WI: 'Open-carry' becoming central gun-rights issue

[damien]

http://www.lakelandtimes.com/main.asp?SectionID=9&SubSectionID=9&ArticleID=8970

There is strength in numbers. If this is defacto legal, why not organize some open carry marches including a couple of guys with video recorders and a journalist or two and publicize this?

'Open-carry' becoming central gun-rights issue

For most of this decade, the most contentious gun issue in Wisconsin has been that of concealed carry, or the legal sanction to carry a firearm in public in a hidden manner, either on the body or in close proximity.

But this year that affair may take a backseat to a rapidly intensifying debate about the legality of open carry, or the act of publicly carrying a firearm in plain view.

Ostensibly, Wisconsin is an open-carry state, meaning there is no law against a law-abiding citizen openly carrying a legal firearm. Theoretically, at least, one could strap on a holster and pistol and go buy groceries, or plant trees in one's own yard, whether or not such an action might be wise.

Indeed, Wisconsin remains one of only two states in the nation not to allow some form of concealed carry, and one of the most-repeated arguments used by concealed-carry opponents is that it is not necessary because citizens can openly carry their guns.

Then attorney general Jim Doyle used that precise argument before the state Supreme Court in Wisconsin v Hamdan, in which the state carved out a concealed weapon exemption for small business owners.

As governor, Doyle reportedly reiterated his belief at a Lake Delton press conference, in which The Wisconsin Dells Events quoted him as saying, "If you want to carry a gun in Wisconsin, wear it on your hip."

Then again, maybe not, if the attitudes of other state officials, not to mention more than a few police actions, are any indication.

Doyle's proclamation notwithstanding, others in his administration take a wary view of wearing a gun openly on the hip, and their message is, if you do it, you're inviting trouble.

For example, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources hunter education administrator Timothy Lawhern wrote last year that openly carrying a gun would likely provoke an unsympathetic and severe response from law enforcement officers.

"Note that the officer on the street doesn't expect to see firearms openly exposed," Lawhern wrote in the April 2008 issue of the Wisconsin Hunter Education newsletter. "In most cases when they do see a firearm, they draw theirs and tell the person 'Let me see your hands! Don't move!' In some cases they yell, 'Put the gun down,' or 'Drop the gun!'"

... (long article)

 

[Treo]

Maybe not a march , but you could get a bunch of OCers and go out to eat ( I'm talking like 100 people filling up a restaraunt) or have a BBG at a local park

 

[Kind of Blued]

I'd be all for an open-carry outing. Wish I was close enough to contribute to it.

Doyle's proclamation notwithstanding, others in his administration take a wary view of wearing a gun openly on the hip, and their message is, if you do it, you're inviting trouble.

That's clearly a threat. Not only that, it's a threat from an appointed official that if you do something legal, governmental employees are so poorly trained that their likely reaction will be illegal. Perhaps he should worry about those who are in the wrong instead of those who are "stupidly" considering exercising their Constitutional rights.

It almost seems as if we need to elect rich, pro-gun fellas with lots of time on their hands to do things for us, whether that be openly-carry, get arrested, and "make an example of" the police misconduct, or to push something as far as it can go, a la Dick Heller.

Nevertheless, these scare tactics are disgusting, borderline illegal, and need to be expelled in some form or another.

 

[Lightninstrike]

There was another thread in the last few weeks about a similar idea, a recreation of the million man march. Some of the concerns expressed there are probably valid here. Very easy for anti-gun elements to infiltrate the event and use the media to spread negativity about pro 2A people.

 

[SuperNaut]

For example, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources hunter education administrator Timothy Lawhern wrote last year that openly carrying a gun would likely provoke an unsympathetic and severe response from law enforcement officers.

"Note that the officer on the street doesn't expect to see firearms openly exposed," Lawhern wrote in the April 2008 issue of the Wisconsin Hunter Education newsletter. "In most cases when they do see a firearm, they draw theirs and tell the person 'Let me see your hands! Don't move!' In some cases they yell, 'Put the gun down,' or 'Drop the gun!'"

Really? We have LEO's here, is that the appropriate and most frequent response to open carry?

 

[Flame Red]

I am really looking for OC here in Florida.

 

[Strings]

*sigh*

Couple things.

First off, IIRC, Doyle was already governor during the Hamden case. NOT AG. And had recently vetoed a concealed carry bill.

Second: any kind of "open carry march" is gonna be doomed, because there will always be a couple folks who show up with a "non-respectable" appearance. And THOSE are the folks that will get air time. Had that happen at all the concealed carry rallys: the press went for the bug-spattered bikers, the "hayseeds", and the "militia men". And ignored the couple hundred others in suits.

Third: this gets brought up every so often, as a way for pushing CCW: "Let's stage an open-carry march. Worked in Ohio!". But (as has been explained MANY times), this is "a bell that can only be rung once". It has to be staged at EXACTLY the right time. Given the current political climate in WI, you can forget any form of CCW passing into law. Which would make such a march an empty gesture...

Last: go ahead and open carry (I do, quite often). But be prepared for the hassle, and be willing to defend your rights in court...

