OCglock1988
Regular Member
imported post
is it legal or not
is it legal or not
-
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.
City bus OC?
- Thread starter OCglock1988
- Start date
Master Doug Huffman
Banned
imported post
Vehicle, §167.31
Vehicle, §167.31
Landose_theghost
Regular Member
imported post
I wouldn't.
I wouldn't.
smithman
Regular Member
imported post
Unload and encase before you enter the bus and you are legal. But you'd better keep a tight hold on your case while on board. The problem if you OC in citybus is that you are violating the vehicle carry statue, but you will likely violate school zones. A big no-no on school zones and they carry a felony penalty.
Unload and encase before you enter the bus and you are legal. But you'd better keep a tight hold on your case while on board. The problem if you OC in citybus is that you are violating the vehicle carry statue, but you will likely violate school zones. A big no-no on school zones and they carry a felony penalty.
hunter9mm
Regular Member
imported post
Master Doug Huffman wrote:
There's your very definitive answer.
Master Doug Huffman wrote:
There's your very definitive answer.
Master Doug Huffman
Banned
imported post
smithman wrote:
smithman wrote:
Free legal advise is worth years of your life.
It says nothing about "unload and encase", that's from 167.31 prohibiting transportation of a loaded, uncased weapon. See The Fork in Wisconsin Gun Laws.
OCglock1988
Regular Member
imported post
yea last night when i was getting a miller free ride on the bus and someone tried to follow me home my gun would have been a nice deterrent.
yea last night when i was getting a miller free ride on the bus and someone tried to follow me home my gun would have been a nice deterrent.
hunter9mm
Regular Member
imported post
So Doug, are you saying legal transportation ofa weapon in my own car differs from transporting on a city bus?
So Doug, are you saying legal transportation ofa weapon in my own car differs from transporting on a city bus?
Master Doug Huffman
Banned
imported post
No. 167 and 941 unless you can find the exception.
No. 167 and 941 unless you can find the exception.
paul@paul-fisher.com
Regular Member
imported post
hunter9mm wrote:
I am not Doug but no. The difference is
So, if you are carrying the unloaded encased weapon in a case in your car or it's within arms reach in your car and I assume you'd not want to hand the gun case to the bus driver, then it's illegal.
hunter9mm wrote:
I am not Doug but no. The difference is
So, if you are carrying the unloaded encased weapon in a case in your car or it's within arms reach in your car and I assume you'd not want to hand the gun case to the bus driver, then it's illegal.
Interceptor_Knight
Regular Member
imported post
While you are riding down the street, hold it so that it is viewable throughthe window of the bus. It is not hidden... No violation of 941.23.
While you are riding down the street, hold it so that it is viewable throughthe window of the bus. It is not hidden... No violation of 941.23.
Master Doug Huffman
Banned
imported post
Interceptor_Knight wrote:
(2) PROHIBITIONS; MOTORBOATS AND VEHICLES; HIGHWAYS AND ROADWAYS.
(b) Except as provided in sub. (4), no person may place, possess
or transport a firearm, bow or crossbow in or on a vehicle,
unless the firearm is unloaded and encased or unless the bow or
crossbow is unstrung or is enclosed in a carrying case.
Oh, and lest you try to impress the newbies, don't forget case law like Alloy's out of reach requirement.
Interceptor_Knight wrote:
Where is the exception for city buses in Safe Use and Transportation of Firearms and Bows, Chapter 167, Section 31,While you are riding down the street, hold it so that it is viewable throughthe window of the bus. It is not hidden... No violation of 941.23.
(2) PROHIBITIONS; MOTORBOATS AND VEHICLES; HIGHWAYS AND ROADWAYS.
(b) Except as provided in sub. (4), no person may place, possess
or transport a firearm, bow or crossbow in or on a vehicle,
unless the firearm is unloaded and encased or unless the bow or
crossbow is unstrung or is enclosed in a carrying case.
Oh, and lest you try to impress the newbies, don't forget case law like Alloy's out of reach requirement.
Interceptor_Knight
Regular Member
imported post
Master Doug Huffman wrote:
I was referring to an unloaded and encased firearm. It does not have to be out of reach if it is not hidden. There is no case law directly addressing an unloaded and encased firearm as being "hidden". We all know that administrative enforcement policy and common practice does not treat it as such otherwise a LEO would sit outside of Dick's or Gander and fill a citation pad with names..... Ifsomeone in the immediate vicinity and outside of the vehicle can discern that you have an encased firearm in your possession, it is not hidden and therefore not concealed. Transparent case or not, if a handgun case is on your dash, it is not hidden and the handgun is not hidden as you are required to encase it in order to comply with safe transportation and gfsz statutes. If you take that encased firearm and lay it on the seat or on the floor, it is arguably hidden as someone walking by can no longer see it.
