Posted on 06/15/2024 6:44:30 AM PDT by marktwain
On June 6, 2024, the Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty filed a lawsuit against Steven Little in his official capacity as Acting Secretary of the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (DNR), demanding the Court temporarily and permanently enjoin enforcement of Wis. Admin. Code § NR 20.05(2).
The DNR regulation bans possession of firearms in a wide variety of locations and activities. It directly violates the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. Virtually any firearm “might be used for the purpose of fishing.” The lawsuit does not claim a violation of Wisconsin Section 25, although the regulation also appears to violate Section 25.
The people have the right to keep and bear arms for security, defense, hunting, recreation, or any other lawful purpose. (Art. 1, § 25)
A far-left Wisconsin Supreme Court essentially nullified Section 25 in State v Hamden in 2003. Because of the 2022 election, the Wisconsin Supreme Court is currently back under the control of far-left judges. This may explain the strategy of citing the U.S. Second Amendment but not Section 25 of the Wisconsin Constitution.
(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...
A friend in SD got a permit for bowfishing paddlefish, this year. They won’t take a lure, and snagging is the other legal method of take.
Looks like Oregon has expanded opportunity to other invasive species.
It’s strangely worded. It says “on the waters, banks or shores that might be used for the purpose of fishing”. It doesn’t seem as worded to have anything to do with fishing with a gun. It just bans guns anywhere on or near the waters that might be used to go fishing. If they mean to say “don’t shoot fish” they worded it so that it disarms everyone for any purpose if they are at a lake or riverbank.
So the criminals, knowing they are unarmed, will rob fishermen.
It is quite ambiguous. For that reason alone, it should be tossed.
No one knows how many, if any, people have been charged under this regulation.
Because of the way Wisconsin law is written, there is a separate proceedure to challenge the validity of the regulation. This proceedure has to be use *before a person is arrested or charged under the regulation*. This is what gives standing in the Wisconsin lawsuit, even though the person has not been charged.
Guns no, but I guess TNT is ok.
What about duck hunting?
The way Wisconsin fishing laws are written is that it is already illegal to harvest fish that are not designated as “rough fish” by any means other than those specified.
Without there once having been a rifle salmon or shotgun trout season, it was already illegal.
One can hunt ducks in cornfields...
But from shorelines or from a boat? Not without violating this regulation.
Of Course, the Wardens enforcing the regulation must disarm themselves before going to a shoreline or on the water, or they are in violation as well.
“Apparently fishing with guns is a lost art in the USA.”
Salmon and stripers are fools for a line baited with a nice 1911. They’ll always bite!
Exactly right. All regulations are written by one person.
It appears the same person used almost the same wording with regard to bows, crossbows, spears, or similar devices in NR 20.09:
(1) Possess or control any bow, crossbow, spear, or similar device while on any water or on the banks or shores of any water that might be used for the purpose of fishing except as specifically authorized in ss. NR 20.10, 20.15 (1m) or 20.20, or ch. NR 21, 22, or 23.
NR 20.09 allows a few very specific uses of bows, crossbows, and spears to take fish. As all of these are "arms" as defined by the Second Amendment, it appears NR 20.09 is also unconsitutional.
Exactly right. All regulations are written by one person.
I remember being is tax school, no new law passed that year but the depreciation calculations were all changed with no practical difference. The speaker even said this was most likely a crat wanting to justify his position.
I stood up and asked for his name. I was escorted out...............
Sure, in a barrel !
Well, I hope they win. This is huge overreach by DNR.
The indians spearfish the hell out of walleyes!
“No person may…[p]ossess or control any firearm, gun or similar device at any time while on the waters, banks or shores that might be used for the purpose of fishing.”
Must have been written by a democrat! All waters in Wisconsin are used “for the purpose of fishing”...not “might”!
“No poaching of fish need have happened yet, or witnessed, just the possession is a presumption of actual guilt by the fish cops of these crimes.”
—————
IOW, mere capability equals guilt. I guess that they should, therefore, arrest every female over the age of 13 for prostitution.
Shooting fish? Who knew?
= = =
“Shooting fish in a barrel”
Probably came from this. You know, half the population runs around shooting into barrels, hoping for fish.
Make a law against that.
Good. Sue them. It’s a stupid law. I’ve yet to hear of anyone arrested for shooting fish.
M80’s tossed in? Maybe... ;)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.