Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: What is the statute that permits open carry?

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    wi
    Posts
    112

    What is the statute that permits open carry?

    I have the pre-emption statute.
    I have the statute which eliminates the disorderly conduct issue for open carry.

    What is the statute that allows open carry?

    Thanks.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    The same statute that allows you to eat a ham on rye sandwich on Sunday, or to wear white after Labor Day.
    ...
    Or, is it the statute that allows you to ride a bicycle, I keep gettin' 'em confused.
    Last edited by Fallschirmjäger; 02-15-2012 at 06:46 PM.

  3. #3
    Herr Heckler Koch
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by ksks View Post
    What is the statute that allows open carry? Thanks.
    Wisconsin Constitution ARTICLE I Right to keep and bear arms. SECTION 25. [As created Nov. 1998] The people have the right to keep and bear arms for security, defense, hunting, recreation or any other lawful purpose.
    [1995 J.R. 27, 1997 J.R. 21, vote November 1998]

  4. #4
    Herr Heckler Koch
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by ksks View Post
    I have the pre-emption statute. I have the statute which eliminates the disorderly conduct issue for open carry. What is the statute that allows open carry? Thanks.
    Here are ALL the statutes http://legis.wisconsin.gov/rsb/stats.html

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    wi
    Posts
    112
    OK, I assume you are saying there is no statute.

    What I'm wondering is, if there is no statute related to open carry, and if the statutes say localities cannot make laws more restrictive than State law...

    Since there would be nothing to be more or less restrictive of...

    What would preclude a locality from restricting open carry since it is not addressed in Statutes?

  6. #6
    Herr Heckler Koch
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by ksks View Post
    What would preclude a locality from restricting open carry since it is not addressed in Statutes?
    In a word, nothing.

    If you read § 66.0409 you will see that it has no teeth, there is no agency charged with enforcement nor any repercussions for contravening state preemption.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    northern wis
    Posts
    3,192
    Quote Originally Posted by Herr Heckler Koch View Post
    In a word, nothing.

    If you read § 66.0409 you will see that it has no teeth, there is no agency charged with enforcement nor any repercussions for contravening state preemption.
    But West Allis just paid out 30000 dollars the word is getting out

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    wi
    Posts
    112
    Wasn't the West Allis case before the new law took effect?

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Somewhere, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,029
    99% of state stautes don't allow anything. Statutes restrict activities and actions. We can lawfully open carry only by default.

    There are two manners of carrying a firearm, visible and hidden. Hidden carry without a state sanctioned license is prohibited by statute 941.23. Accordingly, the WSC has ruled the State must provide a manner of carry by which the activities in Art I sec 25 (right to keep and bear arms amendmnet) can be exercised so that the amendment is not eviscerated. Because statue 941.23 strictly restricts hidden carry without a CCL citizens may visible carry firearms under the reach of Art I sec 25. Visible carry is the only reasonable alternative to hidden carry. I suppose one can say that the highest state law, constitutional law, allows open carry, although it does so by inference.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    wi
    Posts
    112
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Nemo View Post
    99% of state stautes don't allow anything. Statutes restrict activities and actions. We can lawfully open carry only by default.

    There are two manners of carrying a firearm, visible and hidden. Hidden carry without a state sanctioned license is prohibited by statute 941.23. Accordingly, the WSC has ruled the State must provide a manner of carry by which the activities in Art I sec 25 (right to keep and bear arms amendmnet) can be exercised so that the amendment is not eviscerated. Because statue 941.23 strictly restricts hidden carry without a CCL citizens may visible carry firearms under the reach of Art I sec 25. Visible carry is the only reasonable alternative to hidden carry. I suppose one can say that the highest state law, constitutional law, allows open carry, although it does so by inference.

    Thanks Captain. Good explanation.

    I was thinking that since hidden carry was previously specifically precluded, that made visible carry the legal mode by default.

    Was wondering, now that there is a provision for hidden carry, even if it is restricted by the ccl, if that wouldn't make the open carry a dead issue; basically unnecessary as the right is not now completely excluded. Open carry is now not the default manner to carry.

    If it is not the default, and it is not protected, is it vulnerable?

