Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Log In

A valid email is required.
Password is required.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 5/9/2009 10:54:18 AM EST
[Last Edit: 5/12/2009 2:11:49 PM EST by jacobsk]
channel 12 was there, the camera guy said it'll probably end up on the news at 5 or 6 tonight

I'm in a meeting right now, but I'll post up more info some pictures and a maybe a video (if it came out okay) when I get a chance this afternoon...

so this is just a heads up for those of you in the Milwaukee area to try to catch a glimpse of channel 12 and how they report on it...


Edit to add:

I cant leave ya hanging...

cliff notes:


  • the MPD secured his firearm, removed it from his hip after he did not consent.


  • the MPD was very polite, respectful, and all around chatty about the topic.


  • They checked with their supervisor and returned his firearm to him, he was free to go.


  • The MPD had a map of the area showing where all the school zones are, I asked to take a look at it and the officer politly declined, folding it up and put it in his pocket.


  • There were a few police officers waiting outside the mall entrance, so fearing that once we stepped off private (mall) property he'd be within 1000 feet of a school, I went and got his vehicle (up the street), drove it to the entrance, brought his pistol case into the mall, and we left with it encased directly to the vehicle.




















ETA: short video clip I took while Riley was talking to the Channel 12 guy, there is ALOT of background noise (sorry)

link to video on youtube if the embed doesnt work for you

Link Posted: 5/9/2009 11:13:34 AM EST
[Last Edit: 5/9/2009 1:31:15 PM EST by eddiein1984]
IBTGAMDIGF:

(In before the Grand Avenue Mall declares itself gun-free).

Edit: when you removed the pistol from the holster to place it in the case, weren't you "brandishing" it? Also, they should have arrested your friend for carrying a concealed weapon when he/you put it in the pistol case.
Link Posted: 5/9/2009 1:10:36 PM EST
I thought the chief told his officers that they were supposed to "take down" anybody they saw OCing?

Maybe the officers have more sense than the chief?
Link Posted: 5/9/2009 1:42:06 PM EST
good for you guys. did your friend unload the firearm in the mall before putting it in a case? You should be able to get that map from the city some how. There has to be an arfcom member who knows a MPD officer that could send it to me anonymously.

Brian
Link Posted: 5/9/2009 2:02:19 PM EST
HAH, was on just now.
Link Posted: 5/9/2009 2:04:21 PM EST
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
IBTGAMDIGF:

(In before the Grand Avenue Mall declares itself gun-free).

Edit: when you removed the pistol from the holster to place it in the case, weren't you "brandishing" it? Also, they should have arrested your friend for carrying a concealed weapon when he/you put it in the pistol case.



Too late The Grand Av was already gun free. Thats why they called the police.

Link Posted: 5/9/2009 2:09:05 PM EST
Originally Posted By rogueI:
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
IBTGAMDIGF:

(In before the Grand Avenue Mall declares itself gun-free).

Edit: when you removed the pistol from the holster to place it in the case, weren't you "brandishing" it? Also, they should have arrested your friend for carrying a concealed weapon when he/you put it in the pistol case.



Too late The Grand Av was already gun free. Thats why they called the police.



So why didn't the MPD just arrest him? He was trespassing while in possession of a firearm.
Link Posted: 5/9/2009 2:16:00 PM EST
[Last Edit: 5/9/2009 2:16:41 PM EST by rogueI]
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Originally Posted By rogueI:
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
IBTGAMDIGF:

(In before the Grand Avenue Mall declares itself gun-free).

Edit: when you removed the pistol from the holster to place it in the case, weren't you "brandishing" it? Also, they should have arrested your friend for carrying a concealed weapon when he/you put it in the pistol case.



Too late The Grand Av was already gun free. Thats why they called the police.





So why didn't the MPD just arrest him? He was trespassing while in possession of a firearm.


Call the mall to find out.

Link Posted: 5/9/2009 4:12:26 PM EST
Nice
Link Posted: 5/9/2009 4:27:52 PM EST
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
IBTGAMDIGF:

(In before the Grand Avenue Mall declares itself gun-free).

Edit: when you removed the pistol from the holster to place it in the case, weren't you "brandishing" it? Also, they should have arrested your friend for carrying a concealed weapon when he/you put it in the pistol case.



If the gun was unloaded it would not be considered to be concealed if placed into a proper gun case and enclosed correct?
Link Posted: 5/9/2009 4:39:46 PM EST
Originally Posted By smacks1:
If the gun was unloaded it would not be considered to be concealed if placed into a proper gun case and enclosed correct?


Incorrect. According to the case law, a violation of 941.23 (the prohibition of CCW) is a "strict liability" offense, and needs three criteria to be satisfied simultaneously:

The weapon must be "hidden from ordinary observation".
The weapon must be "within reach".
The actor (person who has the weapon) must be aware of the weapon's presence.

The statute does not require intent, and it stands apart from the unsafe transport regs. IOW carrying an unloaded handgun in a case that isn't made of clear plastic is a technical violation of the CCW law.
Link Posted: 5/9/2009 4:47:41 PM EST
Originally Posted By FMD:
Originally Posted By smacks1:
If the gun was unloaded it would not be considered to be concealed if placed into a proper gun case and enclosed correct?


