| Author | Post |
|---|
Shotgun
Member
|
Posted: Thu Oct 2nd, 2008 03:23 am |
|
BJA wrote: Dam good letter shotgun! What are you a college english professor or something lol. No, I'm just a guy who likes to give Doug something to do with his time. LOL
Thanks Doug!
|
Rick Finsta
Member
|
Posted: Thu Oct 2nd, 2008 11:41 pm |
|
After seeing the number of spelling and grammar mistakes in the Sheriff's letter, I have a feeling he won't notice those, Doug. 
|
smithman
Member
|
Posted: Fri Oct 3rd, 2008 02:07 am |
|
Shotgun I assume you stumped him?
|
Shotgun
Member
|
Posted: Fri Oct 3rd, 2008 02:21 am |
|
No reply from the Sheriff yet.
(But that's ok, I want him to THINK.)
Last edited on Fri Oct 3rd, 2008 02:22 am by Shotgun
|
jimmyw
Member
|
Posted: Sat Oct 4th, 2008 10:41 pm |
|
Shotguns email definately did something. I received another email from the Sheriff and he did agree to notify his offers. Here is his email. He doesnt really like the idea of open carry. Jimmy
Jimmy:
I agree that you have the legal right to carry open; I still disagree with doing so. It will result in public opinion that I think in the long run will be adverse to people who own firearms and want to pursue concealed carry. I think anyone walking into a bank for instance, has the right to be concerned when they see someone carrying a firearm and not knowing their intent. I think private business has the right to bar anyone from entering, and by open carry, you are going to get businesses to do just that, bar anyone from entering who may be carrying a firearm.
I recognize your right to do so and will explain this to my officers, I just don’t believe it is the prudent action to take and in the over all picture it will hurt the cause of all second amendment proponents.
I obviously could be wrong.
I can not and will not tell my officers to treat every firearm as it is unloaded and safe, that goes against all law enforcement training. Their job is to protect citizens, and they will do so in a manner that is safe for them. Until they know the situation they have the right and obligation to secure the scene and then make a judgment call on weather or not a call has been committed. I assume they will make the right call at that point. I can not guarantee that you be not be ordered to surrender your weapon until they ascertain the entire situation because I can not predict the circumstances that we will be called to.
I believe you have the right to carry but that you also assume some risks in doing so.
Sheriff Tim Moore
|
Doug Huffman
State Researcher
|
Posted: Sat Oct 4th, 2008 11:32 pm |
|
Our/your foot is in the door! Or is it the camel's nose in the tent? In any case, good job!
|
jimmyw
Member
|
Posted: Sun Oct 5th, 2008 04:42 am |
|
Doug Huffman wrote: Our/your foot is in the door! Or is it the camel's nose in the tent? In any case, good job!
Thank you but I also have to thank shotgun as I feel his letter to the sheriff helped alot to open his eyes. Im going to notify the Police Cheif and start carrying Monday and see where that goes. I will keep everyone here informed. Thank to all that have been helping me and cheering me on. Jimmy
|
bnhcomputing
Member
| Joined: | Thu Dec 13th, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 128 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 5th, 2008 08:04 am |
|
jimmyw wrote: Thank you but I also have to thank shotgun as I feel his letter to the sheriff helped alot to open his eyes. Im going to notify the Police Cheif and start carrying Monday and see where that goes. I will keep everyone here informed. Thank to all that have been helping me and cheering me on. Jimmy
Jimmy:
If have watched this thread from the beginning, and am an avid supporter of both open and concealed carry but, I did NOT see anywhere in your posts where you mentioned training. Although not required under Wisconsin law, I would strongly encourage you to take a carry course and talk, at length, with those who carry regularly about things you need to avoid. I also recommend some sort of weapons retention training.
