Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 36

Thread: So I got into an argument with my wife

  1. #1
    Regular Member bigdaddy1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southsider der hey
    Posts
    1,320

    Post imported post

    We were at a school function for my son. The ROTC representatives march on stage to do the pledge of allegiance (which I am happy they still do that now a days).There were 2 flag carriers and 2escorts, but the escorts had rifles. I mentioned that the 2 boys carrying rifles were in violation of federal law and technically are committing a felony. She argued saying that its a school function and that there was no such law. My wife doesn't disapprove of my open carrying, but doesn't really approve either. She would rather ignore the subject. Anyway I also mentioned that if a cop were to walk his/her child to school while armed, the cop would also be in violation of federal law. Again she said no, the law (if such a law exists) wouldn't apply to a cop. I tried to tell her that unless the cop is there on official business he/she doesn't have the right to carry with in 1000 feet of a school. Anyway knowing that even if I proved my point, its a mute point so I dropped the subject.

    So before I go on thinking I was correct with both points made, lets hear from the OC community.

    Did the school have the authority to suspend federal law, and have these two boys legaly carry rifles in school? Did this constitute a federal carry crime?

    If a LEO is not on duty or acting in an official capacity and are uniform or if in plain clothes armed (as ifdropping or picking up thier child for school ) would that LEO be exempt from the school zone law?




    What part of "shall not be infringed" don't you understand?

  2. #2
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358

    Post imported post

    You are incorrect.

    Better start planning on flowers and dinner for the wife, along with a BIG serving of crow for yourself...
    The Act`s prohibitions do not apply to:
    1) firearms on private property (including homes used for
    home schooling);
    2) unloaded firearms in a locked container or locked firearms
    rack in a motor vehicle;
    3) unloaded firearms possessed while traversing school
    grounds to access hunting land;
    4) entry authorized by the school;
    5) persons licensed by state or local authorities;
    6) individuals using a firearm in a school program;
    7) law enforcement officers acting in an official capacity.
    Also people who have "carry permits" issued by their state are exempt from the 1000-foot rule, but they may not carry on school property, unless they are in their vehicle, and do not get out of their vehicle if they stop (like to pick up a child from school). Of course, even this rule is subject to more stringent limitations depending on the state...
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggressionŚand this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  3. #3
    Campaign Veteran GLOCK21GB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    4,348

    Post imported post

    Take her to a nice dinner at the Prime Quarter steakhouse in Green Bay...Best Steakhouse in Town. Grill your own steaks, enjoy some cocktails, nice conversation...the Place ROCKS !!!! .....You can Gorge on the Beef Eater, 44oz top sirloin...Yummy..
    http://youtu.be/xWgVGu3OR4U AACFI, Wisconsin / Minnesota Carry Certified. Action Pistol & Advanced Action pistol concepts + Urban Carbine course. When the entitlement Zombies begin looting, pillaging, raping, burning & killing..remember HEAD SHOTS it's the only way to kill a Zombie. Stockpile food & water now.

    Please support your local,county, state & Federal Law enforcement agencies, right ???

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Occupied Territory , Illinois, USA
    Posts
    82

    Post imported post

    I think that the OP is confusing Wisconsin's GFSZ law with federal law. Can any of the Wisconsin folks post their law? Maybe this guy can avoid eating the whole crow.

  5. #5
    Regular Member bigdaddy1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southsider der hey
    Posts
    1,320

    Post imported post

    Dreamer wrote:
    You are incorrect.

