ccwing in a Bar, Question?

range rat · Oct 22, 2011

Ok, I just Finish reading the the Madison Legal update, an I've been kicking around this Question in reguards too ccw in a Bar.

So here goes, If stoped comeing out of a bar while ccwing,do we have to submit to a Breather test if asked, an or told we have too???

I,ve got this gut feeiing their going to try an pull this one on people.

HandyHamlet · Oct 22, 2011

How would anyone know you are CCing?

I mean if they know, you are doing it wrong.

JJC · Oct 22, 2011

Water, soda, etc. If I'm carrying I want all my faculties about me. Zero means zero. I for one don't have an issue with not drinking while carrying.

JJC

Brass Magnet · Oct 22, 2011

JJC said:
Water, soda, etc. If I'm carrying I want all my faculties about me. Zero means zero. I for one don't have an issue with not drinking while carrying.

JJC

Heck, I haven't had a drink in almost a year but that's not relevant to the question. You don't need to have had any alcohol to exercise your rights.

I think the answer is that if they are truly unaware you are CCW, they lack the legal authority to demand the test.

If they know you are CCW, that may give them RAS to at least question you further and try to get PC.

protias · Oct 22, 2011

range rat, you don't have to do a breathelizer. The law states you cannot drink while carrying concealed (not sure about open though).

BROKENSPROKET · Oct 22, 2011

range rat said:
Ok, I just Finish reading the the Madison Legal update, an I've been kicking around this Question in reguards too ccw in a Bar.

So here goes, If stoped comeing out of a bar while ccwing,do we have to submit to a Breather test if asked, an or told we have too???

I,ve got this gut feeiing their going to try an pull this one on people.

The law says that one may not consume alcahol while CC'ng in a Class B. However, it does not say that absolute sobriety is required to CCW in a Class B. Hypothetically, one could drink at home or at a park, then go to a Class-B and not drink while there.

I think if there is adequate RAS in the totality of cricurmstances, they could just arrest the person. For a sobriety test, there is no penalty for refusal, unless one is operating a motor vehicle. So just do not give consent or comply with a sobriety test.

What LEO's need then is video survielance or eye witness testimony that someone was consuming in a Class-B and evidence that the person was CCing aswell.

Motofixxer · Oct 22, 2011

I believe the only time you are required to submit to a test is if your driving. Even that is a Constitutional issue. But statutorily speaking it's the only situation. But at a minimum, you don't have to provide any evidence to incriminate yourself. You know that pesky annoying 5th amendment thing. Could those test results be used to convict you...of course. Nope sorry I don't consent to any tests to be used against me.

Why couldn't you enter a bar concealing, if you want an alcoholic drink, unconceal...depending on your carry location, drink your beverage then conceal again when your finished. There now your a nice law abiding citizen. "Drinking" while carrying isn't the problem, excessive consumption is.

Interceptor_Knight · Oct 22, 2011

Motofixxer said:
...Why couldn't you enter a bar concealing, if you want an alcoholic drink, unconceal...depending on your carry location, drink your beverage then conceal again when your finished. There now your a nice law abiding citizen. "Drinking" while carrying isn't the problem, excessive consumption is.

You may not consume alcohol in a bar while carrying regardless if it is concealed or openly. There are 2 separate State Statutes. One prohibits you from being materially impaired while carrying and the other prohibits you from consuming in a "bar".

Motofixxer · Oct 22, 2011

Which specific statutes are you referring to for everyone's reference? Having a drink does not make you "materially impaired". I believe most are aware that being "impaired" and armed is both dangerous and illegal. But simply having a "drink" I don't believe is. I believe the general opine of courts is that you would have to be over the .08 limit. But it's an opinion of the courts not a statutory limit.

Interceptor_Knight · Oct 22, 2011

Motofixxer said:
.... I believe the general opine of courts is that you would have to be over the .08 limit. But it's an opinion of the courts not a statutory limit.

You are "under the influence" regardless of .08 if you are less able to do something than if you were sober. That is all the courts have to prove is that you are "materially impaired".

Interceptor_Knight · Oct 22, 2011

Motofixxer said:
Which specific statutes are you referring to for everyone's reference? .

Are you from Wisconsin and have you been following ACT 35?

941.237 Carrying handgun where alcohol beverages
may be sold and consumed.
(2) Whoever intentionally goes armed with a handgun on any
premises for which a Class “B” or “Class B” license or permit has
been issued under ch. 125 is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.

(3) Subsection (2) does not apply to any of the following

(cx) A licensee, as defined in s. 175.60 (1) (d), or an out−
of−state licensee, as defined in s. 175.60 (1) (g), if the licensee or
out−of−state licensee is not consuming alcohol on the premises

941.20 Endangering safety by use of dangerous
weapon. (1) Whoever does any of the following is guilty of a
Class A misdemeanor:
(a) Endangers another’s safety by the negligent operation or
handling of a dangerous weapon; or
(b) Operates or goes armed with a firearm while he or she is
under the influence of an intoxicant; or
(bm) Operates or goes armed with a firearm while he or she has
a detectable amount of a restricted controlled substance in his or
her blood.

paul@paul-fisher.com · Oct 22, 2011

Everyone calm down:

You are both right.

