|
|
|
OpenCarry.org - Discussion Forum > Stories From The States > Wyoming > Confusion over WY Open Carry restriction
|
|
||
| OpenCarry.org - Discussion Forum > Stories From The States > Wyoming > Confusion over WY Open Carry restriction
|
|||
| Moderated by: jpierce | Topic closed | |
| Author | Post | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
OCGLOCK Regular Member
|
Hey Guys, Please give me some insight on the open carry issue in the state of WY. I have been there over the past summer, and OCed the whole time no problems. But I am coming back for a hunting trip this October and wanted to get some information from the AGs office before my trip. Below are several threads from 2 e-mails I sent to them over the past week. Your thoughts are appreciated. ME: I am resident of Maryland and will soon be traveling to WY for a 2 week hunting trip. I hold a Pennsylvania Licence to Carry Firearms which the State of Wyoming honors. In reading your website about locations off-limits to Concealed carry, I noticed a person cannot carry CONCEALED in an establishment that sells alcohol for consumption. The website did not discuss carrying a pistol openly in a holster in one of these establishments or anywhere in Wyoming for that matter. Please comment on the open carry of a pistol through-out the state of Wyoming and in a establishments that sell alcohol. Any insight you could provide would be greatly appreciated WY AGs office: Patrick, Most, if not all towns and cities in Wyoming has adopted a city/town ordinance which prohibits a civilian (non-law enforcement) from carrying a weapon that can be seen by the public. The language contained within the individual city ordinances could vary from city to city. It would be your responsibility to check with local authorities as you travel throughout the state to insure that you do not violate local city ordinance. State Law does not prohibit or regulate open carry, that’s why it does not appear on our state web-site. Forrest C. Bright Director Wyoming Division of Criminal Investigations 316 W. 22nd Street Cheyenne, WY 82002-0150 Office: 307-777-7181 ME: Forest, Thanks for your quick response to my questions. My understanding of Wyoming law is that the State Legislature has complete Preemption over all Firearm laws through-out the state except Indian and Federal Grounds. How can a municipality regulate a mode of firearm carry when the state has statutory preemption? If arrested for violating a municipal ordinance that legally could not be enacted, I cannot see that being enforceable. WY AGs office: Patrick, The State of Wyoming is an "open carry" state as it relates to firearms. However, the cities in Wyoming have a legal dominance of what is called "home rule". Home rule simply means that the elected Mayors and City Councils have been given the authority to govern their cities in the manner that they see fit, that also includes having the authority to adopt ordinances that are more restrictive than state statute. Cities can adopt ordinances that are more restrictive, but not less restrictive. Therefore, most all the cities in Wyoming restrict the open carry of firearms, by ordinance, within their jurisdiction. Persons who violate the ordinance can be arrested on the spot. Forrest C. Bright Director Wyoming Division of Criminal Investigations 316 W. 22nd Street Cheyenne, WY 82002-0150 Office: 307-777-7181 |
|||||||||
|
mkl Regular Member
|
Be interesting since you have a dialog with this AG to ask him what he thinks the preemption code means, since it clearly says the opposite of what he said it says. Wyoming's preemption code: Firearm preemption is in Wyoming § 6-8-401(a) . This says: 6-8-401.� Firearm, weapon and ammunition regulation and prohibition by state. (a)� The sale, transfer, purchase, delivery, taxation, manufacture, ownership, transportation, storage, use and possession of firearms, weapons and ammunition shall be authorized, regulated and prohibited by the state, and regulation thereof is preempted by the state. Except as authorized by W.S. 15-1-103(a)(xviii), no city, town or county shall authorize, regulate or prohibit the sale, transfer, purchase, delivery, taxation, manufacture, ownership, transportation, storage, use or possession of firearms, weapons and ammunition except as specifically provided by this chapter. This section shall not affect zoning or other ordinances which encompass firearms businesses along with other businesses. Zoning and other ordinances which are designed for the purpose of restricting or prohibiting the sale, purchase, transfer or manufacture of firearms or ammunition as a method of regulating firearms or ammunition are in conflict with this section and are prohibited. http://legisweb.state.wy.us/statutes/statutes.aspx?file=titles/Title6/Title6.htm |
|||||||||
|
sonnycrockett12 Regular Member
|
Okay...I was shocked to see this post as I have vacationed a couple weeks a year in Wyoming for ten years and have always open carried. Actually one of the reasons for going to Wyoming so often(besides it being so beautiful) is the fact it is so gun friendly. I, too, had assumed that the State preemption law covered me so I don't understand where the AG is coming from. The State law doesn't mention doing anything more or less restrictive(actually, the whole intent of any preemption law is to prevent localities from passing laws more restrictive). It actually says clearly that a locality can't make ANY law concerning firerams...period. Except as authorized by W.S. 15-1-103(a)(xviii), no city, town or county shall authorize, regulate or prohibit the sale, transfer, purchase, delivery, taxation, manufacture, ownership, transportation, storage, use or possession of firearms, weapons and ammunition except as specifically provided by this chapter. The only exceptions mentioned in the law regarding zoning of firearm businesses. However, the real troubling section that says: "Except as authorized by Section W.S. 15-1-103(a)(xviii)" This can be found at : http://legisweb.state.wy.us/statutes/titles/Title15/T15CH1AR1.htm and gives local govt bodies the right to: (xviii) Regulate, prevent or suppress riots, disturbances, disorderly assemblies or parades, or any other conduct which disturbs or jeopardizes the public health, safety, peace or morality, in any public or private place; I guess one could argue that this gives a locality the right to regulate open AND concealed carry of firearms(regardless of the state CCW law) since one might argue(I think wrongly) that carrying of firearms disturbs the peace. What is scary about this part is that one could use it to pass laws even covering people in PRIVATE RESIDENCES just by the city council deciding any guns in any homes threaten public safety or the peace. Now I think that this would be overturned( I hope) on appeal as the intent of this is more likely to specific instances of riots, etc and limiting things such as open carry and private gun ownership would be a reach. BUT you'd get to be arrested and be a test case for this. So, on the strict reading of the law, I am shocked to find that even with the preemption law in effect the AG seems to be correct that local govt bodies can ban open carry under section xviii (home rule) if they consider open carry to jeopardize the public peace .(since that section is so vaguely written.) Seriously, all you people in Wyoming...I know you're a gun friendly state and probably wouldn't tolerate any politicians who would pass such laws but with all the California and Colorado hippies moving into places like Jackson Hole it's only a matter of time before it happens. You need to get organized and get a hold of your state reps and get this section of the law rewritten so that section xviii clearly exempts legal use and carry of firearms. NOW....to what the AG said about almost all cities having ordinances limiting open carrying I found this: http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/#WY I didn't find ONE SINGLE law against Open Carry in the biggest cities in Wyoming: Casper, Cheyenne, Douglas, Sheridan, Laramie, and Riverton. I did find a couple of laws that were more restrictive than the State laws.... One concerning carrying in ANY place that even carried alcohol like supermarkets and I even found one town that outlawed concealed carry and had NO EXCEPTION was given for State issued CCW permits! The City of Laramie has a law that states: 9.28.010 Concealed weapons--Carrying. No person, other than the officers of the United States, the state or the city, shall keep or bear concealed upon the person, within the city, a pistol, revolver, knife with a blade over five inches long, slingshot, slug shot, bludgeon, brass knuckles of lead or other metal or other deadly weapon. (Prior code § 26-4).
|
|||||||||
|
sonnycrockett12 Regular Member
|
I searched and Jackson Hole has no law against open carry Now the City of Cody DOES PROHIBIT OPEN CARRY http://www.cityofcody-wy.gov/images/MCode/Code%2034.pdf 34-3. Carrying concealed or wearing weapons openly.* It shall be unlawful for any person to wear or carry any dirk, slingshot, gun, knife, dagger, sword in case, or other dangerous or deadly weapon concealed, or to carry or wear such weapons openly, with the avowed purpose of injuring any other person, or of disturbing the peace of the city or any of the inhabitants thereof. Now it does say for the "avowed purpose" of disturbing the peace...but a cop could arrest you under this ordinance and it would be up to you to argue it wasn't your "intention" to disturb the peace. Nothing in Worland agains Open Carry http://66.113.195.234/WY/Worland/index.htm Nothing in Gillette either. That's all for the cities that I could find their ordinances online. PS...my homestate of Michigan has a preemption law that reads: A local unit of government shall not impose special taxation on, enact or enforce any ordinance or regulation pertaining to, or regulate in any other manner the ownership, registration, purchase, sale, transfer, transportation, or possession of pistols or other firearms, ammunition for pistols or other firearms, or components of pistols or other firearms, except as otherwise provided by federal law or a law of this state. Now years ago a local city(Ferndale) tried to ban guns in public buildings and our state group MCRGO argued that it violated the preemption law. see: http://www.mcrgo.org/mcrgo/doc_pdf/0430_Ferndale_decision.pdf Now Ferndale tried the whole "Home Rule" angle as state law says it can "provide the public peace and health and for the safety of persons and property." of it's residents and then other angles but they were shot down. I doubt any local ordinance would hold up to an appeal court but do you want to be the person getting arresting and paying for the fight? |
|||||||||
|
Hiredgun30 Regular Member 
|
i always thought that wyoming was a pro open carry state like idaho. sorry guys wont be coming to wyoming anytime soon.. |
|||||||||
|
OCGLOCK Regular Member
|
Thank you to the previous posts, I am very concerned about this issue as I love the state of Wyoming and want to preserve our freedom there. Living in Maryland, it is tough for me to organize and work on the state level to bring about change in Wyoming. So for all those folks living in Wy and surrounding areas, your help is needed with this issue. Any additional thoughts about this issue such as what can be done on the state level would be great. |
|||||||||
|
SDguy Regular Member 
|
If there is a problem in Wyoming it would be with some of the authorities in Wyoming not understanding the law regarding concealed and open carry. The law is very clear and I have open carried in Wyoming in most cities, in restaurants, hotels, stores and you name it, without any problems. I think the AG is either ignorant or purposely misleading people. |
|||||||||
|
sonnycrockett12 Regular Member
|
He is definitely ignorant that most cities/towns ban open carry as I only found one so him saying that most do is way off base. Unfortunately, strict reading of the law gives towns the "right" to ban open carry. Again, any person arrested under such law could probably win on appeal but they'd have to be that test case. |
|||||||||
|
Thundar Regular Member 
|
So, if "home rule" preempts preemption in Wyoming why is it a gold star state? |
|||||||||
|
sonnycrockett12 Regular Member
|
Honestly....I just think most people in the movement never really thought of the "home rule" factor let alone know about it...heck, I've open carried there for a decade thinking I was safe. |
|||||||||
|
MamaLiberty Regular Member
|
Here is the response by the WSSA president in Wyoming: WS 6-8-401 means what it says and says what it means. NRA and WSSA worked hard to get Pre-emption passed because of the conflicting network of local ordinances. However, one must keep in mind that we now live in a time where there are really no longer any rules. When what rules there appear to be are whimsically applied, that is the same as there being no rules at all. Remember, despite the SCOTUS decision, Heller has still not been allowed to register his (semi-automatic machinegun) M1911. Despite the Fifth Amendment protection against double jeopardy, the owner of the Hip Hop Hippie Shop in Gillette was sentenced to federal prison after his conviction for selling "drug paraphernalia. He had been acquitted in State court on the exact same charges AND his lawyer was not allowed to even bring this fact up at the federal kangaroo court trial. I could go on and on but am not going to. To believe that you can fall back upon the protection of the Constitution or the law is as dangerous a delusion as the one the Indian tribes held in the 1800s when they thought they could fall back upon their treaties. If you are a WSSA member you would have read this story already, but for those of you who are not I will present an abbreviated version. In the small eastern Wyoming town of Hartville around 1982 a recent Gunsite Academy grad chose to exercise his constitutional (and God-given) right to open carry his cocked and locked M1911. The town council took umbrage and passed an ordinance prohibiting the practice. This was despite being told by myself and a lawyer provided by NRA that a 1920 Wyoming Supreme Court decision told towns that they could not do any such thing. Not having a police department, Hartville hired a Platte County deputy as Town constable on a part-time basis. When the new constable confronted Bob he was told "Make your move or lay it to rest." Bob would have killed Otto graveyard dead before Otto even cleared leather and the constable knew it. He wisely "laid it to rest' and quit the job. The atmosphere now thoroughly poisoned, Bob moved to Wheatland where he was left alone. I realize that not everyone has the right mindset for such a confrontation. If these bastards keep pushing their luck, however, confrontations of the Hartville variety will become inevitable. At the risk of appearing crass and self-serving I will put in a plug for my new book Neither Predator Nor Prey. The Wyoming People in NPNP do not accept abuses perpetrated by enemies of freedom who laugh at the Constitution. Believe me, smiles are wiped from a lot of evil faces. |
|||||||||
|
sonnycrockett12 Regular Member
|
I agree 100%...Everyone knows what Preemption means and what the intent of the law was......BUT the legislature was STUPID enough to leave the loophole in the beginning of the law allowing towns to make laws about firearms concerning "preserving the peace"... The old saying give them an inch they'll take a mile definitely applies here. The best thing you people in Wyoming could do is get your legislature to get rid of the loophole. Even with that gone I'm sure a few towns will test the law...and that's fine. Do what we did in Michigan when they tried...the people who got arrested one their cases then turned around and sued the HELL outta those cities/towns.....so their little arrests ended up costing the towns serious cash. A couple examples of this in Michigan showed most cities who still had the laws on the books to quickly get rid of them. Being what the economy is today most if not all town/cities are too cash strapped to even fight lawsuits let alone pay out damages so they always back down.... UNFORTUNATELY...someone will have to be the test case in Wyoming. |
|||||||||
|
MamaLiberty Regular Member
|
Luckily, outside of Jackson Hole and some other socialist occupied territory, this isn't really a problem here. It could get that way fast, of course, especially if more federal "laws" are passed, but right now it's not a big deal. I open carry every day, everywhere I go - including the courthouse, sheriff's office, bank, library, etc. The only place I can't carry is the post office, and I wear my empty holster there as a protest and reminder to others that we are disarmed victims there. To the people who ask why I think I need to carry a gun in almost crime free Wyoming, all I can do is point out to them the folks who died at V Tech and all of the other mass shootings who ALSO thought it could never happen there or to them. They didn't get a second chance. I'm writing a book, dedicated to the man I already had to shoot in self defense. |
|||||||||
|
mdguy90 Regular Member 
|
MamaLiberty wrote:Luckily, outside of Jackson Hole and some other socialist occupied territory, this isn't really a problem here. It could get that way fast, of course, especially if more federal "laws" are passed, but right now it's not a big deal. I know your pointing it out as an example, but I just thought I'd say that I live in Jackson Hole, and OC everyday. Don't seem to have much issues with anyone. actually i think im the only one who OC's in JH |
|||||||||
|
MamaLiberty Regular Member
|
mdguy90 wrote:
I'm sure glad to hear that!  I belong to a fairly big club, scattered all over the state, and some of our members have had a rough time in JH, Cheyenne and Laramie. One was hassled in Cody and another in Powell. They've all been able to show the cops the law and none have been arrested, but it's getting so some are no longer willing to carry openly in those areas. I think that's a mistake myself. If we give in to this, we'll lose what we have worked so hard to retain of our rights. Recruit more people to OC there in JH. I can't think of anything you could do that would help more.  If I ever got that far west, I'd be proud to walk down the street with you. |
|||||||||
|
mdguy90 Regular Member
|
Just my luck, I move out of Maryland to the worst place possible for guns in wyoming  Some other OC'ers would be nice, being here is my first experiences OC, I've been asked to not come into one store unless it was unloaded (does she expect me to throw the gun at the badguy), but other then that, not many issues. anyone with guns are more then welcome by me anytime. |
|||||||||
|
MamaLiberty Regular Member
|
mdguy90 wrote: Just my luck, I move out of Maryland to the worst place possible for guns in wyoming They don't "expect" you to do anything with it. They have no idea what you are really doing and they have their heads filled with the idiot propaganda. You might try giving them a card listing the reasons you carry, and why you will be taking your business elsewhere from now on. The few times I've been asked to disarm, I let them know they've not only lost my business, but that I will also alert my friends to the fact that they wish to maintain a disarmed victim zone. Be polite, firm, and leave as soon as you say your piece. Personally, I will never comply with a request to unload. It is FAR more dangerous to unholster and unload. If my gun isn't welcome, then neither am I. |
|||||||||
|
AB Regular Member 
|
Wyoming State Constitution trumps and shows agreement with state preemption §024. Right to bear arms. The right of citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and of the state shall not be denied. If you look at the law itself without your state constitutional right it appears kind of spine-less so my question is can a town in Wyoming tell me that I don't have a right to bear arms and defend myself, I think not. Wearing a gun in Wyoming in itself does not cause riots, distubances, disorderly assemblies or parades and is not in itself a conduct which disturbs or jeopardizes the public health ,safety, peace or morality. Unless I was wearing my gun while in a parade , naked and urinating in the street all while using profanity at the on lookers. Looks like a real misuse of law and a violation of my constitusional rights. |
|||||||||
|
AB Regular Member
|
Looks like Cody's law is out-dated in it's reference to: W.S., 1957, § 6-239. 34-3. Carrying concealed or wearing weapons openly.* In Wyoming, in 1957, the legislature established a “discretionary issue” procedure under which county sheriffs in their discretion could issue permits to carry weapons to “travelers, merchant police, private detectives, or other persons who may be required by their work, vocation or profession to carry a weapon or weapons.” In 1994, the Wyoming legislature dramatically changed the law. 1994 Wyo. Sess. Law ch. 41, § 1. The legislature abolished the “discretionary issue” system and replaced it with the “shall issue” system we have today which vests in the state attorney general the authority to issue concealed weapon permits. While this gets "off topic "of open carry it points out a major flaw in the writing of this city code. Last edited on Fri Oct 31st, 2008 04:47 pm by AB |
|||||||||
|
Anubis Regular Member 
|
Given the aforementioned ambiguity, maybe OCDO's "open carry" map should show Wyoming as orange rather than yellow. (Mike?) |
|||||||||
|
PaulB Opt-Out Member
|
l'd like to point out that there is a bit of over-reaction in this thread. Yes, the AG is an idiot and/or liar. What else is new? As to Cody's regulation, it is actually less of an infringement than the state statute allows them to have written (even if it is more of an infringement than the constitution allows). Note, to be convicted of this, you have to have an "avowed" (openly stated) purpose of raising hell or harming someone. To beat it, all you have to do, is not say in front of witnesses that you are going to kill someone with your gun! I have OC'ed many times in Cody. No problem at all. A friend was harassed in Powell but it was just a case of police ignorance. Yes, OC implies an episode now and then of educating cops, even in Wyoming (Wyoming cops are often hired from outside the state). That's all. The sky is not falling. Last edited on Wed Dec 3rd, 2008 07:02 am by PaulB |