Incorrect. According to the case law, a violation of 941.23 (the prohibition of CCW) is a "strict liability" offense, and needs three criteria to be satisfied simultaneously:

The weapon must be "hidden from ordinary observation".
The weapon must be "within reach".
The actor (person who has the weapon) must be aware of the weapon's presence.

The statute does not require intent, and it stands apart from the unsafe transport regs. IOW carrying an unloaded handgun in a case that isn't made of clear plastic is a technical violation of the CCW law.


This is, of course, just an academic discussion. Apparently, nobody has ever been arrested for a CCW while carry an unloaded handgun in a case. I just bring it up because the Wisconsin statutes, strictly construed, allow for such a charge.

Link Posted: 5/9/2009 4:47:56 PM EST
This thread is





Nice job!
Link Posted: 5/9/2009 6:41:17 PM EST
Any chance we can get to see the video of this? You know, for us country yokels that don't go to that thar big city.
Link Posted: 5/9/2009 7:06:22 PM EST
[Last Edit: 5/9/2009 7:09:19 PM EST by FMD]
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Originally Posted By FMD:
Originally Posted By smacks1:
If the gun was unloaded it would not be considered to be concealed if placed into a proper gun case and enclosed correct?


Incorrect. According to the case law, a violation of 941.23 (the prohibition of CCW) is a "strict liability" offense, and needs three criteria to be satisfied simultaneously:

The weapon must be "hidden from ordinary observation".
The weapon must be "within reach".
The actor (person who has the weapon) must be aware of the weapon's presence.

The statute does not require intent, and it stands apart from the unsafe transport regs. IOW carrying an unloaded handgun in a case that isn't made of clear plastic is a technical violation of the CCW law.


This is, of course, just an academic discussion.


Perhaps you missed the operative word in red?

Apparently, nobody has ever been arrested convicted for a CCW while carry an unloaded handgun in a case. I just bring it up because the Wisconsin statutes, strictly construed, allow for such a charge.


Fix in Blue. IIRC the details correctly...

Last year (?) in Green Bay a guy got himself arrested for CCW of an unloaded gun in a box in his backpack while walking down the street. The DA declined to prosecute.

There is no "stritcly construing" the statute. It is what it is, and is fleshed out by case law dating back decades. If an officer decides not to exercise discretion, he most certainly can arrest you for a 941.23 violation because you were in posession of a gun in a case while that case was within your reach. The DA also can prosecute you for the same.

Likely? No. Possible? Yes. Within the law for them to do so? Absolutely.

Intent to comply with one law doesn't exempt one from complying with others, no matter what the spirit of the legislation was when passed.

Link Posted: 5/9/2009 8:40:35 PM EST
just saw the news stint on this..
time to start voting with my $ and not patronizing malls who post no carry signs.
Link Posted: 5/10/2009 3:08:26 AM EST
I taped the 5 O'clock news last night and didn't see it. I was planning to tape the 10 O'clock news, but forgot.

I just looked at the channel 12 website, but, I don't SEE anything listed.

Does anybody have a link??
Link Posted: 5/10/2009 3:48:46 AM EST
[Last Edit: 5/10/2009 3:53:55 AM EST by eddiein1984]
Originally Posted By FMD:
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Originally Posted By FMD:
Originally Posted By smacks1:
If the gun was unloaded it would not be considered to be concealed if placed into a proper gun case and enclosed correct?


Incorrect. According to the case law, a violation of 941.23 (the prohibition of CCW) is a "strict liability" offense, and needs three criteria to be satisfied simultaneously:

The weapon must be "hidden from ordinary observation".
The weapon must be "within reach".
The actor (person who has the weapon) must be aware of the weapon's presence.

The statute does not require intent, and it stands apart from the unsafe transport regs. IOW carrying an unloaded handgun in a case that isn't made of clear plastic is a technical violation of the CCW law.


This is, of course, just an academic discussion.


Perhaps you missed the operative word in red?

Apparently, nobody has ever been arrested convicted for a CCW while carry an unloaded handgun in a case. I just bring it up because the Wisconsin statutes, strictly construed, allow for such a charge.


Fix in Blue. IIRC the details correctly...

Last year (?) in Green Bay a guy got himself arrested for CCW of an unloaded gun in a box in his backpack while walking down the street. The DA declined to prosecute.

There is no "stritcly construing" the statute. It is what it is, and is fleshed out by case law dating back decades. If an officer decides not to exercise discretion, he most certainly can arrest you for a 941.23 violation because you were in posession of a gun in a case while that case was within your reach. The DA also can prosecute you for the same.

Likely? No. Possible? Yes. Within the law for them to do so? Absolutely.

Intent to comply with one law doesn't exempt one from complying with others, no matter what the spirit of the legislation was when passed.




Yeah, I get it. Carry an unloaded handgun under any circumstances other than dangling off your finger tips is a violation of the CCW statute. Of course, we all know that there are practical exceptions. For instance, why doesn't the MPD just arrest everyone at Mitchell Field checking a handgun in their luggage? Why don't they stand in the parking lot of shooting ranges and arrest everyone carrying a cased handgun in a duffel back? How would any handguns get anywhere in this state without violating the statute?
Link Posted: 5/10/2009 5:56:39 AM EST
[Last Edit: 5/10/2009 5:57:02 AM EST by FMD]
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Yeah, I get it. Carry an unloaded handgun under any circumstances other than dangling off your finger tips is a violation of the CCW statute. Of course, we all know that there are practical exceptions. For instance, why doesn't the MPD just arrest everyone at Mitchell Field checking a handgun in their luggage? Why don't they stand in the parking lot of shooting ranges and arrest everyone carrying a cased handgun in a duffel back? How would any handguns get anywhere in this state without violating the statute?


