Doj faq is here

ouch

Drakon said:

I stole this from wikipedia here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun-Free_School_Zones_Act_of_1990


I believe that is what the WI DOJ is making clear. So it isn't a typo or a mistake. The DOJ is simply stating that it is a Felony regardless of whether firing your weapon is justified or not .So carry your weapon in a school zone but don't ever fire it because if you do you quite possibly could go to jail.

Click to expand...

so those of you who live in Milwaukee would be hard pressed to defend yourself? time to write our reps and get an amendment to this if this is as they would enforce it. heh ?

Packfanatic said:

so those of you who live in Milwaukee would be hard pressed to defend yourself? time to write our reps and get an amendment to this if this is as they would enforce it. heh ?

Click to expand...

Nate Nelson has been working on improvements to Act 35 for the new NRA lobbbyist to work on. I can't rememeber what is name is. He stood by Darrin LaSorte at the Wausua signing.

Everyone, find Nate Nelson on Facebook at let him know about this.

Uziel Gal said:

You are correct, I was paraphrasing, and even though I support your position I'm sure I would not want to be the defendant in the case that tests out the theory that a handgun on the dash is in the open.

Click to expand...

September 30, I am taking out one of the taillights and repllacing with a bulb where only the brake lights work. I have already tested having my gun case on the dash the last time my tail light was out and that went fine.

Interesting that the DoJ will only certify law enforcement personnel as instructors. That means any civilian giving instruction must be certified by a state or national organization. There is no way for an independent civilian to become certified by the DoJ to give firearm training.

Captain Nemo said:

Interesting that the DoJ will only certify law enforcement personnel as instructors. That means any civilian giving instruction must be certified by a state or national organization. There is no way for an independent civilian to become certified by the DoJ to give firearm training.

Click to expand...

The NRA has to have their pound of flesh.

Are there any other limits on firearms in school zones?

Yes. It remains a felony for any who knowingly, or with reckless disregard for the safety of others, to discharge or attempt to discharge a firearm at a place the person knows is in or on or within 1,000 feet of school grounds unless:

• On private property not part of school grounds
• For use in a program approved by a school in the school zone by an individual participating in the program.
• By an individual in accordance with a contract entered into between a school in a school zone and the individual or an employer of the individual.

CCW FAQ 08/01/11
- 38 -
• By a law enforcement officer or state certified commission warden acting in his or her official capacity.
Wis. Stat. 948.605(3)(a) and (b).





Hmmm...'Discharge or attempt to discharge'...any thoughts on what 'attempt to discharge' might mean?

GlockRDH said:

Hmmm...'Discharge or attempt to discharge'...any thoughts on what 'attempt to discharge' might mean?

Click to expand...

Misfire perhaps?

Or maybe pulling the trigger, thinking the firearm was loaded when in fact iw wasn't.... attempted discharge?

Outdoorsman1

Wow! Just...wow!

So, your gun misfires, you get stabbed, beaten, and stomped within an inch of your life, and the feds can still throw you in jail for violating the GFSZ law?

Whenyou read the DoJ FAQ keep in mind this portion of Act 35:
175.60(2)(b) (b) The department may not impose conditions, limitations,
or requirements that are not expressly provided
for in this section on the issuance, scope, effect, or content
of a license.

Also keep in mind the DoJ does not have Carte Blanche rule making authority. It only has rule making authority as contracted by specific statute. Act 35 did not give rule making authority to the DoJ over the total of Act 35, only specific topics. It's principle authority in regards to Act 35 is prosecutorial representation of the state in enforcing the statute.

The duties and authority of the DoJ is contained in Chapter 165 of State statutes.

These are my opinions only. I am not a lawyer.

These are my opinions only. I am not a lawyer.[/QUOTE]

To add a bit of humor, and perhapse a smile to the day. You are not a lawyer, however you are a captain:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wW6RCegWp8k

Can someone please post the WI statue that states that a firearm transported must not be "within reach" In this FAQ it is stated this way, but it is my understanding that there is NO WI statue that states this.

Thanks

goforlow said:

Can someone please post the WI statue that states that a firearm transported must not be "within reach" In this FAQ it is stated this way, but it is my understanding that there is NO WI statue that states this.

Thanks

Click to expand...

If it does not exist... How would anyone post a statute...? Lol.

exactly!! but that's kinda my point..why does the DOJ post info in a FAQ that is not legally correct.

I have been wrong in the past, but I want to know the correct answer.

Thanks

goforlow said:

exactly!! but that's kinda my point..why does the DOJ post info in a FAQ that is not legally correct.

I have been wrong in the past, but I want to know the correct answer.

Thanks

Click to expand...

My Friend,
1.Wisxonsin Supreme Court Case Law
2.Wisxonsin Supreme Court Case Law
3.Wisxonsin Supreme Court Case Law
4.Wisxonsin Supreme Court Case Law
5.Wisxonsin Supreme Court Case Law
6.Wisxonsin Supreme Court Case Law
7.Wisxonsin Supreme Court Case Law
8.Wisxonsin Supreme Court Case Law
9.Wisxonsin Supreme Court Case Law

Three prong test. Sorry I am tired.

Greg, you have not answered the question.

I need statues, if they exist. Or, proof that I can put my AR15 in a case, unloaded, and set it on the passenger seat of my truck.

Trip20 said:

If the law clearly states a non-licensee may possess a loaded firearm in a vehicle, I don't see how a properly holstered firearm carried openly inside the vehicle could be considered hidden or concealed. How else would a reasonable man expect to possess a loaded firearm if not in such a manner?

Click to expand...

goforlow said:

Can someone please post the WI statue that states that a firearm transported must not be "within reach" In this FAQ it is stated this way, but it is my understanding that there is NO WI statue that states this.

Click to expand...

The conflicts people are having with understanding the changes is because of wishful thinking. Alot of promises were made or at the least inferences that we would be getting a Constitutional Carry law. We didn't. What we got was a shall issue permit system with an exception carved out for your home and land but not your vehicle.
In order to make permitted carry legal there had to be 2 statute changes. The first was the concealed carry statute and the second was the safe transportation statute. The safe transportation statute was unilaterally changed for handguns. What this means for Open Carry folks is that you may open your case while it is in or on your vehicle. You do no longer need to remove your cased handgun from the vehicle. It also means that any case will do. A transparent plastic box is now an irrefutable case should you choose to use it as such. This transparent case must be placed in a location so that the handgun inside would be visible from outside of the vehicle in the immediate vicinity through casual observation. It must be visible because you must have a permit to conceal it. The concealed weapon statute still applies unless you have a permit. It is case law where the definition of concealed carry exists. It is also annotated in the Statute.

To “go armed” does not require going anywhere. The elements for a violation of
s. 941.23 are: 1) a dangerous weapon is on the defendant’s person or within reach;
2) the defendant is aware of the weapon’s presence; and 3) the weapon is hidden.
State v. Keith, 175 Wis. 2d 75, 498 N.W.2d 865 (Ct. App. 1993).
A handgun on the seat of a car that was indiscernible from ordinary observation
by a person outside, and within the immediate vicinity, of the vehicle was hidden from
view for purposes of determining whether the gun was a concealed weapon under this
section. State v. Walls, 190 Wis. 2d 65, 526 N.W.2d 765 (Ct. App. 1994)

Click to expand...

Question...?