|||||||||
|
MatieA Regular Member 
|
hi all, I just found this forum after being told that the town I live in (Pine Bluffs) has a law against open-carry, I will be checking into this as I have oc'ed several times with no incident and have a WY CCP. This seems a violation of the state constitution, and the preemption law. I may just have to test this out if I find it to be true. |
|||||||||
|
PaulB Opt-Out Member
|
Go down to city hall and ask for a copy of the ordinance, and post it here (I looked on the Internet but they must not have it there). It probably is like Cody's; that is, you really didn't violate it. Find the cop that gave you a bad time and have a friendly talk with him about it. This sort of thing works in small-town Wyoming, usually. |
|||||||||
|
MatieA Regular Member
|
PaulB wrote: Go down to city hall and ask for a copy of the ordinance, and post it here (I looked on the Internet but they must not have it there). It probably is like Cody's; that is, you really didn't violate it. Find the cop that gave you a bad time and have a friendly talk with him about it. Small-town politics; I had to wait for the correct person to be working to get this.   |
|||||||||
|
PaulB Opt-Out Member
|
Wow, that might have come out of California!  Subsection (c) does not allow any exceptions for self defense. Clearly unconstitutional. Not even allowing BB guns to be shot is pretty extreme. Subsection (d) does not allow any exceptions even if you have a state permit to carry concealed. Is this a recent addition to the ordinances? If so, I'd find out who created it, and run against him next election. You should be a shoo-in. It probably was written decades ago, is my guess. You could petition the council to remove it since it is so much in violation of both the constitution and the pre-emption statutes. Otherwise, ignore it. If someone tries to arrest you for it, see if you can sue for false arrest and make some money out of it (you could use that point to show the council why the ordinance should be repealed - save the council from a lawsuit.) If the council won't move on it, that is like many government agencies I have seen before. State passes a law, and municipalities ignore it. Laws are only for us peons, it seems. Well, why pay attention to such a law? I wouldn't. |
|||||||||
|
opusd2 Regular Member
|
Well, chances are I saw indiscretions as posted above when I lived in Cheyenne. I won't mention which ones, but they are as easy as shooting a BB gun to figure out. Then again, the area I lived in Cheyenne was quite an interesting area as far as neighbors are concerned. Chances are my old neighbor still breaks as many as he can in his age. He was a good guy... |
|||||||||
|
MamaLiberty Regular Member
|
If you will read that carefully, it says you can't carry any of those things "for the avowed purpose" of harming someone! So, don't tell a saloon full of people that you are going to kill Black Bart and then go stomping down the street armed and looking for him. Silly to write a separate law about that, but politicians have to find something to do, don't you know? |
|||||||||
|
Mike Super Moderator
|
Anubis wrote: Given the aforementioned ambiguity, maybe OCDO's "open carry" map should show Wyoming as orange rather than yellow. (Mike?) Maybe I missed it - but I don't see any hole in the preemption statute cited above - yhe std grant of authority to localities in WY remains limited by preemption as to mere possession of guns. |
|||||||||
|
MamaLiberty Regular Member
|
That's right, Mike. Several of the members of a club I belong to have had a few problems in Cheyenne or Laramie, but it's always cops who do not understand Wyoming OC and so far it's been straightened out fast, with the cops learning that they can't hassle law abiding OC folks. The only people who would call in a MWG thing are tourists, and we don't get much of that either. One incident in Powell was potentially a real problem, but it worked out good too. The police here just do not generally have the gestapo mind set they do so many other places, and only those being hired from other places tend to have the problems. We're educating them as fast as we can. |
|||||||||
|
PaulB Opt-Out Member
|
If you will read that carefully, it says you can't carry any of those things "for the avowed purpose" of harming someone! Well, that's true for section (e), open carry. In that respect it is similar to Cody's ordinance, and not in violation of the state pre-emption statute as far as I can tell. However, subsection (d), concealed carry, is clear and simple. You may not carry concealed. Subsection (b) provides an exception for cops, but not for people with concealed carry permits. Thus subsection (d) is in violation of the state pre-emption statute. Also subsection (f) seems unconstitutional, as the constitution protects the right to bear arms, not just firearms. Finally subsection (c) does not give an exception for self-defense. If you shoot a home invader, you can be charged under that subsection. Regulating discharge of a weapon, to the extent of eliminating self-defense, is certainly a violation of the state pre-emption statute, as well as being unconstitutional. In general, the ordinance is poorly written and repetitive. Last edited on Sat Feb 7th, 2009 08:41 pm by PaulB |
|||||||||
|
MatieA Regular Member
|
I will be attending the next town meeting that I can attend, and will be bringing up several issues on this. A few of you have pointed out things that I had not noticed. I was told (by Law Enforcement here) that concealed carry (with a permit) was the only way you could carry in town limits, and that open carry would be a $750.00 fine and an automatic court appearance. As I stated before I have been open-carrying for the seven years that I've lived here with no incident, and I'm hoping to resolve this without being arrested, but I am not going to stop carrying just because someone can't read. On a side note: A very interesting result of having people read (e): my kids ages 10, 13, read it as only being allowed to conceal carry all adults (so far) have read it as meaning that you can open-carry as long as you are not doing so with the purpose of hurting someone. Maybe our cops, and town leaders have the mind set of younger children? Last edited on Sat Feb 7th, 2009 09:45 pm by MatieA |
|||||||||
|
bobcat Regular Member
|
As a potential future resident of WY, Thank You MatieA for taking the initiative on this issue. Please be sure and let us know how this turns out. If they don't see the error of their ways, maybe folks here can help with another more legalistic approach. There are a lot of folks here with the skills and connections to get this sorted out. The more individual 'fiefdoms' that get away with these kinds of unconstitutional, illegal and just plain poorly written 'ordinances' must be stopped, as this is how the anti liberty crowd works, incremental. -Be it an old out of date ordinance to lean on or reworded liberal tripe and sheer foolishness. |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
Mike wrote: Anubis wrote:Given the aforementioned ambiguity, maybe OCDO's "open carry" map should show Wyoming as orange rather than yellow. (Mike?) My italics above. The preemption statute does not address carrying, however, unlike for instance, Ohio's. I believe that is the hole. Last edited on Mon Feb 9th, 2009 05:16 pm by BB62 |
|||||||||
|
Mike Super Moderator
|
BB62 wrote: Mike wrote:Anubis wrote:Given the aforementioned ambiguity, maybe OCDO's "open carry" map should show Wyoming as orange rather than yellow. (Mike?) it covers possession, right? That included carriage. |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
Mike wrote: (referring to the preemption statute)...it covers possession, right? That included carriage. I don't know Wyoming law, but not necessarily. Since legislatures can and do define things in different ways than us "common" folk, one never knows. |
|||||||||
|
AB Regular Member
|
The real point is W.S. 15-1-103(a)(xviii), its a read between the lines thing. When this legislation was crafted they didn't get specific and left us wide open. Except as authorized by W.S. 15-1-103(a)(xviii), no city, town or county shall authorize, regulate or prohibit the sale, transfer, purchase, delivery, taxation, manufacture, ownership, transportation, storage, use or possession of firearms, weapons and ammunition except as specifically provided by this chapter. (xviii) Regulate, prevent or suppress riots, disturbances, disorderly assemblies or parades, or any other conduct which disturbs or jeopardizes the public health, safety, peace or morality, in any public or private place. This is the dangerous part of legislation that went into this code W.S. 15-1-103(a)(xviii), gives city's and towns to write their own code as they see fit. Just read (xviii) it brushes a broad stroke that is up for interpretation (or any other conduct which disturbs or jeopardizes the public health, safety, peace or morality, in any public or private place) (or any other conduct; public or private place) even in your home? This is a giant loophole that trumps our preemptive law. On the subject of Pine Bluffs they clearly took advantage of this loophole, Section (e) the police would have to prove "intent or avowed purpose of injuring any person" this is dangerous because if you used your weapon in self defense they could: 1. Charge you with discharge of a weapon in city limits. 2. They could now use it to prove you wanted to injure another person. Section (g) states that No person shall possess a firearm within the town who: (iv) Is a member of a subversive organization. (who would define what a subversive organization is?) (h) This section states they don't need a search warrant (wow the British all over again) This is flat out Un-Constitutional and Dangerous Anthony Bouchard Executive Director Wyoming Gun Owners Association http://www.wyominggunowners.org Last edited on Mon Feb 9th, 2009 11:24 pm by AB |
|||||||||
|
PaulB Opt-Out Member
|
Well, yes and no. If you assume the people using and enforcing and interpreting the laws are reasonable and decent people, then there is no loophole. In such a case it would make perfect sense that municipalities can do things like stop riots. If you assume the people using and enforcing and interpreting the laws are imperious, elitist bastards, then as with any other provision of law, black can be made to seem white, and white black. In that case there is no pre-emption in reality at all. However, it's not for us just to sit here and passively consume whatever style of law these guys wish to dish out for us. That would be stupid, not to mention lazy. The point is, we need to let them know it's not a good idea to act like imperious, elitist bastards. And that there will be a cost if they do. One could imagine all sorts of costs, starting with letters to the editor, flyers, running for office against them, all the way up to... whatever. I'm not suggesting threats actually; I'm sure these guys already know the story. But you at least have to let them know you don't accept what is clearly wrong in the ordinance. The really, really nice thing about Wyoming is that it is a small town state. The powers that be just can't be that isolated from the rest of us. So they have a pretty strong incentive to be reasonable and decent people. And not surprisingly, most of them are like that. This ain't Chicago. In the meantime, Matie, treat them in a friendly and decent way, when you go to those hearings. Works better than the alternative (read "How to Win Friends & Influence People" by Dale Carnegie). Last edited on Tue Feb 10th, 2009 12:36 am by PaulB |
|||||||||
|
AB Regular Member
|
I personally spoke with an officer at Pine Bluffs Police Dept and he told me that they would indeed arrest anyone that open carrys in Pine Bluffs city limits and there would be a $750 fine. From my conversation with the officer it appears that he was told to tell people this, another interesting thing is he said he has never arrested anyone for this offense. I had him site the city code and reviewed it with him and told him it could very easily be challenged, at that point he referred me to the city attorney which appears to be a private firm. I contacted the the attorney and spoke with one of the partners and I was told another individual would get a call back tomorrow. I believe they will have no option other than interpret the law properly, but we will see what happens when the city attorney gets back to me. Anthony Bouchard Executive Director Wyoming Gun Owners Association http://www.wyominggunowners.org Last edited on Tue Feb 10th, 2009 05:00 am by AB |
|||||||||
|
Mike Super Moderator
|
BB62 wrote: Mike wrote:(referring to the preemption statute)...it covers possession, right? That included carriage. If there is no statutory definition the plain meaning applies - possess includes carrying - carrying is a subsent of possession. Post Wyoming's more strict definition of possession if there is one. |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
Mike wrote: If there is no statutory definition the plain meaning applies - possess includes carrying - carrying is a subsent of possession. Post Wyoming's more strict definition of possession if there is one. Subsent? Do you mean subset? Possess: my usage of the term, and the sources I have checked use words like "have, hold, own, control". http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/possess From what source do you derive one of the "plain meanings" of possess to be "to carry"? |
|||||||||
|
MatieA Regular Member
|
AB wrote:
Wow, I appreciate someone else getting involved. Please let me know what you find out. |
|||||||||
|
Mike Super Moderator
|
BB62 wrote: Possess: my usage of the term, and the sources I have checked use words like "have, hold, own, control". Sounds like you got carry covered already from Websters. |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
Mike wrote: BB62 wrote:Possess: my usage of the term, and the sources I have checked use words like "have, hold, own, control". Cite? Possess=carry, where? |
|||||||||
|
Mjolnir Regular Member 
|
PB is a town unique in many ways, a old mayor had a stop sign put in front of his house so he would not have to stop when going out of his driveway and so people would have to stop in front of his house. Lots of minors in town causing problems, shooting windows out with a BB gun & such. Can you still go to the police dispatcher and sign the key out to the police shooting range??? Was nice that you could shoot on the range free of charge. |
|||||||||
|
Mike Super Moderator
|
BB62 wrote: Mike wrote:BB62 wrote:Possess: my usage of the term, and the sources I have checked use words like "have, hold, own, control". Your equation is in error - carry is not the same as possess but included within the term possess - possess is the broadest of terms, inclusive of carrying, e.g., to hold. Somthing possessed is not necessarily caried, but may be carried, e.g., a handgun in a car is possessed yet not normally considered carried on or about a person for purposes of carry statutes unless the gun is within arms reach (wingspan rule). A person carrying a holstered handgun clearly also possesses it. |
|||||||||
|
MatieA Regular Member
|
Mjolnir wrote: PB is a town unique in many ways, a old mayor had a stop sign put in front of his house so he would not have to stop when going out of his driveway and so people would have to stop in front of his house. The Pine Bluffs Sportsman's Club has leased the Range, and has done a lot of improvements, there is a fee for membership, but I feel it is worth it for all that they do. They also support our local 4-H club, by letting us use the range and by supplying money,and ammo. Last edited on Wed Apr 22nd, 2009 05:27 pm by MatieA |
|||||||||
|
AB Regular Member
|
Pine Bluffs Hates your Constitutional Rights In a conversation with City Attorney Alex Davidson it was confirmed that Pine Bluffs has taken a stance to arrest and impose a fine of $750 to anyone open carrying a firearm. Boycott Pinebluffs but don’t do it quietly let the business owners know that you will be doing so and tell them about the Un-Constitutional Policy in their town. For anyone reading this article traveling I-80 on the Nebraska side, make your pit-stops before or after Pine Bluffs, the town that hates your constitutional rights. Pine Bluffs Town Clerk (307) 245-3746 Pine Bluffs Police (307) 245-3777 City Attorney Alex Davidson (307) 635-4111 Wyoming Gun Owners Association http://wyominggunowners.org/ Last edited on Tue Feb 24th, 2009 04:06 pm by AB |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
Mike wrote: BB62 wrote:Cite? Possess=carry, where? I think most people think of possession in static terms, and "carry" in a distinctively different way. You have yet to cite to authority anything to dispute that - so you can represent me free of charge in my "possess" vs "carry" case.  Moving on, it seems like AB has come up a more threatening matter, W.S. 15-1-103(a)(xviii), Wyoming's version of West Allis' wet dream - "disturbing the peace" on steriods. |
|||||||||
|
Arkyhog Regular Member 
|
Here are some email addresses of a business in Pine Bluffs: Pine Bluffs Chamber of Commerce: pinebluffs@rtconnect.net Pine Bluffs RV Park: snowardt@aol.com and the Lions Club in Pine Bluffs: webmaster@pinebluffslions.org Some interested individuals might send some quick emails telling them WHY they are getting bad press and WHY they won't be stopping in their town to spend $$$. I'm going to, because I am going antelope hunting in Wyoming in September. Last edited on Thu Feb 19th, 2009 04:44 am by Arkyhog |
|||||||||
|
Mjolnir Regular Member
|
Have all the Wyoming residents contacted the state Legislature along with all non Wyoming residents. I did sent a polite and respectful e-mail to the Governor. Let them know what you think of this and how it can and will effect you and the state of Wyoming. House: http://legisweb.state.wy.us/LegislatorSummary/LegislatorList.aspx?strHouse=H&strStatus=N Senate: http://legisweb.state.wy.us/LegislatorSummary/LegislatorList.aspx?strHouse=S&strStatus=N Governor Dave: http://governor.wy.gov/contact-dave/default.html |
|||||||||
|
ricecountyrefugee Regular Member
|
AB, If I wish to contribute to Wyoming Gun Owners, why should I need to send a money order to the state of Virginia ? (I don't use credit cards) Why is there no WYOMING contact information listed on the website ? Why is there no human contact name on the website ? Refugee |
|||||||||
|
AB Regular Member
|
Dear Ricecountyrefugee, WyGO recently updated the website and also a pay by card link, there was a graphic image (to prevent Spam) that included the following contact info: Included in original doc xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx It should have been replaced we just haven't got to it yet. Previously one could join/contribute only by mail , however almost all that did complained that there wasn't a way to pay on-line. I do want to add that we use secure credit card processing out of Virginia and that is nothing out of the norm and I would expect them not to correspond with you unless you have used their system to contribute. I do apologize for what seems like a deliberate omission, I will make sure the graphic is replaced within 48 hours. With all that being said, I am personally working on other Strategies, some not under WyGO's name including PAC Funds, to directly affect the State-wide election of Gun-Grabbers. It is through these strategies we will be most effective against the opposition. However State-Wide support is needed to achieve the goal. Anthony Bouchard Executive Director Wyoming Gun Owners Association Phone number was included in original doc http://wyominggunowners.org/ Last edited on Tue Feb 24th, 2009 01:31 pm by AB |
|||||||||
|
ricecountyrefugee Regular Member
|
Hi Anthony, I sent another message through the text box at the Wyoming Gun Owners website. Here's a copy of what I sent at about 1400 today, February 19, 2009 "Thanks for the contact on the opencarry forum. I don't know why the email address didn't work for you, I sent a test message to myself just a few minutes ago and that worked fine. I may have made a mistake typing earlier. The address [ email address] should work OK. I still don't use credit cards and although you consider the credit card processor "secure", I consider the fact that it's in Virginia suspicious. I'll consider support of Wyoming Gun Owners when I can send a money order to a Wyoming address and also have an email address that I can believe in other than this text box routine. rice county refugee" |
|||||||||
|
OCGLOCK Regular Member
|
I started this thread last year and as you can see there have been many more problems around the state of WY then you may think. We need to work hard and take these issues to the state legislature and fix this once and for all. Wyoming is the last great state of freedom and is worth fighting for. Please don't stand by and let these anti-gunners ruin this great state! |
|||||||||
|
Mjolnir Regular Member
|
Article in Cheyennes paper http://www.wyomingnews.com/articles/2009/02/22/featured_story/01top_02-22-09.txt we need to let Cheyenne know what we think of this issue and how we are watching Wyoming to see what they do. While I want to move back to Wyoming some day, issues like this make me think that might not be such a great idea, unless the people of Wyoming can restore the freedoms the state is taking away. |
|||||||||
|
Arkyhog Regular Member
|
duplicate post Last edited on Tue Feb 24th, 2009 03:15 am by Arkyhog |
|||||||||
|
Arkyhog Regular Member
|