Master Doug Huffman wrote:
Interceptor_Knight wrote:Where is the exception for city buses in Safe Use and Transportation of Firearms and Bows, Chapter 167, Section 31,While you are riding down the street, hold it so that it is viewable throughthe window of the bus. It is not hidden... No violation of 941.23.
Oh, and lest you try to impress the newbies, don't forget case law like Alloy's out of reach requirement.
I was referring to an unloaded and encased firearm. It does not have to be out of reach if it is not hidden. There is no case law directly addressing an unloaded and encased firearm as being "hidden". We all know that administrative enforcement policy and common practice does not treat it as such otherwise a LEO would sit outside of Dick's or Gander and fill a citation pad with names..... Ifsomeone in the immediate vicinity and outside of the vehicle can discern that you have an encased firearm in your possession, it is not hidden and therefore not concealed. Transparent case or not, if a handgun case is on your dash, it is not hidden and the handgun is not hidden as you are required to encase it in order to comply with safe transportation and gfsz statutes. If you take that encased firearm and lay it on the seat or on the floor, it is arguably hidden as someone walking by can no longer see it.
GLOCK21GB
Campaign Veteran
imported post
Interceptor_Knight wrote:
Interceptor_Knight wrote:
:lol: in yer face dougy.Master Doug Huffman wrote:Interceptor_Knight wrote:Where is the exception for city buses in Safe Use and Transportation of Firearms and Bows, Chapter 167, Section 31,While you are riding down the street, hold it so that it is viewable throughthe window of the bus. It is not hidden... No violation of 941.23.
Oh, and lest you try to impress the newbies, don't forget case law like Alloy's out of reach requirement.
I was referring to an unloaded and encased firearm. It does not have to be out of reach if it is not hidden. There is no case law directly addressing an unloaded and encased firearm as being "hidden". We all know that administrative enforcement policy and common practice does not treat it as such otherwise a LEO would sit outside of Dick's or Gander and fill a citation pad with names..... Ifsomeone in the immediate vicinity and outside of the vehicle can discern that you have an encased firearm in your possession, it is not hidden and therefore not concealed. Transparent case or not, if a handgun case is on your dash, it is not hidden and the handgun is not hidden as you are required to encase it in order to comply with safe transportation and gfsz statutes. If you take that encased firearm and lay it on the seat or on the floor, it is arguably hidden as someone walking by can no longer see it.
Master Doug Huffman
Banned
imported post
Talk to da han'!
167.31 Safe use and transportation of firearms and bows.
[ ...]
(2) PROHIBITIONS; MOTORBOATS AND VEHICLES; HIGHWAYS AND
ROADWAYS.
[ ...]
(b) Except as provided in sub. (4), no person may place, possess
or transport a firearm, bow or crossbow in or on a vehicle,
unless the firearm is unloaded and encased or unless the bow or
crossbow is unstrung or is enclosed in a carrying case.
No. 99-2258-CR
STATE OF WISCONSIN IN COURT OF APPEALS
DISTRICT III
STATE OF WISCONSIN,
PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
V.
NICK ALLOY,
DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
¶3 Much of Alloy’s argument is based on the false assertion that he was
trapped by a conflict between WIS. STAT. § 167.31 and WIS. STAT. § 941.23. A
person transporting a firearm is governed by both statutes. To comply with
§ 167.31, the person must encase the weapon. To comply with § 941.23, he or she
must place the enclosed weapon out of reach. See State v. Asfoor, 75 Wis. 2d 411,
433-34, 249 N.W.2d 529 (1977). A person complying with § 167.31 is not
required to violate § 941.23. The encased weapon can be lawfully transported out
of reach.3 The trial court properly disallowed testimony in support of the invalid
defense that § 167.31 compelled Alloy to “go armed” with a concealed handgun.
See Dundon, 226 Wis. 2d at 674.
By the Court.—Judgment affirmed.
This opinion will not be published. See WIS. STAT. RULE
809.23(1)(b)5.
941.23 Carrying concealed weapon.
Any person except
a peace officer who goes armed with a concealed and dangerous
weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor. Notwithstanding s.
939.22 (22), for purposes of this section, peace officer does not
include a commission warden who is not a state−certified commission
warden.
History: 1977 c. 173; 1979 c. 115, 221; 2007 a. 27.
[ ...]
