Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 1/20/2006 4:46:31 AM EDT
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
To: dbaker@wi.rr.com
Subject: PPA Alert - "red herrings" debunked

Dear PPA supporter,

We're in danger of losing the 66th vote in the Assembly needed to
override
the Governor's impending veto of the Personal Protection Act. PPA
opponents
are weighing in heavily on 2 particular Assembly Democrats in an effort
to
get them to flip-flop and vote against people who wish to defend
themselves
from violent crime. These two Assembly Democrats have always been WITH
US
in the past and have never voted against PPA, so we need them to STAY
WITH
US in the override.

We have to encourage these two Democrats to STAND FIRM and DON'T LISTEN
TO
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
8953,
Madison, WI 53708, rep.vanakkeren@legis.state.wi.us
Rep. John Steinbrink (D - Pleasant Prairie) (608) 266-0455, P.O. Box
8953, Madison, WI 53708, rep.steinbrink@legis.state.wi.us

Below is information debunking two "red herrings" that PPA opponents
are
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
arguments
below to refute opponents' false claims about the PPA.

Yours in Freedom,

Senator Dave Zien
sen.zien@legis.state.wi.us
(608) 266-7511



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
to
persuade key Assembly Democrats to vote to sustain the Governor's veto
of
the PPA.

PPA opponents make a false claim that law enforcement officers would
not be
able to check if a driver is a permit holder for any violation other
than a
traffic violation. The truth is law enforcement need probable cause
to
pull someone over, which also gives them reason under the bill to check
if
the vehicle is registered to a permit holder.

The example used by PPA opponents is that if a domestic violence
disturbance
occurs where officers are called in, then one of the suspects drives
away,
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
(s.
341.175 (4)), if a law enforcement officer stops a vehicle, he or she
may
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
to a
law enforcement officer's authority to stop or inspect a vehicle to
enforce
certain statutes relating to vehicles and their operation and other
statutes
relating to controlled substances. Thus, if a law enforcement officer
has
probable cause to believe that the driver of a vehicle committed a
crime --
including a crime of domestic abuse, to use your example -- the officer
may
request information from DOT regarding whether the owner of the vehicle
has
a license to carry a concealed weapon.

I hope this information is helpful.

Mike Dsida
Legislative Reference Bureau
608/266-9867
michael.dsida@legis.state.wi.us



____________________________________________________


PPA and the Domestic Violence Red Herring

PPA opponents are providing a fine example of a "red herring" with
their
claim that not allowing law enforcement to access concealed weapon
license
holder information when responding to domestic violence calls will
somehow
cause them to be in greater danger.

They are using this fallacy in a desperate attempt to convince key
democrats
like Representative Terry Van Akkeren, from Sheboygan, and
Representative
John Steinbrink, from Pleasant Prairie, to vote to sustain the
Governor's
veto of the PPA. Both of these legislators have been steadfast
supporters
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
since
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
property
without a license.

Because of this, law enforcement officers may encounter a homeowner at
a
domestic violence call legally carrying a concealed weapon regardless
of
whether he has a license or not. Checking a database of citizens
licensed
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
owners
when responding to a call at a residence.

PPA opponents apparently do not understand this. If law enforcement is
able
to access the license holder database, it only informs them of whether
or
not the homeowner has obtained a laminated piece of paper form the
Department of Justice. It does not indicate whether there are
handguns,
rifles or shotguns at the residence. Only three percent of adults in
Wisconsin will obtain a license. Firearms are present in over 50% of
the
homes in the state.

The practical difference between traffic stops and domestic violence
calls.

At the request of law enforcement interests, the PPA was amended to
authorize law enforcement officers engaged in a traffic stop to
determine
whether the registered owner of the vehicle is a license holder prior
to
approaching the driver. This situation is far different than
responding to
a residential call. The courts have ruled that citizens have no right
to
carry loaded firearms in a vehicle. A concealed weapons license is
required
to legally carry a loaded handgun in a vehicle. This arguably makes
the
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
the
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
check
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
experience
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
one of
dozens of reasons for which a license must be revoked. This is
undeniable
evidence that the instances of license holders committing domestic
violence
are statistically insignificant. Law enforcement officers will respond
to
literally thousands of domestic violence calls for every one case
involving
a license holder's residence.

Law enforcement practices would not change even if the information were
made
available.

Law enforcement officers know that domestic violence calls are the most
dangerous of all calls they respond to. They know that, while only
three
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
home.
If a database search were available and the search came up negative, it
is
not as if law enforcement officers will be leaving their gun belts in
their
cruisers when approaching the front door of a residence. An
inexperienced,
poorly trained officer could actually be placed in greater jeopardy by
such
a system being available because it could lead to a false sense of
security
and complacency.

--



Write those two dems who are thinking of flip flopping!
Link Posted: 1/20/2006 5:10:52 AM EDT
Gee go figure.
Top Top