A time for action: County and Local "park" ordinances IMPORTANT

imported post

Here is the response I received from Calumet County Corporate Counsel:

RE: County Ordinance 46-2(d)‏ From: You may not know this sender.Mark as safe|Mark as junk Sent: Thu 7/30/09 1:03 PM To: 'James Gleason' (j.gleason@hotmail.com) Cc: Jay Shambeau (Shambeau.Jay@co.calumet.wi.us); Lisa Jodar (Jodar.Lisa@co.calumet.wi.us)
Dear Mr. Gleason:

As my legal assistant mentioned to you in her response to you earlier this month, she forwarded the information you sent to me. I am the attorney that represents Calumet County and will review the information when time permits. However, I will not respond to you with any legal opinion. I do not answer legal questions that members of the public submit. My role is to answer legal questions submitted to me by the Board of Supervisors, Committees, Commissions and Boards of Calumet County, county officials and department heads. For your information, ordinance changes come from the recommendation of either a county committee or two supervisors. Thank you for your concern.

[size=Here is what I sent back to her:]
RE: County Ordinance 46-2(d)‏ From: James Gleason (j.gleason@hotmail.com) Sent: Thu 7/30/09 1:14 PM To: captain.pamela@co.calumet.wi.us
Ms Captain,

Thank you for responding to my e-mail. It is regret ful that you can not respond to tax payers inquiries. With that I will send a copy of my concerns and your reply to the County Executives as well as the Attorney Generals Office.

Thank you for your time

James A. Gleason
15 lehner St.
Chilton, WI. 53014

I am now contacting the Attorney Generals Office and will post that reply when received as well

imported post

J.Gleason wrote:

Here is the response I received from Calumet County Corporate Counsel:

RE: County Ordinance 46-2(d)‏

From:

Sent: Thu 7/30/09 1:03 PM

To: 'James Gleason' (j.gleason@hotmail.com)

Cc: Jay Shambeau (Shambeau.Jay@co.calumet.wi.us); Lisa Jodar (Jodar.Lisa@co.calumet.wi.us)

Dear Mr. Gleason:

As my legal assistant mentioned to you in her response to you earlier this month, she forwarded the information you sent to me. I am the attorney that represents Calumet County and will review the information when time permits. However, I will not respond to you with any legal opinion. I do not answer legal questions that members of the public submit. My role is to answer legal questions submitted to me by the Board of Supervisors, Committees, Commissions and Boards of Calumet County, county officials and department heads. For your information, ordinance changes come from the recommendation of either a county committee or two supervisors. Thank you for your concern.

[size=Here is what I sent back to her:]

RE: County Ordinance 46-2(d)‏
From: James Gleason (j.gleason@hotmail.com)
Sent: Thu 7/30/09 1:14 PM
To: captain.pamela@co.calumet.wi.us .
Ms Captain,

Thank you for responding to my e-mail. It is regret ful that you can not respond to tax payers inquiries. With that I will send a copy of my concerns and your reply to the County Executives as well as the Attorney Generals Office.

Thank you for your time

James A. Gleason
15 lehner St.
Chilton, WI. 53014

I am now contacting the Attorney Generals Office and will post that reply when received as well

Click to expand...

imported post

I contacted the AG's office and they told me to Fax my concerns along with copies of the emails to their office. I have Faxed the info and will post any replies I receive.

imported post

My emails to Dane County Executive and to Scott Walker:

Dear County Executive Kathleen Falk:

It appears that Dane County ordinance # 53.03 (2)(a) is in conflict with state statute 66.0409.

Could you request an official opinion from the Attorney General or corporate counsel so that residents of Dane County have the confidence and CLARITY in exercising rights that they are entitled to as State of Wisconsin residents.

Specifically, I would like clarification be requested that the County ordinance, which prohibits ANY possession of a firearm in a county park, is pre-empted because it is more stringent than the state statute which only prohibits possession of a firearm in state parks.

Please provide me withacopyof your request(s) if and when made.

Sincerely,

Name and Address


Dear Candidate for Governor Scott Walker:

It appears that there are counties with firearm ordinances in conflict with state statute 66.0409.

Could you request an official opinion, as a county executive, from the Attorney General so that Wisconsin residents have confidence and CLARITY in exercising rights that they are entitled to as State of Wisconsin residents.

Specifically, I would like clarification be requested that the County ordinance, which prohibits ANY possession of a firearm in a county park, is pre-empted because it is more stringent than the state statute which only prohibits possession of a firearm in state parks.

Sincerely,

Name and Address

imported post

ive been hounding him on twitter also.. a much more public forum...

let him know that we are his supporters. and if we dont get an answer some of us will not be for long.

imported post

Yeah, I posted a comment on his facebook page too

imported post

Email sent.

imported post

Well I know some of you won't agree with this but, it has been 24 hrs since I sent my last e-mail to Scott Walker. It wasn't my first email to him is was probably my third. I still have not received any acknowledgment from Scott walker at all.

After browsing Walkers campaign home page, I have noticed that he has absolutely no information on there as to his stance on the 2nd Amendment or any other gun rights, laws or statutes. He is running his campaign basically on the issue of jobs.

That's great. Good for him.

