• 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.

Concealed carry won’t be allowed on Metro buses

HandyHamlet

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2010
Messages
2,772
Location
Terra, Sol
SANDY CULLEN
Posted: Thursday, October 13, 2011 3:00 pm

Wisconsin’s new concealed carry law should not affect Metro Transit’s policy prohibiting guns on city buses, an assistant city attorney said Wednesday.

“We don’t believe the new law affects buses,” said Marci Paulsen.

“The municipalities that we’ve heard from are in agreement that it doesn’t impact buses,” Paulsen said.

She said Eau Claire and De Pere were the municipalities she was aware of that were in agreement.

City Council members will be asked to approve a measure Tuesday authorizing signs to be posted in all city-owned buildings prohibiting firearms, Paulsen said.

Signs also would be posted prohibiting the carrying of guns and other weapons in bus shelters and transfer points, she said.

Read more: http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/lo...574-53c2-af82-cfae104488ca.html#ixzz1alyv6YhK

:banghead:

Time to fire up the Lawsuit machines. Looks like there is work to be done.
 

protias

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
7,308
Location
SE, WI
167.31 (2) (c) Except as provided in sub. (4), no person
may load a firearm, other than a handgun, as defined
in s. 175.60 (1) (bm), in a vehicle or discharge a firearm
or shoot a bolt or an arrow from a bow or crossbow in or
from a vehicle.

Did they not read the law?
 

Brass Magnet

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2009
Messages
2,818
Location
Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
Yeah,
I don't think they have the authority to restrict carry on the buses. State law, as amended by Act 35 allows it and gives no options to restrict it, therefore a carry restriction on the buses would definitely violate 66.0409. Unless I'm missing something? A bus is not a government building.
 
Last edited:

MilProGuy

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2011
Messages
1,210
Location
Mississippi
The good thing about concealed carry is that, if the gun is properly concealed, the bus driver will never know!
 

protias

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
7,308
Location
SE, WI
Love it McX!

The good thing about concealed carry is that, if the gun is properly concealed, the bus driver will never know!

The other thing that needs to be addressed is, "If it is properly concealed, no one will know." True, however, if a business does this, why would you want to give your money to a place that hates liberty? Same goes for the government. We have laws in place and it needs to abide by it.
 

protias

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
7,308
Location
SE, WI
People who use public transportation give up their rights as American citizens.

While I firmly believe the car resembles freedom because you can go where you want, when you want. I won't go so far as to saying public transportation is not American, but it surely doesn't represent as much freedom as the car.
 

MKEgal

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
4,383
Location
in front of my computer, WI
I was at the town hall in Greenfield this noon-ish, and amazingly the lawyer (Milwaukee assistant DA) explained that while the bus company may regulate its drivers, it may not regulate customers, esp. since (as Brass pointed out) a bus is not a building.

Who woulda thunk that Milwaukee would actually get something right??
 

protias

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
7,308
Location
SE, WI
I was at the town hall in Greenfield this noon-ish, and amazingly the lawyer (Milwaukee assistant DA) explained that while the bus company may regulate its drivers, it may not regulate customers, esp. since (as Brass pointed out) a bus is not a building.

Who woulda thunk that Milwaukee would actually get something right??

Wow, I'm surprised he is on the side of the law rather than making it up (from what I've seen from a few Milwaukee public officials).
 

Shotgun

Wisconsin Carry, Inc.
Joined
Aug 23, 2006
Messages
2,668
Location
Madison, Wisconsin, USA
I was at the town hall in Greenfield this noon-ish, and amazingly the lawyer (Milwaukee assistant DA) explained that while the bus company may regulate its drivers, it may not regulate customers, esp. since (as Brass pointed out) a bus is not a building.

Who woulda thunk that Milwaukee would actually get something right??

Maybe he would be so kind as to phone the Madison city attorney's office and make an inquiry regarding what they've been smoking there.
 

paul@paul-fisher.com

Regular Member
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
4,049
Location
Chandler, AZ
Am I missing anything in Act 35? The way I read it, only 167.31 applies to buses, right? So.... if we open carry and stand so that our sidearms are viewable from outside the bus we are legal 11/1, right?
 

IcrewUH60

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2009
Messages
481
Location
Verona, Wisconsin, USA
Oh yeah, right... :banghead: but now it's just a fine, no misdemeanor or felony. After we get our permits, bus riding would be good?

you'd have to knowingly carry through a school zone. the bus driver and city planners might know, but i'll be damned if I am expected to research all the routes (not including emergency or temp. detours) of the buses to go to and fro.

sitting on a jury, I'd expect it to be difficult to prove that a bus patron, knowingly carried within 1,000' of school property.. especially at night.

added on edit: think of a taxi ride on your way downtown. you have no control of the route, therefore in my opinion, you would not be knowing[ly]....
 
Last edited:

paul@paul-fisher.com

Regular Member
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
4,049
Location
Chandler, AZ
you'd have to knowingly carry through a school zone. the bus driver and city planners might know, but i'll be damned if I am expected to research all the routes (not including emergency or temp. detours) of the buses to go to and fro.

sitting on a jury, I'd expect it to be difficult to prove that a bus patron, knowingly carried within 1,000' of school property.. especially at night.

added on edit: think of a taxi ride on your way downtown. you have no control of the route, therefore in my opinion, you would not be knowing[ly]....

I agree with you post except for a jury. It's a forfeiture, not a crime. I am pretty sure you can't even demand a jury trial for a forfeiture.
 

IcrewUH60

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2009
Messages
481
Location
Verona, Wisconsin, USA
I agree with you post except for a jury. It's a forfeiture, not a crime. I am pretty sure you can't even demand a jury trial for a forfeiture.

i think you can be afforded a 6 person jury in forfeiture cases. Ref: 756.06(2)(c)

A jury in a case involving an offense for which a forfeiture may be imposed or in an inquest under s. 979.05 shall consist of 6 persons.
 
M

McX

Guest
well, i'm glad to see the obnoxious passengers, loud cell phone talkers, hood rats, and winos will still have exclusive rights to public transportation. no one ever gets attacked on the bus right? - i think i saw a video of some thugs with ak-47's shooting at a bus, nahhh, MUST be my imagination.

take the bus- die with us!
 

mrjam2jab

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 26, 2009
Messages
769
Location
Levittown, Pennsylvania, USA
Yeah,
I don't think they have the authority to restrict carry on the buses. State law, as amended by Act 35 allows it and gives no options to restrict it, therefore a carry restriction on the buses would definitely violate 66.0409. Unless I'm missing something? A bus is not a government building.

Does Act 35 restrict carry in govt buildings that are not police (Et al) or courthouses?

1. Any portion of a building that is a police station,
sheriff’s office, state patrol station, or the office of a divi-
sion of criminal investigation special agent of the depart-
ment.
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 desig-
nated 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 court-
room if court is in session.
8. A place beyond a security checkpoint in an airport.

ETA: Found it...

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.
 
Last edited:
Top