"Wisconsin EYE" has round table discussion of Madison 5 w/police chief !

[Bold Lib]

Video:
http://www.wiseye.org/

IMO the chief seems to be talking in circles. If he ever has to take the stand to defend his position a good trial lawyer will eat his lunch.(just my opinion)

[S_B_Jackson]

1. I wonder if the police chief would be as supportive of citing the Madison 5

if the people who had called in had been complaining of 5 black men in the same restaurant who "make them feel uncomfortable". Would he support his officers' ticketing of them? What if the 5 men had been 5 gays who had engaged in light kissing or other PDAs which in a heterosexual couple would be considered "acceptable"?

Methinks that the city of Madison is going to lose that lawsuit which has been filed against them....only question is, how much $$$ is it going to cost them? I'm predicting it's going to be about 5x the annual average salary of a police officer at minimum.

[HelenWheels]

2. Makes me angry

I would have felt very threatened if five men came into a public restaurant with guns on their hips. If I had been there I would have called the police. What other reason would these men strut around packing if not to intimidate? The Madison 5 should have been ticketed for disturbing the peace.

[oneshooter]

3. They broke no law, they were simply eating a meal.

They did not handle the firearms while there, did not raise their voices. Does the mear appearance of a firearm frighten you?
Are you afraid of Police? Afraid of a Security Guard?

If they were carrying concealed would you still be afraid?

Why should your phobias over rule law?

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[reggie the dog]

6. I think WI is a state with no carry concealed law

though i could be wrong

[Glassunion]

4. MSU much?

"What other reason would these men strut around packing if not to intimidate?"
How about they just carry for self defense?
Do the police strut around packing to intimidate? Remember, they are not some sort of super humans. The police are people, just like you and me and these 5 men. No difference.

"The Madison 5 should have been ticketed for disturbing the peace."
Why? They did not disturb the peace at all. Just because you "feel" uncomfortable does not mean that someone is disturbing the peace.

What if I am in an establishment eating with my family, and 5 Skin-heads show up? Do I call the police just because their presence makes me uncomfortable? What would you have the police do in that situation?

Again, SBJ did raise some good points, none of which you answered.

Also, why does this make you angry? Do you get angered when a police officer shows up to have dinner in a public place? Should that officer have left their firearm in their car?

[HelenWheels]

13. Must every one carry

Who are they defending themselves in a family restaurant? So the 5 perceive every place and person as a threat they must defend themselves from? I knew I would get flamed if I dare say any thing negative about guns. Why is this country so gun crazy?

[X_Digger]

15. Google "Luby's Massacre". n/t

[Euromutt]

26. And "San Ysidro McDonald's massacre"

Also "Brown's Chicken massacre."

[SteveM]

22. Some misconceptions here...

"Whgo are they defending themselves in a family restaurant?" There have been "family restaurants" in which thugs/sociopaths have decided to engage in the slaughter of unarmed people. Do you need examples?

"Why is this country so gun crazy?" I don't see it that way. There are between 35% and 40% of Americans who own or who have access to firearms, a figure which hasn't changed much in the last 10 years. The "craziness" you refer to may be the solid and immensely effective push back Second Amendment defenders have engage in. That push back would probably not have occurred had it not been for the gun-control organizations and their rather "crazy" outlook toward gun-owners (over 80,000,000 of us). See: Kates and Kleck, "The Great American Gun Debate," for examples of the bathroom-wall culture war expressions gun-controllers/prohibitionists engaged in. You may wish to read "American Rifle" as well.

"So the 5 perceive every place and person as a threat..." Who says so? Only a very few engage in violent crime (almost always repeat violent felons who for some reason or other are free to walk the streets); I rather suspect these 5 people were carrying for the slim chance some thug might come in for some "juice."

"I knew I would get flamed..." Sounds like you got a head start setting fires. Have I been disrespectful?

[HelenWheels]

19. There is a difference

The police are trained in the use of guns. As far as skin-heads, why should they frighten me? Is every man with a shaved head a Skin-head?
I still maintain they are very threatening as there is no reason 5 men should enter a family restaurant armed.

[PavePusher]

23. Using your own reasoning...

Is every person with a gun a threat/criminal-in-waiting?

[Glassunion]

24. "As far as skin-heads, why should they frighten me?"

From my perspective they intimidate me. I'm not saying every man with a shaved head is a skin head...

What I am saying is if these 5 men walked into a dining establishment while I was eating, I would feel bothered by their presence:


However if these 5 men did, I would not:


I have reason to be bothered by real skin-heads. I'm black and they do not take kindly to me. However, that is my problem. If they come into the same place and sit down and order a meal, they are not disturbing the peace, and I have no reason to contact the police. If I don't like it, I can get my ass up and leave.

[spin]

30. The police are trained in the use of guns???

Some police might be but most qualify on a yearly basis and a high percentage are not extremely good at shooting.

Many gun owners who are regular shooters could out shoot most police on a police qualification course.