The rule before where 'we' can oc with permission didn't change.

941.237 (3)(g) The possession or use of a handgun on the premises ifauthorized for a specific event of limited duration by the owner or
manager of the premises who is issued the Class “B” or “Class B”
license or permit under ch. 125 for the premises.

What is new with Act 35 is carrying open or concealed without explicit permission. For this, we need a permit:

941.237 (3)(cx) A licensee, as defined in s. 175.60 (1) (d), or an out−
of−state licensee, as defined in s. 175.60 (1) (g), if the licensee or
out−of−state licensee is not consuming alcohol on the premises.

So... if you plan on drinking, leave your permit in the car, ask permission, open carry and have a drink or two.

There is a 'materially impaired' law that was NOT changed with Act 35 so be careful if you drink and carry.

BROKENSPROKET · Oct 22, 2011

Interceptor_Knight said:
You are "under the influence" regardless of .08 if you are less able to do something than if you were sober. That is all the courts have to prove is that you are "materially impaired".

I was told by a firearms instructor that is in the medical field that one does not begin to become 'under the infuence' until a BAC of .04 is reached.

Materially Impaired is not the same as Under the Influence. The burden of proof in much higher. One can carry a firearm while Under the Influence, as long as they are not Materiall Impaired.

I personally recommend Absolute Sobriety while carrrying a firearm, but that is not what they law requires.

Interceptor_Knight · Oct 22, 2011

BROKENSPROKET said:
I was told by a firearms instructor that is in the medical field that one does not begin to become 'under the infuence' until a BAC of .04 is reached.

Materially Impaired is not the same as Under the Influence. The burden of proof in much higher. One can carry a firearm while Under the Influence, as long as they are not Materiall Impaired.

I personally recommend Absolute Sobriety while carrrying a firearm, but that is not what they law requires.

The Statutory definition of "under the influence" IS "materially impaired" and has zero relevance to BAC. When you get pulled over and are suspected of having been drinking you will get 2 separate citations. One for prohibited BAC and the other for Operating under the Influence. Only 1 needs to be proven for a conviction.

(42) "Under the influence of an intoxicant" means that the actor's ability to operate a vehicle or handle a firearm or airgun is materially impaired because of his or her consumption of an alcohol beverage, of a controlled substance or controlled substance analog under ch. 961, of any combination of an alcohol beverage, controlled substance and controlled substance analog, or of any other drug or of an alcohol beverage and any other drug.

BrewTownBagger · Oct 23, 2011

I don't know about everyone else on the forum, but don't ever want my mental competence called into question on the stand. If you're carrying drink soda. If you want to have drinks, then leave you're firearm at home.

My 2 cents

BROKENSPROKET · Oct 23, 2011

BrewTownBagger said:
I don't know about everyone else on the forum, but don't ever want my mental competence called into question on the stand. If you're carrying drink soda. If you want to have drinks, then leave you're firearm at home.

My 2 cents

I agree.

But having said that, and before Paul gets here, let me say that have a drink or two with a meal at a restaraunt is particularly safer than going out to watch a football game or shoot some pool.

BROKENSPROKET · Oct 23, 2011

Interceptor_Knight said:
The Statutory definition of "under the influence" IS "materially impaired" and has zero relevance to BAC. When you get pulled over and are suspected of having been drinking you will get 2 separate citations. One for prohibited BAC and the other for Operating under the Influence. Only 1 needs to be proven for a conviction.

Operating under the Influence is the charge that gets dropped more than 99% of the time.

Interceptor_Knight · Oct 23, 2011

BROKENSPROKET said:
Operating under the Influence is the charge that gets dropped more than 99% of the time.

That doesn't appear to be a realistic statistic. Care to cite?
It is factual that they only convict on 1 of the 2 even if you are found guilty of both. They cite for both knowing that one will likely stick. It is pretty hard to beat a blood test or even the breathalyzer. Operating under the influence is also there in the case that you test positive for a controlled substance. In regards to firearms and drugs other than alcohol, you may not possess a firearm with a detectable amount of a controlled substance in your system. You do not have to be proven under the influence.

oak1971 · Oct 23, 2011

It may not be the best idea to imbibe when going heeled, but I will leave that to the discretion of the individual. Just be aware of the possibilities of negative outcomes and consequences thereof.

HandyHamlet · Oct 23, 2011

Yes,.

Eventually you will have to buy a round. It is inevitable.

ccwing in a Bar, Question?

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Founder's Club Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member