• 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.

Vicki McKenna BREAKING....just got this from WIBA news team: "Also just a heads up Pa

M

McX

Guest
so.....were still going to assault the fish tomorrow night in celebration though.right?
 

paul@paul-fisher.com

Regular Member
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
4,049
Location
Chandler, AZ
I just got off the phone with one of our attorneys. He is reviewing the decision now and is going to give me his opinion of how broad or limited the decision is.

It appears to me (as it does to Doug) its a pretty broad decision when it comes to conceal carry of a weapon. Meaning there were not a lot of intricacies of this case which other cases would have to mirror to fall under the same conclusion.

Our attorney DID share with me that EVEN in Clark County, there are other circuit court judges who could hypothetically tomorrow, come to a different conclusion in an identical case. (but that is unlikely)

So this is GOOD news, its another hole in the wall of oppression, but the wall isn't knocked over just yet.

If it is appealed and upheld, the implications would be FAR broader border to border.

Unfortunately, there are still no GUARANTEES that in Clark County you can CC with impunity. (if you get the same judge, and weren't committing a crime while CC'ing you probably have nothing to worry about)

I'll share more of his analysis as he finished reviewing the decision.

So, does the decision to appeal belong to the DA or the AG? If the AG, there is a good chance it won't be appealed, if so, it would be the law of the land?!?
 
M

McX

Guest
i got some lefty assailing me on the book, friend of a friend or something, doesn't like my credo. says it proves violence, like flies cause garbage. anyway, blocked 'em- spew their socialism elsewhere, not at me.
 

Flipper

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
1,140
Location
, Wisconsin, USA
The Court of Appeals for Clark county is District IV, and has concealed carry backstabber Gary Sherman sitting on it as a Doyle appointed judge along with other Madison liberal types. It would appear that the odds would favor the Clark county case being reversed on appeal. If so, next stop State Supreme Court. And this will required those of us who agree with Judge Counsell to cough up some dollars.

http://judgepedia.org/index.php/Wisconsin_Court_of_Appeals
 

Wisconsin Carry Inc. - Chairman

Wisconsin Carry, Inc.
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
1,197
Location
, ,
Updated information.

Clark County has only 1 circuit court judge. So if you chose to CC in Clark County, if you got arrested and charged, you would end up in front of this same judge and likely the same ruling.

One would expect that the police would not arrest and DA not charge given this ruling, but I won't pretend to be able to predict LE behavior.
 
Last edited:

Brass Magnet

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2009
Messages
2,818
Location
Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
None of us here are practicing attorney's, right? I think we need to wait a little bit to see what exactly this judges decision means to the status 0f 941.23.

In hamden, 941.23 was found unconstitutional in that case, yet the law still remains and is enforced. I have a feeling this is all that will happen in the latest case too. I hope not, but this is what I got out of reading a few other challenges to 941.23

I would like to know what impact this judges decision in this case has or will have for the rest of the state. And I think we should wait for a professional in law to make that determination so we do not get ourselves in trouble from a misunderstanding.

In Hamdan it was found unconstitutional "as applied" to Hamdan
In this case the statute was found unconstitutional "on it's face".

IANAL, but I believe this is the difference maker meaning that the whole statute is unconstitutional to everybody, especially reading the justices remarks about equal protection and my favorite tidbit I quoted above.

Also, notice the "strict scrutiny" language.
 
Last edited:

Wisconsin Carry Inc. - Chairman

Wisconsin Carry, Inc.
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
1,197
Location
, ,
In Hamdan it was found unconstitutional "as applied" to Hamdan
In this case the statute was found unconstitutional "on it's face".

IANAL, but I believe this is the difference maker meaning that the whole statute is unconstitutional to everybody, especially reading the justices remarks about equal protection and my favorite tidbit I quoted above.

Also, notice the "strict scrutiny" language.

Yes,

Just got off the phone with WCI Attorney Joe Olson. He reviewed the decision.

Its a very broad decision. If upheld on appeal it strikes a death blow to Wisconsin's CC statute.

If it isn't appealed, those in Clark County could be pretty confident in carrying as they choose so long as they don't violate any other laws. (GFSZ???) are not felons prohibited from carrying, etc.

Not advising people to CC in Clark county (we are all adults, you make your own decisions)

But it appears this decision is very broad and expansive and there is only 1 circuit court judge in Clark County so its completely logical to expect the exact same decision in any CC case that doesn't involve a crime.
 
M

McX

Guest
we witnessed history being made today! Lucky for those in one county, lucky for all of us later.
 

paul@paul-fisher.com

Regular Member
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
4,049
Location
Chandler, AZ
The judge had very logical reasoning:

1. The state Constitution guarantees that we can carry in some form.
2. The act of OC'ing, as shown by the reaction of the Madison Police Department isn't guaranteed without harassment.
3. Since OC isn't guaranteed, and we have to carry somehow, cc is the only viable alternative.
 

Doug Huffman

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,181
Location
Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin,

Wisconsin Carry Inc. - Chairman

Wisconsin Carry, Inc.
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
1,197
Location
, ,
Did he make anything of the Privileges or Immunities language/Clarence Thomas quotes in the decision?

YES, he specifically brought that up. To be honest though, I didn't quite grasp exactly what he meant with his comments about it. Something about it was an incorrect reference but end result same thing.. i cant recall.
 

Brass Magnet

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2009
Messages
2,818
Location
Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
YES, he specifically brought that up. To be honest though, I didn't quite grasp exactly what he meant with his comments about it. Something about it was an incorrect reference but end result same thing.. i cant recall.
Thanks, that would make sense, if it was in fact an incorrect reference. If that's the case I don't need to stay confused. :eek: :lol:
 
B

bhancock

Guest
commented on the book, and will put the same here: it will kinda poo-poo cary events, if we all show up concealed, no one will know, no one will know about their rights!

Help me out McX, what is the book?
 
Top