Index  •  FAQ  •  Search  

It is currently Mon Apr 29, 2024 7:39 pm

This is a static archive the Twin Cities Carry forum, maintained as a public service by the current forum of record, The Minnesota Carry Forum.

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 5 posts ] 
 Bearing arms: Gun memo may reopen concealed controversy 
Author Message
 Post subject: Bearing arms: Gun memo may reopen concealed controversy
PostPosted: Mon Apr 27, 2009 4:24 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 12:53 am
Posts: 725
Location: New Ulm area
http://www.kenoshanews.com/news/bear...y_4827061.html

Bearing arms: Gun memo may reopen concealed controversy
BY JOE POTENTE
jpotente@kenoshanews.com

Kenosha-area lawmakers are lining up behind a recent legal opinion confirming the legality of toting unconcealed firearms in public places.

Some even say it could be an entrée to revisit the controversial issue of concealed carry in Wisconsin, though the current political winds in Madison would make that prospect appear unlikely.

State Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen last week issued a memo citing constitutional grounds allowing for the open carrying of firearms, so long as it is done without disturbing the peace and within specified restrictions, such as not taking a gun into a school.

Some have questioned whether that is possible in many settings, particularly in urban areas. Milwaukee authorities have said Van Hollen’s memo will not change the manner in which their officers approach people with guns.

Sen. Robert Wirch, D-Pleasant Prairie, criticized the timing of Van Hollen’s opinion, but he was not about to argue with the content.

“I think the timing was poor, bringing it out right when the 10th anniversary of Columbine was out there,” Wirch said. “But I think that he’s on pretty solid legal grounds with this.”

Wirch said a 2008 U.S. Supreme Court decision overturning a Washington, D.C., handgun ban, coupled with a 1998 state constitutional amendment that affirmed the right to bear arms in Wisconsin, strengthen Van Hollen’s position. Wirch noted that voters approved the amendment in a statewide referendum.

Enter concealed carry, which has generated controversy in the state Capitol for years.

Wisconsin and Illinois are presently the only two states in the nation that do not allow for some sort of concealed carrying of firearms. The Legislature has twice passed concealed carry bills in recent years, only to see them fall to Gov. Jim Doyle’s vetoes.

“I’m hopeful that perhaps this advisory note will be a catalyst to move the Legislature back to the table to debate this issue and to consider finalizing some laws, in regard to concealed carry,” Sen. Neal Kedzie, R-Elkhorn, said Thursday.

Kedzie said he believes enacting such a law would help put to rest confusion over open carry. Reps. Thomas Lothian, R-Williams Bay, and John Steinbrink, D-Pleasant Prairie, agreed.

“We’ve always been looking for a clean definition of conceal and carry,” Steinbrink said. “We were almost there, and then people started playing games with it, and law enforcement then started having concerns.”

The concealed carry bill that the state considered most recently, in 2006, would have enacted a series of licensing requirements for those who wished to carry a weapon.

Steinbrink found himself in the crosshairs on that issue. After being one of just six Assembly Democrats to support the bill, Steinbrink later reversed course in an unsuccessful GOP-led attempt to override a Doyle veto.

Three years ago, Republicans — typically more inclined toward concealed carry — controlled both houses of the Legislature. Now they control neither.

Kedzie conceded now is not likely the time that a bill could pass. But he said he believes it is inevitable that Wisconsin will one day adopt concealed carry.

In the meantime, Wirch said he is comfortable with the current law that Van Hollen believes allows for open carry.

“If there were problems that came up, I would be willing to look at solutions to those problems,” Wirch said. “But I’m not going to sit here and be hypothetical, if it hasn’t happened.”

Rep. Samantha Kerkman, R-Randall, said she feared the potential repercussions of rolling back open carry. Banning open carry could lead to banning hunting, she said.

“There are a lot of people who responsibly use firearms,” Kerkman said. “We don’t want to prohibit that, but we obviously have to be mindful of people who can be alarmed in certain situations.”

Rep. Peter Barca, D-Kenosha, said he was still digesting Van Hollen’s report, seeking local and state law enforcement agencies’ reactions.

Barca said the opinion caught him by surprise.

“It’s not like we expected him to come out with something and were waiting for it,” Barca said. “It’s just like, all of a sudden, you wake up one morning and look at the paper and say, ‘Now, what is this?’”

_________________
The only downfall to a 1911A1, is actually a plus: You can have it your way, and can put an unreal amount of money into em'.

Squeeze trigger, BANG, repeat. Kind of boring, but I never cared for drama.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 27, 2009 8:13 pm 
Longtime Regular

Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 4:00 pm
Posts: 1064
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Does the WI Constitution only cover WI residents or does it also cover MN folks traveling through WI?


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Apr 27, 2009 8:39 pm 
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2005 8:36 pm
Posts: 144
I would think it applies to all...

http://www.legis.state.wi.us/rsb/unanno ... sconst.pdf

From Article 1 of the state constitution:

Quote:
Equality; inherent rights. SECTION 1. [As amended Nov.
1982 and April 1986] All people are born equally free and independent,
and have certain inherent rights; among these are life,
liberty and the pursuit of happiness;
to secure these rights, governments
are instituted, deriving their just powers from the consent
of the governed. [1979 J.R. 36, 1981 J.R. 29, vote Nov.
1982; 1983 J.R. 40, 1985 J.R. 21, vote April 1986]

_________________
Midwest Marksman
Wisconsin Shooters (USPSA, 3-Gun, IDPA)
MADFI Certified Instructor (#60)


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bearing arms: Gun memo may reopen concealed controversy
PostPosted: Tue Apr 28, 2009 8:29 am 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:54 am
Posts: 5270
Location: Minneapolis
Quote:
“I think the timing was poor, bringing it out right when the 10th anniversary of Columbine was out there,” Wirch said.

My memory is a little foggy, which of the Columbine killers had carry permits?

_________________
I am defending myself... in favor of that!


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Bearing arms: Gun memo may reopen concealed controversy
PostPosted: Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:40 am 
Senior Member

Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 2:43 am
Posts: 371
Location: Anoka, MN
DeanC wrote:
Quote:
“I think the timing was poor, bringing it out right when the 10th anniversary of Columbine was out there,” Wirch said.

My memory is a little foggy, which of the Columbine killers had carry permits?


Wasn't it like 37 gun laws violations they committed, before they started shooting?


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 5 posts ] 

This is a static archive the Twin Cities Carry forum, maintained as a public service by the current forum of record, The Minnesota Carry Forum.

All times are UTC - 6 hours


 Who is online 

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron


 
Index  |  FAQ  |  Search

phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group