Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 47

Thread: Uncased firearms in vehicle Bill debated in Wisconsin

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    103

    Post imported post

    Russ Decker is proposing a law to allow unloaded and uncased firearms in vehicles.

    http://www.stevenspointjournal.com/a...PJ02/906070337

    http://www.myfoxwausau.com/myfox/pag...;pageId=3.11.1What about the "gang bangers"?

    This is a win for our cause. This not only applys to rifles, but bows and handguns. Imagine not having to case and uncase your weapon. You could just leave it in the holster and pull the clip.

    I doubt this is going anyware. Probably just a ploy to win votes. A northwoods Democrat needs support of hunters.

    Now if we could just get the 1000 ft school zone law removed.


  2. #2
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    SOuth Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    503

    Post imported post

    Awesome at least some politician has some balls in this state! I'll e-mail my representatives and ask that they support the bill!



    Ben

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Waukesha, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    721

    Post imported post

    The vehicle carry law cannot be fixed without fixing the school zone in parallel. Being able to have a loaded or cased handgun in a car doesn't matter if your car is in a school zone in the city, since in a school zone it must be unloaded/encased.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    A Sheriff's response

    http://www.myfoxwausau.com/myfox/pag...;pageId=3.11.1

    Gun bill sparks controversy Senator proposes changing weapon casing law Last Edited: Monday, 08 Jun 2009, 6:15 PM CDT Created: Monday, 08 Jun 2009, 6:15 PM CDT Meg Bonacorsi

    Senator Russ Decker of Weston has introduced a bill that would change the way hunters can haul their weapons. He wants them to be able to carry uncased guns, bows and crossbows in their vehicles.
    But not everyone supports the bill.
    Portage County sheriff John Charewicz, who is also a hunting safety instructor says, "The part that's concerning to me is that people like the little gang bangers, the gangsters that want to have guns in their cars are now going to be within the law to a certain extent."
    But Senator Decker says his bill is geared towards hunters, "The gang bangers are law breakers, I'm more concerned about the law abiding citizens."
    But Charewicz thinks the bill is bad news, "It's just another example of a poorly written piece of legislation and I don't know what they're trying to accomplish, I mean I have no idea."
    Decker says not having to deal with a gun case is a matter of convenience, "It's just unnecessary for us to do it as long as it's unloaded. A lot of times you're hunting and go to your vehicle or someone else's vehicle and there's not a case in the vehicle that may have been left with somebody else."
    But Charewicz thinks going caseless could compromise the safety of his officers and the public,
    "Who are we kidding? These cars are going to be loaded while the car is moving and it has some real red flags for law enforcement. The bill is made for lazy hunters more than anything."
    Decker argues that 16 other states have laws that are similar to his bill, and theirs have been successful, "They have not had any increase in accidents or poaching so it just makes sense to give the sportsmen, the law abiding citizens a break."
    The sheriff is also concerned that if the bill passes.. people will be more tempted to shoot guns off from cars or roads.. which is illegal.
    And the bill applies to all guns, not just hunting rifles.
    Decker says he plans totalk with law enforcement agencies to work out a compromise because many don't support the bill.


  5. #5
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    SOuth Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    503

    Post imported post

    Smithman your vehicle does not count as private property? As long as your are not on school grounds I believe it may be considered private property and exempt from the wide reach of the school zone law. Then again thats just my presumption.

    Also not anti-law enforcement butas reading the article I thought to myself who gives a **** what the police think when it pertains to my rights. They do not uphold my rights they uphold the laws of society.



    Ben


  6. #6
    Centurion
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    New Berlin, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    844

    Post imported post

    I thought to myself who gives a @#$% what the police think when it pertains to my rights.
    Yeah, I thought the same thing. Why does it matter what police want. This is not a police state. If police had their way we'd have no freedom. We'd all be wearing ID badges on the outsideof our clothing, there would be police surveillance cameras on everystreet, everyone would submit aDNA sample for records so that crime scene evidence could be instantly matched. (hey, if you have nothing to hide, who would have a problem with that)

    Thats the endpoint of what it would take to make their job easiest and the reason we shouldn't seek police support for laws.



  7. #7
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818

    Post imported post

    I would be much more happy with this if the guns were allowed to be loaded. The last time I was in Wyoming, admittedly many years ago, the DNR regulations stated something like: "You may have an uncased firearm in your vehicle but safety mandates that it should be unloaded". In other words, you could have a loaded firearm but they didn't recommend it. I would much rather see this in our law.
    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481

    Post imported post

    Exactly BJA,
    Your vehicle is private property in that the police have to have consent to search with out a warrant. Unless there is evidence in plain view.

