Email I recieved from Dick Baker today:
From: "Sen.Zien" <Sen.Zien@legis.state.wi.us>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2006 13:26:35 -0600
Subject: PPA Alert - "red herrings" debunked
Dear PPA supporter,
We're in danger of losing the 66th vote in the Assembly needed to
the Governor's impending veto of the Personal Protection Act. PPA
are weighing in heavily on 2 particular Assembly Democrats in an effort
get them to flip-flop and vote against people who wish to defend
from violent crime. These two Assembly Democrats have always been WITH
in the past and have never voted against PPA, so we need them to STAY
US in the override.
We have to encourage these two Democrats to STAND FIRM and DON'T LISTEN
THE LIES spread by the anti-self-defense forces; ask them to VOTE TO
OVERRIDE THE GOVERNOR'S VETO.
The two Assembly Democrats that need our positive encouragement are:
Rep. Terry Van Akkeren (D - Sheboygan) (608) 266-0656, P.O. Box
Madison, WI 53708, firstname.lastname@example.org
Rep. John Steinbrink (D - Pleasant Prairie) (608) 266-0455, P.O. Box
8953, Madison, WI 53708, email@example.com
Below is information debunking two "red herrings" that PPA opponents
trying to use to convince these Democrat allies of self-defense to flip
flip. We have debunked those red herrings, meaning there should be no
reason these 2 brave Assemblymen should vote against us. Use the
below to refute opponents' false claims about the PPA.
Yours in Freedom,
Senator Dave Zien
TO: Interested Parties
FR: Senator Dave Zien
DT: January 18, 2006
RE: PPA vehicle stops "red herring" - DEBUNKED
The non-partisan Legislative Reference Bureau debunks a "red herring"
circulated by PPA opponents. Below is a copy of the LRB's analysis.
Throwing out a red herring such as this represents opponents' efforts
persuade key Assembly Democrats to vote to sustain the Governor's veto
PPA opponents make a false claim that law enforcement officers would
able to check if a driver is a permit holder for any violation other
traffic violation. The truth is law enforcement need probable cause
pull someone over, which also gives them reason under the bill to check
the vehicle is registered to a permit holder.
The example used by PPA opponents is that if a domestic violence
occurs where officers are called in, then one of the suspects drives
opponents claim that officers would not be able to check permit holder
status once the vehicle is pulled over. This is completely untrue.
LRB ANALYSIS ON VEHICLE STOPS
From: Dsida, Michael
Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2006 10:53 AM
To: Hogan, John
Subject: Vehicle stops
In response to your question regarding vehicle stops, under the bill
341.175 (4)), if a law enforcement officer stops a vehicle, he or she
request information from DOT regarding the CCW license status of the
vehicle's registered owner, but only if the vehicle stop meets the
requirements of s. 349.02 (2) (a). That section, however, relates only
law enforcement officer's authority to stop or inspect a vehicle to
certain statutes relating to vehicles and their operation and other
relating to controlled substances. Thus, if a law enforcement officer
probable cause to believe that the driver of a vehicle committed a
including a crime of domestic abuse, to use your example -- the officer
request information from DOT regarding whether the owner of the vehicle
a license to carry a concealed weapon.
I hope this information is helpful.
Legislative Reference Bureau
PPA and the Domestic Violence Red Herring
PPA opponents are providing a fine example of a "red herring" with
claim that not allowing law enforcement to access concealed weapon
holder information when responding to domestic violence calls will
cause them to be in greater danger.
They are using this fallacy in a desperate attempt to convince key
like Representative Terry Van Akkeren, from Sheboygan, and
John Steinbrink, from Pleasant Prairie, to vote to sustain the
veto of the PPA. Both of these legislators have been steadfast
of the right to self-defense. Representative Van Akkeren has voted in
support of the PPA all three times it has come before him since 2003.
Representative Steinbrink has voted for it on four of four occasions
2002. These votes included support for the 2004 override of Governor
Doyle's veto of this life-saving legislation. None of these versions
contained the provision now being demanded by opponents.
In State v. Munir Hamadan, the Wisconsin Supreme Court has ruled that
citizens have the right to carry concealed weapons on their own
without a license.
Because of this, law enforcement officers may encounter a homeowner at
domestic violence call legally carrying a concealed weapon regardless
whether he has a license or not. Checking a database of citizens
to carry concealed firearms in public has absolutely no bearing on the
conditions that law enforcement may find in a home.
Law Enforcement does not currently have access to a database of gun
when responding to a call at a residence.
PPA opponents apparently do not understand this. If law enforcement is
to access the license holder database, it only informs them of whether
not the homeowner has obtained a laminated piece of paper form the
Department of Justice. It does not indicate whether there are
rifles or shotguns at the residence. Only three percent of adults in
Wisconsin will obtain a license. Firearms are present in over 50% of
homes in the state.
The practical difference between traffic stops and domestic violence
At the request of law enforcement interests, the PPA was amended to
authorize law enforcement officers engaged in a traffic stop to
whether the registered owner of the vehicle is a license holder prior
approaching the driver. This situation is far different than
a residential call. The courts have ruled that citizens have no right
carry loaded firearms in a vehicle. A concealed weapons license is
to legally carry a loaded handgun in a vehicle. This arguably makes
database search useful to law enforcement. The courts have ruled that
citizens have a right to possess loaded firearms, including concealed
weapons, in their residence without a license. This makes a check of
license holder database, citizens who are authorized to carry concealed
firearms in public, inconsequential when approaching a residence.
License holders do not commit domestic violence.
License holders will have successfully passed a criminal background
that includes a search for domestic violence offenses. Offenders are
prohibited from obtaining a license and are prohibited from possessing
firearms of any kind pursuant to federal law. Because the majority of
domestic violence calls involve a prior history of domestic violence,
license holders are rarely involved.
Only three percent of the population will obtain licenses. The
of the other 38 Right to Carry states shows that only a fraction of one
percent of licenses will be revoked. A domestic violence offense is
dozens of reasons for which a license must be revoked. This is
evidence that the instances of license holders committing domestic
are statistically insignificant. Law enforcement officers will respond
literally thousands of domestic violence calls for every one case
a license holder's residence.
Law enforcement practices would not change even if the information were
Law enforcement officers know that domestic violence calls are the most
dangerous of all calls they respond to. They know that, while only
percent of the adult population will obtain concealed weapons licenses,
firearms are in the majority of homes in Wisconsin. Well-trained law
enforcement officers always assume that firearms may be present in a
If a database search were available and the search came up negative, it
not as if law enforcement officers will be leaving their gun belts in
cruisers when approaching the front door of a residence. An
poorly trained officer could actually be placed in greater jeopardy by
a system being available because it could lead to a false sense of
Write those two dems who are thinking of flip flopping!
touchdowns pink ribbons are belongs to Favre Patty!