Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: SB93: police harrassment penalties?

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Stoughton, WI
    Posts
    252

    SB93: police harrassment penalties?

    Did anyone notice if the penalties for LEO harassment of legal carriers was still in the new bill?

  2. #2
    Regular Member wild boar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    wisconsin
    Posts
    445

    The semantics involved...

    Quote Originally Posted by rcav8r View Post
    Did anyone notice if the penalties for LEO harassment of legal carriers was still in the new bill?
    ...with the word "harassment" are so objective, who knows.
    Last edited by wild boar; 06-13-2011 at 04:38 PM.
    The purpose of fighting is to win,
    there is no victory in defense.
    The sword is more important than the shield,
    and skill is more important than either.
    The final weapon is the brain,
    all else is supplemental.

  3. #3
    McX
    Guest
    it would be positive to me if the penalties were assessed directly against the cop, not the tax paying citizens, and not require being dragged through a court to get justice. also, i'd like to see some real penalties, not just "baliff........whack his pee-pee.'

  4. #4
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    Heck, if they'd even do that much it'd be an improvement!
    Esp. if we could get justice without the expense of a lawyer & hassle of court.

    And I think the way the bill is (was?) written, if carriers are treated differently from sheep then it's an infraction.
    So carry those recorders, boys & girls, then do FOIA requests to see how other people in similar situations have been treated.
    Betcha they didn't get hauled out of their car at gunpoint by 6 cops for running a stop sign.
    Last edited by MKEgal; 06-13-2011 at 03:07 PM.

  5. #5
    McX
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by MKEgal View Post
    Heck, if they'd even do that much it'd be an improvement!
    Esp. if we could get justice without the expense of a lawyer & hassle of court.

    And I think the way the bill is (was?) written, if carriers are treated differently from sheep then it's an infraction.
    So carry those recorders, boys & girls, then do FOIA requests to see how other people in similar situations have been treated.
    Betcha they didn't get hauled out of their car at gunpoint by 6 cops for running a stop sign.
    or eating dinner at Culvers, in Madison.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Da Po-lock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Green Bay, WI
    Posts
    131

    Yes

    (17) PENALTIES
    (ar) Any law enforcement officer who uses excessive force based solely on an individual's status as a licensee may be fined not ore than $500 or sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not more than 30 days or both. The application of the criminal penalty under this paragraph does not preclude the application of any other civil or criminal remedy.

    The KEY words here are
    excessive force
    This does'nt mean you still will not be "asked friendly questions" OR cited for disorderly conduct OR anything worse.
    Last edited by Da Po-lock; 06-13-2011 at 06:29 PM.
    Any one of you lily livered, flea bitten, bow legged varmints care to slap leather with me?

    A.S.N.F.
    A Son NEVER Forgets

  7. #7
    Regular Member BROKENSPROKET's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Trempealeau County
    Posts
    2,187
    Quote Originally Posted by Da Po-lock View Post
    (17) PENALTIES
    (ar) Any law enforcement officer who uses excessive force based solely on an individual's status as a licensee may be fined not ore than $500 or sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not more than 30 days or both. The application of the criminal penalty under this paragraph does not preclude the application of any other civil or criminal remedy.

    The KEY words here are
    excessive force
    This does'nt mean you still will not be "asked friendly questions" OR cited for disorderly conduct OR anything worse.
    66.0409 (6) Unless other facts and circumstances that indicate a criminal or
    malicious intent on the part of the person apply, no person may be in violation of, or
    be charged with a violation of, an ordinance of a political subdivision relating to
    disorderly conduct or other inappropriate behavior for loading, carrying, or going
    armed with a firearm, without regard to whether the firearm is loaded or is concealed
    or openly carried. Any ordinance in violation of this subsection does not apply and
    may not be enforced.
    Not Disordelry Conduct, But they can use execessve force against a lawful Open Carrier without a license.

Posting Permissions

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