ARCHIVED
 jacobsk
I can't help it!
Team Member
Joined: Jan 2007  WI, USA
 Posts: 1747 Feedback: 100% (5) |
Posted: 5/9/2009 3:54:18 PM
[Last Edit: 5/12/2009 7:11:49 PM by jacobsk]
THE IMAGE ABOVE IS A PAID ADVERTISEMENT 
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:
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 |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/9/2009 4:13:34 PM
[Last Edit: 5/9/2009 6:31:15 PM 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.  |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/9/2009 6:10:36 PM
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? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/9/2009 6:42:06 PM
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 |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/9/2009 7:02:19 PM
HAH, was on just now.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/9/2009 7:04:21 PM
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. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/9/2009 7:09:05 PM
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. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/9/2009 7:16:00 PM
[Last Edit: 5/9/2009 7:16:41 PM 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.
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/9/2009 9:12:26 PM
Nice
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/9/2009 9:27:52 PM
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? |
|
|
|
FMD
Striving not to be "That Guy"
Team Member
Joined: Aug 2004 WI, USA
Posts: 7810 Feedback: 100% (43) Link To This Post |
Posted: 5/9/2009 9:39:46 PM
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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/9/2009 9:47:41 PM
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. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/9/2009 9:47:56 PM
This thread is
Nice job! |
|
|
|
NPH_1985
Yodels in the shower.
Team Member
Joined: Nov 2007 WI, USA
Posts: 1767 Feedback: 100% (1) Link To This Post |
Posted: 5/9/2009 11:41:17 PM
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.
|
|
|
FMD
Striving not to be "That Guy"
Team Member
Joined: Aug 2004 WI, USA
Posts: 7811 Feedback: 100% (43) Link To This Post |
Posted: 5/10/2009 12:06:22 AM
[Last Edit: 5/10/2009 12:09:19 AM 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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/10/2009 1:40:35 AM
just saw the news stint on this..
time to start voting with my $ and not patronizing malls who post no carry signs. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/10/2009 8:08:26 AM
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?? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/10/2009 8:48:46 AM
[Last Edit: 5/10/2009 8:53:55 AM 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? |
|
|
|
FMD
Striving not to be "That Guy"
Team Member
Joined: Aug 2004 WI, USA
Posts: 7812 Feedback: 100% (43) Link To This Post |
Posted: 5/10/2009 10:56:39 AM
[Last Edit: 5/10/2009 10:57:02 AM 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. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/10/2009 12:26:21 PM
[Last Edit: 5/10/2009 12:31:03 PM 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. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/10/2009 3:14:36 PM
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?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/10/2009 3:26:37 PM
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.
|
|
|
|
SoloTwo
I tried being reasonable, I didn't like it.
Team Member
Joined: Jan 2008 WI, USA
Posts: 1459 Feedback: 0% (0) Link To This Post |
Posted: 5/10/2009 4:27:20 PM
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.  |
|
|
HKMP5A2
Happiness is 800 RPM
Team Member
Joined: Nov 2003 WI, USA
Posts: 1912 Feedback: 100% (2) Link To This Post |
Posted: 5/10/2009 5:51:16 PM
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  |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/10/2009 7:17:49 PM
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. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/10/2009 7:46:03 PM
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!!! |
|
|
MOZ
