Green Bay and other NE WI OC friendly municipalities

imported post

Now that the weather is warm, I expect that more people will be out and about Openly Carrying their firearms. In case anyone who is visiting our site has not heard about the successful Open Carry picnic we had last year on Green Bay, I want to remind everyone that Green Bay is Open Carry "friendly".

On May 18th 2009, Green Bay Police Chief Arts sent a memo to all Green Bay officers which all officers had to read and their supervisors were to document this. It reminded them that Open Carry is legal with the exclusions such as a public building, school zone, in a vehicle, a handgun where alcohol is served and consumed (class B) and that municipalities may not have ordinances which are not similar to and no more restrictive than State Statutes etc. He reminded them that the act of Openly Carrying a firearm is not disorderly conduct unless there is other conduct which is disorderly.

Ashwaubenon and De Pere both became Open Carry friendly in 2009 when the Ordinances prohibiting Open Carry were taken off of the books.

So far as I know, Luxemburg still has an ordinance prohibiting Open Carry

Oconto Falls has no Ordinances prohibiting it but most of theCity is a Gun Free School Zone because of where the school premises is located and public sidewalks are necessary to enter most businesses. The exceptions being the grocery store,hardware store and a couple others on the North side of town.

Currently BrownCounty and Oconto County prohibit Open Carry in County Parks. We will be addressing that very soon and are optomistic that these Ordinances will be struck down.

imported post

maybe this year we can get together at Bay Beach here in Green Bay for a Picnic / Social.....of course this would not be an "organized event " .. just a few:lol: of us getting together....maybe this Summer sometime...

imported post

Here is the GB memo

imported post

Page 2

imported post

"The mere fact that a citizen is openly carrying a firearm is not disorderly conduct

(Wis. Stats. 947.01) without other evidence to support the charge. At the same time,

police officers always have the right to stop and question an individual and ask to

examine the individual's identification as long as the officer does not convey the

message that compliance to his questions is mandatory. If an officer notices a person

openly carrying a firearm, that officer should approach the person with the idea of

asking questions and receiving voluntary answers. The officer should continue the

conversation until he or she believes there is no reason for alarm. If the officer is

satisfied that no criminal activity has happened or will happen, the conversation

should end. Refusal to answer questions about carrying a firearm, in some contexts,

could be reasonable suspicion to temporarily detain the person and demand a name,

address and explanation. Take note of the person's mannerisms, tone of voice,

demeanor and other indicators; the important thing to remember is that the officer

must articulate why he or she suspects the person may be up to something illegal in

order to detain the person and demand answers."

Copied by hand from an image thus any errors in transcription are mine alone.

imported post

After reading that letter from the G-B chief, itdoes not really make it sound like they are all too"Open-Carry Friendly",

it reads like the chief is saying:
"We G-B cops must tolerate open-carry under state law, but make sure you find anything you can to turn it into a detainment and subsequent arrest with disorderly conduct charges being used"

imported post

Nutczak wrote:

After reading that letter from the G-B chief, itdoes not really make it sound like they are all too"Open-Carry Friendly",

it reads like the chief is saying:
"We G-B cops must tolerate open-carry under state law, but make sure you find anything you can to turn it into a detainment and subsequent arrest with disorderly conduct charges being used"

Click to expand...

+1000

imported post

J.Gleason wrote:

Nutczak wrote:

After reading that letter from the G-B chief, itdoes not really make it sound like they are all too"Open-Carry Friendly",

it reads like the chief is saying:
"We G-B cops must tolerate open-carry under state law, but make sure you find anything you can to turn it into a detainment and subsequent arrest with disorderly conduct charges being used"

Click to expand...

+1000

Click to expand...

-1.2MM

More like "OC is fine but if someone is beingotherwise disorderly or acting otherwise in an alarming manor, you can investigate further.." :?

imported post

Interceptor_Knight wrote:

J.Gleason wrote:

Nutczak wrote:

After reading that letter from the G-B chief, itdoes not really make it sound like they are all too"Open-Carry Friendly",

it reads like the chief is saying:
"We G-B cops must tolerate open-carry under state law, but make sure you find anything you can to turn it into a detainment and subsequent arrest with disorderly conduct charges being used"

Click to expand...

+1000

Click to expand...

-1.2MM

More like "OC is fine but if someone is beingotherwise disorderly or acting otherwise in an alarming manor, you can investigate further.." :?

Click to expand...

This is the part you left out:

and make up anything you need to arrest the individual so we can set an example for all the rest of the Open Carry scum bags that are flooding my city and taking away all of our glory. we are the only ones who should be able to carry guns and be able to defend ourselves from the rest of this peon society. Now bring me my coffee and donuts. Where is my news paper?

imported post

J.Gleason wrote:

This is the part you left out:

and make up anything you need to arrest the individual so we can set an example for all the rest of the Open Carry scum bags that are flooding my city and taking away all of our glory. we are the only ones who should be able to carry guns and be able to defend ourselves from the rest of this peon society.

