• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

WI senate to consider uncased gun bill tuesday

BJA

Campaign Veteran
Joined
May 4, 2008
Messages
503
Location
SOuth Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Hey guys! haven't been signed on in a while, real busy working part time and going to school fulltime. Decker's bill looks like it will be up for debate on tuesday.

http://host.madison.com/news/state-and-regional/wisconsin/article_eb036be2-abe8-5384-b05e-d1b7d34d7530.html








The state Senate is set to consider a bill next week that would allow people to transport uncased weapons.

Current Wisconsin law, no one can transport a firearm unless it's unloaded and stored in a gun case. No one can transport a bow or a crossbow unless it's either unstrung or cased.

The bill would eliminate the case requirement for firearms and eliminate all prohibitions on firearms, bows and crossbows in a vehicle if the vehicle is stationary.

The Senate is set to take up the measure on Tuesday.

The bill's main author, Senate Majority Leader Russ Decker, a Weston Democrat, introduced a similar measure in 2005. Republicans controlled the Senate then and the legislation never got to the floor for a vote.
 

anmut

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2010
Messages
875
Location
Stevens Point WI, ,
imported post

Sounds like a start in the right direction. But it only states that they will be allowed if the vehicle is "stationary."

Actually, sounds like a compromise to me.
 

protias

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
7,308
Location
SE, WI
imported post

anmut wrote:
Sounds like a start in the right direction. But it only states that they will be allowed if the vehicle is "stationary."

Actually, sounds like a compromise to me.
I was going to say, if the vehicle is stationary, how is that transporting? I don't think it is illegal to be in your car with a loaded weapon. I am not 100% sure on that though.

Edit: Yes, I am wrong.
 

Interceptor_Knight

Regular Member
Joined
May 18, 2007
Messages
2,851
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

protias wrote:
anmut wrote:
Sounds like a start in the right direction. But it only states that they will be allowed if the vehicle is "stationary."

Actually, sounds like a compromise to me.
I was going to say, if the vehicle is stationary, how is that transporting? I don't think it is illegal to be in your car with a loaded weapon. I am not 100% sure on that though.


It currently is most illegal for you to be in or on your car with a loaded weapon. The current WI Statute requires your firearm to be unloaded and encased whether the vehicle is stationary or not.


The proposed bill allows you to transport an unloaded firearm withoutit being "encased". The vehicle does not have to be stationary. A bow or crossbow must still be encased for transport.

If the vehicle is stationary, the firearm, bow or crossbow does not have to be encased and it may be loaded.

This is definitely a compromise, but a step in the right direction. If your loaded magazine is next to your handgun in the vehicle while you drive down the road, it is much better than encased in the trunk.My thought is that this change allows us to have a holster attached to a very visible location inside the vehicle so that the handgun is accessible.
 

protias

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
7,308
Location
SE, WI
imported post

Interceptor_Knight wrote:
protias wrote:
anmut wrote:
Sounds like a start in the right direction. But it only states that they will be allowed if the vehicle is "stationary."

Actually, sounds like a compromise to me.
I was going to say, if the vehicle is stationary, how is that transporting? I don't think it is illegal to be in your car with a loaded weapon. I am not 100% sure on that though.

It currently is most illegal for you to be in or on your car with a loaded weapon. The current WI Statute requires your firearm to be unloaded and encased whether the vehicle is stationary or not.
Hmm, I thought I read somewhere it was okay if the car was stationary and the keys were not in the ignition, but I'll fully admit to being wrong.
 

anmut

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2010
Messages
875
Location
Stevens Point WI, ,
imported post

If my memory back to hunters safety serves me correctly, you can't even lean a gun up against a vehicle, unloaded or not.

It's a stupid law - one more gotchya fine they can hit you with if your caught poaching. Of course as we all know - people that break the laws are going to do so regardless of what's on the books. Laws only work for law abiding citizens, otherwise they're just another way to tax criminals.
 

Shotgun

Wisconsin Carry, Inc.
Joined
Aug 23, 2006
Messages
2,668
Location
Madison, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

protias wrote:
Hmm, I thought I read somewhere it was okay if the car was stationary and the keys were not in the ignition, but I'll fully admit to being wrong.
Maybe if you added "and parked inside your garage" you might be onto something, but otherwise, no.

This bill is far from ideal, but at least an improvement over the current situation. It passed two committees with just one "no" vote. But who knows how it will do in a full Senate vote, in the Assembly, or on Doyle's desk if it gets there?
 

Interceptor_Knight

Regular Member
Joined
May 18, 2007
Messages
2,851
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

protias wrote:
Hmm, I thought I read somewhere it was okay if the car was stationary and the keys were not in the ignition, but I'll fully admit to being wrong.

