Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com

Firearm & Gun Forum - FireArmsTalk.com (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/)
-   Legal and Activism (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f97/)
-   -   CC ban unconstitutional says judge (http://www.firearmstalk.com/forums/f97/cc-ban-unconstitutional-says-judge-33075/)

bkt 10-15-2010 09:23 AM

CC ban unconstitutional says judge
 
Judge rules concealed carry ban unconstitutional
by WRN CONTRIBUTOR on OCTOBER 14, 2010

A Clark County judge says Wisconsin’s ban on carrying concealed weapons is unconstitutional. In the case, authorities charged a Sauk City man with carrying a concealed weapon, after he admitted he had a knife in his waistband. He never threatened anyone. In light of the landmark Supreme Court ruling in McDonald v. City of Chicago, attorney William Poss filed a motion to dismiss the case on constitutional grounds. Judge Jon Counsell obliged Wednesday, ruling the law is overly broad and violates both the Second and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution.

“The government has to have a compelling state interest to do so (restrict the right to carry) and they have to have the least restrictive means of doing that,” said Poss. “Public safety obviously is a state interest, but there’s all kinds of ways to do that in this regard.” In his decision, Counsell states the law forces citizens to “go unarmed (thus not able to act in self defense), violate the law or carry openly,” but notes displaying weapon’s openly isn’t a “realistic alternative.”

As of now, the decision only sets a precedent in Counsell’s court, but Poss expects the case will be appealed. “It’s ultimately going to get to either the Wisconsin Supreme Court and or the United States Supreme Court one way or another,” he predicted. The decision was disseminated around the state Wednesday, and Poss already had 50 congratulatory phone messages or e-mails from colleagues by Wednesday afternoon. “There’s a lot of interest in this obviously,” he said. “It’s not a left or right type of thing quite frankly. It’s a liberty thing.”

Clark County Assistant District Attorney Dick Lewis said he has 20 days to appeal the ruling, and no decision has been made. Wisconsin is one of only two states which completely ban carrying concealed weapons.

spittinfire 10-15-2010 10:55 AM

This could get interesting.

masterPsmith 10-15-2010 03:26 PM

I "hope" that in time. this could lead to Constitional Carry across the Country, as in Arizona and a couple of others...


Jim.............

dunerunner 10-15-2010 03:33 PM

It could lead to the right to CC without the current State tax on that right, also!

CA357 10-15-2010 04:40 PM

It's definitely a move in the right direction.

FreedomFighter69 10-19-2010 12:08 AM

I'd be happy to see open carry across the country even. It's a start in the right direction anyway. You should have the choice though. As far as open carry, if everyone did it, it would not be a big deal anymore !

DragonLW 10-19-2010 10:22 PM

Quote:

I "hope" that in time. this could lead to Constitional Carry across the Country, as in Arizona and a couple of others...
We can hope, but it won't likely happen.

States will always resist the intrusion of Federal Law. Just look at the current group of states bringing suit against FedGov over ObamaCare. States have the right to oppose Federal intrusion into the lives of their citizens, both in terms of the lousy healthcare law, and also in terms of FedGov mandating National Open Carry.

That being said, the best route would be to get SCOTUS to agree that licensing in one state MUST be recognized in any other state. Drivers Licenses work that way, Marriage Licenses do, Pilots licenses to fly planes do, etc.

The prior precedent is there. What is needed is a strong enough case, and a good enough lawyer. The lawyer part is easy...the strong enough case? Not so much, because currently, with the hoops one has to jump through in some states to get a CCW (like NY, MA, NJ, HI, etc...) no-one from those states is going to test the law and try to cross a state line in violation of the other state's law, because they don't want to lose the privilege in their home state by getting arrested, and having a felony conviction on their record that could be used to confiscate their guns.

Add to that the fact that 99% of those of us who carry are law-abiders, and we go to great pains to be mindful of what the law says, and to show that we are responsible citizens, and a case which can be used to challenge al the way up to SCOTUS is almost non-existent.

DragonLW

bkt 10-19-2010 10:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DragonLW (Post 371027)
States will always resist the intrusion of Federal Law. Just look at the current group of states bringing suit against FedGov over ObamaCare. States have the right to oppose Federal intrusion into the lives of their citizens, both in terms of the lousy healthcare law, and also in terms of FedGov mandating National Open Carry.

You're close to hitting on something that has vexed me for some time. In principle, I'm against the Bill of Rights being incorporated against the states; it was intended to apply only to the federal government. That said, it would be a very good thing if 2A were properly recognized as being incorporated against the states and all state and municipal gun laws were tossed out.

The question is which government is intruding into the lives of citizens? The federal government that tries to increase freedom or the state/local governments that try to quash it? This is an odd case, because it's usually the other way 'round.

CourtJester 10-19-2010 10:37 PM

I'd like to see how this one turns out

DragonLW 10-19-2010 11:01 PM

Quote:

I'm against the Bill of Rights being incorporated against the states; it was intended to apply only to the federal government.
Correct...the Constitution and the Original 10 Amendments (of the 12 that were proposed) are restrictions *against* the FedGov, designed and intended to keep the new gov't as a gov't of the People, by the People, for the People. It was the unconstitutional actions of Abe Lincoln during the Civil War, and the 14th Amendment which followed, that radically changed our system of gov't. Think about it...with ONE Amendment, Congress declared that the restrictions which the Founders placed on the FedGov were bullsh*t, and the States (which were in the pockets of corrupt Northern politicians) all went along with it, and gave up the State Sovereignty that was GUARANTEED to them by the Founders.

Its BECAUSE of the 14th that we have the problems of run-away Federal Spending, a bloated FedGov bureaucracy, Congressleaches that trample the rights of States and look down their noses at the US Citizen as nothing but peons and peasants, akin to little children who need to be told what to do for their own good, because without FedGov, they would just be lost and confused.

Yeah....think I'm just a bit jaded with the current state of my Country? :mad:


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:46 AM.

Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.