Shooting in Milwaukee

imported post

Doug Huffman wrote:

I think that I disagree and wonder if the 'or' is intended to be inclusive disjunction or is intended to be exclusive disjunction. What was the legislative intent? Do any Wisconsin cities that are not authorized village powers prohibit discharge?

Click to expand...

Cities are bigger than villages which are bigger than towns.

My reading is: If you're a city or a village, you can make prohibitions. If you're a town board, you can only do it if your "town meeting" has authorized you to act like a bigger unit - a village.

I'd venture to say most cities and villages have prohibitions on discharge and some carve out exceptions for hunting, etc.

If it is read the way you're trying to read it....then no city would be able to because cities don't have "town meetings" that can authorize a "town board" to act like a "village". And why would a city's "town meeting" authorize its "town board" to act like a _smaller_ unit (village)?

Why would a Village need to have it's "town meeting" authorize its "town board" to act like the village it is?

Further, Chapter 60 of WI statutes applies only to towns and how they conduct business.

Ch. 59 is for counties
Ch. 61 is for villages
Ch. 62 is for cities....

imported post

Village powers are broad and expansive and, I am taught by WTA that, they are given wide latitude in judicial interpretation due to Constitutional Home Rule provisions.

imported post

Doug Huffman wrote:

Village powers are broad and expansive and, I am taught by WTA that, they are given wide latitude in judicial interpretation due to Constitutional Home Rule provisions.

Click to expand...

Which is further support for my reading.

WI's Home Rule amendment applies to cities and villages.

It does not apply to counties or towns...thus my reading that cities and villages may prohibit, but towns may only prohibit if they have been authorized under the state statutes that deal with towns.

What this does mean, however, is that no _county_ restriction on discharge of firearms is now permissible.

imported post

I'm no legislator (thank goodness) but if I were one...and I were drafting it to read the way you're interpreting, I would write something like:

(b) Nothing in this section prohibits a city, village or town from
enacting an ordinance or adopting a resolution that restricts the
discharge of a firearm, provided such city, village or town is authorized to exercise village powers under s. 60.22 (3)

Click to expand...

imported post

AaronS wrote:

The last thing Milwaukee wants is to give case law as to CCW. So no charges are filed when CCW saves your life.

Click to expand...

+1