To “go armed” does not require going anywhere. The elements for a violation of
s. 941.23 are: 1) a dangerous weapon is on the defendant’s person or within reach;
2) the defendant is aware of the weapon’s presence; and 3) the weapon is hidden.
State v. Keith, 175 Wis. 2d 75, 498 N.W.2d 865 (Ct. App. 1993).
A handgun on the seat of a car that was indiscernible from ordinary observation
by a person outside, and within the immediate vicinity, of the vehicle was hidden from
view for purposes of determining whether the gun was a concealed weapon under this
section. State v. Walls, 190 Wis. 2d 65, 526 N.W.2d 765 (Ct. App. 1994).
There is no statutory or common law privilege for the crime of carrying a concealed
weapon under s. 941.23. State Dundon, 226 Wis. 2d 654, 594 N.W.2d 780 (1999),
97−1423.
Under the facts of the case, the privilege of of self−defense was inapplicable to a
charge of carrying a concealed weapon. State v. Nollie, 2002 WI 4, 249 Wis. 2d 538,
638 N.W.2d 280, 00−0744.
The concealed weapons statute is a restriction on the manner in which firearms are
possessed and used. It is constitutional under Art. I, s. 25. Only if the public benefit
in the exercise of the police power is substantially outweighed by an individual’s need
to conceal a weapon in the exercise of the right to bear arms will an otherwise valid
restriction on that right be unconstitutional, as applied. The right to keep and bear
arms for security, as a general matter, must permit a person to possess, carry, and
sometimes conceal arms to maintain the security of a private residence or privately
operated business, and to safely move and store weapons within those premises. State
v. Hamdan, 2003 WI 113, 264 Wis. 2d 433, 665 N.W.2d 785, 01−0056. See also State
v. Cole, 2003 WI 112, 264 Wis. 2d 520, 665 N.W.2d 328, 01−0350.
A challenge on constitutional grounds of a prosecution for carrying a concealed
weapon requires affirmative answers to the following before the defendant may raise
the constitutional defense: 1) under the circumstances, did the defendant’s interest in
concealing the weapon to facilitate exercise of his or her right to keep and bear arms
substantially outweigh the state’s interest in enforcing the concealed weapons statute?
and 2) did the defendant conceal his or her weapon because concealment was the
only reasonable means under the circumstances to exercise his or her right to bear
arms? State v. Hamdan, 2003 WI 113, 264 Wis. 2d 433, 665 N.W.2d 785, 01−0056.
This section is constitutional as applied in this case. The defendant’s interest in
exercising his right to keep and bear arms for purposes of security by carrying a concealed
weapon in his vehicle does not substantially outweigh the state’s interest in
prohibiting him from carrying a concealed weapon in his vehicle. State v. Fisher,
2006 WI 44, 290 Wis. 2d 121, 714 N.W.2d 495, 04−2989.
Judges are not peace officers authorized to carry concealed weapons. 69 Atty. Gen.
66.
Talk to da han'!
167.31 Safe use and transportation of firearms and bows.
[ ...]
(2) PROHIBITIONS; MOTORBOATS AND VEHICLES; HIGHWAYS AND
ROADWAYS.
[ ...]
(b) Except as provided in sub. (4), no person may place, possess
or transport a firearm, bow or crossbow in or on a vehicle,
unless the firearm is unloaded and encased or unless the bow or
crossbow is unstrung or is enclosed in a carrying case.
No. 99-2258-CR
STATE OF WISCONSIN IN COURT OF APPEALS
DISTRICT III
STATE OF WISCONSIN,
PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
V.
NICK ALLOY,
DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
¶3 Much of Alloy’s argument is based on the false assertion that he was
trapped by a conflict between WIS. STAT. § 167.31 and WIS. STAT. § 941.23. A
person transporting a firearm is governed by both statutes. To comply with
§ 167.31, the person must encase the weapon. To comply with § 941.23, he or she
must place the enclosed weapon out of reach. See State v. Asfoor, 75 Wis. 2d 411,
433-34, 249 N.W.2d 529 (1977). A person complying with § 167.31 is not
required to violate § 941.23. The encased weapon can be lawfully transported out
of reach.3 The trial court properly disallowed testimony in support of the invalid
defense that § 167.31 compelled Alloy to “go armed” with a concealed handgun.
See Dundon, 226 Wis. 2d at 674.
By the Court.—Judgment affirmed.
This opinion will not be published. See WIS. STAT. RULE
809.23(1)(b)5.
941.23 Carrying concealed weapon.
Any person except
a peace officer who goes armed with a concealed and dangerous
weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor. Notwithstanding s.