[align=left]No big deal. Here is the actual statute for your reference. It prohibits placing on and in, not just transporting.[/align]
[align=left]
167.31 Safe use and transportation of firearms and bows.
[/align]
[align=left](2) PROHIBITIONS; MOTORBOATS AND VEHICLES; HIGHWAYS AND ROADWAYS.[/align]
[align=left]
(b) Except as provided in sub. (4), no person may place, possess or transport a firearm, bow or crossbow in or on a vehicle, unless the firearm is unloaded and encased or unless the bow or crossbow is unstrung or is enclosed in a carrying case.[/align]
(4)
EXCEPTIONS.

[align=left]
(d) Subsection (2) (b) does not prohibit a person from leaning an unloaded firearm against a vehicle.
[/align]
[align=left]http://www.legis.state.wi.us/statutes/Stat0167.pdf[/align]
 

anmut

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2010
Messages
875
Location
Stevens Point WI, ,
imported post

Looks like I need a refresher! Good thing I'm signing my son up for hunters safety this year. I'll have to sit in on it with him.
 

Interceptor_Knight

Regular Member
Joined
May 18, 2007
Messages
2,851
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

anmut wrote:
Looks like I need a refresher! Good thing I'm signing my son up for hunters safety this year. I'll have to sit in on it with him.
Hunters' Safety Instructors do not always know the actual Statutes. It would be a good idea to bring a copy with you for any applicable discussions. :)
 

Interceptor_Knight

Regular Member
Joined
May 18, 2007
Messages
2,851
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

BerettaFS92Custom wrote:
Before we all get too excited maybe best to read the bill

if my reading cognition is correct this bill ONLY APPLIES to hunters not carriers?

if i am wrong i am wrong but this looks quite specific to me



I have one of them Terrorist Huntin' Cards from the last gunshow... Does that count? :lol:

Since Statute 167 does not currently apply exclusively to hunters, the proposed changes do not apply exclusively to hunters. If you read the text, you will see this to be the case. Do not confuse the proposed group hunting changes (Statutes section 29)with the "Safe Transportation" changes (Statutes section 167)...


SECTION 4. 29.324 (2) (a) of the statutes is repealed.

S
ECTION 5. 29.324 (2m) of the statutes is created to read:

S
ECTION 6. 29.324 (3) of the statutes is amended to read:

[/
quote]




[align=left]S
ECTION 7. 167.31 (2) (b) of the statutes is renumbered 167.31 (2) (b) (intro.)[/align]
and amended to read:

 

anmut

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2010
Messages
875
Location
Stevens Point WI, ,
imported post

Master Doug Huffman wrote:
Interceptor_Knight wrote:
It would be a good idea to bring a copy with you for any applicable discussions.:)
Now that might make a point that Doyle will hear, if we all purchase our own copies of the statutes.

"Jimmah! We gots a problem down heah. All dem redneck gunnies bees buyin' da law. Whadif dey larns and knows it?"
LOL - "Ifn dem nortwoods fellars ever get to da book-learn'n we'll be out ov er jobs!"
 

BerettaFS92Custom

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 31, 2010
Messages
232
Location
mid south but not madison , , USA
imported post

Thank You hence the reason i am not a lawyer LOL!



Interceptor_Knight wrote:
BerettaFS92Custom wrote:
Before we all get too excited maybe best to read the bill

if my reading cognition is correct this bill ONLY APPLIES to hunters not carriers?

if i am wrong i am wrong but this looks quite specific to me


I have one of them Terrorist Huntin' Cards from the last gunshow... Does that count? :lol:

Since Statute 167 does not currently apply exclusively to hunters, the proposed changes do not apply exclusively to hunters. If you read the text, you will see this to be the case. Do not confuse the proposed group hunting changes (Statutes section 29)
SECTION 4. 29.324 (2) (a) of the statutes is repealed.

S
ECTION 5. 29.324 (2m) of the statutes is created to read:

S
ECTION 6. 29.324 (3) of the statutes is amended to read:

[/
quote]

with the "Safe Transportation" changes (Statutes section 167)...



[align=left]S
ECTION 7. 167.31 (2) (b) of the statutes is renumbered 167.31 (2) (b) (intro.)[/align]
and amended to read:

 

Parabellum

Founder's Club Member
Joined
May 3, 2008
Messages
287
Location
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Does anyone else get the feeling they are trying to correct the "concealed carry" conflict between the "transport" and "concealed weapons" statutes by not requiring the weapon to be concealed while one transports it?
 
Top