Madison WI City Attorney drops disorderly conduct charges against 5 open carry

[RamboLiberal]

Upon further review of an incident involving openly carried firearms in public, the city attorney dropped disorderly conduct charges Thursday that were filed against five individuals last September.

Wisconsin Carry, Inc., a right to carry activist group, released a statement announcing the dropped charges Thursday. According to the statement, Chris Van Wagner, the group’s attorney, informed WCI of the news after he heard word from the city attorney.

“The Madison City Attorney agreed after a full review of the investigation and 911 call that there was absolutely no disturbance created by our members and the disorderly conduct citations were inappropriate,” Van Wagner said in the statement.

WCI filed a lawsuit against Madison Police Department Chief Noble Wray and the City of Madison on Sept. 29, 2010, over the disorderly conduct charges and MPD’s subsequent press release, WCI president Nik Clark said.

http://badgerherald.com/news/2011/05/05/city_drops_charges_i.php

[jpak]

1. idiots

yup

[RamboLiberal]

3. They were within their rights under Wisconsin law

The idiots were the cops who charged them and the city attorney who allowed such charges.

yup it doesn't fit your agenda. When it comes to lawful guns you think the law should be like a dictatorship.

[Hoyt]

21. Being "lawful" doesn't make it right, moral, or anything else.

[lawodevolution]

22. People say this about sex, sex toys, and homosexuality also.

[Hoyt]

23. We are not talking about pleasurable things -- we are talking about packing guns in public.

Hope you can see the difference.

[Euromutt]

24. Some people don't see those things as merely "pleasurable"

There are people who are of the opinion that sex toys, homosexuality, the works of James Joyce and D.H. Lawrence, and atheists openly stating they're atheists threaten to shred the fabric of society and plunge us all into chaotic anomie (what Islam calls fitna) in which life is once again nasty, brutish and short.

As it happens, I think that's a load of hooey, but if you're going to argue that certain behaviors should be curtailed in deference to other people's beliefs and opinions (no matter how histrionic they may be), then you're stuck with accepting that people have a putative right not to be exposed to same-sex couples, interracial couples, etc. holding hands and kissing in public. If there's a general principle involved, you don't get to pick which subjective views you will or will not defer to.

[Hoyt]

25. Yep, a bunch of those folks are gun toters too. And you guys enable them so that you can carry and

further degrade society.

[lawodevolution]

27. toting guns in all the top 20 most violent nations is illegal and most of them ban guns

and of the 20 least violent nations, many allow toting and allow law abiding citizens to own guns.

so obviously toting guns does not degrade society.

[Starboard Tack]

31. So the toters suppress the violence? Wonderful

[Euromutt]

28. They probably feel the same way about you and gays

(And me and gays, for that matter.)

See, the thing about principles is that you can't apply them selectively; you can't reasonably expect someone to defer to your opinion about what is supposedly "tacky" or "degrades society" and then refuse to defer to others' opinions on what "degrades society." That's just hypocrisy.

So personally, I stick to the principle articulated by John Stuart Mill that the only legitimate reason to curtail individual freedom is when it infringes upon the physical or material well-being of others (or, as Thomas Jefferson put it, "it picks my pocket or breaks my leg"). If you don't like to look at the exercise of those individual freedoms, change the channel; nobody's forcing you to watch.

[lawodevolution]

26. guns are pleasurable. When you go to the shooting range, you are in public

and you have to transport the gun in public to get to the range.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

32. Which is more important, self defense or pleasure?

No every one who carries is a right wing nut. Accept that and maybe you can move on

[Starboard Tack]

30. Which kill people every day, right. Massacre by dildo

Still devolving daily I see.

[lawodevolution]

36. Sex can result in death from an STD.

And your lame comment is pathetic. Grow up and try being a better loser

[S_B_Jackson]

37. Don't forget that sexual activity also increases the risk of stroke (n/t)

[ProgressiveProfessor]

34. So who are you to claims lawful activities are somehow not right or moral?

What makes you any better than the homophobes when you do?

[Starboard Tack]

29. The law is a dictatorship of sorts. It dictates what is legal or illegal

This time, apparently, the law dictated they were acting legally. Doesn't mean the law is just or right.

[rl6214]

6. YUP, the city attorneys WERE idiots to have even filed charges

YUP

YUP

YUP

[Euromutt]

2. It took the City Attorney seven months to work that out? (n/t)

[1620rock]

4. They were assholes looking for trouble.

[rl6214]

7. The city attorney?

Yup, sure were.

[spin]

18. +1000 (n/t)

[RamboLiberal]

9. Hey WI doesn't allow concealed carry

Change the law. Maybe they were assholes but they were lawful assholes.

[petronius]

10. It probably took them about 5 minutes. The rest of the 7 months was trying to

find a way to avoid acknowledging it...

[Tuesday Afternoon]

15. +1

[Oneka]

11. They likely

kept the charges in place that long as a bargaining chip to get the "madison 5"
to drop their civil suit. If so I'm glad to see that it didn't work.

[Hoopla Phil]

5. I wonder how long the civil trial will last. Of if the city will try to

settle it quickly and quietly.

[YllwFvr]

8. Quietly likely isnt an option

If the carry group wins they may crow about it.

[Oneka]

12. They will

likely be offered a rather large settlement, but with a gag order attached. I would assume that they would not accept such a "bargain"
In order to get the message out. We can hope anyway.

[pipoman]

19. That really doesn't actually happen often..

occasionally there will be a non-disclosure of the terms of the settlement, but not that a settlement had been reached.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[iverglas]

14. oh no -- their feelings were hurt!!!

Clark said WCI plans to file a second lawsuit now that the disorderly conduct charges have been dropped. He said the civil lawsuit against the city would be directly related to the damages done to the five men, asking for compensation for legal costs and emotional damages.

No wonder they feel the need to affix firearms to their persons at all times.

[friendly_iconoclast]

16. I thought vigourous litigation targeting infringments of rights was a good thing?

Damned pesky gun owners, thinking legal standards apply to the likes of them!

Whatever is the world coming to?

[friendly_iconoclast]

17. They're taking their rights 'seriously and litigiously', it seems:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=118&topic_id=408879#409666

The sauce served north of the border works just as well south of it, in this case....

[pipoman]

20. -snork-

(to borrow a retort)

[ProgressiveProfessor]

33. Interesting your views of civil rights violationa are

[ileus]

35. The good guys win one...