 

[Matt-J2]

There's another article relating to the DNR fellow in this week's Wisconsin Outdoor News. IIRC, a Hunter Ed instructor was fired/forced to resign over telling folks they had legal rights to open carry, they didn't have to give up their gun, rights pertaining to private property and police/wardens, etc. Not only did they get rid of the instructor, they sent letters to all his students from the past 14 years or so telling them he was wrong, stating the things mentioned in the OP to be true, etc.


I don't have it to hand, but it was troubling. I may have to go back and pick it up tomorrow to make sure I've got the info straight.

 

[sourdough44]

I've read the article in WI Outdoor news, very lengthy one too. I don't see CCW coming to WI anytime soon. The few times I have had contact with a CO out in the field I have never had a problem unloading my gun & setting it down. I was never asked to do it. I agree each situation can be different.

 

[Leanwolf]

Something I've been curious about regarding open carrying of a handgun... in cold climates.

Given that in warm weather, it's fairly easy when wearing a pair of jeans or short pants and tee shirt, or a dressier short sleeved shirt and slacks, etc., to just "strap up."

But in cold weather, when most all of us wear a heavy jacket, parka, or top coat outside, etc., etc., how do you "open carry?"

If you still carry the handgun around your waist, the jacket/parka/coat, etc., then covers the gun and it becomes "concealed."

If you strap on your gun/cartridge belt and holstered handgun OVER your heavy coat, etc., seems to me that would be really awkward and uncomfortable. (???)

Open carry is legal here in Idaho, as is Shall Issue CCW, but I can not recall seeing anyone wearing a gun belt and handgun over a coat in cold weather.

Don't get me wrong here. I could not care less if someone carries openly or concealed. But I've wondered often about "open carry" when wearing heavy outer jackets, parkas, and coats.

L.W.

 

[Monkeyleg]

We've had a couple of cases in Milwaukee county involving open carry.

In one a Hispanic man from a fairly well-to-do family was OC'ing for a couple of weeks before a Walmart manager complained. He was arrested in the parking lot, but after he had already unloaded his pistol and put it in a case.

The last I heard, the DA still didn't know what to do with his case, and was stalling.

The other instance involved a man carrying in his yard all day while planting trees. The odd part about this is that he had a recorder on all day, so he was able to record his interaction with the police. I don't think he's going to beat the charges on this one.

Get outside of the bigger towns, though, and things are different. There's a guy who lives in a town near Green Bay who's a Class III dealer. He was carrying openly and was approached by two deputies. He asked them to call the DA, and the DA told the deputies to leave him alone.

It's a weird state.

 

[roscoe]

The other instance involved a man carrying in his yard all day while planting trees. The odd part about this is that he had a recorder on all day, so he was able to record his interaction with the police. I don't think he's going to beat the charges on this one.

Why?

 

[Monkeyleg]

Just a gut feeling. The fact that he wore a recorder all day is hinky, and I suspect the DA may feel that way.

To be honest, though, I haven't kept track of either of these cases for a couple of months, so circumstances may have changed.

 

[Matt-J2]

That would be the man in West Allis mentioned in the OP.

 

[Strings]

I've read some reports from people who were present during the original court date on the guy in 'Stallis. Judge sounded like he wanted to rule in the guys favor, but the DA dropped a brief in the judge's lap at the last second, causing a continuence.

They do NOT want to find him guilty: would open a whole can of worms, and would start one hell of a game of "legal Russian roulette". If OC is found to be de facto illegal, then our state RKBA amendment becomes useless: would make a HUGE opening for CCW...

 

[Dienekes]

This is one of those issues that asking "why?" five times to get to the bottom of it would probably rile the hell out of the other party. Which is a pretty good way to establish whether or not the idea was ever a sound one in the first place.

Be that as it may--I can make a pretty good case for CCW under just about all circumstances, and have done some things to promote it. Not so for open carry.

 

[t3rmin]

Rule of law?

Treating a legal activity/state like that is like saying:

"Note that the officer on the street doesn't expect to see racial minorities walking around," Lawhern wrote in the April 2008 issue of the Wisconsin Hunter Education newsletter. "In most cases when they do see a black man, they draw their gun and tell the person 'Let me see your hands! Don't move!'"

or

"Note that the officer on the street doesn't expect to see clowns," Lawhern wrote in the April 2008 issue of the Wisconsin Hunter Education newsletter. "In most cases when they do see a clown, they draw their gun and tell the person 'Let me see your hands! Don't move!'"

Unthinking prejudicial tyrants.

 

[Monkeyleg]

Strings, there's a pattern here.

The Andres Vegas case made it to Milwaukee County Circuit Court, where the judge ruled that Vegas had a constitutional need for security that overrode the state's interest in prohibiting concealed carry. Everybody--especially the NRA Legal Defense Fund--expected the case to go further.

The case involving the Hispanic guy I was talking about got stalled in the Milwaukee DA's office, and last I heard it hadn't moved.

Now you're saying that West Allis is dragging its feet in the Krause case.

Seems like some people in the judicial system don't want cases to get to the appeals court level for fear those cases could go to the state supreme court, or further.

 

[Strings]

That's my feeling on it, Dick.

I'll be honest: when I OC, I have a recorder on me. That's just CYA: you can easily play the recording in court, showing that you really weren't doing anything wrong. Nothing "hinky" there.

I'm guessing that TBTB realize that allowing OC, is bad, but don't want to get their privates nailed to the wall when it cmes out that banning it creates a mandate for CC...