    Everyone should definitely ask their State Rep to support this Bill.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481

    Post imported post

    hugh jarmis wrote:
    If police had their way we'd have no freedom. We'd all be wearing ID badges on the outsideof our clothing, there would be police surveillance cameras on everystreet, everyone would submit aDNA sample for records so that crime scene evidence could be instantly matched. (hey, if you have nothing to hide, who would have a problem with that)

    Thats the endpoint of what it would take to make their job easiest and the reason we shouldn't seek police support for laws.
    Nik, You have just described the Prison System.

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481

    Post imported post

    Everyone should go on the Stevenspointjournel.com blog and post a comment to this article giving support to Senator Decker.

  11. #11
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    BJA wrote:
    Smithman your vehicle does not count as private property? As long as your are not on school grounds I believe it may be considered private property and exempt from the wide reach of the school zone law. Then again thats just my presumption.
    What does the statute say?? Does it not mention vehicles? Do vehicles not drive upon public real property?

    Com on folks - read the statutes, cite to authority.

  12. #12
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    Elysium wrote:
    This is a win for our cause. This not only applys to rifles, but bows and handguns. Imagine not having to case and uncase your weapon. You could just leave it in the holster and pull the clip.
    Huh?? Not till you repeal the concealed carry jurisprudance by statute or appeallate review - any gun (even long gun) inside a vehicle compartmewnt within reach of any human, including encased and unloaded or locked in a glove box or laying in plain sight on the seat IS CONCEALED UNLAWFULLY in Wisconsin - have you all reead the annotations in the concealed carry statute published with the code section?

    Sorry to rant here folks but come on, why do Wisconsin folks continue to have no idea about Wisconsin's gun laws?

    Until gun owners understand how draconian the statutes and jurisprudance is re concealed carry, things are not going to change!

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    SOuth Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    503

    Post imported post

    LOL Mikesomelaws in Wisconsin are contradictory! Thats why we have such problems interpreting them. Also I am not that familiar with private property laws. So I'll tackle this issue differently.



    948.605
    948.605
    Gun -
    (1)Definitions. In this section:



    (a) "Encased" has the meaning given in s. 167.31 (1) (b)
    .

    (ac) "Firearm" does not include any beebee or pellet-firing
    gun that expels a projectile through the force of air pressure or any starter pistol.

    (am) "Motor vehicle" has the meaning given in s. 340.01 (35)
    .

    (b) "
    School" has the meaning given in $xhitlist_md=target-id=0-0-0-350395]s. 948.61 (1) (b).

    (c) "
    School
    1. In or on the grounds of a
    school .

    2. Within 1,000 feet from the grounds of a
    school .

    (2)Possession of firearm in
    school
    (a) Any individual who knowingly possesses a firearm at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a
    school
    (b) Paragraph (a)
    does not apply to the possession of a firearm:

    1. On private property not part of
    school grounds;

    2. If the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by a political subdivision of the state or bureau of alcohol, tobacco and firearms in which political subdivision the
    school
    3. That is not loaded and is:

    a. Encased; or



    b. In a locked firearms rack that is on a motor vehicle;



    4. By an individual for use in a program approved by a
    school in the
    5. By an individual in accordance with a contract entered into between a
    school in the
    6. By a law enforcement officer or state-certified commission warden acting in his or her official capacity; or



    7. That is unloaded and is possessed by an individual while traversing
    school grounds for the purpose of gaining access to public or private lands open to hunting, if the entry on
    8. By a person who is legally hunting in a
    school forest if the

    (3)Discharge of firearm in a school
    (a) Any individual who knowingly, or with reckless disregard for the safety of another, discharges or attempts to discharge a firearm at a place the individual knows is a
    school
    (b) Paragraph (a)
    does not apply to the discharge of, or the attempt to discharge, a firearm:

    1. On private property not part of
    school grounds;

    2. As part of a program approved by a
    school in the
    3. By an individual in accordance with a contract entered into between a
    school in a school zone and the individual or an employer of the individual; or


    948.605(3)(b)4.
    4. By a law enforcement officer or state-certified commission warden acting in his or her official capacity.


