Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: 66.0409 Local regulation of firearms.

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    66.0409 Local regulation of firearms. (1) In this section:
    (a) “Firearm” has the meaning given in s. 167.31 (1) (c).
    (b) “Political subdivision” means a city, village, town or
    county.
    (c) “Sport shooting range” means an area designed and operated
    for the practice of weapons used in hunting, skeet shooting
    and similar sport shooting.
    (2) Except as provided in subs. (3) and (4), no political subdivision
    may enact an ordinance or adopt a resolution that regulates
    the sale, purchase, purchase delay, transfer, ownership, use, keeping,
    possession, bearing, transportation, licensing, permitting,
    registration or taxation of any firearm or part of a firearm, including
    ammunition and reloader components, unless the ordinance or
    resolution is the same as or similar to, and no more stringent than,
    a state statute.
    (3) (a) Nothing in this section prohibits a county from imposing
    a sales tax or use tax under subch. V of ch. 77 on any firearm
    or part of a firearm, including ammunition and reloader components,
    sold in the county.
    (b) Nothing in this section prohibits a city, village or town that
    is authorized to exercise village powers under s. 60.22 (3) from
    enacting an ordinance or adopting a resolution that restricts the
    discharge of a firearm.
    (4) (a) Nothing in this section prohibits a political subdivision
    from continuing to enforce an ordinance or resolution that is in
    effect on November 18, 1995, and that regulates the sale, purchase,
    transfer, ownership, use, keeping, possession, bearing,
    transportation, licensing, permitting, registration or taxation of
    any firearm or part of a firearm, including ammunition and
    reloader components, if the ordinance or resolution is the same as
    or similar to, and no more stringent than, a state statute.
    (am) Nothing in this section prohibits a political subdivision
    from continuing to enforce until November 30, 1998, an ordinance
    or resolution that is in effect on November 18, 1995, and
    that requires a waiting period of not more than 7 days for the purchase
    of a handgun.
    (b) If a political subdivision has in effect on November 17,
    1995, an ordinance or resolution that regulates the sale, purchase,
    transfer, ownership, use, keeping, possession, bearing, transportation,
    licensing, permitting, registration or taxation of any firearm
    or part of a firearm, including ammunition and reloader components,
    and the ordinance or resolution is not the same as or similar
    to a state statute, the ordinance or resolution shall have no legal
    effect and the political subdivision may not enforce the ordinance
    or resolution on or after November 18, 1995.
    (c) Nothing in this section prohibits a political subdivision
    from enacting and enforcing a zoning ordinance that regulates the
    new construction of a sport shooting range or when the expansion
    of an existing sport shooting range would impact public health and
    safety.
    (5) A county ordinance that is enacted or a county resolution
    that is adopted by a county under sub. (2) or a county ordinance
    or resolution that remains in effect under sub. (4) (a) or (am)
    applies only in those towns in the county that have not enacted an
    ordinance or adopted a resolution under sub. (2) or that continue
    to enforce an ordinance or resolution under sub. (4) (a) or (am),
    except that this subsection does not apply to a sales or use tax that
    is imposed under subch. V of ch. 77.
    History: 1995 a. 72; 1999 a. 150 s. 260; Stats. 1999 s. 66.0409.
    This section does not prohibit municipalities from enacting and enforcing zoning
    ordinances that apply to sport shooting ranges. Town of Avon v. Oliver, 2002 WI App
    97, 253 Wis. 2d 647, 644 N.W.2d 260, 01−1851.

  2. #2
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. Shotgun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Madison, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,668

    Post imported post

    Proper jurisdiction is the court system. If a municipality attempted to enforce a preempted ordinance a court would, presumably, order them to stop. If they continued to enforce it, then they would be found in contempt of court and the responsible official would be given a jail bunk on which to think things over.
    A. Gold

    Failure to comply may result in discipline up to and including termination.
    The free man is a warrior. - Nietzsche "Twilight of the Idols"

  3. #3
    McX
    Guest

    Post imported post

    playing with my copy and paste today;
    (2) Except as provided in subs. (3) and (4), no political subdivision
    may enact an ordinance or adopt a resolution that regulates
    the sale, purchase, purchase delay, transfer, ownership, use, keeping,
    possession, bearing, transportation, licensing, permitting,
    registration or taxation of any firearm or part of a firearm, including
    ammunition and reloader components, unless the ordinance or
    resolution is the same as or similar to, and no more stringent than,
    a state statute.

    bearing, by God I saw bearing in there!



  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481

    Post imported post

    The argument is that there are effectively more city and county parks then there are state parks. The area of the city and county parks combined would take up a greater area then the state parks within the state. Therefore enforcing an ordinance banning firearms in city or county parks would create a greater area in which an individual can not possess a firearm.

