Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Jackson County DA says he won't prosecute several state gun offenses, MJS

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

    Jackson County DA says he won't prosecute several state gun offenses, MJS

    http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/97680129.html

    Carrying a concealed weapon is now legal in Wisconsin - at least in one county of the state.

    Jackson County District Attorney Gerald R. Fox has declared that, in light of the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling this week that the Second Amendment clearly applies to the states, he will no longer prosecute people for carrying concealed weapons, or certain other gun related offenses.

    The high court's ruling in McDonald vs. Chicago, "immediately renders some of Wisconsin's current laws unconstitutional," Fox said in a news release. Therefore, he said, his office won't take any cases police might refer that are solely about violations of concealed carry, uncased or loaded weapons in vehicles, guns in public buildings or where alcohol is sold or served. Nor will Fox prosecute the possession of switchblade and other types of easy-opening knives.

    Fox said he will still "vigorously enforce" laws against the unlawful use of firearms, such as being a felon with a gun, or intoxicated with a gun, using a gun to commit a crime or handling a gun in a negligent manner.

    "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."

    Wisconsin and Illinois are the only two states that do not issued concealed carry permits.

    Fox was in court Friday and unavailable for comment, his office assistant said.

    His announcement wasn't going over too well with some law enforcement officials in Jackson County.

    Black River Falls Police Chief Don Gilberg said he didn't think Fox's position was very well thought out, and not good public policy.

    "When something's dumb, it's just dumb," Gilberg said.

    Gilberg said his department will continue to issue citations under city ordinances and seize weapons from people who may think that they can now carry concealed weapons in Black River Falls with impunity.

    Gilberg said he, too, applauded the decision in McDonald vs. Chicago, but didn't believe its intent was to "allow a Wild West atmosphere in our cities and towns."

    Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm said he's not really surprised that some district attorney would take this approach, because he fully expected the outcome in the McDonald case.

    "But I think the proper forum to resolve this is in the courts and Legislature," Chisholm said. "Until then, the only responsible course of action is to enforce the laws."

    Chisholm backed a proposal to make concealed carry legal after training, background checks and a permit process, but that would also then make carrying without the permit a felony, not the misdemeanor it is now.

    The proposed law would have also required all guns sales to anyone but a relative to go through licensed brokers and would make straw purchase arrangements that get guns to felons a state felony.

    Fox's policy falls within his discretion as the elected district attorney, said a spokesman for state Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen, who said the office had no comment about Fox's position.

    Notably absent from Fox's announcement was any mention of the law that makes it a felony to possess a gun within 1,000 feet of a school. A gun rights advocacy group, Wisconsin Carry Inc., and some individuals have challenged the constitutionality of that law earlier this year in federal court. They claim the 1,000 foot perimeter is generally impossible to determine, and that in populous areas like Milwaukee County, there are so many schools that the overlapping zones would effectively prohibit someone from carrying a gun at all.

    "I think it had to be an oversight," said Nik Clark, president of Wisconsin Carry.

    "We totally support what he said. But if it doesn't include school zones, then it's all meaningless."


    The McDonald case challenged Chicago's ban on handguns. In a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court reversed a ruling that had upheld the ban, and sent the case back for a lower court to issue the final decision.

    The majority opinion assured that "reasonable regulations" of firearms will be upheld, such as restrictions on gun possession by felons and the mentally ill and bans on guns in schools and government buildings.
    Last edited by Doug Huffman; 07-02-2010 at 05:12 PM.

  2. #2
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. Wisconsin Carry, Inc. - Chairman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,197
    This link has already been posted in 3 other threads... But for that matter there is more to the quote you misssed:

    Notably absent from Fox's announcement was any mention of the law that makes it a felony to possess a gun within 1,000 feet of a school. A gun rights advocacy group, Wisconsin Carry Inc., and some individuals challenged the constitutionality of that law this year in federal court. They contend the 1,000 foot perimeter is generally impossible to determine, and that in populous areas such as Milwaukee County, there are so many schools that the overlapping zones would effectively prohibit someone from carrying a gun at all.

    "I think it had to be an oversight," said Nik Clark, president of Wisconsin Carry.

    "We totally support what he said. But if it doesn't include school zones, then it's all meaningless."

    Fox said it would never occur to him to prosecute that crime, but he's never seen an arrest for it anyway. He agreed that it would probably not withstand constitutional review, either.
    www.wisconsincarry.org Wisconsin Carry, Inc. is not affiliated with opencarry.org or these web forums. Questions about discussion forum policy or forum moderation should be directed to the owners of opencarry.org not Wisconsin Carry, Inc.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    I searched on and posted the text! Quit sniveling, ignore me! Ya know you want to!

    Quote Originally Posted by Wisconsin Carry, Inc. - Chairman View Post
    This link has already been posted in 3 other threads... But for that matter there is more to the quote you misssed:
    Thanks for reading me. Please quit sniveling and just put me in your ignore file.

