Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Wis Police threatens lawful citizenry ?

Discussion in 'Legal' started by bg, Aug 9, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. bg

    bg Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2003
    Messages:
    903
    Location:
    When you find out, let me know..
    Wonder what this LEO means by more "AGGRESSIVE POLICING" should
    this CCW bill get passed and signed..?
    http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/news/archive/local_22121330.shtml
     
  2. meathammer

    meathammer Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2003
    Messages:
    502
    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    Translation: "We will harass lawful citizens who choose to carry."

    :barf:

    If not, my apologies to Police Chief Myers.

    --meathammer
     
  3. R.H. Lee

    R.H. Lee Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2004
    Messages:
    7,377
    Location:
    CA
    If you were more aggressive getting criminals off the street, chief, maybe ccw wouldn't be as necessary.
     
  4. Sindawe

    Sindawe Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    3,480
    Location:
    Outside The People's Republic of Boulder, CO
    At best: Increased scrutiny of people who are stopped, for what ever reason, that have a CCW. Looking for any minor infraction or perceived infraction to issue a citation or even make an arrest.

    At worst: Blanket arrest of anybody with gun, CCW or not. "Let the courts figure it out."

    Note that the issue of "Officer Safety" is trotted out once again. :barf: Also take note of what Green Bay Police Chief Craig Van Schyndle's ally has said:
    Reasonable = further infringement of the 2nd Amendment.
     
  5. Gordon Fink

    Gordon Fink Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2003
    Messages:
    2,322
    Location:
    California
    Idiots. Of course, they would forget all about it within a few months of a shall-issue law going into effect … when the rivers of blood failed to flow through the streets.

    ~G. Fink
     
  6. Mongo the Mutterer

    Mongo the Mutterer Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2005
    Messages:
    1,242
    Location:
    St. Louis
    Hey Chief, maybe we'll see a more agressive style of elections... to get rid of storm troopers like you ... :evil:

    The statistics are out there for shall issue states -- why don't the elitists read them?

    Answer: because they don't care and are socialist nannystaters, that's why...
     
  7. jrpeterman

    jrpeterman Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2003
    Messages:
    173
    With the extensive background checks required for CCW applicants, the chief is barking up the wrong tree. I would think that aggressive policing would be more suitable towards armed criminals who have no regard for the law. Maybe, the chief should spend a little more time on the street in the real world and a little less time behind the desk.
     
    Last edited: Aug 10, 2005
  8. El Tejon

    El Tejon Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    18,083
    Location:
    Lafayette, Indiana-the Ned Flanders neighbor to Il
    I suggest the Wisconsin taxpayers aggressively defund Chief Wiggum's department. :)
     
  9. Monkeyleg

    Monkeyleg Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    5,058
    Location:
    Decatur, AL
    The city of Green Bay is pretty much Democrat. The state senator for the area, who in the past has voted pro-gun, voted against concealed carry.

    I find it really interesting that Jeri Bonavia is getting started this early, but have no idea why she's doing so.

    I've heard rumors that some pro-gun Democrats are asking the governor to find a face-saving way to not veto the bill, because they're afraid of getting hurt in the re-election bids next year. Maybe there's more to that than just a rumor.

    Sigh...I guess this means we're going to have to get to work before the end of summer.
     
  10. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,041
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    Does this mean the streets are going to run with blood? Every fender bender will turn into a shoot-out? All the usual hysterical warnings?

    Wisconsin's a beautiful state, but it's going to have to do without my vacation dollars.
     
  11. Monkeyleg

    Monkeyleg Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    5,058
    Location:
    Decatur, AL
    OK, fellow Cheeseheads. I just sent off a letter to the editor.

    Take a few minutes and do the same. Let's bombard them.
     
  12. beerslurpy

    beerslurpy member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    4,438
    Location:
    Spring Hill, Florida
    I miss the good old days when Officer Safety meant what it literally means, instead of being a weak excuse for whatever authortarian game someone wishes to play with people's lives this week. Its not a good direction to take this country, both for egalitarian reasons and for what history teaches us of such societies.

    In a police State, the Police Officer is an embodiment of the power, authority and will of the state, so making him sacrosanct is of the utmost importance. Finding men who will competently carry out your orders is not easy. Replacing them is even harder. Thats why we punish "cop-killers" so harshly, assuming they even survive to trial.

    The sad part is that it only takes a nation of sheep to turn a healthy democracy into a police state. Remember that Hitler formed his totalitarian government legally after being democratically elected. It was only necessary for him to hide the worst of his regime and smear dissenters as unpatriotic- and the german people went along with it. I guess if you arent being targeted at the moment it is all good.

    To quote an LEO from the dynamic entry thread: "If you dont do anything illegal you dont have to worry about SWAT kicking your door in." What happens when the definition of illegality finally does include you? If somethign as harmless as posessing marijuana can get your door kicked in, what is really off limits?
     
  13. CARRY'IN

    CARRY'IN member

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2005
    Messages:
    233
    Location:
    San Francisco Bay area
    Nothing like someone with a gun telling you he can have one but you cant.
     
  14. beerslurpy

    beerslurpy member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2004
    Messages:
    4,438
    Location:
    Spring Hill, Florida
    Sorry, I guess the nanny-state nonsense just pisses me off a lot.

    The problem is that neither party seems to share my views, even partly. The Democrats and Republicans both want to do away with liberty, they disagree on which freedoms have to go.
     
  15. Tropical Z

    Tropical Z Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2003
    Messages:
    1,552
    Location:
    The path less chosen...
    That Chief's a real A**!
     
  16. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    24,041
    Location:
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    Well said!
     
  17. AZRickD

    AZRickD Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2003
    Messages:
    1,684
    My reply to the comment section and to the writer...
     
  18. chaim

    chaim Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    3,312
    Location:
    Baltimore, MD
    I'm not sure about that. Sometimes I think they only disagree about what order in which to remove them.
     
  19. GregGry

    GregGry Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2005
    Messages:
    994
    Location:
    Milwaukee, Wi
    I have a couple of comments on what was said in that article:

    Although that might be somewhat true, its not about making the police safer, its about protecting yourself. I don't know about you guys (and girls) but I want to be able to protect myself. I decided to go into law enforcement to protect others, especially thoes who can't protect themselves. I want the people in society to be able to protect themselves as best as they can, and if it takes a firearm to do it, so be it. I wish that I didn't have to lock my house and car, but dishonest people will take advantage of my trusting nature if I kept everything unlocked. I wish that guns weren't needed to protect oneself (Guns would still have to exist for hunting and normal gun hobbiest activities :D) but in this day and age, firearms are needed to keep you and your loved ones safe.

    I feel secure in not going armed in public, that has a lot to do with the fact I am a big guy. The thing is however, I can't CCW in Wisconsin. If CCW existed I would carry, there is no doubt in my mind. It would make me feel even safer then I feel already, not to mention I could protect the lives of other people as well. Granted when I become a cop I wont have to worry about the CCW issue regardless of if CCW law is passed. I wont forget about the good citizens however, because after all, I am one of the people. Its not right that police are the only ones that can carry in public, I feel that every honest law abiding human should be able to carry, period. If you choose not to carry fine, if you choose to carry great.

    Although I admit, there is no practical use for a .50bmg, I don't feel that it should be restricted to law abiding people. The same thing goes for other rifles as well. I do feel that there should be restrictions on who can buy them (Pretty much same as for a normal rifle). I don't see why a law abiding citizen should not be able to own one, after all if they are law abiding, there is nothing to fear. If I can legally own a 2,000 hp street car, (which is obviously quite excessive and could easily be very dangerous) then the .50bmg and other firearms like full autos should be legal to. Guns are to men, what Gi joes are to boys, they are fun things to play with. If your not hurting anyone with your "toys" then whats the big deal. I mean when is the last time someone used a .50bmg in a crime, or even a full auto gun? Whats the harm in firing a .50bmg at the range, versus a .22 pistol?


