• 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.

Wis. officials say locals can ban weapons at polls

H

Herr Heckler Koch

Guest
GAB attorney Mike Haas wrote in a memo he prepared for Tuesday’s board meeting that elections appear to qualify as special events under the law, which allows special event organizers — in this case, local election officials — to ban weapons as long as they post signs at every entrance stating as much.
Elections, the foundation of our democrapcy, as special events, what will they think of next?

The legislature must hwack this mole too, soon! Don't be the test case.
 

protias

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
7,308
Location
SE, WI
How do you take this out of context?

943.13 (1e) (h) “Special event” means an event that is open to the public, is for a duration of not more than 3 weeks, and either has designated entrances to and from the event that are locked when the event is closed or requires an admission.

So they are doing a poll tax?!
 

Firearms Iinstuctor

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2011
Messages
3,431
Location
northern wis
One thing about smaller city and town officials they can be Influenced a lot easier then bigger goverment bodies. 10 to 20 people showing up at the annual meeting could pass their own resolution.

A vist to the Mayors office or town board member can have a big effect. Or running for the board can work even better. Some times these positions go begging to be filled.
 
H

Herr Heckler Koch

Guest
943.13 (1e) (h) “Special event” means an event that is open to the public, ...
Voter ID! The public contains others than enfranchised electors, like "illegals", foreigners unable to vote, felons disbarred their rights.
 

Jason in WI

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2010
Messages
542
Location
Under your bed
Nothing surprising here, I knew they were going to use and abuse the "Special Event" clause the moment I seen it in the bill.

Well at least we will be safe now, I mean we just had a primary and there are over 100,000 people with licenses and you know a bunch voted armed, just look at all the problems and mayhem that ensued............. oh wait, nothing like usual.

Sent from my DROID2 GLOBAL using Tapatalk 2
 

rcawdor57

Campaign Veteran
Joined
May 18, 2009
Messages
1,643
Location
Wisconsin, USA
Nothing surprising here, I knew they were going to use and abuse the "Special Event" clause the moment I seen it in the bill.

Well at least we will be safe now, I mean we just had a primary and there are over 100,000 people with licenses and you know a bunch voted armed, just look at all the problems and mayhem that ensued............. oh wait, nothing like usual.

Sent from my DROID2 GLOBAL using Tapatalk 2

Yep, I was one of those armed voters! "Nothing to see here....move along".
 
H

Herr Heckler Koch

Guest
http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/lo...ddb-11e1-9963-001a4bcf887a.html?mode=comments

mailto://govgeneral@wisconsin.gov
Dear Governor Walker,

Please take control of your bureaucrats, specifically the GAB for
deciding that "elections appear to qualify as special events under the
law, which allows special event organizers — in this case, local
election officials — to ban weapons..."

The statute relies on the definition, (§ 943.13(1e)(h)) “Special event”
means an event that is open to the public, ... An election open to the
public would be open to "illegals", foreign visitors, disenfranchised
felons, citizens not of voting age, et cetera.
 
Last edited:

MKEgal

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
4,383
Location
in front of my computer, WI
If the polling place isn't prohibited by statute it should be open to people peacefully exercising any Constitutionally-protected right.

For smaller towns, speak up or get elected so you can change things.
For larger cities :uhoh: vote absentee. Or I suppose you could stand just outside the door & make them bring you a ballot, etc. Speaking up against the PTB isn't as effective.
 

paul@paul-fisher.com

Regular Member
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
4,049
Location
Chandler, AZ
http://fox6now.com/2012/05/14/wis-officials-say-locals-can-ban-weapons-at-polls/

And to think, state preemption truly means nothing. We need to strengthen it so these idiots are unable to infringe upon our rights. :banghead:

:blink: They don't even need the 'special event' language to be able to post, all they have to do is put up a sign, not sure where this rocket scientist did his learnin'.


In Elkhorn, the city has decided not to post ANY of their buildings, including the park district building where I open carry and vote.
 

protias

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
7,308
Location
SE, WI
:blink: They don't even need the 'special event' language to be able to post, all they have to do is put up a sign, not sure where this rocket scientist did his learnin'.


In Elkhorn, the city has decided not to post ANY of their buildings, including the park district building where I open carry and vote.

Since GAB is a government agency, and therefore never worked a real day in their career, they need to look busy since they aren't verifying signatures, or voter ballots, or anything else for that matter.
 
H

Herr Heckler Koch

Guest
Why isn't prohibiting LAC electors at a poll damned as voter suppression like Voter ID?

http://www.boortz.com/weblogs/nealz-nuze/2012/may/25/treason/

We’ve heard the argument for some time now that voter ID laws are raaaaacist. But now, not only are these laws racist but they are treasonous!

Former Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm, a Democrat (duh), says that Republicans are pushing voter ID laws because they don’t have winning issues and are, instead, relying on changing the rules of the game. But then she goes on to say, “Efforts to suppress voting are not just selfish, there not just short-sighted. Voter restriction laws, that lead to an outcome based upon process instead upon merit, might be labeled – and I imagine even by our founding fathers – as treasonous.”

You could fill volumes with the idiotic musings of Granholm. The ONLY way a voter ID law could be voter “suppression” is if you believe that turning people away from the polls who are not legally entitled to cast a ballot fits the definition of voter suppression. So what is the issue here. The facts show that most people who cast illegal ballots cast them for Democrats. Let’s face it; those who break laws are, as a whole, much more likely to vote Democrat than Republican. Yeah .... I’m saying that Republicans are more honorable than Democrats --- deal with it --- and Democrats don’t like you keeping their illegal voters from casting their votes.

There you have it, folks. Proving that you are who you say you are in order to partake in the privilege of voting is treason. Got it?
 
Top