Posted on 10/12/2010 7:20:01 PM PDT by marktwain
A New Holstein man has been walking around the community and entering stores and restaurants with a handgun holstered by his side. That has prompted several telephone calls to the New Holstein Police Department, not unlike a recent incident in Madison where a 62-year-old woman visiting a local Culver's restaurant saw several people outside with guns in holsters. She also called the police, who arrived and cited two of the men for obstructing an officer.
In New Holstein, Madison and elsewhere in Wisconsin, people are seeing other people wearing guns at their side. The answer they get when they call the police is the same and often surprises them-it is perfectly legal to do so, as long as some obvious conditions are met. In April 2009, Wisconsin Attorney General J. B. Van Hollen released an advisory memorandum which received some media attention at the time but which since has been largely forgotten. Now that some people are testing their constitutional right to openly carry a firearm, Van Hollen's informal opinion is being dusted off by law enforcement and others around the state. As amended in 1998, the Wisconsin Constitution provides that the "people have the right to keep and bear arms for security, defense, hunting, recreation or any other lawful purpose." A Wisconsin citizen has the right to openly carry a firearm for any of those purposes "absent the application of a reasonable regulation properly imposed as an exercise of police power." Some early tests of the law resulted in police officers issuing disorderly conduct charges, which spurred Van Hollen to issue his statement in 2009. Van Hollen pointed out that in order for a person to be displaying disorderly conduct, they must be engaging in "violent, abusive, indecent, profane, boisterous, unreasonably loud, or similar disorderly conduct. Second, it must prove that the defendant's conduct tends to cause or provoke a disturbance."
Circumstance must be weighed Van Hollen said the decision on whether or not to charge a person with disorderly conduct depends on the totality of the circumstances, but he added, "The Department believes that mere open carry of a firearm, absent additional facts and circumstances, should not result in a disorderly conduct charge." Van Hollen used this example: A hunter opening carrying a rifle or shotgun on his property during hunting season while quietly tracking game should not face a disorderly conduct charge. But if the same hunter carries the same rifle or shotgun through a crowded street while barking at a passerby, the conduct might lost its constitutional protection. He said the same concepts should apply to handguns. A man in West Allis wore a holstered handgun while doing lawnwork. He was cited for disorderly conduct but was found not guilty. New Holstein Police Chief Brian Reedy said his department received a phone call recently about a man walking on Hoover Street with a holstered handgun. The caller was informed that the man was not breaking the law, but the chief said he does not want to inhibit such phone calls, either.
(Please see the October 7 issue of the Tri-County News for more on this story.)
In Wisconsin anyway.
Don’t you wish the whole country could treat the gun debate like this?
Keep in mind that Wisconsin and Illinois are the only two states that do not allow concealed carry.
Believe me, I know. I know.
so far it seems that 7 whole people have worn pistols in wisconsin in the last couple years, at least according to this 'news'...
its leo and nanny state busybodies that have been testing...our patience...
carrying is NOT a form of 'testing' Constitutionally protected
...
now its 'reallyneedsaneditor.com'...
Several years ago my town’s Board of Selectmen decided to make it a crime for anyone who lawfully carried a gun to step foot on any town property. At the next BOS meeting, over 100 really pissed-off gun owners showed up and tore the selectpeople new rectums. That was the last we ever heard of the proposed law. And this is in MA. What we will see on Nov 2 has been building for years under this type of crap.
Actually, we are winning in every single case, if you examine things closely.
in fact, the left can not win.
Honestly, I don’t like concealed firearms. They just ask for trouble.
If anything it’s best to be out in the open with what you’re packing. If the enemy conceals a firearm you don’t know it. If they don’t, you know it, along with the type of accuracy and damage it can provide. If others want to mess around with you, they’ll think twice when you’re carrying right on your hip.
No surprises. No BS. People will leave you alone, especially if you’re carrying a silver plated 45 or other military-grade handgun.
“Don’t you wish the whole country could treat the gun debate like this?”
As the liberals say, it is a step in the right direction.
We are winning. I have been in this fight for more than 40 years. I remember when most that I talked to were convinced that we could never win, that we would go the way of England, or at best, France. Now we are winning. Now is the time to push hard. The Second Amendment has been at the point of the spear to enforce and restore the Constitution, because it is clearly understood by anyone who looks at it with unbiased eyes. All the propaganda in the government schools has been unable to convince people to believe what liberals say on the issue.
Push now. Work hard. Leftists know that we are winning, and are becoming desperate. This election is our last best chance to win on the cheap.
Now we have for the first amendment too
“it seems that 7 whole people have worn pistols in wisconsin in the last couple years, at least according to this ‘news’...”
Perhaps, according the this ‘news’.
But, in my previous home town of Hudson, WI - this time last year - several hundred folks, including the mayor, attended an open carry event. Right in the town’s best park. Along the St. Croix River. (A dangerous spot for gun carrying, because we can almost see the whites of those dirty Minnesotans’ eyes from that river bank.)
I’m not sure how many took place, but this was not the only mass open carry get together last year in WI.
nope, couldnt have happened or idve seen it on the ‘news’...8^]
Texas, of all places still stupidly requires that a carried handgun be hidden. I don't like to wear my shirttail on the outside, but did so (and am doing so right now) because I went out to a meeting and obeyed that law.
Having said that, I've always thought the legal distinction between concealed and open carry to be asinine. To me the distinction is tactical: do I prefer having the element of surprise -- or do I want to make myself a visible target? In most "social" situations I usually prefer concealment -- unless it is just too much of a hassle.
What I DON'T like is being told which tactical choice I must make -- especially by some bunch of whininglillyliveredliberal "legislators"...
“To me the distinction is tactical: do I prefer having the element of surprise — or do I want to make myself a visible target? In most “social” situations I usually prefer concealment — unless it is just too much of a hassle.”
Logic, rationality,..they do not matter to liberals. It is all about what they feel or what they want. They can be very good at using rationality to get what they want, especially if they can rationally lie to obtain power.
very well stated MT.
if you have a ping list please put me on it.
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.