Just remember people that even if an intruder is in YOUR home, you had better be backed into a corner with all alternatives exhausted before you shoot to kill. That is the law.

"And yes, I am a liberal. Out."
+
Gee, I never would have guessed it!

MooShoo, you are the nut.

Final comments on this story from MooShoo. I own guns. I hunt deer. I qualified expert with a rifle 3 times when I was in the Marines. Guns have their place. It is not on your hip on Main Street in Milton. And yes, I am a liberal. Out.

Some of you can talk the talk, but you can't walk the walk. CELEBRATE YOUR RIGHTS! Strap it on and stroll down Main in Milton. I can't wait to read the story in the local paper. Perhaps if we are lucky, there will be some action photos of you too. Go ahead gun nutz, make my day!

mabusejuvenalis, you might want to read this.

America Over-Dosed:
The Role Of Anti-Depressants
In The Columbine Tragedy
& Other Bizarre Killings

Christopher Bollyn
American Free Press
June 2006
http://www.erichufschmid.net/Columbine/C...

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

Before you say it: Spahn and Sane and pray for rane.

The question continues, why on heavenly earth would any sain civilian want to waltz around with guns on his person?
-
Explanation Redux
-
I love my gun, it is such fun
I flash it for my honey bun
And when I chase her on the run
We roll around it when we're done.
-
She likes the way I make it shine
And knows it's hers as much as mine
And when we play with it it's fine
If no one mentions Columbine.
-
So what's the people's major worry
We don't need no judge or jury
We're adults to tell what's right
And know what's handy in a fight.
-
We got it on our old TVs -
Bill Hickoks, Dillons, Cassidys
The Cisco Kids and Rogers, Roys
Knew righteousness demands cowboys.
-
White and black was good and bad
And we got spankings from our dad
And cowboys killed a guy or two
Or sometimes more, if two wouldn't do.
-
Those sweet days' passing we all rue,
But look, relief is coming through
To give your swagger extra bolster
To march down Main with gun in holster.
-
My hon will nuzzle next to mine
We'll walk a straight and fearless line
I'll feel like any decent man
Who wants to shoot and thinks he can.
-
In public, private, all will know
Your weapon's not just there for show
It tells the public what you wish
Though night time tricks be emptyish.
-
Thus hon will someday see a man
When comes the chance by God’s own plan:
Let some black-hat guy pass me by
He’ll reap my weapon’s crack and die.
-
And I will be a hero then
Just like those other western men
Who made such thrills and gory joys
When men were men and cowboys boys.
-
I plumb fergot the goviment
So thick with noxious sediment
Who when they come to bully you
A simple shotgun will not do.
-
No sir, a beast as vile as that
Is no stray mangy pussy cat
Flame-throwers, uzis – that’s the stuff
To make ‘em give a think enough.
-
However much they think they’re tough
They’ll find that we are just as rough,
And will dispatch them straight to heaven
With our AK forty-seven.
-
For when invading feds march in,
We’ll pot them pretty as a pin
And then the fun at last begin
With God’s accountants counting sin.
-
With mounting calculations grim,
St Peter’s head aches wracking him,
Our good Saint Timothy McVeigh
Haloed, winged and having sway,
-
The feds will be adjudged right well
And every one cast down to hell.
And standing proud atop the stair
Heston and Wayne Le Pierre
-
Stout and fearless, iron jawed,
Will look to earth both proud and awed
And see their minions all unharmed:
So fiercesome, brave and duly armed.

MooShoo,
I'm not "crying" about an ordinance that doesn't allow me to carry guns into government buildings. You seem to be confusing law abiding, gun-owning citizens with criminals. Criminals don't care that guns are not allowed in certain buildings. They'll bring them in anyway. I'm a law abiding citizen and simply would not take a gun into a government building (or any other building that prohibits them).

But your argument seems to be that law abiding citizens exercising their constitutional right to carry guns in public are "asking for trouble" or are "stupid" because people like yourself who are ignorant of the law will call the police on them. Sounds like you're the one that is paranoid.

Stupid is as stupid does.

mooshoo you have a corner on this don't you .

P-Brains, not much to say, or is your mouth full of chocolate?

Dr. Talk, you cannot have it both ways. You tell me a municipal ordinance, preventing you from open carry in Milton is a violation of your constitutional rights. Why aren't you crying about an ordinance that does not allow you to carry in government buildings? After all, isn't the whole crux of your argument is that oppressive govenment is limiting your constitutional rights?
*
You guys won't win this argument with me. If you want to strap on in a residential neighborhood, you asking for trouble, period. Stupid is as stupid does.

MooShoo:"Better yet, walk in J.B Van Hollen's Office with your piece hanging on your hip. I am sure he'll glady meet with you to discuss your constitutional rights."
.
Apparently you're not familiar with the law. There are restrictions on carrying guns into buildings, especially government offices. But just walking down the street with one holstered to your hip is not illegal.

Reponse to Digriz: A no brains gut nut would stroll through the City of Milton in open carry mode. Why? If you are a no brains gut nut, and just "happen to go walking in Milton with an openly carried firearm, be careful crossing the rivers of chocolate. Very messy."
*
Anyone who straps on and recognizes that the act makes his fellow citizens the headwaters of the chocolate river is a gun nut. Q.E.D.

Hi RAF,
Good to see your back, as sharp as ever.

Response to MooShoo 6:21 p.m. on the 22nd:

""BRaines: The only problem with that is one idiot, like a few that have posted on this thread, will call the police when they see you and if the cop is a freak like they are, he'll ignore the fact that you are legally carrying a gun openly and simply arrest you for disorderly conduct or disturbing the peace. If you do happen to go walking in Milton with an openly carried firearm, be careful crossing the rivers of chocolate. Very messy.""

"The People have a RIGHT to wear their arms under the U.S. Constitution "
-
That's right, and we need to make sure that we all use deodorant under those arms, so we don't end up smelling like the French.

DiGriz, looks like "z-z-z-z-z-z-z-z" boy has come back out to plop his 2 cents into another debate; before he walks out all upset that someone calls him on his ineptness again.

Dr. Talk, you miss the point. Its your right to open carry, and there are 56,000 square miles in Wisconsin. The majority of which no one will give a rip whether or not you strap one on. Furthermore, the goof ball Atty. General issued an opinion that if you strap on, it should not be prosecuted as disorderly. Good, I triple dog dare anyone to strap on their dog leg, and march up State Street in Madison. Better yet, walk in J.B Van Hollen's Office with your piece hanging on your hip. I am sure he'll glady meet with you to discuss your constitutional rights.
*
It might not be disorderly, but if it happens in my neighborhood, I am calling 911 and saying "That nut case Dr. Talk has a gun strapped to his leg, please send the police ASAP"
*
So go ahead, strap one on and parade around your yard. Exercise your constitutional rights. If you do so in an urban environment, you need to have your head examined. Other than scaring the hell out of the neighbors, what do you think you accomplished?

There are so many comments that are completely immature and interpersonal. Why do you people squabble between each other here? Get a room or call each other. The People have a RIGHT to wear their arms under the U.S. Constitution and the State of Wisconsin Constitution. If you people don't understand those that exercise their rights that you DON'T then that is your problem. This is a RIGHT people, not a privilege, not something that happens to only occur when you are sleeping and dreaming about Obama Sheep dancing over your heads. Wake up people and learn the Constitution of the U.S. and Wisconsin. What do you think will happen when the government finally destroys the 1st amendment? That's right, you will be imprisoned (as I will be) for writing or saying anything the government doesn't approve. These are all RIGHTS. Stand up for them and stop being crybabies because you are scared of a piece of plastic and metal on someone's hip. How many of you have EVER protested in public out on a street corner? NONE is what I would think of most of you. That is a RIGHT too folks and those that protest the government are the ones that normally fix the problems with government. Get a copy of the Constitution and read it...learn it....LIVE IT.

MooShoo,
Do you think that everyone who exercises their legal rights is a nut? Even Gov. Jim Doyle said that if you want to carry a gun in Wisconsin, carry it on your hip.
http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepoliti...

I'm in the mood to pick on some red-necks today. If you'd like to see the profile of someone who would support concealed gun carry, check out Michael R. Huber's profile in today's Gazette.

"There must be some kind twitch somewhere hidden there in your belligerent demeanor."
-
Nah, that was just a bit of gas.. : )

I hear that that the local Chamber of Commerce is "up in arms" about this issue. They can hardly wait for the Council to pass this ordinance. Yep, that gun nut in West Allis will be our first out of town customer to strap it on and stroll the business district in Milton. Its going to be good for business folks, you wait and see! Yep, I predict this will do wonders for the east and west side business districts. People will flock to friendly Milton when we can holster up and show the folk our big ole dog legs strapped to our hips.

For Griz:

Thoreau: In order to have good poets you must have good audiences.

At least you didn't fling me down to the Azgoths of Kria level. Thanks for that. There must be some kind twitch somewhere hidden there in your belligerent demeanor.

I know this was a huge issue up in Milton before one gun nut in West Allis felt the urge to "holster up" before he went and did yard work. It became a must do something now issue when the goof ball Attorney General weighed in with his "opinion" on the issue. Guess what folks, its a freaking opinion. If the Milton Council was stupid enough to wade into this mess, they deserve sit in a hot room full of gun nutz and anti gun nutz next time it is on the Agenda.

Worse than a Vogon.

I know of one - you writing poetry.

Don't know, Grizzy: can't think of too many images more vomit-inducing than chocolate rivers or too many kids with candy faces.

BRaines: The only problem with that is one idiot, like a few that have posted on this thread, will call the police when they see you and if the cop is a freak like they are, he'll ignore the fact that you are legally carrying a gun openly and simply arrest you for disorderly conduct or disturbing the peace. If you do happen to go walking in Milton with an openly carried firearm, be careful crossing the rivers of chocolate. Very messy.

mabusejuvee on Milton Open Carry:
-
"Last year I went to Milton. Before they allowed open carry, it was a happy place. They had flowery meadows and rainbow skies, and rivers made of chocolate, where the children danced and laughed and played with gumdrop smiles."

The cops arrested me for having a 50 cal machine gun and laws rocket in my gun rack in my ferd truck, i will fight this in court.

Wow, there are many comments posted that have nothing to do with this subject. Many of you are using this site to post interpersonal squabbles. Don't you people have better things to do?
I for one DO carry a gun openly in Wisconsin and have for the last few months. I don't live in Milton but if I did I WOULD openly carry NOW. Why? Because the city of Milton has NO AUTHORITY to pass laws that are more stringent than the state. The state laws override ALL city and local laws with a state pre-emption law that simply states that no city, town, county or local government or community can pass ANY law that is more stringent than the state law. The state of Wisconsin law for the past 137 years has ALWAYS allowed open carry of firearms. Since 1998 the state Constitution also supports the right to keep and bear arms for the security, defense, etc...and any other lawful purpose. So, all the towns, cities, counties, etc...that have laws that are more stringent than the state law are illegal, unenforceable in a court of law and unconstitutional. So the town or city of Milton only has to do one thing: NOTHING. The open carry of firearms is LEGAL IN ALL OF WISCONSIN NO MATTER WHAT THE CITY OF MILTON SAYS. So strap on your guns and go to Milton. Walk downtown and enjoy the day. When you get arrested be nice and when the hearing comes up you really have nothing to worry about. Once that is over SUE THE CRAP OUT OF THE CITY OF MILTON. This is a RIGHT. NOT A PRIVILEGE! If you don't like people that carry guns then too bad. Move to Canada or perhaps Russia. I am sure you will fit right in.

I plumb fergot the goviment
So thick with noxious sediment
Who when they come to bully you
A simple shotgun will not do.
-
No sir, a beast as vile as that
Is no stray mangy pussy cat
Flame-throwers, uzis – that’s the stuff
To make ‘em give a think enough.
-
However much they think they’re tough
They’ll find that we are just as rough,
And will dispatch them straight to heaven
With our AK forty-seven.
-
For when invading feds march in,
We’ll pot them pretty as a pin
And then the fun at last begin
With God’s accountants counting sin.
-
With mounting calculations grim,
St Peter’s head aches wracking him,
Our good Saint Timothy McVeigh
Haloed, winged and having sway,
-
The feds will be adjudged right well
And every one cast down to hell.
And standing proud atop the stair
Heston and Wayne Le Pierre
-
Stout and fearless, iron jawed,
Will look to earth both proud and awed
And see their minions all unharmed:
So fiercesome, brave and duly armed.

Everyone should watch this video "No guns for Negroes".

http://www.jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/moviepla...

I love my gun, it is such fun
I flash it for my honey bun
And when I chase her on the run
We roll around it when we're done.
-
She likes the way I make it shine
And knows it's hers as much as mine
And when we play with it it's fine
If no one mentions Columbine.
-
So what's the people's major worry
We don't need no judge or jury
We're adults to tell what's right
And know what's handy in a fight.
-
We got it on our old TVs -
Bill Hickoks, Dillons, Cassidys
The Cisco Kids and Rogers, Roys
Knew righteousness demands cowboys.
-
White and black was good and bad
And we got spankings from our dad
And cowboys killed a guy or two
Or sometimes more, if two wouldn't do.
-
Those sweet days' passing we all rue,
But look, relief is coming through
To give your swagger extra bolster
To march down Main with gun in holster.
-
My hon will nuzzle next to mine
We'll walk a straight and fearless line
I'll feel like any decent man
Who wants to shoot and thinks he can.
-
In public, private, all will know
Your weapon's not just there for show
It tells the public what you wish
Though night time tricks be emptyish.
-
Thus hon will someday see a man
When comes the chance by God’s own plan:
Let some black-hat guy pass me by
He’ll reap my weapon’s crack and die.
-
And I will be a hero then
Just like those other western men
Who made such thrills and gory joys
When men were men and cowboys boys.

I guess I have to repeat for the second time. Under the Napoleonic code in Louisiana you are guilty until proven innocent. So, if you are carrying a gun outside your home the police can say your guilty and take your gun. How many time does this have to be repeated. This is why Louisiana is such an absurd example but the NRA is a paranoid organization supported and run by paranoid people. Just look at these posts.

im on a roll here:) i actually just asked my boss what his take was on registering guns. he, like my dad is vietnam vet. he voted no on registering guns and in my opinion had THE MOST logical answer to why they shouldnt be registered. he said cuz if the citizens need to revolt and overthrow the govt the govt doesnt need to know what kind of weapons we have. sort of on the same line as fear of them coming for the weapons just a dift angle.

digirlz: per your request i asked the pops an bro an BOTH said yes they should be registered. thought it would never happen, but that it should. fyi.

clarify...that video says police and gaurd were ordered...but never says who made the order...

glock that abc video you posted was the national gaurd going door to door. serious question cuz ive never served, is it the governor that makes the calls for the national gaurd or someone else??

glock: someone earlier asked me to ask my bro/dad what they thought

digirlz: you make me lol. only unfortunately not with you.

I just heard that the new state budget includes a provision that 10-year-olds can legally carry concealed weapons. Pass it on.

and no it wasn't Uncle Sam's fault, it was the pinheads at the state and local levels that did the most damage! Like Mayor "No-gun's" delay in evacuating the city and the poor resources he had to do it, and he pi$$ poor ability to do anything right.

who cares if your bro wants to register his gun, there is no gun registration in WI. And since we are going on 6 months with Obama as president, only 3 more to go before the liberals can stop blaming Bush for Everything! Clinton didn't get blamed for 9-11 and Bush was only pres. for 9 months at that point. So, 3 more months and it's on cuz!

so its a few bad cops and not uncle sams fault?? then why the fear of him coming for your registered guns?? regardless of the rules you will have bad cops who are going to come in an get yo stuff regardless. now youre going to make fun of someone by teasing them about being mentally handicapped?? are you 12?? grow up man. and fyi my bro said hed have no problem registering his guns cuz he knows he has nothing to hide

i appreciate yo sympathy;) im guessing if uncle sam thought he had a reason, legit or not, i dont think the NOYGDB would work;) but good luck sir.

Thekid, sorry to hear about your diminished supply! I feel for you. I don't smoke, but have back in the day and feel alcohol is a far worse drug than marijuana. If a officer came on my property and asked me if I had any guns I would tell him it's none of his business. The only reason they got taken was because the owners were honest and said yes.

im not already chilled out?? anyways dont get me started...i am almost out of pot for the first time in about half a decade. oh dont worry, its on its way and i wont run out and ive got my reserve but it irritates the crap out of me nonetheless when i run low cuz if alcohol was my choice theres like prolly 50 places in a 30 min drive where i can legally DRIVE to and intoxicate myself...but not one legal source for me to get some pot and smoke on my couch. troutturd hypocrites. anyways...i understand your concern about uncle sam knowing where they are and coming to get them...but doesnt that video show that if he wants them he will get them whether registered or not??

amen etownguy. Thekid-go smoke a doobie and chill out, registering guns just tells the government where you live when they want to come and take them...Period.

futurerichguy this isn't a movie and you are not chuck norris. maybe if someone is very disrespectful, ignorant and threatens you it is a good thing they get a reality check. by reality a check a i mean being knocked out in a public place. how much more peaceful of a world would it be if people knew there were consequences for their actions? not being thrown in jail, but a broken nose instead.

our founding fathers were pretty smart forward looking people. the 2nd Amendment assures that a militia can defend its self against its government. among other things. for example the Revolutionary War. without our militia we would more than likely be an English nation. when obama was in Green Bay a week or so ago there were a lot of Wisconsin citizens protesting against our "Socialist" president. you won't hear about that on the major news networks. you don't want any part of a Socialist ran country.

the real issue is the right to carry a firearm down the street holstered in plain sight. how many people die from violence from a firearm compared to those that are killed by an automobile because of negligence?

we've went from a country who makes things happen to one that sits back and let's things happen.

citizens of this country who are living a carefree lifestyle of Wal-Mart and SUV's are in for a rude awakening in the near future.

it is a law glock?? wow, i bow to your intelligence and thank you for saving me from future prosecution. wait...that was my point that it should be a law to register your guns and thanx for that abc video. it PROVES my point that if uncle sam wants your guns he will come and get them whether they are registered or not.

