Federal Court Rules Open Carrying Disorderly

[Guest redbarron06]

GCO member Jesus Gonzalez’ federal lawsuit in Wisconsin was dismissed after the judge granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. In his lawsuit, Gonzalez challenged his arrest in two separate incidents for disorderly conduct when openly carrying in retail stores. The court found no specific disorderly conduct on Gonzalez’ part, but went on to observe:

“No reasonable person would dispute that walking into a retail store openly carrying a firearm is highly disruptive conduct which is virtually certain to create a disturbance. This is so because when employees and shoppers in retail stores see a person carrying a lethal weapon, they are likely to be frightened and possibly even panicky. many employees and shoppers are likely to think that the person with the gun is either deranged or about to commit a felony or both. Further, it is almost certain that someone will call the police. And when police respond to a “man with a gun†call, they have no idea what the armed individual’s intentions are. The volatility in such a situation could easily lead to someone being seriously injured or killed.â€

A copy of the order can be found here.

I guess that court forgot what bearing arms is about.

[Guest jackdm3]

I don't OC, and for some reason, I don't get harrassed, arrested or charged. Go figure. I'd love to fight the good fight, but I've seen no true reason/benefit.

[BlackHawk93]

This is ridiculous. I OFTEN see off duty LEO's openly carrying. No one panics. No one freaks out. If someone were going to go in and rob the place, 1) they are not going to go in and walk around with their weapon in a holster. 2) they certainly don't want anyone else to even KNOW they have a gun, so if the DO come in they are going to rob the place RIGHT THEN. 3) If they ARE there when the police arrive, if the LEO handles the situation like he's been trained, and the person uses common sense, then there should be no danger. It's ridiculous to see judges make statements or rulings like these with such little proof this EVER happens.

[Guest Ae-35]

I don't OC, and for some reason, I don't get harassed, arrested or charged. Go figure. I'd love to fight the good fight, but I've seen no true reason/benefit.

Amen, agree on the "right" not on the "judgment", OC should be just that "out in the open" not in buildings or stores , open carry in confined areas, can and does cause fear in a minority of the public, even more so to people in higher populated towns and cities, and those from the communist north.

[Guest bubruins]

As easy as it is to blame the courts, I think that it's also important to consider how we as a society have gotten to the point that people are genuinely scared of people OCing. The courts decided this case based on what a "reasonable person" would think. While that is extremely subjective, it says something about how the this district court in particular views an average "reasonable person's" fear of Open Carry in public.

Although few people on these boards would get scared if they saw some law abiding citizen OCing, I think that it's fair to say that many people do get scared. Why is this? What causes them to get scared? I know of one instance when I was working at an auto parts store that a guy came in with a g26 OWB with his tshirt tucked into his jeans. I was the only employee (of five working) that didn't flip out. We can't blame the courts for everything.

[Guest Letereat!]

12

Edited May 14, 2010 by Letereat!

[kb4ns]

Its the regular Joe with the Big gun strapped to his belt that makes people edgie, understandably so with the constant news coverage of some wacko blasting away at random or not so randomely in public at unarmed people going peacefully about their lives.

Sadly, it's this way. Doesn't mean it should be, though.

[Guest truthsayer]

via commenter hsoi at Http://snarkybytes.com

“No reasonable person would dispute that a black man walking into a retail store is highly disruptive conduct which is virtually certain to create a disturbance. This is so because when employees and shoppers in retail stores see a black person, they are likely to be frightened and possibly even panicky. many employees and shoppers are likely to think that the black person is either deranged or about to commit a felony or both. Further, it is almost certain that someone will call the police. And when police respond to a “black man” call, they have no idea what the black individual’s intentions are. The volatility in such a situation could easily lead to someone being seriously injured or killed.”

Kinda fails the test, doesn't it?

[kb4ns]

Kinda fails the test, doesn't it?

Yes it does!

[Fallguy]

Hmmmm...

Well there is another Federal Court Ruling out of NM that said OCing was not enough probable cause to detain someone. Now that is because OC without a permit is legal in NM.

