• 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.

Madison PD tears up obstruction tickets D/O/C tickets to all 5 Culvers OCers!!

anmut

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2010
Messages
875
Location
Stevens Point WI, ,
Letters to the Madison mayor are ok, but be aware that he hasn't much control over the Chief of Police, who is appointed by the Police and Fire Commission and serves at their pleasure. Secondly, the mayor is anti-gun so if you say you aren't coming to town to spend your money, he'll probably say "good!"

Well if he's about driving out potential money to his city by allowing the MPD to violate Constitutional Rights, then his voters should be informed. Hence the letter to the editor of the WSJ. :)
 

CUOfficer

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2010
Messages
197
Location
La Crosse, Wisconsin, USA
There is nothing illegal with OC as long as you don't go to the five places you cannot carry. The police are doing illegal activities, not law abiding citizen who happen to open carry. Cities cannot enact laws more restrictive than state law (preemption).

I never mentioned anything being illegal and I am well aware of the laws. I simply stated that they could clear up this difference in county by county enforcement by getting a law on the books. Whether it be referring to open-carry, concealed, permit, no permit, whatever... Just something so that each county and each police officer doesn't treat the laws different. That is the MAIN problem with open carry in WI; each office enforces it as they see fit.
 

paul@paul-fisher.com

Regular Member
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
4,049
Location
Chandler, AZ
I never mentioned anything being illegal and I am well aware of the laws. I simply stated that they could clear up this difference in county by county enforcement by getting a law on the books. Whether it be referring to open-carry, concealed, permit, no permit, whatever... Just something so that each county and each police officer doesn't treat the laws different. That is the MAIN problem with open carry in WI; each office enforces it as they see fit.

I understand what you are saying, however, most laws list prohibitions, not allowed actions. Sometimes there are laws that say something is illegal and then lists exceptions but I'm not sure how one would formulate one for this situation.
 

littlewolf

Regular Member
Joined
May 10, 2010
Messages
349
Location
A, A
EMAILS to Madison Police Cheif

How many people sending the Chief emails to express our concern of his violating our RIGHTS and his Oath of OFFICE ?
 

Shotgun

Wisconsin Carry, Inc.
Joined
Aug 23, 2006
Messages
2,668
Location
Madison, Wisconsin, USA
Christopher Ahmuty

Executive Director: ACLU of Wisconsin

207 E. Buffalo Street, Suite 325
Milwaukee, WI 53202

Phone: (414) 272-4032 | Email: liberty@aclu-wi.org

Web: http://www.aclu-wi.org

I followed the Madison ACLU chapter on twitter yesterday and they responded by putting me on a list that says "These folks get our tweets because they generally oppose us and are monitoring our news." There are only two followers on that list!
 

.30-06

New member
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
12
Location
, ,
Some courts would beg to disagree. It's been determined (and I'm sure someone here can cite the caselaw for me because I don't have it handy) that the mere prescence of that many police officers is intimidating enough, especially after others were arrested, to make it non-consensual. IMHO, it was illegally obtained.

The only ID's that were illegally obtained were from the two who were arrested for obstruction. Whether you like it or not, cops are within their rights to coercise, intimidate and even outright lie in order to get a consensual search. They do it every day. If this weren't the case, every kid who got caught with a bag of dope would be able to argue he was intimidated into allowing the search.

Moving on... this isn't as open and shut as everyone thinks. There is nothing binding about Van Hollen's OPINION regarding open carry. Evidently, the Madison City Attorney diagrees, and is squaring off with Van Hollen. The only way this will truly be settled is by it being heard by the WI Supreme Court.
 

Brass Magnet

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2009
Messages
2,818
Location
Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
I followed the Madison ACLU chapter on twitter yesterday and they responded by putting me on a list that says "These folks get our tweets because they generally oppose us and are monitoring our news." There are only two followers on that list!

That's hilarious.......especially since I think many of us generally support them except for one issue. It's they who don't support us. What a bunch of hypocrites! :banghead:

I'm using the "head banging on wall" an awefully lot today. :cry: It hurts......
 

anmut

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2010
Messages
875
Location
Stevens Point WI, ,
I followed the Madison ACLU chapter on twitter yesterday and they responded by putting me on a list that says "These folks get our tweets because they generally oppose us and are monitoring our news." There are only two followers on that list!

Isn't that what the ACLU is for though? Or is it the American Civil Liberties Union (except if your not a liberal elitist)

They would have to change their names to ACLUEIYNALE. To phonetically pronounce it just sneeze.
 