Darwin, the police were not interviewed because they broke the law!!! you really think they were gonna go on tv and discuss it?? Duh!

Darwin if you don't believe the last video because it had an agenda, try this video, by ABC News, who is so slanted to the left it isn't even funny! This should be one of your favorite news sources and even they talk about forcibly disarming American citizens in New Orleans.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sm5PC7z79...

you are not allowed to take your weapon out of your home??? I am at a loss. your ignorance astonishes me and saddens me. You do not know one thing of which you talk about. I am having a battle of wits with an unarmed person, unarmed by choice. I am not screaming in the streets that the sky is falling or that they are trying to take my guns, on the contrary, I feel we are on the verge of regaining a lot of our lost gun rights back. Just wanted to point out it HAS happened in the past, you can refuse to believe the truth if you want. When presented with the truth your ilk just responds with the same old "agenda" crap. Give me a break. Any view point other than your own is considered an agenda by you and your ilk. Try reading the book "the great Louisiana gun grab",oh, I forgot, it's all a conspiracy.

http://www.neworleansgungrab.com/

glocktard, this happened while the fascist Bush was President who failed to take measures to ensure people's safety from the start. It is an absurd example at best because it only interviews those who have an agenda. Why weren't the police interviewed? It was a state of emergency and all but one had taken their weapons out of their homes which you don't have the right to do unless part of a militia. Try reading the Constitution. This is also Louisiana which operates under the Napoleonic code which means you are guilty until proven innocent.

"When the Government fears the people there is Freedom, When the people fear the Government there is Tyranny" - Thomas Jefferson.

Thekid, it is the law that you have to register your car. There is no such law about registering firearms in the state of WI. Sorry you lose on that point.

here Darwin watch this video and tell me if you think what they did to these people was legal. The Government has no more right to deny the people their 2nd amendment right as they do the first amendment or any of the amendments, they were not given to us by the Government.

http://www.givethemback.com/

Darwin, go read History before you comment about something you know nothing of. I am glad you are proud to be a Libtard, Are you proud of the Change Obama has brought us so far? he tripled Bush's spending in just 100 days. And yes, the government has forcefully taken guns from law abiding citizens in the past and then denied it ever happened until they were caught lying about it. Google New Orleans, Katrina, Gun confiscations. I have a video of Police wrestling a small revolver from an elderly woman's hand when she told them she can protect herself from the criminals with her gun. They asked to see it and when she showed them her gun they attacked her. It has happened and they said they would do it again if given the same opportunity.
You just go put your head back in the sand and proclaim your allegiance to the socialist Obama administration.

DizzyGirl, you and the goon squad are at it again. Yes, I am a proud liberal who believes the government can do lots of things better than private business. And personally, I would rather be a liberal than a neo-con who believes that we can spread liberty, democracy and peace by killing and torturing people. How delusional is that?

Neo-con: Poor me, poor me the government is trying to take my guns.

Liberal: When has the government tried to take your guns?

Neo-con: In the fantasy world of my own conspiracy theories where I hate victims while portraying myself as one.

Secondly, Hitler changed the gun laws for Jewish people only and relaxed them for Germans. So, please stop the lies.
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?a...

Ok....if YOU say so. I feel much safer now, grasshopper.

Futurerichguy, you are just ignorant. Just because it is unlikely to happen doesn't mean one should not be prepared or trained to handle the situation should it arrive. I have lived 41 years without a house fire, but I still have a fire extinguisher and smoke detector just in case. I don't think the victims of the triple murder here in Janesville 2 years ago where looking for violence, or putting themselves in harms way. They were sleeping in their beds.

DiGriz, your comment confirmed my suspicions that because of your experiences in combat, you feel the need to arm yourself here in Southern Wisconsin. There is no need to react with violence in any civilian situation. Bar fights are for drunkards and red-necks, not martial artists. When I say "any civilian situation" I do understand there are rare occurences, but again I'm more concerned about lightning. If a person takes care of themselves, exudes an image of confidence, avoids rough neighborhoods late at night, their chances of getting attacked with a gun or knife are about 1 in a million.

"I'm afraid that your experiences in Afghanistan may have warped your sense of danger, and when you come back to civilian life, I hope you're able to adjust."
-
etownguy - thank you for what you said.
-
futurerichguy - You have no idea what I've experienced either here or during the Gulf War, nor could you grasp it, and I've been on this earth longer than you. Besides being a close combat instructor for USMC LINE (Jujitsu-Akido), I've done the Tae Kwondo thing, so I know how worthless most of it is unless you can do it expertly by reflex. One thing I always told my students was that if they were going to use any of it to defend themselves, they had better be able to do it without thinking, and with the utmost violence of action, otherwise they were going to get hurt. Also, that they would more than likely end up in jail. The best close combat instruction comes from the school of getting your ass kicked and kicking ass in bars, both of which I've done more times than I care to remember. That's also known as learning how to fight dirty, and doing so with flair and skill, and also without reservation. So, anyway - don't attempt to patronize me regarding my military experiences. No one (hopefully) looks for trouble, it finds you, so having heightened senses isn't going to help you unless it makes it possible for you to see the danger coming and run really fast away from it. That is, if you don't get shot in the back while you are running, of course.
-
If you like your martial arts, more power to you. Everyone needs a good hobby. Don't expect it to ever save your life.
-
Now, did I mention we should have term limits for our elected officials?

lol. thats funny richguy:)

good point. im gonna stop registering and licensing my car. hahaha eat that uncle sam...when you finally come you will never find me or my car!!

etownguy, if someone were to pull a knife on me, I'd run. I can run fast because I'm not fat. If someone were to pull a gun on me (again I'm in more danger of lighning), I would simply hand them my wallet. You're saying that you would pull out your gun and shoot them. I'm guessing by the time you retrieve your gun you'd have a hole in your head.

Registration, licensing, confiscation, elimination.

A regime that rules in arrogance and by force fears an armed citizenry.

The simple fact that one citizen agrees to a repressive measure does not mean all citizens should be subject to it.

futurerichguy, you have a warped sense of reality. if i had to choose to have someone trained in using a firearm in hostile situations or someone who is trained in kicking/chopping in a controlled, padded environment.....wonder which one i would choose? becoming engaged in hand to hand battle with an attacker isn't realistic or the safest. if there were more than one attacker, what then? there is nothing wrong with carrying a firearm if one is trained well.
Here's an example. you are working at a gas station. someone comes in and demands all your money and has a knife in their hands. from what i understand, you would show them your fists and they would be frightened enough to run off. don't think so. when i was younger working retail by myself, there was always a handgun loaded and holstered on my person.

also Danielson, refrain from slandering our Veterans in that manner. it doesn't show any respect or understanding for those who have given their lives for your freedom to kick at people. who knows, he might be the guy who comes alone when you get a gun thrown in your face.

DiGriz, a large part of martial arts training is learning how to avoid a dangerous situation, and how to heighten your senses. I've lived for 37 years and never once was even close to having a gun pulled on me. I'm guessing the whole "better chance of getting struck by lightning" logic would apply here, especially considering we live in a fairly safe location of the country. I'm afraid that your experiences in Afghanistan may have warped your sense of danger, and when you come back to civilian life, I hope you're able to adjust. Actually, war veterans with concealed weapons are probably the greatest fear I have (no fault of their own mind you).

ARRGH! Enforce the laws we got. We be needin more outcomes like this bilge-rat got! www.madison.com/tct/news/police/455467
RAmen

"if you're really that scared, take a martial arts class, and not Karate, but a real one like Judo or Jujitsu."
-
futurerichguy: I almost let this one go, but alas, cannot. Suggesting martial arts for defense is just silly for many reasons. Not the least of which is that if you do not make it second-nature, it's of little or no value in a fight. I know that from experience. I was a CCI in the Corps. Not only that, when you start pulling all the fast moves or tell your assailant that you know "karate" as a warning that they should back off, IF I were them I would probably take the gun out of my pocket and pull an Indiana Jones on you. Criminals never play well with others and are not going to care if it's fair or not. Reality and what is portrayed in the movies are two entirely different things. Please also note that there havn't been very many stories lately about people getting robbed by ninjas, either.

"ive never asked my bro or the pops what their opinion is on registering guns."
-
Now would be a good time to ask
-
"i cant imagine why they would have a problem registering them, like most wi hunters and gun enthusiasts, they use them in a responsible manner and the way they are suppose to be used, which is why i dont think theyd have a problem registering them."
-
You should ask them. Besides that, proper use has nothing to do with whether or not guns should be registered. People who use them improperly (criminals) will not comply. In addition, you fail to understand WHY someone wants registration in the first place, and that's where you need to focus your imagination, I think. 1. To create revenue through the sin tax of firearms license. We have a very large deficit, and congress is looking for people to screw in order to mitigate it. You'll notice if you read H.R. 45 entirely that it says nothing about where the money will go from the sales. That is because you are not supposed to know that this is simply another back-door tax. They will use the money to balance the budget, that's all. 2. To control and TAX the SALE of firearms that are otherwise transferred privately, and eliminate the transfer of weapons between private citizens so the gov knows where they are at all times (in case the fingermen want to come get them), and to create even more revenue. There are a lot of guns out there, and if they know that you have one, you can not sell it unless it's through a dealer, which means that they get sales tax, ta boot. Under the table sales do not generate revenue for the fed. 3. In relation to #2, the death of gun and knife shows, which is a knee-jerk reaction of people who simply don't like guns, period, because a couple bad men killed people with weapons purchased at gun shows.
-
"i understand what you are saying about the cali law and the 'assult weapons'...but if the only reason one doesnt want a gun registered is cuz they dont want uncle sam knowing they have it for fear of 'them' coming to take it...well i think thats an irrational fear cuz if that happens we'll have bigger things to worry about..."
-
I've just given you some rational fears to worry about. The people who wrote H.R. 45 know full well that it's not worth the paper it's written on in relation to solving crimes or tracing weapons to catch criminals, or even to deter crime. What you need to understand then, is why they REALLY wrote it - their motives and desires to me are more than just transparent. They are insidious. Yes, it's hard to know what the future will be like, but it's important to remember what the past has taught us, and to not make the same mistake that others have made, to their own destruction.

Officer: Hey, no problem. It took me a while to be able to read the whole damn thing, but once I did, it became clear what the real motives were. The killer of that kid the bill is named after got sentenced yesterday, I think...as an aside. Anyway, the bill is a piece of junk. Everyone should read it before they decide what side of the aisle they are on. The part about child saftey is good, but should be a separate bill. The only reason it's in the verbage of H.R. 45 is to sugar coat the really, really bitter and inedible rest of it. Americans that believe in the promise of this country and our freedom need to fight this bill tooth and nail. No good at all will come of it if it passes. And, we need to get term limits slapped on ALL our politicians and get the jerks that come up with trash like H.R. 45 OUT OF OFFICE, and get some people with common sense in there. COMMON people, as was not only provided for by our founding fathers, but EXPECTED.
-
Glock: You have my thanks for the kind words. I don't know if intelligence has much to do with thinking the right thing or doing the right thing. Darwin1 is the self-proclaimed most intelligent person who posts on these comment boards, and he certainly does not behave that way. I'd like to believe it's more that I have a lot of common sense, I study the issues from both perspectives before I let my knee do the talking, I stay informed, and I try very hard to not talk about things I don't know or post ficticious statistics or embellishments. I'll try to keep in line.

"Poor Darwin has the wool pulled over his eyes by the LEFT"
-
Controlledchaos: Darwin IS the left.
-
Like the name. Reminds me of the controlled detonations we have off the perimeter, which is controlled chaos to the locals working nearby. They don't speak English, so when the "Giant Voice" calls a controlled det, and it goes off, they go running in every direction because they think we are being attacked. Controlled Chaos.

DiGriz, Confucius say, “be very wary of slicksters peddling fictitious words with claims of advanced degrees”.

"If Adolf disarmed everyone, then how did the Jews of the Warsaw ghettos manage to hold the Nazis off for so long? H"
-
Poland was an occupied country after it was INVADED, Einstein. Germany didn't/couldn't enforce gun registration and/or seizure of firearms (that they could FIND) in Poland before they invaded it. I'm sure that the Polish were thankful that they had hidden their guns to fight the Germans with later on. Do you even THINK before you ask questions?
-
Darwin, you know what you are like? You remind me of the Monty Python "argument" sketch. It's like this:
-
DiGriz (opens door and walks in): Is this the right room for an argument?
-
Darwin: I told you once....
-
DiGriz: No you havn't, I just walked in.
-
Darwin: No you didn't
-
DiGriz: Yes I did just now!
-
Dawin: No you havn't
-
Like that sketch, your forte is the automatic gainsaying of whatever the other person says, isn't it?

If Adolf disarmed everyone, then how did the Jews of the Warsaw ghettos manage to hold the Nazis off for so long? H

"griz you replied to my post but you didnt answer my question. i have thought about it. registering all guns means that we know the source. if a handgun is used in a murder in california but was registered to an owner in wi it GREATLY reduces the potential suspects. "
-
I replied to your post?? It must have been a lapse of judgement if I did. I guess here's another lapse...Hold your panties on...I'm getting to it. My internet went down last night again. I just got up and it's back on, but might not be at the building I work in - a conex-box wonder of construction. Anyway, so, seriously.....what you are saying is that you had an epiphany and now are able to make sense out of reducing the number of possible suspects in a gun crime from 304 million down to the much more workable number of 33 million? And those suspects would be who, exactly? The guy who pulled the trigger, or the guy who lawfully purchased the weapon and got his home broken into by and his weapon stolen by some nameless unregistered scofflaw? I just want to get this straight before I answer further. Please clarify that.
-
Darwin my boy!!! I see you are back to your old self again. I had actually started to respect a few things you were saying when you stopped the banter about bigots and republicans and actually started conversing rather than bashing like a witless idiot hopped-up on LSD. My faith hath been restored, however.

Poor Darwin has the wool pulled over his eyes by the LEFT

DiGriz, sorry for the misinformation regarding HR 45. To be honest I just copied and pasted an e-mail that I received from what I thought was a reliable source about the issue. I still think it's a bad bill.

that would be heaven:) if they use nacho cheese anyways...cheddar clumps;) the two die-hards, ron paul and barney frank, who i read just today, re-introduced the 'Act to Remove Federal Penalties for the Personal Use of Marijuana by Responsible Adults'. federal prohibition WILL end and it WILL be left as it should be, to the states to decide, same as the open carry gun laws. then maybe you will find heaven on earth;)

DiGriz is the most intelligent poster I have ever come across on the Gazette boards. Everything he/she has said has been right on and 100% factual. Throughout history every major genocide has been preceded by gun registration and confiscation. The first thing Adolf Hitler and Stalin did was disarm the people. In the words of Thomas Jefferson, "When the Government fears the people, there is freedom, When the people fear the Government there is Tyranny".

thekid3477, I think you may have described my vision of heaven below (smoking a joint with Obama on the Whitehouse lawn while Michelle serves us nachos in her bikini). I'd blow myself up for that. Also, why can't someone figure out how to get a line-item in one of these gun bills to legalize marijuana? It would be a perfect compromise.

funny post darwin:)

i TRULY DO understand your worry. the only way to actually determine if its rational or not would be to have that happen. im gonna hope your worry is irrational an uncle sam NEVER comes knockin on your door. we ALL have the RIGHT to possess a firearm, if for no other reason than if they do come, we can fire back:)

fortunately i dont have to worry about them taking away any rights i currently enjoy. the greedy fat cheating lieing troutturd hypocrites took away my right before it was ever even an option for me. of course WHEN we win and can legally smoke pot again, i will have to worry about them taking the right away from me again, but id actually enjoy that worry:)

Shopierehuh, really, we don't care about the emails you get from proartist. Your IQ though, that is funny. You have an IQ of 130? HA HA HA HA. Proartist is merely stating that you are a bit of a bigot for your comments on the French since your comments are stereotypes. For example, from your comments one might assume that all right wingers are bigoted, cognitively impaired conspiracy theorists who portray themselves as victims of the left.

It might be irrational, I don’t know, I am not a very trusting person any more, I have learned from my past to not trust much and all I can do is use history to guide me so that I do not make the same mistakes. I hope that if it would get passed that the information would not be used for what I fear it would be used for but you get enough people saying that citizens don’t need firearms and who knows what could happen, that is a large part of my worry. You can see just on these posts that there are a lot of people that would take guns away from me if they had their way, claiming that I don’t need them yet the two cops that posted are all for the citizens carrying firearms (they are the professionals who would know if they are needed or not). I think that you can understand the worry that is associated with people wanting to take away something that you enjoy and care about.

im gonna guess you are not the norm with writing down your models/serial numbers. id guess a SMALL percentage of peeps actually do that. i agree that registering guns wouldnt help prevent crimes, but i think it would certainly help solve a few more. ive never asked my bro or the pops what their opinion is on registering guns. i cant imagine why they would have a problem registering them, like most wi hunters and gun enthusiasts, they use them in a responsible manner and the way they are suppose to be used, which is why i dont think theyd have a problem registering them. i understand what you are saying about the cali law and the 'assult weapons'...but if the only reason one doesnt want a gun registered is cuz they dont want uncle sam knowing they have it for fear of 'them' coming to take it...well i think thats an irrational fear cuz if that happens we'll have bigger things to worry about...

