OC/CC in Wisconsin RIP

[ilbob]

imported post

Mike wrote:

Why this emphasis on "marching"? It shows weakness and could be construed as an effort to intimidate,

Just OC as an individual while minding your own business. This is the activity we want secured thru custom and practice.

That is a lot easier said than done in WI, regardless of the possibility (maybe low) of being arrested for DTP or DC. Since you cannot carry in your car at all, you would, as a practical matter,be restricted to just walking around your own neighborhood. I am not a huge fan of loading and unloading guns when getting in and out of vehicles. It just about guarantees an unintentional discharge at some point.

 

[Mike]

imported post

ilbob wrote:

Since you cannot carry in your car at all, you would, as a practical matter,be restricted to just walking around your own neighborhood. I am not a huge fan of loading and unloading guns when getting in and out of vehicles. It just about guarantees an unintentional discharge at some point.

I agree guys - but you have to work with what you got sometimes. Walking while OCing from your residence (or some other suitable staging area where gun handling is appropriate) to some public place and returning and getting this in the press as "normal" and "legal" is the goal.

Companion legislation to the next CC bill that Doyle will veto ought to be introduced to:

1. Eliminate the $100 hunting fine for possessing a loaded handgun in a vehicle; and,

2. Clarifying the definition of "concealed" to overturn the WI appeals court opinion that handguns in plain veiw in vehicles are "concealed" for purposes of WI's concealed carry ban.

 

[pkbites]

imported post

Companion legislation to the next CC bill that Doyle will veto ought to be introduced to:

The Governor will not veto ANY concealed carry bill within the next 2-4 years.

The Democrats own the State Senate & will not pass ANY pro-gun bill to send him in the first place.

 

[Monkeyleg]

imported post

Mike, one of the Democrats in the state senate has announced a bill that would eliminate the requirement for an unloaded firearm to be encased while in a vehicle. A small step for open carry, but a step nonetheless.

He--Russ Decker--is from a solid pro-gun district, and is also eyeing a run for the US Congress. It makes 100% perfect sense for him to start off the new legislative session this way, especially since the Milwaukee area Democrats are going to push for gun registration, and bans on private sales.

I hope I didn't come across as playing "Secret Agent Man" in the prior post when I mentioned ongoing efforts.

Like it or not, the test of a gun group is not in how much noise it makes, but in how much it helps its friends. As I've said, the WCCA/WCCM is a small group. But we've helped many friends in the legislature. Without such help, we'd just be a bunch of nobody's spitting in the wind.

Once a group is accepted into the inner discussions, it's assumed that those who are part of those discussions will keep their mouths shut until everyone involved agrees that it's time to go public with the plans.

I've screwed up on that at least once, and got a royal *ss-reaming.

The only reason I mentioned that there's something being planned is to let people know that open carry has always been on the table, and always will be. But, there are serious political reasons why the concealed carry bill had to take center stage.

If this effort is successful, it will have an enormous impact on open carry, as well as concealed carry.

Call the WCCA "moribund" if you so desire. But, before anyone does so, I would ask that person to point to even one other gun group in Wisconsin that has done as much in so little time to advance the cause of the right to "BEAR" arms.

Who? Wisconsin Gun Owners? Get real. You'll learn the truth about them soon enough.

The Wisconsin Rifle and Pistol Association? I'm a board member, and the so-called "legislative director." The WRPA has been very effective in promoting the shooting sports, but not so effective legislatively. I've made it pretty clear why I volunteered for the board, and I've been pretty vocal in calling for changes, and soon.

Sporting Heritage? Honestly, I don't know much about the group, although I know some members of the board.

The Wisconsin Pro-Gun Movement? Jim Fendry has been enormously successful in helping get pro-gun bills passed, and killing the anti-gun bills. He's been at this for over 28 years. He knows just about everyone in Madison--right down to the clerks who work in the documents offices--and he has the respect of pretty much everyone in the Capitol. But he wants to retire. I'd say he's earned that.

Besides raising awareness and support for CCW in Wisconsin, I'd have to say that the growth of the WCCA has inspired new leaders. People with passion, and people who have decided that they will spend however much time it takes to make Wisconsin one of the "free" states.

If that should be the only upside, it's not a bad upside.

