Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Judges react to DA's petition to carry gun at work(WI)
jsonline.com ^ | 18 June, 2012 | Bruce Vielmetti

Posted on 06/19/2012 5:28:51 AM PDT by marktwain

Winnebago County's circuit judges responded Monday to an effort by the district attorney there to wear his gun to work in the courthouse.

The judges in January banned anyone but on-duty law enforcement officers from carrying a gun in the courthouse without written permission of the judge or court commissioner in front of whom the applicant will appear.

District Attorney Christian Gossett and Deputy DA Scott Ceman, in a Monday petition to the Supreme Court, claim the orders exceed the judges' authority and contradict the state's concealed carry law which Gossett and Ceman claim specifically exempts prosecutors from the general ban on guns in courthouses, if they have concealed weapon permits.

Tom Sheehan, the spokesman for the state courts system, released this statement on behalf of the Winnebago Circuit Court judges:

"Winnebago County Circuit Court Judges and our law enforcement partners have a duty and obligation to ensure that everyone participating in a court proceeding has a safe and secure environment in which to settle a dispute.

"The first step in fulfilling that obligation, and in assessing safety and security threats in a courtroom, is for judges and law enforcement to be aware of who is carrying a weapon during a proceeding.

"The order approved unanimously by the Winnebago County Circuit Court Judges applies equally to everyone who enters a courtroom during a proceeding."

(Excerpt) Read more at jsonline.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government; US: Wisconsin
KEYWORDS: banglist; ccw; courthouse; wi
Wisconsin law clearly states that prosecutors who have a CCW are allowed to carry in the courthouse. I guess the judges are saying that they do not have to follow the law.
1 posted on 06/19/2012 5:28:58 AM PDT by marktwain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: marktwain

The judicial fascists in our elitist royalty are getting scared. That’s good. Next step is to remove all taxpayer-funded security from the perfumed princes. Sheriff’s deputies have more important things to do, such as eating doughnuts and investigating and arresting left wing judges.


2 posted on 06/19/2012 5:35:39 AM PDT by sergeantdave (Public unions exist to protect the unions from the taxpaying public)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain; Hunton Peck; Diana in Wisconsin; P from Sheb; Shady; DonkeyBonker; Wisconsinlady; JPG; ..

Wisconsin judges react to DA’s request to conceal carry in courthouse

FReep Mail me if you want on, or off, this Wisconsin interest ping list.


3 posted on 06/19/2012 5:47:10 AM PDT by afraidfortherepublic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain

My brother is a DA in Kentucky and he carries a 9mm in his front jacket.

DA’s are targets of criminals who want “vindication.” I can’t imagine a judge not granting this . . . but wait . . . this is Wisconsin.


4 posted on 06/19/2012 6:41:59 AM PDT by Justice4awe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
The judges in January banned anyone but on-duty law enforcement officers from carrying a gun in the courthouse without written permission of the judge or court commissioner in front of whom the applicant will appear.

Hmmm, this seems odd...

Right to keep and bear arms. Section 25. [As created Nov. 1998]
The people have the right to keep and bear arms for security, defense, hunting, recreation or any other lawful purpose.
Art 12 -- Amendments
Section 1.Any amendment or amendments to this constitution may be proposed in either house of the legislature, and if the same shall be agreed to by a majority of the members elected to each of the two houses, such proposed amendment or amendments shall be entered on their journals, with the yeas and nays taken thereon, and referred to the legislature to be chosen at the next general election, and shall be published for three months previous to the time of holding such election; and if, in the legislature so next chosen, such proposed amendment or amendments shall be agreed to by a majority of all the members elected to each house, then it shall be the duty of the legislature to submit such proposed amendment or amendments to the people in such manner and at such time as the legislature shall prescribe; and if the people shall approve and ratify such amendment or amendments by a majority of the electors voting thereon, such amendment or amendments shall become part of the constitution; provided, that if more than one amendment be submitted, they shall be submitted in such manner that the people may vote for or against such amendments separately.

Section 2. If at any time a majority of the senate and assembly shall deem it necessary to call a convention to revise or change this constitution, they shall recommend to the electors to vote for or against a convention at the next election for members of the legislature. And if it shall appear that a majority of the electors voting thereon have voted for a convention, the legislature shall, at its next session, provide for calling such convention.
I don't see anywhere here that allows the Judiciary to determine that it's unlawful for people to bring weapons to court (the USSC has, after all, declared that LEOs have no obligation to a private citizen's safety)... nor do I see where the legislature can legitimately restrict such bearing of arms.

In fact, it cannot legitimately be done without Constitutional amendment. So, when was it amended? And who amended it?

5 posted on 06/19/2012 7:07:52 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Justice4awe

I was a prosecutor in Indiana for 18 years. Under Indiana law, prosecutors are law enforcement officers and can carry sidearms.

In all the years I prosecuted, I only carried one time, when I was prosecuting the son of the leader of the local Black Panther Miltia. It was a gruesome murder prosecution where we were seeking the death penalty and the defendant’s dad promised that there would be “other death penalties carried out.”

Even though my dad taught me to shoot before he taught me how to ride a bike, I was never comfortable with carrying a sidearm, and stopped some time after the case was concluded. But having been there, I have no problem with prosecutors carrying.


6 posted on 06/19/2012 8:28:26 AM PDT by henkster (Why should I care? Why should I care?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: marktwain
The judges in January banned anyone but on-duty law enforcement officers from carrying a gun in the courthouse...

A DA is not law enforcement?!? Since when?

7 posted on 06/19/2012 8:36:54 AM PDT by houeto (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark
Right to keep and bear arms. Section 25. [As created Nov. 1998]
The people have the right to keep and bear arms for security, defense, hunting, recreation or any other lawful purpose.

That's just a piece of paper. The government has people with guns and no compunction against using them. Guess who wins.

8 posted on 06/19/2012 9:24:30 AM PDT by zeugma (Those of us who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: zeugma
That's just a piece of paper. The government has people with guns and no compunction against using them. Guess who wins.

Well, considering that the general civil population is quickly learning the "us vs them" mentality is so deeply entrenched in "public servants" it may be premature to simply declare for the government. That said, the people still do have compunction against using them, and given it would be foolish to think that most of the population that could/would fight have the same "breaking point"/"line in the sand", the government does have the upper hand.

9 posted on 06/19/2012 10:12:43 AM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson