• 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.

FWI CIty of Milwaukee District #2

Interceptor_Knight

Regular Member
Joined
May 18, 2007
Messages
2,851
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

J.Gleason wrote:
As far as sitting behind my keyboard, that more discribes you then me. Sure I come into this forum when I have some free time. But throughout my entire day I am armed. I am not afraid to be armed and I am not afraid to stand my ground when unlawfully questioned by the police. My statements were not an attack they were the truth. there is a difference.

At this point I don't think it would have mattered if I absolutley had agreed with the OP you simply always have to play the devil's advocate and have the opposite point of view on everything. Even when it is pointless.

Just like the see through case for example. Do you carry for self defense or do yu carry because you like the attention it brings? Because it seems to me that it is really important to you that everyone sees your firearm. And don't say it is for legal purposes that you want the see through case because that is horse crap. It is nothing more than for someone to notice you. If that is all you want is to be noticed then walk down the street in your underwear.

You can hold your breath until you turn purple, jump up and down and cry about your rights being violated, but the facts remain that the police can walk onto your property and question you. Case laws seems to support the "lawfulness" of police questioning. Good luck with that whole "leave now because you are tresspassing" stuff...:?

You attacked the OP because he did not act the way you wanted him to. Get over yourself and recognize that it is a person's right to choose in spite of your wishes. Who are you to demand that he get a police report for you?

I am not playing the Devil's advocate. My position has been consistent. In most cases I will show ID when asked. I support someone else's choice to do the same.

I would rather not Open Carry most of the time. I have made this position clear before. I would rather conceal carry and I do so for protection. This is why Ipaid for the Utah and Minnesota classes and got my permit. I have carried in WI concealed when I felt it was necessary for protection.

A transparent case is merely an option when you are in an areayou know to have an Administrative enforcement position that acase on your seat is concealed. I do not have that problem and my caseis often next to me, asI have stated before. I will continue to recommend the trunk to be 100% "safe" if you have any LEO interaction.
 

J.Gleason

Banned
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
3,481
Location
Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Blah , Blah, Blah, everyone look at Interupter _Knight.

A partime advocate of open carry. He will stand up for your rights as he is handing his ID over to the cops and answering all questions.

The more I read from your posts the less credibility you have.
 

Interceptor_Knight

Regular Member
Joined
May 18, 2007
Messages
2,851
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

J.Gleason wrote:
Blah , Blah, Blah, everyone look at Interupter _Knight.

A partime advocate of open carry. He will stand up for your rights as he is handing his ID over to the cops and answering all questions.

The more I read from your posts the less credibility you have.

You fail to see that I do not need your blessing for what I do. I am free to act according to my own conscience. I carry often yet I am not anxious to be sitting in courtand lose because the ruling says that the police have the ability to lawfully ask questions, ask for ID so long as they do not demand it and even if they cite you and take your weapon you can not sue them for rights violations because none of your rights have been violated. If a store employee claims that you were being disruptive, the LEO may reasonably cite you. It is then up to thecourts if it will go any further. Forcing the point is not always the wise move. Gray areas are not always bad.There are already alleged waves because of what happened in the suit Jesus filed.

For now, I will continue toexercise my right to carry and not make unnecessary issues about it.I refuse to be a drama queen and play "look at me, I am carrying a weapon" You will not see me post videos on U-Tube where I baited the local cops. My point which I am making in this thread is that others are free to do the same despite your demands of how we should act. You sir are the one loosing credibility by demanding others act as you say you would.
 

J.Gleason

Banned
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
3,481
Location
Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Interceptor_Knight wrote:
J.Gleason wrote:
Blah , Blah, Blah, everyone look at Interupter _Knight.

A partime advocate of open carry. He will stand up for your rights as he is handing his ID over to the cops and answering all questions.

The more I read from your posts the less credibility you have.

You fail to see that I do not need your blessing for what I do. I am free to act according to my own conscience. I carry often yet I am not anxious to be sitting in courtand lose because the ruling says that the police have the ability to lawfully ask questions, ask for ID so long as they do not demand it and even if they cite you and take your weapon you can not sue them for rights violations because none of your rights have been violated. If a store employee claims that you were being disruptive, the LEO may reasonably cite you. It is then up to thecourts if it will go any further. Forcing the point is not always the wise move. Gray areas are not always bad.There are already alleged waves because of what happened in the suit Jesus filed.

For now, I will continue toexercise my right to carry and not make unnecessary issues about it.I refuse to be a drama queen and play "look at me, I am carrying a weapon" You will not see me post videos on U-Tube where I baited the local cops. My point which I am making in this thread is that others are free to do the same despite your demands of how we should act. You sir are the one loosing credibility by demanding others act as you say you would.
Yeah OK Mr. I need to have a see through case so everyone can see how big my gun is. It is your credibility that is gone.
 

