Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.6.2
Site Design by Sekimori

« Premiere of my documentary! | Main | Debate on Saul Cornell's book "A Well Regulated Militia" »

Milwaukee trial judge rules CCW unconstitutional as applied

Posted by David Hardy · 24 September 2007 10:29 PM

Story here: now, it is a trial court, not an appellate one, and it is "as applied," in the context of a pizza deliveryman in a high-crime area.

Reading the opinion (linked to that page): He defended himself against an armed robbery, and was then charged with CCW for it. It wasn't the first time. The court applies the new state constitutional amendment on arms, the Wisconsin caselaw construing it, which essentially requires for concealed carry that the individual's need to carry outweigh the state's interest in enforcing CCW bans, and that the situation be such that open carry wasn't a feasible way to exercise the right to arms. The trial court concluded both were true and dismissed the prosecution.

Hat tip to Budd Schroeder....

· CCW licensing

3 Comments | Leave a comment

Ian Argent | September 25, 2007 12:55 PM | Reply

Interesting quote:
"Deputy District Attorney Kent Lovern said the office has no plans to appeal the decision. An appeal could give a higher court an opportunity to hand down a precedent-setting decision on whether the concealed-carry prohibition is constitutional, whereas Noonan's decision applies only to Vegas's case."

That is a)cowardice on the DA's part, and b) an indication that the times, they are a'changing

30yearprof | September 25, 2007 1:40 PM | Reply

Yes. In Hamden (4-5 years ago) the Wisconsin Supreme Court requested that the Legislature deal with the CCW situation. It has, twice I believe, but Democrat Governor Doyle keeps vetoing the bills. The Supreme Court WILL solve the problem if it gets a case.

Wadwizard | September 26, 2007 6:47 PM | Reply

There can be no law, justified by "experiency" as in the case of anti- concealed carry legislation, that trumps the plain language of Art. I, Sec. 25, Wis. Const. Such anti-contitutional legislation is a tyranny of the worst and most odious kind and does not deserve to be taken seriously by free citizens.

Leave a comment