Click to expand...

Absolute fabricated conjecture as you have no first hand case of this happening to an Open Carrier in Green Bay (false unjustified charges). This is probably the best memo we have seen so far. It is in line 100% with the AG memo.

imported post

Interceptor_Knight wrote:

J.Gleason wrote:

This is the part you left out:

and make up anything you need to arrest the individual so we can set an example for all the rest of the Open Carry scum bags that are flooding my city and taking away all of our glory. we are the only ones who should be able to carry guns and be able to defend ourselves from the rest of this peon society.

Click to expand...

Absolute fabricated conjecture as you have no first hand case of this happening to an Open Carrier in Green Bay (false unjustified charges). This is probably the best memo we have seen so far. It is in line 100% with the AG memo.

Click to expand...

You sure have some awesome dreams.

imported post

J.Gleason wrote:

Interceptor_Knight wrote:

J.Gleason wrote:

This is the part you left out:

and make up anything you need to arrest the individual so we can set an example for all the rest of the Open Carry scum bags that are flooding my city and taking away all of our glory. we are the only ones who should be able to carry guns and be able to defend ourselves from the rest of this peon society.

Click to expand...

Absolute fabricated conjecture as you have no first hand case of this happening to an Open Carrier in Green Bay (false unjustified charges). This is probably the best memo we have seen so far. It is in line 100% with the AG memo.

Click to expand...

You sure have some awesome dreams.

Click to expand...

Says the man with no basis in reality for his conjecture.....

imported post

Refusal to answer questions about carrying a firearm, in some contexts, could be reasonable suspicion to temporarily detain the person and demand a name, address and explanation. Take note of the person's mannerisms, tone of voice,demeanor and other indicators;
the important thing to remember is that the officer must articulate why he or she suspects the person may be up to something illegal in order to detain the person and demand answers."

Click to expand...

What about the above quoted paragraph in boldsounds friendly to you?
The letter simply reiterates the laws, and goes on to show them a way to legally detain a person that is doing nothing more than exercising their rights.
Why even approach a person doing nothing wrong, to make sure they are not a felon? Do they use that excuse to stop everyone driving a car too, "you were stopped to make sure you have a valid drivers license"

here is what I would expect to see in a report of why they arrested someone peacefully walking down the sidewalkwith a pistol on their hip:

"We detained and subsequently arrested the individual because he was acting nervous, and I did not like the tone of his voice as 4 other officers and myself approached him with our weapons drawn while yelling at him and commanding him to lay on the ground with his arms outstretched"

Click to expand...

Yeah, your tone of voice may sound differentif you have cops harassing you for exercising your rights!
Mine would have a tone which would be recognized as agitated, very agitated!

imported post

I_K is an eager and happy statist, erect for his leader's healthcare victory.

imported post

The statement is the equivalent of:

In some contexts could be justification to demand that the person identify themselves.

It says nothing about demanding ID. It says nothing about proning the person out. You are grasping at straws and objecting to nothing.....:?

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. Use your head and you will give them no reason to suspect you of being an ax murderer..

imported post

Master Doug Huffman wrote:

I_K is an eager and happy statist, erect for his leader's healthcare victory.

Click to expand...

Says the man who is content withWashington island's preempted prohibition of Open Carry....:dude:

imported post

Interceptor_Knight wrote:

Master Doug Huffman wrote:

I_K is an eager and happy statist, erect for his leader's healthcare victory.

Click to expand...

Says the man who is content withWashington island's preempted prohibition of Open Carry....:dude:

Click to expand...

Prohibited for you because my 'state' is tiny and incompetent. That hardly makes me a statist. And you do not know my state of mind.

imported post

Master Doug Huffman wrote:

That hardly makes me a statist. And you do not know my state of mind.

Click to expand...

Says the man who arrogantly and most vainly presumes to know the state of mind of others.....:lol:

Doug, you are truly a master of ASSumptions.... You would do well to accept the still open invitation for adult conversation over the beverage of your choice.....

imported post

Interceptor_Knight wrote:

Master Doug Huffman wrote:

That hardly makes me a statist. And you do not know my state of mind.

Click to expand...

Says the man who arrogantly and most vainly presumes to know the state of mind of others.....:lol:

Doug, you are truly a master of ASSumptions.... You would do well to accept the still open invitation for adult conversation over the beverage of your choice.....

Click to expand...

Can I come too ? I will bring a large bottle of Bombay Sapphire for Dougy.:lol: He likes the sauce...:lol::lol::lol:

imported post

Glock34 wrote:

Can I come too ? I will bring a large bottle of Bombay Sapphire for Dougy.:lol:

Click to expand...

Sorry mang...I am not kidding...... :?