MatieA wrote: Mjolnir wrote:PB is a town unique in many ways, a old mayor had a stop sign put in front of his house so he would not have to stop when going out of his driveway and so people would have to stop in front of his house. I received this email from the Sportsman Club this afternoon: " I am the president of the Pine Bluffs Sportsman Club. I don't know where you got your information about the town of Pine Bluffs being anti gun BUT it couldn't be farther from the truth!!!!!! Just to let you know the shooting range sits on town property. We work with the town government to make it a great place to shoot. Pine Bluffs lets the gun club hold 2 gun shows at the community center every year at no charge to our club. We have 14 trap league teams that shoot trap every Tuesday evening and Sunday afternoon during the summer. NO one has ever been harassed about carrying guns. Every June we host the Laramie County 4H Shooting Sports county meet that brings in over 200 youth shooters for a weekend of shooting competition. The local 4H Shooting Sports Club has over 85 youth shooters participating in the different disciplines at our club from April through July. We hold open shoots 2 times a month with varying numbers of people shooting hand guns, rifles, and shot guns. IN the 18 yrs that the range has been in operation there has been NO ONE harassed about openly carrying guns. Our club has 160 members that use the shooting in 1 form of shooting or the other. So I wouldn't say that Pine Bluffs is Anti Gun or against any ones 2nd amendment rights. ! more reason not to believe everything you read in some web site, or wherever you got your information from. BY the way the Town Attorney Is a member of our club and is our clubs attorney and a very supportive member of our club along with his wife. President of the Pine Bluffs Sportman's Club John Wise I wrote back: "I am getting this information from a website which supports the open carry of handguns in Wyoming . This is a national website, and I am getting this information from residents in Wyoming who post this information. I will provide you a link to the specific information I am talking about, which describes a conversation with a police officer in Pine Bluffs. Pine Bluffs conversation I truly hope what you are telling me is the honest truth. I would hate to visit your town and be thrown in jail. If you want, I will post your letter to the website as a rebuttal to all which is being posted there. From your description, Pine Bluffs sounds like a town I would love to live in. Thank you very much for your answer. He wrote back: "Put it up if you want to i am just telling the truth. actually i feel that if 1 feels they have has to carry a gun in this town or most towns in Wyoming they need to buy a M1 abram's tank to drive to the coffee shop if they are that scared of shadows. I am 59 yrs old and have lived in Wyoming all but the years i served in the military, have hunted ,fished, traveled all over the state and have never felt the need to carry a gun for protection. I do have a concieled carry permit but very seldom carry i see no need i guess i dont feel that thretened.....John Wise" ] |
|||||||||
|
Mjolnir Regular Member
|
Why is it "gun" people do not understand and are our own worse enemies. It is NOT about being scared of shadows or feeling threatened let alone buying a tank. While I am sure Pine Bluffs are "gun friendly" chances are it is more of a shotgun and hunting rifle kind of FUDD friendly and not a "tactical" pistol or AR15 kind of friendly and the post above shows how it is not a self defense friendly range with all the mocking words and phrases. |
|||||||||
|
AB Regular Member
|
John Wise stated "NO one has ever been harassed about carrying guns." it's not harassed one should worry about it's being arrested, charged, and fined. While I respect Mr. Wise's point of view I cannot ignore the fact is the towns Authorities including the town Attorney Alex Davidson have repeatedly stated that you will be arrested and fined $750 for open carrying in Pine Bluffs City limits. I would strongly agree with Mr. Wise about reading anything on the Internet and suggest you check for yourself. So lets set the record straight, call the powers that be in Pine Bluffs and ask them if you can open carry in city limits. Remember to be polite If anyone finds that they have retracted the former statements and in fact you can open carry in Pine Bluffs please post who you spoke with, time and date. (ie; Officer Smith, Stated that xyz at 10.32 am on dd/mm/yyyy. make notes and be specific. Pine Bluffs Police (307) 245-3777 City Attorney Alex Davidson (307) 635-4111 Wyoming Gun Owners Association http://wyominggunowners.org/ Article 1 Section 24 of the Wyoming Constitution. The right of citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and of the state shall not be denied. Last edited on Tue Feb 24th, 2009 04:08 pm by AB |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
BB62 wrote: Mike wrote:BB62 wrote:Cite? Possess=carry, where? Mike? Mike? Since the AG's office has taken a position that the state preemption law does not apply ("possess" including "carry" or not notwithstanding), and since AB has identified another threat to the OCer, what is it you suggest? In no way can WY still be considered a "Gold Star" state because of these two things. Last edited on Tue Feb 24th, 2009 03:57 pm by BB62 |
|||||||||
|
Ranger1 Regular Member
|
I have called the Pine Bluffs Police Department to verify the information that I have read on this forum. They have neglected to contact for nearly a week. when i called the dispatcher simply said "what is this about" when i told her she said " oh another call about that!" I will try to call them again. What could they be hiding? And as for the Pistol Club being such a great place what does that have to do with OPEN CARRY IN TOWN, I have no doubt that no has ever encountered a problem with open carry at the pistol range, I mean after all it is a GUN RANGE!!! |
|||||||||
|
Arkyhog Regular Member
|
Yeah, that is what I am getting out of the whole local government there. They are horrified tourists may be avoiding their town, but they don't want to let these tourists exercise their rights. They seem to believe in the Second Amendment, but only while shooting skeet. |
|||||||||
|
Mjolnir Regular Member
|
Pine bluffs is a really small town with 1-2 (or possibly 3 now) police if that many a couple gas stations that double as truck stops and only a couple resturants & a subway & A&W last time we were there (a few years ago). Was not really worth stopping as the A&W had gone downhill in quality and service. The fire department does not help the ambulance guys and they are always fighting it would not be a good place to live if you ever need fire or medical help. In the grand scheme of things up there in Wyoming pine bluf is insignifiant but needs to realize they can not make up rules as they go along for political reasons but they need to obey and follow state rules and laws. |
|||||||||
|
MatieA Regular Member
|
I have scanned in and posted below an article from our "Pine Bluffs Post" paper. Attached Image (viewed 427 times): |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
Well, isn't that interesting! Last edited on Fri Feb 27th, 2009 10:43 pm by BB62 |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
I just got off the phone with Mr. Benjamin Cossel of the Pine Bluffs Post. It was a very pleasant conversation, and he informed me that he had gotten calls from Wyoming as well as from all around the U.S. He sounded like a well informed individual. If you call, don't get on his case - he is simply reporting the news!! Mr. Cossel did inform me that the section of Pine Bluffs law he cited in the article was not the correct one. The article identifies 8-115(A)(d), but he said the correct sections were actually subsection (c) and (e). Subsection (c) identifies various sorts of "weapons" and subsection (e) disallows open carry of same. Mr. Cossel also said that he intends to do a follow-up article on the matter, seemingly because of or in reference to information about statewide preemption. Last edited on Fri Feb 27th, 2009 09:13 pm by BB62 |
|||||||||
|
Crossfire Jedi Regular Member 
|
This is just unreal...I was born and raised in Cheyenne...I had no idea things headed south? How is it possible that I can OC daily in Arizona/Phoenix area...like the 5th largest city in the country..but can't in Cheyenne or in Pine Bluffs which if you aren't looking carefully you will pass it? I am really confused about how this is possible. Is it true, like Glenn Beck demonstrated, that people are shredding the frign constitution? I wonder if lawsuit's can be placed against the city? I am so tired of this. Last edited on Sun Mar 1st, 2009 01:53 am by Crossfire Jedi |
|||||||||
|
AB Regular Member
|
To clarify you can open carry in Wyoming except for Pine Bluffs |
|||||||||
|
AB Regular Member
|
Pine Bluffs, I thought we were in Wyoming not New Jersey? On the surface Pine Bluffs seems like a typical Wyoming rural town with it's western appeal and weekend rodeo during the summer months, but don't be fooled, the town officials have taken a strong position against your constitutional rights, it seems that they have decided to interpret the law in a New Jersey fashion. You should be offended that a Wyoming town has accepted the philosophy that a disarmed public is somehow safer. All evidence proves otherwise, if you control the guns of law abiding citizen's you have an open invitation to the thugs. What you are really saying about this community is "we are a gun-free zone". That has been done outside of Wyoming and clearly gun-control never controls crime, in fact it does just the opposite. The Wyoming Constitution clearly states, "The right of the citizens to bear arms in the defense of themselves and the state shall not be denied." It appears that the powers that be in Pine Bluffs would just as well re-write our constitution and other state laws that grant the rights to Wyoming citizens. 8-115 (a) (d) is specifically about concealed carry and has nothing to do about open carry and it should be noted that Pine Bluffs has ignored the fact that just 40 miles away in Cheyenne there is a similar law in place, however it has been interpreted properly and open carry is permissable in city limits. Why would Pine Bluffs support the out-of-state anti-gun agenda?, Mayor Leonard Anderson and the Town Council should take great care when it comes to your constitutional rights. A new website, pinebluffswy.org will explain the anti-gun agenda to the general public, also WyGO has made preliminary agreements with land owners to place billboard signs on both sides of the town on I-80, No Guns - No Money, Drive Thru Pine Bluffs, ultimately we hope that they reconsider before it comes to that. Pine Bluffs Town Clerk (307) 245-3746 Pine Bluffs Police (307) 245-3777 Wyoming Gun Owners http://wyominggunowners.org/ Last edited on Sun Mar 1st, 2009 08:43 am by AB |
|||||||||
|
AB Regular Member
|
Attached Image (viewed 196 times): Last edited on Sun Mar 1st, 2009 05:03 am by AB |
|||||||||
|
Arkyhog Regular Member
|
I live in Arkansas, but I am watching what happens in Wyoming very closely. Wyoming gun owners should be aware they are in dangerous territory, but they are in a position Arkansas gun owners would love to be in. Please fight these towns in Wyoming which choose to ignore your state laws, your state Constitution and the U.S. Constitution! We gun owners in other states depend on your actions to keep a firm foothold for us to stand on. Arkansans need states such as Wyoming to hold up as an ideal Second Amendment state. Last edited on Sun Mar 1st, 2009 05:50 am by Arkyhog |
|||||||||
|
Arkyhog Regular Member
|
I loved the billboard! It's exactly what Pine Bluffs deserves! Last edited on Sun Mar 1st, 2009 05:49 am by Arkyhog |
|||||||||
|
AB Regular Member
|
Link to article: Pine Bluffs patrolman Brian Yeomans shouldn’t practice law! Wyoming Gun Owners http://wyominggunowners.org/ Last edited on Mon Mar 2nd, 2009 05:07 pm by AB |
|||||||||
|
Arkyhog Regular Member
|
John Wise sent me an email today. The town council and the mayor have called a meeting for Monday night. He says he will let me know the outcome of the meeting after it is over. It seems the town does not like what the article in the paper says. Hopefully this misunderstanding about the law can be overcome. It seems this law was written years ago to keep the kids from shooting out street lights and such. Good news may be around the corner! |
|||||||||
|
SDguy Regular Member
|
I just dropped the Bine Bluffs Chamber of Commerce an e-mail note informing them that I travel thru Pine Bluffs regularly when I travel on business from my home state of South Dakota into Wyoming. I informed them that I will now make it a point NOT to stop in Pine Bluffs for a meal, gas or any other business knowing that I am not welcome there with my legally carried personal firearm that is legal elsewhere in the state of Wyoming. I have a South Dakota CC permit which is good elsewhere in the great state of Wyoming with the exception of Pine Bluffs. |
|||||||||
|
AB Regular Member
|
PineBluffsWY.org site is up and running, it is very basic for now. This will be a good resource for traveling gun-owners. http://pinebluffswy.org/ Wyoming Gun Owners Join - Contribute - Be an Active Member http://wyominggunowners.org/ |
|||||||||
|
MatieA Regular Member
|
Pine Bluffs monthly town meeting is tonight at 1900 and I will be attending. From the sounds of things I won't have to do much because the mayor and town council have already decided to change things due to phone calls, and emails recieved. Officer Brian Yeomans was also unintelligent enough to put an article in the paper effectively "shooting himself in the foot". I for one am hoping that he is dismissed, and if given the chance I will recommend or second this action; and although he is not the only officer involved in this fiasco, I know that the other officer will get nothing more than a "stern talking to". Last edited on Mon Mar 2nd, 2009 11:25 am by MatieA |
|||||||||
|
MatieA Regular Member
|
Crossfire Jedi wrote: This is just unreal...I was born and raised in Cheyenne...I had no idea things headed south? How is it possible that I can OC daily in Arizona/Phoenix area...like the 5th largest city in the country..but can't in Cheyenne or in Pine Bluffs which if you aren't looking carefully you will pass it? I am really confused about how this is possible. Is it true, like Glenn Beck demonstrated, that people are shredding the frign constitution? I don't know how long it has been since you've been to Cheyenne, but you won't miss it by blinking anymore. It has gotten much to large for my tastes. |
|||||||||
|
AB Regular Member
|
New Post on PineBluffsWY.org Link Gun laws - preempted by the state WyGO / Wyoming Gun Owners |
|||||||||
|
MatieA Regular Member
|
I have spoken with John Wise ( Pine Bluffs Sportman's Club President) a short while ago, and he said that he does not believe that there will be any resistance to rewording or striking out the ordinances that are wrong. The officer that could not read, but felt he could interpret the laws his own way will be reprimanded, but most probably terminated. It seems that this particular law has been on the books since before the town even had an attorney, and most people did not even know it existed. If you check statutes for other Wyoming towns ( including Cheyenne) they have one worded almost the same way, but it is interpreted correctly, or ignored. Side note - I like the way Rawlins worded their ordinance for Firearms. I will post an update as soon as I get home from the meeting tonight, but I am pretty sure that this is a done deal. Last edited on Tue Mar 3rd, 2009 11:33 pm by MatieA |
|||||||||
|
AB Regular Member
|
WyGo Will be attending the town council meeting as well. Anthony Bouchard Executive Director Wyoming Gun Owners Association http://wyominggunowners.org/ |
|||||||||
|
MatieA Regular Member
|
Ok, town meeting is over. The Attorney brought up the point of State Preemption, and the town council unanimously decided that the town ordinances are void. The attorney also stated that the ordinances had been misinterpreted by the officer. I am fully satisfied that the matter is settled, and there will be no problems with open carry in this town. The council also asked that WYGO remove the negative publicity from their sites, and I agree that it should be removed. It was mentioned that I had asked for Yeoman's dismissal, I did not in fact ask for his dismissal. An apology for making me believe that I had been breaking a town law would be nice. I wish to make it known that I harbor no ill will toward my town, or it's law enforcement. Last edited on Tue Mar 3rd, 2009 01:32 pm by MatieA |
|||||||||
|
SkunkApe Regular Member
|
Well done. Thank you. |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
MatieA wrote: #1 ...The Attorney brought up the point of State Preemption ,and the town council unanimously decided that the town ordinances are void. The attorney also stated that the ordinances had been misinterpreted by the officer. My point #'s and emphasis above. #1 - That's very nice, but I sure wouldn't claim total victory. Cities and towns here in Ohio have played that same game - leaving laws on the books for the intimidation factor. The town can say that the laws are void, and that they were misinterpreted all they want, but that doesn't change the fact that they are still on the books. If I were you, I would continue to press for their removal, or modification to fit Wyoming's preemption statute. If council resists, one ought to ask oneself why - and if you think about it, you'll get your answer - it's a power thing. That's the ONLY reason. If anyone thinks I am wrong, tell me why. #2 - Council doesn't enforce the laws, the police do. If council starts telling the police what laws on the books are to be enforced, and not enforced, then you have a larger issue. See #1 above for the solution. As for the negative publicity, again, see #1. |
|||||||||
|
Arkyhog Regular Member
|
I think all of the gun-rights people of Wyoming deserve a thank you! Thanks to all of you! Keep fighting until there is no question from anyone as to what the Second Amendment gives us. |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
Arkyhog wrote: ...Keep fighting until there is no question from anyone as to what the Second Amendment gives us. Just a slight correction - the Second Amendment doesn't give us anything - it merely confirms a God given right. We give life to the Second Amendment by our willingness to fight to preserve it. |
|||||||||
|
Arkyhog Regular Member
|
BB62 wrote: Arkyhog wrote:...Keep fighting until there is no question from anyone as to what the Second Amendment gives us. Just another slight correction; the Second Amendment DOES give us something. It gives us the ability to exercise this God-given right (and by the way, I DID know it was a God-given right, it's no secret). Our ability to exercise our rights given to us by the Second Amendment can be taken from us at any time, unless we fight to preserve it. We were given our right to self-defense and the right to keep and bear arms at birth. This doesn't mean we will always have the ability to exercise this right. As long as the Second Amendment is alive and breathing, it GIVES us the ability to exercise this God-given right. |
|||||||||
|
MatieA Regular Member
|
I just spoke with our mayor, and he stated that the ordinances will be changed, but that they have to go through the proper procedures to do so. He stated that there will be 3 readings of the proposed changes with opportunity for public input at each. I will be watching the paper for the dates. |
|||||||||
|
SDguy Regular Member
|
Below is a copy of a series of e-mails between myself and the town lawyer for Pine Bluffs. Scroll to the bottom of this screen to read the first one and then move up the next in order to read them in order. Norm, As I suspected the governing body has always been and continues to be strongly pro-gun. They uniformly expressed no concern with open carry only desiring an attitude of common sense and responsibility. I was asked to review the current ordinances and bring them into conformity with state and federal law. I look forward to doing that. I think the information published on the web was premature and misleading. It is unfortunate that the governing body had to do the right thing in spite of the posted information and negative publicity. It made the job harder not easier. The Mayor expressed concern that outside agitators would create such a negative impression based on something that was coming from ONE member of the PD without checking with a single elected official. He further noted that we need to work together not be at odds with those who agree with us. I hope your affiliated group and the Wyoming Gun Owners can learn from the experience to be more careful in the approach taken to these matters. Assumptions and prejudgments can be very detrimental. All that aside though I believe it will pan out OK. Regards, Alex Davison
|
|||||||||
|
SDguy Regular Member
|
After the exchange of the e-mails in my last post, I replied with the following message. We will see if Alex gets back to me again. From my perspective we cannot simply trust what they tell us. We must see that they actually change the law. It also seems that the Pine Bluffs city fathers do not like hearing the opinion of "outsiders". Since when are my constitutional rights only valid where I live? Rights do not vary from town to town according to the whim of the locally elected officials. Hopefully, the city officials of Pine Bluffs will get that message and perhaps other local governments will notice as well. Here is my latest e-mail to the Pine Bluffs town lawyer: Alex: Two things: 1) I find it an interesting attitude by some in the town of Pine Bluffs to be considered an "outside agitator" when it comes to my constitutional rights while visiting Pine Bluffs. 2) Regardless of what anyone states, promises or even places in writing, until the local law is recinded which prohibits open carry, I cannot be sure that I will not be arrested under that law during a visit to Pine Bluffs. Norm Last edited on Tue Mar 3rd, 2009 07:18 pm by SDguy |
|||||||||
|
MatieA Regular Member
|
SDguy wrote:
I think what he (Alex) may be referring to is the attitude of some people that they (Council Members) have spoken to leaving a bitter taste in the mouth of those who were working to rectify the matter. Granted this is just my opinion and an educated(or not) guess. Last edited on Tue Mar 3rd, 2009 11:35 pm by MatieA |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
