WI circuit court sides with gun owners

[turbojohn41]

Wisconsin Circuit Court Sides With Gun Owners!



Today, the 31st Circuit Court of Milwaukee County ruled that the Concealed Carry Weapons (CCW) statute was unconstitutional as applied to a particular defendant -- in this case, a pizza delivery driver who carried a gun for self-defense on the job, after being robbed repeatedly in a high crime area.

Andres Vegas is a pizza delivery driver and has been robbed and mugged while attempting to deliver a pizza on four different occasions. The first time was in March of 2005. The second time was July 14, 2006, when Vegas was attacked and threatened at gunpoint. Vegas, armed with a firearm, exercised his constitutional right of self-defense and shot one of the assailants. Vegas was not charged with the crime of carrying concealed and was ruled as acting in self defense. Not only was his firearm confiscated at the time of arrest, but it was never returned. He was subsequently told by the prosecuting District Attorney that if he were to use a firearm in self-defense again he would be prosecuted.

On September 13, 2006, an unarmed Vegas -- acting under the orders of the District Attorney to avoid prosecution -- was robbed, beaten, and sprayed with pepper spray by three assailants. Consequently Vegas went out and purchased another firearm. On January 4, 2007, Vegas was again attempting to deliver a pizza when two men approached him and pointed a gun in his face. This time, he responded by again exercising his right to self-defense and shot his assailant in the hip. Vegas then secured his assailant' s firearm along with his, placed them both on the roof of his car, dialed 911, and waited for the police to arrive. The DA determined that he acted in self defense, but he was subsequently charged with CCW for the moments before he was assaulted and defended.

Even though this charge was brought forward by the DA’s office, the court has ruled in favor of Vegas, saying:



“Defendant Vegas has demonstrated the requisite extraordinary circumstances that warrant his concealed weapon…Vegas legally purchased his firearm for the purpose of security and protection. There is a strong inference that Vegas’ concealed firearm has saved his life during these violent assaults…Vegas has a substantial interest in being secure and protecting himself by carrying a concealed weapon.”



“This Court is not convinced that there are any reasonable alternatives that would have secured Vegas’ safety. Vegas' concealed weapon has most likely saved his life on several occasions; this the State cannot ignore. The State has conceded that Vegas did not have an unlawful purpose for concealing a weapon. Given the totality of the circumstances, this Court is satisfied that the Defendant has affirmatively answered the two-prong analysis as outlined in Hamdan and Fisher and thus grants the Defendant’s motion to dismiss.”



This is a giant step forward in the battle for Right-to-Carry in Wisconsin. This court ruling will likely lead to future citizens exercising their right to self-defense by carrying concealed firearms. Unfortunately this will likely lead to subsequent prosecutions, but this circuit court ruling will become a perfect example of law-abiding citizens' need for concealed firearms for protection against crime, especially in high crime areas such as Milwaukee

[usmarine0352_2005]

This is good.

[Noxx]

That guy really needs a new job.

[Gunnerpalace]

Kudos to the Wisconsin Courts.

[Strings]

So... the next step in this prong of the assualt is average Joe Citizen, who doesn't have the "dangerous job" tag... right?

[ServiceSoon]

That guy really needs a new job.

Uh, ya!

[Standing Wolf]

That guy really needs a new job.

Yes, he needs a new job, but a.) his job is his choice, and b.) the state of Wisconsin is far more dangerous than his job: criminals assault and kill us a few at a time, whereas government destroys our civil rights and entire culture at the stroke of a pen.

No one should ever require government permission to defend his or her life.

[Neo-Luddite]

Wow. I didn't know anyone was that dedicated to the job of pizza delivery!

I bet the state doesn't appeal either--too much negative publicity. I wonder if the judge returned his weapon?

[ID_shooting]

"Yes, he needs a new job"

I don't think he needs a new job. He obviously like his job. It mush bring him some form of satisfaction. I would rather have a guy, who has demostrated his skill to defend himself drive than the kid who has no clue they would hire in his place.

I know there is a camp that says it is better to work a safe job than one where you have a risk. I say it is up to the person. After all, if we all went this route, there would be no one in the military or LEO. Some of us will do the dirty work and not be to phased by it.

Ultimately it is up to you as an individual, but I aplaud the guys tenacity at least.

[Gene_WI]

So what are the chances of a WI supreme court appeal on this one.

[glummer]

And did he get his gun back??

[romma]

If this guy needs a new job, it's lobbying for the rights of Wiscosonites to carry legally!


Long Live Andres Vegas!! Go Wisconson!

[ozwyn]

yes he needs a new job, but a lot of gun owners are happier he kept his job and chose to exercise his rights.

keep up the good work Andres

[S.P.E.C.T.R.E.]

What boggles the mind is the prosecution's obvious preference that Vegas die than carry a gun for his own defense. But that sums up the anti-gun crowd's whole mindset doesn't it?