And, as for the money aspect? That $10,000 that went to Green's campaign didn't go unnoticed by the powers that be. Nor did the contributions we've given to so many other campaigns.

It isn't "buying access," as only the most lowly piece of amphibious legislative *hit would turn his/her vote for $1000, or $2000, or even $3000. What we've done is cement relationships with legislators who agree with us by showing that they'll get more than a "Vote for Joe" recommendation from us.

 

[Shotgun]

imported post

pkbites wrote:

The Governor will not veto ANY concealed carry bill within the next 2-4 years.

The Democrats own the State Senate & will not pass ANY pro-gun bill to send him in the first place.

That might be the case, but maybe not too. There were enough Democrats who supported the last CCW bill to override Doyle's veto in the state Senate. There may still be enough Democrats, combined with the Rebublicans, to pass another bill. The certain veto again would be the problem. As long as Doyle is in office the biggest hope is for a victory in court. Most likely that will be a victory for OC, not complete CC.

I think Open Carry is going to become particularly important in Wisconsin. If it turns out that people are prosecuted for OC, and I mean OC in urban areas-- I don't think OC out in the wilds or small towns of, say, Vilas or Forest County is much of a political statement-- then the courts will conclude that concealed carry is legal. The WI Supreme Court has already stated that there has to be a practical way to exercise the RKBA. If cannot do so openly (due to police intereference) then one has to be allowed to CC.

 

[Mike]

imported post

OK guys, allI can say is that some WI residents need to start regularly getting in thepress for peacibly OCing in the course of everyday activities, and not some future planned "march."

Once you are in the press, and the viability of citizen OC is demonstrated, your issue on the de-criminalization of OC in vehicles will have traction.

 

[TrueBrit]

imported post

I like Shotgun's take on this matter. Logic would seem to dictate that if WI has no CC, then OC is the only way to go! I believe that the OH guys argued thus, and, with a few open carry marches, got CC passed. A lthough I much prefer individual OC to OCing in packs, this might be the way to go to stir things up initially.

Just my opinion, worth exactly what you paid me for it!

TrueBrit.

 

[Mike]

imported post

TrueBrit wrote:

I like Shotgun's take on this matter. Logic would seem to dictate that if WI has no CC, then OC is the only way to go! I believe that the OH guys argued thus, and, with a few open carry marches, got CC passed. A lthough I much prefer individual OC to OCing in packs, this might be the way to go to stir things up initially.

Just my opinion, worth exactly what you paid me for it!

TrueBrit.

I am arguing, from afar, that based on what I have heard about apparnet hyper-sensitivity to OC in WI, that the point to prove is that OC can be done legally and peacibly "by averge Joe" without necessarily causing a commotion.

"Stirring things up" is thus not the goal. The goal is to OC & have nobody care, but have the press report. Once the press reports, education begins, sheeple less likely to be alarmed, etc.

From this foundation, you can move the ball.

But holding a mass armed march or even a small group is exactly the conduct which may scare, enrage, and lead to arrests - you will be compared to the KKK marching around trying to scare people. This cannot be said for a fella walking to the Supermarket with his family to buy some eggs and bread.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

imported post

I agree that armed marches and demonstrations are likely to be counterproductive. Your stated alternative is to encourage "average Joes" to OC in their day-to-day travels. While this might be helpful, it is unlikely that more than a very few will find the motivation to start doing this regularly. My suggestion is to form goups of likeminded "regular Joes and Janes", then go out to dinner together on a regular basis. Eight or 10 polite, well-dressed adults can make a statement without causing much social apprehension. Its a lot easier to OC like this when you have companions, and a lot of fun as well.

Check out the "get together" threads on the Virginia pages.

 

[TrueBrit]

imported post

Great points that Mike and the Uncle make, and maybe I am overlooking the point here. Am I to take it that WI needs to push for OC rather than CC?

Just curious, you understand.

The parallel I drew with OH and the OC marches was , I guess ,geared to show that ,since CC was forbidden, then OC was the only alternative.

 

[lockman]

imported post

Individually OC'ing does not preclude a coordinatedOC. On any given day The impact of several OC'ers in a specific urban location but not congregating would have a much greater positive impact.

 

[pkbites]

imported post

My thoughts are what is needed is to get a high court to rule that open carry is completely legal, and that it, in and of itself, is NOT disorderly conduct.