Technically, they can not. If you haven't figured it out yet, that's my point, and it's the same point I make evry time these questions come up:

If you transport a gun in some way other than OC, it is (while it is within reach) a violation of 941.23

If you're already going to be in violation... draw your own conclusions.
Link Posted: 5/10/2009 7:26:21 AM EST
[Last Edit: 5/10/2009 7:31:03 AM EST by eddiein1984]
Originally Posted By FMD:
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Yeah, I get it. Carry an unloaded handgun under any circumstances other than dangling off your finger tips is a violation of the CCW statute. Of course, we all know that there are practical exceptions. For instance, why doesn't the MPD just arrest everyone at Mitchell Field checking a handgun in their luggage? Why don't they stand in the parking lot of shooting ranges and arrest everyone carrying a cased handgun in a duffel back? How would any handguns get anywhere in this state without violating the statute?


Technically, they can not. If you haven't figured it out yet, that's my point, and it's the same point I make evry time these questions come up:

If you transport a gun in some way other than OC, it is (while it is within reach) a violation of 941.23

If you're already going to be in violation... draw your own conclusions.


I'm not sure if you're trying to argue with me or agree with me. Your making exactly the same point as I am. What you highlighted in blue wasn't actually a question I had. These are just matters of police and prosecutorial discretion.
Link Posted: 5/10/2009 10:14:36 AM EST
So the guy was open carrying on his right side while his right arm is tied up in a sling? How was he planning on defending himself if needed?
Link Posted: 5/10/2009 10:26:37 AM EST
I guess he wasn't planning on drawing but rather just exercising his right to OC! Good for him that he wasn't thrown to the ground and injured.
Link Posted: 5/10/2009 11:27:20 AM EST
Originally Posted By par0thead151:
just saw the news stint on this..
time to start voting with my $ and not patronizing malls who post no carry signs.


Who the hell goes to grand ave mall anywhoo.
Link Posted: 5/10/2009 12:51:16 PM EST
Originally Posted By none:
So the guy was open carrying on his right side while his right arm is tied up in a sling? How was he planning on defending himself if needed?


Not to mention weapon retention
Link Posted: 5/10/2009 2:17:49 PM EST
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Originally Posted By FMD:
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Originally Posted By FMD:
Originally Posted By smacks1:
If the gun was unloaded it would not be considered to be concealed if placed into a proper gun case and enclosed correct?


Incorrect. According to the case law, a violation of 941.23 (the prohibition of CCW) is a "strict liability" offense, and needs three criteria to be satisfied simultaneously:

The weapon must be "hidden from ordinary observation".
The weapon must be "within reach".
The actor (person who has the weapon) must be aware of the weapon's presence.

The statute does not require intent, and it stands apart from the unsafe transport regs. IOW carrying an unloaded handgun in a case that isn't made of clear plastic is a technical violation of the CCW law.


This is, of course, just an academic discussion.


Perhaps you missed the operative word in red?

Apparently, nobody has ever been arrested convicted for a CCW while carry an unloaded handgun in a case. I just bring it up because the Wisconsin statutes, strictly construed, allow for such a charge.


Fix in Blue. IIRC the details correctly...

Last year (?) in Green Bay a guy got himself arrested for CCW of an unloaded gun in a box in his backpack while walking down the street. The DA declined to prosecute.

There is no "stritcly construing" the statute. It is what it is, and is fleshed out by case law dating back decades. If an officer decides not to exercise discretion, he most certainly can arrest you for a 941.23 violation because you were in posession of a gun in a case while that case was within your reach. The DA also can prosecute you for the same.

Likely? No. Possible? Yes. Within the law for them to do so? Absolutely.

Intent to comply with one law doesn't exempt one from complying with others, no matter what the spirit of the legislation was when passed.




Yeah, I get it. Carry an unloaded handgun under any circumstances other than dangling off your finger tips is a violation of the CCW statute. Of course, we all know that there are practical exceptions. For instance, why doesn't the MPD just arrest everyone at Mitchell Field checking a handgun in their luggage? Why don't they stand in the parking lot of shooting ranges and arrest everyone carrying a cased handgun in a duffel back? How would any handguns get anywhere in this state without violating the statute?


my range is private property. RCLC
this means conceal carry is legal? correct?
LEO have no jurisdiction on private property unless given such authority by the owner.
Link Posted: 5/10/2009 2:46:03 PM EST
Originally Posted By par0thead151:
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Originally Posted By FMD:
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Originally Posted By FMD:
Originally Posted By smacks1:
If the gun was unloaded it would not be considered to be concealed if placed into a proper gun case and enclosed correct?


Incorrect. According to the case law, a violation of 941.23 (the prohibition of CCW) is a "strict liability" offense, and needs three criteria to be satisfied simultaneously:

The weapon must be "hidden from ordinary observation".
The weapon must be "within reach".
The actor (person who has the weapon) must be aware of the weapon's presence.