So I guess one thing to keep in mind is most of the time these are state casses that have reached the federal level and any decision is based on the state law...which of course is different from state to state.

But regardless the statement from this judge is just dumb...

[aquaman67]

The same guy in this case was just involved in a fatal shooting.

Gun buff charged in fatal shooting - JSOnline

[Oh Shoot]

Now that is because OC without a permit is legal in NM. ....

Apparently, it's not illegal in Wisconsin, at least on state level.

Indeed, it's listed as an "open carry friendly" state at opencarry.org.

"Open carry permitted by state law without license, but either lacks preemption or does not allow unlicensed open carry inside a vehicle."

- OS

[Fallguy]

Apparently, it's not illegal in Wisconsin, at least on state level.

Indeed, it's listed as an "open carry friendly" state at opencarry.org.

"Open carry permitted by state law without license, but either lacks preemption or does not allow unlicensed open carry inside a vehicle."

- OS

I think you're right....but there has been a much different attitude about it up there.

I believe the AG up there issued an opinion about OC and one Chief of Police said he didn't care his officers would still stop and "take down" anyone with a firearm.

[Oh Shoot]

I think you're right....but there has been a much different attitude about it up there.

I believe the AG up there issued an opinion about OC and one Chief of Police said he didn't care his officers would still stop and "take down" anyone with a firearm.

Yeah, I remember that from reading other forums.

Shows ya what's it's likely worth when Robert Cooper issues an opinion here, eh?

- OS

[Fallguy]

Yeah, I remember that from reading other forums.

Shows ya what's it's likely worth when Robert Cooper issues an opinion here, eh?

- OS

Yep...

This also show what "...shall not be infringed" is apparently worth in many areas.

[DaveTN]

via commenter hsoi at Http://snarkybytes.com

“No reasonable person would dispute that a black man walking into a retail store is highly disruptive conduct which is virtually certain to create a disturbance. This is so because when employees and shoppers in retail stores see a black person, they are likely to be frightened and possibly even panicky. many employees and shoppers are likely to think that the black person is either deranged or about to commit a felony or both. Further, it is almost certain that someone will call the police. And when police respond to a “black man†call, they have no idea what the black individual’s intentions are. The volatility in such a situation could easily lead to someone being seriously injured or killed.â€

Kinda fails the test, doesn't it?

I don’t know. Are all Black Men banned by state law from entering a retail store and only a special group of Black Men allowed to do so?

[Guest faust921]

First, it is not the role of municipal ayatollahs to reinterpret the second amendment.

Second, instead of an inside and pointless debate on the tactical merit of OC, it is not the core issue and I suggest that the real objective (and original intent of our founding fathers) is "no permit". Do you think that the colonialists had a debate if their Kentucky rifles should be hidden lest the British take offense. The reason you have OC is so if your concealed gun prints, you cannot be charged with a crime.

The bigger issue is what role do we allow our government to have regarding the private ownership of firearms. We are citizens, not subjects. The government exists for our benefit not the other way around. Our government should be of the People, not the elites. We are forgetting this and if we do not vote this mentality out of our government we deserve what we get. We are running out of chances to fix the entitlement quagmire we are sinking into. Our demographics are working against us and the concept of being a citizen and taking responsibility instead of a lump of government cheese is being purposefully corroded by public schools, the NEA, universities and socialists in our midst. Their ideas and agendas need to be exposed and ridiculed but I digress...

Finally, why should my name, address, gun purchase records and money, ect go to a government for 2A "rights" when I don't have to have a permit to have 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th amendment rights. I don't have to pay to vote, why is it OK to make me pay to carry?

Take a page out of the gun hater's playbook.

1. Gun hater's litigate their agendas, when they can't legislate them. Heller will do more for gun rights than hundreds of local elections. We can and will do both.

2. Gun hater's personalize issues, and offer anecdotes when the numbers say otherwise. In our cause we have both on our side.

3. Gun hater's control the language of the argument "gun in bars" should have been "guns in cars" because that's where they get left when the owner can take them along. We are not where we need to be in language.

4. The Chattanooga City council needs to be confronted with the recent park shootings and asked tough questions. Why did police fail to respond? How many police responded? When did they respond? What did they do? Isn't this proof that Chattanooga parks are not safe? It's time to prohibit "unarmed victim zones" in our parks.

[DaveTN]

First, it is not the role of municipal ayatollahs to reinterpret the second amendment.

Our founding fathers put in place a system to address Constitutional issues. That has been done.

The bigger issue is what role do we allow our government to have regarding the private ownership of firearms. We are citizens, not subjects. The government exists for our benefit not the other way around. Our government should be of the People, not the elites.

Do you want to put carry to a vote? I don’t, the average person doesn’t think you need to carry; concealed or otherwise.

You just saw a President elected that openly said he wanted all semi-automatic weapons banned. Those of us that carry are a small minority; if “the people†get what they want we are in trouble.

Edited May 17, 2010 by DaveTN

[byrnemm]

As easy as it is to blame the courts, I think that it's also important to consider how we as a society have gotten to the point that people are genuinely scared of people OCing.

I think most of society has felt this way about people openly armed with firearms since the 1800s.. or further back.

Nothing is comfortable about seeing a stranger with a deadly weapon when you don't have one.

The fact that we are comfortable with police and military openly carrying weapons is a tribute to our society for producing trustworthy civil servants. It sure hasn't always been that way.

[eapking]

It took a long time to get this country's head where it is concerning OC'ing. It's going to take a long time to turn that feeling around.

[Spiffy]

This is my take on OC and public perception. In our father's youth all the TV shows were westerns. Everyone wore a gun unless they were the reformed outlaw or preacher or deacon who didn't believe in killin ... and we know how those story lines played out.

We as kids got to play with toy guns and run around screaming BANG! playing ...... Cowboys and Indians.

Somewhere along the way the gritty real life (yeah right) Hollywood cops and robbers came along as the big TV shows. Most were men our father's age with snub nose wheel guns or a 1911 (Magnum PI). So it set the stage for Cops have guns and the bad guys have guns. The average extra on the set didn't get a fake gun to wear under their coat.

This all starts to make sense when you see that a section of people think only Cops and Soldiers should have guns. Because this is all they ever see as good guys on TV with guns.

If there is a great conspiracy to disarm America......... and I think there is for bibical reasons....... this is a major part of it. Popular media sets what we think of as reasonable..... agree or not it does. Rap songs are full of Thugs with Glocks and AKs.

[Fallguy]

The fact that we are comfortable with police and military openly carrying weapons is a tribute to our society for producing trustworthy civil servants. It sure hasn't always been that way.

It's not 100% that way now.......

and absent any evidence to the contrary I'm not sure why I should be deemed any less or any more trustworthy than any other individual regardless of what they may be wearing...

[Guest Jamie]

The problem is that OC isn't commonly accepted everywhere. Some places, nobody thinks anything of it, others, it causes quite a stir.

I can OC around here all I want, and not even get a second look. If I try it any number of other places, I'll likely have a bit of explaining to do.

That's just how it is.

So I guess that in the end, what we need most is some consistency on the subject, with everyone understanding that a visible firearm isn't likely to be the end of the world.

I'm not gonna wait for it to happen though.

J.

Edited May 18, 2010 by Jamie

[Guest rsgillmd]

The problem is that OC isn't commonly accepted everywhere. Some places, nobody thinks anything of it, others, it causes quite a stir.....

J.

Jamie, as the saying goes, I think you've hit the nail on the head. To those that get upset at the sight of a weapon, ignorance is bliss. They want to live with their heads buried in the sand.

Except in the movies, I have not heard of criminals openly carrying. If they want to commit a crime, they tend to conceal the weapons until the last moment.

People wearing baggy clothes or clothes with strange bulges would worry me more than people carrying openly. So this judge that said open carry is disruptive is just acknowledging the ignorant people in society.

[gotigers]

By that ruling the judge gave, if i saw a young man walking with a baseball bat,i should call the law. He might be doing something illegal with it. A bat can be considered a weapon.

Oops, the kid was walking to a baseball game. My bad.

The judge is making a legal act punishable. Total BS.