• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

DOJ FAQ for LEO's. Am I missing something?

Captain Nemo

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
1,029
Location
Somewhere, Wisconsin, USA
This is what the WSC said in Hamdan.

IV. STATUTORY INTERPRETATION

¶20. To convict a person of carrying a concealed weapon in violation of Wis.Stat.§941.23, the State must prove three elements. First, the State must show that a person who is not a peace officer went armed with a dangerous weapon. State v. Dundon, 226 Wis.2d654, 661, 594 N.W.2d780 (1999) (citing State v. Asfoor, 75 Wis.2d411, 433-34, 249 N.W.2d529 (1977)). Second, the State must show that the defendant was aware of the presence of the weapon. Id. (citing Asfoor, 75 Wis.2dat 433). Third, the State must show that the weapon was concealed. Id. (citing Mularkey v. State, 201 Wis. 429, 432, 230 N.W. 76 (1930)). Over the years, every element of the statute has been vigorously litigated.

Note: This is the most recent WSC statute interpretation of ss941.23. Note that there is no mention of out of reach or within reach.
 
Last edited:

Captain Nemo

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
1,029
Location
Somewhere, Wisconsin, USA
Under literal interpretation if a person puts a firearm in a vehicles trunk, whether cased or uncased, and that same person occupies the vehicle that person can technically be charged with violation of ss941.23.

1. The person can readily be determined to be a peace officer by simple records check.
2. The weapon is definitely not visible, therfore concealed.
3. If the person concealing the weapon occupies the vehicle or was seen to occupy the vehicle by LE, then the person was "going armed" as defined elsewehere in Hamdan.

The eliment of proof of within or without reach is not indicated.

This statute interpretation was made July 15, 2003. Please cite a later one that appears to contradict it if you have one.

My opinion. I am of the opinion that a specific WSC interpretation of a specific statute takes precident over casual reference of the activity in a published opinion. Bottom line; The only way you can lawfully transport a firearm in a vehicle without a CC permit is to hang it from the rear view mirror with a string. ACT 35 butchered 167.31 and made it even worse than it was before.


I am not a lawyer so consider this only an opinion.
 

Flipper

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
1,140
Location
, Wisconsin, USA
Partial quote:

......

My opinion. .... Bottom line; The only way you can lawfully transport a firearm in a vehicle without a CC permit is to hang it from the rear view mirror with a string. ACT 35 butchered 167.31 and made it even worse than it was before.


I am not a lawyer so consider this only an opinion.

& make sure it is not hidden by the dice'es or garter. :)
 
Top