• 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.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • 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.

66.0409 Local regulation of firearms.

Doug Huffman

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,180
Location
Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin,
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.
 

Shotgun

Wisconsin Carry, Inc.
Joined
Aug 23, 2006
Messages
2,668
Location
Madison, Wisconsin, USA
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.
 
M

McX

Guest
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!
 

J.Gleason

Banned
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
3,481
Location
Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
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.
 

Doug Huffman

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,180
Location
Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin,
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.
 

icepik

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2009
Messages
172
Location
Grafton, Wisconsin, USA
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.
 

paul@paul-fisher.com

Regular Member
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
4,049
Location
Chandler, AZ
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.
 

phred

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2010
Messages
768
Location
North Central Wisconsin, ,
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?
 

paul@paul-fisher.com

Regular Member
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
4,049
Location
Chandler, AZ
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'?
 

Doug Huffman

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,180
Location
Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin,
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.
 

BROKENSPROKET

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2010
Messages
2,199
Location
Trempealeau County
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.
 

paul@paul-fisher.com

Regular Member
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
4,049
Location
Chandler, AZ
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.
 
Top