Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: The LRB rides again

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Somewhere, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,029

    The LRB rides again

    The LRB strikes again.

    Current statute 941.235 reads as follows:


    941.235 Carrying firearm in public building.

    941.235(1)
    (1) Any person who goes armed with a firearm in any building owned or leased by the state or any political subdivision of the state is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.


    941.235(2)
    (2) This section does not apply to peace officers or armed forces or military personnel who go armed in the line of duty or to any person duly authorized by the chief of police of any city, village or town, the chief of the capitol police, or the sheriff of any county to possess a firearm in any building under sub. (1). Notwithstanding s. 939.22 (22), for purposes of this subsection, peace officer does not include a commission warden who is not a state-certified commission warden.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Essentially what is says is that only certain law enforcement and military personnel are allowed to carry any firearm in any public building owned or leased by any unit of government.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Act 35 modified statute 941.235 to also exempt licensees from the prohibition of carrying firearms in public buildings. See section 60 below. 941.235 (2)(e)
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    SECTION 58. 941.235 (2) (c) of the statutes is created
    to read:
    941.235 (2) (c) A qualified out−of−state law enforcement
    officer, as defined in s. 941.23 (1) (g), to whom s.
    941.23 (2) (b) 1. to 3. applies.
    SECTION 59. 941.235 (2) (d) of the statutes is created
    to read:
    941.235 (2) (d) A former officer, as defined in s.
    941.23 (1) (c), to whom s. 941.23 (2) (c) 1. to 7. applies.
    SECTION 60. 941.235 (2) (e) of the statutes is created
    to read:
    941.235 (2) (e) A licensee, as defined in s. 175.60 (1)
    (d), or an out−of−state licensee, as defined in s. 175.60 (1)
    (g).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    However, concealed carry permit holders were not given carte blanche exemption to carry in all public buildings. Specific public buildings are still off limits as contained in (16) (a) Prohibited Activity section as quoted below.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    (16) PROHIBITED ACTIVITY. (a) Except as provided in
    par. (b), neither a licensee nor an out−of−state licensee
    may knowingly carry a concealed weapon, a weapon that
    is not concealed, or a firearm that is not a weapon in any
    of the following places:
    1. Any portion of a building that is a police station,
    sheriff’s office, state patrol station, or the office of a division
    of criminal investigation special agent of the department.
    2. Any portion of a building that is a prison, jail,
    house of correction, or secured correctional facility.
    3. The facility established under s. 46.055.
    4. The center established under s. 46.056.
    5. Any secured unit or secured portion of a mental
    health institute under s. 51.05, including a facility designated
    as the Maximum Security Facility at Mendota
    Mental Health Institute.
    6. Any portion of a building that is a county, state, or
    federal courthouse.
    7. Any portion of a building that is a municipal courtroom
    if court is in session.
    8. A place beyond a security checkpoint in an airport.
    (b) The prohibitions under par. (a) do not apply to any
    of the following:
    1. A weapon in a vehicle driven or parked in a parking
    facility located in a building that is used as, or any portion
    of which is used as, a location under par. (a).
    2. A weapon in a courthouse or courtroom if a judge
    who is a licensee is carrying the weapon or if another
    licensee or out−of−state licensee, whom a judge has permitted
    in writing to carry a weapon, is carrying the
    weapon.
    3. A weapon in a courthouse or courtroom if a district
    attorney, or an assistant district attorney, who is a licensee
    is carrying the weapon.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    But now in it’s interest to maintain a police state the LRB rides again. It created statute 943.13(1m) ( c) 4 as shown below.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    SECTION 80. 943.13 (1m) (c) of the statutes is created
    to read:
    943.13 (1m) (c) 4. Enters or remains in any part of a building that is
    owned, occupied, or controlled by the state or any local
    governmental unit, excluding any building or portion of
    a building under s. 175.60 (16) (a), if the state or local
    governmental unit has notified the actor not to enter or
    remain in the building while carrying a firearm or with
    that type of firearm. This subdivision does not apply to
    a person who leases residential or business premises in
    the building or, if the firearm is in a vehicle driven or
    parked in the parking facility, to any part of the building
    used as a parking facility.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Section 943.13(1)( c) 4. In effect eviscerates carry of concealed weapons by licensees in public buildings as allowed by changes made to ss941.235. Many public places such as we saw in the DNR FAQ are taking the position that the posting of signs is adequate ‘notification”. My personal thoughts are that the paragraph is being misinterpreted. I think the intent is that if an individual is personally notified not to enter a particular public area with a firearm the actor should comply. I don’t think the paragraph was intended to imply that a sign as a notification to the general public is acceptable.
    --------------------------------------------------------
    ‘The Senate is a place filled with goodwill and good intentions, and if the road to hell is paved with them, then it's a pretty good detour".
    Hubert H. Humphrey
    --------------------------------------------------------
    I’m not sure if the sponsors of Act 35 are aware of the switch-a-roo or the misinterpretation, if that be what it is.. If not they certainly should be made aware of it loud and clear.

    I also think the preemption statute comes into play on this issue. If the State restricts carry of firearms in only those public places described in (16)(a) Then a political subdivision adding additional public areas of prohibition is definitely making the carry of firearms in a public place more strict than the state restrictions. As far as the effect of Act 35 on the preemption statute; political subdivisions still only have the unrestricted authority to prevent discgarge of firearms in their jurisdiction.

    You hunters out there should also be aware that as of Nov. 1, 2011 you must have training and a CC license in order to carry your hunting knife on your pants belt if covered by your outer garment or if you carry a folding style hunting knife in your pocket.

    Act 35 does not read Concealed Carry of Firearms or Concealed Carry of Handguns. It reads Concealed Carry of Weapons. Knives, Billy Clubs and Electric Weapons are included by definition as weapons, so the requirements of 175.60 apply to them as well. In regards to hunting knives I don’t know if this was by intention or an oversight.

    As good as Act 35 may be, it has some serious problems. Constitutional carry is the only reasonable solution.

    My opinions.

  2. #2
    Regular Member BROKENSPROKET's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Trempealeau County
    Posts
    2,187
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Nemo View Post
    Section 943.13(1)( c) 4. In effect eviscerates carry of concealed weapons by licensees in public buildings as allowed by changes made to ss941.235. Many public places such as we saw in the DNR FAQ are taking the position that the posting of signs is adequate ‘notification”. My personal thoughts are that the paragraph is being misinterpreted. I think the intent is that if an individual is personally notified not to enter a particular public area with a firearm the actor should comply. I don’t think the paragraph was intended to imply that a sign as a notification to the general public is acceptable.
    I strongly suggest that you read Sections 81 & 82 of Act 35 more carefully. Signage is notification.

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Nemo View Post
    I’m not sure if the sponsors of Act 35 are aware of the switch-a-roo or the misinterpretation, if that be what it is.. If not they certainly should be made aware of it loud and clear.
    I have watched the debates of the Assembly, Senate, Joint Finance Committe, and Senate Judicary Committee and interviews of legislators and it is very clear to me that is clearly the intent of the legislature. 941.235 in not enforceable with proper signeage for licensees, but 943.13 is.

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Nemo View Post
    I also think the preemption statute comes into play on this issue. If the State restricts carry of firearms in only those public places described in (16)(a) Then a political subdivision adding additional public areas of prohibition is definitely making the carry of firearms in a public place more strict than the state restrictions. As far as the effect of Act 35 on the preemption statute; political subdivisions still only have the unrestricted authority to prevent discgarge of firearms in their jurisdiction.
    I understand and like your angle on this, but it was clearly the legislative intent that political subdivisions could CHOOSE to post buildings that were covered under 941.235 to prohibit licensees, but it would be a trespassing charge, which is just a forfeiture. Now you have me digging into this to see if there is infact a preemptive loophole here for us. You certainly got me thinking with this one.



    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Nemo View Post
    My opinions.
    You may have a point here, but I don't believe so. IMHO.
    Last edited by BROKENSPROKET; 08-06-2011 at 05:10 PM.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Interceptor_Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Nemo View Post
    You hunters out there should also be aware that as of Nov. 1, 2011 you must have training and a CC license in order to carry your hunting knife on your pants belt if covered by your outer garment or if you carry a folding style hunting knife in your pocket.
    Nothing changes for knife carry except that a permit will protect you against an overly zealous LEO. It does not magically become illegal. It always was and continues to be a subjective item regarding knives being treated as weapons. The DNR does not care about your hunting knife in your pocket or if your outer garment obstructs their view of it.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Somewhere, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,029
    IK:

    I'm not concerned with what the DNR thinks and what it may elect to enforce or not enforce. I am only concerned with the letter of the law. Act 35 requires that a person receive training and a conceal carry license to carry a concealed weapon. I also don't care if it has been a subjective issue as to whether or not a knife is a weapon. Act 35 clears up that subjectivity. It clearly defines all knives except switchblades as a weapon. Simply put if a person wishes to carry a concealed knife he/she must have training and a license to do so. It doesn't matter if the knife is a tactical knife used for defense or if it is a hunting knife for hunting.