[ArmedBear]

Someone will deliver pizzas. If he quits, someone will take his place.

If not him, then the next person will get assaulted. Might as well be him. He knows what to do.

[TallPine]

So you only have a right to CCW after a violent crime is committed against you ???

[Oldskoolfan]

Well now you can carry and if your life is threatened you have an affirmative defense. Is this correct?

[Dave Workman]

The Second Amendment Foundation weighed in on this ruling:

http://www.saf.org/viewpr-new.asp?id=242

SAF SAYS MILWAUKEE JUDGE UNDERSTANDS STATE CONSTITUTION BETTER THAN DOYLE

BELLEVUE, WA – Milwaukee County, WI Circuit Judge Daniel A. Noonan understands the Wisconsin Constitution far better than Gov. Jim Doyle and the Legislature’s Democrat majority, the Second Amendment Foundation said today.

Judge Noonan nullified charges Monday against a Milwaukee pizza delivery man who had been accused of shooting two would-be robbers, ruling that a state law prohibiting concealed carry – at least as it applies to the case against Andres Vegas – is unconstitutional. Article 1, Section 25 of the Wisconsin State Constitution affirms that “The people have the right to keep and bear arms for security, defense, hunting, recreation or any other lawful purpose.”

“Anti-gun Gov. Jim Doyle and his cronies in the Legislature should take a lesson from the Vargas case and stop interfering with the civil rights of their constituents,” said SAF founder Alan Gottlieb. “Twice in the past five years, Doyle has blocked sensible concealed carry legislation. Evidently he would rather see hard-working citizens like Vargas be robbed, and perhaps worse, than have the ability to defend themselves against a criminal element that has been emboldened by Doyle’s disarmament policies.”

Gottlieb said Judge Noonan’s ruling, although it only applies to the Vegas case, should serve as a catalyst for passage of a state concealed carry law. He said the judge clearly recognized the right of a citizen like Mr. Vegas to defend himself, and how the state’s concealed carry prohibition impairs that right and the right to keep and bear arms under the state constitution.

“Wisconsin is an open carry state, as affirmed in the case of State v Hamdan,” Gottlieb noted, “and even Gov. Doyle seemed to recognize this in March 2006 when he told a Lake Delton crowd that ‘If you want to carry a gun in Wisconsin, wear it on your hip.’ Perhaps Wisconsinites ought to take Doyle’s advice. Remember when Ohio citizens did the same thing? The Ohio Legislature passed a concealed carry law in record time, and then at the next election, citizens elected a new governor. Perhaps there’s a lesson in the Ohio experience.

“Bouquets to the judge,” Gottlieb observed, “but brickbats to the governor.”

[Monkeyleg]

Gene_WI, this won't go to the SC. This is where the case stops.

I was really hoping this case would go all the way. I'm not sure why the attorney made a motion to dismiss charges. The attorneys from the NRA are looking at this case to see if it has ramifications beyond Vegas himself.

"Well now you can carry and if your life is threatened you have an affirmative defense. Is this correct?"

True to some extent, but depends upon the individual situation. Plus, if you get caught before you're threatened, you're guilty.

[alan]

Perhaps the DA should be made to "walk a mile" in the drivers shoes, without his armed body guards, that is.

[cracked butt]

What boggles the mind is the prosecution's obvious preference that Vegas die than carry a gun for his own defense. But that sums up the anti-gun crowd's whole mindset doesn't it?

Absolutely. The DA is an overt anti-gunner. What better statistic in his little mind than for an unarmed sheeple to be gunned down by a criminal?

Perhaps the DA should be made to "walk a mile" in the drivers shoes, without his armed body guards, that is.

I would just settle for him to simply drive a mile down some of the roads my wife and I take to work everyday. He'd crap his liberal whitebread panties.

[Strings]

I mentioned this on another forum, but what about filing a class-action suit against the state for unequal protection under the law?

The way things stand now, there's a disparity between folks like Mr Vegas and myself in the eyes of the law. I thought we were all supposed to be equal?

[usmarine0352_2005]

So you only have a right to CCW after a violent crime is committed against you ???

Yes. In WI at least.

And if you get killed.....too bad.

[Monkeyleg]

"The way things stand now, there's a disparity between folks like Mr Vegas and myself in the eyes of the law. I thought we were all supposed to be equal?"

No, Vegas can still be arrested for CCW. But he can use this dismissal as a defense.

I talked to Vegas' attorney an hour ago, and he had some interesting things to say, but asked that they not be made public.

The DA's office is not going to appeal, which suggests that the DA knows a supreme court review of this case might overturn the entire state statute.

I wish this case had gone further.

[Crunker1337]

Maybe there is hope after all.

I hope this case will be used as something of a landmark ruling in the case of the RKBA. With this and the DC case on the books, the antis have their work cut out for them; but so do we.

Americans have won a major battle here, but the war isn't over.