Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Clarification needed!!

  1. #1
    Regular Member gunguy2009's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Janesville, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    200

    Clarification needed!!

    http://legis.wisconsin.gov/lc/public.../IM2011_10.pdf

    In this wonderful link that was sent to me, I found a section that I don't understand. The top of page 5, paragraphs 1 and 2. The first one states that Colleges and Universities can prohibit firearms. The second says they cannot without a provision prohibiting it, meaning??? Is a "no carry" sign a provision? My college does unfortunately prohibit them... I'm assuming they will figure out how to do it, but I hope they don't post the 5X7 signs, which would allow me to carry legally. :-)
    Last edited by gunguy2009; 07-06-2011 at 12:48 AM.

  2. #2
    Regular Member davegran's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Cassville Area -Twelve Miles From Anything, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,565
    If you look at the actual bill you will see language that says in 943.13 (1m) (c),(Disclaimer: this is the way I read it and someone else, including the University, may read it differently...) that a university or college can't prohibit carry on any part of its grounds, in a car in a parking lot, or in a residential building and the building's common areas IF you are a resident.
    Dave
    45ACP-For when you care enough to send the very best-
    Fight for "Stand Your Ground " legislation!

    WI DA Gerald R. Fox:
    "These so-called 'public safety' laws only put decent law-abiding citizens at a dangerous disadvantage when it comes to their personal safety, and I for one am glad that this decades-long era of defective thinking on gun issues is over..."

    Remember: Don't make old People mad. We don't like being old in the first place, so it doesn't take much to piss us off.

  3. #3
    Regular Member gunguy2009's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Janesville, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    200
    That would be nice! As of now, they don't even allow you to have a weapon in your vehicle while parked on the property. The LAST thing I need is to get booted outta school when this is my last year!! So I think I'm gonna dig into this question a little more... Does Walker do Emails?

  4. #4
    Regular Member paul@paul-fisher.com's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chandler, AZ
    Posts
    4,047
    Quote Originally Posted by davegran View Post
    If you look at the actual bill you will see language that says in 943.13 (1m) (c),(Disclaimer: this is the way I read it and someone else, including the University, may read it differently...) that a university or college can't prohibit carry on any part of its grounds, in a car in a parking lot, or in a residential building and the building's common areas IF you are a resident.
    I am reading it the same way.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,169

    Discretion is Important

    Even though the new law may permit certain activities, it does not require that anybody engage in those activities at every available opportuniity. There is no need to flaunt carry on college campii. Concealed is a better choice all other things being equal. Remember that we are dealing with a law. Laws can be changed by future governments. One sure way to increase restrictions is to draw attention to oneself. I am not going to list what that may entail, most everybody is smart enough to figure it out for themselves. The purpose of this law is to enhance self-defense, not pick up chicks, make the news or poke your finger in the eye of the university administration. If the legislature gets a slew of phone calls from anxious parents worried, however irrationally, about Freddy Freshman, expect certain members to seize upon that emotion to attempt to add new no-carry zones or other restrictions.

    There has been much (justified) complaint about Bill Berry's column. Yet, if you look at some posts on OCDO and similar sites, it is not hard to figure out why people like Berry write such stuff. There is a grain of truth to some of what he says, he just extrapolates to the nth degree. Quite often, when I read a post about a particular self-defense scenario that is extremely improbable, carrying backup guns, purchasing CCW badges, using a CWL for identification, standing your ground in a public place etc., I wonder if some don't have a unhealthy concept of OC/CC.

    I am not saying that any discussion of these issues is indicative of a problem but some people (albeit a very small percentage) go overboard and give the Bill Berrys (Berries?) of this world a hook on which to hang their monsters.

  6. #6
    Regular Member jpm84092's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
    Posts
    1,068
    Here is something to ponder. WI SS 947.01(2) takes effect the day after publication.

    947.01 (2) Unless other facts and circumstances that indicate a criminal or malicious intent on the part of the
    person apply, a person is not in violation of, and may not be charged with a violation of, this section for loading,
    carrying, or going armed with a firearm, without regard to whether the firearm is loaded or is concealed or openly
    carried.

    (Copied and pasted directly from the Bill)
    Last edited by jpm84092; 07-09-2011 at 01:35 PM.
    My cats support the Second Amendment. NRA Life Member, NRA Instructor: Pistol, Rifle, & Personal Protection - NRA Certified Range Safety Officer, Utah BCI Certified Concealed Firearm Permit Instructor.
    "Permission Slips" from Utah, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Arizona, and Florida. _ Verily, thou shalt not fiddle with thine firearm whilst in the bathroom stall, lest thine spouse seek condolences from thine friends.

