• 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.

MKEgal Is Free

rcawdor57

Campaign Veteran
Joined
May 18, 2009
Messages
1,643
Location
Wisconsin, USA
My Thoughts Exactly...What About Long Guns Uncased In The Vehicles Now?

Vicki did a real nice job on the interview.

Imagine this scenario:

1) You are arrested for carrying a concealed weapon.
2) You are intentionally jacked around for over 36 hours.
3) You are finally released, but never formally charged with CCW.
4) You are told to appear at 08:30 with the DA.
5) The DA says "well, we are still thinking about charging you with CCW, but we won't know until we investigate the law thoroughly." In essence, they will charge her only if they feel they have a reasonable chance of winning. OR, they may charge her as further harassment because they know darned well that she has an ongoing lawsuit against the MPD. In other words "you mess with the fraternal order of the secret handshake and we will mess with you 10X as much".

Now imagine this...and take note! If this is in fact a test case, imagine the hunter going to or coming back from hunting. He has a LEGAL rifle that is LEGALLY uncased laying on the back seat. The LEO stops him for a tail light being out. He approaches the car, sees the rifle, orders the hunter out and to the ground, then arrests him for having a concealed weapon. He arrests him because he could not see the weapon below the level of the window.

This isn't just about OC folks, it is much broader than that. Suggest a donation of whatever you can afford to mkegal.legal@yahoo.com

So now we have ANOTHER change in law that will cause even more people to be arrested for not breaking the law because the police cannot "See" the gun from outside the vehicle. I thought the exact same thing when the law was changed for long guns. We have to get our legislators to CHANGE 941.23 to reflect ACT 35 and the recent changes for long guns.
 

Nutczak

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Messages
2,165
Location
The Northwoods, lakeland area, Wisconsin, USA
Act 35 states that we can "Open Carry" in a vehicle, the case law in question was prior to this new law.

And another thing on case law, there is no way for the typical human or a cop (<there's a joke there) to know and or research case law involved with every single statute.
I go by what the published law is, what has been made available to us via the DOJ. To assume things are different than the published law is reading too far into this situation IMO.
I have stated this argument before, and I stand by that argument. I go by the published law only. And when a cop pulls out his little statute book to look at it for reference to find something to charge an otherwise innocent actor with, that is all they have access to also.
 

Jason in WI

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2010
Messages
542
Location
Under your bed
Now imagine this...and take note! If this is in fact a test case, imagine the hunter going to or coming back from hunting. He has a LEGAL rifle that is LEGALLY uncased laying on the back seat. The LEO stops him for a tail light being out. He approaches the car, sees the rifle, orders the hunter out and to the ground, then arrests him for having a concealed weapon. He arrests him because he could not see the weapon below the level of the window.

This is exactly how I thought we'd get our test case, or at least piss off the hunters enough to help us get the law fixed.





Sent from my DROID2 GLOBAL using Tapatalk
 

Law abider

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
1,164
Location
Ellsworth Wisconsin
Good! News!

I hope there will be an investigation to determine if MPD leos broke the law bec there are penalties for them too. So I gather that leos can arrest you for OC if they don't like it. Now that too has to be challenged or something done about it.
In December I'll probably get a revolver (cuz they are cheaper in general) and hope to OC or CC by January. My constitutional leo buddy encouraged me to get armed.
So this Thanksgiving, apart from being thankful for our country's bountiful blessings compared to the rest of the world, I am going to thank God for our second amendment and some of the good court decisions in our favor and for His continual Hand in our nation's total redemption from the garbage taking place in DC. I'll play my part in continuing voting all the time. Good to see Krysta out.
 

Interceptor_Knight

Regular Member
Joined
May 18, 2007
Messages
2,851
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
Act 35 states that we can "Open Carry" in a vehicle, ....

Even with the Act 35 and Act 51 changes, 167.31 does not authorize you do do anything. It does not state that you "can" do anything. It simply prohibits specific acts. It specifically prohibits having a loaded long gun in a vehicle or a loaded long gun on a vehicle in motion. It prohibits shooting from a vehicle.
The fact that it no longer explicitly prohibits having a firearm in or on a vehicle does not authorize you to have a firearm in a vehicle. Having an loaded handgun in a vehicle is legal because and only when it is not otherwise prohibited by another Statute. 941.23 is such another Statute which prohibits you from having a handgun in a vehicle if it is "hidden".
 
Last edited:

rcawdor57

Campaign Veteran
Joined
May 18, 2009
Messages
1,643
Location
Wisconsin, USA
Actually It Doesn't State "Open Carry"....

