-
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.
-
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.
Green Bay "Leaders" Want Guns Out of Parks
- Thread starter Mike
- Start date
Interceptor_Knight
Regular Member
imported post
Dude.... please don't spam multiple threads.....
Dude.... please don't spam multiple threads.....
Interceptor_Knight
Regular Member
imported post
There is a fact which is becoming more and more obvious to me. The City Attorneys' office and 3 members of the Park Committee may want guns out of parks, but they can not keep them out and this proposed change to the code will not prohibit anyone from legally bringing their firearms to the parks and carrying them there. This proposed language merely hinders the choice of manorby which you may carry your firearm in the City Parks.
Even with this language, you may carry your firearm on your body. It simply will be less accessible than traditional "open" carry. You may still open carry with your firearm unloaded and enclosed in a case. Not "fully enclosed", not "encased" with no prohibition on part of your firearm being exposed. The City is inavertently adopting a hunting ordinance, not a carry ordinance.
There is a fact which is becoming more and more obvious to me. The City Attorneys' office and 3 members of the Park Committee may want guns out of parks, but they can not keep them out and this proposed change to the code will not prohibit anyone from legally bringing their firearms to the parks and carrying them there. This proposed language merely hinders the choice of manorby which you may carry your firearm in the City Parks.
Even with this language, you may carry your firearm on your body. It simply will be less accessible than traditional "open" carry. You may still open carry with your firearm unloaded and enclosed in a case. Not "fully enclosed", not "encased" with no prohibition on part of your firearm being exposed. The City is inavertently adopting a hunting ordinance, not a carry ordinance.
Landose_theghost
Regular Member
imported post
Interceptor_Knight wrote:
Interceptor_Knight wrote:
I'm not following you on this one...so we can open carry our guns so long as they are in cases? and not in a holster?
Interceptor_Knight
Regular Member
imported post
Landose_theghost wrote:
Landose_theghost wrote:
My premise is that some type of holsters are "cases"... And yes, you may still carry an "unloaded and cased" firearm.
N6ATF
Banned
imported post
Interceptor_Knight wrote:
Interceptor_Knight wrote:
Traces of CA's BS Unloaded Open Carry law here... which needs to die a gruesome death.
J.Gleason
Banned
imported post
Just a thought. If they want to stop you from having Open carry Picnics in Parks then why not have Open Carry Block Party's?
Or Open Carry Street dances?
Just a thought. If they want to stop you from having Open carry Picnics in Parks then why not have Open Carry Block Party's?
Or Open Carry Street dances?
Mike
Site Co-Founder
imported post
J.Gleason wrote:
I guess you could apply for a street closing permit to hold a block party
Is that what the city "leaders" want?
J.Gleason wrote:
I guess you could apply for a street closing permit to hold a block party
Is that what the city "leaders" want?
J.Gleason
Banned
imported post
Mike wrote:
Obviously they don't want us in Parks so they must want us on the streets. :celebrate
Mike wrote:
Could they legally deny it? I mean simply because of the cause.J.Gleason wrote:
I guess you could apply for a street closing permit to hold a block party
Is that what the city "leaders" want?
Obviously they don't want us in Parks so they must want us on the streets. :celebrate
Mike
Site Co-Founder
imported post
J.Gleason wrote:
First find out of the city grants permits to folks who want to hold a block party and on what grounds - then have somebody who meets the criteria apply - don't mention anything about guns - no permit is needed to open carry in Wisconsin. it may not have to be a whole street - maybe a cul desac, maybe an alley, maybe a vacabnt lot owned by the City which is not a park, etc.
There is always more than one way to skin a cat.
J.Gleason wrote:
Mike wrote:Could they legally deny it? I mean simply because of the cause.J.Gleason wrote:
I guess you could apply for a street closing permit to hold a block party
Is that what the city "leaders" want?
Obviously they don't want us in Parks so they must want us on the streets. :celebrate
First find out of the city grants permits to folks who want to hold a block party and on what grounds - then have somebody who meets the criteria apply - don't mention anything about guns - no permit is needed to open carry in Wisconsin. it may not have to be a whole street - maybe a cul desac, maybe an alley, maybe a vacabnt lot owned by the City which is not a park, etc.
There is always more than one way to skin a cat.
Interceptor_Knight
Regular Member
imported post
J.Gleason wrote:
J.Gleason wrote:
The goal is not to have "events". Events are only held for education. The goal is to open carry during your mundane daily tasks. If people are only willing to carry at events, then it is a right not exercised...... and they win.
J.Gleason
Banned
imported post
Interceptor_Knight wrote:
Just because you are having a Block Party doesn't mean you can not educate.
Besides it is a great way to educate your neighbors, who will not be afraid to ask you questions.
No said anything about only carrying at events. The point is you know as well as I do that the picnics in the parks draw attention. So the city is trying to stop us from having our picnics in the Parks (In the manner which we see appropriate).
They can't stop you from having a picnic, block party or "event" on your street. As Mike said, there is no permit to open carry needed or available.
Simply apply for a permit to close the street and have fun.
How many people stopped by your event in the park and were able to be educated?
How many people pass by your street on a daily basis?
Remember strength in numbers.
Interceptor_Knight wrote:
Then why worry about Parks when you will get more attention on the Street?
Just because you are having a Block Party doesn't mean you can not educate.
Besides it is a great way to educate your neighbors, who will not be afraid to ask you questions.
No said anything about only carrying at events. The point is you know as well as I do that the picnics in the parks draw attention. So the city is trying to stop us from having our picnics in the Parks (In the manner which we see appropriate).