Interceptor_Knight

Regular Member
Joined
May 18, 2007
Messages
2,851
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

J.Gleason wrote:
Yeah OK Mr. I need to have a see through case so everyone can see how big my gun is. It is your credibility that is gone.

Nice selective memory. You are absolutely so full of your own feces that it is now coming out of your ears. I challenge you to find a statement where I said that I "had" to have a transparent case.

You will find that I suggested such a case as an option if someone wanted to eliminate the "hidden" portion of the WI anti CCW law.

You sir are the last one who should be making statements regarding credibility...:?
 

TyGuy

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2010
Messages
775
Location
, ,
imported post

Have we found out if this truly is the new policy yet? I would prefer not to wade through 4 pages of bickering to get to it.
 

J.Gleason

Banned
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
3,481
Location
Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Interceptor_Knight wrote:
J.Gleason wrote:
Yeah OK Mr. I need to have a see through case so everyone can see how big my gun is. It is your credibility that is gone.

Nice selective memory. You are absolutely so full of your own feces that it is now coming out of your ears. I challenge you to find a statement where I said that I "had" to have a transparent case.

You will find that I suggested such a case as an option if someone wanted to eliminate the "hidden" portion of the WI anti CCW law.

You sir are the last one who should be making statements regarding credibility...:?
Nothing wrong with mine. If you really want to get into this I am up for it though.
 

Wisconsin Carry Inc. - Chairman

Wisconsin Carry, Inc.
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
1,197
Location
, ,
imported post

Sun May 16th:

J.Gleason wrote:
Until I see some information verified by an open records request, I am calling shenanigans on this.

Monday May 17th:
J.Gleason wrote:
I have yet to see a post of someone submitting an open records request as of yet so I am still calling shenanigans on this. if this is for real there should be a record. The police have to notify dispatch anytime they leave the squad.

Tuesday May 18th:
J.Gleason wrote:
Still waiting for someone to post the open records on this one.

Wednesday May 19th:
J.Gleason wrote:
Smells in here.

Wednesday May 19th:
J.Gleason wrote:
I am saying it smells in here. Shenanigans, Shenanigans, Shenanigans.

Need a better answer? OK

Someone is full of BS here. Either it is you or the officers. Not trying to be disrespectful but here is how I see it.

You come into the forum and tell us of this incident and how you just allowed these officers to trample all over your rights for no good reason, yet you have not made any effort to take an hour out of your day and go down to the PD and ask for the open records. It was one supposed police call so it would more than likely be given to you within a day at the most. Where is the open records request? Where are the records of the call? The police response? What are the names of the officers? What is your name so one of us may submit an open records request?

Why haven't you done this on your own?

As far as the "supposed" police encounter, why didn't you exercise your rights?

You say you have been watching this forum and have just recently decided to post. If you have been watching the forum, then you should know how to respond when you have an encounter with the police. That does not include allowing an officer to reach into your pocket where they could very well leave behind an illegal substance that could cause you to spend some time in prison for being in possession of a firearm while being in possession of drugs or whatever else they felt like leaving behind in your pocket.

If you are not well versed in your rights, maybe you should hold off on carrying until you are. If you are uncomfortable with standing up to the police and enforcing those rights then maybe you should not carry until you are.

So far you have taken offense to any comment that may appear to suggest that something is amiss with your story. That seems to appear as though you have something to hide.

You clearly admit that you did not even ask the officers if you were being detained even on your own property. You clearly admit to allowing the officer to search your person without  question or objection.

It just seems funny to me that all of these people that have just been watching the forum, now suddenly come out to post after the incident with Jesus Gonzalez. And all of these new posters have some story to tell about how the police said they were going to crack down on OCers. Yet you offer no proof that the incident actually took place.

If that was me I would have immediately went to the PD and submitted an ORR and got all of the information on the call. I would have then posted that information here for everyone to see.

Now if the incident actually did take place, then what are the officers names? Have you spoken with an attorney concerning your detainment? Because if they took your ID and ran your name you were being detained.

With all of your inaction in this incident, I have to question as to whether or not this actually took place or if this is nothing more than a story to try and deter people form OCing. Until I see records of the call I have to stand by this opinion. If I am wrong I apologize in advance. Sorry, I have grown very suspicious as of late, but with good reason.

Hey I am only stating what many here are thinking and don't have the balls to put in writing.

You asked, I told. Shenanigans!

Thursday May 20th:
J.Gleason wrote:
<Cricket chirp>

Wednesday May 19th:
J.Gleason wrote:
Oh for crying out loud I_K get over yourself. You sound like a bleeding heart liberal. "Don't let anyone bully you."

There are more and more people coming into this forum and making statements that Police are stopping them on the street and on their "OWN" property and harassing them because they are OCing and it is all happening now since Jesus was arrested.

