Sigh. Maybe it [i]is[/i]time to leave Wisconsin

Status
Not open for further replies.
Everyone I know from Wisconsin has nothign good to say about the guy. My Illinois friends got better things to say about Daley and the governor.

Pretty glad you guys lost the UP to us.
 
In the national legislature it's even harder, requiring a 3/4 majority to override a veto
Click to expand...
Umm... unless someone changed Article I, Seciton 7, it's still a 2/3 majority to override a veto:

Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States; If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law.
Click to expand...
 
Just remember, no matter how bad it is in Wisconsin, you don't have Chicago polluting your state like we do in Illinois. I look forward to the day when I can move just across the Indiana border.
 
Come on over Samuraigg the waters fine and the handgun laws are much better:D. In fact Indiana now has lifetime license to carry:evil:.
 
Hasn't that bozo also killed CCW laws ....like more than once???

Why on earth does he want to be just like the fibbies
 
Obiwan, Doyle has vetoed our CCW bill twice. Then he rubs our noses in the dirt by publicly saying that there's a legal way to carry a weapon (while patting his hip). He's saying that open carry is legal in Wisconsin, which is true. But, in fact, carrying openly will result in an arrest for disorderly conduct or disturbing the peace, and Doyle knows that full well.

The man is completely corrupt, and so devoid of redeeming qualities that even many members of his own party hate him. He rules by fear.

We'll get CCW here in Wisconsin. But it will probably have to wait until Doyle leaves office. However, we have an excellent case challenging the constitutionality of the ban on concealed carry that's winding its way through the court system. It should hit the state supreme court. If so, WI could become another Vermont.
 
"For instance, I can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater ..."

Incredibly stupid analogy.

Of course you can yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater. But there are legal consequences if you do so.

That said, just be cause you have the "equipment" to shout "Fire!," the theater owner does not stand outside and cut out your tongue before you enter in order to PREVENT you from crying "Fire!" in his crowded theater. If so, he could certainly remove the means all people have to irresponsibly cry "Fire!" in his crowded theater.

But the gun grabbers seek legal means to take away from you/us the object with which you/I MIGHT act irresponsibly, before the fact.

That is the ridiculousness of their "shouting Fire! in a crowded theater" argument. Doesn't wash.

L.W.
 
If so, WI could become another Vermont.
Click to expand...

That'd be nice. We'll need to have the "disorderly conduct" legislation adjusted a bit though. Right now it's based upon the opinion of someone objecting, right or wrong, at least that is how it seems to be applied from my understanding. If we go the way of Vermont all it will take is for someone to "think" you have a gun due to seeing you do a wallet tap.

Then factor in the issues the Milwaukee P.D. is having and it's going to get real interesting as application of the facts of reality take hold.

I'd hate to have to add another state to the list of "don't live there" places.

edit: how does reciprocity work for Vermont people when they travel since they don't get permission cards for CC ? Guess I'll have to go look that up later.
 
Last edited:
Monkeyleg said:
It should hit the state supreme court. If so, WI could become another Vermont.
Click to expand...

What is the case about CCW that you expect to hit the supreme court (I assume you mean the Wisconsin supreme court)? I ask because I've been assuming that CCW is not a protected activity under RKBA provisions. What argument are they making to claim that it is?

BTW, WI just had a case where a man now has the constitutionally-protected right to a CCW. But the situation had to become quite extreme before the courts granted him his CCW.

Read about it here:

http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=3242

So now WI has at least one civilian CCW. Which, I believe, is one more than they've ever had before.

Hey, that's progress. :)

Here's the text of the linked-to article, just for posterity's sake:

Wisconsin Circuit Court Sides With Gun Owners! Monday, September 24, 2007 Today, Monday, September 24, 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.
Click to expand...
 
The charges were dismissed, he was not granted CCW status. And according to a post someone made in a different thread the person in question might have changed job locations to a different community, which to me implies his circumstances might have changed enough to get him prosecuted should something like this happen again to him.
 
Please join the NRA today. The ANTI's would pay twice as much to stop you yet you walk away & let them do it for nothing!

I live in NYC but I still "chose" to become a NRA LIFE MEMBER. As well as a NRA Recruiter in NYC no less!

$25 dollars gets you one year at $10 below the basic rate providing us with PRO RKBA support. Just $20 for LEO's.

Please utilize the provided links below as they will provide you with the discounted rate. I apologize for preaching to the choir but a hard head makes a soft behind!

Thank you for your continued support.

LEO's can access their link from my site menu at the 1st link below for Small Armz

All others can access it from my site or directly from the 2nd link below.
__________________
 
Bulgron, our RKBA amendment to the state constitution reads, "The people have the right to keep and bear arms for security, defense, hunting, recreation, or any other lawful purpose."

The Vegas case was the one I was talking about. If it had made it to the SC (I think that Doyle & Co made sure it didn't), we might have seen the entire statute banning concealed carry thrown out. The justices on the court are fed up with hearing one concealed carry case after another, and the legislature not passing a CCW bill.

As for Vegas having a "permit" to carry now that his case has been dismissed, that's not true. He can be arrested again, and he'll have to either accept a plea bargain or go to court again.

Strings, I guess we just keep trying to come up with new ideas. Or we just say the law is crazy. ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top