    Okay so until we find out if driving your car with an uncased weapon on public roads counts as firearm not being possessed ON private property look at this. On private property not part of school grounds, could that actually mean your car? I am not as familiar with private property laws as I am firearm laws. The statute also reads " In a locked firearms rack On your vehicle" maybe that means we could carry them uncased, but they have to be locked in a firearms rack.


    Ben



  14. #14
    Campaign Veteran Flipper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,140

    Post imported post

    BJA wrote:
    LOL Mikesomelaws in Wisconsin are contradictory! Thats why we have such problems interpreting them. Also I am not that familiar with private property laws. So I'll tackle this issue differently.



    Wisconsin gun laws are drafted either bytree hugging attorneys living in Madison workingfor the legislature or by the DNR. Guess that explains the reason for mish-mash of gun laws we have.
    When in danger you can dial 911 and hope for the police to arrive a few minutes later armed with guns.
    Why do police carry guns?

    The Joyce Foundation funded firearm control empire:
    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...lFundingR1.png

    "Everything that we see is a shadow cast by that which we do not see." - Martin Luther King Jr.

  15. #15
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818

    Post imported post

    This is like the 4th time we've run into this discussion since I've been here and it hasn't been that long! I just posted something onthe subject in another thread.

    Can a law/caselaw post be stickied in the Wisconsin section "for reference only"? Something to at least have people read so the questions don't come up as much and so that more fruitful discussions can be had on how to get rid of these laws?
    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

  16. #16
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    BJA wrote:
    Okay so until we find out if driving your car with an uncased weapon on public roads counts as firearm not being possessed ON private property look at this. On private property not part of school grounds, could that actually mean your car? I am not as familiar with private property laws as I am firearm laws. The statute also reads " In a locked firearms rack On your vehicle" maybe that means we could carry them uncased, but they have to be locked in a firearms rack.


    Ben
    ben - the word "on" and ref to vehicle exceptions gives it away - the school zone statute exception for private property is private real proerty - real estate. vehicles are personal property.

    Meanwhile the concealed carry statute makes it unlawful to pssess any gun **arguably** within in arms reach inside a vehicle even while unloaded, encased, and/or in a locked glove box.

    Is this clear enough? Cite to case was in another thread.

    What the legislators need to do is fix the concealed carry statute - changing the encasement statute does not help anyone at all.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Waukesha, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    721

    Post imported post

    Mike wrote:
    What the legislators need to do is fix the concealed carry statute - changing the encasement statute does not help anyone at all.
    Agreed. Let me summarize the issues here:

    One can CC on their own property. One cannot CC in a vehicle since the statues require that your handgun be unloaded/encased in a car, period. This is the first clue that your car is not considered private property in the eyes of the state. The vehicle carry statute has been tested in court and no defense invoking the right of private property of a car has succeeded it appears.

    Basically any city or county road is public property. Having your own car on a public road does NOT induce some private property exemption. Cars traveling on public roads are NOT exempt from the school zone statute. Hence, BOTH laws have to be changed...to allow an non-cased handgun in a car and to not allow the same non-cased handgun in a school zone cannot exist. Don't misunderstand the italicized statement. For instance, you have the right to refuse a search of your car. You also have the right to refuse a search of your person. Does this mean that your person is now private property, and a gun concealed on your person is exempt? No, that has been tried in court and people have lost many times.

    I don't know about you guys but I'd rather be allowed to carry a loaded gun in my car, even if encased, rather than the other way around. Better yet have the state shove it and stop telling me how I can't protect myself in my own friggin car.

  18. #18
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    SOuth Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    503

    Post imported post

    True that SmithMan! Isn't it crazy how times change! We are totally reliant on "" Public"" roads that WE pay for but when it comes to protecting oursleves on OUR roads there is nothing that helps us......... Either way this uncased firearms bill is a step in the right direction. And if somehow it passed and I was out of a school zone HELL YEAH I WILL FOLLOW IT. But until then we shall conform to modern society where others are relied upon to protect us and personal rights are a thing the past.

    We have come far, and we are marching further. The only thing that keeps the pace from going faster is lack of Wisconsin Lawyers actually caring about their rights and joining us in this fight.



    FACT: we need more help, especially Wisconsin Certified Lawyers



    Ben

  19. #19
    Campaign Veteran Flipper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,140

    Post imported post

    BJA wrote:
    FACT: we need more help, especially Wisconsin Certified Lawyers



    Ben
    A reason to be a member of both the ACLU and the NRA.

