Just for Kicks, not that it will make a difference.

I had a ton of these made up after reading the post from someone on another forum that was looking for something like this. I have to credit someone else with the idea for what it says on the back, but I think they will work out just fine. These are my "Why I Carry" folding business cards.

Looks good, however shouldnt it say 'right' not 'rite'?

xd40arff said:

Looks good, however shouldnt it say 'right' not 'rite'?

Click to expand...

this

xd40arff said:

Looks good, however shouldnt it say 'right' not 'rite'?

Click to expand...

I am curious about that as well.

Why Yes, it should, guess it wont matter much, cause they are meant as jokes, so we will see if anyone else picks up on that.

CalicoJack10 said:

...we will see if anyone else picks up on that.

Click to expand...

FWIW it jumped off the page when I read the first line.

scm54449 said:

FWIW it jumped off the page when I read the first line.

Click to expand...

Agreed, let's not give anti's more to stereotype.

Anyone who is going to get something printed up to hand out should get several people to proof read it first.

Brass Magnet said:

Agreed, let's not give anti's more to stereotype.

Anyone who is going to get something printed up to hand out should get several people to proof read it first.

Click to expand...

Agree 100%. We have made tremendous progress in Wisconsin, let's keep it going. I suggest you hand out WCI fliers instead. They are well written, present all the needed facts and provide a uniform message.

comp45acp said:

Agree 100%. We have made tremendous progress in Wisconsin, let's keep it going. I suggest you hand out WCI fliers instead. They are well written, present all the needed facts and provide a uniform message.

Click to expand...

And even those WCI flyers ended up being proof read by members of this forum and changed before they were printed. In fact, that's probably the easiest. Put up the rough draft here and let members mull it over.

It has been fixed. I just finished modifying it 10 seconds ago. It is still just for kicks, I mean lets be honest, it is not like the anti's are going to read it anyway, but I understand your points, so I fixed it.

CalicoJack10 said:

It has been fixed. I just finished modifying it 10 seconds ago. It is still just for kicks, I mean lets be honest, it is not like the anti's are going to read it anyway, but I understand your points, so I fixed it.

Click to expand...

Maybe they won't, maybe they will. I know I sometimes will read anti-gun writings just to see what's in them. That way if I have a conversation in the future, I can anticipate their comments and have a response ready.

While it's not going to change their minds, it's going to be a reflection on those who want better gun rights in WI.

Hope you don't mind an outsider chiming in.

As a private citizen I have no obligation to come to the defense of anyone except myself. I may have decided to provide for the defense of certain others, such as family members, other relatives, close friends, sweet old ladies crossing the street, and that hawt teller down at the bank. But those are all individual, moral/philosophical choices that I have made. There is nothing that legally compells me, and may in many circumstances be conditions that legal constrain me.

Telling someone that, because of their philosophical decisions, I have made my own philosophical decisions is probably a waste of time - especially if our philosophies differ greatly. Why would they care? Why should I care about them and their safety if they do not care? Why should I put myself in danger if they are content to wait and see if dialing 9-1-1 works?

As I said, there are philosophical issues at play. Some may have decided that playing sheepdog chasing after the wolves is in fact the game to play, while others may have decided that as long as the wolf is not nipping at them the rest of the flock can be sacrificed for their own survival. But I just don't see the profit in telling the flock that you have decided they are on their own - especially when you condider that there are a whole bunch of lawyers out there who specialize in turning your announcement into the opporunity to extract money from you by twist your words. Tell me you choose not to defend me and my lawyer will twist that into a declaration that you had some duty to protect me but refused to act on that duty. Maybe by pulling out that "sheepdog" attitude and seeing how far he can take that with a jury looking at a gun-toting wannabe hero.

I'm just saying that telling folks - especially in print - you are not going to put your life and livelihood on the line for them is not a good idea. Evewn when there is nothing, at least legally, compelling you to protect them in the first place.

If you wanted to get their attention, why not help them understand that the cops have obligation to protect them/come to their rescue? That if the cops want to stay at the donut shop (not that cops ever go there in the first place ) they can and there is nothing that can be done about it except become a crime scene.

stay safe.

skidmark said:

If you wanted to get their attention, why not help them understand that the cops have obligation to protect them/come to their rescue?

stay safe.

Click to expand...

Should be edited to add the "NO" ?

"If you wanted to get their attention, why not help them understand that the cops have "NO" obligation to protect them/come to their rescue?"