At this point it is my decision that I will not be voting for Scott walker. I think he is a fake and obviously any response he puts forward concerning gun rights is simply a front and a cover up to win votes. He should change his name to Scott Waffler.

In the past he has made comments supporting 2A and now he stands mute.

Next!

imported post

Thank you for finding some skepticism.

The only politician that we might trust is one that has bled political blood for the Second Amendment. The best candidate would be one that was clearly unseated for his pro-2A stance.

Read The Real Nature of Politics by Michael I Rothfeld, now at http://www.vcdl.org/new/realpolitics.htm

Believe nothing you read or hear without verifying it yourself unless it fits your preexisting worldview.

imported post

Doug Huffman wrote:

The only politician that we might trust is one that has bled political blood for the Second Amendment. The best candidate would be one that was clearly unseated for his pro-2A stance.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately I don't believe there is any such person running for Governor at this time.

I am still considering mark Todd because of some recent posts on his web page concerning Guns.

http://www.marktoddforgovernor.com/issues_guns_and_hunting.html

There is an article there under Proper and Useful use of Gun Control.

He may not have written the article and it may not be his personal opinion. However, he did allow it to be posted on his web page.

imported post

OK as promised I will post the reply I received from the AG's Office and then another bit of information I received afterward.

As you would all of expected this is the response I received from the AG's Office:

imported post

After that response from the AG's Office I contacted the County Chairperson and this is what he told me:

"The county is not in the position to enforce the fire arms ordinance for county parks because of the court of appeals case that was just heard last week."

He then asked if I had heard about it.

I told him, no.

He said, " the county lost a case in the State Court of Appeals concerning the regulation of Wind Turbines."

I asked him how this was related to the fire arms ordinance concerning the possession of fire arms in county parks.

He said, "It is similar in that, the county can not create an ordinance that is more stringent then the state statutes."

He then said, " The county is appealing, but until that appeal is heard and answered, the county is not in the position to enforce the fire arms ordinance."

Now we need to figure out how we can use this state wide.

Here is the case in point:

imported post

I also sent this email to the county chair and I am awaiting a response.

Mr. Barribeau,

Thank you for sending this information. I was wondering if the Calumet County Sheriff's Department is aware then that the fire arms ordinance would be unenforceable as it would be more stringent then the state statutes concerning fire arms possession. In that the statute restricts the possession of fire arms in state parks but not county parks, which would create a greater area restricting fire arms possession and therefore be more stringent then the state statute. At this point any enforcement could be subject to a civil suit in equity, which would be an unnecessary cost to the tax payers.

Again, thank you for your time.

James Gleason

imported post

Oooh, is it time for a picnic in Milwaukee?

imported post

It may be time for a picnic in every county.

imported post

It seems a reach from 'cannot create an ordinance more stringent' to 'cannot enforce an existing ordinance.' Remember, the Chairman is not likely an attorney either.

imported post

No he is not an attorney, but from what I gathered from our conversation he has already discussed the issue with the corporate counsel.

Any update on county park laws?

What does this mean now? Has anything changed for the county park firearm laws? I plan on grilling on the 4th of July (tomorrow) in Washington Park with some family and given the area, I would much prefer to have my handgun on my person.

Washington Park is a Milwaukee County park. If I understand correctly, then OC is "frowned upon" but perfectly legal.

I did some searching online to confirm the statements in this thread and couldn't find anything concerning Milwaukee County park firearm laws except from this forum. This post is the most relevant info I could find. Any clarification would be awesome and very much appreciated.

P.S. Sorry to drag an old post back to the top.

Sadly no....

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/s...rks&highlight=milwaukee+county+park+ordinance

Another relevent thread ^




The ordinance, and my take on things

Milwaukee county ordinance 47.05





Use of firearms and fireworks; hunting with bow and arrow; trapping. No person shall carry, fire or discharge any gun, pistol or firearm, nor any rocket, torpedo or other fireworks of any description, nor shall any person engage in trapping within any park or parkway without a written permit of the department of parks, recreation and culture; nor shall any person hunt with bow and arrow within any park or parkway. No person shall carry, fire or discharge any gun, pistol or firearm, nor any rocket, torpedo or other fireworks of any description upon any premises owed or leased by Milwaukee County which is not part of the county parks and parkways. The word "gun" shall include airgun.



Now some people say that it is similar to the state park statute but in fact it is way more restrictive. You can't possess a gun at all in a county par, which is a total gun ban while the state park statute states you may carry a gun ANYTIME as long as it is unloaded and encased. Also there is a huge difference between county and state parks!! Not to mention we have 99 state parks and 120 or so M. CTY parks.



Here is the state park statute
29.089(2)
(3)'] no person may have in his or her possession or under his or her control a firearm on land located in state parks or state fish hatcheries unless the firearm is unloaded and enclosed within a carrying case.


It is of my belief that it would need to be challenged in court (someone getting prosecuted for violating 47.05) or maybe another court method not discussed, and not in my base of knowledge or...... we would need a huge change in the county board of supervisors. The second appears not likely to happen. However




Ben

Crap. Oh well. Thanks for the clarification BJA. I'll just head to a park in Brookfield. I don't want to risk Washington Park.

Caution over Convenience.