• 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.

Racine man not to be charged

bigdaddy1

Regular Member
Joined
May 7, 2009
Messages
1,320
Location
Southsider der hey
imported post

Bicyclist pointing gun not charged
By Associated Press


Posted: May. 15, 2009

Racine - A Racine bicyclist who pulled out his revolver to scare off a group of teens during an apparent robbery attempt won't be charged.

The man, 42, told police he was riding his bicycle May 1 when four teens knocked him off and seemed to be trying to rob him, so he pulled out the revolver he was carrying in a side holster, pointed it up and yelled, "Gun."

The teens fled, and he flagged down a police officer.

The man, who asked not to be identified, was treated at the scene for a wrist injury. Police escorted him home and returned his gun to him.

Racine County District Attorney Mike Nieskes sent him a letter Friday, saying he wouldn't be charged, even though he was violating a law by carrying a gun within 1,000 feet of a school.

"I have decided it would not be in the greater interest of justice in the community to charge you with violation of Wisconsin Statute regarding gun free zones," Nieskes wrote.

Nieskes noted that the man has no criminal record, and there was no showing of irresponsible use of the firearm.

He also cited a recent memo issued by Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen that people have a constitutional right to openly carry firearms, as long as they aren't violating restrictions set in other laws. But Van Hollen also said police have the right to check anyone openly carrying a gun.
 

paramedic70002

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
1,440
Location
Franklin, VA, Virginia, USA
imported post

I'm none too familiar with WI law on GFS zones but here in VA that would not fly. I'm assuming our armed victim was traveling down a city conveyance. Otherwise known as a "public right of way" which infers right to free travel. Probably a house nearly with guns inside too. The prosecutor was right to avoid the legal quagmire that charge would have entailed.
 

bigdaddy1

Regular Member
Joined
May 7, 2009
Messages
1,320
Location
Southsider der hey
imported post

I kinda wish he had tried to prosecute. Would have brought to light the stupidity of the 1000 foot rule and how difficult it is to simply walk down the street. However I'm sure that was the intention.
 

Axctal

Regular Member
Joined
May 13, 2007
Messages
24
Location
, ,
imported post

I am happy to live in Utah ... concealed permit exempts you from the school territory AND the school itself. An you do not have to conceal :) So you can go visit the school while open carrying.
 

Brass Magnet

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2009
Messages
2,818
Location
Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

paramedic70002 wrote:
I'm none too familiar with WI law on GFS zones but here in VA that would not fly. I'm assuming our armed victim was traveling down a city conveyance. Otherwise known as a "public right of way" which infers right to free travel. Probably a house nearly with guns inside too. The prosecutor was right to avoid the legal quagmire that charge would have entailed.

The wisconsin law factors in "knowledge".
From Wisconsin State statute 948.605:

(2) POSSESSION OF FIREARM IN SCHOOL ZONE. (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.

I beleive someone here described it something like: "Usually ignorance is no excuse but in this case ignorance is factored into the law."

In any case, my guess is either the DA actuallyhad justice in mind and decided not to prosecute, orhe didn't think they could prove that the guy knew he was in a school zone.


EditTo Add:Anarticle from CATO: http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/05/18/gun-free-school-zone-follies/


 
Top