    "The 1st Amendment defines America, the 2nd Amendment defends it"


    When in danger you can dial 911 and hope for the police to arrive a few minutes later armed with guns.
    Why do police carry guns?

    The Joyce Foundation funded firearm control empire:
    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...lFundingR1.png

    "Everything that we see is a shadow cast by that which we do not see." - Martin Luther King Jr.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Milwaukee, ,
    Posts
    155

    Post imported post

    I let my ACLU membership expire a few months ago after I read their position on the 2nd amendment-

    http://www.aclu.org/crimjustice/gen/...s20020304.html

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

    Post imported post

    gbu28 wrote:
    I let my ACLU membership expire a few months ago after I read their position on the 2nd amendment-

    http://www.aclu.org/crimjustice/gen/...s20020304.html
    It's because the ACLU is a tool of the left. Don't get me wrong, they understand and want people to exercise their rights (except for the second amendment). But interpreting the second amendment as a collective right is just so stupid it's laughable. The founding fathers didn't write the BOR to protect so called "collective rights".

  22. #22
    Campaign Veteran Flipper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,140

    Post imported post

    smithman wrote:
    gbu28 wrote:
    I let my ACLU membership expire a few months ago after I read their position on the 2nd amendment-

    http://www.aclu.org/crimjustice/gen/...s20020304.html
    It's because the ACLU is a tool of the left. Don't get me wrong, they understand and want people to exercise their rights (except for the second amendment). But interpreting the second amendment as a collective right is just so stupid it's laughable. The founding fathers didn't write the BOR to protect so called "collective rights".
    Let them know your feelings..... organizations, out of the need to survive, must reflect their members viewpoints. Thats why the election of blue dog democrats is so important in protecting 2nd Amendment rights. I bet if 18,000 members of a pro-gun organization joined the ACLU, they would decide toagree with the SCUS.

    When in danger you can dial 911 and hope for the police to arrive a few minutes later armed with guns.
    Why do police carry guns?

    The Joyce Foundation funded firearm control empire:
    http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...lFundingR1.png

    "Everything that we see is a shadow cast by that which we do not see." - Martin Luther King Jr.

  23. #23
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    , Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    908

    Post imported post

    BJA:

    The case Mike refers to where a person was convicted for carrying a concealed weapon because the gun was in a locked glove compartment is State v. Fry. I agree with Mike that the Wisconsin Supreme Court would likely find a firearm locked in a rack concealed, if the firearm is within reach. It could possibly avoid the SSCruling being that it more than likely would be very visiblebut then it would be in violation of s167.31(2)(b).

    The "or locked in rack attached to the vehicle "phrase is probably an argument against the constitutionality or the enforceabilty of the school zone statute or of 167.31. That is unless the SSC would rule that to avoid a problem the rack had to be attached to the vehicle out of arms reach which of course would make the typical pickup truck real window mounts illegal and would still require the firearm to be encased even if locked in the rack in order to avoid the reach of 167.31.

    It is absolutely impossible to second guess how the Wisconsin Supreme Court will rule on any firearm issue. Judged by other SSC rulings it is my opinon that the WSSC is only too happy to let Wisconsin exist as a "police state".

    There is no question that there is an enforcement conflict between the school zone statute, the vehicle carry statute and the concealed carry prohibition statute. The SSC keeps "spinning" around the solution.



  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Waukesha, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    721

    Post imported post

    Doug Huffman wrote:
    Decker argues that 16 other states have laws that are similar to his bill, and theirs have been successful, "They have not had any increase in accidents or poaching so it just makes sense to give the sportsmen, the law abiding citizens a break."
    The sheriff is also concerned that if the bill passes.. people will be more tempted to shoot guns off from cars or roads.. which is illegal.
    And the bill applies to all guns, not just hunting rifles.
    This is funny. If I read it right, the bill does not allow loaded guns, so how could one shoot one from their car, Mr. Sheriff?

    You know that people will use the poaching argument as a way to attack the bill. "large numbers of law-abiding hunters will become poachers if this bill is passed" they will probably say. Surely the current vehicle laws keep all poachers from hunting from their vehicles. Since they care so much about laws it seems.

  25. #25
    Opt-Out Members
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    31

    Post imported post

    WOW......all I can say about Wisconsin and it's draconian laws.



    WOW

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •