GAG Lawyer Says Governments Can Ban Guns At The Polls

Personally, I don’t think that the law includes election sites as a “special event,” nor do I think that was the intent of the provisions. After all, elections are normally regularly scheduled events. They aren’t “special.” Still, such an interpretation is not wholly unreasonable. If the DOJ upholds the interpretation, then hopefully the legislature can clarify the law before the taxpayers have to defend a lawsuit about it.

Madison - State election officials say local governments can ban concealed weapons at all polling sites, from city halls to assisted living homes.

Government Accountability Board attorney Mike Haas writes in a report that Wisconsin’s concealed carry law contains a provision that allows organizers to ban concealed weapons at special events. Haas writes that an election qualifies as a special event.

Firearm Business Booming

Good news/bad news.

MILWAUKEE - Firearms-related businesses in Wisconsin say they are having a difficult time meeting demand from rising gun sales in the state.

Wisconsin’s gun sales follow a national trend, and businesses say the rising demand is being driven by various factors, from Wisconsin’s concealed carry law to presidential politics.

“It’s incredible,” said Steve Lauer, owner of Lauer Custom Weaponry, which manufactures firearms, firearm coatings and accessories in Chippewa Falls. “We can hardly keep up.”

The good news is that it’s great for Wisconsin’s firearms industry and it’s great to see more folks exercising their rights. The bad news is that it’s driving up prices. Ah well…

Wisconsin Prints 100,000th Concealed Carry Permit

Awesome.

MADISON — Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen will address members of the media tomorrow morning as the Department of Justice (DOJ) marks a milestone – the printing of the 100,000th Concealed Carry License—fewer than six months after 2011 Wisconsin Act 35 took effect.

Man Sues Milwaukee Police to Return Gun

One would think that MPD and the Milwaukee DA would learn.

Nazir Al-Mujaahid certainly sticks to his guns.

For the fourth time, Al-Mujaahid has gone to court to regain possession of a firearm held by the police, in this case, the 9mm handgun he used to foil a robbery attempt at a Milwaukee grocery store in January. Al-Mujaahid shot and wounded a man who was waving a gun at cashiers and customers

It was the first instance of someone with Wisconsin’s new permit to carry a concealed weapon of using his gun to defend himself or others during a crime, and prosecutors cleared Al-Mujaahid, 35, of any wrongdoing.

But they still have his gun, which is being held as evidence in the case of the two men charged with trying to rob the Aldi store where one of them encountered Al-Mujaahid.

Texas Allows Suppressors to be Used While Hunting

Excellent!

Today, after hearing your support for this NRA-backed common sense hunting reform, the Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission voted unanimously to legalize suppressor use while hunting.  The benefits associated with suppressor use include increased accuracy due to reduced recoil and muzzle blast, protection from hearing damage and reduced noise pollution. 

Prior to the adoption of this rule, lawfully-possessed suppressors were permitted for all other shooting activities besides hunting game animals, including the taking of nuisance species.  The adoption of this common sense proposal by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department helps in other states where the NRA is involved with similar pro-hunting measures.  Legislatures in Oklahoma and Georgia are currently considering similar measures and Arizona has recently passed one which would enhance hunting opportunities because of the many benefits that suppressors provide. 

Citizen Credits Concealed Carry With Thwarting Crime

Glad everyone’s safe.

Saturday night, March 24th, Danny Black and his girlfriend Julie took the dogs out for a walk. Seven-year-old golden-doodle Chloe was along for the stroll when Black says another person interrupted.

The two were confronted by the driver of a van in the area of 73rd and Courtland. Worrisome words quickly turned into threatening actions. Black says the driver was armed, and tried to rob the two. “He was saying to her, ‘give me the bag, give me the bag.’ It was a semi-automatic and he clicked it like he was loading it,” Black said.

Black says his heart began to pound, but it wasn’t the adrenaline that helped him through. He credits his own firearm. Black has a concealed carry permit, but hoped to never even threaten to use his weapon in public. “Me pulling a gun out saved both of our lives last night. I pointed the gun at him and he said, what was I doing, and just drove off,” Black said.

Black says he’s all too aware in a different scenario, pulling out a gun against another gunman could have greatly escalated the violence. “I’m just happy with the way it turned out. I don’t ever want to be in that situation again,” Black said.

Black says this incident should serve as a reminder to Wisconsin criminals that the victims they target may no longer be as defenseless as they may have been before the concealed carry law took effect in the state. “There are thousands of people like me, carrying guns, so them looking for easy targets – that’s all over now. That’s not going to happen anymore,” Black said.

Defending the castle

My column for the Daily News is online. It’s called, “Defending the castle.” Here’re the guts of it:

What we do know is that Mr. Morrison was trespassing at 2 a.m. and is no longer alive because of that bad decision.

  Some are seizing on the fate of Mr. Morrison as a test case for Wisconsin’s new Castle Doctrine that was passed late last year. Under that law, homeowners are given the benefit of the doubt when a shooting like this occurs under the presumption that a homeowner is entitled to protect their family and home against an intruder. The burden of guilt is on an intruder who is illegally trespassing in someone else’s home. Indeed, the circumstances regarding Mr. Morrison’s demise shows that Wisconsin’s Castle Doctrine is working perfectly as designed.

Flynn Proposes More Gun Laws

Boy, there’s a lot of concealed carry news today. Milwaukee’s Police Chief is proposing some changes to Wisconsin’s gun laws that deserve some evaluation. It is a bit disengenuous that he would wait until the final week of the legislative session - when there is virtually no time to properly evaluate and allow public input into the proposals - before announcing his ideas. It smells more like political posturing by the police chief than a serious set of proposals. But still… let’s take a look.

First, straw purchases - buying a firearm for someone who is prohibited from possessing a firearm - are a misdemeanor on a state level, not a felony as they are on a federal level.

I’m fine with that. Make straw purchases a state felony.

Second, the requirements for a gun permit ignore the reality of plea bargains. Many habitual criminals legally qualify for, and could obtain, a concealed-carry permit because they were never convicted of a felony for which they were charged.

“Many of our career criminals don’t have a felony conviction,” explained Joel Plant, chief of staff with the Milwaukee Police Department. “They’ve been arrested for felonies, they’ve been charged with felonies, but because of necessity of the criminal justice process - and this is not a disparaging comment on the prosecution process or the judicial process - but because of necessity in our system, a lot of those felonies, many of those felonies, most of those felonies, are pled down to misdemeanor convictions.”

Habitual criminals, Plant said, can carry a concealed gun with impunity from a potential of a felony charge unless they fire their guns.

So the idea here is that a series of misdemeanors should count as a felony for the purpose of eligibility for a concealed carry permit. I disagree with this proposal. There is a difference between felonies and misdemeanors for a reason and a person should not be penalized as a felon if they have not been lawfully convicted of committing a felony. Bear in mind that felons who are still under supervision also can’t vote in Wisconsin. Should the law also be changed to strip away that right if a person committs some misdemeanor crimes? No.

The problem here is that the district attorneys are allegedly plea-bargaining down felonies too readily. Stripping people of more rights will not fix that problem.

The third problem, police say, is that regardless of how many times people carry concealed without a permit - illegally - the offense never rises above a misdemeanor.

“The sanctions they face are not significant,” Flynn said. “No matter how many times they are caught with that gun, the charge is a misdemeanor. It’s a misdemeanor for the first offense, it’s a misdemeanor for a 10th offense. That’s why I say they’re more afraid to get caught without their gun than with their gun.”

Police would like to change the permitting requirements and prohibit what the statute already defines as “habitual offenders” from getting a permit. A habitual offender is someone convicted of three misdemeanors in five years.

I’m OK with there being a boundary after which someone who is caught repeatedly illegally carrying a gun is prohibited from obtaining a concealed carry permit, but I’m not OK with using the habitual offender classification to get at this. It’s too broad. Instead, I’d rather see the law changed to escalating penalties for multiple offences - much like we do with drunk driving. Perhaps on the 3rd or 4th conviction of a person illegally carrying a weapon, it should be a felony. That way the prohibition against concealed carry for felons kicks in and the permit can be denied.

In both the second and third proposals, Flynn wants to lower the bar for denying permits by treating misdemeanors as felonies. Whether there aren’t enough convicted felons in Wisconsin because district attorneys are too lenient or because some misdemeanor crimes should rise to the level of a felony, that’s a broader issue for the legislature to address that doesn’t require any changes to the concealed carry licensing guidelines.

Demand for Concealed Carry Permits Up

Awesome.

The state Department of Justice is starting to see a slight increase in the number people seeking concealed carry permits, but the department has been able to keep up with the demand.

The department’s biggest surge in concealed carry permit applications came in November, after the law took effect Nov. 1. Since then, the department has received an average of 3,000 applications each week, but those numbers have slightly increased in recent weeks, said department spokeswoman Dana Brueck.

More than 96,000 applications were submitted to the DOJ since Nov. 1. More than 82,000 licenses have been printed, Brueck said.

Despite falling behind the state’s deadlines for processing the applications in the end of December, the department now is able to process applications before the 21-day deadline expires, Brueck said.

“We’re on schedule,” she said. “The majority of the concealed carry applications received today are approved in fewer than two weeks, many times within one week.”

Activists Want Permit List

The NRA is right on this one.

Advocacy group Wisconsin Anti-Violence Effort says making available concealed carry permit information would allow groups to ensure people who carry concealed handguns, knives or electric weapons are “as law abiding as the lawmakers promised,” said Jeri Bonavia, the organization’s executive director.

“Since we don’t know who concealed carry weapon holders are, we don’t know what they’re doing” or if they’re the ones committing violent crimes, she said. “That’s really frustrating. … Are these people as law abiding as the senators promised us, or have we been kind of duped?”

But the National Rifle Association says making sure concealed carry permit holders are abiding the law isn’t a job for the public.

“That’s the function of law enforcement,” said Andrew Arulanandam, director of public affairs for the NRA. “There’s no need for these people to have their privacy compromised. Anyone who makes any other argument is not being honest.”

Yes, it is a matter for law enforcement. And if a concealed carry permit holder is conviced of a crime that makes them no longer eligible to have that license, I’d expect a judge to order the surrender of the license upon conviction.

Return the Gun

Yeah… this is crap.

A gun rights advocacy group has taken Milwaukee police to task for refusing to give back a gun used in an Aldi grocery store shooting that was ruled justifiable and legal.

Police say the gun is still evidence in the case.

Nazir Al-Mujaahid shot and injured a suspected robber who was threatening a cashier and waving a sawed-off rifle at other patrons on Jan. 30. Al-Mujaahid had gotten a concealed-carry permit a couple of weeks earlier. The suspect fled, was later arrested and charged in the Aldi robbery and two other armed holdups.

Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm cleared Al-Mujaahid, 35, of any criminal wrongdoing, but police still have his gun and holster, according to Nik Clark, president of Wisconsin Carry Inc., a gun rights advocacy group.

“WCI believes that these acts by the Milwaukee Police Department represent violations to law-abiding citizens’ constitutionally guaranteed right to be free from illegal seizures of their private property and their constitutionally recognized right to keep and bear arms,” Clark said in a news release Tuesday.

He was cleared. There is absolutely no legal or rational justification for the governemt to continue to hold a gun that was lawfully used. Al-Mujaahid’s 4th Amendment rights are being violated.

Man Shot In Slinger

This is unfortunate.

By SARAH MANN Daily News Staff

SLINGER — A 20-year-old West Bend man was shot and killed after a party went wrong early Saturday.

Bo A. Morrison, a 2010 graduate of West Bend East High School, was killed a little before 2 a.m. on Saturday by a homeowner who reportedly believed that Morrison was an intruder.

  According to the Slinger Police Department, police received reports of loud noise and a possible underaged-drinking party at about 12:50 a.m. in the 100 block of North Kettle Moraine Drive. When officers were sent to investigate, they were unable to make contact with anyone at the house. They were able to speak with one of the homeowners, who was at work, by phone.

  Officers were called to the same area again at 2 a.m. by a homeowner who reported that he had shot an alleged intruder in his house after youths had fled the party to hide from police. About 15 to 20 young people were at the party.

  According to a release from the Slinger Police Department, “Responding officers located a 20-year-old male in the porch area of the house with a single gunshot wound to his chest. Officers as well as LifeStar Rescue attempted life-saving measures; however, the male was deceased.”

Here’s the thing… the result was clearly tragic. A young man who was apparently just drunk and stupid is now dead. However, the result does not change the realities of the situation. From the homeowner’s perspective, he had a grown man on his porch at 2 AM with an unknown intent. We do not know what happened between these two. We don’t know if the trespasser was belligerant, threatening, or appeared to possess a weapon. We also don’t know if the homeowner questioned the intruder or just acted immediately. Certainly there is a tactical advantage in acting without warning an intruder of your presence. We may see the statements later, but we don’t have them now.

With what we know, I see no fault in the homeowner. If I find a man on my porch at 2 AM, what would I do? If he is truly a threat, why would I turn on a light and ask him his intentions? Isn’t my first priority my family’s safety? I admit that personally I would not pull a trigger unless he was actually in my home, but the story is vague and I don’t know the circumstances. Was it an enclosed porch where the intruder had already forcibly entered the home? I don’t know. We also don’t know the actual intent of the intruder. Perhaps he was a hapless drunk looking for refuge, but perhaps he had more devious intentions. We don’t know and neither did the homeowner. 

As it is, this is a perfect case for the Castle Doctrine. The presumption should be that the homeowner isn’t required to devine the intruder’s intentions before taking action. The fault lies with the intruder. He should not have trespassed in the wee hours of the morning for any purpose and now he is dead. If it ends up that the homeowner acted recklessly and knew that the intruder was harmless, then he should, and will, be fully prosecuted. But at 2 AM in the dark in a person’s home, the law should presume that the homeowner has a right and duty to protect himself and his family. And now it does in Wisconsin.

Man Charged for Warning Shot

“Live free or die” my ass.

A New Hampshire man who fired his handgun into the ground to scare an alleged burglar he caught crawling out of a neighbor’s window is now facing a felony charge—and the same potential prison sentence as the man he stopped.

Dennis Fleming, 61, of Farmington, was arrested for reckless conduct after the Saturday incident at his 19th century farmhouse. The single grandfather had returned home to find that his home had been burglarized and spotted Joseph Hebert, 27, climbing out of a window at a neighbor’s home. Fleming said he yelled “Freeze!” before firing his gun into the ground, then held Hebert at gunpoint until police arrived.

“I didn’t think I could handle this guy physically, so I fired into the ground,” Fleming told FoxNews.com. “He stopped. He knew I was serious. I was angry … and I was worried that this guy was going to come after me.”

No one was injured in the incident, but when the police arrived, they made two arrests. Hebert was charged with two counts of burglary and drug possession. He faces up to seven years in prison if convicted. Fleming, meanwhile, is scheduled to be arraigned March 20 on a charge of reckless conduct, which could potentially land him a sentence similar to the one Hebert faces.

The grandpa shouldn’t have fired his weapon. There’s really no such thing as a “warning shot.” If you shoot, it better be because you are in fear of your (or someone else’s) life and intend to stop the threat. But his actions were certainly not irrational or reckless. They were deliberate and had the positive outcome of capturing a criminal. At the most, the grandpa should get a light slap on the wrist. Ideally, he should get a stear lecture from the cops and a “thank you” for looking out for his neighbors.

DOJ Trainer Shoots Himself

Oops.

FOND DU LAC, Wis.— The training director for the Wisconsin Department of Justice is recovering from an accidental self-inflicted gunshot wound to the hand.

DOJ spokeswoman Dana Brueck (BROO’-ick) says Tony Barthuly (bar-THOO’-lee) was cleaning his personal handgun Wednesday night at his Fond du Lac home when it went off. The 54-year-old was taken to St. Agnes Hospital in Fond du Lac, then transferred to Appleton Medical Center and eventually discharged. Brueck says Barthuly is back at work Friday.

Liberal Blogger Praises Concealed Carry

I’ll put up a screen shot, becuase I presume cooler heads will prevail and he will remove the post. It’s nice that he’s able to vent his hatred of conservatives and think fondly of shooting first, eh? One might consider this somewhat threatening language. But I’m sure he didn’t mean it that way, right? Somehow I don’t think I’d get a pass if I wrote something like that.