Police do have a lot more training than most gun owners but much of the training deals with eventualities that a person carrying a firearm for self defense will never face. People who carry openly or concealed are not police nor are they vigilantes.

As to why the men openly carried firearms into the restaurant you have to look at Wisconsin gun laws. Open carry is legal but concealed carry is not.

It is now 2010, and Wisconsin is one of only two states that completely prohibits anyone but police officers and sheriffs' deputies from carrying concealed weapons for self defense.
http://www.wisconsinconcealedcarry.com/

How would you have felt if five men walked into a restaurant where you were dining with legally concealed weapons? My guess is that if you knew they were carrying concealed you would be just as upset as you are with the five individuals carrying openly. Of course, you wouldn't know as the weapons are concealed.

As to why a person would carry in a restaurant, restaurants have been targets of mass murderers. Also a person has to walk to and from his vehicle to get into the restaurant. Parking lots often are dangerous places.

Another point to consider is that if a person with a concealed carry permit decides to not carry in the restaurant, he has to leave his weapon in his car where it may be stolen. There is always an increased chance of an accident involving a firearm when holstering or unholstering it. My concealed weapon goes with me when I dine out.

[merqz]

39. You don't get to determine that

in an open state jurisdiction, NOBODY is required to establish any NEED or reason to open carry. PER-I-OD.

The cops need REASONABLE SUSPICION that criminal activity is occurring, has occurred, or is about to occur in order to take the actions they did. Since open carry is legal in that jurisdiction, what "facts and circumstances" did they have to reasonably suspect that criminal activity was afoot? None

You can be threatened by a woman in burqa. You can call police. But if they act upon your complaint of being threatened by terry'ing the individual, they are violating the law. JUST like in this case

[X_Digger]

5. Fortunately, the law doesn't depend on people's 'feelings'. n/t

[oneshooter]

7. Are you willing to pay when the lawsuit goes against the city?

San Diego just lost a similar suit. To the tune of $35,000. How much are you willing to pony up when the suit goes against the city?
The arrests were illegal, the Police Dept will be sued and YOU as a taxpayer will pay.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[PavePusher]

8. You seem to be the only one disturbing the peace here.

Angry? Over the peaceful, quiet, modest exercise of Civil Rights? Not very Progressive, eh?

P.S. No-one was "strut<ing> around packing" and there was no "intimidation". You do your argument no good by making things up.

[benEzra]

9. They were probably carrying openly because

Wisconsin is one of only two states that does not allow licensed concealed carry. In Wisconsin, if someone wishes to carry a firearm for lawful purposes (as millions of people do peaceably every day in other states, including places like Massachusetts), the law requires that it be carried openly and in full view of everyone. I and a lot of others feel that is a rather ill-advised and counterproductive law, but that's the way it is in WI.

[reggie the dog]

10. ah they can carry but in plain view

in illinois you cant even do that. it is true that in most states carry concealed is the way. I am sure that many times law abiding people around me have been carrying guns but i never saw them because law allowed them to be concealed.

[Pavulon]

11. Just like the black folks at the lunch counter

I am sure the white folks "felt" something too. Luckily emotion is not legislated.

[proteus_lives]

12. People's rights intimidate you.

Sorry but scared is no way to go through life.

[HelenWheels]

14. Who's scared?

Seems to me the ones who are scared are the ones carrying guns.

[oneshooter]

17. Are you willing to help pay for the lawsuits that the city will lose? n/t

[S Calawag]

18. It looked like you would have been scared, you said you would feel 'threatened'

how can you feel threatened without feeling fear?

[brendan120678]

21. You said yourself...

"I would have felt very threatened if five men came into a public restaurant with guns on their hips."
Link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x342270#342291

[proteus_lives]

25. Have you asked them?

That might help.

You could ask them why they're practicing OC.

You might conquer a little of that irrational fear as well.

[S_B_Jackson]

16. Why should it make you angry?

The men were in FULL compliance with Wisconsin laws, which prohibit concealed carry of a firearm but that explicitly authorize the open carry of a gun. They were not brandishing them, simply ordering and then eating their food. Do you find yourself threatened when eating at a restaurant if you encounter a police office with a gun on his/her hip?

The woman who called, when informed by the 911 operator that open carry of a firearm is legal and asked if the men were creating a disturbance, said "no, they're not. Don't send the police."

What reason could they have for carrying a firearm? Perhaps they are in the habit of carrying significant amounts of money on their persons, perhaps they live or work in a high-crime area of Madison. Self-defense seems a perfectly valid rationale which requires no other justification. Or perhaps, they were asserting their rights as lawful Wisconsin citizens to openly carry a firearm as a political statement which SHOULD be covered by both the 1st and 2nd Amendments to the US Constitution by which the states, and its subordinate governmental entities must abide.

The men were not disturbing the peace, were doing nothing to inconvenience or discomfit others by their ACTIONS - there was no rationale for citing them for anything. The lawsuit which has been filed should be successful, and the city of Madison will likely be paying several thousand dollars (multiplied by 5) for their unlawful citation of these men. Money which, in these times, I'm sure could have been better spent elsewhere.

