CC ban unconstitutional says judge

Discussion in 'Legal and Activism' started by bkt, Oct 15, 2010.

  1. bkt

    bkt New Member

    6,964
    0
    0
    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.
     
  2. spittinfire

    spittinfire New Member Supporter

    9,663
    2
    0
    This could get interesting.
     

  3. masterPsmith

    masterPsmith New Member

    1,346
    1
    0
    I "hope" that in time. this could lead to Constitional Carry across the Country, as in Arizona and a couple of others...


    Jim.............
     
  4. dunerunner

    dunerunner New Member

    8,411
    3
    0
    It could lead to the right to CC without the current State tax on that right, also!
     
  5. CA357

    CA357 New Member Supporter

    19,847
    3
    0
    It's definitely a move in the right direction.
     
  6. FreedomFighter69

    FreedomFighter69 New Member

    212
    0
    0
    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 !
     
  7. DragonLW

    DragonLW New Member

    26
    0
    0
    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
     
  8. bkt

    bkt New Member

    6,964
    0
    0
    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.
     
  9. CourtJester

    CourtJester Active Member

    3,299
    15
    38
    I'd like to see how this one turns out
     
  10. DragonLW

    DragonLW New Member

    26
    0
    0
    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:
     
  11. DragonLW

    DragonLW New Member

    26
    0
    0
    Under the Originalist view of the Constitution (Scalia adheres to this, and to some extent do Roberts and Alito) the answer is already IN the Constitution. Its in the Commerce Clause. It is the Commerce clause that settled the Licensing question when automobiles became ubiquitous in modern society. Same with licensing pilots when airplanes became affordable for the average citizen to own. Congress has used the Commerce Clause (and SCOTUS concurred) to allow people to move themselves between state borders without needing to seek out licensing in all 50 states.

    So, we don't NEED FedGov to pass a law that mandates National Open Carry...we simply need SCOTUS to reaffirm that if States wish to have a licensing scheme, said scheme is the same as all other licenses, and can be carried state to state and honored without question.

    If a State thinks it can dodge that by not issuing licenses (so as to say *we aren't participants in licensing*) then the 2nd gets applied under the intent of the Declaration (which SCOTUS has also used in the past) because one's right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness is an INALIENABLE Right, which precedes the wording of the Declaration and Constitution, and thus falls under Natural Law. Natural Law dictates that you have the right to defend yourself, your family, and your fellow Human Beings...and the OBLIGATION to do so.

    Its sad that we've strayed so far from the core principals that the Country was built on...

    DragonLW
     
  12. bkt

    bkt New Member

    6,964
    0
    0
    Well said, Dragon - I agree completely. But as we have seen, the government (at all levels) doesn't worry about a trifling matter like obeying the law.

    Of course, when you really grasp the import of that fact, most thinking Americans would ask "Then why should we obey the law?"
     
  13. 007BondJamesBond007

    007BondJamesBond007 New Member

    428
    0
    0
    USA Today Poll

    PLEASE VOTE, THEN PASS IT ON !!!!!!!!
    They are hoping you won't remember when you vote in November.

    Obama's new Attorney General, the idiot Eric Holder, has already said this is one of his major issues. He does not believe the 2nd Amendment gives individuals the right to bear arms. This takes literally 2 clicks to complete. Please vote on this gun issue question with USA Today. It will only take a few seconds of your time. Then pass the link on to all the pro gun folks you know. Hopefully these results will be published later this month. This upcoming year will become critical for gun owners with the Supreme Court's accepting the District of Columbia case against the right for individuals to bear arms.

    Here's what you need to do:

    First - vote on this one.

    Second - launch it folks and have THEM vote - then we will see if the results get published.

    The Question is:

    "Does the Second Amendment give individuals the right to bear arms?"

    Click on the link below and PLEASE vote Yes!

    USATODAY.com - USATODAY.com - Quick Question
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2010
  14. dragonsmith

    dragonsmith New Member

    7
    0
    0
    cc good for wisconsin

    I have had my cc in other states when i was in the service, and i think that cc permitted in wisconsin would gravely help in our crime rates, especially those that are aggressive in nature like rape, theft and a whole host of others. i have done a lot of research on the subject and it has been proven time and time again in the states that have enacted cc that crimes of violent nature always show a decrees in frequency.
    Law makers hear in wisconsin have little brains, it only makes sense, from a criminals stand point, they generally will think twice before engaging in activities that would or could be conducive in harming a victim if that victim he or she may be armed.
    Further more i am unable to understand there logic in banning it for wisconsin residents when the vast amount of studies conducted on the matter all point towards an ideal outcome, Crime drops, revenue for the state increases and the average citizen is no longer a lamb amongst wolves.
     
  15. WoodysKJ

    WoodysKJ New Member

    246
    0
    0
    As well they (we) should. It is a State's right issue. For tose who can not carry, elect officials who will change that in your state, don't wait for the feds to try to dictate your rights, or lack there of.
     
  16. wb_carpenter

    wb_carpenter New Member

    198
    0
    0
    That USA today poll has been around for at least a couple years now I doubt anything is being done with it.

    You must vote at the real polls.
     
  17. gorknoids

    gorknoids New Member

    2,396
    0
    0
    The 2nd Amendment reaffirms our natural right to bear arms. I know that it's picking the fly crap out of the pepper, but it says that the right to bear arms will not be infringed.