Act 35 states that we can "Open Carry" in a vehicle, the case law in question was prior to this new law.

And another thing on case law, there is no way for the typical human or a cop (<there's a joke there) to know and or research case law involved with every single statute.
I go by what the published law is, what has been made available to us via the DOJ. To assume things are different than the published law is reading too far into this situation IMO.
I have stated this argument before, and I stand by that argument. I go by the published law only. And when a cop pulls out his little statute book to look at it for reference to find something to charge an otherwise innocent actor with, that is all they have access to also.

Unfortunately those words are not in ACT 35 for vehicle carry. It states...load, unload, possess.....nothing about "Open Carry". I wish it did but it doesn't...hence the continuing discussions about open carry in a vehicle. I am certain that our legislators MEANT for us to be able to open carry in a vehicle but knowing how some cops and D.A.s are they will always charge us for open carry in a vehicle unless it is "spelled out for them".

The battle continues for our rights...
 

bmwguy11

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
461
Location
wisconsin
I'll donate some money soon as I get a chance as I think what happened to MKEgal was wrong.



That said, that's really the crux of all of this. The current precedent is state V Wells. Until someone gets a case that overturns or changes that outcome, this will continue to happen for people who open carry in their vehicles. :(
 

Grant Guess

Regular Member
Joined
May 30, 2011
Messages
217
Location
Wisconsin, United States
You gave nooo idea how much that I am hoping that MKEgal has a letter in her mailbox from the DoJ today. Wouldn't that be the schnitz? She has a 50/50 chance that her app for a permission slip has already been processed.
 

Law abider

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2011
Messages
1,164
Location
Ellsworth Wisconsin
Fund adress

Where do I send the donation to???? for the defense fund for krysta??. Being behind tech times, I have snail mail unless... my son has a paypal account.. if he will let me use it.
 

BROKENSPROKET

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2010
Messages
2,199
Location
Trempealeau County
You gave nooo idea how much that I am hoping that MKEgal has a letter in her mailbox from the DoJ today. Wouldn't that be the schnitz? She has a 50/50 chance that her app for a permission slip has already been processed.
She is one of over 10,000 applications to be recieved on Wednesday, Nov. 2. 50/50 chance is delusinally optimistic.
 

bmwguy11

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
461
Location
wisconsin
Now you are forever blocked. Over 5000 apps processed as of yesterday and 10,500 apps total.

--Moderator deleted comment--
Reason: Language/attitude not acceptable on OCDO.

Uh, might want to double check that math... 50/50 would mean that of the apps remaining (5000), 2500 will get their license today and 2500 will not.

They don't do 2500 licenses per day. It's closer to about 500 it seems on the high end. So it would be more like maybe a 1 in 10 chance. :/
 
Last edited:

BROKENSPROKET

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2010
Messages
2,199
Location
Trempealeau County
Uh, might want to double check that math... 50/50 would mean that of the apps remaining (5000), 2500 will get their license today and 2500 will not.

They don't do 2500 licenses per day. It's closer to about 500 it seems on the high end. So it would be more like maybe a 1 in 10 chance. :/

Thank you.
 

Grant Guess

Regular Member
Joined
May 30, 2011
Messages
217
Location
Wisconsin, United States
Uh, might want to double check that math... 50/50 would mean that of the apps remaining (5000), 2500 will get their license today and 2500 will not.

They don't do 2500 licenses per day. It's closer to about 500 it seems on the high end. So it would be more like maybe a 1 in 10 chance. :/

No, you might want to check yours.

50/50 would mean that out of 10,000 apps received on 2 Nov that 5000 were issued and 5000 were in process. Pretty basic math right there :shocker:
 

xenophon

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2008
Messages
316
Location
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
No, you might want to check yours.

50/50 would mean that out of 10,000 apps received on 2 Nov that 5000 were issued and 5000 were in process. Pretty basic math right there :shocker:

That's the way I interpreted your statement. If 10,000 received on that day, and, to date, they are around the 5XXX numbers on permits being issued, I'd agree you have a 1 in 2 change of being in that processed pile.
 

Grant Guess

Regular Member
Joined
May 30, 2011
Messages
217
Location
Wisconsin, United States
--Moderator deleted comment--
Reason: Language/attitude not acceptable on OCDO.

No problemo, I am leaving your heavy-handed "attitude" with this final post. Maybe you should consider learning how to moderate fairly and somebody will actually respect you....


G-Man...out.
 
Top