    Better start planning on flowers and dinner for the wife, along with a BIG serving of crow for yourself...
    The Act`s prohibitions do not apply to:
    1) firearms on private property (including homes used for
    home schooling);
    2) unloaded firearms in a locked container or locked firearms
    rack in a motor vehicle;
    3) unloaded firearms possessed while traversing school
    grounds to access hunting land;
    4) entry authorized by the school;
    5) persons licensed by state or local authorities;
    6) individuals using a firearm in a school program;
    7) law enforcement officers acting in an official capacity.
    Also people who have "carry permits" issued by their state are exempt from the 1000-foot rule, but they may not carry on school property, unless they are in their vehicle, and do not get out of their vehicle if they stop (like to pick up a child from school). Of course, even this rule is subject to more stringent limitations depending on the state...
    Wisconsin GFSZ reads;employer of the individual;public or private lands open to hunting, if the entry on schoolgrounds is authorized by school authorities.

    1. On private property not part of school grounds;

    2. If the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to do so by a political subdivision of the state or bureau of alcohol, tobacco and firearms in which political subdivision the school zone is located, and the law of the political subdivision requires that, before an individual may obtain such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the political subdivision must verify that the individual is qualified under law to receive the license;
    3. That is not loaded and is:
    a. Encased; or
    b. In a locked firearms rack that is on a motor vehicle;
    4. By an individual for use in a program approved by a school in the school zone;

    I admit I was wrong here,
    5. By an individual in accordance with a contract entered into between a school in the school zone and the individual or an
    6. By a law enforcement officer acting in his or her official capacity; or

    However this does not give permission for a LEO to carry within the school zone unless acting in "OFFICIAL CAPACITY". Dropping off thier child does not fall into that action.
    7. That is unloaded and is possessed by an individual while traversing school grounds for the purpose of gaining access to




    What part of "shall not be infringed" don't you understand?

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    1,140

    Post imported post

    ROTC drill rifles are M1 Garrard replicas.

    They are not working rifles in any shape or form.


    They are not "guns"



    bigdaddy1 wrote:
    We were at a school function for my son. The ROTC representatives march on stage to do the pledge of allegiance (which I am happy they still do that now a days).There were 2 flag carriers and 2escorts, but the escorts had rifles. I mentioned that the 2 boys carrying rifles were in violation of federal law and technically are committing a felony. She argued saying that its a school function and that there was no such law. My wife doesn't disapprove of my open carrying, but doesn't really approve either. She would rather ignore the subject. Anyway I also mentioned that if a cop were to walk his/her child to school while armed, the cop would also be in violation of federal law. Again she said no, the law (if such a law exists) wouldn't apply to a cop. I tried to tell her that unless the cop is there on official business he/she doesn't have the right to carry with in 1000 feet of a school. Anyway knowing that even if I proved my point, its a mute point so I dropped the subject.

    So before I go on thinking I was correct with both points made, lets hear from the OC community.

    Did the school have the authority to suspend federal law, and have these two boys legaly carry rifles in school? Did this constitute a federal carry crime?

    If a LEO is not on duty or acting in an official capacity and are uniform or if in plain clothes armed (as ifdropping or picking up thier child for school ) would that LEO be exempt from the school zone law?




  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    251

    Post imported post

    Pace wrote:
    ROTC drill rifles are M1 Garrard replicas.

    They are not working rifles in any shape or form.


    They are not "guns"
    Rifle model makes no difference, but you're correct that they are non-working models. Even those that are considered "working" have the firing pins removed and the barrels filled so the only functionality they have is the cycling of the receiver. Pistols need to be completely non-working with the inability to cycle the slide and disassemble.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    san diego, California, USA
    Posts
    26

    Post imported post

    Must have been changed from when I was in ROTC,, ours only had firing pin removed,, no blocked barrels

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    1,140

    Post imported post

    Actually, most of the ROTC M1's are made specifically only to be replicas. They don't have firing pins removed, or barrels filled because they are made without any working parts now.