Smells like fish to me. Now all of a sudden the police are coming onto peoples property and questioning them for what? What have they done that is illegal? What RAS do the police have to indict that there is a need for them to question someone who is working in their own yard because that person is carrying a firearm?

I think the next time I see a police officer I will just place my hands behind my head and drop down to my knees and cross my ankles so they can just frisk the hell out of me.

Get fecking real here. Let's be honest this hasn't only become an issue about our right to self protection it is a "Rights" issue as well and the fact is if you are an advocate for "Civil Rights" you certainly don't allow the police to just trample all over them now do you?

If I am working in my yard and the police come onto my property I will assume they may need my assistance. Once they start questioning me about me doing something that is "Pertfectly Legal" (I love that phrase) that is when I request that they remove themselves from my property. At that point they are trespassing. I do not answer any questions they have and if the police do not leave then I call the Sherriff's Department and have them removed.

I don't let them reach in my pockets or search my person because they have no RAS, Probable Cause, gut suspicions, medicaL need, or any other damn reason to do so.

I do not have to ID myself and at this point since the police are there for no legal reason I would not ID myself or allow them to obtain my ID either.

What they hell is the point of carrying a firearm for self defense if you damn near deficate in your drawers just because the police stop to talk to you when they have no cause? What do you think your going to do with that firearm if a criminal attacks you when you nearly poop yourself because the cops harass you?

I guess we will just have to wait and see if this incident even took place as from what I understand the WCI has filed an ORR.

As far as sitting behind my keyboard, that more discribes you then me. Sure I comeinto this forum when I have some free time. But throughout my entire day I am armed. I am not afraid to be armed and I am not afraid to stand my ground when unlawfully questioned by the police. My statements were not an attack they were the truth. there is a difference.

If this incident actually did take place and happened as the OP originally stated then so be it. But I for one wouldn't come into this forum and post in such a way that it would possibly deter others from exercising their rights simply because I chose to stand mute and let the police harass me.

At this point I don't think it would have mattered if I absolutley had agreed with the OP you simply always have to play the devil's advocate and have the opposite point of view on everything. Even when it is pointless.

Just like the see through case for example. Do you carry for self defense or do yu carry because you like the attention it brings? Because it seems to me that it is really important to you that everyone sees your firearm. And don't say it is for legal purposes that you want the see through case because that is horse crap. It is nothing more than for someone to notice you. If that is all you want is to be noticed then walk down the street in your underwear.

Thursday May 20th:
J.Gleason wrote:
Blah , Blah, Blah, everyone look at Interupter _Knight.

A partime advocate of open carry. He will stand up for your rights as he is handing his ID over to the cops and answering all questions.

The more I read from your posts the less credibility you have.

Thursday May 20
J.Gleason wrote:
Yeah OK Mr. I need to have a see through case so everyone can see how big my gun is. It is your credibility that is gone

Sunday May 23rd
J.Gleason wrote:
Still nothing on the open records?

Tuesday June 1
J.Gleason wrote:
And still nothing? Which leads me to believe that this never happened.

An open-records request was made by me on May 19th.

I followed that request up with a phone call to verify they had received it. They had.

The WI-DOJ has indicated that 10 - 14 days is a reasonable amount of time to respond to an open-records request.

Given the holiday weekend, and that 14 days would be tomorrow, I think its reasonable to wait til the end of the week before bugging them again.

I can't help but offer James that in the time it has taken you to pen all of your comments in this thread, including inquiring about the status of the open-records request and questioning the character of posters in this thread and jumping to conclusions, you could have driven down here to Milwaukee and made your open-records request in person.

Anyone can make an open-records request. Its not difficult, its not time consuming.


http://wikifoia.pbworks.com/How+to+file+an+open+records+request+in+Wisconsin

http://www.journalism.wisc.edu/~drechsel/j559/readings/openrec.html

http://www.doj.state.wi.us/AWP/2007OMCG-PRO/2007_OML_Compliance_Guide.pdf

As I've said before in a previous thread, this board can be a tremendous resource. Justified or not, it doesn't serve the cause to speculate and berate fellow posters. Even if you win the argument, you may drive away dozens of lurkers who have come here for information.

WCI sends a link to this forum to every new member in their welcome letter.

With 100 new members on average per month, please consider whether taking pot-shots at fellow posters is SO important that its worth driving away new members who come here.

I've had 2 or 3 new members (which is a small percentage but worth noting considering many probably just say nothing) email me after receiving the welcome letter that this forum if full of more bickering and keyboard-attack's than it is information. It doesn't have to be that way, and we can re-focus the forum on INFORMATION rather than attacks immediately.

PLEASE put your ego's aside and recognize that WHAT WISCONSIN REALLY NEEDS is more people law-fully respectfully exercising their right to open-carry. Without that, our movement will fail to grow and gather the support it needs. There is no better online forum to discuss open-carry in Wisconsin than this one. Please let this forum be about information and not about keyboard-attacks so that new WCI members who come here for information to learn to exercise their rights will stick around and become part of the movement as well.
 

