal civil suit. Amazing stuff, really.

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

    Post imported post

    Nutczak wrote:
    They seemd to have thought out their wording to say "That if a single person is offended by you exercising your right to keep and bear arms, you are guilty of disorderly conduct and will be arrested under that charge". isn't this exactly reasonthat the AG put out the memo , to saythat carrying a firearm by itself is not disorderly conduct and therefore the citizen should not be charged.
    it seems impossible for some folks to understand that "disorderly conduct" is not related to the reactions of others.

  7. #7
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    New Berlin, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    844

    Post imported post

    The end game of ALL of these "police chief memo's" is the same. They will do everything they can to scare and intimidate you into not exercising your rights.

    But we know its legal, and we know if you do nothing wrong, you won't have a problem. We have a not-guilty verdict for Brad, we had 2 cases from Jesus where he was NEVER charged. Then we have an AG advisory memo, and we also have a lawsuit filed.

    If you let yourself be intimidated by ambiguous responses from police chiefs, then you need not ever discuss the law, you need not ever concern yourself with our state constitution. Because none of those matter if you are going to let a police chief float an ambiguous memo to scare you from exercising your rights.

    If the police chiefs make the law, then why don't we just call madison and tell them all to go home. We don't need you, police chiefs determine the law??? Bull$hit...

    People are open-carrying all over the state. Television stations anchors preface EVERY story with plain-as-day statements that "open carry is perfectly legal"

    Ed Flynn even got a leash thrown on him after his outrageous comments. Don't be afraid to go about your LAWFUL business. If you let unelected police chiefs with their biased and intentionally as ambiguous-as-possible statements keep you from what is legal to do, you are a slave to your own fear and you, for all practical purposes, live in a self-imposed police state.



  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Saukville, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    233

    Post imported post

    Max wrote:
    I wonder of they teach anything about the constitution at police academies?
    Nope. They don't teach them statutory or administrative law, either - they teach them to be mindless drones who follow department policy without question. Some fall through the cracks and become peace officers. Most become Cops.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Sonora Rebel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Gone
    Posts
    3,958

    Post imported post

    Rick Finsta wrote:
    Max wrote:
    I wonder of they teach anything about the constitution at police academies?
    Nope. They don't teach them statutory or administrative law, either - they teach them to be mindless drones who follow department policy without question. Some fall through the cracks and become peace officers. Most become Cops.
    Even when the acadamy teaches constitutional law... the departmental drone syndrome remains endemic. 'You will lick the hands that feed you"... all else is secondary. IL, MD, NJ, DC are prime examples.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    10

    Post imported post

    I'm not an organizer, but I'd attend if someone put together an OC trip through the farmers' market.

  11. #11
    Regular Member opusd2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Butt is in, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    453

    Post imported post

    Rick Finsta wrote:
    Max wrote:
    I wonder of they teach anything about the constitution at police academies?
    Nope. They don't teach them statutory or administrative law, either - they teach them to be mindless drones who follow department policy without question. Some fall through the cracks and become peace officers. Most become Cops.
    When I attended UW=Platteville 20 years ago starting out as a Criminal Justice major, we were taught rights. But granted, that was a long time ago and the instructor died midway through the course and then the syllabus changed. But I quickly became tired of the attitudes I encountered daily and what my future would entail, so I changed majors. Still, I learned a lot those two years worth of CJ core classes.
    I aim to misbehave

  12. #12
    Regular Member opusd2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Butt is in, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    453

    Post imported post

    FeralOne wrote:
    I'm not an organizer, but I'd attend if someone put together an OC trip through the farmers' market.
    Wow! That would be fun! However with my luck, I should probably just be a spectator with a camcorder for this event.
    I aim to misbehave

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Saukville, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    233

    Post imported post

    After my sister went into law enforcement, I started thinking about maybe work with a crime lab (this is, of course, before all the CSI shows; one of my roomates was a CSI in MN for an internship so I had a realistice view of the job).

    I took an elective CJ class, and I had to walk out after the second lecture, when the professor was spending most of the class explaining why the disparate number of blacks in the prison system meant that police and judges were racist. I decided if I ever go back, I'll skip the CJ stuff and just get a Juris Doctorate.

Posting Permissions

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