WI district attorney wants CCW law amended; sheriff sets him straight

[SigP229R]

Don't know this sheriff but want to; he speaks with common sense. Sounds a lot like something the sheriff of my county here in N C would say.

 

[walking arsenal]

Someone send that sheriff a gift certificate to a good coffee joint. He's earned a good cup of jo.

 

[Carl N. Brown]

Pretty enlightening article.

Gitte Laasby, "Sheboygan DA blasts concealed-carry law: Gun rule raises questions of owner privacy, officer safety", Journal Sentinel, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, July 13, 2011.

There are need to know limits on checking the WI concealed carry permit data base. Sheboygan County District Attorney Joe DeCecco "said access to the database could help officers determine the level of danger and alert them of any guns present before they make contact. In rural areas where a single officer often responds, he could call for backup or secure the weapon immediately upon contact."

Duh. Rural areas are likely to have 80% gun ownership anyway. If it's rural, I would assume folks have guns.

DeCecco also said: ""The present prohibition ... reflects the extreme agenda and paranoia of the National Rifle Association and other gun lobbying groups that advanced these provisions. What are they afraid of?"

Uh, criminals who have guns acquired legally or (more probably) illegally are not likely to get permits to carry. DeCecco is calling for treating legal handgun permit holders worse than most criminals would get treated. The permit database would not alert officers to any guns present, only to the presence of a legal permit holder who may not be actually carrying & in all probability would not deserve special attention.

"What are they afraid of?" Well, a DA thinking police should routinely call on backup just because a person has a pistol permit. That's kinda extreme and paranoid on DeCecco's part.

Milwaukee County Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. correctly pointed out that if the database says the guy does not have a permit, it does mean the guy is not armed. I agree with that: especially if the guy is a crook who is not likely to have a permit in the first place. DeCecco talks like, if a check on the database shows the individual does not have a permit, the cop does not have to be alert. Duh.

As one of the commentators pointed out, he legally owned 13 guns, did not have a carry permit, was not likely to get a carry permit. At least he would be spared the special backup treatment DeCecco thinks he deserves.

Clarke sounds like some our local working police, fully in contact with reality. "The debate's over. Everybody just exhale. Forty-eight other states have this. They haven't experienced all this hysteria and fear-mongering, and life went on in those states. We'll be fine."

Tennessee has had shall-issue RTC since 1996. No blood in the gutters from shootouts over parking spaces, no additional floor to the county morgue, or any of the other dire predictions. (Shall issue actually removes the necessity defense against a charge of illegally going armed: no excuse.)

 

[Romeo 33 Delta]

DeCecco apparently doesn't take into account a situation involving a traffic stop where the vehicle is recently stolen and none of the occupants are the registered owner. Exactly what would the data base tell the officer?

So the occupants have stolen a vehicle registered to a non-cc owner. The occupants have just hit a 7-11, killed the night clerk. All the while the actual owner is sould asleep in his bed, having no idea his vehicle has been both stolen and used in the commission of multiple felonies.

Yep, that officer is going to casually walk up to that vehicle because the data base shows there is no gun in the vehicle?

I don't think cops are either that badly trained or just that dumb. I'll rephrase that ... I KNOW THEY'RE NOT!

The only idiot in this room is Joe DeCecco ... "what a maroon".

 

[Monkeyleg]

Thank you for that article, Monkeyleg. Miss the place, do you?

No, but I read the Journal Sentinel briefly every evening, looking for stupid things like DeCecco's statements, just to remind me why I moved. What blew me away was Clarke's response.

 

[armoredman]

Sheriff Clarke and my local CLEO, Sheriff Babeau of Pinal County might get along quite well, I think. Well done, sir.

 

[shep854]

Consider that a sheriff is an elected position, while police chiefs are generally appointments. Which is more likely to reflect the population's perspective.
If anything, a CCW flag should indicate to an officer that the person in question is most likely a Good Guy!

 

[Monkeyleg]

Which is more likely to reflect the population's perspective.

Sheriff Clarke has been something of a closet conservative his entire time in the position. It's a pretty liberal city.

 

[wideym]

That's the up side of electing a local sheriff, you don't have to bow down to the political bosses of your party,state, or city's pet subjects, just those who elected you, like it should be.

 

[az_imuth]

Actually, when a Texas cop runs your plate and sees that you don't have a CHL, that's when they get suspicious.

 

[goon]

I've been pulled over several times while carrying, sometimes just during routine stops and DUI checks, and a couple times for speeding (which I was guilty of). Was even in an accident once while I and the driver of the car I was in were carrying.

No one's gotten shot.
Carrying makes you more conscious of how ugly things could get and how fast they could get there.

So good for the ol' Sheriff.

 

[El Tejon]

That Attorney General should be fired immediately. He doesn't know the difference between hiding behind and exercising a right.

Ummm, why are you firing the Attorney General when the county District Attorney made the statement?

Talk about not knowing the difference!

 

[Deltaboy1984]

Horray for that Sheriff and Fire the Idiot AG!

 

[12131]

They're all attorneys. Fire them.

 

[Zoogster]

Most people that shoot cops don't have a permit and would be considered unarmed by the database.
If a cop is more alert when someone legally has the ability to carry a firearm than when they confront someone who doesn't then they are being foolish.
According to such a database most thugs and violent criminals likely to shoot you are unarmed, and have no carry permit, or legally registered firearm in a place with registration.
Such a system is pointless, does not increase officer safety, and with no good that can come from it you have only the bad that can come from it.

 

[Husker_Fan]

By the DA's logic, cops should breath a sigh of relief if they run someone and find out they are a convicted felon. Everyone knows felons can't have guns.

Also, I read Clarke's statement as one of resignation. He has, IIRC, always opposed concealed carry bills in the past.

 

[RyanAnchors]

+1 for the sheriff and a big +1 for WingWalker above. You are the pinnacle of what a LEO should represent and be.

And "hiding behind a Constitutional right"?
This guy really didn't pay attention in law school, did he?

 

[Monkeyleg]

Husker Fan, I was told several years back by people who would know that Clarke supported CCW, but because he was sheriff of Milwaukee county, he had to keep his mouth shut.

He did finally come out in favor last year, although he and the mayor were angling to get some anti-gun measures in exchange.

 

[Cop Bob]

It is refreshing to read when someone high up in LE takes a positive stance... Sheriff Clarke, thank you...

 

[oldbear]

The good Sheriff Clarke, summed it up very well. now let's move on with life and our jobs.

 

[Bullnettles]

By the DA's logic, cops should breath a sigh of relief if they run someone and find out they are a convicted felon. Everyone knows felons can't have guns.

HuskerFan, can I use this in my signature?

 

[Husker_Fan]

Feel free.