MatieA wrote: I just spoke with our mayor, and he stated that the ordinances will be changed, but that they have to go through the proper procedures to do so. He stated that there will be 3 readings of the proposed changes with opportunity for public input at each. That's great, but keep your eyes on them! Assuming this comes off as the mayor has said, congratulations! Oh, one more thing - a point that SDGuy made: the mayor's complaint about no one contacting elected officials is a little weak, IMHO. Not only did an officer tell a number of people that OC was unlawful, calls weren't returned, then the matter got into the paper (does the PD allow officers to get quoted in the newspaper without higher level approval?), AND the city attorney was also contacted, and he (it seems) repeatedly backed the officer! Did the mayor really expect that there would be no noise unless and until the matter got to the elected officials? To me, it's a bit disingenuous to blame "agitaters" for agitating. Of course, I wasn't at the council meeting, but various Pine Bluffs officials (and John Wise) had a number of chances to nip the matter in the bud long before then. Keep us posted MatieA!! Last edited on Wed Mar 4th, 2009 02:58 am by BB62 |
|||||||||
|
SDguy Regular Member
|
It just turns out that in two weeks I will be traveling thru Pine Bluffs on another regular business trip. I am considering stopping for lunch while openly carrying to help make the point. Actually, I normally open carry on those Wyoming trips regardless of the Pine Bluffs affair. I have never had a Wyoming law enforcement officer even speak to me even though my firearm was in plain sight on my hip. There is no reason that things should be any different in Pine Bluffs. |
|||||||||
|
MatieA Regular Member
|
SDguy wrote:
I carried all day today; except for my meeting with the mayor, which I felt would have been inappropriate. Most people never even noticed. |
|||||||||
|
Arkyhog Regular Member
|
SDguy wrote:
I will be traveling through there in September. I would like to meet Mr. John Wise of the gun club while I am there. He seems to be confused about where we are coming from on this issue, and I would love to talk to him about it. I foresee people such as him being some of our biggest supporters in the future! We simply need to educate them. He may be the type of people we need as swing votes in future elections. |
|||||||||
|
MatieA Regular Member
|
Arkyhog wrote: SDguy wrote: Anybody traveling through town should give me a holler, If I'm not at work at that time, I'll come meet you for a coffee or something. Last edited on Wed Mar 4th, 2009 02:11 pm by MatieA |
|||||||||
|
Leonard Regular Member
|
Norman, I have read the e-mails of our attorney sent to you and he is representing the thoughts of the mayor and council on this issue. Anthony Bouchard the Executive Director for Wyoming Gun Owners was a loose cannon at our council meeting Monday night. We feel he has done alot of damage to and insulted the town and the people of this community and we do resent this. His actions at the council meeting were surely not in the best interest of the Wyoming Gun Owners organization. My advice to you before you take up an issue that Anthony Bouchard the Executive Director of the Wyoming Fun Owners has proposed to you on a web site is that you check it out thorougly. The actions of the Council will be coming on the gun issue and our attorney has said he will keep you informed if you want. I invite you to stop by the Town Hall or Police Station when you come through as I would like to meet you personally and further discuss this issue. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Leonard Anderson, Mayor Town of Pine Bluffs, WY |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
Leonard wrote: Norman, Assuming you are who you say you are, it's good of you to sign on and post here. Obviously, I was not at your meeting, and consequently can have no opinion on how anyone conducted themselves. The only thing us non-attendees can judge is how quickly and in what form Pine Bluff's laws fall into compliance with Wyoming's preemption laws. On a personal note, and as I posted about 5 posts up, I think it unrealistic for you to expect that given the number of contacts by various people with officials in Pine Bluffs, "agitaters" would hold off until council had their say. Maybe things are different in small town Wyoming, but when the police and city attorney are saying the same thing, in contrast to expected practice, people get agitated before, during and after yanking elected official's chains. At least, that's the way things go in Cincinnati. Again, it's good to have you here, and were we going to be closer to Pine Bluffs when we vacation in Wyoming in June (which gives you more than enough time to modify your laws  ), we would stop by. As it is, we will be 1 1/2 hours north.Last edited on Wed Mar 4th, 2009 11:53 pm by BB62 |
|||||||||
|
AB Regular Member
|
Leonard wrote: ...Anthony Bouchard the Executive Director for Wyoming Gun Owners was a loose cannon at our council meeting Monday night. We feel he has done alot of damage to and insulted the town and the people of this community and we do resent this. His actions at the council meeting were surely not in the best interest of the Wyoming Gun Owners organization. My advice to you before you take up an issue that Anthony Bouchard the Executive Director of the Wyoming Fun Owners has proposed to you on a web site is that you check it out thorougly... Let the readers draw their own conclusions... The article below is from the Pine Bluffs Post: Anthony Bouchard Executive Director WyGO / Wyoming Gun Owners Association http://wyominggunowners.org/ Open carry ordinance hot topic during council meeting Town to revise antiquated ordinance Pine Bluffs Post March 5, 2009 By Benjamin Cossel editor@pinebluffspost.com Wanda Theobald’s third class may have gotten more than they bargained for. The Pine Bluffs Elementary students were on hand during Monday’s regular session of the Pine Bluffs Town Council and were treated to a lively example of city government in action. The hot topic during the evening’s session? Open carry of firearms in the town of Pine Bluffs. Theobald explained her students were learning how towns operate – they’d set up businesses in the classroom, elected a mayor and council and were at the meeting to see the real deal in action. The open carry issue was brought up during visitor comments when Pine Bluffs resident, Alan Matie asked the council about the existing ordinance. “This is and old, old ordinance,” Mayor Leonard Anderson explained. “What do we need to do to change it then?” Matie asked. Matie explained he been told, on several occasions by members of the Pine Bluffs Police Department, that anyone carrying a firearm in the open would be arrested and fined. “To the best of my knowledge, no one in town has ever been arrested for open carry of a firearm,” Anderson said. Taking up the discussion, town attorney, Alex Davison noted no one currently in the town government was serving when the ordinance, 8-115 (c) and (e) were adopted. “I think this law was put on the books back in the days of Wild Bill Hickock,” Davison said. Davison went on to explain gun rights were one of the few issues where state law preempted local law or home rule. Davison said home rule, as defined in article 13 of the Wyoming Constitution, gave localities the right to make laws but there were a few cases were state law preempted home rule. “In a Supreme Court case with the town of Green River, the Court gave four guidelines where state law preempts home rule,” said Davison. Davison then said gun rights was one of the issues that meet the guidelines and state law did, indeed, preempt home rule. “I really think our ordinance is outdated, it’s just never come up before,” Davison said. Councilman Bill Shain pushed Davison further, “Let me make sure I understand this,” Shain said. “Unless we try to fight this with some sort of home rule claim, the law we have on the books is unenforceable, is that correct?” “In my opinion, that is correct,” Davison responded. Anthony Bouchard of the Wyoming Gun Owners Association then stood and added weight to the comment made by Matie. The WGOA is a gun rights advocacy group that recently took up the issue of the town’s ordinance. According to the organization’s Web site, their purpose is solely to defend gun rights. From the group’s purpose statement, “To advocate, protect and defend the God given and inalienable right to bear arms as in the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution and Article 1 Section 24 of the Wyoming Constitution.” “I too called the Pine Bluffs Police Department and was told that I would be arrested and fined for the open carry of a firearm,” said Bouchard. A demonstrably angry Councilman Bill Cushing fired back at Bouchard. “Are you going to call off the attack dogs now and take down the signs telling people to boycott Pine Bluffs?” Bouchard responded his group would wait until the ordinance was modified to allow the open carry of firearms. Anderson then asked if Bouchard’s organization was the one responsible for the signs and messages against Pine Bluffs. “Yes, we are, and the ball is now in your court,” Bouchard said. “We just sat here and said the law was unenforceable, that no one was going to be arrested for this,” Shain said. “I mean, this town sponsors two gun shows a year, our town attorney is a member of the shooting club and we have a shooting range in town,” Shain added. “Too often towns say they’re going to do something about it, the boycotts and signs get taken down and nothing ever happens,” said Bouchard. “Look, we are going to look at changing this ordinance, but we’re not going to do it out of a sense of intimidation, we’ll do it out of a sense of the law and the will of the residents of the town,” said Davison. Watching the debate get more and more heated, Anderson then thanked Bouchard. “I do appreciate you coming down and speaking and now that this is out in the open we’ll address it,” Anderson said. Speaking after the meeting, Anderson said the council does intend to bring the town ordinance in line with state law concerning the open carry of firearms in town. The next regular session of council is scheduled for 7 p.m. Monday, March 23 at the town hall. |
|||||||||
|
rastus Regular Member
|
check out where the shooting range is in pine bluffs ( inside the city limits) A little common sense keeps people from looking like nut jobs and federal law says they cant buy guns |
|||||||||
|
rastus Regular Member
|
check out where the shooting range is in pine bluffs ( inside the city limits) A little common sense keeps people from looking like nut jobs and federal law says they cant buy guns |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
rastus wrote: check out where the shooting range is in pine bluffs ( inside the city limits) Huh? |
|||||||||
|
MamaLiberty Regular Member
|
Looks like this is progressing nicely to a good conclusion. Seems we need two things here, however. 1. Keep watching. We each need to talk to the police and sheriff in our own area about open carry and our rights in general. Until these "laws" are totally off the books, nobody is really safe from harassment or arrest, regardless of what the officials say. Be polite, be educational and be CAREFUL. Don't give our enemies, or even those who don't understand, any ammunition to use against us. 2. CARRY for pity sake!! Recruit others to carry! I've been preaching to the choir for more than three years and, as far as I know, I'm STILL the only private citizen in Newcastle, Wyoming that carries a gun, at least openly. Sticking out like a sore thumb, MamaLiberty |
|||||||||
|
mattman Regular Member
|
In having read several of the replies on this forum there were a few that related to how some people had been "Hassled" by law enforcement for carrying openly. What many of these folks probably need to understand was that these officers were most likley responding to a "Man with a gun call" that had been phoned in by a citizen who saw them packing and was made nervous enough by that they they phoned it in. I am a police officer and always carry while off duty. With that said, I always carry concealed. I am still ready to take action should I need to do so but I am not making people around me nervous. It is my understanding that Wyoming honors most concealed carry permits issued by other states (Check the laws on this one) so concealed carry, for the most part, should not be an issue here if you have such a permit. Those who do not have a permit, or who wish to carry openly even though they do, must understand that their character or good intent is not apparent to the casual observer. Nervous people will occassionaly call law enforcement on this and when called, law enforcement must respond to investigate. This is not "Hassling" anyone exercising their rights, as long as the responding officers conduct themselves as they should. |
|||||||||
|
MamaLiberty Regular Member
|
You have this just backwards. My "character" and intent must be assumed to be peaceful unless I am actively doing something to threaten or harm others. Presumption of innocence is one very important item that is evidently no longer taught to police personnel. So, unless I am doing something to cause harm, there is no reason for anyone to be alarmed or uncomfortable, especially police. The proper response to a caller who is frightened at the sight of an armed citizen would be, "Were they threatening anyone? Were they committing a crime?" If the answer was NO, then there would be no reason for a contact and the caller should be gently reminded that they had no reason to be uncomfortable or to call police since the person was completely within their rights. The "hassling" comes with incidents such as that which started this thread. The police officer did not know or understand the state law and threatened the person as if he were a criminal, rather than as one who was exercising his right to carry. It happens all the time. And your notion that CC is somehow the magic answer is no answer at all. The actual sight of openly carried sidearms can, eventually, help the ninnies to understand that we are not the criminals, and are not a threat. Proper response to those callers could help a great deal as well. Last edited on Sat Mar 7th, 2009 07:18 pm by MamaLiberty |
|||||||||
|
SDguy Regular Member
|
The real issue for me is to be threatened with arrest for carrying and having it published in a newspaper article. Threatened against doing something legal is the "hasseling" I am concerned about. The second form of hasseling is being given a hard time for expressing my concern over a local community acting against state constitutional rights. Being told that I am an outside instigator just because I don't live in that town. Yet, I am directly affected by the town law and local law enforcement. These are things that should be of concern to anyone who happens to travel through small towns, stop to eat or fuel up while carrying firearms. I am not aware of any "man with a gun" calls having to to with this issue. If you are aware of such calls please inform us with the facts. I carry concealed and openly and have never had anyone make a "man with a gun" call. I have had people ask me about the law and gun rights. Many a civil discussion with vacationing people who are interested in how this works but not a single person who expressed fear. |
|||||||||
|
MatieA Regular Member
|
mattman wrote: In having read several of the replies on this forum there were a few that related to how some people had been "Hassled" by law enforcement for carrying openly. What many of these folks probably need to understand was that these officers were most likley responding to a "Man with a gun call" that had been phoned in by a citizen who saw them packing and was made nervous enough by that they they phoned it in. I have always open carried except for a few times when my duster covered it, but have never had any problems. I have even been asked to pose with tourist's kids so that they could take a picture. I wonder how many family albums I'm in? |
|||||||||
|
SDguy Regular Member
|
Does anyone know if this item is on the next town meeting agenda? We need to continue watching this issue in Pine Bluffs. I get the impression the town board may think they can leave the current unconstitutional regulation on the books and just not enforce it. That would not be the proper way to handle this issue. |
|||||||||
|
Anubis Regular Member
|
mattman wrote: Nervous people will occassionaly call law enforcement on this and when called, law enforcement must respond to investigate. This is not "Hassling" anyone exercising their rights, as long as the responding officers conduct themselves as they should. Welcome to the forum, officer mattman. I have a CO permit and usually do carry concealed; but as you know, WY is considering canceling recognition of my permit. Then my only armed self-defense option in WY would be OC. So if a nervous person makes a MWAG call about me OCing, and an officer interrogates me, I shouldn't feel hassled. By this logic, when I make a 911 call about the nervous person interfering with my going about my lawful activities, officers should respond and grill the nervous person too, right? |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
mattman wrote: In having read several of the replies on this forum there were a few that related to how some people had been "Hassled" by law enforcement for carrying openly... First, WELCOME!! I agree with the totality of your post, but as I'm sure you suspect, the "as they should" is where things go off the rails. As LE, we are pleased that you are here. Whatever you do, don't run away from the board because some negative impression of the board or of OCers confirms what other LEOs have said about "us". Your first few posts are a good sign. Again, welcome! |
|||||||||
|
BenjaminHare Regular Member
|
What does the Pine Bluffs PD have to say about this issue? I called them (307-245-3777) and was assured "until further notice" I would not be arrested or fined if I OCed in town. Although I do not travel very often to Pine Bluffs I am planning on attending the Town Council meeting on the 23rd of this month. That will be my day to put the "until further notice" issue to the test. |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
BenjaminHare wrote: What does the Pine Bluffs PD have to say about this issue? I called them (307-245-3777) and was assured "until further notice" I would not be arrested or fined if I OCed in town. Although I do not travel very often to Pine Bluffs I am planning on attending the Town Council meeting on the 23rd of this month. That will be my day to put the "until further notice" issue to the test. Call me pessimistic, but I think you have hit upon a couple (and there are more) elements of the whole matter that make me distrust those in authority in Pine Bluffs: 1) the "until further notice"? answer and 2) the seeming lack of a timetable for the town council to change their laws. Those in authority in this little spot on the map seem to have worked their way into a contradictory position, and now they are puffing their chest out and whining about agitators. I'm glad to hear that there will be yet another set of eyes and ears on their activities (or lack thereof) related to the matter on March 23. Keep us posted. Last edited on Wed Mar 11th, 2009 12:58 am by BB62 |
|||||||||
|
oshane Opt-Out Member
|
PaulB wrote:Wow, that might have come out of California! Statutes are almost never written in such a way that the average person could know what the common law is on a subject. That is, unless the statute specifically abrogates the common law, courts assume the legislature meant to continue employing all relevant common law doctrines. Here, the common law doctrines of self-defense and necessity apply. They are affirmative defenses, meaning that if the overly-zealous prosecutor chooses to file, you may have to endure a trial, etc., but ultimately, if your actions were reasonable and lawful, you will just need to demonstrate that you were acting in self-defense or out of necessity, and you likely will not be convicted under the ordinance. Most prosecutors will see a self-defense action that is reasonable under the circumstances and not charge you, because it would be a) wrong and b) a waste of everyone's time. |
|||||||||
|
oshane Opt-Out Member
|
MatieA wrote:I will be attending the next town meeting that I can attend, and will be bringing up several issues on this. A few of you have pointed out things that I had not noticed. I was told (by Law Enforcement here) that concealed carry (with a permit) was the only way you could carry in town limits, and that open carry would be a $750.00 fine and an automatic court appearance. As I stated before I have been open-carrying for the seven years that I've lived here with no incident, and I'm hoping to resolve this without being arrested, but I am not going to stop carrying just because someone can't read. In Section 8-115(e), the "intent or avowed purpose" clause is a manifestation of the defendant's mental state. That is, this ordinance has a built in explicit "mens rea" (latin for: "guilty mind") that the prosecutor/state would have to prove to convict you. If you are open carrying without the intent or avowed purpose of doing the harm specified, you will have no problem. Or, even if the prosecutor is a big jerk, your defense will not be very difficult, because he has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you intended to do the harm listed. |
|||||||||
|
oshane Opt-Out Member
|
AB wrote:(xviii) Regulate, prevent or suppress riots, disturbances, disorderly assemblies or parades, or any other conduct which disturbs or jeopardizes the public health, safety, peace or morality, in any public or private place. It is facially ambiguous, but most of the fear about it is probably misplaced. Rules of statutory interpretation dictate that a court read the last clause in context to the first clause so that the whole statement is coherent. You should also know that the Wyoming Supreme Court is totally sane and very conservative when it comes to making sure the rights of the people are not infringed. In this case, the latter clause is probably the legislature's way of creating a catch-all phrase to embody other things like riots and genuine disturbances of the peace. It is not meant to catch-all activity or render the pre-emption law as a whole void or absurd. For example, what if there was no "riot" per se but there was a gang war in town (God forbid). Would it classify as a riot or classic disturbance? Probably not. But it would fall under the catch-all clause and the state could use that to convict. It is not meant to infringe the rights of people open carrying. |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
oshane wrote: ...It is not meant to infringe the rights of people open carrying. I quoted only a small part of both of your posts, because I think that portion well represents the thrust of them. I don't know whether you have read the entire thread, nor do I know what experience you have with those in authority trying to twist what is "clear". Whatever the intent of the legislature, unless it is crystal clear, you can be assured that the letter of the law can and will be turned against you by those intent on making a point. As someone else said previously, those people will do their best to make black white, and vice versa. Yes, you may win as you work yourself up the court system to the WSC, but at what cost?? A good example is here in Ohio, where the original CCW law said that one may not carry in places that "dispense" liquor. What does that mean to most people? I would say "sell for consumption on the premises", yet a person was charged for carrying in a Wal-Mart... So, the same RKBA group that who worked on the passage of the first version of the bill had to go back to the legislature and have the law made more specific - now it says you may not carry in a (liquor establishment) "in which any person is consuming liquor". http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/2923.121 |
|||||||||
|
oshane Opt-Out Member
|
BB62 wrote:oshane wrote:...It is not meant to infringe the rights of people open carrying. Yes, I read the entire thread, and I manifestly understand the tendency of the police and the executive of a jurisdiction to over-interpret laws in favor of the state. You asked rhetorically that "you may win . . . [in] the court system . . . but at what cost?" Yes, it is always a huge hassle to go to court, especially because there is a risk of losing. So, is it worth it to attempt to or lobby to have the legislated law clarified, narrowed, specified so the risk of having to ever go to court is minimized. Yes! Always. That said, what I am pointing out is that in many cases that people were hypothesizing on this thread (over-eager LEOs arresting you), the prosecutor would not charge you or the trial court would likely dismiss, find in summary judgment for the defendant (you) or if not, the Supreme Court of Wyoming would (eventually) find in your favor. Would that be a large cost that no one should have to bear? Yes. However, presuming you won (most likely), it would also set a new or clarify an old precedent for law enforcement. One thing that I found interesting about the Pine Bluffs situation was that the mayor, the council and the city attorney were entirely rational and knew the pre-emption law well enough to realize the local law (an old one) was . . . preempted. Sometimes people wonder why laws/ordinances that have been overruled or preempted are not taken off the books. It's because the law is simply not a well-oiled or engineered system. If "everybody" (i.e. the council) knows that the ordinance is now moot by state statute or case law, then they rationalize not acting, because it's not that important as the legal community knows the ordinance is dead letter. Should they repeal the law? Yes! It is worth their time: probably not. Is it worth ours? Yes. So I also advocate the lobbying to repeal preempted ordinances, too. But in the meantime, you shouldn't be worried about the ones listed in this thread. |
|||||||||
|
MatieA Regular Member
|
oshane wrote: BB62 wrote: I believe that our mayor, and town council have every intention of taking care of this matter, but it is not a process that can be done overnight. Would you want to live somewhere where laws could be changed overnight, ruling out any chance of you having a say in the matter? I have emailed the town attorney some ordinances that I felt were worded in an appropriate manner to uphold state laws,and give citizens their freedoms. whether or not he uses them, I still felt compelled to offer him my $.02 worth. I do not know how long this will take, and I do not plan on letting the matter drop; I also do not plan to harrass the council, making matters worse for everyone involved, and making those of us who enjoy our "right to carry" an enemy to the council. Last edited on Thu Mar 12th, 2009 05:33 pm by MatieA |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
oshane wrote: Yes, I read the entire thread... Uh, not quite... If you read the entire thread carefully, you will find that not only was the city attorney VERY resistant to that (a preempted) interpretation of PB's laws, but also that the seeming sacrificial lamb (since when does a police dept have a low-level officer speak for it) felt the same way - the attorney only changing his tune when at the council meeting. Even now, the best that can be gotten out of the police department is that "until further notice" one needn't worry? "But in the meantime, you shouldn't be worried about the ones listed in this thread." In the meantime, I and any right-thinking person SHOULD worry about preempted laws (or those that are unclear) remaining on the books. Here's another example, though not from Wyoming, of where you'd better have the appropriate size checkbook if you're not worried about such things: http://buckeyefirearms.org/node/6528 |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
MatieA wrote: I believe that our mayor, and town council have every intention of taking care of this matter, but it is not a process that can be done overnight... I agree. Only the wording changes necessary to bring PB into compliance with Wyoming's preemption law can be done virtually overnight. I don't know what the required reading/hearing process is in PB, but that must take it's own course in addition to the time required to modify the ordinance's wording. Since the wording changes are relatively easily done, it will be interesting to see what progress or timetable, if any, is offered at the next council meeting so the reading/hearing process can begin. |
|||||||||
|
oshane Opt-Out Member
|
Uh, not quite... So the city attorney was wrong and publicly repudiated his previously held wrong views. Sounds like a step in the right direction. The "until further notice" tripe statement on the phone by the police officer does concern me. Sounds like another way of subtly trying to get you to not open carry, but it is smoke and mirrors. No, you shouldn't worry in the long run about preempted laws. They are dead letter. |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
oshane wrote: So the city attorney was wrong and publicly repudiated his previously held wrong views. Sounds like a step in the right direction. (my emphasis above) Thanks for the post. Not to argue just to be arguing, but preempted laws on the books have ways of being used (see the link I previously provided), and are really not dead letters - and as we both agree (I think), they need to be removed. Last edited on Thu Mar 12th, 2009 08:55 pm by BB62 |
|||||||||
|
sparky79 Regular Member
|
I can't believe what a deal this turned out to be. Going from one Officers misguided comment to wanting to post billboard's telling travelers to ban Pine Bluffs. Unbelievable! As for this forum I can't believe some people went as far to try to spread rumors about special stop signs in front of former mayors houses and bashing the local first responders. How would you know I'm willing to bet your initials are D.S. I mean this forum was to discuss your gun rights not rumorville. com. Now back onto the matter at hand. You know all it would have taken was for someone to go to a Town Council meeting and politely and rationally ask about and point out the outdated ordinance. But instead the town I live in and am proud to live in was bashed and raked through the coal's. Notice I said rationally and politely and from what I hear Mr. Bouchard was far from that. I spoke with a member of law enforcement who was at the last council meeting (not a PBPD officer by the way) and he was in agreement with Mayor Anderson in that Mr. Bouchard was way out of line. I agree with the town attorney all the ugliness and negativity made a simple thing of pointing out an outdated ordinance and asking it be changed made it into a complete mess. Give the town council the appropriate amount of time and a chance to make this right before passing judgement. If in a couple months this has not been resolved then go from there but give them a chance now. I bet when the council rectifies this issue that there will be no signs posted or letters mailed saying we where sorry for jumping to conclusions. I bet there will be no apologies from Mr. Bouchard for the way he acted at the last meeting. I hope I'm wrong and that these things do happen but I am betting not. Pine Bluffs is a fine town to live in. Please stop in and have a bite, check out our museum and archeology dig. Walk around and have picnic in the bluffs. Come to an open shoot at our very nice shooting range. You would be more then welcome packing or not I'm sure. |
|||||||||
|
sonnycrockett12 Regular Member
|
Sparky, I agree with you...Pine Bluffs is a fine town and so are it's citizens....I've been through there many a time on my visits to Wyoming and always enjoyed myself. Heck, I can't name a town in Wyoming that wasn't filled with the friendliest people I ever met. I think this whole situation could have probably been handled better on both sides and got out of hand. The police officers should have been more tactful and better trained to know that law better and perhaps members of the city govt could have been more responsive...BUT the town council should have been first given a chance to rectify the matter before we went in guns blazing. While I believe in holding any people in power's feet to the fire this isn't a New Jersey town full of anti-gun people who won't listen to us. 99.9% of the people in Wyoming are pro-gun. I think a visit by a concerned TOWN CITIZEN to the town council meeting to express concerns of the ordinance should have been a first step. If no response then perhaps a meeting with the mayor to point out the law and the desire to have it repealed. If that didn't work then I have no problem with "bringing out the big guns" and boycotting the town, billboards, etc. I think another problem with all of this is that it wasn't a coordinated effort with a single voice...when many people are expressing concerns in such a way it's easy for people to get mixed up in a "who said what" situation and perhaps act without all the information. Anyway....let's let the council work on this and if it's not rectified in a reasonable amount of time then we can hit them hard. I highly doubt it will ever come to that. They will do the right thing being the fine people they all are. Let's let bygones be bygones and focus our efforts on the bigger fish that we need to fry. As gun owners are enemies aren't eachother....there's plenty of big ones sitting in Washington. |
|||||||||
|
oshane Opt-Out Member
|
sonnycrockett12 wrote: I think this whole situation could have probably been handled better on both sides and got out of hand. The police officers should have been more tactful and better trained to know that law better and perhaps members of the city govt could have been more responsive...BUT the town council should have been first given a chance to rectify the matter before we went in guns blazing. While I believe in holding any people in power's feet to the fire this isn't a New Jersey town full of anti-gun people who won't listen to us. 99.9% of the people in Wyoming are pro-gun. I think a visit by a concerned TOWN CITIZEN to the town council meeting to express concerns of the ordinance should have been a first step. If no response then perhaps a meeting with the mayor to point out the law and the desire to have it repealed. If that didn't work then I have no problem with "bringing out the big guns" and boycotting the town, billboards, etc. I think another problem with all of this is that it wasn't a coordinated effort with a single voice...when many people are expressing concerns in such a way it's easy for people to get mixed up in a "who said what" situation and perhaps act without all the information. Agreed! |
|||||||||
|
MatieA Regular Member
|
oshane wrote: sonnycrockett12 wrote:I think this whole situation could have probably been handled better on both sides and got out of hand. The police officers should have been more tactful and better trained to know that law better and perhaps members of the city govt could have been more responsive...BUT the town council should have been first given a chance to rectify the matter before we went in guns blazing. While I believe in holding any people in power's feet to the fire this isn't a New Jersey town full of anti-gun people who won't listen to us. 99.9% of the people in Wyoming are pro-gun. I think a visit by a concerned TOWN CITIZEN to the town council meeting to express concerns of the ordinance should have been a first step. If no response then perhaps a meeting with the mayor to point out the law and the desire to have it repealed. If that didn't work then I have no problem with "bringing out the big guns" and boycotting the town, billboards, etc. I think another problem with all of this is that it wasn't a coordinated effort with a single voice...when many people are expressing concerns in such a way it's easy for people to get mixed up in a "who said what" situation and perhaps act without all the information. Since I am the one that got this whole thing going, I have to admit that I should have done things differently, and have apologized to the mayor, and town council for the headaches caused. I am now trying to keep things moving in a more peaceful, friendly manner, and am doing my best to work with the council, and the town's attorney, and not make things worse than they presently are. On a side note: I have told Mr. Bouchard (WYGO pres.) that he needs to remove his negative publicity of the town, and he has not done so. He verbally accosted the mayor, and council members, and proved himself through his actions to be no friend of gun owners anywhere. I now consider anything he says about gun control to be highly suspect. Attached Image (viewed 265 times): |
|||||||||
|
Mjolnir Regular Member
|
Sparky, is it not true that a former mayor lived in a yellow home (think it was yellow) on the North side of the street that the new Subway sandwich shop is on & a stop sign was placed there in front of the prior Mayors home? Does the Pine Bluff Fire Department provide Emergency Medical Care and respond to medical emergencies automatacilly like the Fire Departments in Albin, Burns, Carpenter and Cheyenne do, or are they a stand alone good old boy fire department that refuses to assist members of there community when needed? Does the VFD fail to provide medical training to members of the department along with not automatically responding to medical emergencies in Pine Bluff and other areas the Pine Bluff ambulance responds to. |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
For more than a week, I've been thinking about whether or not I should post my in-depth thoughts to the thread. I've decided to do so.... Those of you who are demonizing Anthony Bouchard, and praising the level-headed (HA!) mayor and council members are really missing the boat. This whole matter was going precisely NOWHERE until Mr. Bouchard got involved - yet no one seems to recognize that fact. Go back and re-read the posts as I have, and you will find the following: 1) The police shot Mr. Matie and others down on the subject of legal OC in PB 2) Mr. Bouchard contacted the police, who confirmed what Mr. Matie had said 3) Mr. Bouchard attempted to contact the city attorney 4) Mr. Matie expressed appreciation for Mr. Bouchard's intervention 5) Mr. Bouchard was told by the city attorney that the police were right 6) Mr. Bouchard took various steps to publicize what had happened & the status of things 7) John Wise felt no need or compunction to act 8) An article reaffirming what the police had told callers appeared in the newspaper 9) The town meeting was held, and even after the town attorney (CHANGING his tune from what he had earlier told Mr. Bouchard) told the council members that their law was invalid, some still questioned the need and timing of a change. 10) The PB mayor appears on the thread, slamming Mr. Bouchard 11) Mr. Matie takes issue with Mr. Bouchard, various new posters appear, some people complain about "agitators" or report that various town officials have done so. This villification of Mr. Bouchard is overdone, IMHO. To me, the thrust of your questions ought to be this: "When and WHAT caused the city attorney to change his tune so dramatically between when Mr. Bouchard first talked to him and the time of the March 2 council meeting?" HMMMMMM.... Let me think.... Could it be - ANTHONY BOUCHARD? Your second question ought to be - "Why has the mayor felt it necessary to slam Mr. Bouchard on this thread, and why were some council members STILL resistant to changing the town code even AFTER the city attorney told them the laws were unenforceable? Come on folks! From what is publically available, one might see Mr. Bouchard as being over the top, but as one who has been involved in these kinds of matters before, I think you need to honestly answer the two questions posed above before painting horns on Mr. Bouchard. Let's just see how the council acts on Monday, if they still want to puff out their collective chests, or play the bogey-man "agitator" game, if they are still "studying" things - OR if they are going to do what the city attorney could have advised all parties to do FIRST THING - recognize that the position of the police (AND of himself) was unsupportable - BEFORE things got to where they are. >edited to add "council" to a sentence Last edited on Tue Mar 17th, 2009 08:37 pm by BB62 |
|||||||||
|
MatieA Regular Member
|
BB62 wrote: For more than a week, I've been thinking about whether or not I should post my in-depth thoughts to the thread. I've decided to do so.... Ok, I am not refuting any facts as stated, I am saying that I could/should have done things differently, and maybe things would not have had to go so far as publicly demonizing Pine Bluffs as an ANTI-GUN town. Mr Bouchard (unfortunately) did not act in a professional manner, and is not giving the town time to properly change the ordinances. IMHO his website should have shown the facts from the meeting (it does not), and his http://www.pinebluffswy.org site should have been changed, or suspended until such time as it may be proven that the town does nothing(if this happens). I honestly believe that the town is working on it, and we will see this in future meetings; there is a "due process" for changing ordinances and as I have stated before I would not want to live somewhere that could rewrite an ordinance, and put it in effect the same day. Mr Bouchard is demanding that the town change the ordinances "RIGHT NOW", and refuses to change his websites to show that the town is changing things to meet Wy state law. I am not demonizing Mr. Bouchard; he could do a lot of good, but you have to be professional, and recognize that things cannot and should not be done overnight. The town council asked Mr. Bouchard to remove his negative publicity on the town, and he refused. I honestly believe that it should have come down, with statements made about the town meeting, and put back up IF the town decided to do nothing. Mr. Bouchard hasn't even acknowledged the fact that the town has said that they were going to change these ordinances on either of his sites. I myself believe as I stated at the beginning of this post that I should have done things differently at the beginning, and then we would (probably) not be in the position that we are in now, with negative publicity slamming the town on the internet. I WILL NOT in the future ask for help from rights groups UNTIL I have exhausted every other option that I have available to me. I asked for advice ,and thought that I was getting help, and all I got was my town being blasted as ANTI-GUN (STILL). I am open-carrying my sidearm every day, to prove that this town is not what the sites say it is. I only wish more people would do the same. The more that we are seen the less negative effect the sites will have on the town. >>>edited for various spelling errors ( I think I found them all) Last edited on Tue Mar 17th, 2009 09:06 pm by MatieA |
|||||||||
|
MamaLiberty Regular Member
|
Any new word on this from the town? Has the "rule" been repealed yet? |
|||||||||
|
SDguy Regular Member
|
A number of us are waiting patiently to hear. We were asked to give the town time and we have done just that. My concern is that they just wanted us to take the pressure off of them, a request they put forth in private communications several times. We were asked to back off and give them time to accomplish the withdrawal of the unconstitutional local anti-gun law. So, what is up? |
|||||||||
|
MatieA Regular Member
|
MamaLiberty wrote: Any new word on this from the town? Has the "rule" been repealed yet? I missed Monday's meeting, but I will be going to see the Mayor on Friday, and will update afterwards. |
|||||||||
|
AB Regular Member
|
With great disappointment there was no mention of the issue at the last meeting. Our hope had been that they would pursue fixing the matter with the same energy and commitment that they displayed while defending their ban on open carry. Folks are tired of this "politics as usual", especially when it comes to gun-rights. The elected officials of Pine Bluffs fail to realize that the more they puff up their egos, place blame elsewhere, and do nothing, the public views this as more of the same. Monitoring Senator John Barrasso on the national level, he consistently comes back to the Second Amendment. This is no accident - Sen. Barrasso knows that this issue is on the front burner of his constituents. Senator Barrasso's message is "Leave our land alone, leave our water alone and leave our guns alone!" On February 20th of this year Senator Barrasso was in Pine Bluffs and reaffirmed his stance on our Second Amendment rights and stated he was "very concerned with the future of a citizen's right to keep and bear arms" This is not an endorsement, just looking at the sharp contrast in these leadership styles, as many of Pine Bluffs citizens already have. This reality is evidenced from the many emails WyGO has received from Pine Bluffs citizens, for example "Pine Bluffs doesn't need finger pointing; we need people that will get things done" and from another "If we want to see politics like this we can watch the news". It can't be said any better than what yet another resident said: "Real leaders accept responsibility for their own mistakes and always do the right thing". WyGO / Wyoming Gun Owners Association http://wyominggunowners.org/ Last edited on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 06:32 am by AB |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
MatieA wrote: MamaLiberty wrote:Any new word on this from the town? Has the "rule" been repealed yet? I wanted to check for myself what (if anything) happened at Monday's meeting, AND simultaneously verify AB's reported council inaction at the meeting, so I made my first call to PB this afternoon. I called the number posted previously for the Town Clerk (307-245-3746), but Kate, (who said "Kate, PB PD") answered and was told #1, that there was no discussion of modifying the law regarding OC at the most recent meeting, and #2 - that there wasn't a meeting on Monday, March 23 - it was held on March 16! It seems AB was accurate. Sorry for doubting you! Evidently the Pine Bluffs newspaper got the date wrong in the March 5th edition, in the article entitled "Open carry ordinance hot topic during council meeting..." - in which the newspaper said the next meeting would be 7PM, Monday, March 23. Kate said that meetings were held the first and third Monday of each month - the next one being April 6th. I forgot to ask what time the next meeting was, so I called back, and she told me that it was at 7:30 PM (not 7:00), and she asked me if I needed to get on the agenda! So... by the time of the next meeting, the city attorney will have had a month to do his research, and to present revised laws that comply with Wyoming's preemption statute. If he doesn't do his part, then council ought to do their part and demand the revisions! I guess we'll have to wait a bit more to see if the appropriate parties do their respective jobs. I have my doubts... Last edited on Thu Mar 26th, 2009 11:13 pm by BB62 |
|||||||||
|
SDguy Regular Member
|
BB62, I appreciate the follow up and update. We need to keep the pressure on and not let them just ignore the issue and hope we go away. |
|||||||||
|
MamaLiberty Regular Member
|
BB62 wrote: I called back, and she told me that it was at 7:30 PM (not 7:00), and she asked me if I needed to get on the agenda! Did you get on the agenda? That would seem to be a perfect "in" to take care of this. Just saying... |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
MatieA wrote: MamaLiberty wrote:Any new word on this from the town? Has the "rule" been repealed yet? What did the mayor have to say about why nothing was done on March 16? Did he indicate they will be ready to take action at the next meeting? |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
MamaLiberty wrote: BB62 wrote:I called back, and she told me that it was at 7:30 PM (not 7:00), and she asked me if I needed to get on the agenda! Well, I would have, but since I am four states away, it would be tough! At the rate they're going, though, maybe they'll still be dawdling around when we vacation in WY in June! |
|||||||||
|
Mjolnir Regular Member
|
Strange how we get a couple new members here, they attack AB personally and then go away and do not come back with any kind of productive update about the issue at hand. is this just standard small town politics doing what they do best (protecting the old boy network) of friends and family or are they actually doing what they say. sure appears that they are not exactly chomping at the bit to make things right, but are attacking the person who has stood up to them. |
|||||||||
|
MatieA Regular Member
|
Mjolnir wrote: Strange how we get a couple new members here, they attack AB personally and then go away and do not come back with any kind of productive update about the issue at hand. Excuse me I am still here and have not updated any more as I have nothing more to update yet. I missed the Mayor on Friday, but am meeting with him on Monday morning. I have not given up on anything, nor am I going to let it drop, but I also believe that we are not going to get anywhere by verbally assaulting the town council and Mayor of the town. I also do not agree with AB's tactics on this, as he is not showing any willingness to cooperate but seems to be wanting a fight. Why fight if there is no reason to? As I have stated before lets save the "rough stuff" for IF the council does not act. |
|||||||||
|
Mjolnir Regular Member
|
MatieA wroteExcuse me I was not refering to you as obviously you are a contributing member to this forum, but if you go back and look you will find a few posts from new members who flamed AB rather nastily and then left without coming back. Did not the guy who runs the Pine Bluff range post here once and has not come back among others? Who is to say if what AB did is wrong or not?? Is it not possible that his actions had a effect on him things played out in the 1st meeting and that people came here to this forum and then slammed him for his actions and web site, including yourself who has from his actions and words but now you have done some back peddling no doubt due to political pressure applied to you since you live in Pine and post here. It is a extremly common tactic to attack the person when you can not find fault with the persons message to try and discredit him & thus discredit the message that person is delevering. Thus you win by default and personal attacks even if that persons message is 100% correct. Could that possibly what is going on here with AB and possibly yourself? |
|||||||||
|
MatieA Regular Member
|
Mjolnir wrote: MatieA wroteExcuse me No, I can say that I am getting no pressure from anyone to drop this matter, but I thought/think that AB could have acted in a more professional manner. If his attitude when dealing with these matters is like this all the time, then I can see it causing much more harm than good. I am not a politician nor a professional with dealing with people, but I do know that professionalism and courtesy will open doors that would otherwise get slammed in your face. AB has a position that could do a lot of good for gun owners, but he needs to school himself learn to deal with people. You do not have to fight every battle with guns ablazing. Some can be won by being professional and working WITH the people in charge. |
|||||||||
|
Mjolnir Regular Member
|
MatieA wrote:No, I can say that I am getting no pressure from anyone to drop this matter, Of course not, you have not gotten any negative feedback, pressure or anything negative related to this issue, especially since we might have lurkers from Pine Bluff watching what you are posting here...........   |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
Mjolnir wrote: MatieA wroteExcuse me (my emphasis above) AB can speak for himself, but I agree. I've experienced the same thing here in Ohio, but usually in public. In PB's case, though, the antics of various parties went further, and were even more telling. Public officials assailing a citizen on on internet forum for being what they essentially call being "mean" and "nasty"- that takes the cake! This is definitely small town politics at its worst. All of what's happened (and may happen), could have been avoided had they adopted a different mindset from the start. |
|||||||||
|
AB Regular Member
|
Mjolnir wrote: ...It is a extremely common tactic to attack the person when you can not find fault with the persons message to try and discredit him & thus discredit the message that person is delivering. Thus you win by default and personal attacks even if that persons message is 100% correct... You have hit the nail on the head, it's part of the "warped" process, the way politicians use other people to "Push-back". How Politicians Operate 101/ Pine Bluffs Case Study: First they will threaten you. "I am going to sue you" or " I will make your name mud" Second they will try to reason with you. "We're on your side, but..." Third they will use others that are close to the issue or personally known by you to threaten, reason, or discredit you. In this case they used third parties and attempted to discredit. Examples from this case as posted on this forum: "rationally and politely and from what I hear Mr. Bouchard was far from that" "Mr. Bouchard was way out of line" "He verbally accosted the mayor, and council members, and proved himself through his actions to be no friend of gun owners anywhere" "Mr Bouchard (unfortunately) did not act in a professional manner" "verbally assaulting the town council and Mayor of the town" We should hold these "third party persons" harmless and not fault them, they have little to no experience in these matters. Over time maybe they to will learn not to succumb to political fluff. Remember our mission here is to uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution and the Wyoming Constitution, you know the same thing that public officials are sworn-in to do. P.S. even police officers. The bottom line here is from the beginning they Pushed-back and hoped it would go away. I was told that I would be arrested and fined $750 for open-carry in Pine Bluffs. When I informed the police that "Their law could be easily challenged" they passed me off to the town attorney, and from him during more than one conversation I experienced Push-back. Important fact: The Town Attorney does not work on his own - he answers directly to the mayor and town council. Almost three weeks after I personally became involved in this matter "anyone would be arrested and fined $750 for open-carry in Pine Bluffs" was published in the local newspaper. This my dear friends is "more Push-back" It was at this point that WyGO took a stronger position, maybe next time they will re-think their Push-back strategy especially with an election right around the corner, May 5th, 2009 to be exact. see: http://pinebluffswy.org/elections After the open-session part of the town council meeting on 3-2-09, Officer Yeomans held the opinion that one still could not open-carry and he stated this directly to me while I was speaking with the mayor (Yeomans wasn't present during the open-session) it was then that he was informed by Mayor Anderson about the fact that state law preempts local law, Officer Yeomans replied "I had no idea". This means that all the way up until about 8pm on 3-2-09 (after the town council open-session) it was very possible that one would have been arrested for open-carry! Why wouldn't Officer Yeomans have been informed of this sooner?, you can draw your own conclusions. Now if anyone thinks that they would overcome this "Push-back" by simply asking, well you already know the line about "water-front property". For the record when encountering "Push-back" WyGO will always give back the same and a little extra for good measure. The real truth is the way that the Pine Bluffs officials handled this matter is an embarrassment in itself and they should work on fixing the problem instead of making others out to be the boogie-man. In other words the Pine Bluffs officials should of handled this matter swiftly from the beginning and the "unwillingness" that was displayed only re-affirms the position that WyGO took. As posted on: http://pinebluffswy.org/pine-bluffs-case-study Wygo / Wyoming Gun Owners Association http://wyominggunowners.org/ Last edited on Mon Mar 30th, 2009 08:06 pm by AB |
|||||||||
|
vote_no Regular Member
|
this just in, overzealous gun rights activists make things worse for gun owners everywhere |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
vote_no wrote: this just in, overzealous gun rights activists make things worse for gun owners everywhere Is your post supposed to be a contribution to this thread? Overzealous? Worse? Everywhere? Maybe you can explain yourself rather than just sniping. |
|||||||||
|
KBCraig Regular Member
|
BB62 wrote: vote_no wrote:this just in, overzealous gun rights activists make things worse for gun owners everywhere Sarcasm "You're ruining it for the rest of us!" is the cry of appeasers everywhere. cf. Texas efforts for legalized open carry. |
|||||||||
|
vote_no Regular Member
|
KBCraig wrote: BB62 wrote:vote_no wrote:this just in, overzealous gun rights activists make things worse for gun owners everywhere hahahaha appeasement |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
MatieA wrote: Mjolnir wrote:Strange how we get a couple new members here, they attack AB personally and then go away and do not come back with any kind of productive update about the issue at hand. MatieA, Where do things stand? Have you had your expected meeting with the Mayor? I hope you have met him, and I that you have good things to report, but my spidey-sense says that it is a false hope. Again, I'll repeat - I've seen this kind of thing before, and all that ever comes out of it are games and delays, delays and games - by officials who know they are in the wrong, but don't want to admit it. When and if they act, it will be interesting to compare my (and other's) predictions and warnings of low expectations to reality. I don't like to be wrong, but if I turn out to be, I will be the first to admit it. |
|||||||||
|
MatieA Regular Member
|
I have met with the Mayor, and I still say that the Mayor has gun owners best interest at heart. This matter will not be taken care of in a hurry, and probably much slower that I would like; but I do believe that it will be taken care of, and if some people would be willing to ease off on bad-mouthing this town, the council might even decide to move a little faster. This will be my last post on this thread, and I am unsubscribing to it so that I quit getting updates by email. There are to many people here who have NO faith in their fellow human beings, and are not willing to give anyone a chance to do the right thing without feeling the need to FORCE them into action. I will continue to keep up on this issue, while helping the town come to a resolution in this matter, but will no longer participate in this thread. Attached Image (viewed 143 times): Last edited on Thu Apr 2nd, 2009 04:47 am by MatieA |
|||||||||
|
AB Regular Member
|
Pine Bluffs Update MatieA wrote:
Of course the town officials don't like any pressure, that's a given. But why up to this point, didn't the mayor and the council do the right thing for MatieA? especially after befriending him. Last edited on Thu Apr 2nd, 2009 03:39 pm by AB |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
MatieA wrote: I have met with the Mayor, and I still say that the Mayor has gun owners best interest at heart. This matter will not be taken care of in a hurry, and probably much slower that I would like; but I do believe that it will be taken care of, and if some people would be willing to ease off on bad-mouthing this town, the council might even decide to move a little faster. MatieA, I don't like beating a man when he's down, but AB seems to have pretty well covered your positions and expectations regarding Pine Bluffs elected officials - and they're all over the map. In your posts, I don't see a logical progression - what I see is a man who has been used and lied to by officials in Pine Bluffs - in other words, a pawn. AB is just a convenient scapegoat used to shift blame from the real culprits - elected (and unelected) officials who don't want to be seen as lacking power or control. I don't know what will happen on Monday (if anything), but taking your ball and going home is just childish. Are you "Always Faithful" to anything other than the Marines? Use the influence you seem to think you have to get things done as they have been promised to you. |
|||||||||
|
rpyne Regular Member
|
MatieA wrote:Why fight if there is no reason to? As I have stated before lets save the "rough stuff" for IF the council does not act. There is one clear reason to fight, they are violating civil rights. This was very clearly not just an oversight or the town attorney would not have backed up the police officer in stating that open carry would bring an arrest and fine. I have been around the block far too many times on getting politicians from local town councils to state legislatures to congress to take action and they all have one thing in common, none of them will take action until forced to do so and the very minute the pressure stops, so does the action. I am in complete agreement with keeping the boycott, signs, website, etc., active until the law is changed. The town council made it clear that was of more concern than their own violation of the citizen's rights. I would be willing to bet that if there had not been the outburst about this issue it would have made little if any difference if someone had politely approached the town council to try and get the law changed, This was clearly evidenced by the council member who continued to resist making the change even after the town attorney advised them that it was in violation of state law. I will continue to watch, and if action is not taken in the April 6th council meeting and reported here, I will add my own pressure, including emails to the chamber of commerce and any town officials for which I can find email addresses along with posts on several blogs and forums. Edit: added "and reported here" Last edited on Sat Apr 4th, 2009 12:05 am by rpyne |
|||||||||
|
MamaLiberty Regular Member
|
Nobody yet has explained just why repealing this town rule should have taken more than 5 minutes once it was understood to be in violation of Wyoming law. Is something else going on, besides stupid stonewalling? Just what does the town have to gain by all this? |
|||||||||
|
rpyne Regular Member
|
MamaLiberty wrote: Nobody yet has explained just why repealing this town rule should have taken more than 5 minutes once it was understood to be in violation of Wyoming law. Most legislative bodies, including town councils, are bound by either law or rules that require legislation or ordinances to be brought before them more than once before final passage in order to allow adequate discussion and revision. From what I can gather, in the case of Pine Bluff, that is three times. That being said, I agree that there is no excuse for them having not yet brought forth either a motion to repeal the existing ordinance or a replacement for the current ordinance. Once it is brought forward it will take three council meetings to pass the change. |
|||||||||
|
AB Regular Member
|
MamaLiberty wrote: ...Is something else going on, besides stupid stonewalling? Just what does the town have to gain by all this? I believe this statement from the town attorney Alex Davison sums it up: “Look, we are going to look at changing this ordinance, but we’re not going to do it out of a sense of intimidation, we’ll do it out of a sense of the law and the will of the residents of the town,” said Davison. They were only looking at changing the ordinance and at this point it's obvious that they don't care about the constitutional rights of the residents. They just want to keep the old law on the books, so when no one is watching they can misinterpret the law and use it to harass people with it. What do they gain, In their own minds they possess what they believe to be the greatest treasure, POWER!!! |
|||||||||
|
MamaLiberty Regular Member
|
rpyne wrote:Most legislative bodies, including town councils, are bound by either law or rules that require legislation or ordinances to be brought before them more than once before final passage in order to allow adequate discussion and revision. From what I can gather, in the case of Pine Bluff, that is three times.Sounds like a cop out to me. What's to discuss? No revision is possible. The rule is in VIOLATION of state law. It shouldn't take 5 minutes to dump it. Anything else is just playing games. No soap, no sale. |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
AB wrote: MamaLiberty wrote:...Is something else going on, besides stupid stonewalling? Just what does the town have to gain by all this? +1 And to MamaLiberty, +100 for a short, sweet, on-point summary of the horsehockey emanating from the town council. |
|||||||||
|
sparky79 Regular Member
|
latest artcile in Pine Bluffs Post... http://www.pinebluffspost.com/#gun |
|||||||||
|
SDguy Regular Member
|
sparky79 wrote: latest artcile in Pine Bluffs Post... http://www.pinebluffspost.com/#gun Well Sparky, what the city says and what they do seem to be two different things. Their inaction speaks volumes to me. I have already taken my business elsewhere since I simply no longer stop in Pine Bluffs like I used to on my regular trips thru the area. I intend to continue to avoid Pine Bluffs. |
|||||||||
|
AB Regular Member
|
sparky79 (joined: Wed Mar 11th, 2009) wrote: ...I said rationally and politely and from what I hear Mr. Bouchard was far from that. I spoke with a member of law enforcement who was at the last council meeting (not a PBPD officer by the way) and he was in agreement with Mayor Anderson in that Mr. Bouchard was way out of line. I agree with the town attorney all the ugliness and negativity made a simple thing of pointing out an outdated ordinance and asking it be changed made it into a complete mess... The Real Headline as posted on: http://pinebluffswy.org/ Alert! Pine Bluffs keeps law on books they used against your constitutional rights. Posted April 2, 2009 What is important here is statements the town attorney Alex Davison has previously stated: ” I can see how the law could also be interpreted to mean no open-carry at all” and ” I could prosecute and let the judge decide”. These prior statements coupled with the newest one ”It is not the position of the governing council that open carry is prohibited by town ordinances“ is just more smoke and mirrors. To read article from The Pine Bluffs Post, click here These positions contradict each other and confirm the need to remove all of 8-115 of their municipal code to stop any future abuses and misinterpretations. To search codes of other Wyoming municipalities, click here |
|||||||||
|
AB Regular Member
|
WyGO's Position as posted on: http://pinebluffswy.org/wygos-position WyGO's Position Posted: March 27, 2009 Municipal code 8-115 has already been used by the Pine Bluffs police to threaten the rights of law abiding gun owners. This law must be removed from the books to stop this from happening in the future, removing such laws also saves the town from law suits arising from these misinterpretations. In my experience, these laws are left in place for one reason only to threaten the uninformed. At this point we simply expect the mayor and council to do what they said they would do, which is "bring the town ordinance in line with state law concerning the open carry of firearms in town." and "modify the ordinance to comply with state statue" . Sources: "Speaking after the meeting, Anderson said the council does intend to bring the town ordinance in line with state law concerning the open carry of firearms in town." -Pine Bluffs Post March 5, 2009 "Council will modify the ordinance to comply with state statue at a future meeting" -Council meeting minutes March 2, 2009 as published in the Pine Bluffs Post March 12, 2009 |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
sparky79 wrote: latest artcile in Pine Bluffs Post... http://www.pinebluffspost.com/#gun Council has come full circle - almost. Yesterday their law meant one thing, now it means another - and tomorrow? They say they recognize preemption, while at the same time leaving their preempted law on the books. It looks like WyGo (and those not fooled by the liars on council) should keep up their work. Did anyone attend the council meeting? |
|||||||||
|
Mjolnir Regular Member
|
It sure appears that you have given in to political pressure along with pressure from the town. This just goes to show without a doubt that the good old boy system in in full effect in pine bluff and that if you do not do what they want and rock the boat life becomes miserable for you. Shame to see you bending to the pressure but to live in a small town and make waves makes ones life ugly................ MatieA wrote: I have met with the Mayor, and I still say that the Mayor has gun owners best interest at heart. This matter will not be taken care of in a hurry, and probably much slower that I would like; but I do believe that it will be taken care of, and if some people would be willing to ease off on bad-mouthing this town, the council might even decide to move a little faster. |
|||||||||
|
Mjolnir Regular Member
|
Yes, drove past Pine on I80 the other day and just kept on going to Cheyenne. SDguy wrote: sparky79 wrote:latest artcile in Pine Bluffs Post... http://www.pinebluffspost.com/#gun |
|||||||||
|
sparky79 Regular Member
|
The following below is copied and pasted off the last online edition of the Pine Bluffs Post: Following the county officials was Duncan Philp of the Wyoming Tyranny Response Team. Philp was on hand to show his support of the town in the open carry debate. “I was absolutely flabbergasted by the notion that Pine Bluffs is some sort of gun-grabbing municipality,” said Philp. In recent weeks, town officials have been involved in a flap with the Wyoming Gun Owners association due to the group’s perceived notion that town ordinances prohibit the open carry of fire arms. Philp took exception with the Wyoming Gun Owners response to the town and gave the town some of his views on the organization. “They don’t seem to have an inkling of how things are done,” Philp said referring to the Wyoming Gun Owners Association. link for full article: http://www.pinebluffspost.com/#future |
|||||||||
|
rpyne Regular Member
|
sparky79 wrote: Following the county officials was Duncan Philp of the Wyoming Tyranny Response Team. Philp was on hand to show his support of the town in the open carry debate. Either Duncan Philp is a puppet or he has not paid any attention to what has happened. If he thinks that Pine Bluffs is "gun friendly" he needs to go back a few weeks and read the newspaper article that quotes the officer flatly stating that anyone open carrying will be arrested and fined. Then add to that the people who phoned the city and asked and were told the same, even by the City Attorney. And what a bunch of crap about "perceived notion that town ordinances prohibit the open carry of fire arms." The city attorney said it in so many words until he was confronted with the state preemption law. |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
rpyne wrote: sparky79 wrote:Following the county officials was Duncan Philp of the Wyoming Tyranny Response Team. Philp was on hand to show his support of the town in the open carry debate. +100 Hey, sparky79, how much are you being paid to be a shill for the mayor and council membes? |
|||||||||
|
MamaLiberty Regular Member
|
I know this can get frustrating BB62 (and everyone), but let's not allow this to degenerate into name calling and silly accusations. How does that further the cause of liberty and justice, regardless of who does it? Don't we have enough of that to deal with from those who hate our freedom? If we have proof of wrongdoing, then it should be posted. But let's not indulge in speculation and personal attacks. |
|||||||||
|
sparky79 Regular Member
|
MamaLiberty wrote: I know this can get frustrating BB62 (and everyone), but let's not allow this to degenerate into name calling and silly accusations. How does that further the cause of liberty and justice, regardless of who does it? Don't we have enough of that to deal with from those who hate our freedom? Thank you MamaLiberty I have not at any time called anyone names on this posting site. My last two post's have just been to inform people on this site what has been recently printed in the local newspaper. I have no connections to the government of the town or the newspaper. I was just letting you all know when something new was reported. I am now being called a shill being paid my the mayor. In my last two post's I did not add any comment or remark about the article printed I just simply let you know what was printed and to let you make your own judgement on the article instead your judging me! Wow true colors are coming out if most of you are the kind of people who attack the messanger then I don't care if you don't ever stop in our town again. Last edited on Fri Apr 10th, 2009 03:51 pm by sparky79 |
|||||||||
|
rpyne Regular Member
|
sparky79 wrote: I am now being called a puppet and accused of being paid. In my last two post's I did not add any comment or remark about the article printed I just simply let you know what was printed and to let you make your own judgement on the article instead your judging me! Wow everyones true colors are coming out if most of you are the kind of people who attack the messanger then I don't care if you don't ever stop in our town again. Let me make it perfectly clear, please re-read what I wrote, I clearly referred to Mr. Duncan Philp as either being a puppet or ignoring previous information. After browsing their web site, it is very clear to me that his organization is nothing more than a front group for those in power in Wyoming. Having spent a considerable amount of time in Wyoming, including working there for a year, I see the citizens rapidly making the same mistakes other states have made in that they are so secure in believing that their rights are protected that they have gone to sleep and are now allowing their rights to be stripped away from them without any protest. Those of us who live outside of Wyoming are trying to tell you who live in Wyoming, please, don't let your rights be trampled by the liberals who are taking over the government there. Stand up and defend your rights while you can. Any bad law that remains on the books, whether it is enforced or not, is still a bad law. The longer it remains on the books the more danger it poses to your rights and well being. If it stays on the books long enough, the day will come when it WILL be used against you. |
|||||||||
|
MamaLiberty Regular Member
|
I understand, sparky. The bottom line here, however, is that we are all human. We all get frustrated and tired. We are all tempted to blame the messenger instead of those who are truly responsible. And we each see things from at least a somewhat different point of view, have our own agendas, and lots of other things. Seems to me that if we keep our eyes on the goal of individual liberty, as sovereigns over our own lives, without aggression toward others - but with the hand of friendship extended in respect for the other person's individuality... we can't go wrong. Let's worry less about hurt feelings or misunderstandings and put our grit and energy into learning how to function as free individuals in voluntary cooperation. That, I believe, is the only basis for a free society. If we don't... then the slavers and haters and killers of liberty will surely engulf us all in their evil. |
|||||||||
|
AB Regular Member
|
"The truth is they were to busy falling all over themselves protecting their own interpretation of the law instead of just doing the right thing" sparky79 wrote: ...As for this forum I can't believe some people went as far to try to spread rumors... "From what I hear" Now sparky, isn't that how rumors start? While I agree with Mama Liberty, I can't help but to look back at this comment posted by sparky79 and I am sure others have as well. The truth is there are individuals that come on to this forum with the purpose of disruption. I personally never thought that the "push back" in itself would ever keep this issue going on as far as it has. It amuses me the way that these individuals have kept a "fight" going by themselves, they are merely shadow boxing. What is important is not that WyGO had a "perceived notion that town ordinances prohibit the open carry of fire arms" as stated by these shadow boxers. What the Mayor and council believed and how they interpreted the law is of the utmost importance. If the town officials are blameless then what is the meaning of the following statements? "This is and old, old ordinance" Said Mayor Leonard Anderson -Pine Bluffs Post March 5, 2009 "Speaking after the meeting, Anderson said the council does intend to bring the town ordinance in line with state law concerning the open carry of firearms in town." -Pine Bluffs Post March 5, 2009 "Council will modify the ordinance to comply with state statue at a future meeting" -Council meeting minutes March 2, 2009 as published in the Pine Bluffs Post March 12, 2009 "I think this law was put on the books back in the days of Wild Bill Hickock," -Town Attorney, Alex Davison -Pine Bluffs Post March 5, 2009 "The ordinance details the penalty for such violations noting that carrying an open firearm is an arrestable offense with a mandatory court appearance and a minimum $750 fine." “This is a weapons violation and considered a high misdemeanor,” Yeomans explained. -Officer Brian Yeomans Pine Bluffs Post Feb 27, 2009 The truth is they were to busy falling all over themselves protecting their own interpretation of the law instead of just doing the right thing. Last edited on Fri Apr 10th, 2009 06:19 pm by AB |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
MamaLiberty wrote: I know this can get frustrating BB62 (and everyone), but let's not allow this to degenerate into name calling and silly accusations... I accept your criticism, Mama, however, I find it more than a little interesting that various new OCDO members have appeared on this thread, not answered direct questions, and have cast aspersions on AB (after MatieA appealed for help) and/or have blindly accepted the contradictory positions of PB elected officials. I initially thought AB was seeing things in the shadows, but the way PB and their apologists have conducted themselves, he has been proven correct time and again. |
|||||||||
|
BB62 State Researcher
|
sparky79 wrote: Thank you MamaLiberty I have not at any time called anyone names on this posting site. My last two post's have just been to inform people on this site what has been recently printed in the local newspaper. I have no connections to the government of the town or the newspaper. I was just letting you all know when something new was reported... I am now being called a shill being paid my the mayor. In my last two post's I did not add any comment or remark about the article printed I just simply let you know what was printed and to let you make your own judgement on the article instead your judging me! Wow true colors are coming out if most of you are the kind of people who attack the messanger then I don't care if you don't ever stop in our town again. I apologize for my "paid shill" comment. I was more reacting to the article than to you - BUT it does seem a little more than strange that you have continued your assault on AB's character. What's your motivation? It sure appears to be more than mere dissemination of information. "...I have not at any time called anyone names on this posting site." No, but you cast aspersions on someone you didn't even hear. Why? Are you really unaware of the games your (you say) elected officials are playing, or are you playing them yourself? Last edited on Sat Apr 11th, 2009 12:32 am by BB62 |
|||||||||
|
SDguy Regular Member
|
I am not a member of AB's Wyoming group but he and I have had several phone conversations regarding the Pine Bluffs afair. I found AB to be fair but tough. You have to hold your ground against anyone who opposes your rights as given by the state or federal constitution. This holds true regardless of the opposition's motive. In some cases the motive is a simple disregard for rights and in others it may be an ego problem when faced with the truth. In the Pine Bluffs affair I think it is just too hard for the local town government to put their egos down and do what is right and what they know is right. I am glad AB is hanging in there as he is. There is absolutely nothing for the Pine Bluffs leadership to discuss. They simply need to recind the current unconstitutional town law. There is no reason that should take months and there is no good reason to leave a bad law on the books so future misunderstandings or misuse can appear again. |
|||||||||
|
MamaLiberty Regular Member
|
I wasn't trying to criticize, just acknowledge the frustration we all feel at times and point out that fighting among ourselves produces no good, only feeds our enemies. Who is the real enemy? What is the goal? Where should our priorities be? Do we have time and energy to waste? Each one must answer those questions for themselves. |
|||||||||
|
Duncan Philp Regular Member 
|
No confusion here in Pine Bluffs, anyone can carry openly and Bouchard was way out of line and so are you rpyne. You don't even live here rpyne and I do. State law allows the open carry of gun in Wyoming. The confusion lies with the issue of 'home rule', but no town or city can enact an ordinance that would violate the state constitution. Puppet? The TRT has been around longer than WYGO has. http://www.wyomingtrt.com/ http://www.trtnational.com/ Who am I? I'm not a puppet of anyone or any government. I live 24 miles east of Pine Bluffs and have no real attachment to the town. I don't work in PB and I do very little business there. The town has a population of ,1,500 and is located on I-80 on the Nebraska, Wyoming border. This is who I am. Pro-gun protester wins lawsuit Cops ticketed driver en route to home of Columbine victim A self-described "political agitator" who was cited for several traffic violations as he prepared to protest outside the home of a Columbine victim won a $20,000 settlement from two sheriff's deputies in a civil-rights lawsuit. Duncan D. Philp, 45, accused Jefferson County sheriff's deputies Kirk Beaulieu and Donald Estep of violating his constitutional rights protecting him from unreasonable search and seizure and guaranteeing him due process. Philp's attorney, Vincent Todd, also alleged that Beaulieu and Estep pulled Philp over, detained him and ticketed him as part of a concerted effort to deny him and other protesters their First Amendment rights to free speech and assembly. "In my experience, it's a fairly large settlement for something that started as a traffic ticket for someone that wasn't actually jailed," Todd said Wednesday afternoon as he prepared to pick up a $20,000 check from Jefferson County authorities. Assistant Jefferson County Attorney Patricia Gilbert said officials decided to settle the lawsuit for "a variety of reasons." "We don't admit these deputies did anything wrong," she said. Estep said he could not comment until he had spoken with sheriff's administrators. Beaulieu defended his handling of the situation. "I saw what I believe to be a traffic violation and I acted upon it," he said Wednesday evening. "The judge didn't agree." Beaulieu said he does not believe he violated Philp's rights. "He still was able to do what he set out to do that night," he said. Philp, who has a New Mexico driver's license and a Fort Collins post office box, says he's a resident of Wyoming. He could not be reached Wednesday. The lawsuit stemmed from a protest last Dec. 14 outside the home of Tom Mauser, whose son, Daniel, was murdered in the Columbine library in the April 20, 1999, killings. Tom Mauser joined SAFE Colorado after his son's killing and championed a law requiring background checks at gun shows and called for measures imposing requirements on the storage of weapons. On the day of the protest, members of a group calling itself the Tyranny Response Team planned to gather outside Mauser's home and rally for the Second Amendment. The protesters gathered in a parking lot in the 7500 block of South Pierce Street and planned to march to Mauser's nearby home. Shortly before the protest was to begin, according to the lawsuit, Philp decided to drive to Mauser's neighborhood and make sure some demonstrators hadn't already gone there. As he pulled out of a shopping center parking lot onto Pierce Street, Beaulieu followed and pulled Philp over a short time later. The deputy alleged that Philp hadn't used his turn signal when he pulled out of the parking lot, which is on private property. Beaulieu, who was later joined by Estep, wrote Philp a ticket for making an improper left turn, driving without insurance, driving without a seat belt and driving without a valid license. Philp did show the officers a New Mexico driver's license, according to court documents. However, Estep believed that Philp had lived in Colorado for more than 30 days, meaning that he needed a Colorado driver's license. Philp and his attorney filed a motion in Jefferson County Court alleging that the traffic stop and everything that followed was illegal. Their argument: that state law did not require the use of a turn signal on private property, and, consequently, Beaulieu did not have probable cause and could not legally stop Philp. "The problem here was that the sheriff's deputies were basically clueless," Todd said. "They never bothered to read the statutes under which they made their stop and arrest. They didn't apply." On Feb. 8, Judge Charles T. Hoppin granted Philp's motion to suppress the traffic stop and any evidence gathered from it. On Feb. 25, prosecutors dropped all the charges against him. After that, Philp filed suit against the two deputies in federal court. On Sept. 24, Jefferson County authorities agreed to settle it for $20,000. Although the suit had named only the deputies, Jefferson County taxpayers will foot the bill for the settlement. Part of the lawsuit alleged that the traffic stop was part of a concerted effort by sheriff's deputies to "chill" the First Amendment rights of the protesters. "I don't think there's any question about that," Todd said. Attached Image (viewed 80 times): Last edited on Sun Apr 12th, 2009 12:26 am by Duncan Philp |
|||||||||
|
Duncan Philp Regular Member
|
http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2002/Jun-23-Sun-2002/opinion/18975535.html "Protesting a Denver ordinance against bearing arms, business owner and Libertarian U.S. Senate candidate Rick Stanley late last year strapped on a hip holster bearing a .380 Beretta (fellow protester Duncan Philp chose a shoulder rig) during a Dec. 15 rally celebrating the 210th anniversary of the Bill of Rights." "He'd advertised what he was going to do and invited Denver police to come get him. They did. He was peacefully arrested by 18 officers, and brought to trial on May 15 in the municipal court of Judge Robert L. Patterson." ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I wore a gun on my hip at the Pine Bluffs town hall meeting this past Monday night on April 11th and the town cop Yeomans was standing at the back of the meeting room when I was wearing my side arm, a Springfiled .45 ACP. I was not arrested nor was I even threatened with arrest for doing so. You can verify this by checking out the latest Pine Bluffs Post on line. You can also call and ask Mayor Anderson or councilman Shain. The TRT is a no BS pro-Bill of Rights organization and unlike RMGO we never ask anyone for dues. We are not professional lobbiest who live off of membership dues. The TRT is a grass roots organization that has been around since 2000. We are a closely aligned with the Jews for Preservation of Firearms Ownership. I am a graduate of CSU with a BA in polsci/history and a certficate in criminal justice. I also have an AOS from the Colorado School of Trades, which is listed in Brownells as a gunsmithing school located in Lakewood, Colorado. I spent four years in the US Coast Guard and was the boats armorer for a CG patrol boat. Puppet? Any questions? |
|||||||||
|
LDS Gun Man Regular Member
|
 - Apr 11, 2009 4:06 pm (#9 of 10)  Our boy rpyne is a mormon from utah. He doesn't live in PB or even Wyoming.
On your website you have this - "We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights." You really don't know what this means, try reading it real slow - That All Men Are Created Equal. Oh wait the TRT Bill of Rights all Men are created equal - except LDS Just what we need a hate group - disguised as a gun rights group.
