• 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.

Grrr...Milwaukee Biz that produces NO-CCW signs.

Grant Guess

Regular Member
Joined
May 30, 2011
Messages
217
Location
Wisconsin, United States
WHOIS search results for: CNISECURITY.COM (Registered)
Is this your
domain?
Add hosting, email and more.

Want to buy
this domain?
Get it with our Domain Buy service.
The data contained in GoDaddy.com, Inc.'s WHOIS database,
while believed by the company to be reliable, is provided "as is"
with no guarantee or warranties regarding its accuracy. This
information is provided for the sole purpose of assisting you
in obtaining information about domain name registration records.
Any use of this data for any other purpose is expressly forbidden without the prior written
permission of GoDaddy.com, Inc. By submitting an inquiry,
you agree to these terms of usage and limitations of warranty. In particular,
you agree not to use this data to allow, enable, or otherwise make possible,
dissemination or collection of this data, in part or in its entirety, for any
purpose, such as the transmission of unsolicited advertising and
solicitations of any kind, including spam. You further agree
not to use this data to enable high volume, automated or robotic electronic
processes designed to collect or compile this data for any purpose,
including mining this data for your own personal or commercial purposes.

Please note: the registrant of the domain name is specified
in the "registrant" field. In most cases, GoDaddy.com, Inc.
is not the registrant of domain names listed in this database.


Registrant:
Palm Security

2605 w. kimberly ave
milwaukee, Wisconsin 53221
United States

Registered through: GoDaddy.com, Inc. (http://www.godaddy.com)
Domain Name: CNISECURITY.COM
Created on: 28-Aug-11
Expires on: 28-Aug-12
Last Updated on: 28-Aug-11

Administrative Contact:
janiszewski, scott scottjaniszewski@gmail.com
Palm Security
2605 w. kimberly ave
milwaukee, Wisconsin 53221
United States
(414) 292-7921

Technical Contact:
janiszewski, scott scottjaniszewski@gmail.com
Palm Security
2605 w. kimberly ave
milwaukee, Wisconsin 53221
United States
(414) 292-7921
 

Captain Nemo

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
1,029
Location
Somewhere, Wisconsin, USA
Do you think they issue a disclaimer to their customers that under 175.60(21)(a)and (b) that the customer could be subject to civil liability if they post their buildings and a lawfully licensed to carry person is injured or killed by a violent act of a third party while in those premisis. Also, do you suppose they mention that the establishments liability insurance may take a big increase because of that possibility. I'm being facetious on both counts but all coins have two sides.

It isn't so much that the above paragraph gives immunity to establishments that don't post. It is that the paragraph also can make establishments subject to civil liablility if they do post. Amazing how the paranoia of guns can trump common sense.

My opinion
 

Captain Nemo

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
1,029
Location
Somewhere, Wisconsin, USA
To post or not to post

I sent the following memo to a few local businesses and city councils. If you agree with it and think it may be of value feel free to use it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
2011Act 35 takes effect on November 2011. It is the Act that allows the carry of concealed weapons in Wisconsin. In anticipation of Act 35 many private and public establishments are contemplating posting signs prohibiting carry of firearms in their buildings. Most of that contemplation is apparently driven by the paranoia that law-abiding citizens will misuse their new privilege, the privilege to carry concealed firearms to protect themselves and others from harm. Perhaps those establishments have not read or obtained legal opinion of Act 35. More specifically paragraphs 175.60(21)(a) and (b). Those paragraphs give immunity to any establishment or employer that does not post firearm prohibition. However, in the same vein those paragraphs also put an implied legal responsibility on those establishments that do post their facilities.

Establishments that do decide to post their buildings accept the risk of possible civil liability if a person qualified to carry a firearm is denied entry unless unarmed. If that person is injured or killed when if they had been armed may have prevented the violence, the owner or proprietor of the posted facilities could be held liable for any injuries. Liability that could amount to a considerable value.

Not only is the civil liability a consideration so is the consideration of insurance costs. The wording of Act 35 puts a presumed legal responsibility on an establishment to assure a person’s safety if the establishment unarms that person. Accordingly, it would not be surprising if insurance companies increase the cost of liability insurance for those establishments that prohibit lawful carry of firearms. This could amount to considerable expense, especially for high risk private and public businesses.

Statistical evidence from other states with a long history of a concealed carry privilege prove that misuse of that privilege is exceedingly low, in fact not statistically significant.. It is many hundreds of times lower than the incidence of customer injury due to robbery or other acts of violence within business establishments. The comparative figures do not make the potential legal liability and higher insurance costs of posting a reasonable decision.
 

MKEgal

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
4,383
Location
in front of my computer, WI
Shotgun said:
Maybe they'll all buy the 3"x9" one! (law requires it to be at least 5x7)
Or the one that says "no concealed firearms"... fine by me, I'll OC.
And the ones banning all "weapons"? Doesn't matter - all Act35 allows them to ban are firearms.
(I could be misremembering... convince me otherwise w/ a cite.)
 

davegran

Regular Member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
1,563
Location
Cassville Area -Twelve Miles From Anything, Wiscon
I sent the following memo to a few local businesses and city councils. If you agree with it and think it may be of value feel free to use it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
....
Great memo! I think I might preface it with the subject line, "The wrong decision on this matter could be very expensive."
 

LaBomba

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2011
Messages
118
Location
Tosa
Or the one that says "no concealed firearms"... fine by me, I'll OC.
And the ones banning all "weapons"? Doesn't matter - all Act35 allows them to ban are firearms.
(I could be misremembering... convince me otherwise w/ a cite.)

They can ban any and all weapons, except those stored/carried in vehicles. If they want to ban firearms, trespass laws only apply if they post the required signage. If they want to ban other weapons, trespass laws apply regardless of whether signs are posted are not.

Regarding a cite: the cite is all of 943. It says that you can't stay on someone else's property if the owner doesn't want you to, except that an owner has to 1) post signs in order for trespass law to apply regarding a firearm; and 2) post signs on land in order for a trespasser to be considered to be notified (for a general posting unrelated to firearms.

Those are the only exceptions. Which means someone can ask you to leave because you're swearing, you remind grandma of her first husband's mistress, or anything other reason not explicitly excepted.
 
Last edited:

apjonas

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2006
Messages
1,157
Location
, ,
To What End?

I sent the following memo to a few local businesses and city councils. If you agree with it and think it may be of value feel free to use it.

Why should a business pay heed to an unknown person's unsolicited opinion? Since presumably the sender would not be the recipient's attorney (and probably not an attorney period), such communication would likely be dispatched immediately to the circular file with a mental note that the sender is probably a gun nut. Not even a Clarence Darrow could know for sure what the impact of the law will be with any certainty. It also brings the issue to the attention of people who might not have cared. They will instinctively post just "to be on the safe side." The people that are going to post will post. Those who are not inclined to post, won't post. Messages of this type just stir the pot and cause the uninterested to be interested. Let's face it - no posting is the status quo/natural condition. It takes thought, energy and money to post. Leave sleeping dogs lie.
 
Last edited:
Top