Carrying at work.

[Gordo]

imported post

Thank you.

 

[ffemt1079]

imported post

The court noted that "f the constitutional right to keep and bear arms for security is to mean anything, it must, as a general matter, permit a person to possess, carry, and sometimes conceal arms to maintain the security of his private residence or privately operated business, and to safely move and store weapons within these premises." State v. Hamdan, 2003 WI 113, ¶ 68, 264 Wis. 2d 433, ¶ 68, 665 N.W.2d 785, ¶ 68.




Granted this does not specifically tell anyone that you as an owner can give permission, it also does not expressly exclude an owner from granting permission to CC on PRIVATE property. I mean, isn't OC in wisconsin lawful due to the sole fact the WI written law simply does not mention it to forbid it??? Yes, we have the right to bear arms, but that doesnt mean the state couldnt start licensing like other states in order to practice that right. And no, I do not want the state to start issuing licenses for us to be able to carry, either OC or CC.

 

[bnhcomputing]

imported post

First, concealed carry is strictly prohibited in Wisconsin. The court did carve out a few exceptions but we have already heard from at least one forum member that even after these exceptions, he was still charged and tried for carrying a concealed firearm on his own property.

Second, this site is devoted to open carry. I will neither advocate nor condone violating the law. Conceal at your own risk as I believe it to be a violation of the law.

I will open carry when I carry, work within the law, and encourage all the forum members and readers to do the same.

 

[Gordo]

imported post

Concur BNH, It is my hope that all law abiding citizens not only be armed but stay law abiding. It doesn't help the cause any if a few of us start breaking the rules.

just my 2 cents.

 

[__]

imported post

Gordo wrote:

Concur BNH, It is my hope that all law abiding citizens not only be armed but stay law abiding. It doesn't help the cause any if a few of us start breaking the rules.

just my 2 cents.

Thank you, too many citizens challenge the law and its discretion egged on by irresponsible advisers. Listen to a personal representative bound by canons and ethics to your interest above all others.

 

[bigdaddy1]

imported post

Gordo wrote:

Concur BNH, It is my hope that all law abiding citizens not only be armed but stay law abiding. It doesn't help the cause any if a few of us start breaking the rules.

just my 2 cents.

HEAVY SIGH,:banghead:

It is not illegal as plainly noted in the cite. Its like someone saying you can walk on the grass but are afraid to because you were told you cant before. If the Supreme Court says its legal, why would you say it aint?

Yes this is an open carry forum, however if someone asks a question that I can help them with why would I refuse?

 

[paul@paul-fisher.com]

imported post

bigdaddy1 wrote:

HEAVY SIGH,:banghead:

It is not illegal as plainly noted in the cite.  Its like someone saying you can walk on the grass but are afraid to because you were told you cant before.  If the Supreme Court says its legal, why would you say it aint?

They didn't say it was legal. They said that the private residence and owner of a private business can carry.

Once again, the OP asked if he could carry at work when he has permission from the owner of a private business. The court doesn't specifically say no but it only specifically says yes for the owner of the private business and doesn't say anything about an agent.

 

[bigdaddy1]

imported post

paul@paul-fisher.com wrote:

bigdaddy1 wrote:

HEAVY SIGH,:banghead:

It is not illegal as plainly noted in the cite. Its like someone saying you can walk on the grass but are afraid to because you were told you cant before. If the Supreme Court says its legal, why would you say it aint?

They didn't say it was legal. They said that the private residence and owner of a private business can carry.

Once again, the OP asked if he could carry at work when he has permission from the owner of a private business. The court doesn't specifically say no but it only specifically says yes for the owner of the private business and doesn't say anything about an agent.

IT DOESNT SAY OWNER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The court noted that "If the constitutional right to keep and bear arms for security is to mean anything, it must, as a general matter, permit a person to possess, carry, and sometimes conceal arms to maintain the security of his private residence or privately operated business, and to safely move and store weapons within these premises

It says PRIVATE.

 

[revolverrandy]

imported post

BROKENSPROKET wrote:

Company policy I cannot even have it in my vehicle if I park on company property.

same here