    Yes, this has changed in the last 20 years or so slowly.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Everett, Washington, USA
    Posts
    251

    Post imported post

    How long ago were you in? My experience stems from 1998 to 2002 and my own rifle at the time (mkV mod 1 M1903A) along with our entire armory had the barrels concrete filled. Perhaps it was for balance, but a lot of the other schools we competed with had barrels filled or plugged, including the few Marine Corps JROTC that had M1 Garands. There was one particular Air Force JROTC that used replicas of the M1903 and we all got a chuckle out of them since they were 100% plastic replicas that weighed less then 3 lbs.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Posts
    1,558

    Post imported post

    Dreamer wrote:
    You are incorrect.

    Better start planning on flowers and dinner for the wife, along with a BIG serving of crow for yourself...
    The Act`s prohibitions do not apply to:
    1) firearms on private property (including homes used for
    home schooling);
    2) unloaded firearms in a locked container or locked firearms
    rack in a motor vehicle;
    3) unloaded firearms possessed while traversing school
    grounds to access hunting land;
    4) entry authorized by the school;
    5) persons licensed by state or local authorities;
    6) individuals using a firearm in a school program;
    7) law enforcement officers acting in an official capacity.
    Also people who have "carry permits" issued by their state are exempt from the 1000-foot rule, but they may not carry on school property, unless they are in their vehicle, and do not get out of their vehicle if they stop (like to pick up a child from school). Of course, even this rule is subject to more stringent limitations depending on the state...
    or not tell her. As you say she think she was right anyways and does not really support you open carrying. You know if you do tell her she will always bring it up every change she gets.
    -I come in peace, I didn't bring artillery. But I am pleading with you with tears in my eyes: If you screw with me, I'll kill you all.
    -Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everybody you meet.
    Marine General James Mattis,

  12. #12
    Regular Member bigdaddy1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southsider der hey
    Posts
    1,320

    Post imported post

    The Federal GFSZ is not the same as Wisconsin's. I was incorrect about the 2 rotc boys, but still hold firm on the LEO issue. Reading Wisconsin's GFSZ, unless the officer is acting in an official capacity that officer does not have the right to carry with in the GFSZ.

    My example was;

    Officer Publicservent is dropping off little Timmy at school before heading off to start his shift. Officer Publicservent is not on duty at this point but is in uniform and armed. Officer Publicservent does not have immunity to Wisconsin's GFSZ law hence is in violation and committing a felony per WI GFSZ.

    Now the Federal law may read different, but as Wisconsin has its own and I am bound by it, would not anyone in WI be bound by this law?
    What part of "shall not be infringed" don't you understand?

  13. #13
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Greensboro, North Carolina, USA
    Posts
    1,052

    Post imported post

    bigdaddy1 wrote:
    The Federal GFSZ is not the same as Wisconsin's.┬* I was incorrect about the 2 rotc boys, but still hold firm on the LEO issue.┬* Reading Wisconsin's GFSZ, unless the officer is acting in an official capacity that officer does not have the right to carry with in the GFSZ.

    My example was;

    Officer Publicservent┬* is dropping off little Timmy at school before heading off to start his shift.┬* Officer Publicservent is not on duty at this point but is in uniform and armed.┬* Officer Publicservent does not have immunity to Wisconsin's GFSZ law hence is in violation and committing a felony per WI GFSZ.

    Now the Federal law may read different, but as Wisconsin has its own and I am bound by it, would not anyone in WI be bound by this law?
    While I hear what you're getting at but the Wisconsin law that you quoted only states that it does not give a peace officer permission, it certainly does not restrict:

    I am sure, if you dig deeper, a LEO only need permission, and perhaps as condition of employment, especially while uniformed, they may have permission. I am sure a uniformed LEO dropping his or her child off at school, in the vehicle or not, is considered on duty and if not, is still lawfully carrying their firearm.

  14. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    across Death's Door on Washington Island, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,382

    Post imported post

    Here is the whole of Wisconsin Statute Law and, on the same page, a link URL to the Administrative Regulations...

    http://www.legis.state.wi.us/rsb/stats.html

    Please search for and cite an exception.


    Re Garands, our saluting pieces have the barrels blocked only.