[SteveM]

20. Social policy in this country is too affected by "feelings..."

There is no evidence that anyone "disturbed the peace," only that someone "felt" intimidated or threatened by people carrying on normally while wearing guns.

What other reason other than intimidation, you ask? I would think to challenge the laws of Wisconsin and the ordinances of Madison. I believe Wisconsin still prohibits concealed-carry; so how else can a person keep and BEAR arms? Looks like an inconsistency in the laws, and flimsy grounds for prosecution in any case. The action by the open-carry citizens revealed all this. Either allow concealed-carry, or put up with open-carry. If Madison pushes the issue, they may get both.

[HelenWheels]

28. The end result

of all of this is: if I walk into a business and there are several with guns I will turn, go out and not spend any money in that establishment. So I guess you would say those with guns win.

[Bold Lib]

29. And some do the same when they walk into a restaurant and see black people.

Civil rights are civil rights. Unfortunately it sometimes takes a generation to get prejudices out of a culture.

[spin]

31. That's your choice ...

and why I personally believe that legal concealed carry is the best way to go.

If you travel to Florida and journey around the state you will be in close contact with people carry concealed weapons on a fairly frequent basis. Currently there are 754,548 valid Florida concealed weapons permits, plus Florida recognizes the carry permits from many other states as legal in Florida.

If Floridians walked around carrying openly, the tourist business might be hurt. That's probably one reason Florida does not allow open carry.

[HelenWheels]

33. Open carry better

I'd like to know which people to avoid.

[oneshooter]

34. If they were concealed would you avoid everybody?

Because you couldn't tell then all are suspect.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[Bold Lib]

35. What if they painted their guns white? Would that be less offensive to you?

[PavePusher]

36. You want us to make your practice of bigotry easier?

Really?

Any other group you want to pin a scarlet A or gold star on?

[spin]

40. That could be a mistake ...

the guys carrying a firearm openly are not criminals. Criminals conceal their weapons as do people with concealed carry licenses.

The only people carrying a weapon that you need to worry about are the criminals. If you feel safe because you don't see any weapons on the people near you, you might find yourself a very surprised victim.

[Abq_Sarah]

42. I would call it a win for the Constitution

And the rights of the people.

The only person who "loses" in this situation is the person throwing the fit over their inability to control their law abiding fellow citizens.

[Euromutt]

27. The whole point of the "open carry" movement is to NOT intimidate

First, it needs to be made clear that the "open carry" movement is not the same as the yahoos who showed up packing while protesting outside Obama's "town hall" meetings last summer. In fact, those displays set the open carry movement back severely, and they harbor quite a bit of resentment over that.

The objective of the open carry movement is to normalize the idea that private citizens may carry firearms for the purpose of self-defense without calling attention to it, or trying to intimidate anyone except prospective criminal assailants. One of the leading figures in the movement here in Washington state is a gay man who decided when he came out that he didn't want to stay in the closet regarding any aspect of his life.

It should be noted, moreover, that Article I, Section 25 of the state constitution of Wisconsin explicitly acknowledges that citizens have a right to carry firearms for self-defense. Since Wisconsin does not permit concealed carry, that must needs be open carry. I have a serious issue with charging someone with something as vaguely defined as "disorderly conduct" or "disturbing the peace" for doing something that the state constitution explicitly states they have a right to do.

[merqz]

38. The issue, much like in my state

is that it doesn't matter what you FEEL, it matters if your feelings or suspicions are objectively reasonable. In a state where open carry is legal, it is objectively unreasonable. That's the case in my state, fwiw. You can FEEL threatened by a man with a "The End of the World is Nigh" sign who is preaching about armageddon. You can feel threatened by people of a certain race, or a certain style of dress. All of these are expressions of fundamental rights and your feelings are irrelevant to the terry standard which is the standard that the cops need to actually stop and question people.

[pneutin]

41. Wouldn't calling the police bring five more men with guns on their hips?

So let me get this straight...you would have felt threatened by five men coming into a restaurant with guns on their hip, so you would have called the police which would bring five more men with guns? And you are ok with the police strutting around packing for the sole reason of intimidating? :crazy::crazy::crazy:

[PavePusher]

32. For the life of me....

I can not understand how sitting down and eating a meal peacefully qualifies as D.C.

And I don't understand why this Chief has not abjectly apologized in order to at least try to avoid the law suit. Good faith gestures can go a long way...

[X_Digger]

37. An interesting segment there in the middle...

.. talking about the "heckler's veto"-like consequence of broad application of "disturbing the peace" in these cases. (Which would be an unconstitutional abridgment of people's rights.)

If all it took to reach the chief's "totality of circumstances" as reasonable suspicion to charge with disturbing the peace is a couple of calls to the non-emergency line with folks saying they were uncomfortable with these guys who have guns but aren't threatening anyone.. then you're basically saying that the "heckler" gets to decide what rights are exercised.

It certainly doesn't fly with the first amendment, it won't with the second, either.