Keep them out (Wisconsin barf alert)

Milwaukee J-S ^ | 24 aug 2011

[rellimpank]

Yes, concealed carry is now the law in Wisconsin. But there are some places where carrying weapons isn't appropriate. Public buildings are among such places.

Before the Civil War, a Southern congressman once used a cane to beat a Northern senator to within an inch of his life on the Senate floor. But, although we haven't done an extensive search of the records, we're unaware of any gunplay that ever took place in those hallowed halls or similar halls of other legislative bodies.

We'd like to see that it stays that way, as the state moves toward implementing its new concealed-carry law. Which is why the bans that many municipalities are considering putting on weapons in public buildings are a good idea.

Waukesha Common Council President Paul Ybarra points out that public debates sometimes get pretty heated. So do public hearings, some of which go on for hours and involve a lot of angry words. Granted, shootouts aren't likely to break out, but allowing guns into the mix of heated politics and angry words still isn't a good idea.

[rellimpank]

--as usual, the comments following demolish the premis of the article---

[Celerity]

I hope canes are banned from the state senate. Having a history of violence and all.

[gibsosa]

Wow, I think the good people of Wisconsin are fed up, love the comments!

[EQAndyBuzz]

Northern Senator was probably from Mass. And deserved the beating.

[Obadiah]

LOL!

[GonzoGOP]

If Charles Sumner had been packing raising cane would have been the last act of one Preston Brooks. The moral of the story; A unarmed reasonable man will always lose to the fanatic with a stick. So reason dictates that having a firearm is the best way for reason to prevail in other maters.

[CGalen]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Capitol_shooting_incident_%281954%29

The United States Capitol shooting incident of 1954 was an attack on March 1, 1954 by four Puerto Rican nationalists who shot 30 rounds using automatic pistols from the Ladies’ Gallery (a balcony for visitors) of the House of Representatives chamber in the United States Capitol.

Five representatives were shot in the attack.

[Sherman Logan]

Preston Brooks was a coward and a bully.

While he was provoked, he could have challenged Sumner to a duel, but instead attacked a seated man trapped behind his desk without warning.

Brooks later challenged a different New Englander to a duel. But unfortunately for Brooks the challengee accepted with enthusiasm and Brooks found out he was a crack shot.

Rather than fight someone who could actually fight back, Brooks refused to show up for the duel.

[Sherman Logan]

Preston Brooks brought along armed friends who held senators who tried to intervene at gunpoint.

[GonzoGOP]

Preston Brooks was a big time coward. When called out as such on the floor of the Senate for beating an unarmed man he challenged the accuser to a duel. However his rhetorical challenge was not greeted rhetorically by the Northern Senator who eagerly accepted. And being the challenged party stipulated long rifles at ten paces, indicating that he was not interested in it as a matter of honor, but as an opportunity to ensure the very certain and complete death of one Preston Brooks. Brooks then failed to show up for the duel that he had publicly initiated.

This incident contributed greatly to the Civil War. First it gave the Southerners the impression that the best way to shut up a Norherner was to give him a good thrashing. Of course as the incidents of 1861-1865 were to show even repeated thrashings were not enough to deter Northerners, it just made them bring more guys and torches the next time. Worse the failure of Preston Brooks, a hero in the South after the beating incident, to show up for the duel lead Northerners to believe that the South wouldn't show up for a fair fight. Preston Brooks might have been a craven coward, but in that way is was definitely not representative of Southerners and they showed up in mass for the war.

A whole lot of people ended up dead because this incident gave the impression, to both sides, that the other side was all talk and no fight.

[Sherman Logan]

Anson Burlingame was a MA Congressman, not a Senator, and he gave the speech that induced Brooks to challenge him in the House.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anson_Burlingame#Burlingame_vs._Preston_Brooks

Otherwise, you’re quite correct.

One consequence of Brooks’ attack is that it launched John Brown on his career of murder.

<<The next day, May 22, South Carolina Senator Preston Brooks took his gold-topped cane and, on the floor of the U. S. Senate, clubbed senseless Massachusetts Senator Charles Sumner after he delivered a abolitionist speech, “The Crime Against Kansas.” When Brown received word of the caning in Washington, according to his son Jason, “it seemed to be the finishing, decisive touch.” Brown told his supporters, “I am entirely tired of hearing that word ‘caution.’ It is nothing but the word of cowardice.”

He and his followers perpetrated the Pottawatomie Massacre on the night of May 24th.

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/johnbrown/brownaccount.html