SAK

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Messages
259
Location
ShaunKranish from ICarry.org, ,
For the ACLU I would focus on two important points:

1) Engaging in perfectly legal and harmless activity should not be turned into a crime because someone was unsure and called the cops, or because someone was scared, or because someone doesn't like it. Otherwise anyone could have anyone else arrested for ANYTHING.

2) Allowing the police to require identification of everyone - requiring everyone to carry ID even when walking around - at any time for no reason (when there is no reasonable articulable suspicion that a CRIME or violation of law is taking place) is no different than the Nazis or the Soviets.


I would stay away from talking about guns, but stick them on these two points. If they don't help, they will show their true colors. If they really are committed to civil liberties, then the case of these 5 men is HUGE.
 

.30-06

New member
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
12
Location
, ,
I'll also add...

That all of this nonsense will be over in about a year's time. Nate Silver has Walker's odds of winning the big chair at about 82%.

A lot of you won't like this, but this is the way it's going to work. The legislature will whip up some permit req'd CC law which will also serve to ban open carry (excepting hunting and maybe some other activities.) Walker will sign off on it and we'll ultimately have carry policies similar to Texas.

Public opinion is NOT on your side with regard to open carry. These high-profile arrests are doing the cause more harm than good. Sure, I support OC, you support OC, but most Wisconsinites do NOT support OC. Legislators will not go to bat for it in the CC legislation. As a matter of fact, these incidents might be used as fodder to flip some legislators who are generally anti-CC into supporting the legislation so Mabel doesn't have to get scared at Culver's anymore.
 

TyGuy

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2010
Messages
775
Location
, ,
That all of this nonsense will be over in about a year's time. Nate Silver has Walker's odds of winning the big chair at about 82%.

A lot of you won't like this, but this is the way it's going to work. The legislature will whip up some permit req'd CC law which will also serve to ban open carry (excepting hunting and maybe some other activities.) Walker will sign off on it and we'll ultimately have carry policies similar to Texas.

Public opinion is NOT on your side with regard to open carry. These high-profile arrests are doing the cause more harm than good. Sure, I support OC, you support OC, but most Wisconsinites do NOT support OC. Legislators will not go to bat for it in the CC legislation. As a matter of fact, these incidents might be used as fodder to flip some legislators who are generally anti-CC into supporting the legislation so Mabel doesn't have to get scared at Culver's anymore.

Maybe we should require all black people to wear white-face when they are out of their homes because they might scare people? Like it or not it's a civil right. When the states actually absorb the Heller and McDonald rulings I am confident that will be clear. Until then we have to continue to exercise our rights and to protect them in court if needed. Should the people doing the sit ins in the 60s have given up just becuase some in the public didn't like it?
 

protias

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
7,308
Location
SE, WI
That all of this nonsense will be over in about a year's time. Nate Silver has Walker's odds of winning the big chair at about 82%.

A lot of you won't like this, but this is the way it's going to work. The legislature will whip up some permit req'd CC law which will also serve to ban open carry (excepting hunting and maybe some other activities.) Walker will sign off on it and we'll ultimately have carry policies similar to Texas.

Public opinion is NOT on your side with regard to open carry. These high-profile arrests are doing the cause more harm than good. Sure, I support OC, you support OC, but most Wisconsinites do NOT support OC. Legislators will not go to bat for it in the CC legislation. As a matter of fact, these incidents might be used as fodder to flip some legislators who are generally anti-CC into supporting the legislation so Mabel doesn't have to get scared at Culver's anymore.

I've found most of the people I interact with are for people being able to protect themselves, whether it is open or conceal carry.
 

bnhcomputing

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2007
Messages
1,709
Location
Wisconsin, USA
AG Candidate Debate

MADISON, Wis. - Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen and challenger Scott Hassett have agreed to a debate at Marquette University's law school.


Van Hollen, a Republican, and Hassett, a Democrat, will be the guests for the "On The Issues with Mike Gousha" on Thursday, Oct. 7.


"On The Issues with Mike Gousha" is a series of speaker appearances at the law school hosted by WISN-TV journalist Mike Gousha.


The latest campaign finance reports show Van Hollen has a more than two-to-one lead in campaign cash over Hassett.


Contact Gausha and tell him to ask about OC and the Madison issue. That would make a GREAT debate question!
 

.30-06

New member
Joined
Nov 16, 2009
Messages
12
Location
, ,
I've found most of the people I interact with are for people being able to protect themselves, whether it is open or conceal carry.

I can say the same. People tend to associate with other like-minded folk. But that doesn't change the fact that public opinion is stacked against OC. You have to face that fact. You also have to face the fact that when this state finally does legitimize shall-issue CC they may very well wipe OC out with it.
 

Gunslinger

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2008
Messages
3,852
Location
Free, Colorado, USA
A DC charge because a person "felt uneasy" around individuals exercising constitutional rights? Sue her for being part of a conspiracy to deprive the Five of their civil rights.