  7. #7
    Regular Member paul@paul-fisher.com's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chandler, AZ
    Posts
    4,047
    Quote Originally Posted by jpm84092 View Post
    Here is something to ponder. WI SS 947.01(2) takes effect the day after publication.

    947.01 (2) Unless other facts and circumstances that indicate a criminal or malicious intent on the part of the
    person apply, a person is not in violation of, and may not be charged with a violation of, this section for loading,
    carrying, or going armed with a firearm, without regard to whether the firearm is loaded or is concealed or openly
    carried.

    (Copied and pasted directly from the Bill)
    Yep, they did a couple things that took either memo's or court rulings and gave them rule of law. This part was taking the AG memo and they took the Supreme Court rulings about exceptions to the concealed carry law in one's house or place of business and expanded it to all your owned real estate. It would of been nice if they expanded a little further to your vehicle but we can work on that in the fall session.

  8. #8
    Regular Member davegran's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Cassville Area -Twelve Miles From Anything, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,565
    Quote Originally Posted by jpm84092 View Post
    Here is something to ponder. WI SS 947.01(2) takes effect the day after publication.

    947.01 (2) Unless other facts and circumstances that indicate a criminal or malicious intent on the part of the
    person apply, a person is not in violation of, and may not be charged with a violation of, this section for loading,
    carrying, or going armed with a firearm, without regard to whether the firearm is loaded or is concealed or openly
    carried.

    (Copied and pasted directly from the Bill)
    This section just eliminates some firearm activities (loading, concealing, openly carrying) as reasons to be charged with disorderly conduct. If you are doing other things such as unholstering and waving the firearm around, you could still be be charged with DC for criminal intent. What was the point you were trying to make?
    Last edited by davegran; 07-10-2011 at 11:31 AM.
    Dave
    45ACP-For when you care enough to send the very best-
    Fight for "Stand Your Ground " legislation!

    WI DA Gerald R. Fox:
    "These so-called 'public safety' laws only put decent law-abiding citizens at a dangerous disadvantage when it comes to their personal safety, and I for one am glad that this decades-long era of defective thinking on gun issues is over..."

    Remember: Don't make old People mad. We don't like being old in the first place, so it doesn't take much to piss us off.

  9. #9
    Regular Member jpm84092's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
    Posts
    1,068
    Quote Originally Posted by davegran View Post
    This section just eliminates some firearm activities (loading, concealing, openly carrying) as reasons to be charged with disorderly conduct. If you doing other things such as unholstering and waving the firearm around, you could still be be charged with DC for criminal intent. What was the point you were trying to make?
    No Point being being made. I just wanted to hear what others had to say who are more familiar with the history and intent of the Bill. It was a request for commentary.
    My cats support the Second Amendment. NRA Life Member, NRA Instructor: Pistol, Rifle, & Personal Protection - NRA Certified Range Safety Officer, Utah BCI Certified Concealed Firearm Permit Instructor.
    "Permission Slips" from Utah, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Arizona, and Florida. _ Verily, thou shalt not fiddle with thine firearm whilst in the bathroom stall, lest thine spouse seek condolences from thine friends.

  10. #10
    Regular Member paul@paul-fisher.com's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chandler, AZ
    Posts
    4,047
    Quote Originally Posted by jpm84092 View Post
    No Point being being made. I just wanted to hear what others had to say who are more familiar with the history and intent of the Bill. It was a request for commentary.
    I thought I explained it here

    I guess I didn't make it clear. It's an addition to the DC statute that says DC can't be charged absent any other crime if someone is oc'ing or cc'ing. It basically puts into legislation the memo released by the AG saying the same thing.

  11. #11
    Regular Member gunguy2009's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Janesville, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    200
    apjonas- It's going to be carried concealed while in class, not OC'ed. I'm not going to be flaunting my weapon, I'm not trying to be the cool guy, I'm already as cool as a polar bear :-). As for chicks, I've got my woman. And the only woman there is the administrator for the Aviation center, and let's just say she's NOT my type, lol. The program I'm in is Airframe & Powerplant, most girls don't want to work on planes, jets, and helicopters...

    The college I go to also has an Aviation Center at the Airport, which only has 2 class rooms which are above a hanger filled with our own aircrafts. My class only has 10 people (very small) and we don't change rooms, the instructors come to us. So I don't come in contact with 200-300 people a day. Of the 10 people- 2 Navy, 3 Army, 1 Air Force, and 1 Instructor that is a retired Marine that has 2 tours in Vietnam. My class is fairly comfortable around guns... They all know I open carry and know about the CC bill. No one will be alarmed. Regardless, its not going to be visible anyways...


    Thank you everyone else for ur input and help answering this question. We will see what the fall brings as far as college carry goes...
    Last edited by gunguy2009; 07-10-2011 at 06:18 PM.

Posting Permissions

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