  15. #15
    Regular Member bigdaddy1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southsider der hey
    Posts
    1,320

    Post imported post

    I posted the law, doesnt say anywhere LEO's are exempt unless acting in aofficial capacity. Law 948.605 in the Wisconsin ledger. Now the Federal deal may read different, but ours clearly states;By a law enforcement officer acting in his or her officialcapacity;

    Doest state any exceptions regarding this that I was able to find.
    What part of "shall not be infringed" don't you understand?

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    across Death's Door on Washington Island, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,382

    Post imported post

    I wasn't disputing with you, BD.

    Heh heh heh, makes me think of Burl Ives as Big Daddy in the film 'Cat on a Hot Tin Roof', with Elizabeth Tailor and a young Paul Newman as Brick (as in 'dumb as a').

  17. #17
    Regular Member bigdaddy1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southsider der hey
    Posts
    1,320

    Post imported post

    No beef Doug. It may be a mute point anyway, if the impending suit against WI goes as planned the GFSZ will be at the very least amended.



    Still looks like the very letter of the law indicates I am correct about LEO and carry.
    What part of "shall not be infringed" don't you understand?

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    across Death's Door on Washington Island, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,382

    Post imported post

    The complaint is that "Wisconsin's gun Free School Zone Act is unconstitutional on its face and as applied...cover[ing] such a broad area that it practically forecloses a meaningful right to keep and bear arms ..."

    http://www.wisconsincarry.org/pdf/GFSZ_Complaint.pdf

    I-ANAL and neither are you as I believe. That complaint is wishful thinking and demonstrates no uncommon legal insight. Who ever paid for that either gets the too-good-to-be-true deal or just what he paid for.



  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    1,140

    Post imported post

    Ok, lets all agree that most of these laws are unconstitutional.

    However it does no good whenever someone asks a question about the law, to continue to reply that. I bet if I search "Master Doug" on this board, I will see 1,000 posts that say "that's unconstitutional."

    Some people want to know the law as written, until SCOTUS declares it unconstitutional.



  20. #20
    Regular Member okboomer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma, USA
    Posts
    1,164

    Post imported post

    Pace wrote:
    Ok, lets all agree that most of these laws are unconstitutional.

    However it does no good whenever someone asks a question about the law, to continue to reply that. I bet if I search "Master Doug" on this board, I will see 1,000 posts that say "that's unconstitutional."

    Some people want to know the law as written, until SCOTUS declares it unconstitutional.
    So you were appointed as a moderator and now have the power to restrict free discussion ON TOPIC of OPEN CARRY in the forum?

    Yes, it has been stated that it is unconstitutional, but have you noticed how MANY new members have signed up lately ... this discussion is not for your sole edification, but for the general membership, including the new members who are joining the discussion mid-stream.

    It might be time for some to lighten up and consider the whole of the membership.

    Of course, I might be wrong, out of line, or just plain being a bitch, but I do see a lot of new members who probably do not have time to read all the past posts (I know I didn't, but did try to follow the whole thread as they were resurrected), and who just might be interested in asking questions about the logic of a specific position and can then be pointed to the relevant thread/discussion.


    cheers - okboomer
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Lead, follow, or get out of the way

    Exercising my 2A Rights does NOT make me a CRIMINAL! Infringing on the exercise of those rights makes YOU one!

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Las Vegas, NV
    Posts
    1,140

    Post imported post

    The problme is that people will ask

    "Is it legal to do this?"

    And they get, besides the incorrect answers, things like "Oh, it's Unconstitutional, we shouldn't have to obey laws."

    I don't want to see someone walking down the street OCing in NYC and then have to defend themselves for a 5 year jail sentence with "It's Unconstitutional because Masta Doug told me on OCDO."

    I'm a pretty damn light person actually.

    okboomer wrote:
    Pace wrote:
    Ok, lets all agree that most of these laws are unconstitutional.