    Or you might whine to the administrator to have the pointless posts purged, me censured and banned or maybe he'll let you buy an even more meaningless title.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Updated, from the Jackson County Chronicle, Wednesday 07 July 2010

    http://www.jacksoncountychronicle.co...ews/00lead.txt

    Quote Originally Posted by Excerpt
    The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources said it had concerns over Fox’s announcement, primarily in regards to enforcing uncased or loaded firearms in vehicles.

    “We are very concerned with the DA’s assertion that he will refuse to enforce state public safety laws,” said Laurel Steffes, director of the DNR office of communication. “The U.S. Supreme Court decision did not overturn any existing Wisconsin laws. To protect public safety and prevent poaching, these laws must be consistently and correctly applied across the state.

    “We will meet with the Department of Justice before determining the next steps, but loaded, uncased guns in vehicles are a real threat to public safety and law enforcement.”
    Quote Originally Posted by Experpt
    Black River Falls resident Jan Rousey, a National Rifle Association and Wisconsin Firearm Owners, Ranges, Clubs & Educators member, said ... "proper education is important when handling firearms."

    “I would encourage anybody that wishes to exercise that constitutional right of carrying arms — whether it be concealed or open — receive proper training in the use of that particular firearm.”
    This NRA WI-FARCE spokesperson is laying the groundwork for individually permitted firearms, "the use of that particular firearm." That's what they get for letting just any Tom, or Harry Dick speak for the organization.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Somewhere, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,029

    They don't get it do they?

    I have been reading a number of objections to DA Fox's Memo. Law enforcement and people in general just don't get it do they? SCOTUS has declared that the second amendment of the United staes constitution gives all law abiding citizens of the United States the right to keep and bear arms. It has also ruled that the guarantee of that right is also applied to the goverments of the states and local political establishments. The rulings of SCOTUS does not eloborate under what circumstances the right is applied. The Wisconsin constitution fills that void. It specifically states under what circumstances the citizens of Wisconsin can keep and bear arms. They are: security, defense, hunting, recreation or any other lawful purpose. What does that mean? The words security and defense are key elements in the carry of firearms for personal protection. In that regard the state constitution is saying that the people of wisconsin have the right to keep and bear arms for personal protection. It doesn't restrict when and in what locations. The inference is it is a constitutionally protected right 24/7, in all locations. Unfortunately the amendment didn't also refer to all manners of carry. That is what allowed the state supreme court of Wisconsin to inject it's liberal anti-gun views into the process and try to wordsmith Article I section 25 to the court's ideology and ignore the will of 75% of the state's voters.

    The bottom line is; Under the umbrella of the Wisconsin constitution any law that deprives we citizens of the right to carry arms for our personal protection is in fact unconstitutional and an infringement on our rights. I feel that is the central message behind Mr. Fox's memo.

    It is difficult for me to comprehend why the say-nayers can't see that message. On the other hand I do undestand. The anti-gun law enforcement agencies and the anti-gun factions have only one agenda and that is the prohibition of all firearms in the hands of private citizens. They have such an indelible mind set that no amount of logic, argument, or statistical evidence will detract them from their goal.

  6. #6
    Regular Member paul@paul-fisher.com's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chandler, AZ
    Posts
    4,047
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Nemo View Post
    I have been reading a number of objections to DA Fox's Memo. Law enforcement and people in general just don't get it do they? SCOTUS has declared that the second amendment of the United staes constitution gives all law abiding citizens of the United States the right to keep and bear arms. It has also ruled that the guarantee of that right is also applied to the goverments of the states and local political establishments. The rulings of SCOTUS does not eloborate under what circumstances the right is applied. The Wisconsin constitution fills that void. It specifically states under what circumstances the citizens of Wisconsin can keep and bear arms. They are: security, defense, hunting, recreation or any other lawful purpose. What does that mean? The words security and defense are key elements in the carry of firearms for personal protection. In that regard the state constitution is saying that the people of wisconsin have the right to keep and bear arms for personal protection. It doesn't restrict when and in what locations. The inference is it is a constitutionally protected right 24/7, in all locations. Unfortunately the amendment didn't also refer to all manners of carry. That is what allowed the state supreme court of Wisconsin to inject it's liberal anti-gun views into the process and try to wordsmith Article I section 25 to the court's ideology and ignore the will of 75% of the state's voters.

    The bottom line is; Under the umbrella of the Wisconsin constitution any law that deprives we citizens of the right to carry arms for our personal protection is in fact unconstitutional and an infringement on our rights. I feel that is the central message behind Mr. Fox's memo.

    It is difficult for me to comprehend why the say-nayers can't see that message. On the other hand I do undestand. The anti-gun law enforcement agencies and the anti-gun factions have only one agenda and that is the prohibition of all firearms in the hands of private citizens. They have such an indelible mind set that no amount of logic, argument, or statistical evidence will detract them from their goal.
    Good analysis. I will keep it!

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    North Central Wisconsin, ,
    Posts
    768
    Quote Originally Posted by Excerpt
    The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources said it had concerns over Fox’s announcement, primarily in regards to enforcing uncased or loaded firearms in vehicles.