The statute does not require intent, and it stands apart from the unsafe transport regs. IOW carrying an unloaded handgun in a case that isn't made of clear plastic is a technical violation of the CCW law.


This is, of course, just an academic discussion.


Perhaps you missed the operative word in red?

Apparently, nobody has ever been arrested convicted for a CCW while carry an unloaded handgun in a case. I just bring it up because the Wisconsin statutes, strictly construed, allow for such a charge.


Fix in Blue. IIRC the details correctly...

Last year (?) in Green Bay a guy got himself arrested for CCW of an unloaded gun in a box in his backpack while walking down the street. The DA declined to prosecute.

There is no "stritcly construing" the statute. It is what it is, and is fleshed out by case law dating back decades. If an officer decides not to exercise discretion, he most certainly can arrest you for a 941.23 violation because you were in posession of a gun in a case while that case was within your reach. The DA also can prosecute you for the same.

Likely? No. Possible? Yes. Within the law for them to do so? Absolutely.

Intent to comply with one law doesn't exempt one from complying with others, no matter what the spirit of the legislation was when passed.




Yeah, I get it. Carry an unloaded handgun under any circumstances other than dangling off your finger tips is a violation of the CCW statute. Of course, we all know that there are practical exceptions. For instance, why doesn't the MPD just arrest everyone at Mitchell Field checking a handgun in their luggage? Why don't they stand in the parking lot of shooting ranges and arrest everyone carrying a cased handgun in a duffel back? How would any handguns get anywhere in this state without violating the statute?


my range is private property. RCLC
this means conceal carry is legal? correct?
LEO have no jurisdiction on private property unless given such authority by the owner.


No, absolutely 100% incorrect. THE CCW STATUTE HAS NO EXCEPTIONS!!!

Link Posted: 5/10/2009 3:28:03 PM EST
Originally Posted By none:
So the guy was open carrying on his right side while his right arm is tied up in a sling? How was he planning on defending himself if needed?


I was thinking the same thing.... other then excercsing his right... what was the point??? What if he REALLY needed it... or needed to retain if from a grab.... or was it a strategy to see if he would still be thrown to the ground with a bad wing and a camera crew close by.. I smell something....
Link Posted: 5/10/2009 3:37:25 PM EST
The point is that he open carried at the mall.
Link Posted: 5/10/2009 4:36:31 PM EST
Originally Posted By GlockFace:
The point is that he open carried at the mall.


+1

And the more people do this, the more common it will become to LEO, reducing the likely hood that they act upon it in a unconstitutional manner. I give him credit.

I will also say that it helps to have someone like him be interviewed by the TV crew as well. He was a normal, decent looking man who articulated his point very nicely. I'd much rather have him speaking for the OC crowd than one of the toothless hillbillies they seem to find for other stories.
Link Posted: 5/10/2009 4:37:40 PM EST
Originally Posted By GlockFace:
The point is that he open carried at the mall.


+2
Link Posted: 5/10/2009 4:57:55 PM EST
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Originally Posted By par0thead151:
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Originally Posted By FMD:
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Originally Posted By FMD:
Originally Posted By smacks1:
If the gun was unloaded it would not be considered to be concealed if placed into a proper gun case and enclosed correct?


Incorrect. According to the case law, a violation of 941.23 (the prohibition of CCW) is a "strict liability" offense, and needs three criteria to be satisfied simultaneously:

The weapon must be "hidden from ordinary observation".
The weapon must be "within reach".
The actor (person who has the weapon) must be aware of the weapon's presence.

The statute does not require intent, and it stands apart from the unsafe transport regs. IOW carrying an unloaded handgun in a case that isn't made of clear plastic is a technical violation of the CCW law.


This is, of course, just an academic discussion.


Perhaps you missed the operative word in red?

Apparently, nobody has ever been arrested convicted for a CCW while carry an unloaded handgun in a case. I just bring it up because the Wisconsin statutes, strictly construed, allow for such a charge.


Fix in Blue. IIRC the details correctly...

Last year (?) in Green Bay a guy got himself arrested for CCW of an unloaded gun in a box in his backpack while walking down the street. The DA declined to prosecute.

There is no "stritcly construing" the statute. It is what it is, and is fleshed out by case law dating back decades. If an officer decides not to exercise discretion, he most certainly can arrest you for a 941.23 violation because you were in posession of a gun in a case while that case was within your reach. The DA also can prosecute you for the same.

Likely? No. Possible? Yes. Within the law for them to do so? Absolutely.

Intent to comply with one law doesn't exempt one from complying with others, no matter what the spirit of the legislation was when passed.




Yeah, I get it. Carry an unloaded handgun under any circumstances other than dangling off your finger tips is a violation of the CCW statute. Of course, we all know that there are practical exceptions. For instance, why doesn't the MPD just arrest everyone at Mitchell Field checking a handgun in their luggage? Why don't they stand in the parking lot of shooting ranges and arrest everyone carrying a cased handgun in a duffel back? How would any handguns get anywhere in this state without violating the statute?


my range is private property. RCLC
this means conceal carry is legal? correct?
LEO have no jurisdiction on private property unless given such authority by the owner.