    However it does no good whenever someone asks a question about the law, to continue to reply that. I bet if I search "Master Doug" on this board, I will see 1,000 posts that say "that's unconstitutional."

    Some people want to know the law as written, until SCOTUS declares it unconstitutional.
    So you were appointed as a moderator and now have the power to restrict free discussion ON TOPIC of OPEN CARRY in the forum?

    Yes, it has been stated that it is unconstitutional, but have you noticed how MANY new members have signed up lately ... this discussion is not for your sole edification, but for the general membership, including the new members who are joining the discussion mid-stream.

    It might be time for some to lighten up and consider the whole of the membership.

    Of course, I might be wrong, out of line, or just plain being a bitch, but I do see a lot of new members who probably do not have time to read all the past posts (I know I didn't, but did try to follow the whole thread as they were resurrected), and who just might be interested in asking questions about the logic of a specific position and can then be pointed to the relevant thread/discussion.


  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hodgenville, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    1,261

    Post imported post

    Just FYI: Every year a local school hosts a dinner for vets. I am a sworn Ky Deputy. At these events, I am not in uniform nor do I have my badge exposed. We dine in the school cafeteria during school hours with students as servers.

    I let the principal or organizer know I am armed and theyinvite me on in.Once seated, I removemy jacket orvest and eat with my exposed Glock. Usually with the mayor or my friend, her husband. The local cop and county deputy are there too.

    Opinions of this?

  23. #23
    Regular Member okboomer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Oklahoma, USA
    Posts
    1,164

    Post imported post

    Pace wrote:
    The problme is that people will ask And you are to determine what is a problem - a problem for whom?
    "Is it legal to do this?"
    Legal to do what? I saw no call to action, nor advocacy of anything other than a discussion on the constitutionality of a standing law.
    And they get, besides the incorrect answers, things like "Oh, it's Unconstitutional, we shouldn't have to obey laws."
    What was incorrect in any of the discussion, other than what was cited and admitted to by the OP, but his disagreement of interpretation was noted on one point. Again, a discussion of the constitutionality and application of a standing law with no call to action against the law, nor the advocacy of anything else

    I don't want to see someone walking down the street OCing in NYC and then have to defend themselves for a 5 year jail sentence with "It's Unconstitutional because Masta Doug told me on OCDO."
    And you are responsible in what way? Who appointed you to this responsibility? And you use a derrogatory appellation? How dare you! That is offensive on so many levels!
    I'm a pretty damn light person actually.
    Umm, IMHO, you are overbearing and condescending, but that is just my opinion.
    cheers - okboomer
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Lead, follow, or get out of the way

    Exercising my 2A Rights does NOT make me a CRIMINAL! Infringing on the exercise of those rights makes YOU one!

  24. #24
    Regular Member bigdaddy1's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Southsider der hey
    Posts
    1,320

    Post imported post

    TheMrMitch wrote:
    Just FYI: Every year a local school hosts a dinner for vets. I am a sworn Ky Deputy. At these events, I am not in uniform nor do I have my badge exposed. We dine in the school cafeteria during school hours with students as servers.

    I let the principal or organizer know I am armed and theyinvite me on in.Once seated, I removemy jacket orvest and eat with my exposed Glock. Usually with the mayor or my friend, her husband. The local cop and county deputy are there too.

    Opinions of this?
    My opinion is thats cool. I dont know what the law in KY is, but in WI as long as you have permission (apparently its ok for the pricipal to authorize) its all good from what the WI GFSZ reads.
    4. By an individual for use in a program approved by a school in the school zone;

    Although the concealed part may be a problem in WI:what: Otherwise from how the law is worded, unless you are working, your violating.

    What part of "shall not be infringed" don't you understand?

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Hodgenville, Kentucky, USA
    Posts
    1,261

    Post imported post

    I carry open.....unless weather dictates otherwise. This event is held on vets day in November. Once seated in a warm room, I OC.



Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •