Milwaukee Police Chief Edward Flynn calls Walker's Concealed Carry Bill "reckless and foolish"

[PeaceNikki]

http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/123042228.html

MILWAUKEE - Milwaukee Police Chief Edward Flynn and Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm vigorously opposed the concealed carry legislation currently being considered in Madison during a news conference on Milwaukee's north side Thursday.

Chief Flynn called the measure "reckless and foolish" as well as "chaotic."

The chief, speaking from the site of an officer involved shooting near 39th and Clarke, called for Gov. Walker to take leadership on the issue.

"We cannot afford a reckless bill," he said. "The D.A. and I are both calling for a bill that has a strict permitting process that keeps criminals and substance abusers away from dangerous weapons and that makes it a felony crime to carry a weapon without a permit."

2 officers were involved in a running shoot-out last night and Chief Flynn is pissed.

[Scuba]

1. Think they regret endorsing this asshat yet?

[PeaceNikki]

2. Yes.

Some were helping collect recall signatures.

Part of me is very glad while the other part is thinking "HOW THE FUCK DID YOU NOT KNOW WHAT THIS FUCKER WOULD DO!?!?!?"

[roguevalley]

9. redemption is the way. they won't be fooled by this again.

[PeaceNikki]

11. Agreed and when faced with the inner conflict, I do come back to this.

[roguevalley]

15. agreed. we all should get a second chance. Lovely picture, :)

[PeaceNikki]

17. Thanks, yours, too!

:)

[krispos42]

46. Well, the Repubes usually act in a slower and more deceitful manner

Behind the smokescreen of the RW noise machine, for example.


Walker's problem from a PR standpoint is not that he did what he did, he did it too quickly and publicly. He's a fuckstick, that's for certain.

[gejohnston]

47. my understanding is that none of these people ran on or mentioned it

That simple. If the media in Florida would have thought to mention Scott's legal problems before the day after the election, he would not have gotten the 49 percent that he did.

[Kingofalldems]

3. Here they come...

:popcorn:

[Cid_B]

4. What a strangely written article...

Maybe the author assumes that the reader has more background information already...

[PeaceNikki]

5. Likely. The shootout has been all over.

This one goes into more detail: http://www.jsonline.com/news/crime/123048453.html

[Cid_B]

7. Yeah..

Found a bit more. Chief Flynn is attempting to associate legal gun owners with criminals who run at the sight of law enforcement and then draw down.

I realize Wisconsin is a bit late to the party but the idea of CCW gun battles in the streets didn't come to pass. This is what happens when your state is behind the curve. You have to go through growing pains that everyone else is already through.

[PeaceNikki]

10. The two are not mutually exclusive.

[PavePusher]

18. The overlap is so rare as to be statistically meaningless. n/t

[cleanhippie]

42. Uh, yeah, they are.

Unless you have some evidence that proves otherwise.....


feel free to share it.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

6. Poorly written at best

[ProgressiveProfessor]

8. Other police chiefs have said they have no problem with it which is not surprising

There is law enforcement on both sides of the issue.

The gun battle last night has nothing to do with the issues since the perps were thugs who should not have had access to firearms to begin with.

[PeaceNikki]

12. With the Wisconsin Bill?

Nah, most Law Enforcement here thinks it sucks.

http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/article_51ab9882-7aa4-11e0-84c4-001cc4c002e0.html

[eqfan592]

19. Your article says nothing about "most"...

...believing one way or another, unless I missed something. It simply reiterates that some "think it sucks" as you put it. What is interesting is that with all the hand wringing you see about how "irresponsible" constitutional carry is, you don't really see them pointing to any evidence from the several states that already allow it to back up this statement.

What is funny about the first article you published is the police chief is worried about felons carrying firearms. That act would continue to remain illegal, even with constitutional carry. To suggest that it wouldn't means he is either ignorant of the law proposed, or is intentionally misrepresenting the law to gain political points.