No, absolutely 100% incorrect. THE CCW STATUTE HAS NO EXCEPTIONS!!!



it is exempt from my private property, my business( i am a partner/owner), and i would assume a private club/range would also apply to that as wel, unless the club otherwise states that CCW is restricted.
it is easily justifiable, as when at a range where there are weapons, i NEVER go down range un armed. either have the AR slung, pistol in a waistband or holster... never know who will show up. lots of bad stuff happens at ranges when there is one guy shooting alone or with one other person...

i would be interested to see where wi law says CCW is not allowed on a private clubs range.
Link Posted: 5/10/2009 5:16:39 PM EST
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Originally Posted By par0thead151:
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Originally Posted By FMD:
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Originally Posted By FMD:
Originally Posted By smacks1:
If the gun was unloaded it would not be considered to be concealed if placed into a proper gun case and enclosed correct?


Incorrect. According to the case law, a violation of 941.23 (the prohibition of CCW) is a "strict liability" offense, and needs three criteria to be satisfied simultaneously:

The weapon must be "hidden from ordinary observation".
The weapon must be "within reach".
The actor (person who has the weapon) must be aware of the weapon's presence.

The statute does not require intent, and it stands apart from the unsafe transport regs. IOW carrying an unloaded handgun in a case that isn't made of clear plastic is a technical violation of the CCW law.


This is, of course, just an academic discussion.


Perhaps you missed the operative word in red?

Apparently, nobody has ever been arrested convicted for a CCW while carry an unloaded handgun in a case. I just bring it up because the Wisconsin statutes, strictly construed, allow for such a charge.


Fix in Blue. IIRC the details correctly...

Last year (?) in Green Bay a guy got himself arrested for CCW of an unloaded gun in a box in his backpack while walking down the street. The DA declined to prosecute.

There is no "stritcly construing" the statute. It is what it is, and is fleshed out by case law dating back decades. If an officer decides not to exercise discretion, he most certainly can arrest you for a 941.23 violation because you were in posession of a gun in a case while that case was within your reach. The DA also can prosecute you for the same.

Likely? No. Possible? Yes. Within the law for them to do so? Absolutely.

Intent to comply with one law doesn't exempt one from complying with others, no matter what the spirit of the legislation was when passed.




Yeah, I get it. Carry an unloaded handgun under any circumstances other than dangling off your finger tips is a violation of the CCW statute. Of course, we all know that there are practical exceptions. For instance, why doesn't the MPD just arrest everyone at Mitchell Field checking a handgun in their luggage? Why don't they stand in the parking lot of shooting ranges and arrest everyone carrying a cased handgun in a duffel back? How would any handguns get anywhere in this state without violating the statute?


my range is private property. RCLC
this means conceal carry is legal? correct?
LEO have no jurisdiction on private property unless given such authority by the owner.


No, absolutely 100% incorrect. THE CCW STATUTE HAS NO EXCEPTIONS!!!



So you're saying that if I ccw in my home, it's illegal and I can go to jail?


Link Posted: 5/10/2009 5:31:21 PM EST
[Last Edit: 5/10/2009 5:33:35 PM EST by eddiein1984]
Originally Posted By neoinarien:
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Originally Posted By par0thead151:

my range is private property. RCLC
this means conceal carry is legal? correct?
LEO have no jurisdiction on private property unless given such authority by the owner.


No, absolutely 100% incorrect. THE CCW STATUTE HAS NO EXCEPTIONS!!!



So you're saying that if I ccw in my home, it's illegal and I can go to jail?





No, if you get caught carrying a concealed weapon in your home (and the cop is a dick) you will be arrested. If the DA is also a dick, you will be charged under 941.23. Several months later, at a pre-trial hearing or at trial, you might prevail by asserting the Hamdan constitutional defense, but by that point you'll have already blown a ton of money and maybe lost your job. Does that sound "legal" to you?
Link Posted: 5/10/2009 5:31:29 PM EST
Serious kudos to yer buddy for carrying.

I don't thing I'd go to Grand Ave unarmed..
Link Posted: 5/10/2009 5:39:41 PM EST
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Originally Posted By neoinarien:
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Originally Posted By par0thead151:

my range is private property. RCLC
this means conceal carry is legal? correct?
LEO have no jurisdiction on private property unless given such authority by the owner.


No, absolutely 100% incorrect. THE CCW STATUTE HAS NO EXCEPTIONS!!!



So you're saying that if I ccw in my home, it's illegal and I can go to jail?





No, if you get caught carrying a concealed weapon in your home (and the cop is a dick) you will be arrested. If the DA is also a dick, you will be charged under 941.23. Several months later, at a pre-trial hearing or at trial, you might prevail by asserting the Hamdan constitutional defense, but by that point you'll have already blown a ton of money and maybe lost your job. Does that sound "legal" to you?


you are stretching just how much they can twist the laws...
if you own the property, or have the owners permission, the officers can not legally arrest you for carrying a weapon, either open or concealed.
the officer will probably confirm you own the land or have permission of the owner, check your weapon and run its #'s, check your namre and run your background. once it is clean, you can tell him to "get off my lawn" with a Clint Eastwood like voice
il be damned if anyone tells me what to do on my own property.
Link Posted: 5/10/2009 5:47:43 PM EST
[Last Edit: 5/10/2009 5:50:59 PM EST by eddiein1984]
Originally Posted By par0thead151:
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Originally Posted By neoinarien:
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Originally Posted By par0thead151:

my range is private property. RCLC
this means conceal carry is legal? correct?
LEO have no jurisdiction on private property unless given such authority by the owner.


No, absolutely 100% incorrect. THE CCW STATUTE HAS NO EXCEPTIONS!!!



So you're saying that if I ccw in my home, it's illegal and I can go to jail?





No, if you get caught carrying a concealed weapon in your home (and the cop is a dick) you will be arrested. If the DA is also a dick, you will be charged under 941.23. Several months later, at a pre-trial hearing or at trial, you might prevail by asserting the Hamdan constitutional defense, but by that point you'll have already blown a ton of money and maybe lost your job. Does that sound "legal" to you?


you are stretching just how much they can twist the laws...
if you own the property, or have the owners permission, the officers can not legally arrest you for carrying a weapon, either open or concealed.
the officer will probably confirm you own the land or have permission of the owner, check your weapon and run its #'s, check your namre and run your background. once it is clean, you can tell him to "get off my lawn" with a Clint Eastwood like voice
il be damned if anyone tells me what to do on my own property.



Where on earth did you come up with that bullshit? Where is the "this is my property so you can't arrest me" exception in the statutes? Does it apply to other crimes? Can you grow pot in your basement? Can you evade your taxes, so long as you work from home? The law applies whether on your property or off it. THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS TO THE CCW STATUTE. Why is this concept so difficult for everyone to wrap their heads around?
Link Posted: 5/10/2009 5:51:44 PM EST
Originally Posted By none:
So the guy was open carrying on his right side while his right arm is tied up in a sling? How was he planning on defending himself if needed?



Originally Posted By HKMP5A2:
Not to mention weapon retention



Originally Posted By Harv24:
I was thinking the same thing.... other then excercsing his right... what was the point??? What if he REALLY needed it... or needed to retain if from a grab.... or was it a strategy to see if he would still be thrown to the ground with a bad wing and a camera crew close by.. I smell something....




it's sad that there are still some people who just don't get it

I think this pretty much sums it up:

Originally Posted By GlockFace:
The point is that he open carried at the mall.


yet again the wisconsin population is too worried about specifics... yes we are our own worst enemy.

maybe we can talk about the tactics of open carrying once we dont have to worry about the police tazing us
Link Posted: 5/10/2009 6:02:48 PM EST
[Last Edit: 5/10/2009 6:04:11 PM EST by par0thead151]
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Originally Posted By par0thead151:
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Originally Posted By neoinarien:
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Originally Posted By par0thead151:

my range is private property. RCLC
this means conceal carry is legal? correct?
LEO have no jurisdiction on private property unless given such authority by the owner.


No, absolutely 100% incorrect. THE CCW STATUTE HAS NO EXCEPTIONS!!!



So you're saying that if I ccw in my home, it's illegal and I can go to jail?





No, if you get caught carrying a concealed weapon in your home (and the cop is a dick) you will be arrested. If the DA is also a dick, you will be charged under 941.23. Several months later, at a pre-trial hearing or at trial, you might prevail by asserting the Hamdan constitutional defense, but by that point you'll have already blown a ton of money and maybe lost your job. Does that sound "legal" to you?


you are stretching just how much they can twist the laws...
if you own the property, or have the owners permission, the officers can not legally arrest you for carrying a weapon, either open or concealed.
the officer will probably confirm you own the land or have permission of the owner, check your weapon and run its #'s, check your namre and run your background. once it is clean, you can tell him to "get off my lawn" with a Clint Eastwood like voice
il be damned if anyone tells me what to do on my own property.



Where on earth did you come up with that bullshit? Where is the "this is my property so you can't arrest me" exception in the statutes? Does it apply to other crimes? Can you grow pot in your basement? Can you evade your taxes, so long as you work from home? The law applies whether on your property or off it. THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS TO THE CCW STATUTE. Why is this concept so difficult for everyone to wrap their heads around?




please show me where in the Wisconsin statutes it says one may not carry a concealed weapon on their private property.
i keep a handgun in a desk drawer, that is concealed. it is considered concealed in my vault? should i go unlock all my weapons and place them in plain view of the windows, so as to not be illegally concealing them?
are you telling me everyone who owns a gun vault is illegally concealing a firearm?
Link Posted: 5/10/2009 6:15:42 PM EST
[Last Edit: 5/10/2009 6:20:57 PM EST by eddiein1984]
Originally Posted By par0thead151:
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Originally Posted By par0thead151:
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Originally Posted By neoinarien:
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Originally Posted By par0thead151:

my range is private property. RCLC
this means conceal carry is legal? correct?
LEO have no jurisdiction on private property unless given such authority by the owner.


No, absolutely 100% incorrect. THE CCW STATUTE HAS NO EXCEPTIONS!!!



So you're saying that if I ccw in my home, it's illegal and I can go to jail?





No, if you get caught carrying a concealed weapon in your home (and the cop is a dick) you will be arrested. If the DA is also a dick, you will be charged under 941.23. Several months later, at a pre-trial hearing or at trial, you might prevail by asserting the Hamdan constitutional defense, but by that point you'll have already blown a ton of money and maybe lost your job. Does that sound "legal" to you?


you are stretching just how much they can twist the laws...
if you own the property, or have the owners permission, the officers can not legally arrest you for carrying a weapon, either open or concealed.
the officer will probably confirm you own the land or have permission of the owner, check your weapon and run its #'s, check your namre and run your background. once it is clean, you can tell him to "get off my lawn" with a Clint Eastwood like voice
il be damned if anyone tells me what to do on my own property.



Where on earth did you come up with that bullshit? Where is the "this is my property so you can't arrest me" exception in the statutes? Does it apply to other crimes? Can you grow pot in your basement? Can you evade your taxes, so long as you work from home? The law applies whether on your property or off it. THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS TO THE CCW STATUTE. Why is this concept so difficult for everyone to wrap their heads around?




please show me where in the Wisconsin statutes it says one may not carry a concealed weapon on their private property.
i keep a handgun in a desk drawer, that is concealed. it is considered concealed in my vault? should i go unlock all my weapons and place them in plain view of the windows, so as to not be illegally concealing them?
are you telling me everyone who owns a gun vault is illegally concealing a firearm?


Section 941.23. No exceptions. None.

Read State v. Hamdan:
¶48. Wisconsin's current CCW statute is very broad. It is essentially a strict liability offense.20 The legislature has not authorized any statutory defenses or exceptions (other than peace officers) to the broad prohibition found in the statute. As presently construed, the statute prohibits any person, except a peace officer, from carrying a concealed weapon, regardless of the circumstances, including pursuit of one of the lawful purposes enumerated in Article I, Section 25. In addition, the statute reaches unloaded firearms as well as loaded ones, see Wis.Stat.§939.22(10) (defining a "dangerous weapon" under the CCW statute), and applies to any weapon within a individual's reach, see Asfoor, 75 Wis.2dat 433-34, if the person knows the weapon is present.

As previously discussed, Hamdan sets forth a pre-trial constitutional challenge to a charges under 941.23 when it violates Article I, Section 25 (Wis. Right to Bear Arms) "as applied".


Link Posted: 5/10/2009 6:22:11 PM EST
so if i have a vault that has a facade in front of it, hypothetically that is also concealed?
sweet Jesus, that is ridiculous.
if my partnership/business ever dissolves or turns unprofitable, i am moving out of this tax hell liberal cesspool.
Link Posted: 5/10/2009 6:28:26 PM EST
Originally Posted By par0thead151:
so if i have a vault that has a facade in front of it, hypothetically that is also concealed?
sweet Jesus, that is ridiculous.
if my partnership/business ever dissolves or turns unprofitable, i am moving out of this tax hell liberal cesspool.


Hypothetically, yes. In reality, no. No DA would prosecute that, and no judge would ever instruct a jury in a way that would allow them to convict you for having guns in a safe. Like Hamdan, though, you could be convicted for CCW in your home or business having the gun on your person.
Link Posted: 5/10/2009 6:47:12 PM EST
eddie,

do you have any legal training/experience to be interpreting and applying laws?

just curious
Link Posted: 5/10/2009 6:52:10 PM EST
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Originally Posted By par0thead151:
so if i have a vault that has a facade in front of it, hypothetically that is also concealed?
sweet Jesus, that is ridiculous.
if my partnership/business ever dissolves or turns unprofitable, i am moving out of this tax hell liberal cesspool.


Hypothetically, yes. In reality, no. No DA would prosecute that, and no judge would ever instruct a jury in a way that would allow them to convict you for having guns in a safe. Like Hamdan, though, you could be convicted for CCW in your home or business having the gun on your person.


Actually I believe you are wrong on that one.

link

The concealed weapons statute is a restriction on the manner in which firearms are possessed and used. It is constitutional under Art. I, s. 25. Only if the public benefit in the exercise of the police power is substantially outweighed by an individual's need to conceal a weapon in the exercise of the right to bear arms will an otherwise valid restriction on that right be unconstitutional, as applied. The right to keep and bear arms for security, as a general matter, must permit a person to possess, carry, and sometimes conceal arms to maintain the security of a private residence or privately operated business, and to safely move and store weapons within those premises.
Link Posted: 5/11/2009 4:06:11 AM EST
[Last Edit: 5/11/2009 4:07:37 AM EST by smacks1]
I believe in the hamden case that was one of the concerns of the CCW law (CCW on private property). I cant remember which female State Justice it was, but they stated that the CCW law as it stands WOULD apply to a gun in a safe the was knowingly there and within reach because it fit the criteria of the CCW law.

This is the reason the WI supreme court told the state (legislatures and senators) to come up with a way for people to legally be able to do things such as this. To this point, the governor, legislatures and senators still not have agreed upon legislation to allow this to be changed. So I believe the problem as stated about CCW in your home is correct. You could be arrested and charged. However, at some point it would most likely be thrown out, because if it gets to the WI supreme court, the law would be struck down again with the supreme court again telling the lawmakers to do something........it seems like it is one big circle...
Link Posted: 5/11/2009 7:17:18 AM EST
Guys,
All this energy spent yelling at each other would be better spent fighting for the cause.
Link Posted: 5/11/2009 1:52:50 PM EST
[Last Edit: 5/11/2009 1:55:02 PM EST by FMD]
Originally Posted By par0thead151:
sweet Jesus, that is ridiculous.