I don't know that I agree with the "risks" term the Sheriff used, but you do take on a considerable responsibility every time you carry. When you carry, you represent ALL of us. Done correctly it makes it much easier for the "next guy" but done incorrectly, it has the potential to, as the Sheriff said, "hurt the cause of all second amendment proponents." You need to be thoughtful and deliberate in all actions.
Good luck, be safe.
Just my $0.02.
|
Doug Huffman
State Researcher
|
Posted: Sun Oct 5th, 2008 11:41 am |
|
Re training, I disagree. Citizens are presumed responsible and innocent.
Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA KMfreekinA$$
|
Pointman
Member
|
Posted: Sun Oct 5th, 2008 01:38 pm |
|
I suggest purchasing a well-designed and high-quality digital voice recorder. If something happens you'll want unbiased proof of what occurred. (Say a person confronts you about your gun, they become irate, and you remain peaceable. They call the police and say you verbally assaulted them. Do you want unbiased proof you did not, or do you think your word is enough?)
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/view_topic.php?id=11463&forum_id=62&jump_to=213888#p213888
In Wisconsin, training is not required by law. Reading the instructions before operating a chainsaw isn't either, but both are a good idea, and both tools are used more effectively when a person knows how to use them in a given situation.
Almost any employer will train you for your job before you begin, whether you're on an assembly line, unloading trucks, working in an office, designing ice-cube trays, and so forth, not because it's required, but because it's a wise investment. The same is true about carrying a gun in public; if you know about the strengths and weaknesses, have a better idea of how people (including officers) will react, know what the laws are and how you're legally required to act, you'll be able to confidently exercise your right and hopefully stay out of all sorts of trouble you might otherwise find yourself in. Dick Heller didn't walk around with a gun and say, "It's my right to carry a gun, deal with it," even though that's pretty much what the Supreme Court confirmed. Similarly, saying "It's my right, deal with it," in Wisconsin won't carry a person as far as if they knew the laws more intimately.
Unfortunately, in Wisconsin a resident usually has two choices: learn the laws before an arrest, or learn them after and hope they didn't break one. A police encounter is an eventuality if you open carry.
Training encompasses many facts, too many to list here. Briefly, a good instructor:
- Educates a person about carrying a gun in public. Even people who only carry at home for personal security against bad elements of the public should understand how to avoid conflict situations, how to secure and use their weapon, when they can legally use their weapon and how to use it legally, and how to protect themselves financially in the horrible event they need to discharge a weapon in order to save their life.
- Helps demonstrate a person is a responsible individual and should not be convicted of the charges the police and DA levied against them. Any time armed citizens and the police meet in Wisconsin there is a good probably of and arrest and that charges will be filed. If you find yourself in that position, you want the judge to dismiss all charges at pre-trial before you face expensive legal fees and a potential outcome that will ruin a good year or more of your life.
- Might save a life. Many people who shot defensively have horrible memories and wish things went differently. The life saved might be your own.
People on forums talk about suing for wrongful detention as if they can walk into court, ask for gobs of money, and walk away with a duffel bag of cash. In real life police have immunity (by law), and taxpayer-funded legal representation. Know the law, abide by the law, and be a safe, responsible individual.
Disclaimer: I am not a trainer nor associated with any training program, and receive no related compensation. I am not an attorney and at no time provide anything near legal advice. The comments are personal opinion subject to change and do not reflect the views or opinions of any organization.
|
Shotgun
Member
|
Posted: Sun Oct 5th, 2008 01:42 pm |
|
I have not yet received a reply from the Sheriff, maybe he thinks I'm too much of an ass to be worthy of a response. In any event, I don't think his latest communication represents a huge shift in his position. I believe he recognized the legality of open carry but thought that it was ill-advised prior to any emails and it looks like that still is his position. I am at least encouraged that he stated he would remind his deputies that open carry is, in itself, a legal activity.
As far as businesses not welcoming you, okay, that's their right. It's also lost business for them. The sheriff may be overestimating the number of businesses that will respond in that manner, but as OC becomes more commonplace it will certainly become less of a concern to businesses, the general public and to law enforcement.