They can't stop you from having a picnic, block party or "event" on your street. As Mike said, there is no permit to open carry needed or available.
Simply apply for a permit to close the street and have fun.
How many people stopped by your event in the park and were able to be educated?
How many people pass by your street on a daily basis?
Remember strength in numbers.
Interceptor_Knight
Regular Member
imported post
The best solution is to keep having picnics in the parks and bring your guns in addition to Open Carry around town in addition to Open Carry block parties, etc. Open Carry in order to make it ordinary and no longer extraordinary.
They win if we stop bringing guns to parks even if this passes.
The best solution is to keep having picnics in the parks and bring your guns in addition to Open Carry around town in addition to Open Carry block parties, etc. Open Carry in order to make it ordinary and no longer extraordinary.
They win if we stop bringing guns to parks even if this passes.
Mike
Site Co-Founder
imported post
Interceptor_Knight wrote:
Interceptor_Knight wrote:
Yeah, the idea is to keep open carrying - I was just what iffing if the ordiance passes - we should work to block passage - no other localitiy has passed any park bans since the AG memo - have you all started emailing the cityc ouncilmen? Sombody should draft and post an action item pre-formatted to start pounding the council members.
Interceptor_Knight
Regular Member
imported post
Ihave been talking to them on the phone in addition to E-mails. Everyone in Green Bay should be contacting their Alderman especially but also contact the remainder also. The theme of my recent posts is one of thethemes of my presentation to the council for Tuesday. Screaming about 2nd Amendment rights is not the way to pursuade those opposed to guns. Illustrating that this Code will not prevent guns in parks is just one of the points I will make. The source of the language is an Anti Hunting in State Parks Statute, not an Anti Carry in Parks Statute. It hinders Open Carry but does not prevent it.
Ihave been talking to them on the phone in addition to E-mails. Everyone in Green Bay should be contacting their Alderman especially but also contact the remainder also. The theme of my recent posts is one of thethemes of my presentation to the council for Tuesday. Screaming about 2nd Amendment rights is not the way to pursuade those opposed to guns. Illustrating that this Code will not prevent guns in parks is just one of the points I will make. The source of the language is an Anti Hunting in State Parks Statute, not an Anti Carry in Parks Statute. It hinders Open Carry but does not prevent it.
Shotgun
Wisconsin Carry, Inc.
imported post
Doug Huffman wrote:
Sorry Doug, now we're just picking on you!
Doug Huffman wrote:
It's solecism.
Sorry Doug, now we're just picking on you!
J.Gleason
Banned
imported post
Interceptor_Knight wrote:
Now that is what I call compromise.:banghead:
I am not trying to be a critic here, but going into the meeting with any thought of compromise on any part of this issue is going to result in a loss.
We are not talking about hunting here and neither is the City Park Commission.
They are proposing a ban on fire arms in City Parks. Not a ban on hunting in City Parks.
I would understand your point if they were only looking to pass an ordinance banning the discharge of a fire arm in City Parks. From what I understand this is not the case.
Am I wrong?
Interceptor_Knight wrote:
So we can have an Open Carry in a case picnic?
Now that is what I call compromise.:banghead:
I am not trying to be a critic here, but going into the meeting with any thought of compromise on any part of this issue is going to result in a loss.
We are not talking about hunting here and neither is the City Park Commission.
They are proposing a ban on fire arms in City Parks. Not a ban on hunting in City Parks.
I would understand your point if they were only looking to pass an ordinance banning the discharge of a fire arm in City Parks. From what I understand this is not the case.
Am I wrong?
Interceptor_Knight
Regular Member
imported post
J.Gleason wrote:
I agree 100% that anything less than a majority NO vote is a loss for us. I am making no attempt or offer at a compromise. My point is that a "win" for them really will not be a win. They need to be made aware that the language they are attempting to get passed is usedto curtail hunting in State Parks. It is not used to ban guns.
Their intention is nothing less than to ban guns from Green Bay City Parks. We will not be able to change the minds of those rabidly opposed to guns. It just isn't going to happen. There are several council members who are already on our side. We should encourage them and thank them for their support. It is the group which may be on the fence with the issue whom I am targeting.
I wish to make them aware that they will NOT stop picnics in City Parks where guns will be legally carried by passing this absurd Code change. This awareness may discourage some from voting yes.
J.Gleason wrote:
I agree 100% that anything less than a majority NO vote is a loss for us. I am making no attempt or offer at a compromise. My point is that a "win" for them really will not be a win. They need to be made aware that the language they are attempting to get passed is usedto curtail hunting in State Parks. It is not used to ban guns.
Their intention is nothing less than to ban guns from Green Bay City Parks. We will not be able to change the minds of those rabidly opposed to guns. It just isn't going to happen. There are several council members who are already on our side. We should encourage them and thank them for their support. It is the group which may be on the fence with the issue whom I am targeting.
I wish to make them aware that they will NOT stop picnics in City Parks where guns will be legally carried by passing this absurd Code change. This awareness may discourage some from voting yes.
J.Gleason
Banned
imported post
Have you had any face to face conversations with any of these committee members?
Anyone can say anything in an email or over the phone but body language says a lot.
How many of them are opposed at this time?
Have you had any face to face conversations with any of these committee members?
Anyone can say anything in an email or over the phone but body language says a lot.
How many of them are opposed at this time?
Interceptor_Knight
Regular Member
imported post
5face to face so far. Monday I hope to contact more and have a good idea what we are up against.
5face to face so far. Monday I hope to contact more and have a good idea what we are up against.