Milwaukee Chief Has Officers Ignore AG's Gun Memo
This is a discussion on Milwaukee Chief Has Officers Ignore AG's Gun Memo within the Open Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by rocky
I removed 3 comments of religious nature from the thread. Consider this a warning.
I'm happy to comply with whatever restrictions ...
April 28th, 2009 09:14 AM
I'm happy to comply with whatever restrictions our moderator wishes to impose, but there is a point of clarification required, I think.
Originally Posted by rocky
In the posts that were deleted, there was absolutely no discussion of religious content, only about the fact that groups of people do have religions, and thus cultural differences, and that is (at least in part) an explanation for why different parts of the U.S. have different legally imposed attitudes towards self-defense.
I saw it as sociology, not religion, and related to the OP's topic.
Daniel L. Hawes - 540 347 2430 - HTTP://www.VirginiaLegalDefense.com
Nothing I say as "user" should be taken as either advertising for attorney services or legal advice. Legal questions should be presented to a competent attorney licensed to practice in the relevant state.
April 28th, 2009 09:24 AM
See it as you wish, if you open the flood gates of religion , it will get you wet.
Originally Posted by user
Second, a PM message to me , another Mod or Admin might be a more appropriate choice to voice your opinion on Moderator action.
Back to the topic on hand.
"In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock." Thomas Jefferson
Nemo Me Impune Lacesset
April 28th, 2009 10:15 AM
I could use some extra cash one would say in a situation like this!
After they take the first person down then follows a law suit and the city loosing millions and then him his job. Not to mention the loss of integrity and so forth to the department. Hopefully his department is full of competent police officers and or deputies.
I have four words for ya: SWAT
Originally Posted by Rugergirl
The sheepdog is both blessed and cursed with the capacity for violence, and a profound love for the flock. This is what makes the warrior different from the wolf.
April 28th, 2009 11:25 AM
US Code. Title 18. Section 241. Conspiracy to deprive individual Rights under color of Law. Maximum penalty is Death. Minimum is 10 years.
test case in the making.
April 28th, 2009 11:46 AM
This may become a reality if we all get out there and campaign, and vote. Look into Walker.
Originally Posted by rlimke
I have direct insight to a lot of the issues throughout the state and while watching the news on the morning when the AG made the statement, Ed couldn't wait to make that statement and he did state that his officers will deal with anyone open carrying while face down on the ground.
Originally Posted by patrol
I couldn't stop wondering if he is somewhat related to Doyle and how I could get in on the bandwagon of lawsuits.
I carry a gun cause a cop is too heavy.
April 28th, 2009 12:24 PM
I have nine letters for you: C I V I L T O R T
Originally Posted by Protect_All
April 29th, 2009 01:23 AM
Boy, that sounds like a great way to test this min head.
Originally Posted by Rugergirl
April 29th, 2009 03:42 AM
The mayor of Seattle has basically said the same thing about city property, so I don't see it as bogus one bit. Some of these guys in power are really taking it as far as they can. The Seattle Mayor did the exact same thing saying he did not care what the AG had to say he was doing what he wanted regardless.
Originally Posted by patrol
Why these people are not fired for direct assault against the people rights (that are in written law no less) is beyond me but then again the same people that vote for people like this voted for the obamination.
I sure wish I lived there I could use some big $$$ for some projects :-) especially someone like me who has a physical disability that they hurt in the process of taking down can we say new city owner???
April 29th, 2009 09:21 PM
Maybe I missed it, but does anyone know if Milwaukee has enacted municipal law prohibiting openly carrying firearms?
April 29th, 2009 10:52 PM
Some of them don't think they can be sued, but if they are over-stepping their authority they can be.... and they are.
April 30th, 2009 11:35 AM
You know, one thing that always confuses me with these kind of incidents...WHY? Why is it that when an "official" knowingly violates the law and our rights, that some are content with lawsuits? You know who's paying that lawsuit if you win right? You are. The government official isn't paying a dime. What we should really be doing is FILING FOR CRIMINAL CHARGES!
These fools should be brought up on charges just like any other pinhead that breaks the law. I think it's time we put a stop to this nonsense and fight.
"My God David, We're a Civilized society."
"Sure, As long as the machines are workin' and you can call 911. But you take those things away, you throw people in the dark, and you scare the crap out of them; no more rules...You'll see how primitive they can get."
-The Mist (2007)
April 30th, 2009 11:51 AM
I've read this memo several times, and lots of opinions about it, and what I can't get past right now is this...
Looking here, we see an Attorney General that states clearly that this behavior does not count as Disorderly Conduct (under current law), and that the State Constitution allows the right of open carry unless some other law is broken. Nothing more.
Optimistic folks see this as good, and a step forward for gun rights in Wisconsin.
I see is as a call to State Legislature to change the law giving precidence to eliminate open carry. He's telling them that the current law does not address it, that's all. He flat told them how to stop it.
It's like how folks saw the Heller case as an "end" to anything. As much as it clarified the Second Amenement as an individual freedom, it also clarified how to make it invalid. You simply gain public buy in on how you define "reasonable restrictions", and pass it through into law at the state level. It's black and white. Yes, the vote was 5-4, but 4 against, and Obama is likely to fill one or two positions this term. Heller was nothng more than a stall.
We in Wisconsin, need several things, but this memo really does nothing for us.
Nobody in power here is really in favor of the right to carry. It's not just Milwaukee that's against it. One person (Doyle) does not have the power, he has to have buy in from others.
Washington Post 06/28/2010 re: Supreme Court Decision
"The court's decision means that the enigmatically worded Second Amendment... identifies an individual right to gun ownership, like the freedom of speech, that cannot be unduly restricted by Congress, state laws or city ordinances. "
May 1st, 2009 06:43 PM
Yes, the location being anywhere in Wisconsin.
Originally Posted by FHBrumb
By Kevin Jensen in forum Open Carry Issues & Discussions
Last Post: April 4th, 2011, 10:32 PM
By SpencerB in forum In the News: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
Last Post: October 18th, 2010, 12:31 PM
By paramedic70002 in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
Last Post: June 11th, 2010, 10:07 PM
By TacticalCompact in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
Last Post: June 29th, 2008, 09:35 PM
Search tags for this page
ag van hollen memo open carry not probably cause
Click on a term to search for related topics.