    Having law abiding citizens that are carrying is not a safety risk in my opinion. Criminals in my area rarely buy legit guns, the only people that are affected by not having a ccw is the honest people.

    I am going into law enforcement in Wisconsin, and I back the introduction of CCW 100%. As a cop I rather have 1,000 good guys armed and on the streets, then no good guys packing. Although more guns on the street could equal more gunfights, the fact that there are more gunfights doesn't mean that any of them weren't justified.

    One last thing I find appalling
    Ok so they are saying that when the honest people take it upon themselves to protect their lives legally (if ccw was passed) they will be hassled because of their (totally legal) choice to do so. I am sorry, but that is a bunch of garbage. I don't fear CCW holders, I fear the idiot crack head that stole his firearm, and will shoot me rather then going to jail.

    I mean come on, to get a gun, and get a CCW its safe to say you have to take & pass a class, pass a back round check, and numerous other security measures. Your average crack head doesn't have to pass any tests, deal with a back round test, let alone even pay for his firearm (theft). Why people fear CCW holders is beyond me, they should be afraid of the criminals. Its safe to say that most criminals will be weeded out in that process of getting a CCW. If a persons record is clean, then big deal, let them buy whatever they want. Now if a person without a criminal back round commits a crime with weapons they bought, they should be treated as a criminal, and loose their rights to own firearms. Things like that will happen, but I know that most people who CCW are decent law abiding folks. The government really needs to stop making the good people suffer, and actually attempt to deal with the problem people (aka criminals).
     
  20. stevelyn

    stevelyn Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2003
    Messages:
    3,290
    Location:
    Fairbanksan in Aleutian Hell
    Sounds like the threat of harrassment under the color of law to me. :scrutiny:

    Either that or the Sturmgruppen fuhrer......excuse me......police chief is gonna call out the goon.....er SWAT everytime an officer pulls over a motorist with a valid CHL whether they're carrying or not.

    This chief obviously dosen't agree with the prospect of lawful right-to-carry and is telegraphing his intentions of harrassing lawful permit holders in protest if the bill is signed into law.

    The only way to deal with his type is to sue him and the jurisdiction into oblivion after they exhibit several incidents of using heavy handed tactics against valid CHL holders.
     
  21. gunsmith

    gunsmith member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2003
    Messages:
    5,906
    Location:
    Reno, Nevada
    Gregry!

    well they scare liberal politicians so there must be something
    they are good for! :evil:
    Somebody needs to make a real cheap version so I can buy one.

    Why is it that so many "Chief of police" types are complete morons?
     
  22. Art Eatman

    Art Eatman Administrator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2002
    Messages:
    42,991
    Location:
    Terlingua, TX; Thomasville,GA
    The more important point that's missed by both the police chief and those reporting the news or writing editorials is that of the experience in other states where carry-laws are relatively new. To wit, Florida and Texas.

    The laws have been in place long enough for reasonable conclusions to be drawn--and they have. Both states' law enforcement agencies have issued positive press releases pointing out the absence of problems with people having the concealed carry permits.

    It's sad the chief won't look outside his own parochial little world to see what's happened--or not happened--elsewhere.

    Art
     
  23. TheEgg

    TheEgg Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    1,363
    Like maybe if you have a search warrant to serve on someone that has a CCW, you call in SWAT at 5:00am, bust down the door, and shoot anyone that "looks" like they might have a gun? Because the guy smoked a little weed on the side?

    Naw, that couldn't happen. Could it?
     
  24. 308win

    308win Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Messages:
    2,918
    Location:
    Ohio - The Heart of it All
    OK, I like the term, what does it mean? I tried Googling it and got a couple of hits but couldn't find the term in context.
    ETA: Not in Wikipedia either
     
  25. scottgun

    scottgun Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    575
    Location:
    CO
    The government creating laws for your own protection for the common good.

    At least thats my take on it. This would be opposed to the principles of individual freedoms and responsibility and accepting the consequences for your own actions.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page