Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Wisconsin DA Will Honor McDonald Decision 100%

  1. #1
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,620

    Wisconsin DA Will Honor McDonald Decision 100%

    A press release from a Wisconsin (!!) District Attorney:

    http://www.co.jackson.wi.us/html/dis...%20Chicago.pdf

    OFFICE OF GERALD R. FOX
    JACKSON COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY
    NEWS RELEASE
    For Immediate Release June 29, 2010
    DISTRICT ATTORNEY GERALD FOX’S STATEMENT ON THE
    U. S. SUPREME COURT’S DECISION IN MCDONALD v. CITY OF CHICAGO

    Yesterday, in a resounding victory for all freedom-loving Americans,
    the United States Supreme Court confirmed that the Second
    Amendment’s protection of our right to keep and bear arms applies
    everywhere in America, and serves as a rampart against state
    infringement of this fundamental individual liberty. In its ruling,
    the Court declared that the right to keep and bear arms is a
    fundamental right, and that self-defense is at the core of the
    freedoms protected by the amendment.

    This Supreme Court ruling is binding on all states and local
    governments, and immediately renders some of Wisconsin’s current
    laws unconstitutional. Therefore, in keeping with my oath to uphold
    and defend the Constitution, I hereby declare that this office will
    no longer accept law enforcement referrals for violations of the
    following statutes:

    Section 167.31, prohibiting uncased or loaded firearms in vehicles;
    Section 941.23, prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons,
    including firearms;
    Section 941.235, prohibiting the possession of firearms in public
    buildings;
    Section 941.237, prohibiting the possession of firearms in
    establishments where alcohol may be sold or served; and,
    Section 941.24, prohibiting the possession of knives that open with
    a button, or by gravity, or thrust, or movement.

    All of these statutes constitute unjustifiable infringements on the
    fundamental right of every law-abiding American to arm themselves
    for self-defense and the defense of their loved ones, co-workers,
    homes and communities. This change also invalidates Jackson County
    Ordinance Sections 9.01 (firearms in public buildings) and 9.29 (CCW).

    Prior to this historic ruling, our state Supreme Court placed the
    state’s interests first, and would only create an exception to these
    laws when the individual’s need for protection outweighed the
    state’s interest. In the area of concealed carry, only 2 cases have
    approved concealed carry, one at home, and the other one at the
    defendant’s personally-owned place of business. Well, as the United
    States Supreme Court held yesterday, that view was exactly backward.

    As with the other fundamental rights, such as the freedom of speech,
    of religion, of association, or of security in our homes, persons,
    and effects, government limitations on fundamental rights are lawful
    only in the rare case that the state can show a compelling
    governmental need that can be accomplished only by enacting a
    narrowly-tailored restriction, in terms of time, place and manner.
    Clearly, a blanket prohibition against carrying your loaded firearm
    in your personal vehicle does not pass that test.

    Put it another way: Does preventing the barkeep from protecting
    herself when she carries the bank bag home from the tavern make
    sense? Not here, not anymore. That’s not an American value; it puts
    concern for the criminal’s welfare ahead of the barkeeper’s right to
    self-defense. The fact is, criminals don’t pay attention to gun
    laws, only we good folks do. After 15 years of criminal law
    practice, I can state positively that when criminals resolve to harm
    someone, no law will stop them. These so-called “public safety” laws
    only put decent law-abiding citizens at a dangerous disadvantage
    when it comes to their personal safety, and I for one am glad that
    this decades-long era of defective thinking on gun issues is over.

    I will watch for the legislature to make needed corrections in these
    areas. In the meantime, while I am happy to declare that we will
    follow the Supreme Court’s ruling, I want to emphasize that with
    fundamental rights come grave responsibilities, and I will continue
    to vigorously enforce the laws against unlawfully using firearms,
    such as the prohibition against felons being armed; going armed
    while intoxicated; using a firearm to commit a crime; and
    endangering safety by negligent handling of a weapon, to name just a
    few. Only by the strictest adherence to firearm safety rules and
    common sense will we show that the elitists who seek to disarm all
    of us are wrong, and that every law abiding citizen can be trusted
    to protect themselves and their neighbors safely.

    A copy of the Supreme Court’s decision can be found at
    http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1521.pdf

    A copy of the amicus brief joined by J.B. Van Hollen, the Attorney
    General of
    Wisconsin, can be viewed at: http://www.abanet.org/publiced/preview/briefs/pdfs/09-
    10/08-1521_PetitionerAmCuStateofTexas.pdf

    Let Freedom Ring.