If you live in Amery chances are you'd more than likely deal directly with that police department than with the county department, so that is good considering the friendlier reception from that department's chief.
|
Shotgun
Member
|
Posted: Sun Oct 5th, 2008 01:57 pm |
|
Doug Huffman wrote: Re training, I disagree. Citizens are presumed responsible and innocent.
Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA KMfreekinA$$
Doug I wish you would explain your objection to training. Bnh's post did not advocate mandatory training, in fact he mentioned that there is no mandatory training in Wisconsin (although I might mention that there is mandatory gun-related training to obtain a hunting license for people under a certain age.)
Are you opposed to voluntary firearms training? If so, then I will point out that knowledge of the issues and candidates is not required prior to exercising one's right to vote, but I would consider it advisable. Please clarify whether it is training in general to which you object, or simply to mandatory training. If you object to mandatory training prior to being allowed to carry a firearm, then I would side with you-- although at the same time I would much prefer that anyone who handles a firearm has at least voluntarily received a certain amount of competent instruction prior to doing so.
|
Doug Huffman
State Researcher
|
Posted: Sun Oct 5th, 2008 02:33 pm |
|
I object to profiteers and fearmongers. I object to arbiters of reasonableness. I object to arbiters of competent instruction. I object to shotgun-chic gallus snappers.
Do you want me to name names? We have seen over this year past where these objectionable profiteers have led gun rights in Wisconsin. The very best that can be said of them is that they have distracted the gullible.
If someone sees the need for training and desires it that is fine and good. I was a NRA certified pistol instructor as qualification for SC state certification as CWP Instructor. It is bullshiite theater for profiteers selling dispensations from infringement.
There is only a right to vote in a democracy and we live in a constitutional republic with legally limited enfranchisement that must be more restrictive.
Citizens are presumed innocent and responsible.
Do you also advocate competent sex education in schools? That is an OT rhetorical question not desiring a response.
|
Pointman
Member
|
Posted: Sun Oct 5th, 2008 04:21 pm |
|
Did I just read:
I support the financially irresponsible and delusional. I support arbiters of unreasonableness. I support arbiters of incompetent information. I support ineffective and self-destructive hippie ideals.
Do you want me to name names? We have seen over this year past where these objectionable naysayers have fought against thine rights in Wisconsin. The very best that can be said of them is that they have distracted the gullible.
If someone sees the need for training and desires it that is fine and good. I was a NRA certified pistol instructor as qualification for SC state certification as CWP Instructor. I was ineffectual at instructing persons on the use and maintenance of firearms. I did not diligently alert persons of their lawful responsibilities and duties as a member of a functional society. I did not properly address alternatives to shooting someone "just because they tried to steal my TV." In short, I was in it for the money.
I will misguide you, because I am the self-appointed tyrant you must obey, and because I'm smarter than you.
You will deny reality and believe citizens are presumed innocent and responsible, despite the many counter-examples you've read, because I command you.
I shall now go off-topic, because I've stated everything I allow you to know about this topic.
|
Parabellum
Member
|
Posted: Sun Oct 5th, 2008 06:05 pm |
|
Pointman, do you really think its fair that just because someone opposes one view of things they completely endorse another? Thats kind of like saying if one is for CCW they hate OC or vice versa, or if they hate cake they love pie(joke). It is possible to have ones position on middle ground between two extremes. And you know full well you attributed some of your comments rather unfairly to Doug, a politicians attack. He objected to profiteers and fear-mongers, how does that translate to supporting the financially irresponsible and delusional? I think we are above such things on this forum.
Jimmy, if you are going to be carrying, call me so I can give you a first hand account of what happened to me. I will PM you my number. You will have a much clearer picture of what to expect(if your unlucky anyway).
|
Doug Huffman
State Researcher
|
Posted: Sun Oct 5th, 2008 06:26 pm |
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/arbiter
Any person who has the power of judging and determining, or ordaining, without control; one whose power of deciding and governing is not limited.
