Hey one4yes2forno; cty35799; mespl; and Jim:

I just realized why this Lyke posting drew me in, in the first place (Memory can be an enemy and a friend). Anyway, not too many years ago I sat in on a Wisconsin Supreme Court case for a pre-law class (please forgive me for not posting its court number, I do not have time to dig in my old notes - it was around 2002 or so).

The crux of the case as I remember (forgive me if I get some things mixed up) was a dude had committed a crime with a gun. Aside from getting busted for the crime, the authorities tacked on a gun charge. His lawyer argued the dude was within his rights to wander around with an open-carry gun (the meat of our debate here) in Wisconsin. Here is the interesting part:

As Supreme Courts will do - they got off the track and started a debate on if it was legal to carry gun to a car from the house or gun shop etcetera in a carry case...you see, technically that is a concealed weapon. It has never been addressed (clarified) to my knowledge in Wisconsin law. Therefore, if one is an absolutist, cops are within their right to detain anyone and everyone carrying a gun case.

Wait; however, the Supremes decided that detaining people with gun cases "was not in the spirit of Wisconsin law," giving caveat to anyone listening that if a court case like that ever came to their high Court, the cops would most often lose.

As for the dude in the case I attended, his lawyers' time ran out, the Supremes decided the perp's fate later; and, to my knowledge his open-carry defense did not amuse the Supremes.

- Just some more Wisconsin gun lore, urban legand etcetera.

Bob Keith

Jimm, if you don't like it, it's fine with those who do. Jim Doyle even support the OPEN CARRY of a firearm. I think you should address your issues to Doyle before he quites.

mespl and one4yes2forno - Thank you for proving me wrong. Thoughtful, respectful debate and discussion isn't dead, after all.

Your statement of people disregarding the rules of where they can and cannot carry is a valid point and people currently do that very thing with having concealed weapons. If someone dose disregard those rules then they would be risking losing their right to carry all together. I also do not worry any additionally when someone is carrying versus not carrying I still pay attention to the people around me since I have not only myself to worry about but also my children. I do understand your point of accidental discharge, and believe that keeping the firearm in its holster is the best way to prevent this also firearm selection helps in this matter, some firearms especially small pistols have very hard to pull triggers, and are designed that way as a safety factor. I also choose not to carry because I don’t feel I need to currently and I don’t feel that I have had enough training in small arms handling and shooting to safely do so in public. I also don’t want to draw that much attention to myself, my family, or my employer, because the majority of the attention that it draws is negative. However I believe that it is a right that very few people realize is legal and that many people are afraid of and should be better educated on. Also with your comment of people doing this to look cool or act thought I agree that that might very well happen and that is the primary reason why I am for concealed carry (which is not legal in Wisconsin), we are not having that debate right now however if the firearm is concealed then the public does not get disturbed by it and the people are not doing so to look cool because no one know that it is there, also psych evaluations and training are required which I think are good for anyone carrying open or concealed. Just my thoughts, thanks for the input.

mespl, I understand what you are saying. I have to think that those that decide they need to carry will feel even more insecure on the trips planned w/o the gun. While a few will opt not to make those trips, I will bet on more of the carriers will forget or disregard such rules. They will not discern between their right to carry and the publics right to deny that right on a premises-by-premises basis. I am not taking sides on this. I choose not to carry, but retain that right regardless. Do I feel more comfortable in a store knowing the guy next to me is packing? Maybe, but maybe not. I bet it is not for the reason you may feel uncomfortable though. I know people that handle guns regularly have faith in their gun handling skills, however how many times do we read about a police officer, or in Rock Co, a Deputy that fires off a round unintentionally? The chances are almost as slim as encountering a genuine situation that warrants the use of a civilians weapon. Looking cool, acting tough, or intimidation is not the intent of the right. I am no more intimidated by a person carrying a gun in his holster than I am of him without it. If he feels he needs the weapon to do anything other than end an statistically unlikely situation great. If he needs it to feel more secure, it is nothing more than a "blanky" a young child takes everywhere they go.

one4yes2forno: You asked “…what do you expect a person will do with the weapon when they take it off to go into Subway, the school, or city hall? Will it be placed under the seat of the car?” I can use your own post to tell you that no law abiding person would do this. “It is illegal to have the weapon in the vehicle w/o being fully incased and unloaded. It does not matter if it is in Milton or any other place in the State.” So no weapons would not be anywhere in a car without being fully incased and unloaded. Your questions come down to personal responsibility where you must know where you are going and where you will be stopping if you are walking around Milton.

