WI Attorney General Issues Opinion on Open Carry - it's legal

[Fast Ed]

imported post

Until the SCOTUS rules on Nordyke, it only applies to the Ninth circus, er, I mean Circuit. Circuit Court decisions have no power in other circuits. They can be used as precedent, and unless there is a conflict with another Circuit, does have some influence. SCOTUS usually gets involved when there is a conflict in order to eliminate the conflict between Circuits.

Nordyke was a good thing, as far as it went, but doesn't apply here in Wisconsin.

Fast Ed

 

[Kevin Jensen]

imported post

Will this change Wisconsin's status on the open carry map? Or is it the vehicle restrictions that keeps them from a gold status?

 

[Mike]

imported post

SGT Jensen wrote:

Will this change Wisconsin's status on the open carry map? Or is it the vehicle restrictions that keeps them from a gold status?

Vehicle ban plus, probablyt, the 1000 ft school zone thing.

 

[Pointman]

imported post

You can 'take your guns to town' (for now)
Sussex, Lisbon
http://www.livinglakecountry.com/sussexsun/news/43891112.html
Gumm said the sheriff's office is abiding by a recent advisory opinion by Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen, which says individuals, as long as they remain lawful and are not suspected of criminal activity, may carry unconcealed sidearms.

Gumm said he will discuss an ordinance that would regulate carrying guns on local government property with Sussex village trustees.

He said communities can also adopt ordinances that enforce property owners' rights to prohibit carrying firearms on private property and in local businesses.

Supervisor Dan Fischer said he might consider proposing such an ordinance.

Newly elected Town Chairman Matt Gehrke said if Fischer, or anyone else, proposed such an ordinance, the board would consider it.

 

[Nutczak]

imported post

Pointman wrote:

You can 'take your guns to town' (for now)
Sussex, Lisbon
http://www.livinglakecountry.com/sussexsun/news/43891112.html
Gumm said the sheriff's office is abiding by a recent advisory opinion by Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen, which says individuals, as long as they remain lawful and are not suspected of criminal activity, may carry unconcealed sidearms.

Gumm said he will discuss an ordinance that would regulate carrying guns on local government property with Sussex village trustees.

He said communities can also adopt ordinances that enforce property owners' rights to prohibit carrying firearms on private property and in local businesses.

Supervisor Dan Fischer said he might consider proposing such an ordinance.

Newly elected Town Chairman Matt Gehrke said if Fischer, or anyone else, proposed such an ordinance, the board would consider it.

Please correct me if I am wrong, But doesn't the current law already prohibit carry into a government owned building?
And the private property or business owner already has the right to make their business "Gun-Free" by posting a simple sign stating it is as such. It can either be a written sign, or a picture of a pistol with a red circle, and a red line diagonally running through it.

 

[Mike]

imported post

Nutczak wrote:

ordinance, the board would consider it.

Please correct me if I am wrong, But doesn't the current law already prohibit carry into a government owned building?
And the private property or business owner already has the right to make their business "Gun-Free" by posting a simple sign stating it is as such. It can either be a written sign, or a picture of a pistol with a red circle, and a red line diagonally running through it.

well, preemption precludes local ordinances, but i think you are right on state wide gov building ban - anybody have a cite to statute?

On private facilities, i do not think WI has a siganage statute nor do we want one - if you enact a sign statute, they will come . . .

 

[WIG19]

imported post

Mike wrote:

Nutczak wrote:

ordinance, the board would consider it.

Please correct me if I am wrong, But doesn't the current law already prohibit carry into a government owned building?
And the private property or business owner already has the right to make their business "Gun-Free" by posting a simple sign stating it is as such. It can either be a written sign, or a picture of a pistol with a red circle, and a red line diagonally running through it.

well, preemption precludes local ordinances, but i think you are right on state wide gov building ban - anybody have a cite to statute?

On private facilities, i do not think WI has a siganage statute nor do we want one - if you enact a sign statute, they will come . . .

941.235

And private property is private property; no sign statute is needed. You can be asked to leave private property for any reason by anyone; if private property is of the type that "public" invite is implied (aka business) vs. "public" as in govt owned their sign is sufficient, although then people will quibble over size, font, ad nauseum, and that gnashing of teeth is what generates statutes.