Interceptor_Knight said:

The conflicts people are having with understanding the changes is because of wishful thinking. Alot of promises were made or at the least inferences that we would be getting a Constitutional Carry law. We didn't. What we got was a shall issue permit system with an exception carved out for your home and land but not your vehicle.
In order to make permitted carry legal there had to be 2 statute changes. The first was the concealed carry statute and the second was the safe transportation statute. The safe transportation statute was unilaterally changed for handguns. What this means for Open Carry folks is that you may open your case while it is in or on your vehicle. You do no longer need to remove your cased handgun from the vehicle. It also means that any case will do. A transparent plastic box is now an irrefutable case should you choose to use it as such. This transparent case must be placed in a location so that the handgun inside would be visible from outside of the vehicle in the immediate vicinity through casual observation. It must be visible because you must have a permit to conceal it. The concealed weapon statute still applies unless you have a permit. It is case law where the definition of concealed carry exists. It is also annotated in the Statute.

Click to expand...

Question... So, if someone (me) gets the permit (which I do plan on doing), after I received the permit, will I be able to "open carry" in a vehicle with my loaded firearm holstered to my right (inside) hip...???

Based on info above, it is looking more and more like I will be SECURELY mounting a holster (with a retention strap to keep firearm form coming out while driving ) up on the TOP of the dashboard.... :banghead:

That way, when I exit the vehicle just take it from that holster and put it in the one that will already be on my hip.. and visa versa when I re-enter... :banghead:

Oh by they way... did I mention...:banghead:

Outdoorsman1

Outdoorsman1 said:

Question... So, if someone (me) gets the permit (which I do plan on doing), after I received the permit, will I be able to "open carry" in a vehicle with my loaded firearm holstered to my right (inside) hip...???

Based on info above, it is looking more and more like I will be SECURELY mounting a holster (with a retention strap to keep firearm form coming out while driving up on the TOP of the dashboard....

That way, when I exit the vehicle just take it from that holster and put it in the one that will already be on my hip.. and visa versa when I re-enter...

Click to expand...

To answer your question.. Yes.

The permit gives you an exception to the CCW Statute but does not require that you carry concealed. I plan to carry openly much of the time and will also be installing a holster within my vehicles.

Outdoorsman1 said:

Question... So, if someone (me) gets the permit (which I do plan on doing), after I received the permit, will I be able to "open carry" in a vehicle with my loaded firearm holstered to my right (inside) hip...???

Based on info above, it is looking more and more like I will be SECURELY mounting a holster (with a retention strap to keep firearm form coming out while driving ) up on the TOP of the dashboard.... :banghead:

That way, when I exit the vehicle just take it from that holster and put it in the one that will already be on my hip.. and visa versa when I re-enter... :banghead:

Oh by they way... did I mention...:banghead:

Outdoorsman1

Click to expand...

That is exactly what I will be doing from Nov.1 until I get my permit.

Right now is just stays in it's holster. So, Nov. 1, if I have a way to be compliant with the law without opening myself to the potential of a N.D. that loading and unloading makes possible and not compromise my split secand ability to defend myself or others, I am taking it.



It is my opinion that Open Carry in a vehicle is not a violation of 941.23. It was a violation of 167.31 but not for long.

If I am standing strong side away from an officer, am I carrying concealed? NO.

If I am eating in a restaraunt, sitting in a booth, with my strong side in, am I carrying concealed? NO.

If I go into dressing room or in a bathroom stall, am I carrying conealed? NO.

Just because someone cannot see it, because my firearm is not visible to them at the moment, does not mean I am carring concealed.

If my holster is at 2 o'clock and the officer approaches from the passenger side, is it concealed? IMO, NO.

If I am a leftie and my holster is at 8 o'clock and the officer approaches from either side, is it concealed? IMO, NO.

If it is considered not concealed outside my vehicle, and do not change the location of my firearm when I get in my vehicle, IMO it is not concealed.

If a adjust or add clothing that conceals, or I remove in form my holster and place it my vehicle under the seat, in the glove box or console, there was an action to attempt to conceal it. Simply getting in my vehicle is not an attempt to conceal it, even though it may not be visible.

That is MY viewpoint. What we need is Legislation that will clarify this. Legislators draft bills and gov. signs them into law, then our Supreme court can either clarify or prevert it's meaning. The three prong test is far too simplistic and never contemplated our Consitutionally protected right Open Carry.