Topsgt132 and Bob - Actually, in thinking about this, you're both absolutely right that in today's media world, intelligent, reasoned, respectful debate IS dead. Just about every news or opinion show consists primarily of inflammatory statements and insults.
I'm reminded of Jon Stewart's appearance on "Crossfire" a few years ago when he dressed down both hosts and told them, "Stop it. You're hurting America."
So I guess I've now officially lost my blog virginity. Bring it on!!

Sorry Bob. Let me clarify. I was attempting to give Mr. Lyke advice on "Your critical assessment of my posting" that he deemed was "way overblown and unnecessarily rude." If he is going to write about controversial topics he should be prepared to deal with the replies. If he is not he should stick to safer topics. This was not a comment directed at you.

cty35799 Aug 23, 2009 at 6:44 p.m.
"What is the law in regards to having a gun (not concealed) in a car while driving through Milton? It seems as though it would be legal as long as it is in open view."

It is illegal to have the weapon in the vehicle w/o being fully incased and unloaded. It does not matter if it is in Milton or any other place in the State.

For the people in favor of the open carry law as well as those that place restrictions on where one can openly carry, what do you expect a person will do with the weapon when they take it off to go into Subway, the school, or city hall? Will it be placed under the seat of the car? Placed in the nice grocery basket on the bike someone is riding to save in order to save the environment? In the baby stroller they leave outside?

Hey tpsgt132 - Apparently you have never seen my two 20-year-old work cars; or, my garden.

To stay marginally on topic, your right - choose one's blog battles well. Especially when talking guns, war, politicians,smoking bans etcetera.

The odd culture of blog-world anonymity most often puts the burden of real authorship on the article writer while commenters hover around anonymously and nip at the literary angles of the writers. Frequently of course, they take a piece out of the writer's pontificating butt. I usually try to use my own name...at my own peril I might add. It is a creepy culture after all; but it is what it is and here to stay in some form or another, apparently for the foreseeable future.

Related gun saga in Eagle it would seem -

http://walworthcountytoday.com/news/2009...

Bob Keith

This is merely putting Milton statutes inline with the state laws, no one thought it up, it is conforming to state laws, that is all.

cty35799: Even with open carry nothing is changed with firearms in cars, they must be in sealed carrying cases anytime that they are in or on a car. Yes on, it is illegal to place a gun on a parked car if it is not in a case.

commonsence123: you stated that you would call the cops if you saw someone carrying a gun in a holster however if you saw your neighbor shooting one at a bird you would not call. I would like to point out that it might be legal to carry one in Milton however it is still against Milton ordinance to fire a projectile within Milton limits. That includes guns, bow and arrows, and I think that even includes slingshots. So you if you live in Milton you would be calling the cops on the person who is acting legally and not the person who should be ticketed.

I think that there is a reason why the average person should be allowed to carry a gun and that is self protection, plain and simple the police cannot always be there when they are needed or in time and it is our constitutional right to be able to protect ourselves. I hope (as I am sure that everyone that chooses to carry hopes) that no one that chooses to openly carry ever has to use their firearm however it is their right to be able to protect themselves if they ever need to.