Actually, Wisconsin does have a "Failure to act" or "Failure to render aid" law that was passed some years ago. I am having trouble finding the exact statute, but as soon as I do I will post it. It says Applicable to all citizens, not just physicians, that assigns an affirmative duty to aid a victim in need. Violation of these laws are punishable criminally. Though there has never been a case that I have seen where someone has actually been prosicuted for this, it is still an active law in Wisconsin.

Note, this is aside from teh Police Officers failure to render aid laws that are currently on the books.

CalicoJack10 said:

Actually, Wisconsin does have a "Failure to act" or "Failure to render aid" law that was passed some years ago. I am having trouble finding the exact statute, but as soon as I do I will post it. It says Applicable to all citizens, not just physicians, that assigns an affirmative duty to aid a victim in need. Violation of these laws are punishable criminally. Though there has never been a case that I have seen where someone has actually been prosicuted for this, it is still an active law in Wisconsin.

Note, this is aside from teh Police Officers failure to render aid laws that are currently on the books.

Click to expand...

There's a render aid law in the motor vehicle code, but that only requires one to render aid to somebody if you have hit them or their vehicle with your vehicle. And that certainly is enforced.

I don't believe there's a law that requires one to rescue a crime victim or to engage in a gunfight. That's the job police are hired to do. Not to say a non-cop wouldn't necessarily feel a personal or moral obligation to do so if it is within their ability, but I can't think of any statutory duty which would require it.

There is Ch. 946.40 which says "Whoever, without reasonable excuse, refuses or fails, upon command, to aid any person known by the person to be a peace officer is guilty of a Class C misdemeanor." It doesn't appear that would include being commanded to do something risky. The cited court cases involve police ordering hospital personnel to do a blood alcohol test and ordering a hospital to gather evidence of a sexual assault.

There is also a good Samaritan law that just says you can't be sued for a good faith effort to render emergency medical aid on the scene where somebody has been injured.

940.34 Duty to aid victim or report crime.

http://nxt.legis.state.wi.us/nxt/gateway.dll?f=templates&fn=default.htm&d=stats&jd=940.34 -or-

http://legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/Stat0940.pdf

940.34 Duty to aid victim or report crime. (1) (a) Whoever
violates sub. (2) (a) is guilty of a Class C misdemeanor.
(b) Whoever violates sub. (2) (b) is guilty of a Class C misdemeanor
and is subject to discipline under s. 440.26 (6).
(c) Whoever violates sub. (2) (c) is guilty of a Class C misdemeanor.
(2) (a) Any person who knows that a crime is being committed
and that a victim is exposed to bodily harm shall summon
law enforcement officers or other assistance or shall provide assistance
to the victim.
(b) Any person licensed as a private detective or granted a private
security permit under s. 440.26 who has reasonable grounds
to believe that a crime is being committed or has been committed
shall notify promptly an appropriate law enforcement agency of
the facts which form the basis for this belief.
(c) 1. In this paragraph, “unlicensed private security person”
means a private security person, as defined in s. 440.26 (1m) (h),
who is exempt from the permit and licensure requirements of s.
440.26.
2. Any unlicensed private security person who has reasonable
grounds to believe that a crime is being committed or has been
committed shall notify promptly an appropriate law enforcement
agency of the facts which form the basis for this belief.
(d) A person need not comply with this subsection if any of the
following apply:
1. Compliance would place him or her in danger.
2. Compliance would interfere with duties the person owes to
others.
3. In the circumstances described under par. (a), assistance is
being summoned or provided by others.
4. In the circumstances described under par. (b) or (c), the
crime or alleged crime has been reported to an appropriate law
enforcement agency by others.
(2m) If a person is subject to sub. (2) (b) or (c), the person need
not comply with sub. (2) (b) or (c) until after he or she has summoned
or provided assistance to a victim.
(3) If a person renders emergency care for a victim, s. 895.48
(1) applies. Any person who provides other reasonable assistance
under this section is immune from civil liability for his or her acts
or omissions in providing the assistance. This immunity does not
apply if the person receives or expects to receive compensation for
providing the assistance.

trailblazer2003 said:

940.34 Duty to aid victim or report crime.

http://nxt.legis.state.wi.us/nxt/gateway.dll?f=templates&fn=default.htm&d=stats&jd=940.34 -or-

http://legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/Stat0940.pdf

940.34 Duty to aid victim or report crime.

Click to expand...

Thank you, that is the one I was thinking of.