The arguments come right from the state statutes. The statutes specifically do not address open carry, but they do address specifically where a firearm cannot be carried, (bars, vehicles, etc.) and the statutres do address that CONCEALED carry is specifically illegal.

The statutes also specifically prohibit local ordinances that are stronger than the states (which wipped out open carry ordinances) along with the State Constitutional right to bear arms, the state statutes therefore clearly infer that open carry is legal. If the statutes clearly infer this (and they do) then a conflicting statute, like Disorderly Conduct, cannot override that.

Getting a lower court to agree with this argument may be good enough to get an individual off a local DC charge, but it won't do a collective good. What is needed is for the State Supreme Court to rule on it. And the only way I see that happening is if a person is convicted of DC for OC and appeals it there (and the SSC takes the case) or if a local court accepts the argument and the prosecutor appeals it (unlikely). Remember, most disorderly conduct cases get charged or pled down to ordinance violations (not a crime) and the likelyhood of the high court reviewing a conviction for an ordinance is extremely low.

I have to admonish everyone NOT to do any act that may be a violation of law and/or get yourself arrested, even if you think you'll win the case in the end.

Mike-

After he takes office how about presenting the statute arguments for open carry to the new AG and getting his opinion issued on it?

 

[lockman]

imported post

pkbites wrote:

I have to admonish everyone NOT to do any act that may be a violation of law and/or get yourself arrested, even if you think you'll win the case in the end.

Unfortunately if no one takes it on, i.e. tempt arrest for disorderly conduct or whatever the cause will go no where in the courts. To go through the courts there has to be a defendant. No one else has legal standing to pursue action.



If a defendant pleads down to another charge, case over.



This is what they (the state) depend on. They have scared us with a potential criminal offense for something that is clearly not criminal! Being a full time resident of Illinois I certainly know where you are coming from. I do OC in WI but I don’t get anywhere near any towns on foot.



Start by OC’ing on your own property. I have got my neighbors more used to it. It’s a start. I am very grateful for those who do have the courage to stand up for their rights. We must all also understand that many have obligations causing reservations. When those obligations are met I will head to the Wal-mart or wherever with all the attached accoutrements.



There is a place for everyone. If for whatever reason any of us have a reservation about public OC, then don’t do it, but at least be a financial, legal and moral support for those that do.

 

[pkbites]

imported post

CMA statement:
Understand that as a peace officer I can't & won't advise anyone to do anything that might be get them arrested, even if we believe that in the end it is ruled that it wasn't illegal. I also can't and won't give any legal advice. Nothing I post, posted, or will post here is too, in any way WHATSOEVER, be construed as legal advice, or as advising anyone to break any laws. Open carry, at least where I'm at, will get you pinched for DC. DON'T DO IT! __________________________________________________




The incoming Attorney General claims to be strongly pro-gun. I would like to see an AG opinion that open carry is legal, infered to be legal by statute, and is not in and of itself disorderly conduct nor any other breach of law. An AG opinion like that would certainly be a strong pro-gun stance! And it would be better than someone having to appeal to the Supreme Court on a case.

How likely this is to happen I know not.

 

[Mike]

imported post

A lot of talk here about Disorderly Conduct ("DC") charges for OC.

Where's the beef?

What case says that OC in a holster (while going about your daily business and not doing anything weird or provactive or marching/pacing about etc.) is "disorderly" under any WI statute?

Does the statute seem on it's face to indicate that OC = "disorderly?

Unless anybody can answer "yes" (with authorities) to either of these 2 questions, let's drop the nonesense about OC = DC in WI. This kind of discussion thread is counter-productive and belongs on some of the other paranoid gun "rights" boards.

 

[pkbites]

imported post

Mike wrote:

A lot of talk here about Disorderly Conduct ("DC") charges for OC.

Where's the beef?

What case says that OC in a holster (while going about your daily business and not doing anything weird or provactive or marching/pacing about etc.) is "disorderly" under any WI statute?

Does the statute seem on it's face to indicate that OC = "disorderly?

Unless anybody can answer "yes" (with authorities) to either of these 2 questions, let's drop the nonesense about OC = DC in WI. This kind of discussion thread is counter-productive and belongs on some of the other paranoid gun "rights" boards.

Mike, if you open carry here in Milwaukee you WILL be cited for DC.

 

[Monkeyleg]

imported post

Mike, with all due respect to the cause you've been fighting for: fly into Milwaukee, strap a gun on your hip, and see how many yards---not miles, but yards--it takes before you're busted for disturbing the peace.

Not necessarily disorderly conduct, but certainly disturbing the peace.

Milwaukee is a miniature Chicago, and Wisconsin is a miniature Illinois. And, based upon those realities, anything is possible when it comes to encounters with law enforcement.

As I said in a previous post, we are going to have a well-constructed, well-thought, and well-planned open carry march.

And, as I've already said in previous posts, I am not the "king" of the WCCA. Anyone is free to organize his/her march. And I'll publicize it as widely as possible.

Having said that, I would ask that people take into consideration the point that there are other efforts going on. Efforts that involve people with more power than you or me.

What I'm asking is that folks here--the ones in Wisconsin, not the ones in other states where open carry is a non-issue---give the WI gun groups a few months to do what was in the contingency plans months ago.

I've never lied to our WCCA volunteers. And the WCCA volunteers have never lied to you.

Our pro-gun friends in Madison are going to be walking on eggshells until we've established our ground. It would be a huge mistake to throw our friends to the media wolves before we've figured out our positions.

Please don't go off on a rant and **** up some delicate negotiations.

 

[minuteman]

imported post

Yup that is the one, my mistake I didnt realize it was a CCW charge dropped and not DC. I know Dave and he carries openly without many problems other than this.

I know ofcharges that have been dropped including my own but your totally right about having a higher court case to fall back on. I carry just about everywhere I go and have very few problems other than strange looks. These are small cities though and were talking about Madison and Milwaukee they are a whole different story.

I think the point of a march in a big city would show others who dont know their rightsthat itsok to exersize them and if theydo chargepeople they would have to take on several of us. But itsNOT a good idea unless there is full support from the sherriff and have it properly organized.If thekkk or black panthers can marchso can we. There would be permits and areas we could go and police everywhere but we can still do it. If they openly say we dont have the right to keep and BEAR arms then there is a much bigger problem than a disorderly conduct charge.

 

[DKSuddeth]

imported post

pkbites wrote:

Mike wrote:

A lot of talk here about Disorderly Conduct ("DC") charges for OC.

Where's the beef?

What case says that OC in a holster (while going about your daily business and not doing anything weird or provactive or marching/pacing about etc.) is "disorderly" under any WI statute?

Does the statute seem on it's face to indicate that OC = "disorderly?

Unless anybody can answer "yes" (with authorities) to either of these 2 questions, let's drop the nonesense about OC = DC in WI. This kind of discussion thread is counter-productive and belongs on some of the other paranoid gun "rights" boards.

Mike, if you open carry here in Milwaukee you WILL be cited for DC.

pk, as an LEO, are you telling me that if I open carry, in a holster, according to the constitution of wisconsin and within the law as stated, are you going to cite me or arrest me for disorderly conduct? If so, i'd like to know how YOU, as the arresting officer, are going to present your 'case' at trial.

 

[reefteach]

imported post

pkbites wrote:

CMA statement:
Understand that as a peace officer I can't & won't advise anyone to do anything that might be get them arrested, even if we believe that in the end it is ruled that it wasn't illegal. I also can't and won't give any legal advice. Nothing I post, posted, or will post here is too, in any way WHATSOEVER, be construed as legal advice, or as advising anyone to break any laws. Open carry, at least where I'm at, will get you pinched for DC. DON'T DO IT! __________________________________________________

OK here is the standard for DC in WI:

947.01 Disorderly conduct. Whoever, in a public or private place, engages in violent, abusive, indecent, profane, boisterous, unreasonably loud or otherwise disorderly conduct under circumstances in which the conduct tends to cause or provoke a disturbance is guilty of a Class B misdemeanor.

So as an officer, if you saw somebody minding his own business walking his dog in his neigborhood OCing, on what ground would you give a charge. It does not fit the criteria. Really.I want to know from an officer whyyou want to include peacable activity as DC. Why do you find it necessary to arrest people when they are not clearly not breaking the law? Look around the site. OC does not result in widespread panic by fellow citizens. At most people inquire about it. The law is NOT written as follows:

947.01 Disorderly conduct. Whoever, in a public or private place, engages in peacable, constitutionaly protected activities which a police officer does not agree with.