Topsgt132 - Thanks for your comment. I think you're right about what the law will do, but I was surprised to hear you say that I "fear the outcome of passing this law." I really don't and didn't mean to give that impression; as I say in the posting, other than a few "No Firearms" signs, I don't expect that anything in Milton will change.
If you're referring to the end of the blog, all I was saying is that the presence of a gun (carried legally or not) certainly has the potential to change a situation.

hannah--Most likely the person at the gun show was a gun shop owner. Most small gun shop owners will carry a firearm to protect them, their business, and the public from theives stealing firearms. Most gun owners take firearms very seriously. They will learn to properly clean and shoot the firearm safely. There is great responsibility when carrying a gun in public because if the firearm is used, the gun owner will be heavily scrutinized.

hannah - I need a gun so I can hunt. If I want to have that gun to protect myself from the so called gangbangers with ILLEGAL guns that you mentioned, I should be able to.
-
That's what I don't understand about many of you antis arguments. You always bring up the "why do you need a gun?" and then you bring up the criminal, which proves my point. It's the person with the gun, not the gun!!!!!

lovemycountry - Reality sometimes scares people. Thanks for the good post.

* Guns used 2.5 million times a year in self-defense. Law-abiding citizens use guns to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times every year -- or about 6,850 times a day.1 This means that each year, firearms are used more than 60 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives.
-
* Anti-gun Clinton researchers find an annual total of 1.5 million self-defense cases. According to the Clinton Justice Department, there are as many as 1.5 million cases of self-defense every year. The National Institute of Justice published this figure in 1997 as part of "Guns in America" -- a study which was authored by noted anti-gun criminologists Philip Cook and Jens Ludwig.
-
* Concealed carry laws have dropped murder and crime rates in the states that have enacted them. According to a comprehensive study which studied crime statistics in all of the counties in the United States from 1977 to 1992, states which passed concealed carry laws reduced their murder rate by 8.5%, rapes by 5%, aggravated assaults by 7% and robbery by 3%.
-
* Anti-gun journal pronounces the failure of the Brady law. One of the nation's leading anti-gun medical publications, the Journal of the American Medical Association, found that the Brady registration law has failed to reduce murder rates. In August 2000, JAMA reported that states implementing waiting periods and background checks did "not [experience] reductions in homicide rates or overall suicide rates."
-
* More children are killed playing football in school than they are by guns. That's right. Despite what media coverage might seem to indicate, more children die playing high school football, than they do by firearms at school. The most recent year on record shows that 18 football players died during the school year ending in June, 2000 (from hits to the head, heat stroke, etc.), as compared with 9 students by firearms.

iamqueenb - You said the average person has no reason to carry a gun.
That comment is extremely wide open. Who is average? Where is average? Prove to me that crime has gone up because of this law?

Jim, I don't understand your position on this. You fear the outcome of passing this law but talk about your father actually discharging his hunting rifle inside the limits of a Milwaukee suburb as if it were no big thing and your son shooting his air gun inside the city limits of Milton with the same attitude. Wouldn't either of those acts, actually firing your weapon in a residential area, be considerably more dangerous than the act of carrying one. This law protects me if I take my weapon out into my yard, as your son does. I think you actually answered your own concerns when you wrote of your father: "Yet, he didn't walk up and down the streets with his rifle just because he could." I think that will be the case here. I seriously doubt you will see a mass exodus to Gander Mountain to buy shoulder rigs and slings.

As far as Bob goes..If you're gonna try to tackle any topic relating to guns, politics, religion or abortion you better be ready to take the heat. Otherwise maybe go for gardening or auto care.

iamqueenb - Actually, in many areas where even conceal and carry is permitted, it's made less work for the police because the crime rates have decreased. It has shown no source of an increase in crime. Think about it. You said there is no reason the average person should have to carry a gun. Really? Apparently you don't watch the news.

SkyBlue62 - The flying moose was the best one. However, I'm sorry what happened to the moose. But the story was still funny.

This article is lyke someone shouting FIRE in a movie theater just to inform people fires are possible. That would not make going to the movies more enjoyable, would it? Just lyke Jim's articles about the bad things that MIGHT happen in Milton do not make people feel good about living in Milton. Just keep shouting FIRE Jim!