You're right, and yet Eddie has been 100% correct with each point he's made.

None, re-read the case law summary. Hamdan was an "as applied" ruling. "Sometimes" concealing is okay but you'll only be able to use Article 1, Sec. 25 as an affirmative defense to prosecution after you've been arrested (meaning you have to win that argument in court). Remember, the law treats a gun in a holster under a shirt the same as in a gun safe. Both meet the statutory def. of "concealed" according to the case law and the Attorney General (statement made at the Hamdan oral arguments).
Link Posted: 5/11/2009 1:58:21 PM EST
Originally Posted By FMD:
Originally Posted By par0thead151:
sweet Jesus, that is ridiculous.


You're right, and yet Eddie has been 100% correct with each point he's made.

None, re-read the case law summary. Hamdan was an "as applied" ruling. "Sometimes" concealing is okay but you'll only be able to use Article 1, Sec. 25 as an affirmative defense to prosecution after you've been arrested (meaning you have to win that argument in court). Remember, the law treats a gun in a holster under a shirt the same as in a gun safe. Both meet the statutory def. of "concealed" according to the case law and the Attorney General (statement made at the Hamdan oral arguments).





So why would anyone use a case instead of a holster? I'm just saying.

CYFG
Brian
Link Posted: 5/11/2009 2:27:07 PM EST
[Last Edit: 5/11/2009 2:33:37 PM EST by FMD]
Originally Posted By rogueI:
So why would anyone use a case instead of a holster?


Excellent question.

Better hypothetical Q: Why are we both not sleeping?

ETA:

Originally Posted By neoinarien:
eddie,

do you have any legal training/experience to be interpreting and applying laws?

just curious


While I'm not Eddie...

Does it take a law degree to repeat the opinions published by the Wisconson Supreme Court? They've already done the interpreting and applying of the law. Just because many of those rulings have been stupid and inconsistant doesn't make it any less the legal landscape in the state.


Link Posted: 5/11/2009 4:03:51 PM EST
Awesome - your friend has cohones, glad to hear things went fairly well.

You guys see this too...

Link Posted: 5/12/2009 12:37:31 PM EST
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Originally Posted By par0thead151:
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Originally Posted By FMD:
Originally Posted By eddiein1984:
Originally Posted By FMD:
Originally Posted By smacks1:
If the gun was unloaded it would not be considered to be concealed if placed into a proper gun case and enclosed correct?


Incorrect. According to the case law, a violation of 941.23 (the prohibition of CCW) is a "strict liability" offense, and needs three criteria to be satisfied simultaneously:

The weapon must be "hidden from ordinary observation".
The weapon must be "within reach".
The actor (person who has the weapon) must be aware of the weapon's presence.

The statute does not require intent, and it stands apart from the unsafe transport regs. IOW carrying an unloaded handgun in a case that isn't made of clear plastic is a technical violation of the CCW law.


This is, of course, just an academic discussion.


Perhaps you missed the operative word in red?

Apparently, nobody has ever been arrested convicted for a CCW while carry an unloaded handgun in a case. I just bring it up because the Wisconsin statutes, strictly construed, allow for such a charge.


Fix in Blue. IIRC the details correctly...

Last year (?) in Green Bay a guy got himself arrested for CCW of an unloaded gun in a box in his backpack while walking down the street. The DA declined to prosecute.

There is no "stritcly construing" the statute. It is what it is, and is fleshed out by case law dating back decades. If an officer decides not to exercise discretion, he most certainly can arrest you for a 941.23 violation because you were in posession of a gun in a case while that case was within your reach. The DA also can prosecute you for the same.

Likely? No. Possible? Yes. Within the law for them to do so? Absolutely.

Intent to comply with one law doesn't exempt one from complying with others, no matter what the spirit of the legislation was when passed.




Yeah, I get it. Carry an unloaded handgun under any circumstances other than dangling off your finger tips is a violation of the CCW statute. Of course, we all know that there are practical exceptions. For instance, why doesn't the MPD just arrest everyone at Mitchell Field checking a handgun in their luggage? Why don't they stand in the parking lot of shooting ranges and arrest everyone carrying a cased handgun in a duffel back? How would any handguns get anywhere in this state without violating the statute?


my range is private property. RCLC
this means conceal carry is legal? correct?
LEO have no jurisdiction on private property unless given such authority by the owner.


No, absolutely 100% incorrect. THE CCW STATUTE HAS NO EXCEPTIONS!!!



I believe State of WI vs Hamden states you can carry concealed on your own property or own place of business.
Link Posted: 5/12/2009 1:10:44 PM EST
Originally Posted By Tazaroo:
I believe State of WI vs Hamden states you can carry concealed on your own property or own place of business.

Hamdan simply creates an affirmative defense to prosecution. It is still illegal to CCW in your home or place of business, you are still subject to 941.23, and you may still be arrested and convicted for the same. There are no statutory exceptions to 941.23, and the case law in Hamdan simply allows for you to raise objections based on Art 1 Sec 25 before a judge at trial.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top