Title 18 U.S.C. § 241. Conspiracy against rights of citizens
If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any citizen in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; ... They shall be fined ... or imprisoned ... or both;

You bring up an interesting idea. Also add abuse of process or malicious prosecution (depending which way you go on class of suit) as well as false arrest, battery, illegal search and seizure and any other tort your attorneys can come up with. These 5 guys could be looking at some big money in punitive damages with the right jury. Name the stupid broad who called it in as a co-respondent on a conspiracy action under 241 in a Federal complaint. See how fast she changes her tune. And you cut the Gruppenfuhrer's legs off at the knees. Chief of police! This CS should be cleaning septic tanks. I can't believe the city attorney would be stupid enough to proceed. If he does, it's malicious prosecution and the pos running the department becomes actionable as an individual respondent for conspiracy under 241 with no immunity because he's a cop, as well as the state tort action. Prove intimidation of the old broad by the Nazis and boy do you have a case!
 
Last edited:

IcrewUH60

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2009
Messages
481
Location
Verona, Wisconsin, USA
Simple question: If the MPD is now going to claim that the behavior before their arrival at Culver's on Saturday was "Disorderly Conduct" then how can they explain the identical conduct after they identified all individuals as not being "DC?"

If the same conduct changes from being disorderly to normal, as evidenced by either not not confiscating the openly carried weapons, or returning the two that were, and not requiring any change in demeanor or activity, what changed?

This sort of petty tyranny by the self important in an attempt to "have their way" despite the laws they are sworn to uphold is unacceptable.

ETA: Does what allegedly was "Disorderly Conduct" suddenly become acceptable conduct once the folks targeted have been harassed sufficiently? Is that the MPD's thinking?

Carry on!

Great point! They were all given their weapons back and were "free to go"; even if that meant going back into Culver's for desert while still OC. This, I think will be key at the trial if there is one.

The only drawback is that DC is only a municiple code violation and even if they were found not guilty of DC, it does nothing to prevent the police from continuing this practice of harassment as it (the charges of DC) technically has nothing to do with open carry. I still beleive that their rights were violated and a civil lawsuit against the city, will make much more progress than fighting the DC charges.

It's tough to educate the public when all they see is the cops show up and arrest the open carriers. In the public's' mind, that usually translates to "yippee!, they got another criminal off the street and now I feel safer that the police are doing their jobs". I beleive that it's a wrong impression to have and it definitely does not help the OC cause in public education. People associate police with right, and handcuffed as criminal... and I think it's why they do it.
 

protias

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
7,308
Location
SE, WI
I can say the same. People tend to associate with other like-minded folk. But that doesn't change the fact that public opinion is stacked against OC. You have to face that fact. You also have to face the fact that when this state finally does legitimize shall-issue CC they may very well wipe OC out with it.

It is more than just my friends (and yes, I have some pretty liberal friends who disagree with pretty much everything I say and do), but when I go shopping and people ask me about it, I am very cordial with them. In that minute I have their attention, majority of them agree with everything I say.
 

Nutczak

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Messages
2,165
Location
The Northwoods, lakeland area, Wisconsin, USA
I can say the same. People tend to associate with other like-minded folk. But that doesn't change the fact that public opinion is stacked against OC. You have to face that fact. You also have to face the fact that when this state finally does legitimize shall-issue CC they may very well wipe OC out with it.

are you even aware of the WI GOP's stance on our 2A rights? with your recent comments I doubt very highly that you are!
 

Brass Magnet

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2009
Messages
2,818
Location
Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
The only ID's that were illegally obtained were from the two who were arrested for obstruction. Whether you like it or not, cops are within their rights to coercise, intimidate and even outright lie in order to get a consensual search. They do it every day. If this weren't the case, every kid who got caught with a bag of dope would be able to argue he was intimidated into allowing the search.

Your not wrong that police can do those things. What your wrong about is that this has no effect on the outcome. I think I found at least one of the sections of case law... There's more where this came from though:

For consent to be valid, the Government must show that consent was given without duress or coercion, express or implied. Werking, 915 F.2d at 1409.

And they don't have special rights as police officers; only police powers.

Doug! Where are you when I need you!?
 
Last edited:

Wisconsin Carry Inc. - Chairman

Wisconsin Carry, Inc.
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
1,197
Location
, ,
Stay tuned to CH. 12 out of Milwaukee tonight.

Doing an interview regarding the Madison 5 and the disorderly conduct tickets being issued and obstruction tickets being disposed of.

Interview is at 4:45 so I don't expect it would run until 6 oclock or 10pm newscast.
 
Top