    Therefore it is more stringent.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    Doug Huffman wrote:
    66.0409 Local regulation of firearms.
    [ ... ]
    (b) If a political subdivision has in effect on November 17,
    1995, an ordinance or resolution that regulates the sale, purchase,
    transfer, ownership, use, keeping, possession, bearing, transportation,
    licensing, permitting, registration or taxation of any firearm
    or part of a firearm, including ammunition and reloader components,
    and the ordinance or resolution is not the same as or similar
    to a state statute, the ordinance or resolution shall have no legal
    effect and the political subdivision may not enforce the ordinance
    or resolution on or after November 18, 1995.
    My point is that the words "may not enforce the ordinance" occur only in a specific instance and sub-paragraph - for a grandfathered ordinance.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Grafton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    172

    Post imported post

    Doug Huffman wrote:
    Doug Huffman wrote:
    66.0409 Local regulation of firearms.
    [ ...]
    (b) If a political subdivision has in effect on November 17,
    1995, an ordinance or resolution that regulates the sale, purchase,
    transfer, ownership, use, keeping, possession, bearing, transportation,
    licensing, permitting, registration or taxation of any firearm
    or part of a firearm, including ammunition and reloader components,
    and the ordinance or resolution is not the same as or similar
    to a state statute, the ordinance or resolution shall have no legal
    effect and the political subdivision may not enforce the ordinance
    or resolution on or after November 18, 1995.
    My point is that the words "may not enforce the ordinance" occur only in a specific instance and sub-paragraph - for a grandfathered ordinance.
    That line is stating that on or after November 18, 1995, any ordinance that is more stringent that state statute cannot be enforced.

    I don't see anything that says an older ordinance is grandfathered and still enforceable.

  7. #7
    Regular Member paul@paul-fisher.com's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chandler, AZ
    Posts
    4,047

    Post imported post

    icepik wrote:
    Doug Huffman wrote:
    Doug Huffman wrote:
    66.0409 Local regulation of firearms.
    [ ...]
    (b) If a political subdivision has in effect on November 17,
    1995, an ordinance or resolution that regulates the sale, purchase,
    transfer, ownership, use, keeping, possession, bearing, transportation,
    licensing, permitting, registration or taxation of any firearm
    or part of a firearm, including ammunition and reloader components,
    and the ordinance or resolution is not the same as or similar
    to a state statute, the ordinance or resolution shall have no legal
    effect and the political subdivision may not enforce the ordinance
    or resolution on or after November 18, 1995.
    My point is that the words "may not enforce the ordinance" occur only in a specific instance and sub-paragraph - for a grandfathered ordinance.*
    That line is stating that on or after November 18, 1995, any ordinance that is more stringent that state statute cannot be enforced.

    I don't see anything that says an older ordinance is grandfathered and still enforceable.
    Right, but what I believe Doug is saying is that only ordinances that were passed before 11/17/95 'cannot be enforced'. Any that are passed after that don't have that verbiage affect them.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    North Central Wisconsin, ,
    Posts
    768

    Post imported post

    Ok, I'm confused. If the "old laws" cannot be enforced and "new laws" more stringent than state laws cannot be enacted, what's left? What am I missing?

  9. #9
    Regular Member paul@paul-fisher.com's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chandler, AZ
    Posts
    4,047

    Post imported post

    phred wrote:
    Ok, I'm confused.* If the "old laws" cannot be enforced and "new laws" more stringent than state laws cannot be enacted, what's left?* What am I missing?
    I believe it is a legal technicality. Doug, can you please explain the difference? Does one mean 'no longer valid' and the other 'never was valid'?

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    phred wrote:
    Ok, I'm confused. If the "old laws" cannot be enforced and "new laws" more stringent than state laws cannot be enacted, what's left? What am I missing?
    It is a meaningless difference.

    Now compare the words of § 66.0409 with the words of, for instance, § 19.97.

    §19.97 Enforcement. (1) This subchapter shall be enforced in the name and on behalf of the state by the attorney general or, upon the verified complaint of any person, by the district attorney of any county wherein a violation may occur.
    There is no jurisdiction charged in the statutes with enforcing Chapter 66 and especially with enforcing against the sovereign state and its political subdivisions. Repeal/rescission of ordinances written contrary to § 66.0409 is a political and legislative concern.

    Or compare the way § 66.0409 is written with any other section of Chapter 66, Subchapter IV, Regulation. In the other sections there are many bureaucratic requirements and permits, violation of which gives standing to a complainant in a local court.

  11. #11
    Regular Member BROKENSPROKET's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Trempealeau County
    Posts
    2,187

    Post imported post

    Doug Huffman wrote:
    Doug Huffman wrote:
    66.0409 Local regulation of firearms.
    [ ...]
    (b) If a political subdivision has in effect on November 17,
    1995, an ordinance or resolution that regulates the sale, purchase,
    transfer, ownership, use, keeping, possession, bearing, transportation,
    licensing, permitting, registration or taxation of any firearm
    or part of a firearm, including ammunition and reloader components,
    and the ordinance or resolution is not the same as or similar
    to a state statute, the ordinance or resolution shall have no legal
    effect and the political subdivision may not enforce the ordinance
    or resolution on or after November 18, 1995.
    My point is that the words "may not enforce the ordinance" occur only in a specific instance and sub-paragraph - for a grandfathered ordinance.
    Would it not have been awesome if they would have written in that such ordinances must be removed Dec. 31, 1995.

  12. #12
    Regular Member paul@paul-fisher.com's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chandler, AZ
    Posts
    4,047

    Post imported post

    BROKENSPROKET wrote:
    Would it not have been awesome if they would have written in that such ordinances must be removed Dec. 31, 1995.
    It would of been but just with my experience in Elkhorn, I have been working on it since September and I believe we might have it fixed next month.

Posting Permissions

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