Greenfield Gun Laws

imported post

Town cop is probably not commissioned to enforce state law. - from Kalispell, MT

imported post

Meeting time is 7:00pm Tuesday the 15th.




[align=center]Tues., Sept. 15[/align]




[align=center]7:00 PM[/align]




[align=center]Common Council[/align]

From attached PDF (bolded by me):

9. Citizen Commentary




[align=left]27. City Attorney’s Report:[/align]



[align=left]a. Ordinance amending Section 3.12(11) of the Municipal Code relating to Police Department fees[/align]



[align=left](Legislative 8/17/09)[/align]



[align=left]b. Ordinance amending Chapter 10 of the Municipal Code relating to offenses against State laws subject to forfeiture with regard to firearms (Legislative 8/17/09)[/align]



[align=left]************************************************[/align]



[align=left]I will be there. I do not believe they have thought this through, and would like to politely discuss with them the error of their ways.[/align]



[align=left][/align]

imported post

Doug Huffman wrote:

Town cop is probably not commissioned to enforce state law. - from Kalispell, MT

Click to expand...

I wouldthink that all local cops would be able to do that, but I guess...

If I get a better understanding of this all, I will try to ask them about that.

imported post

So, why then does each political subdivision have a law enforcement agency if the junior-est and the senior-est can each enforce the other's law?

"We're from the World Police, ma'am, here to cite you for smoking in bed."

imported post

Folks - my bet is that this is about revenue & publicity - if the local police cite on a local ordinance they can keep the fine money in many or most states.

Here is my suggestion - let's take this opportunity to explain our agenda to pair back the 1,000 ft. school zone gun ban and introducing the constitutional concept of "lawful purpose" into statutory law.

So this idea would be to have the following position: That we do not oppose the cty effort to localize the enforcement of state criminal law, we believe the 1,000 ft.school zone to be constitutionally overbroad regulation as evidenced by multiple DA's recently refusing to charge folks with violating the zone.

To conform the local school gun ban enforcement effort to what the constitutonal requires, we recommend that the Council re-structure the school zone gun ban to only make it unlawful to open carry a handgun within the 1,000 ft. zone around the school if carried for an "unlawful purpose." The ban at the school itself would continue as per state law with the state law exceptions intact.

Make sense? We could get great publicity on this issue and gain signatures on the petition as well.

imported post

Makes perfect sense to me. Is Greenfield the place to start?
Or should we start with the person whom authored the legislation?

imported post

A (very) little light just turned on.. I think I do understand this now. A show of force, and a good way to get some extra money. Two of the State Statutes have fines that are a felony.One could get you 3.5 years, and $25,000. I guess the city lawyer saw that $25,000, and thought it would be real nice to try to get the big money!

imported post

Thanks to ALL that did respond to this issue, and for the new stuff I have learned, again. IANAL, and never want to be, but it sure does look like we have to be a little...

So, we might not be able to stop Greenfield from adoptingthe state laws. But we can let them know that we do not want them to do this. If no people want it, it should fail?...

Also,this IS a great time to bring up 10.01 of local law. It is one of the "no people can carry" laws. It should be rewritten. I am also going to show them a copy of the Milwaukee school zone map, and ask how I should protect myself when I go for a nice long walk. I would like a better form of protection then the Mayor of Milwaukee has. The cell phone just don't cut it. And the ideato use my face to stop a club, just won't work for me.

imported post

Well, I tried, AaronS tried - they passed it anyway.

imported post

Well I did see ya on the news, but I guess it did not help at all.

With onlyfour people at the meeting, I fear we looked like a joke. Again none from Greenfield even came. The people that made the change, do not have any idea of state gun laws at all. The city attorney has his ownagenda going on.

I can only guess that this will become the new norm in every small town in the state. If you do go to Greenfield, bring cash ($3-4k)!

Did give them a page with the Milwaukee School Zones, asked how I could take a walk... Also asked that code 10.01 be fixed to become "in line" with state law, but no go... Again only four people, what could we do? And we were all from outside of the city... And only two spoke... And one of them can not speak in public well (me)!


Oh well, it was my best try for you in the City of Greenfield (40,000 weak). You suck!:cuss: This is what you get. I should have not spoken out for you when the sign law was up for vote.:banghead: Trust me, my wife and I will do our best to never return. I bought my wife's last car in your town! Never again...:banghead:

Thanks for yourGovernments time (a few are users)... I have a real thing for Ald. Linda Lubotsky, and will miss her...:shock:

:?Aaron:?

imported post

Doug Huffman wrote:

Town cop is probably not commissioned to enforce state law. - from Kalispell, MT

Click to expand...