Naming names would be Pointless, man.
Last edited on Sun Oct 5th, 2008 06:30 pm by Doug Huffman
|
jimmyw
Member
|
Posted: Sun Oct 5th, 2008 10:58 pm |
|
After reading all responses I do believe that it would be in my best interest to carry a quality voice recorder and go through a class so at least it might be a positive mark should I ever end up in court. Can anyone tell me where to find a class thats near me? Im in North western Wisconsin.
I want to thank each and every one of you for your help and support. Jimmy
|
Doug Huffman
State Researcher
|
Posted: Sun Oct 5th, 2008 11:10 pm |
|
| http://www.permittocarry.us/
|
smithman
Member
|
Posted: Mon Oct 6th, 2008 12:07 am |
|
jimmyw wrote: After reading all responses I do believe that it would be in my best interest to carry a quality voice recorder and go through a class so at least it might be a positive mark should I ever end up in court. Can anyone tell me where to find a class thats near me? Im in North western Wisconsin.
I want to thank each and every one of you for your help and support. Jimmy
When carrying a gun you want to stack the odds in your favor. The same goes for if you ever have to use a gun. You can certainly do this by carrying a recorder and taking a class. Though you don't need to do either of these to exercise your right lawfully.
Also, a WI person who is OCing and has a permit from another state can be shown to be a "certified good guy" in the eyes of an LEO. Many LEOs in this state seem very proud of all their firearms training and some encounters I have heard about an LEO may say "I go through 20 hours a year in training and you've just taken a 3-hour class like anybody can..." Also the more liberal the person, the more they want to see the state itself certify something or somebody as good.
Basically, take any and all steps you feel necessary to stack the odds in your favor. Also, it would be prudent to read up about LEO encounters, while memorizing the following phrases and when to use them...
"I do not consent to any search"
"I do not consent to any siezure"
"I have nothing to say about that"
"Am I being detained or am I free to go?"
One who exercises his RKBA rights in WI must be prepared to exercise all of his other rights such as 4th and 5th amendments.
|
PavePusher
Member
| Joined: | Thu Apr 26th, 2007 |
| Location: | Tucson, Arizona USA |
| Posts: | 441 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Oct 6th, 2008 06:54 am |
|
jimmyw wrote: Shotguns email definately did something. I received another email from the Sheriff and he did agree to notify his offers. Here is his email. He doesnt really like the idea of open carry. Jimmy
Jimmy:
I agree that you have the legal right to carry open; I still disagree with doing so. It will result in public opinion that I think in the long run will be adverse to people who own firearms and want to pursue concealed carry. I think anyone walking into a bank for instance, has the right to be concerned when they see someone carrying a firearm and not knowing their intent. I think private business has the right to bar anyone from entering, and by open carry, you are going to get businesses to do just that, bar anyone from entering who may be carrying a firearm.
I recognize your right to do so and will explain this to my officers, I just don’t believe it is the prudent action to take and in the over all picture it will hurt the cause of all second amendment proponents.
I obviously could be wrong.
I can not and will not tell my officers to treat every firearm as it is unloaded and safe, that goes against all law enforcement training. Their job is to protect citizens, and they will do so in a manner that is safe for them. Until they know the situation they have the right and obligation to secure the scene and then make a judgment call on weather or not a call has been committed. I assume they will make the right call at that point. I can not guarantee that you be not be ordered to surrender your weapon until they ascertain the entire situation because I can not predict the circumstances that we will be called to.
I believe you have the right to carry but that you also assume some risks in doing so.
Sheriff Tim Moore
Sounds to me like the good sherrif needs to be pressed on what legal options to O.C. exist. Is he actually endorsing illegal C.C. or not? Get him to state a solid opinion. Then send copies of his correspondence to all the D.A.'s and other authority in his chain of command.
|
Current time is 10:24 am | Page:   1 2 3   |
|