    175.60 License to carry a concealed weapon. (1)

    (d) “Licensee” means an individual holding a valid
    license to carry a concealed weapon issued under this section.

    (j) “Weapon” means a handgun, an electric weapon,
    as defined in s. 941.295 (1c) (a), a knife other than a
    switchblade knife under s. 941.24, or a billy club.


    On the subjectivity of DNR enforcement. I have had numerous discussion with the head of the DNR legal department. I will not release his name on a public forum but be assured I have back up documentation of those discussions. The discussions centered around the legal issue as to whether or not the carry of an encased weapon on a vehicle where it is impossible to carry such item out of reach is technically concealment. After a number of exchanges the DNR representative's answer was that technically it could be considered concealment under the WSC definition. Went on to say that if a person carried a firearm on such a vehicle and the encasement advertised ( not necessarily by words but by relative shape) that it contained a firearm, the DNR would not consider that to be a violation of 941.23. Went on to say that the DNR could not speak to how other law enforcement agencies would react.

    As I said, I do not care how the DNR decides which laws it will enforce and how it will enforce them. I am only concerned on how the law literally translates and how an overzealous judge or DA may prosecute it.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Interceptor_Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,839
    I believe you to be mistaken regarding the letter of the law and knives... 939.22 is not amended...
    Like I said.. Nothing changes except that you are allowed to carry specific "Dangerous Weapons" with a permit. Knives have always been considered weapons depending on circumstances. If cited for carrying a weapon including a knife, the definition used would be the same old definition, not a new one as part of 175.60. 175.60 allows you to carry a knife (which you intend to use as a weapon) concealed.
    The burden of proof is on the citing LEO. Lacking sufficient evidence otherwise, a knife in your pocket or on your belt while hunting IS NOT a dangerous weapon by virtue of the manner you intend to use it!!!
    .
    .
    Old Statute
    941.23 Carrying concealed weapon. Any person except
    a peace officer who goes armed with a concealed and dangerous
    weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor
    New Statute
    941.23 (2) (intro.) Any person other than one of the following, who carries
    a concealed and dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor
    Old and still current definition of "Dangerous Weapon".... (no changes were made by SB93)
    939.22 Words and phrases defined. In chs. 939 to 948 and
    951, the following words and phrases have the designated meanings unless the context of a specific section manifestly requires a
    different construction or the word or phrase is defined in s. 948.01 for purposes of ch. 948:
    (10) “Dangerous weapon” means any firearm, whether
    loaded or unloaded; any device designed as a weapon and capable
    of producing death or great bodily harm; any ligature or other
    instrumentality used on the throat, neck, nose, or mouth of another
    person to impede, partially or completely, breathing or circulation
    of blood; any electric weapon, as defined in s. 941.295 (4); or any
    other device or instrumentality which, in the manner it is used or
    intended to be used, is calculated or likely to produce death or
    great bodily harm
    The purpose of 175.60 defining which weapons were allowed was to have a narrow definition of what the permit entitled you to carry and to exclude other weapons such as throwing stars, nunchucks, axes, flails, etc...
    Last edited by Interceptor_Knight; 08-06-2011 at 05:34 PM.

  6. #6
    Regular Member BROKENSPROKET's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Trempealeau County
    Posts
    2,187
    Quote Originally Posted by Interceptor_Knight View Post
    The purpose of 175.60 defining which weapons were allowed was to have a narrow definition of what the permit entitled you to carry and to exclude other weapons such as throwing stars, nunchucks, axes, flails, etc...
    Dammit, I won't be able to carry my nunchucks when I get my CWL?

  7. #7
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    Quote Originally Posted by BROKENSPROKET
    I won't be able to carry my nunchucks when I get my CWL?
    Only openly.
    Quote Originally Posted by MLK, Jr
    The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort & convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge & controversy.
    Quote Originally Posted by MSG Laigaie
    Citizenship is a verb.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 27:12
    A prudent person foresees the danger ahead and takes precautions.
    The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 31:17
    She dresses herself with strength and makes her arms strong.

Posting Permissions

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