From what was said, I guess it was more "the honor of the City of Greenfield needs to be protected", and if the State DA wont press the case, the local Greenfield DA will still take your cash ($3k-4k max.) to help deter that crime. So if people see that the state will never do a case for the school zone, Greenfield still can, but no jail, just cash. Hey, I do not know, is this normal? It is less a fine than the State would have given. But if the State tells me "no case" is that not the law of the land? I have no clue, IANAL at all...

I can say that if I were 15 years younger, I would start law school.

imported post

I missed it, waiting for 12 to post video. Curious to see what 12 used, and how things were spun.

imported post

It's actually quite common. Local jurisdictions often have the same or similar laws as those at the State level and if the State declines to prosecute, the municipality often does. Years ago I was nailed for operating with a suspended license in Brookfield (City of, I believe). I received notice in the mail to arrive at the Brookfield courthouse on such and such date. While I was waiting for my case to be called, the same cop who stopped me started talking to me like we were old college buddies and informed me they had recommended to the County that State charges for operating while suspended be issued but they declined because it was my first offense. Thus, he said Brookfield municipality was charging me with it (which if I recall correctly had less severe penalties but I don't know exactly).
We also do background checks on people at my work and we see all the time people charged with the same things, some at the State level (circuit court), other's at the local level, municipal court.

imported post

Oh and I just remembered something from law class, which was a few years back. You can also be charged for the same thing (a specific act) in EACH jurisidiction you violated the law and it's not double jeopardy. Now, we were specifically talking about people charged at the State level, being found not guilty, and then charged at the Federal level(mostly civil rights type things) so I don't know if that same relationship exists between local laws and the State laws, it may not, or may vary between different States. I know it exists between State laws and Federal laws but I have no cite for it. In practice, I don't think it happens often.

correction: I believe it was my criminal law class actually, taught by one of the retired detectives from the Dahmer case...and since I mention him- quick story. He would often tell us real life incidents he encountered. 2 gun related ones I can think of. The first was regarding a foot chase between one cop and one suspect led led into a dark alleyway. (I forget a lot of the detail now but not the important parts). At some point a gun battle erupted between the two. Both emptied their guns. Neither was hit. It was determined they were about 6-7 feet apart at the time of the shooting.

A different story was a robbery had occurred near Marquette. Female officer in the area spotted suspect, pulled up and jumped out of squad. Suspect fired, officer returned fire, hitting suspect numerous times. Suspect jumped up and took off. Later caught. Both stories were about what people can/cannot do in a gun battle, and it's all very unpredictable.

imported post

It kind of came across to me that they weredoing thisfor the money/revenue generation.

I'll get some rest tonite, then decide what to take up next.

imported post

If I ever get a choice, I want to spin a wheel. It would make it more like a game show. Would not even need a judge. Just spin and see what you get. One of the things on the wheel must be a hot poker, for the bad people.

imported post

ROOK_WI wrote:

It kind of came across to me that they were doing this for the money/revenue generation.

I'll get some rest tonite, then decide what to take up next.

 

Click to expand...

I lived in Greenfield for a few years (would never move back). I would definitely not rule that out as the motivating factor. After all, they have to pay for that brand new Justice Center they built. I'm only saying that they are allowed to do it.

imported post

I would agree with you, yes they can.

I am seven years removed from Greenfield, grew up in the area of 34th & St. Francis - far northeast corner of the city behind Point Loomis.

imported post

ROOK_WI wrote:

I would agree with you, yes they can.

I am seven years removed from Greenfield, grew up in the area of 34th & St. Francis - far northeast corner of the city behind Point Loomis.

Click to expand...

50th and Layton. Back then if you drove a car past, say midnight, and you had the unfortunate circumstance at some point to have a Greenfield PD behind you, you WERE getting stopped and they WERE going to find out what your business was.

It doesn't seem to be that way any more as I drive my cycle through there at night a lot and have never been stopped. Not sure though.

imported post

AaronS wrote:

Well I did see ya on the news, but I guess it did not help at all.

With onlyfour people at the meeting, I fear we looked like a joke. Again none from Greenfield even came. The people that made the change, do not have any idea of state gun laws at all. The city attorney has his ownagenda going on.

I can only guess that this will become the new norm in every small town in the state. If you do go to Greenfield, bring cash ($3-4k)!

Did give them a page with the Milwaukee School Zones, asked how I could take a walk... Also asked that code 10.01 be fixed to become "in line" with state law, but no go... Again only four people, what could we do? And we were all from outside of the city... And only two spoke... And one of them can not speak in public well (me)!


Oh well, it was my best try for you in the City of Greenfield (40,000 weak). You suck!:cuss: This is what you get. I should have not spoken out for you when the sign law was up for vote.:banghead: Trust me, my wife and I will do our best to never return. I bought my wife's last car in your town! Never again...:banghead:

Thanks for yourGovernments time (a few are users)... I have a real thing for Ald. Linda Lubotsky, and will miss her...:shock:

:?Aaron:?

Click to expand...

...I'll hold my tongue and spare you a retort on this.