J.Gleason

Banned
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
3,481
Location
Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

So the only people allowed to hold in question the authenticity of an OP is the board members of WCI?

You think it is beyond the realm of the anti gun police to have officers post such incidents in this forum? That would be niave.

The OP's original post was on May 16th if he was genuinely disturbed by the incident he would have submitted his ORR ASAP. Most ORR's are answered within the 10 day period unless there is a refusal to comply and BNH has shown members how to handle such a refusal.

I am not jumping the gun here and why should I drive down to milwaukee and submit an ORR when the OP or even yourself live in the vicinity?

I am not looking for a who has more pull, knowledge and support argument here. I am simply pointing out that there are several things amiss that lead me to believe that there may be a troll present and as I stated before if I am wrong then I apologize in advance.

The OP's user name sports a handgun carried by many police officers, the SIG P229 357 model. The way the op described the incident and how he wouldn't even reach for his ID but instead allowed the officer to search his person without probable cause.

That sounds to me like the way an officer would describe the situation.

Then the OP gets all defensive when I suggest an ORR like I don't believe him or something.

Am I the only one seeing this? Or am I the only one with the balls to speak up?

Don't get me wrong. I am a member or WCI and I would not do anything to harm the growing membership. I devote much of my time to the WCI efforts and cause so to insinuate that I am trying to chase anyone away is ridiculous.

But I will also not sit by and idley watch as trolls come into the forum and post incidents to persuade the members that the risks of being arrested for OCing are much to great and anyone should consider these risks before exercising their rights.

Doesn't it strike you as odd that a post such as this come directly after Jesus' arrest?
 

J.Gleason

Banned
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
3,481
Location
Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Well it is obvious, you can not see anyone elses point of view and MY pm's will not go through to you to discuss it in private. So there is no point in discussing it any further.

I certainly hope you will post the ORR response if there is anything to post.
 

Wisconsin Carry Inc. - Chairman

Wisconsin Carry, Inc.
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
1,197
Location
, ,
imported post

James, my point is, an open-records request has been made.

Lets just wait until that comes in before we muck-up the thread with opinions, speculation, attacks.

Lets make the board about information, not speculation or assumption.

When we get the Open Records reply the facts will speak for themselves.
 

Wisconsin Carry Inc. - Chairman

Wisconsin Carry, Inc.
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
1,197
Location
, ,
imported post

Finally heard back from MPD on the open-records request. Oddly they weren't able to email me whatever records exist.

Asked for a mailing address which I gave them.

I should have something back within a day or two.
 
M

McX

Guest
imported post

if there is an order coming down for arrest re disturbing the peace, it will be interesting if the records can indicate who wrote this order, and if the attorney general was consulted. i can patiently wait for this.
 

KansasKraut

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
116
Location
Verona, WI
imported post

Master Doug Huffman wrote:
Satisfied by an oral statement without a seizure of papers.

968.24 Temporary questioning without arrest. After
having identified himself or herself as a law enforcement officer,
a law enforcement officer may stop a person in a public place for
a reasonable period of time when the officer reasonably suspects
that such person is committing, is about to commit or has committed
a crime, and may demand the name and address of the person
and an explanation of the person’s conduct. Such detention
and temporary questioning shall be
So does this mean that Wisconsin does, in fact, have a stop-and-identify statute? You are required to give your name and address if demanded?
 

Cobra469

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2010
Messages
218
Location
West Allis, WI, , USA
imported post

KansasKraut wrote:
Master Doug Huffman wrote:
Satisfied by an oral statement without a seizure of papers.

968.24 Temporary questioning without arrest. After
having identified himself or herself as a law enforcement officer,
a law enforcement officer may stop a person in a public place for
a reasonable period of time when the officer reasonably suspects
that such person is committing, is about to commit or has committed
a crime
, and may demand the name and address of the person
and an explanation of the person’s conduct. Such detention
and temporary questioning shall be
So does this mean that Wisconsin does, in fact, have a stop-and-identify statute? You are required to give your name and address if demanded?

officer reasonably suspects
that such person is committing, is about to commit or has committed
a crime.


Only if there is probable cause may they demand identification. Otherwise you may ask what their probable cause is. Then again if your ID is no on you all you have to do is say I don't have any on me and invoke my right to remain silent. If they have enough to arrest you they will and run your fingerprints. Otherwise you may ask if your free to go.
 

Cobra469

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2010
Messages
218
Location
West Allis, WI, , USA
imported post

If you do have your ID on you you can object to their illegal search but do not resist the search. Then anything derived from that illegal search (assuming no probable cause) is poisoned fruit.



I am not a lawyer but this is the understanding that I have to such encounters.
 
Top