Really though, the dems in Wisconsin have brought this on themselves by urging Gov. Doyle to veto the two previous shall issue permit laws that were passed. Had those been in place, it is unlikely that anybody would be talking about constitutional carry now.

EDIT: I noticed that in the original article he wasn't complaining about felons carrying, simply "criminals and substance abusers." Well, in a shall issue system, unless they were previously convicted of a crime that would bar them from owning a firearm, they would qualify for a concealed carry permit anyway. So really constitutional carry does the exact same thing, just without the permit, as it would still be illegal for people who wouldn't qualify under a shall issue system to carry a concealed firearm (hell, it'd be illegal for them to own one, much less conceal one).

[PeaceNikki]

20. Many support concealed carry, but not this bill. Get your Google on and find more than 2 that do.

In its reckless form.

[eqfan592]

23. To be frank...

..I don't base my opinion of the sanity of a law only on the opinion of a specific special interest group, especially police chiefs as they tend to have a very slanted view when it comes to the issue of concealed carry. As I stated in my post, nowhere have I seen them pointing to evidence to support their claims that constitutional carry is somehow "reckless" and this is because no such evidence exist. It has worked fine in the several states that allow it. The only thing it affects are people who would have been legal to carry under the permit system by removing the fees required to get a permit. Those who would have been unable to get a permit in a shall carry system will still be breaking the law by carrying a firearm even in a constitutional carry system. Training programs have not proven to decrease the accident rate among those who carry in states that require it. Really, I fail to see the "recklessness" at all.

[PeaceNikki]

24. lol

noted, frank.

[eqfan592]

36. I am serious...

..and don't call me Shirley..... ;)

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

43. Surely you can't be serious.

:thumbsup:

[Euromutt]

54. You touch upon an interesting point

Really though, the dems in Wisconsin have brought this on themselves by urging Gov. Doyle to veto the two previous shall issue permit laws that were passed. Had those been in place, it is unlikely that anybody would be talking about constitutional carry now.

So is the legislation for permitless carry perhaps simply political maneuvering, which the object of making the CLEOs and the governor accede to a "shall issue" CCW permit system lest they be forced to accept something even less palatable to them?

[ladjf]

13. Way to go Chief. Would you be interested in running for Governor next time?

[eqfan592]

21. The Chief clearly lacks an understanding of the bills in question...

...and this is born out by his statements. Either that or he is simply misrepresenting the truth intentionally.

People that cannot own a firearm legally will still be breaking the law by carrying a firearm even in a constitutional carry system. The Chief should know and understand this.

Really though, all we have to do is look to the other states where constitutional carry is already legal to see that such claims of "recklessness" with such a program are clearly unfounded.

[slackmaster]

14. "Flynn is also requesting a provision... ...that would make straw purchases illegal."

Straw purchases of firearms are already illegal under federal law.

[PeaceNikki]

16. Here's more on that

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/91935479.html
Straw buying is a felony under federal law but a misdemeanor under Wisconsin law. The bill would have made it a state felony. It failed.

[petronius]

22. Is it common that people are only charged by the state for straw purchases?

I suppose a federal prosecutor would need to step in, but it seems like it should be almost automatic...

[slackmaster]

26. Prosecutions for straw purchases are about as rare as hens' teeth

They're very hard to detect.

[petronius]

29. Interesting - is it because proving the intent is so difficult?

I would imagine that the pattern is the same at both the state and federal levels, then...

[slackmaster]

33. "Are you the actual purchaser of the firearm(s)?"

It's easy to lie on the paperwork, and later to say you bought the gun as a gift (which is legal in most states.)

[PavePusher]

48. Or just claim to have not liked it as much as you thought you would... n/t

Pretty much all the questions on the form are a complete joke, since they run your name against the system anyway.

[spin]

34. Obviously that needs to change ...

Perhaps if the ATF would stop smuggling guns to Mexico and actually work on catching straw purchasers we could reduce the number of illegal guns on our streets.

[PeaceNikki]

27. Only a handful per year tried in Federal Court

http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/63459407.html

[petronius]

30. Unfortunate. Is there a reason to think state prosecutors would be more inclined

to file the charges, or more successful in getting convictions?

[PeaceNikki]

31. I don't know, really. That is a question that crossed my mind, too.

[gejohnston]

25. so why not just send them to federal court?

Can't the locals call the ATF to come and take their happy asses away? Seriously, we have federal gun control laws since the 1930s (not counting the Uniform Pistol Act of 1927, which was pointless) and they are half assed enforced and rarely prosecuted. Especially is being a felon in possession. Local DAs make it disappear. I say we do something sane, and the one thing NRA and Brady Bunch actually agree with and send all federal gun crimes to federal court.
Rip off a gas station with a sawed offed shotgun or submachine gun? Locals get to for the robbery, then to federal prison for the gun. Felon in possession, same thing. We can make room by pardoning everyone in for pot use.

[PeaceNikki]

28. Here:

http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/63459407.html

Federal law also prohibits anyone from selling guns to felons and others prohibited from owning a gun including a straw buyer. But there have been no such cases filed in Milwaukee in at least five years. Prosecutors said that's because they are such hard cases to prove.

Straw buy cases aren't easy and often depend on ATF agents getting a confession.


The straw buyers issue is what the subthread is discussing. Those buyers are not felons before being busted. There are efforts to make it a felony so that they become one, too.

[gejohnston]

32. I know, get that but is

the state going to a better job? If they do, I'm all for it. But then again, I don't think any state agency that could be as screwed up as ATF.

[one-eyed fat man]

52. US Attorney has a lot of discretion

Oddly enough, the US Attorney for the area has wide discretion on what he will prosecute. In 1994 a couple of juveniles from town were caught red-handed planting marijuana on back corner of our farm. They were detained and held for the sheriff. Besides their stash of seedlings and Miracle-Gro, the little bastards had a .357 revolver and a sawed off shotgun.

As the wheels of justice ground, I recall the letter from the US Attorney for the Western District of Kentucky the Sheriff showed me. The germane part was "...absent aggravating circumstances, the policy of this office is not to prosecute, under the National Firearms Act, a simple possession..." As long as the illegal firearm had been seized by the law, he was not going to pursue the case.

As a result, they were charged with possessing a "defaced firearm" under State law and got "ninety days." Less than two years later, the same maggot kid, with a "new" sawed-off shotgun, killed a rival drug dealer in the parking lot of the skating rink. Seventeen this time, he was charged as an adult.

Makes you want to sing!

[jpak]

35. Stupid GOP/NRA gun laws have gone too far - the backlash cometh

yup

[eqfan592]

37. Yes, the backlash in the form...

...of Wisconsin becoming a concealed carry state.....that makes TOTAL sense. Nope, the backlash has been going on for some time now, but it's not against the NRA, but the Brady Campaign. You can only lie so much before people start to figure out how full of it you are.

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[petronius]

40. Shouldn't you be preparing your daily Google-dump, rather than nattering

on about imaginary backlashes? :shrug:

[benEzra]

41. This *IS* the backlash. Doyle twice vetoed CCW proposals with strict licensure requirements. n/t

[gejohnston]

44. Nope, so can you and Shares get one of those Tavors from Canada?

[rl6214]

45. You keep posting this idiotic tripe and you just might believe it.

Wait, you already do.

:rolf:

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TPaine7]

49. So?

[Tejas]

50. The governor of Wisconsin authored this bill?

Milwaukee Police Chief Edward Flynn calls Walker's Concealed Carry Bill "reckless and foolish"




I did not know that.

[DonP]

51. I don't think he did but it gets everybody riled up easier

He may have promised he'd sign it, but I doubt he actually drafted the bill. But using his name will get a lot of less informed people all upset and opposing it, with no idea what it actually says.

[ManiacJoe]

53. Is this the bill being discussed?

http://www.legis.state.wi.us/2011/data/AB-126.pdf