Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Who is unclear that a bicycle is a vehicle?

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

    Who is unclear that a bicycle is a vehicle?

    Who is unclear that a bicycle is a vehicle?

    We'll start at § 167.31 and work backwards. Here is Chapter 167 PDF link URL http://www.legis.state.wi.us/statutes/Stat0167.pdf download it for future reference.

    § 167.31 Safe use and transportation of firearms and bows. (1) DEFINITIONS. In this section: [extraneous material deleted ... ] (h) “Vehicle” has the meaning given in s. 340.01 (74), and ...

    Here is the Chapter 340 PDF link URL http://www.legis.state.wi.us/statutes/Stat0340.pdf download it for future reference.

    § 340.01 (74) “Vehicle” means every device in, upon, or by which any person or property is or may be transported or drawn upon a highway, except railroad trains....

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    323

    To repeat.

    To repeat what someone else here said, if shoes are considered a "device", then walking and open carrying violates the statute. Just another in a very long list of unconstitutional statutes.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Krusty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Trempealeau County, Wisconsin
    Posts
    281

    Bicycles, vehicles, motor vehicles, prosecution

    This is what I asked the LaCrosse county DA in an email on Sept 17, 2010

    I am involved in an ongoing debate on the legality of Open Carry of a
    firearm while on a bicycle. I understand the gun free school zones and
    public buildings and transporting firearms in a motor vehicle. Aside
    from all of that, would LaCrosse County prosecute for Open Carry while
    riding a bicycle in the proper areas? I also understand that a bicycle
    is actually classified as a "Vehicle"
    but not as a "Motor Vehicle".


    And this was his answer which was received on Sept 17, 2010

    A bicycle is not a "motor vehicle" so I would not prosecute for a person
    carrying a weapon while riding a bicycle. You are also right that the
    school zone would still apply, as could other statutes given the
    particular situation, but if it is simply an open carry while riding a
    bike, that alone would not be any violation. I would also caution that
    other people or officers who see you may still wonder of a person's
    intent to be carrying a weapon so I can't guarantee that you would not
    be stopped.


    It may not be in perfect alignment with the discussion, but it does answer possible legal situations.

    Krusty

  4. #4
    Regular Member paul@paul-fisher.com's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chandler, AZ
    Posts
    4,047
    Quote Originally Posted by Krusty View Post
    This is what I asked the LaCrosse county DA in an email on Sept 17, 2010

    I am involved in an ongoing debate on the legality of Open Carry of a
    firearm while on a bicycle. I understand the gun free school zones and
    public buildings and transporting firearms in a motor vehicle. Aside
    from all of that, would LaCrosse County prosecute for Open Carry while
    riding a bicycle in the proper areas? I also understand that a bicycle
    is actually classified as a "Vehicle"
    but not as a "Motor Vehicle".


    And this was his answer which was received on Sept 17, 2010

    A bicycle is not a "motor vehicle" so I would not prosecute for a person
    carrying a weapon while riding a bicycle. You are also right that the
    school zone would still apply, as could other statutes given the
    particular situation, but if it is simply an open carry while riding a
    bike, that alone would not be any violation. I would also caution that
    other people or officers who see you may still wonder of a person's
    intent to be carrying a weapon so I can't guarantee that you would not
    be stopped.


    It may not be in perfect alignment with the discussion, but it does answer possible legal situations.

    Krusty
    So the DA doesn't know the law or is only wishing to enforce part of it. What Doug is saying isn't a gray area. It is back letter law. I'm not saying I agree with it or that it;s smart, it's the law.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Canard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    SE, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by paul@paul-fisher.com View Post
    So the DA doesn't know the law or is only wishing to enforce part of it. What Doug is saying isn't a gray area. It is back letter law. I'm not saying I agree with it or that it;s smart, it's the law.
    I don't see it as clear. If it were as black and white as you suggest we wouldn't see so many discussions about this. The argument acknowledging shoe as a "device" you could travel on a highway is a valid argument. This creates the grey area. If OC is legal while wearing shoes why not a bike... or roller blades...or stilts. Or maybe this arguement indicates that OC is illegal according to this definition (absurd but arguable).

  6. #6
    Founder's Club Member bnhcomputing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,709

    Don't forget prosecutorial discretion

    Remember DA Fox in Jackson County? He knows the law and has stated he would use his discretion and not charge/prosecute certain laws. I think the La Crosse DA is doing the same think in this case.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481
    To: Bnh

    +1000

    I think it is evident in both the Racine and Sheboygan falls incidents.
    Last edited by J.Gleason; 09-18-2010 at 10:22 AM.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Interceptor_Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Max View Post
    To repeat what someone else here said, if shoes are considered a "device", then walking and open carrying violates the statute. Just another in a very long list of unconstitutional statutes.
    You are not transported in your shoes. A shoe is not a "vehicle" any more than your socks, jeans, shirt, etc.
    If you stand in one spot and I hook a rope to your body and pull, you will not be able to be "transported" in or on your shoes....
    If an overly zealous LEO cites you for OC on roller skates, I doubt a DA would prosecute.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Interceptor_Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Canard View Post
    I don't see it as clear. If it were as black and white as you suggest we wouldn't see so many discussions about this. The argument acknowledging shoe as a "device" you could travel on a highway is a valid argument. .
    Not only is it in-valid, it is absurd. The letter of the law is explicit and clear despite the desire for individuals to be absurd. The enforcement of the law has varied which confuses some persons. WI LEOs do not enforce every Motor Vehicle code in WI. As an example, if you have a rust hole through your car, you may not operate it. Any hole which could allow exhaust fumes into the interior is illegal. Not every car is cited for a burned out license plate light. Not every car is cited for tires sticking out of the wheel wells. The list goes on. There is the law and then there is the administrative enforcement policies of the various LEO groups. What the DNR will enforce is different than that a Milwaukee City Police officer will enforce.

  10. #10
    Regular Member ckmorley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    suring wisconsin
    Posts
    78
    So, I guess my bike is a grey area and my ATV is not ?

    ckmorley
    Anti-gunners tell us to run away from muggers. What about those of us who can't run ?

  11. #11
    Regular Member Interceptor_Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,839
    Quote Originally Posted by ckmorley View Post
    So, I guess my bike is a grey area and my ATV is not ?
    Your bike is a vehicle. No grey area. You are prohibited from OC-ing on a bicycle. Many LEOs do not enforce a bicycle as a vehicle and do not issue a citation.

  12. #12
    Guest
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Green Bay
    Posts
    232
    Can I OC in a little red wagon while my dog pulls it?

  13. #13
    Regular Member Interceptor_Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Springfielddx40 View Post
    Can I OC in a little red wagon while my dog pulls it?
    Not according to the letter of the law...
    Will you be cited? Not likely.....
    Last edited by Interceptor_Knight; 09-18-2010 at 07:46 PM.

  14. #14
    Guest
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Green Bay
    Posts
    232
    Quote Originally Posted by Interceptor_Knight View Post
    Not according to the letter of the law...
    Will you be cited? Not likely.....
    damn, I wanted to oc my Ak-57 uzi radar laser triple barreled double scoped heat seeking shotgun

Posting Permissions

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