939.22 (22), for purposes of this section, peace officer does not
include a commission warden who is not a state−certified commission
warden.
History: 1977 c. 173; 1979 c. 115, 221; 2007 a. 27.
[ ...]
To “go armed” does not require going anywhere. The elements for a violation of
s. 941.23 are: 1) a dangerous weapon is on the defendant’s person or within reach;
2) the defendant is aware of the weapon’s presence; and 3) the weapon is hidden.
State v. Keith, 175 Wis. 2d 75, 498 N.W.2d 865 (Ct. App. 1993).
A handgun on the seat of a car that was indiscernible from ordinary observation
by a person outside, and within the immediate vicinity, of the vehicle was hidden from
view for purposes of determining whether the gun was a concealed weapon under this
section. State v. Walls, 190 Wis. 2d 65, 526 N.W.2d 765 (Ct. App. 1994).
There is no statutory or common law privilege for the crime of carrying a concealed
weapon under s. 941.23. State Dundon, 226 Wis. 2d 654, 594 N.W.2d 780 (1999),
97−1423.
Under the facts of the case, the privilege of of self−defense was inapplicable to a
charge of carrying a concealed weapon. State v. Nollie, 2002 WI 4, 249 Wis. 2d 538,
638 N.W.2d 280, 00−0744.
The concealed weapons statute is a restriction on the manner in which firearms are
possessed and used. It is constitutional under Art. I, s. 25. Only if the public benefit
in the exercise of the police power is substantially outweighed by an individual’s need
to conceal a weapon in the exercise of the right to bear arms will an otherwise valid
restriction on that right be unconstitutional, as applied. The right to keep and bear
arms for security, as a general matter, must permit a person to possess, carry, and
sometimes conceal arms to maintain the security of a private residence or privately
operated business, and to safely move and store weapons within those premises. State
v. Hamdan, 2003 WI 113, 264 Wis. 2d 433, 665 N.W.2d 785, 01−0056. See also State
v. Cole, 2003 WI 112, 264 Wis. 2d 520, 665 N.W.2d 328, 01−0350.
A challenge on constitutional grounds of a prosecution for carrying a concealed
weapon requires affirmative answers to the following before the defendant may raise
the constitutional defense: 1) under the circumstances, did the defendant’s interest in
concealing the weapon to facilitate exercise of his or her right to keep and bear arms
substantially outweigh the state’s interest in enforcing the concealed weapons statute?
and 2) did the defendant conceal his or her weapon because concealment was the
only reasonable means under the circumstances to exercise his or her right to bear
arms? State v. Hamdan, 2003 WI 113, 264 Wis. 2d 433, 665 N.W.2d 785, 01−0056.
This section is constitutional as applied in this case. The defendant’s interest in
exercising his right to keep and bear arms for purposes of security by carrying a concealed
weapon in his vehicle does not substantially outweigh the state’s interest in
prohibiting him from carrying a concealed weapon in his vehicle. State v. Fisher,
2006 WI 44, 290 Wis. 2d 121, 714 N.W.2d 495, 04−2989.
Judges are not peace officers authorized to carry concealed weapons. 69 Atty. Gen.
66.
GLOCK21GB
Campaign Veteran
imported post
here goes Dougy trying to be Mr. Know it all ------ > again....:lol:
here goes Dougy trying to be Mr. Know it all ------ > again....:lol:
Master Doug Huffman
Banned
imported post
Glock34 wrote:
Glock34 wrote:
Yep, Mr. Wizard, that's me. The sooner you and your puppeteer learn it, love it and leave it alone the happier y'all will be.
GLOCK21GB
Campaign Veteran
imported post
Master Doug Huffman wrote:
Master Doug Huffman wrote:
Master Doug Huffman
Banned
imported post
Glock34 wrote:
You and the ignorant_interrupter are welcome to ignore me - but you can't. Tsk tsk tsk.
Glock34 wrote:
I'm sure that you are being as eloquent as you can be, but it has no effect on me because none of your images get through. It's like an ignore feature on other forums, and that this forum doesn't have, I've set my browser to ignore all images not necessary for functioning of the forum script. For additional instances, smilies are just collections of characters and avatars are filtered.
You and the ignorant_interrupter are welcome to ignore me - but you can't. Tsk tsk tsk.
OCglock1988
Regular Member
imported post
wow you both just turned my question into a debate fit for a middleschool girls bathroom not a gun rights website.
wow you both just turned my question into a debate fit for a middleschool girls bathroom not a gun rights website.