    “We are very concerned with the DA’s assertion that he will refuse to enforce state public safety laws,” said Laurel Steffes, director of the DNR office of communication. “The U.S. Supreme Court decision did not overturn any existing Wisconsin laws. To protect public safety and prevent poaching, these laws must be consistently and correctly applied across the state.

    “We will meet with the Department of Justice before determining the next steps, but loaded, uncased guns in vehicles are a real threat to public safety and law enforcement.”
    Thanks Doug for bringing this to our attention.

    It seems that uncased or loaded firearms in vehicles is a major problem only in Wisconsin. What is it with Wisconsinites that creates such a problem? And of course, accidents with loaded firearms NEVER happen with trained professionals such as LEO and/or Game Wardens.

    Banging my head against a brick wall.... again

  8. #8
    Founder's Club Member protias's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    SE, WI
    Posts
    7,318
    Quote Originally Posted by phred View Post
    Thanks Doug for bringing this to our attention.

    It seems that uncased or loaded firearms in vehicles is a major problem only in Wisconsin. What is it with Wisconsinites that creates such a problem? And of course, accidents with loaded firearms NEVER happen with trained professionals such as LEO and/or Game Wardens.

    Banging my head against a brick wall.... again
    "I am the only one in this room, professional enough, in this room, that I know of, that carries a Glock 40."

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeGD7r6s-zU

    Nothing like shooting yourself and then leaving the firearm right by the criminals. I can't tell if they are all chained together or not.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJf1Ku_F74Q
    No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. Thomas Jefferson (1776)

    If you go into a store, with a gun, and rob it, you have forfeited your right to not get shot - Joe Deters, Hamilton County (Cincinnati) Prosecutor

    I ask sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few politicians. - George Mason (father of the Bill of Rights and The Virginia Declaration of Rights)

  9. #9
    Regular Member hardballer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    West Coast of Wisconsin
    Posts
    925
    Edit: [I agree with Phred and others. We cannot allow the DNR or any other government org. or any employee of the people to run roughshod over us. These fear mongers act as if there is no internet or national communication possible. Constitutional carry has already been done and is good to go where ever it has been implemented. We do not live in a vacuum. It is time to reign in the DNR and law enforcement. The Constitution is the law. Statutes can only stand if they follow the Constitution. Period. We must enforce the Constitution and act accordingly.

    No, the DNR may not arbitrarily make laws that stands against the Constitution. If they have, they must be repealed. Neither may the BATF or any other letters for that matter. Sheriffs must follow the Constitution. Police Chiefs must follow the Constitution. I give a rip about their personal beliefs.]

    If we don't start making our case in non-politically correct terms, meeting each and every one of these incredibly stupid remarks with a direct, blunt, intelligent rebuttal, I can see where this thing is going.

    Constitutional carry is fabulously successful in every state where it is practiced. Crime is down in Wisconsin just since Open Carry has been commonly practiced.

    Each and every time we hear about these clowns, they need to be rebutted. I have been doing so as have a few others here. We just need more patriots; Freedom and liberty loving Americans, men and women with a voice, who embrace the Constitution, to speak their mind.

    Nobody will "get it" if they never hear it. Patience will not work nor will diplomacy. Compromise just means we have ceded ground. They had nothing to begin with, we and our ancestors have given way our birthright in order to placate and assuage unreasonable fear.

    Enough!

    It is time to take back the ground we have lost. These people, those against whom we struggle to regain that which is lost, are just plain nuts and will stop at nothing to smear us, up to and including out right lies. We must start acting like missionaries or AmWay sales people. Persistent, and ready to talk about our cause at the drop of a hat. Further, do not put up with lies. Fabrications. Stand against them.

    In one voice, so many speaking it would seem a shout, to lift the veil of lies and speak and write the truth. The truth you will never see in many dieing newspapers or hear on many an abandoned newscast. Quiet, polite people get herded into cattle cars. I for one, will not go that way. Let your voice be heard.
    Last edited by hardballer; 07-11-2010 at 02:58 AM. Reason: sp/Clarity

  10. #10
    Regular Member paul@paul-fisher.com's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chandler, AZ
    Posts
    4,047
    Quote Originally Posted by hardballer View Post
    In one voice, so many speaking it would seem a shout, to lift the veil of lies and speak and write the truth. The truth you will never see in many dieing newspapers or hear on many an abandoned newscast. Quiet, polite people get herded into cattle cars. I for one, will not go that way. Let your voice be heard.
    +1!!!

    The 1st step is to stop bickering amongst ourselves!!!! We have a common enemy, fear and ignorance, let's eradicate them, then we can argue about the little stuff.

    Here's my hit list:

    1. GFSZ
    2. Car carry
    3. CC
    4. No permit
    5. Park carry
    6. Government building carry

    In addition we need to get all of our localities (cities, villages, towns, counties) to remove any laws that are preempted.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481
    My list,

    Constitutional Carry!

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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