Unless proartist is female. If so send pics, maybe we will talk.

thekid: I do have one question how do your father and brother feel about the possibility of having to register their guns, I know some cops that wouldn't do it if the law passed so I am just wondering. Thanks.

Here is another e-mail from proartist. He is a lefty who doesn't like being talked back to. He needs to stop emailing me. Is he a coward who can't place his highly cultered, extremely intelligent writings on a public forum? Or does he "like" me. Yes, I am a fine specimen, 6'4", 220 lbs. IQ of 130, brown on brown, but I don't go out with men. Sorry.

"I have read many accounts stating the same."(Shopierehuh) Be very careful in believing what you read AND what you write for your fear of fellow human beings, ethnocentrism, and bigotry will never further any issue you care to support/debate but only demonstrate absurd irrationality.

I do understand you logic also with regards to registering firearms because not everyone keeps track of the serial numbers of their guns very well. However I can at least speak for my guns and if they are stolen first off everyone is legally required to file a police report and secondly I keep a sheet of paper in my wallet (and a second one in my house) listing the models and serial numbers of every firearm that I own. That way if they are used in a crime the police will know who they belong to because the report will be on file once they are stolen. Those two things can protect me if anything were to ever happen. I do not believe that registration would help prevent any crimes; however I am glad that we could discuss this in a civilized manner and see each other’s points of view it was informative. Also good luck with that Obama thing.

i can comprehend that logic. thanks for answering my question. can you see the logic in registering all guns?? as for our second amendment rights, if they decide to take away those rights entirely, which is about as far of a stretch as me legally smoking a joint with president obama on the whitehouse lawn while mrs obama hooks us up with unlimited nachos in a bikini, they will get them all whether they are registered or not. i mean if 'they' are coming for registered guns, that means 'they' are not the government we currently have, and 'they' will just go thru everyones house to eliminate all registered and non registered guns. im not opposed to gun ownership. my fam hunts big times and i couldnt even guess how many guns my bro/dad own. but i think they should have everyone of them registered. if they are stolen and used in a crime, i want, actually we NEED to know where they came from. if they owned 100 cars they would have to register each one every year.

thekid3477:
We can look at history to explain to us why a responsible gun owner should not register their gun. Recall when California enacted its Assault Weapons Ban the 1989 Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act. This is before the federal ban that lapsed and the California ban is permanent. All owners of Assault Weapons in California were told that they could have their firearms grandfathered in if they simply registered them. So all law abiding citizens registered their firearms before the deadline to register and then the state announced that it had changed its mind and that all existing firearms had to be turned in or they would come and take them. These law abiding people tried to follow the law and tried to do the right thing and they were lied to by our government and forced to disarm. That is my concern with this bill that you are discussing, they will know where to come and get the guns when they decide that they do not want us to have our second amendment any more.

"I'm sorry, but this issue is so ridiculous it doesn't even deserve serious debate" Then why are you on here?

There is no one "scared", futurerichguy. Actually one might wonder why we need more guy laws on top of the 20,000+ that are already on the books. Those who want more firearms laws are many times scared of people owning guns. I believe the term is "hoplaphobia" or something like that.

griz you replied to my post but you didnt answer my question. i have thought about it. registering all guns means that we know the source. if a handgun is used in a murder in california but was registered to an owner in wi it GREATLY reduces the potential suspects. i know where the registration money is going. i know theyll waste it. so make it a free registration. im not debating the cost im just pointing out that there is NO reason a responsible gun owner shouldnt register EVERY gun. and of course thats where criminals will get there guns. isnt that where they currently get them?? tell me, why do you think a responsible gun owner shouldnt register a gun??

Now, back to the original subject. The left, when it is obvious that they have no valid arguement, resort to name calling, insults, staw man arguements and other tactics to defer from the subject.

The fact is that this bill would serve to regulate and prohibit the private sale of firearms, without a paper trail. This is defacto registration. This is a precurser to confication of privately owned firearms by the government, by following the paper trail. This would not happen today, but it would happen sometime in the future as the govenment becomes more oppresive and becomes more fearful of the citizens being armed. This has happened all over the world historically. This is unacceptable, and we don't intend to allow this.

I will send $100.00 today to one of my lobbying groups, the NRA. Thanks for prompting me.

Here is an e-mail I received from proartist.

"I have heard that the french have different standards of hygiene". . . You're right. They do. Generally, it's a HIGHER standard than you see in Janesville. If you've ever been in France, you'd know. Those toilets that self-sanitize the seat with ultra-violet light are amazing technology most American public places should emulate! Please don't presume to judge any group of people or a whole nationality until you've been there; met them."

Proartist, I don't care if you have been to France, that does not impress me in the least. I don't care if they u-v their toilet seats, they are not going to eat off the toilet seat. You can cover it with tp for the same effect, or spray sanitize it, or for the sake of all that is holy, wash it once in a while with soap and water.

What I am refering to is the smell, the b.o. I know many who have been there and said the same thing, that it is bad. I have read many accounts stating the same. In this country, we generally don't find that attractive or alluring.

Someone had called French women hot and Wisconsin woman some derogatory animal name by comparison. I find that untrue and unacceptable. You, of course being such a highly cultered wordly traveller aren't going to allow anyone to disagree with that, are you?

I'm sorry, but this issue is so ridiculous it doesn't even deserve serious debate. I personally think that debating Chuck Norris's invincibility and French odor has more merit. I mean come on people; if you're really that scared, take a martial arts class, and not Karate, but a real one like Judo or Jujitsu. Also, lose some weight and quit burdening our health care system.

DiGriz: Regarding your 11:10 post, what exactly is your point?

The portion you selected says, "No qualifying firearms, under this bill, would be able to be sold OR transfered other than through a licensed dealer, manufacturer, or collector." It doesn't prevent their sale, just requires registration through a licensed person/business. It doesn't say gun shows are disallowed. As we all know, where there's a will there's a way. Easy solution for gun shows? Have an on-site licensed dealer to handle all the paperwork!

There are a number of states that register firearms, there are others that register owners. And, as thekid pointed out, the only requirement here that does not exist for vehicle transfers is the thumbprint. The bill does not require physical or mental screening.

As one who has sold a firearm without this sort of registry, I am very aware of the fact that if that gun is ever used in a crime, the ONLY evidence I have that I sold it is my own notes. I would feel much safer regarding liability if there were this sort of registry.

Look out...the sky is falling.

futureguy: You are unwittingly digging a hole about your size. Again, you embellished your comments. That study you just linked about "disgust vs. political views" was a spin-off of one done by some college in Kansas or Nebraska last year, and again, doesn't support your statement as to why conservatives need guns other than maybe in your own mind. There's nothing scientific about your statement, although I myself am getting a little disgusted by your train of thought.

"other than the physical/mental evaluations and the fingerprints, which any responsible gun owner should NOT have a problem with, this sounds like the EXACT same info you provide when you buy a car. why should those things not be required to buy a gun??"
-
THINK........ABOUT..........IT.
-
Let's register all the guns, shall we? What's it do for us? Really....think.
-
$25 bucks a pop per license. Times how many lawful gun owners? Who gets the money? Wait before you answer.......I'll give you a hint...Credit.....GM.......bailouts...
Seems a lot like a sin tax to me.
-
So, let's say that we have everyone registered and licensed. How many criminals are going to want to register and license their weapons?? Where do you think they will GET their weapons? Hmmmmmm...steal them from lawful gun owners? Black market? They'll have to get them from somewhere...
-
In the end then, what does this bill accomplish other than: 1. Shut down gun shows. 2. Gives law enforcement the ability to find out who the criminal stole the gun from that he just used to blow the face off a little old lady for five bucks in nickles. 3. Encourages gun theft and illegal trade of firearms. Am I off here? I don't think so.
-
For the record, I think there are a LOT of car drivers on Janesville streets that should have been required to have a psyche eval before they were issued a driver's license. There would be a lot less cars on Milton Ave. if that was a requirement.

DiGriz, actually it was a fairly recent Cornell study. This might explain your distaste for the French and fear of scary things.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/2009...

futuredude: That study is old news and old hat. It's from last year, right? It didn't have anything to do with conservatives being wimps, only that they tended to be more "sensitive" to threats, and perhaps more susceptible to "fear-mongering" by politicians. That was pretty much the gist of it. The study as published said nothing about queasiness or being weak. You made that up. Your description of that study is jaded and false. Your contention that conservatives need guns as "evidenced" by this landmark study of a total of 46 people is both specious and aggrandizes the myth that only conservatives need, want, own, or would ever carry a gun.
-
I do get serious every now and then...

'It is registered -You are fingerprinted -You supply a current Driver's License -You supply your Social Security # -You will submit to a physical & mental evaluation at any time of their choosing -Each update - change or ownership through private or public sale must be reported and costs $25'

other than the physical/mental evaluations and the fingerprints, which any responsible gun owner should NOT have a problem with, this sounds like the EXACT same info you provide when you buy a car. why should those things not be required to buy a gun??

Shopierehuh: LMAO! Don't confuse me with someone who likes ANY French people. They are mean, and they suck. One thing, however, that the French don't realize is that if they can see Chuck Norris, he can see them. If they CAN'T see Chuck Norris, they may be only seconds away from death.

These last posts are funny because I recently read a scientific study showing that conservatives are more likely to get queasy (weak stomachs). This I believe is consistent with their inability to defend themselves without guns (weak in general). Yes I know Chuck Norris is a conservative, but he’d get his butt kicked in a non-choreographed fight.

Hiya again, all! I just read H.R. 45. Copperguy, you need to read it again, but I agree with you that the previous arguments don't match up with what I read. Lemme check again.....
-
Hmmmm. Officer, are we reading the same bill? You are correct on some things, but maybe I missed something. BUT, never fear.....I see what you did not.
-
H.R. 45 is a bill constructed to shut down the sale of any handguns or semi-automatic weapons that are clip fed at gun shows per Title II Section 201. No qualifying firearms, under this bill, would be able to be sold OR transfered other than through a licensed dealer, manufacturer, or collector. I think that pretty much gets it. It mentions that antiques would be excluded, but doesn't define antique. Most weapons sold at gun shows would fall into the qualifying weapon catagory. This is a bill to shut down gun shows, plain and simple, from what I see.

I support carrying guns have you driven down on Cherry Street at about 8:00 pm it is scary same guys every night walking in front of my car and giving me the come on lets get it on look. Scares me.

Let me clarify; forget to breath from their sheer beauty as in take my breath away. That first post didn't look quite right.

I have heard that the french have different standards of hygiene. I wouldn't get too excited about their woman just yet. And furthermore, I have seen many, many Wisconsin women who have caused me to forget to breath. Yes, that's right.

DiGriz, A lot of people don't know that when the boogeyman goes to sleep, he checks his closet for Chuck Norris.

"Well, just because they havn't siezed any guns yet means that they won't at some point in time"
-
change to Well, just because they havn't siezed any guns yet DOESN'T mean that they won't...etc.

"Nothing in HR45 scares me."
-
Chuck Norris should scare you.

"Many states have a firearm registry, and the citizens of those states have not had their firearms seized or warrantless searches of their homes."
-
Many? MANY?? AZ, CT, HI, MD, MA, NJ, NY, NC are it as far as registration is concerned, and most are partial. You just want to hear someone say Hitler again, don't you?? Well, just because they havn't siezed any guns yet means that they won't at some point in time, or that they wouldn't use the registry to find people who have guns. Don't think for a second that this country will look anything like it does now in a hundred years if we havn't blown ourselves up by then. This country looks nothing like it did in 1909, right now, so don't say that's not true. Hell, we may be in bed with the French for sure by then. Ewwwwwwwww.....
-
Look at history and see what gun registration has done historically in Europe and other countries. Or shall we just repeat their mistakes because we know better than them. Right......

Wow! I HAVE read HR45, and the information presented on this forum aout it seems ill-informed in some very important ways.

Firstly, I saw nothing to require the applicant to "submit to a physical & mental evaluation at any time of their choosing"

Second, the fee can be NO MORE than $25.

Next, there is nothing that would allow the government to "come and inspect that you are storing your gun safely away from accessibility to children" ( can you say, "Fourth Amendment?")

The proposal does mandate firearm licensing either through the US DOJ or a state registry. It does require that ALL transfers of a firearm be reported. It does require that all firearms be out of the reach of children.

Many states have a firearm registry, and the citizens of those states have not had their firearms seized or warrantless searches of their homes.

I support open and concealed carry for qualified citizens. I also support some registry (either state or federal) for the purpose of tracking firearm sales. I also support requiring all people to prevent a child from accessing a firearm without adult supervision.

Nothing in HR45 scares me.

lol!!- The mere mention of Chuck Norris' name cured a man of blindness. Sadly the first, last, and only thing this man ever saw, was a fatal roundhouse delivered by Chuck Norris.

If you Google search "Chuck Norris getting his butt kicked" you will generate zero results. It just doesn't happen.

In addition, futurerichguy, Chuck Norris never wet his bed as a child. The bed wet itself out of fear. He never needed a gun.

topsgt132 - You are also most welcome.

whoops, the last post of mine was aimed at futurerichguy.
-
Outdoors, YW!

I have to admit, I never entertained that posibility. Now that I think of it, you may be right. If we were all like Chuck Norris, there would be no use for guns anymore. For example, it is ipso facto that Chuck Norris will never have a heart attack. His heart isn't nearly foolish enough to attack him. Not only that, it is well known in some circles that when Chuck Norris was born, the only person who cried was the doctor. Never slap Chuck Norris.

Thanks Griz. Outdoors post stated that there were "exceptions". Just trying to get as many facts as possible.

That being said, what's the point of a local ordinance that's already covered by state law and which may not be more exacting than any state law? If you put a LESS stringent local ordinance on the books, what good is that, as well? It's superceeded by the more stringent state law. Which is the law enforcement officer going to enforce - the local ordinance or the state law? Will they have a choice?
-
Like I said, must be really boring at those council meetings.

This is just a result of people becoming so fat and out of shape that the only way they can defend themselves is with a gun.

topsgt32: Nope.
-
1995 Wisconsin Act 72 prohibits local ordinances that exceed state regulation of the sale, use, possession, carrying, transportation, licensing, registration, or taxation of firearms. Permitted are ordinances that are no more stringent than state law. Act 72 invalidated local controls that have been enacted in numerous municipalities around the state, including Milwaukee, Eau Claire, Green Bay, Racine, Wausau, Superior Sheboygan, Stevens Point, and, of course you guess it, The Emerald City (Madison).

Outdoors--you only provided the portion of the statute that supports your position. Please provide "66.0409(2) (2) Except as provided in subs. (3) and (4)," so we have enough to make an intelligent decision. The exeptions listed in (3) and (4) may support the other side of the discussion.

Don't be daft. Let's say I am carrying a concealed weapon legally. A mugger comes out of the bushes and demands money. I say ok, and instead of reaching for my wallet like he thinks I am doing, I reach for and pull out a Glock 9mm and point it at his head. How does that not deter a crime? He's not getting my wallet at that point, IS he?
-
If you just want to have a "battle of the studies" you can pull off google, find someone else to play with. Common sense is common sense, and some people don't have any when they ask questions like that, unless, of course, they are loaded questions (pun intended).

DiGriz
"Concealed carry has also not been proven to do anything other than deter crime."
Can you provide the studies to prove this claim?

"people should be more concerned about what they don't know, than what they do know."
-
Wisconsinheat, that wasn't aimed at you specifically. Sorry if you took offense, but since you seem to want to play.....
-
Your quote above seems to imply that in the context presented that everyone should live in fear of everything. It's the same mindset that puts IOTV's that weigh 50 pounds on an already overloaded infantryman, making us much easier to hit in combat. Every try to get up from the prone or out of a burning vehicle and move while wearing more than half your bodyweight in relatively worthless encumbering equipment and ammo? It isn't fun. Mommy and daddy complain to congress, congress tries to put us in a cocoon of safety, body armor and MRAPS. Body armor encumbers, MRAPs are just bigger targets that require an interstate system to operate. Consider THIS quote:
-
"Open carry means that loaded guns will be left more accessible to children. How many times do we hear accounts of a child who picks up a gun and discharges it. The adult then says I only set it there for a minute while I had to ____."
-
There are already laws on the books in Wisconsin that address the issue brought up above. Review s.948.60, s. 175.37, s. 940.24. It's sad that we now live in a society where parents are so afraid for their child that they feel it necessary to wrap them in a blanket of safety - follow them to school in a car, knee-pads and helmets for any sport in which they might scrape a knee, etc. If you use the excuse that the only thing in a house that is dangerous to a child is a firearm, then you are miopic to all the other everyday dangers that you take for granted and don't think about and are much more likely to cause harm, like cleaning products, paint, lighters, steep stairs, knives, glass, medications, etc., etc., for which parents should then be held just as liable as s.948.55 makes them if their child gets injured due to their improper use.

A friend of mine had a situation happen in Janesville. She has a very large dog s for protection. When she had the cops arrive and informed them of all that happened. They asked her if she had ever considered owning a gun. She said she has a dog so she would not have to worry about that. It was still recommended.

I have dogs as a 1st defense. If someone harms them or is intent on harming me inside my house. My second defense is loaded. I will not try for deadly harm. It will be harm enough that I won't be worried and in a rush for the law to arrive.

Must be something abnormal about me: I've never owned a gun and have never been a victim of a crime.

Hey Milton--try reading the law.

66.0409(2)
(2) Except as provided in subs. (3) and (4), no political subdivision may enact an ordinance or adopt a resolution that regulates the sale, purchase, purchase delay, transfer, ownership, use, keeping, possession, bearing, transportation, licensing, permitting, registration or taxation of any firearm or part of a firearm, including ammunition and reloader components, unless the ordinance or resolution is the same as or similar to, and no more stringent than, a state statute.

"Was the 2nd amendment written so we can "protect ourselves" from criminals?"
-
Not specifically. Self-defense in 18th Century America was viewed as a common right and ordinary. Further clarification via a law was not necessary at that time. They didn't bother themselves with making up unecessary laws like legislators do these days. If they had, even though not invented yet, they would have banned machine-guns for hunting well before we actually did.
-
"The biggest coward can become a murderer with one bad decision if they are carrying a gun."
-
It does not take a gun for a coward to make a bad decision. Review my last post, please. Baseball bats are just as dangerous, as are knives (Just ask Mark Staskal's sister - oh, that's right, you can't).
-
"I strongly believe we have too many gun laws without strong enough penalties to change anyone's mind."
-
I strongly agree with you on that. In the end, if a criminal wants to do something by force, no matter what you do, he/she will find their weapon of choice. Ban guns and get rid of Gun shops, and you will only create a black-market for guns. One already exists, so it will expand exponentially. They will come from wherever they are still in existence, like Mexico. Instead of drugs, they'll run guns. Stricter penalties are needed, but won't solve the problem. Per "Red" in the Shawshank Redemption, everyone in jail is innocent, and before they get there, none of them think they'll get caught, so where's the deterrent? There is none. And jail time these days is only an inconvenience. You will NEVER change someone's mind with a law if they intend to do bad. "Locked doors only keep good people out." All you can do is try to defend yourself.

Crime is usually committed when the opportunity is present....Main St. Milton or Bay St. in Savannah, if the opportunity is there the action may be taken. I commend everyone for having an actual serious discussion on this issue, as it should be.

"but kersty, most likely not on Main Street, Milton, WI."
-
Don't be surprised. I seem to remember a few months ago numerous articles in the Gazette about the area being flooded with Heroin (which incidentally, finds it's way there from where I am right now...ironic). It is not unlikely that at some point in time, drive-by shootings on main streets of even small towns will indeed happen. It's already happening in Janesville, which is one reason I am MOVING when I get back. I happen to have a drug dealer on my street whom I've called the cops on several times. He came down the street to my house one day with a baseball bat when I was sitting on the porch. I saw him coming and was expecting it because I had just called the cops on one of his buyers. He backed off when he saw I had my holstered .45 on me. I had two small children in the house at the time, and with no time for the police to respond, if he had tried to break into my house to harm me or my family, it would have been a one-way ticket and a short ride. I'm positive that the only thing that stopped him was him seeing that I was armed and apparently willing to use it if he made that necessary.

but kersty, most likely not on Main Street, Milton, WI.
.
I do, however, understand your point.

and mine...

whythink-The criminals dont and will never care, thats what makes them non law-abiding citizens. Law-abiding citizens would not take their weapons into these places. True that the bad guy may be the only one armed in this instance...but thats the difference between lawful and unlawful. Personally I wouldnt call these people "cowards", one just might save your butt one day.

Was the 2nd amendment written so we can "protect ourselves" from criminals?
.
That said, I don't have strong feelings on this issue. I do have concerns about some people carrying guns. Verbal confrontations can quickly turn ugly. The biggest coward can become a murderer with one bad decision if they are carrying a gun.
.
Many have cited that this is needed because currently the criminals are the only ones armed.
.
Others have defended this because it will still be illegal to carry guns at certain locations.
.
QUESTION: If the criminals don't care what will stop one from carrying the gun into one of the prohibited locations?
.
Doesn't this mean criminals will still have the ability to be the only one's armed...at schools, government buildings and where alcohol is served (as mentioned above).
.
I just don't understand how one can feel the need to carry a gun while walking down Main Street in Milton. I get having the gun in your house, but Main Street Milton, like I said, the biggest coward in the world can become a murderer...ie the guy who feels the need to carry a gun on Main Street in Milton, WI.
.
Not a gun person, but I get the issue and have many friend and family members who are "into" guns.
.
I strongly believe we have too many gun laws without strong enough penalties to change anyone's mind.
.
More guns is being needed or being perceived to be needed is still a sad commentary of our current culture.

"follow the state supreme court's guidance and enact a CCW law in this state."...huh?

And just how is the Supreme court "guiding" in that direction?

I thought their job was to interpret laws already on the books.

My feeling is I could care less how the Milton leaders feel, there is such a thing as the LAW, and whether they like it or not (a.k.a. whether they want to pander to their political beliefs) that falls under tough crap. Perhaps they should petition the governor, who has apparently been too busy taking payoffs from the teachers union, the casino lobby and the trial lawyers, to actually follow the state supreme court's guidance and enact a CCW law in this state.

Sorry to disappoint you griz...but that is not even the question...everyone is still stuck on OPEN carry.

The point is....people should be more concerned about what they don't know, than what they do know. Now THAT is what should be friggen obvious. But you've shown otherwise.

H.R. 45 sounds like something Hitler did when he took power. I'm going to have to research that.

George Washington: "A free people ought to be armed."

Hmmmm. You have an amazing grasp of the totally friggen obvious. The question is whether or not to make it LEGAL.

Concealed carry is here and has been here forever....legality has nothing to do with it.
Anyone who thinks otherwise is deluding themselves with a false sense of security.

MooShoo:

1. Nowhere where the laws are less stringent have gunfights broken out. It's a myth.
2. Correct statement. If you criminalize firearms, only criminals will have them (which includes formerly law-abiding citizens).
3. Wisconsin currently allows open-carry, but you do so at the whim of police officers. If they believe you are disturbing the peace by openly carrying a firearm, they will arrest you for disorderly conduct. Similar to drunken driving arrests, where the officer ALWAYS smells alcohol, even from 10 feet away (I have cop friends) in their reports (required to prove probable cause), it gives the officer great levity to act upon their own opinion, and thereby abuse their authority, which believe it or not, some cops do.
4. Concealed carry has also not been proven to do anything other than deter crime, and it is well regulated where it exists, which is everywhere except for the State of Gotham just south of us, and Wisconsin.

I say rubber bullets they hurt like hell

Can anyone say,"BELOIT"!

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h45...

Congress is now starting on the firearms confiscation bill. If it passes, gun owners will become criminals if you don't fully comply.

It has started.

Very Important for you to be aware of a new bill HR 45 introduced into the House. This is the Blair Holt Firearm Licensing & Record of Sale Act of 2009.

Even gun shop owners didn't know about this because the government is trying to fly it under the radar.

To find out about this - go to any government website and type in HR 45 or GoogleHR 45 Blair Holt Firearm Licensing & Record of Sales Act of 2009. You will get all the information.

Basically this would make it illegal to own a firearm - any rifle with a clip or ANY pistol unless:

-It is registered -You are fingerprinted -You supply a current Driver's License -You supply your Social Security # -You will submit to a physical & mental evaluation at any time of their choosing -Each update - change or ownership through private or public sale must be reported and costs $25 - Failure to do so you automatically lose the right to own a firearm and are subject up to a year in jail. -There is a child provision clause on page 16 section 305 stating a child-access provision. Gun must be locked and inaccessible to any child under 18. -They would have the right to come and inspect that you are storing your gun safely away from accessibility to children and fine is punishable for up to 5 yrs. in prison.

If you think this is a joke - go to the website and take your pick of many options to read this. It is long and lengthy. But, more and more people are becoming aware of this. Pass the word along. Any hunters in your family pass this along.

This is just a "termite" approach to complete confiscation of guns and disarming of our society to the point we have no defense - chip away a little here and there until the goal is accomplished before anyone realizes it.

This is one to act on whether you own a gun or not.

If you take my gun, only the criminal will have one to use against me. HR 45 only makes me/us less safe. After working with convicts for 26 years I know this bill, if passed, would make them happy and in less danger from their victims.

kersty52, I share your opinion. That makes TWO cops!

Much ado about nothing.
-
Wisconsin law already prohibits everything they are considering word for word.
-
"The ordinance would bring Milton in line with state and federal guidelines, Police Chief Jerry Schuetz said."
-
O.k...., so they already knew that....is Milton some how in another state that they have to pass an ordinance to enforce Wisconsin state laws? Slow council night?
-
Current city ordinance says you can't carry guns anywhere, even on your own property, he said.
-
THAT is against State and Federal law, as NO municipality may pass a law more stringent than that of the state. The only real issue is concealed carry, and likewise if Milton passed an ordinance allowing concealed carry, it would not be legal because of state law, which is a stupid law, as well. I'm sure that many in Wisconsin would like to think that the people of Wisconsin and Illinois are simply more civilized and intelligent than the other 48 states. It's the other way around, I'm afraid. Heck, one look at our governor gives it away.
-
And of course, the public interest was served another dollop of wisdom and courage when the state just a few weeks ago banned the use of Gauss and Plasma rifles for hunting. I guess it's just better to get those laws on the books before things are even invented yet, huh? Which reminds me. They promised me a flying car by the year 2000. I want my damn flying car, now!! Perhaps if G.M. had invented an affordable flying car when they said they would, Jamesville would be pumping the little beauties out right now instead of sitting idle and broken.
-
Hey, with that new law on space weapons, does anyone know if they added anything like a minimum barrel-length to Phazers? I have a standard Federation-issue hand phaser, and it's got an awfully short barrel length. Wait, it doesn't have a barrel. Forget it.........

"I hope to move back to Wisconsin soon"

I hope that you do, kersty 52. We need more people like you who are capable of clear thinking.

"What on earth does anybody have to carry a weapon for? I can't think of a good reason."
--Council member David Adams

Umm...how about to defend themselves? That's a very good reason.

MooShoo-I am a formere WI resident living in Ga as a police officer. Here in Ga law abiding citizens have the privelege to concealed carry. Open carry in this state is legal, unless inside a bar, church or area that is posted to be weapon free. As a cop, it gives me great joy to hear that when a citizen in my city pulled his/her own weapon on a subject who was trying to do them harm. This has happened quite often here. As an officer, I like the idea that a citizen has the capacity to come to MY assistance if needed, it doesnt make me feel uneasy when a person has a weapon on their person, just more cautious. A guy that wants to do harm to society will do harm to society, they will get guns, its that simple. As I know, it is impossible for police to be everywhere at the right time, a citizen should have the opportunity to protect themselves and others. The best conversation I had with an arrestee was when I asked him how he felt about people carrying guns. He said it scared him to death. The reason, he was arrested for armed robbery, the person he was trying to rob who was carrying concealed pulled a gun on him. The victim had every right to shoot that person, but showed great restraint. Responsible people who pass psych tests along with a class that teaches them the laws surrounding deadly force in my belief should be allowed to carry.
I hope to move back to Wisconsin soon, I would not feel afraid to know that people may be carrying weapons openly. I also would not be afraid to know that a person MAY be carrying concealed. Just try to put yourself in a position that you are being robbed at gunpoint. A citizen who is carrying LEGALLY pulls his/her own weapon. This criminal is subdued by the LEGALLY carrying citizen before the police arrive, which with budget cuts slashing public safety, may be longer than expected. Many criminals are afraid of an armed public. When criminals are faced with the same jeopardy that they place others in, most fold under the scare. Ill get off my soapbox, but that is ONE cops opinion, sure not to be shared by all.

Concealed carry and open carry both are a human right to self defense. Who gives a rats behind what a cop's opinion is. This is the same state that it's politicians proposed the death penalty back 10 to 20 yrs ago, but only if you killed a cop or politician. Guess the average citizens life isn't worth as much as a cops or politicians. Your arguements about kids and guns doesn't hold water, WI & Il are the only two states without concealed carry and the rate of little kids getting ahold of guns in the houses in other states didn't change.

Since many of these socialsit liberals do not believe in the Bill of Rights, I suggest we carry a cop. That should please them, or we should ask the non-law abiding person who is robbing us, mugging us, car jacking us, or threatening to do harm to our children and families to politely wait a moment while we call the police and wait to them to come arrest the individual. Is that what you would do proartist? And Phil, I am glad you are gone. Off to Cuba or North Korea I presume.

I have heard said that a polite society is an armed society. That is a true statement only if society is polite, otherwise everyone is itching for a gunfight.
*
I have also heard said that if you take the guns away from the law abiding citizens, only criminals will have guns. No one is proposing to take your guns away - unless you are a convicted felon. Van Hollen should know this better than anyone. He prosecuted gun crime as a U.S. Attorney.
*
J.B. VanHollen is the highest elected Republican in the State of Wisconsin. It is his political desire to frame the discussion about guns. Personally I do not agree with his politics or policies. It is a divisive issue in order to push the polls and voters.
*
I am interested in hearing from the cops. How do you feel about open carry? Better yet, how do you feel about conceal and carry?

Huge drug issue here in Milton?! Give me a break.

We have the right to bear arms, and that means we should have the right to carry them. I'm not for conceal and carry, but carry where the firearm is in plain view.

"Most of the people who are afraid of guns are people who havent been around them much." . . . Quite the opposite! Those who carry guns are inherently demonstrating that they are afraid of everyone else! If you need to have a gun (a piece of technology created with the sole purpose to harm and injure whether in offense or defense mode) then you inherently demonstrate a high level of fear and distrust of others whether provoked, real, or imagined. THAT combined with anger, unintentional or sudden agitation at any given moment equals disaster that quite often has turned otherwise "good" people into criminals. Guns combined with children creates catastrophe even more often.

Boy am I glad I got out of Wisconsin.

We need to get back to what is written in the constitution, and it looks like Attorney General Van Hollen is doing that here. I have to admit I didn't vote for him because of some other issue I don't remember. I think it's important for me personally to be able to agree, and disagree with a person on different issues, and not reject them outright. Council member Adams doesn't seem to believe in a core American value that the individual knows best how to exercise his or her rights, and not the government.

ozzman99
"Most of the people who are afraid of guns are people who havent been around them much."
I don't think that is true. I think more people are afraid of the idiots walking around with guns.

law may be the law.. but are we moving toward a more civilized society or back to the wild west? at least we will have to check our guns before the school play !

Open carry means that loaded guns will be left more accessible to children. How many times do we hear accounts of a child who picks up a gun and discharges it. The adult then says I only set it there for a minute while I had to ____.

“The ordinance would bring Milton in line with state and federal guidelines, Police Chief Jerry Schuetz said.”

Ok so this works on a state level and on a federal level without any large issues. After all when you go to a different city or even out in the country where they do not have this ordinance how many people do you see openly carrying a weapon? Not many if any. Yet for some reason in Milton it would be a huge issue if this ordinance got removed. Come on give me a break, I live in Milton and I am all for removing this ban. It is unnecessary; there is absolutely no reason why a law abiding citizen cannot have a holstered firearm in their position especially on their own property. And to be completely honest I am pro concealed carry more than open carry because you have to take safety classes and psychological tests to get a concealed carry permit, in my opinion that is safer however Wisconsin is against safety classes and psychological tests. There are still very many places where you can NOT openly carry a fire arm including schools, areas around schools, government buildings, places where alcohol is being consumed or sold, and not to mention that every property owner and business owner can prohibit people from openly carrying. Also even with having open carry you still are required to properly store and transport firearms when they are in your car. This being repelled would give the residents of Milton some of their second amendment rights back, me having a holstered gun on my property dose not harm anyone.

Wanna bet, Mr. Frazier? Oh yes we DO own guns! And they "ain't fer a huntin' wildlife, nohow"!
.
I see it as a bit of an equalizer. We've got a huge drug issue here in Milton. I do not want my house broke into, just because some punk needs drug money. If nothing else, it will possibly make them think twice... before entering a home where they might not be sure if someone is home or not. I would not hesitate to greet someone, intent on stealing or harming me or my family in my own home, with a gun. I would hope it would cause them to just leave, but if push comes to shove...
.
Crooks and creeps don't care about the laws anyway, so the argument that this will arm the thugs doesn't "hold water" for me. They'll get guns anyway. What irks me is treating law-abiding citizens with less regard for our right to protect ourselves and our family than catching the little snots!
.
Just make sure the little slimeball is IN the house when you shoot 'em...
.
Remember the doctor who had an intruder enter his home? He shot the guy and the creep actually tried to sue him! The Doc won the court case, but it never should have gotten that far, in the first place!
.
I want our right to bear arms back!

Most of the people who are afraid of guns are people who havent been around them much. Hunters, sports shooters, collectors etc who are around a lot of firearms don't have this pent up fear about guns that non gun owners have.

This is Milton Alderman Brett Frazier. I would just add to this.

The Attorney General's opinion basically says that just openly carrying a gun is not disorderly conduct. I agree with that. The issue here is changing our ordinance so that it falls within the bounds of that opinion. Our current ordinance says, very simply, if you have a gun...you're violating city ordinance. This new version will lay out a set of common sense places that you can't carry- bars, city buildings, schools, etc.

I care very much about our right to bear arms. I care equally about the safety of our people, our businesses, and our police force. I believe there can be a balance between those two interests.

"But he doesn't think many people carry guns in Milton, anyway, he said".

I do.