|
|||||||||
|
Duncan Philp Regular Member
|
"I see you have a problem with LDS, what kind of group is TRT?" What kind of group is the LDS? The kind who use ad-hom attacks? The kind of get off topic? The kind who post lies about another man and don't invite him to respond? LDS seem to have a problem with non-LDS. Why is this? "On your website you have this - "We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights."" "You really don't know what this means, try reading it real slow - That All Men Are Created Equal." You don't know what it means. Some folks seem to think that they are more equal to others. Did you treat rpynes lies about me with equal measure? Nope, ergo you have just violated your own supposed equal treatment of others. You have in effect posted that "I will ignore what rpryne has to say about this guy Philp, even if it is a proven lie and attack Philp, because I don't like his opinion of my church.". And according to you others are not allowed to have their own opinons of your church, but I'll bet that every LDS has his or her own opinion of other churches. Ever read the book titled "The Slamander Letters"? Quite an insight into the leaderhsip of your church, but of course the LDS brand of corruption is not conducive to just the CLDS. How many times does a guy have to get screwed over by a LDS before he froms a logical conclusion about the LDS church? "Oh wait the TRT Bill of Rights all Men are created equal - except LDS" Oh wiat the LDS Bill of Rights all men are created equal, unless they are not of the LDS belief or if they have an opinion about the LDS that we don't like. "Just what we need a hate group - disguised as a gun rights group." You're a queer? You're a black man? Please don't stoop to the level of the gun grabbers, unless of course you are one. When some guy posts a lie about another men then this is your idea of love. This is my idea of hate. Stay on topic please and that would be, why did Bouchard lie and why is he beating a dead horse when the town has publicly stated that individuals can carry a side arm openly in town limits? |
|||||||||
|
Duncan Philp Regular Member
|
What kind of group is the TRT? We are the anti in the word Anti-Federalist. We want the fed abolished. We insist on the seperation of chruch and state, something the LDS do not support. Because all men are created equal in the eyes of God then no on church or religion can be allowed to impose their will on others by use of the state through means of violence and or conercion. Which church knows the absolute truth? I believe that there is an absolute truth. I don't believe that anyone man knows what it is. The right of the individual is above that of the needs of the state. When we hold a rally no one is allowed to tell another how to conduct their own protest. No one is allowed to tell another how to dress. No one is allowed to treat another as if they are less than equal. Several LDS who attended several of our rallies insisted that they were more superior than others and they insited that others present be made to say what they wanted protestors to say at a TRT rally and dress a certain way . One of these LDS was a guy by the name of Ray Hickman. I'm sure you must have heard of this Tyrant. We see guys like Hickman move here from CA all the time. They lost the the war for gun rights in CA and now they want to coem here and show us hicks how to do it in WY and CO. Fudley Brown of RMGO has stated over and over that he is a Christian, yet he conducts himslef just like rpryne does. "Back Stabber" is Fud's middle name. No more of this for the Wyoming TRT. Bouchard stabbed locla gun owners of Pb in the back when he made the many flase claims that he has thus far made. How many small towns do you know have their own out door shooting range? If PB is like NJ then why are people allowed to shoot those evil assault rifles at the town range? |
|||||||||
|
Duncan Philp Regular Member
|
http://pinebluffssportsmansclub.com/ GUN SHOW The Pine Bluffs Sportsman's Club, Inc. is a non-profit corporation founded to promote the safe use of firearms, the shooting sports and to provide a safe shooting facility.  The shooting range is located just west of the Bluffs on old U.S. Highway 30. Our Sportsman's club offers a wide variety of ranges. Two trap fields equipped with fully automatic traps capable of throwing single or double targets. The club also has a Sporting Clays course that we set up for special events. A 200 yard rifle and 25 yard pistol range round out the shooting facilities. We have a multi-purpose modular building located at the range that is used for meetings and other club activities.We have fun shoots in pistol, rifle and trap. We also have a summer trap league, We are an NRA affiliated shooting club as well as being affiliated with the Civilian Marksmanship Program (CMP).  Our range features:
|
|||||||||
|
Duncan Philp Regular Member
|
Well there ya have it folks. According to Bouchard, PB is a den of gun grabbing activity. Stabbing fellow gun owners in the back is the way of RMGO, WYGO and apparently the LDS church. I've been told that Bouchard lives in Burns, WY. He just moved there from CA. My father was born in Burns and his father owned a local seed house business during the depression. The small park in the center of town has several very large chinese elms trees in it, my grand father planted them all when they were sapplings. Burns has a population 250 people with one loser for a town marshall. I wonder if Bouchard has packed a gun in front of that town marshall? But what do I know uh? My family has only lived in the area for over one hundred years. I know that we have none of those LDS churches in the area. We have a few Baptist churches, a Presbyterian church, a Lutheran church, a Catholic church, a Methodist church and many others but noen of those LDS churches. Last edited on Sun Apr 12th, 2009 10:33 pm by Duncan Philp |
|||||||||
|
LDS Gun Man Regular Member
|
Duncan Philp wrote: - A self-described "political agitator" who was cited for several traffic violations as he prepared to protest outside the home of a Columbine victim won a $20,000 settlement from two sheriff's deputies in a civil-rights lawsuit - We have settled that you hate LDS, Cops, The Government and a whole list of others. I will not even touch religion with you again I think you have summarized your position and it will be clear to others. Looks like your own post sums it up: - "A self-described "political agitator" who was cited for several traffic violations". |
|||||||||
|
LDS Gun Man Regular Member
|
Duncan Philps "A self-described "political agitator" who was cited for several traffic violations" Duncan found this on the web, thought it would be great to share. Duncan’s Philp fury of Hate. "A man so vile and hateful he never seems to be happy unless he is hurting other person" http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1756921/posts ________________________________________________________________ Is the Pine Bluffs Sportsmans Club happy to have you support them? What about the the town council, are they happy to have your support? Have they seen your rant about their cops, you know the one that you called them copscum? Last edited on Mon Apr 13th, 2009 04:11 am by LDS Gun Man |
|||||||||
|
LDS Gun Man Regular Member
|
Duncan Philps "A self-described "political agitator" who was cited for several traffic violations" ___________________________________________________ Duncan, I didn't know you were in a book, your Pastor Pete Peters is in it too. Again, thought it would be great to share. Title: False Patriots Who they are, what they believe (conspiracy theories, patriot enemies, divine mandate), operations they have carried out, & histories of their leaders. http://books.google.com/books?id=zN_vAlq4eUcC&pg=PA54&lpg=PA54&dq=Duncan+Philps+LaPorte+Church+of+Christ&source=bl&ots=1VqhmzVElz&sig=iTRyb4dB-Da3_qn0V_YVBC2M0OU&hl=en&ei=jLDiSfS7GJq4tgP_j_S2CQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3 Last edited on Mon Apr 13th, 2009 04:50 am by LDS Gun Man |
|||||||||
|
SDguy Regular Member
|
Boy, has this thread gone south or what? I assume that it was so effective at exposing Pine Bluffs that someone just had to come and hijack the thread in order to take the pressure off. The only thing that currently matters is to see Pine Bluffs bring their local ordinances in compliance with the Wyoming State Constitution. All else is misdirection. |
|||||||||
|
Duncan Philp Regular Member
|
More lies from the Mormon. Why the lie Mormon? So you must be a member of the Morris Dees fan club. Dees wrote that trash and Dees is the leader of leftist group known as The Southern Poverty Law Center, which wants the fed to confiscate all guns. Tell us about that other Mormon Col. Bo Gritz? Who prints his books for him? The neo-nazi Pete Peters and Pete's Scriptures for America. When you found that trash did you bother to notice that there are no sources for it? No footnotes, no post scripts and no bibliography. Imagine that. You just used a gun grabber for your source of information. When Dees came out with that trash, the you just used as your only source, in it he listed a string of groups and people for the state of Colorado, all impling they we are neo-nazi's. Check it out Morman, Dees listed a gun store called "Paladin Arms" the store was owned by Bob Glass. Bob is one of the founders of the TRT and oh yea Bob is Jewish. OOPS!!!!! Blew that one big time uh Mormon? Oh stop the hate. Why the lies? Why are you unable to stay on topic? Lying only means that you lost the arguement. |
|||||||||
|
Duncan Philp Regular Member
|
"Duncan Philp, Fort Collins, Colorado, Founder of the Colorado Patriots Militia, Philp was a member of Pete Peter's Identity La Porte Church of Christ" ( False Patriots magazine p 54, 1996 Southern Poverty Law Center) And now notice how he continues to twist the lie even further in his book. "In Colorado, Duncan Philp, who was closely aligned with Pete Peters, and formed the White Patriot Militia in Ft. Collins, "(Gathering Strom; Americas Militia Threat p 90, 1996 Morris Dees) Wow I went from being a being an imaginary member of the La Porte Church of Christ to know being the very founder of a white revolutionary movement and I never even knew about it. Here is yet another interesting quote about and from Bubba Dees. "Although his name appears on the inside cover of -False Patriots� manual, Dees was quick to distance himself when told that a business owned by a Jew, with no patriot links, was listed as a patriot group." " I don't have anything to do with that book,� Dees said, You�d have to talk to Joe Roy (director of Klanwatch) about that.� (Wayne Laugesen Boulder Weekly pg 23, May 2nd, 1996) Shazaam looks like Bubba lied. I had consulted with an Denver attorney, whom I had helped out in regards to a topless donut shop, named Arthur Schwartz to see about suing Dees. Although he stated that I had a case I probably couldn�t afford to hire him as I was an unemployed student attending CSU at the time. The owner of the gun shop was Bob Glass a good friend of mine. You can�t find the book or the magazine any more and I�ll bet I am just one of the few who still has them both. Several people did file lawsuits against Dees and he at least lost a bundle of money defending him self. Bubba passed the lie about me onto to the Nikor Project and McVay who obviously never bothered to question its credibility. |
|||||||||
|
Duncan Philp Regular Member
|
You just been busted Mormon and yer little scam just blew up in your face. You have just committed the sin of bearing false witness, a sin often commited by people like you. Care to apologize? We all know why you lied, you lost the debate and you were forced to lie. Got any proof that I am a meber of that church or that I ever been a member of that church? Next time ya see Bo Gritz ask him who printed his book "America Betrayed" for him. Gritz is a Mormon and a good friedn of Pete Peters. |
|||||||||
|
Duncan Philp Regular Member
|
Duncan Philps "A self-described "political agitator" who was cited for several traffic violations" Duncan found this on the web, thought it would be great to share. Who won a 2oK lawsuit aginst two cops that violated the law. So you supprt cops who violate the Bill of Rights, yet here you supporting a guy who cliams that two cops in Pine Bluffs violated his right to carry openly. make up your mind Mormon. Duncan’s Philp fury of Hate. "A man so vile and hateful he never seems to be happy unless he is hurting other person" http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1756921/posts _______________________________________________________________ And the guy who posted that trash was arrested and given tiem in jail. More lies form the Mormon who hates non-Mormons. http://www.westword.com/2007-06-07/news/darren-morrison-s-virtual-aggression/ Darren Morrison's Virtual Aggression Gun activists take their fire fight online. By Alan Prendergast Published on June 07, 2007 It takes all kinds, this argument over guns in America. Patriots and paranoids, cranks and constitutionalists, handwringers and Huns, they all step up to the plate sooner or later. The debate is rarely polite, often incoherent and generally clouded by suspicion, fear and rancor. Subject(s): Columbine, Darren Morrison, Duncan Philp, Tom MauserBut it takes something special to reach the kind of bizarre denouement that played out in a Jefferson County courtroom last week, when a gun activist admitted to e-mailing death threats to a Columbine parent in the name of another gun activist — because, see, he believed his life had been threatened by the other activist, and he wanted to see the man arrested. Makes sense? No? Then you haven't met Darren Morrison. Morrison, 44, is a Navy veteran and was, until recently, a custodian at Colorado State University. He ran unsuccessfully for Angie Paccione's seat in the state legislature last year as a self-proclaimed independent, pro-gun, anti-immigration, anti-abortion, born-again Christian. An additional preoccupation, not listed in his campaign biography, appears to be Duncan Philp. Philp, a prominent gun-rights advocate who lives in Wyoming, posts frequently on Tyranny Response Team (http://www.trtnational.com) and has been a fixture at antiwar and Second Amendment rights rallies in Fort Collins. Morrison claims that Philp is a "hate monger" and has shouted unpleasant things at him at protests through a megaphone. He thinks he's seen Philp's car idling outside his home. When Morrison was banned from posting on the TRT forum a few months ago, Philp suggested adding Morrison to a list of deceased members: "Poor Darren we knew him well," he wrote. Morrison regarded the jibe as a death threat. Philp denies ever threatening Morrison. "I don't have the time to drive seventy miles to stalk this guy," he says. "He was sending me all kinds of e-mails taunting me. We were never friends. He found out that a lot of the Tyranny Response Team members are anarchist libertarians, and he equates that with communists." Last December as the feud heated up, a series of ominous e-mails went out to law enforcement, a local gun group and others, ostensibly from Philp, boasting of his prowess with a .50-caliber handgun. The most disturbing ones came to the inbox of Tom Mauser, who's become an outspoken advocate of tougher gun laws since his son, Daniel, was slain in the 1999 attack on Columbine High School. Philp was involved in a protest outside Mauser's home in 2001 and collected $20,000 in a lawsuit over police harassment stemming from the incident ("Deeper Into Columbine," October 31, 2002). "I have a laser site on my 50 cal as well as a home made silencer," one typo-riddled missive read. "I have spotted planes fling into DIA. I could easly shoot one down so do not take any trips for a while." Mauser was understandably alarmed. "I get this stuff a lot, but this one really did cross the line," he says. He contacted the authorities. The threat came to the attention of the director of the FBI, and the Denver airport went to a heightened state of security for a brief time. A few days later, in a parking lot on the campus of a Cheyenne community college where he was taking classes, Philp was confronted by six sheriff's deputies, three FBI agents and four campus security guards. Some of the officers had guns drawn, Philp says, leading to a shouting match between him and the federal agents. "I just got fed up with this nonsense," he says. "I've put up with it for fifteen years." Questioned about the e-mails, Philp admitted some familiarity with .50-caliber weaponry — enough to know that shooting down an airplane with a handgun isn't an option. He pointed out that the atrocious spelling and grammar were similar to that found in messages he'd received from Morrison. In online postings, Morrison has acknowledged having dyslexia; he's also written of the "rabid" growth of the TRT and to receiving "treats," not threats, from Philp. Morrison later admitted to a reporter from CSU's Rocky Mountain Collegian that he'd sent the e-mails. He wrote a letter of apology to Mauser and pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of harassment. At Morrison's sentencing two weeks ago, Mauser testified about the strain the threats caused to his family during the Christmas season. "My wife was very disturbed," he said. "He's playing with people's lives. Mr. Philp has engaged in some unsavory activities toward me over the years, but he didn't deserve to be targeted like this, either." A tearful Morrison apologized again while insisting that he had reason to fear Philp. "I wasn't sure he wasn't going to try to kill me," he said. "I got sucked into the fight...What I did was inexcusable. I beat myself up all the time for what I did...I've never done anything like this. I just didn't think this through." Philp suspects that Morrison is behind other threatening e-mails he's received in recent months, a charge Morrison has denied. Philp wanted the judge to order some jail time as well as a psychological evaluation. "He's cost the system an awful lot of money," he said. |
|||||||||
|
Duncan Philp Regular Member
|
Is the Pine Bluffs Sportsmans Club happy to have you support them? Yep What about the the town council, are they happy to have your support? Yep Have they seen your rant about their cops, you know the one that you called them copscum? My main source of info about the PB cops was the town. Yeomans fired from the Cheyenne PD for drinking on the job, now a PB cop. You support this sort of thing? You support lying about gun rights actvists? Why the need to get off topic? Why the need to lie? Why are you supporting the lies of rpyne and Bouchard? Are you a gun grabber? Are you copster who wants to confiscate guns? Last edited on Mon Apr 13th, 2009 09:42 pm by Duncan Philp |
|||||||||
|
Duncan Philp Regular Member
|
"Boy, has this thread gone south or what? I assume that it was so effective at exposing Pine Bluffs that someone just had to come and hijack the thread in order to take the pressure off." Exposing Bouchard and the fact that he and or his pals had to post their lies about the town on this string. I carried openly and I wasn't arrested, ergo Bouchard lied. Who hijacked what? rpyne posted a lie about me and I responded. Who intiated the off topic posts and who intiated the lies about a gun rights actvist? rpyne and the mormon "The only thing that currently matters is to see Pine Bluffs bring their local ordinances in compliance with the Wyoming State Constitution. All else is misdirection." Their ordinance was in complaince before Bouchard ever showed up. We need to boycott WYGO and RMGO and bring them into complaince with the truth. Back stabbing is the way of a mormon and the way of WYGO. We can do this all year long, but after it is all siad and done you and your felow back stabbers will still be lacking in credibility. |
|||||||||
|
Duncan Philp Regular Member
|
LDS Man Fri Apr 10th, 2009 Posts: 4 E-mail: Private Homepage: ICQ: AIM: YM: MSNM: Location: Utah Birthday: Ummm my and this does look suspect. Leaves out imporatant facts just like rpyne and Bouchard. Bouchard never sites the town ordinance, nor does he site quotes form the local PB paper. Just like this guy LDS man. A half truth is still a lie. |
|||||||||
|
Duncan Philp Regular Member
|
LDS guy doesn't have a copy of the magazine that he has chosen for his source of information, but I do. Just for the sake of argument we shall go along with the trash that Dudley of RMGO is using to discredit me. Ummm and what have we here on page 55 of the magazine "False Patriots"? The very same magazine that LDA guy has used to defame me. "Larry Pratt, Springfield, Virginia. A former Virginia Repukelican state legislator and a veteran of the radical right, Pratt heads the Gun Owners of America with an estimated membership of 200,000. In 1990, Pratt published "Armed People Victorous", in whihc he urged the formation of "citizens militias". He is a frequent speaker at Identity and Patriot gatherings. In February 1996 pratt took a leave of absence form his postion as co-chiar of Presidential candidate Pat Buchanana's campaign after his connections with white supremacists became widley known." - False Patriots page 55 Ummm and of course Dudley Brown's group Rocky Mountian Gun Owners is under the umbrella of Pratt's group. That would mean that RMGO is a white supremacist leaning organization just like GOA. And Wyoming Gun owners is under the umbrella of GOA as well, thus making Buchard a known neo-nazi sympathizer. The truth is Pratt is NOT a white supremacist and of course neither am I. But for the sake of argument we shall go along with LDS guys postion regardless of Morris Dees lack of crediblity. Why lookie here I see that Bo Gritz and Jack McLamb are listed in the magazine as well. Gritz and McLamb are both Moromons. Col. Bob Brown of another magazine called "Soldier of Fortune" once did a feature story on the great Mormon Bo Gritz and his article publicly exposed the con-man nature of Gritz. Gritz will tell everyone he meets that he is the most decorated Green Beret veteran to have ever served in Vietnam. This is true, but it was Gritz who awared himself all of those ribbons and medals, as a Colonel he could write his own stuff up and then pin it on himself, ummm and I not impressed. Gritz was and still could be a close friend of the neo-nazi Pete Peters. Jack McLamb is a retired Phoenix copster and now a full time Mormon. McLamb investigated the murder of one Gordon Kahl. Kahl was hunted down like a dog by federal agents and killed for having defended his life from US Marshall over a tax issue. Kahl killed three LEO types at a stand off in North Dakota. McLamb investigated the issues surrounding Kahl with the help of one Timothy Coombs aka James Wilson. Wilson is a known white supremacist that is presently on the FBI's "Most Wanted List". Wilson is wanted for the killing of Missouri deputy. Morris Dees can be found as the author of this incredible magazine, but he didn't write it. These lies were written by Joe Roy, a copster and staff member of the Southern Poverty Law Center. Why does RMGO and WYGO lie? The guy who runs it all makes his living off of lies. So tell me how does the town of Pine Bluffs compare to the state of New Jersey? Bouchard uses the same sort of tactics that Dees and Brown use. If PB is like NJ, and Bouchard makes the claim that it is, then why isn't the town of PB allowing for the ownership of assault rifles? If the town has outlawed open carry then why didn't officer Yeomans arrest me at the town meeting when he saw me carrying a pistol on my hip? Why the lies Bouchard? Can't find any issue to deal with in Wyoming so you need to invent them? You need to justify your pathetic existence so much that you are forced to lie about the town of PB and another gun right activist? Here we have a picture of Brown standing next to his favorite white supremacist Larry Pratt. Hey if it works for LDS guy then sure outta work for me. Attached Image (viewed 242 times): |
|||||||||
|
Mjolnir Regular Member
|
Here is a novel idea. While eating at Carl Jr in Cheyenne I ran across a small newspaper that seems to print facts while calling a spade a spade. Why not contact the Cheyenne Herald http://www.cheyenneherald.com/ and see if they will check out and print a story about this issue. Might be good getting a 3rd party newspaper involved!!! |
|||||||||
|
Duncan Philp Regular Member
|
"Why not contact the Cheyenne Herald ... " Dave might, but generally speaking if a story is running in another paper then he won't do the same story. People will be hearing about it on local talk radio and some one has been putting out fliers around the county to let the Cheyenne locals know about the PB issue. See you at the Tea Party tomorrow. I wonder if Bouchard has the kahones to wear a sidearm at this event? I doubt it. I've been told that he wears an empty holster around town. There will be men present at this event who will be wearing a sidearm and we suspect that the Wyoming Homeland Gestapo will be there, along with the goons who work for herr Fecht, to harass us all. I dare Bouchard to pack a gun around Cheyenne. Herr Fecht will be on live radio this coming Friday to talk about those awful fake plates. We can ask him about his policy in regards to open carry and put his feet to the fire. Don't you feel safe knowing that Fecht and his thugs are keeping our streets safe from those fake plates? I know I do. I've had several reports that Fecht has ordered his people to harass anyone they see carrying openly. I heard of one case in which a Cheyenne man had defended his home from local hoodlums and used a hand gun to do so. After which Fecht sent in a SWAT crew to steal this man's entire gun collection. I will ask Jeff more about it when I see him at the Tea Party. Seems to me like there are bigger fish to fry in this state rather than a small town on the Wyoming/Nebraska border. PB has a population of 1,500 people. It is a two cop town with more dispatchers than there are cops. many of the posters who by the way don't even live in Wyomign are demanding that this town clean up their old ordinances. The problem is that the town would have to hire a full time attorney to do just that. The attorney they have now is only a part time contrat worker and he has his own private practice. This town derives its revenue from sales tax and a small protion of property taxes. It is simply easier not to enforce these old laws. PB was fist established in 1868 and was set up as stop over for pioneers. You can imagine the kind of riff-raff headed for those gold mines in the Black Hills of SD. |
|||||||||
|
SDguy Regular Member
|
Duncan, you are not one of us, you are simply a troublemaker here and nobody is taking you seriously. I just see it is you who has posted and don't bother even reading you anymore. |
|||||||||