    Gerald R. Fox
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818
    Ongoing discussion here:
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...nconstituional

    BTW, it must be nice to be able to use the new softwares "signature" ablilty so you don't have to type "Yata hey" all the time.
    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

  3. #3
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,620
    Quote Originally Posted by Brass Magnet View Post
    Ongoing discussion here:
    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...nconstituional

    BTW, it must be nice to be able to use the new softwares "signature" ablilty so you don't have to type "Yata hey" all the time.
    Duplicated - Must have used the wrong search terms.

    Anyway, kudos to the DA - its a shame he doesn't have authority over the entire state.

    New forum features are appreciated.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

  4. #4
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818
    Quote Originally Posted by Grapeshot View Post
    Duplicated - Must have used the wrong search terms.

    Anyway, kudos to the DA - its a shame he doesn't have authority over the entire state.

    New forum features are appreciated.
    AMEN to that.......... I'm hoping we get a bunch of the Wisconsin DA's to agree to this and force the legislatures hand.
    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

  5. #5
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961
    He gets it.
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come …………. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  6. #6
    Regular Member johnny amish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    High altitude of Vernon County, ,
    Posts
    1,025
    A letter of thanks is not out of line. We need to support him and his public stance, he will no doubt recieve a lot of flack from anti-gunners about this. His e-mail is www.gerald.fox@da.wi.gov . I sent him one today and it took about two hours for him to respond, he believes he is standing up for the oath he took to protect the constitution. Lets all get behind him and show him our support.

  7. #7
    Regular Member simmonsjoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Mattaponi, Virginia, United States
    Posts
    1,664
    Quote Originally Posted by Brass Magnet View Post
    BTW, it must be nice to be able to use the new softwares "signature" ability so you don't have to type "Yata hey" all the time.
    Pwned

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Tahoe, Nevada, USA
    Posts
    109
    I added this to another thread, but I don't agree with the thinking of the DA.

    His job is not only to uphold the constitution(s) but the law of the land as passed by the people. As long as laws exist on the books, he needs to defend them and pursue them as that is his job.

    The conflict arises when there is an obvious conflict between the law(s) and constitution(s). It's not his job to interpret which to follow, but to let the judicial / legislative branch figure it out.

    He *should* prosecute. But he shouldn't play to win 100% of the time. If the opposing team (e.g. SAF) wants to take the ball to the Federal courts, he should help by playing to win. If the opposing team (e.g. Joe Blow) made a mistake, he should play to lose.

    By him refusing to prosecute, there's no reason to strike the bad laws from the books, in fact, there's little way to strike them as there's no case to appeal. Years down the road, someone may get caught up in a similar case, become a convicted felon (due to a new person in charge) and lose their rights.

    Now is the time to remove these laws, once and for all. Not to ignore them and wait for the pendulum to swing back.

  9. #9
    Moderator / Administrator Grapeshot's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    North Chesterfield, Va.
    Posts
    34,620
    Quote Originally Posted by merle View Post
    I added this to another thread, but I don't agree with the thinking of the DA.

    His job is not only to uphold the constitution(s) but the law of the land as passed by the people. As long as laws exist on the books, he needs to defend them and pursue them as that is his job.

    The conflict arises when there is an obvious conflict between the law(s) and constitution(s). It's not his job to interpret which to follow, but to let the judicial / legislative branch figure it out.

    He *should* prosecute. But he shouldn't play to win 100% of the time. If the opposing team (e.g. SAF) wants to take the ball to the Federal courts, he should help by playing to win. If the opposing team (e.g. Joe Blow) made a mistake, he should play to lose.

    By him refusing to prosecute, there's no reason to strike the bad laws from the books, in fact, there's little way to strike them as there's no case to appeal. Years down the road, someone may get caught up in a similar case, become a convicted felon (due to a new person in charge) and lose their rights.

    Now is the time to remove these laws, once and for all. Not to ignore them and wait for the pendulum to swing back.
    Whether to prosecute a case or not is up to the discretion of the District Attorney - there is no must prosecute. The financial burden to appeal a bad court decision must be borne by the defendant to have precedent set by the court of record. Indeed a heavy load to carry that is avoided by this DA's decision - commendable IMHO.

    Far better to push your state legislature to honor the Constitution and the SCOTUS verdict. Much cheaper, less painful and it is the RIGHT thing to do.
    You will not rise to the occasion; you will fall back on your level of training.” Archilochus, 650 BC

    Old and treacherous will beat young and skilled every time. Yata hey.

Posting Permissions

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