Nevada, where I live, is an open carry state. However, Clark County has a "Deadly Weapons" registration law. Travelers to and through Nevada, however, are exempted from these registration requirements for 60 days. Great, now we have to deal with Miltonites on vacation with guns. Ouch! Just kidding....sort of.

Here we go again...using paranoia and fear to sell an article. Get all the scared people all worked up again, Jim. Didn't your last article about gangs in milton get enough of a response?

You people all need to stop your crying, it is not the end of the world. Jim as far as your gang banger story goes get over it, it's not that big of a deal man up already. As far as what would I have done if I had my gun you would have probally would have done the same thing stopped and maybe turned around and ran which in your case would have been smart. No matter what law goes on the books someone somewhere will find it wrong and have a arguement for it, so people just live and let live the time's they are a changing.

Are some of you seriously that out of touch with this? Do you realize that 48 states allow conceal and carry, let alone open carry? This isn't something new. And for some of you commenting about Norway, etc. Go ahead and move there if you want the Government to control even more of your lives. As you can see, that's really working well in the U.S.

I might mention, the Moose can be a problem too. good thing we don't have them in the area around here. :D
http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/...

You would really want some protection from a amorous moose, who has just eating alot of rotting and fermenting fruits. they get quite drunken. who would have thought?
http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/...

and flying moose http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/...

JWEyster:

Please rethinks Your idea that is it safer in Oslo, Noway. it is not, as You'll see from these newspaper reports.
.
http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/...

http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/...

http://citynoise.org/article/2310

To answer your question, Bob, my son shoots his BB gun in our backyard. My father-in-law used to use his hunting rifle to shoot squirrels in his backyard in his Milwaukee suburb. He was a long-time member of the NRA. Yet, he didn't walk up and down the streets with his rifle just because he could.
And sorry, I'm not buying that the "new media world" makes it OK to be unnecessarily rude. There is no excuse to be that way in order to make a point or get a question answered.

I think like Jim. I would call the police if I saw someone with a gun. They may be harmless, but how do I know? That would be the job of the police to determine. I would hate to sit home later watching the news and find someone had gotten shot and I could have stopped it. If you legally own a gun and carry it in the open, know you may be stopped and asked about it. As with anyone who is doing nothing wrong, cooperate and be on your way. Now, if I saw a neighbor shooting a pesky bird or crow, I would know what they are shooting at so I would not need to call the police.

Legal open carry of firearms is a poor second choice to legal concealed carry of firearms. Perhaps we can clean out some of the hysterical cradle-to-grave socialists occupying the Senate and Assembly if we can convince enough PARTY-LINE-VOTING-SHEEP* to not re-elect the usual suspects, the cronies who prefer playing games and party politiks to actually representing their constituents.
.
The Democratic Party, in particular, needs more people like the admirable Representatives Wayne Wood and Barbara Gronemus, who truly cared about their constituents and the state of the state, and fewer pols like Sheridan, who care about their private agendas and supporting a broken system.
.
*BLOG_ALL_CAPZ is a registered trademark of the JWEyster Foundation, ©2009)

Not sure who you are referring to as "both" johnDoe oh nameless one. If you are talking about myself and Jim, at least we use our real names. (Oh, I know, blog-world anonymity is sacred). Anyway, what is your take on walking around the street and back yard with a gun - real gun or real-looking pellet gun? - Did not catch that from your vague posts.
Bob Keith

Actually ABOUT both of you...think about it.

LOL to both of you...

"-you don't what to appear thin-skinned literarily after all." - Is what I was trying to write.
I am so tired of no spell check or grammar check on these blog platforms.

Bob Keith
cooldadiomedia.com

Jim. It has been my experience that one of the only ways to get a rise out of most of the authors in blog land is to be..."unecessarily rude" - Glad you read your own stuff. Don't take it personal...it is a construct of the "new media" world...you don't what to appear thin-skinned literally after all. Any way; glad I got a rise out of an auther for a change. And by the by, would you call the cops on a neighbor popping off pellets with a real looking gun, at crows in the garden? - Did not quite filter out that variable from your response to my post.

Bob Keith
cooldadiomedia.com

Bad editing. I blame my proofreader. He must have taken Sunday off this week.

Bob - Your critical assessment of my posting is way overblown and unnecessarily rude. You're right that TECHNICALLY open carry isn't addressed by Wisconsin law; but Van Hollen's interpretation of it as legal is the defining statement at the moment. I didn't feel that I had to spell that out because it is referenced in the link I inserted about the upcoming Madison court case, a link I found using...gee, Google. For now, the state AG says it's legal, so it's legal.
And to your other point, yes, my first inclination would be to call the police. Maybe seeing people walk down the streets with guns is normal in Iraq, but it ain't here.

Jim, from your first blog entry: "I am a history buff..." - Apparently not in matters of Wisconsin law. This "open carry" provision in Wisconsin law has been urban legend, and fact, for as long as I have lived in and around Southern Wisconsin...born in Fort Atkinson hospital, long before your Edgerton appearance perhaps, thank you very much. Wisconsin "open carry" has been the fodder of Wisconsin talk radio, both "right" and "left" for decades.
And then, your quote in this posting, "My first inclination would be to call the police..." Oh, my god, the mantra of the new world we live in...fear, fear, fear, we are all gone'a die don't you know. - Hope you never see one of your neighbors popping off some pellets from a pellet gun at some nuisance birds, crows, etcetera.
But actually, my main beef with you is as a "history buff," you do not know this rather common "open carry" Wisconsin lore - fact.
What ever; I hope Milton, Wisconsin is able to embrace your naivety in United States regional culture. There is a thing called Google; a noun and a verb; perhaps you could try it before you enter your next incredulus posting on something like Wisconsin fish fry being unique to Wisconsin, etcetera.

Bob Keith
cooldadiomedia.com

Hand-wringing liberals that start jerking knees at the mere mention of "open carry" are usually even more terrified of "concealed carry", & commonly resort to the same emotional arguments against both. While "open" is less common, 48 states now allow some form of "concealed"--yielding useful STATISTICS (you know, pesky facts) on the subject. In none of those states has the violent crime rate risen since implementation. In fact, in most (if not all) cases, the rates have DROPPED SIGNIFICANTLY!! I, for one, am sick to death of pinkos telling me that "facts" & "evidence" are all that matters when talking about climate change, for example. When it comes to things like abortion or gun control, then facts are irrelevant--right?

What is the law in regards to having a gun (not concealed) in a car while driving through Milton? It seems as though it would be legal as long as it is in open view.

Jim, who was the source of this fabulous idea? Maybe next, this person will propose a law making it OK to carry a gun to school.

I'm a Milton resident, subscibe to the Milton emails and didn't know anything about this. The idea, although I legally own a gun for hunting purposes, scares the bajeezes out of me.
What's next I wonder?!

When a city's crime increases the people that can move out do. That leaves the people who can't leave, usually poor people, behind to deal with it. Also, the people moving out take their tax money with them to their greener suburbia pastures, and watch with malicious glee as the city crumbles further. It reinforces their decision to move when they see crime rampant in the old city. They wash their hands of the city, and the people who are least able to defend themselves become prey. They feel trapped, hopeless, and angry, too. The only thing they know of that makes them feel better is drugs and alcohol furthering the demise of the city.

"Do I lucky?"

I share your anxiety, Jim... thanks for articulating your perspective AND FOR PUTTING IT ON YOUR BLOG so the general public has opportunity to consider and comment.

IF the day you cite comes in Milton, I would hope I were able to move to NORWAY. The absence of GUNS is a healthier environment, as I see it.

I remember my fear when there was legislation proposed to have K-12 PUBLIC EDUCATORS carrying guns in their classrooms! Just what we need - GUN BATTLES in the classrooms and halls of our K-12 public schools!

Keep the dialog going, Jim! THANKS! John

I don't know. They'd have to ask themselves the question. "Do I lucky?" Well, do you, punk?