  11. #11
    Regular Member VW_Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Leesburg, GA
    Posts
    1,098
    Quote Originally Posted by ksks View Post
    If it is not the default, and it is not protected, is it vulnerable?
    If any of the other traditional OC states with CHL options are any indication, I would say no.
    Quote Originally Posted by Beretta92FSLady
    I am no victim, just a poor college student who looks to the day where the rich have the living piss taxed out of them.

  12. #12
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    Quote Originally Posted by ksks
    What would preclude a locality from restricting open carry since it is not addressed in Statutes?
    Since the state (mostly) does not infringe the right neither can any locality.

    Quote Originally Posted by ksks
    now that there is a provision for hidden carry, even if it is restricted by the ccl, if that wouldn't make the open carry a dead issue; basically unnecessary as the right is not now completely excluded.
    No.
    If you're allowed to ride a bicycle more or less uninfringed, does getting a driver's license mean you're not allowed to ride a bicycle?
    Or more of a parallel, does the ability of some people to get a driver's license mean that nobody is allowed to ride a bicycle?
    Quote Originally Posted by MLK, Jr
    The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort & convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge & controversy.
    Quote Originally Posted by MSG Laigaie
    Citizenship is a verb.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 27:12
    A prudent person foresees the danger ahead and takes precautions.
    The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 31:17
    She dresses herself with strength and makes her arms strong.

  13. #13
    Regular Member BROKENSPROKET's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Trempealeau County
    Posts
    2,187
    ksks

    I thought you would have been taken to the woodshed already. Your thinking is way tooo subverviant. Tell me what I can do so I can do it.

    Laws don't permit you to do anything. Laws prohibit, restrict and regulate. If it is ain't illegal, then its legal. Open carry is not prohibited by state statute so political subdivisions of the state cannnot either. Although some do have ordinances that prohibit open carry, but 66.0409(2) makes them unenforceable.

  14. #14
    Regular Member Interceptor_Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,839
    Quote Originally Posted by ksks View Post
    OK, I assume you are saying there is no statute.

    What I'm wondering is, if there is no statute related to open carry, and if the statutes say localities cannot make laws more restrictive than State law...

    Since there would be nothing to be more or less restrictive of...

    What would preclude a locality from restricting open carry since it is not addressed in Statutes?
    You have to go back to the preemption statute. Municipalities are prohibited from enforcing or creating ANY ordinance which regulates the carry of a firearm unless there is already a State Statute and then it may not be more stringent than the existing State Statute. Since there is no State Statute which regulates Open Carry, a municipality is prohibited from creating an ordinance regulating it.
    66.0409 Local regulation of firearms.

    (2) Except as provided in subs. (3) and (4), no political subdivision may enact an ordinance or adopt a resolution that regulates
    the sale, purchase, purchase delay, transfer, ownership, use, keeping, possession, bearing, transportation, licensing, permitting,
    registration or taxation of any firearm or part of a firearm, including ammunition and reloader components, unless the ordinance or
    resolution is the same as or similar to, and no more stringent than,
    a state statute
    (4)(b) If a political subdivision has in effect on November 17,
    1995, an ordinance or resolution that regulates the sale, purchase,
    transfer, ownership, use, keeping, possession, bearing, transportation, licensing, permitting, registration or taxation of any firearm
    or part of a firearm, including ammunition and reloader components, and the ordinance or resolution is not the same as or similar
    to a state statute, the ordinance or resolution shall have no legal
    effect and the political subdivision may not enforce the ordinance
    or resolution on or after November 18, 1995.
    Last edited by Interceptor_Knight; 02-16-2012 at 01:33 AM.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    wi
    Posts
    112
    Quote Originally Posted by Interceptor_Knight View Post
    You have to go back to the preemption statute. Municipalities are prohibited from enforcing or creating ANY ordinance which regulates the carry of a firearm unless there is already a State Statute and then it may not be more stringent than the existing State Statute. Since there is no State Statute which regulates Open Carry, a municipality is prohibited from creating an ordinance regulating it.
    Thanks IK. I was trying to get my head around how the localities would be precluded from doing something that was not otherwise addressed. Your explanation clears it up.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Somewhere, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,029
    ksks:

    Good comments from IK and 'sproket.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •