• 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.

Area attorney wants to challenge state gun law http://www.wqow.com

Doug Huffman

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,180
Location
Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin,
http://www.wqow.com/Global/story.asp?S=12774051

Clark County (WQOW) - A recent Supreme Court ruling on the second amendment is already impacting a case in Wisconsin. An attorney wants to challenge a state gun law.

Here's the background: Daniel Rueden is a convicted felon, who's accused of trying to sell a stolen handgun in Clark County. He's charged with being a felon in possession of a firearm. He was in court Wednesday. His attorney claims the state law that prohibits felons from having firearms for life is too broad.

WQOW was told he feels the restriction should be lifted once probation, or other sentencing guidelines, run their course. He wants a court to determine whether the law is unconstitutional.

Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled Americans have the right to have handguns anywhere for self-defense. That ruling opened the door to challenges against gun laws in many cities and states.

A Federal lawsuit was filed Tuesday against a new gun law in Chicago. That ordinance was passed on Friday, four days after the Supreme Court ruling. The new Chicago law prohibits gun owners from stepping outside their homes with a handgun. The people who filed the lawsuit say the new ordinance is unconstitutional.
 
M

McX

Guest
Doug, is that part about have handguns anywhere for self defense true?
 

Shotgun

Wisconsin Carry, Inc.
Joined
Aug 23, 2006
Messages
2,668
Location
Madison, Wisconsin, USA
Doug, is that part about have handguns anywhere for self defense true?

You shouldn't take that literally. "Anywhere" means, in all states and cities. There cannot have an outright ban such as the one in Chicago. It doesn't mean you can carry a gun at every place you go, e.g., into a school, on a commercial flight, on a tour of the White House. I wish it meant that!
 

Brass Magnet

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2009
Messages
2,818
Location
Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
Hardly the ideal candidate for a test case..........

943.10(1m)(a)
Burglary-Building or Dwelling
Felony F
Dismissed-Read In-Pr

943.20(1)(a)
Theft-Movable Property >$2500-$5000
Felony I
Guilty / No Contest

943.23(3)
Drive or Operate Vehicle w/o Consent
Felony I
Dismissed-Read In-Pr


346.04(3)
Vehicle Operator Flee/Elude Officer
Felony I
Guilty / No Contest

The only thing I can see going for him is that there doesn't seem to be anything violent in his past transgressions and I don't see anything about using a firearm to commit any crimes.

In any case, he appears to never learn his lesson. This wouldn't be an individual that I would call "reformed" but far be it from me to say he shouldn't be allowed to have a firearm to defend himself; at least BEFORE this latest incident that actually involved firearms.

This brings up the conversation once again on where the bar should be set for disabling of rights. My personal opinion is when someone behaves violently towards others; especially repeatedly, they should be disabled or incarcerated. That seems pretty black and white to me but it get's a lot stickier (and a whole lot more gray) when someone demonstrates repeated lack of judgement as this man has however nonviolent.

I suppose it goes back to the lack of a real and working criminal justice system. This man was obviously never given the proper time in the joint or proper help to get his act together. There would be a lot less gray area and I could agree whole-heartedly that everone who is free from incarceration should have full rights if our criminal justice system actually worked.

If you look up his record you can see all the plea-bargaining that went on. Maybe without this, he would have learned his lesson in the first place and this would have never happened. Heck, he still may be in jail.
 
Top