Simple statistics, if we use this forum as our base to study, would very likely say she is very prone to it.

Who in here has been taken in to custody more than once due to possible firearms infractions in the past 5 years?  Note I said taken in to custody for possible infractions.

For the record phrases like "He is a nice guy" etc etc etc are some of the most overused phrases in mankind.  If you only hire the nice people or people you like, you are screwed.  Nice is not a qualifier for much of anything technical, it just points to possible people skills and communication skills.  Both of which are useful when you have encounters with LEO's.  She trains people?


For me, since January 2005 I have been taken in to custody zero times.  And now that is two people close to you that have had gun related encounters with LEO's that have been posted about in here since I first joined this forum.  Some cops would profile you as possible trouble.  Watch Minorty report.  

Forum anecdotes make great basis for statistical data.

And this has what to do with anything?  Straw man argument.  Trolling and trying to attack me and my "character" in an effort to undermine anything I have to say.

Yea. You are a real class act.

Yeah and I probably have more then both of you combined, trip on none of them no matter what room I am in but have plenty of quick access to more than I need.  Probably more experience carrying too since I just moved here from out of state.  Why don't you ask her out and explain to her out of sight out of mind is a good thing.

If she is a trainer perhaps she also sees some possible financial gain to the public drama but you may also remind her Jesus died on the cross, in public.  I am no Jesus and tend to avoid those who may think they are.  I don't want the attention.

No, it is just BS on the internet, like her drama.

If you claim  she is one of us, then it does.  I would think people in here operate at a higher standard then Grandma with a gun or a Man living in an Urban shithole with zero firearms experience but wants a gun to defend his family.

Once you invoked "she is a trainer" she is also held to an even higher standard.  She knows that, she chose that.  Do you think she is just a victim of bad luck?  I don't because I don't believe in luck, good or bad.  You may be biased, but many will feel she is failing.  your opinion is a non issue, the same way you dismiss mine.

Where I come from, Drama Queen with an agenda.  She fits the profile.

Or when they come up with the "permit" to obtain a ccw "permit" , get one of those too. My God people you have to buy a "permit" to be Free.

she was in her vehicle.
how can one be charged with loitering or prowling if you are parked in a public lot in your vehicle? i could see if she was just sitting in front the the business without  a vehicle, why LEO may view that at suspicious.

Ok, some one break this down into little words so I can understand...

A lady got pulled over while breaking the law and is now going to file suit against the arresting PD for it????

Why would LEO go after her? Rule number 1, keep your profile below the radar. She violated it.



Sounds as if she wants to test the waters, take on MPD and make a point. She has accomplished her goals, if that is what they are. Is she winning? My opinion? No.



If she didn't have her CCW (and at this time I have no clue if she does, and this is a HUGE fact to know to make an opinion of her situation) she should not have been open carrying in her car. Because without CCW ~~~ wait for it ~~~  SHE IS BREAKING THE LAW.



Doesn't look like they charged her for it though, unless I missed that part. They are charging her on lesser charges just to tie up her cash and time. I get it.





For the life of me I can't see poking the bear again and again and again, then wondering why the bear swatted you back. I don't get it.



This chicks draws too much drama into her life although she might be the nicest woman in the world. Drama. And those at the Open Carry forum, too many acting like she is some kind of martyr.



Still waiting for "Condition Red" to happen. Might be fun to watch...

If she was open carrying in the car how was she breaking a law?  Was she in a school zone?

Good for her for carrying her gun.  

I fail to see how this story gives anyone a black eye.  

We are our own worst enemy


My opinion on this matter and I know most of you will disagree but I don't really care.   If she has a Utah or another states permit which WI accepts for out of state people and has sent in for her WI permit she should be good.  Why should out of state people with the same permit I have be able to carry before me in the state in which I live?  

It's not a matter of whether we agree with you or not B. The law says otherwise.

How can you open carry without the gun being concealed?

I am asking the question, and have yet to get an answer.

Your right. As far as I know there is no State crime of loitering, it's only an ordnance violation with jurisdiction in the City municipal court. And I don't think municipal judges even have the authority to issue no weapons or no alcohol/drugs orders. Where the order would come from is if they issue State charges. It appears as if she was also arrested for resisting or obstruction, and there is an applicable State charge for that. Since she possessed a gun at the time of her arrest, if she is charged with a state crime, they may very well add the "use of a dangerous weapon" charge modifier (Stat. 939.63). If that happens, she will definitely be given a no weapons possession order.

The definition of concealed is as follows:



So that is the question, is whether or not her gun met that definition.  We won't know until we find out where the gun actually was.  But, because there are places you could have you gun in which it WOULD NOT be hidden by the definition above, that is how you could open carry in a car.

So if, for example. her gun was on her dashboard, it would not be concealed and would therefore not meet the definition of a concealed weapon.

No, I don't really know how ridiculous it sounds. The only thing that sounds ridiculous it why someone who applied for her permit on the 1st, and will probably receive it no later than the middle of next week, would be so foolish as to sacrifice herself to make some sort of statement. Leave the sacrificing to Jesus and to the brave troopers who wouldn't think twice about throwing themselves on top of a grenade to save their buddies.

So you're wondering why I called her "dumb" and said she was "poking the bear" and "kicking the dog"? Please see my last post. I hope I knew enough details to answer to your satisfaction. I could say a lot more but I'd just be repeating what many others have said in their posts. You seem to be privy to the the details of this latest incident. Please, tell me. Tell all of us. Prove me wrong. Put me into a position where I'l have to rescind my statements and apologize. I won't exactly be holding my breath though.

So doing something that is completely legal is, in your eyes, poking a bear.  She carries everywhere for the same reason any of us do. Yet somehow this is "poking the bear"?  Because no crimes ever happen in church right?  Be sure you don't google the Brookfield incident then where a parish member went crazy and killed 7 people while they were attending services.

actually that is not legal.

i and many others open carry everywhere all the time and never get that kind of response. And open carry is legal in this state. If you don't like it, then that's too bad. And the act of open carrying is NOT "poking the bear".

her one mistake. Still no bear poking though.


What did she do that was illegal to cause this act of martyrdom you proclaim she has done?  Once again just because YOU don't like open carry doesn't mean it is illegal or "poking the bear".

NO one knows the details yet. Which is why I don't understand why you are chastising her based upon an assumption?  And I already refuted your last post. You seem to have a problem with open carry. Which means no matter what you will think anyone who openly carries is "poking the bear". There isn't much to discuss since that is your position.

I quoted Unique1 who said she was open carrying.  So ask him how it can be open carry but still ccw.  That is what I was asking.

I know what the law says and what the surpreme court has said in the past but your average joe is way less informed and than most of us on here.  btw the faq is very decieving to read.  

I also know that my opinion is illegal (maybe)  It is just what I would do if need be and what my lawyer would argue if caught.  just say'n

Fair enough.

Ding Ding Ding we have a winner here.  It cannot be concealed if she was open carrying.  If it was concealed it would be concealed carry.  So the info we need id where was the gun and what will the courts take on it be if she is charged and it goes that far.

This is not necessarily what the situation is here even though it is a fair assumption but if you are Open Carrying a handgun on your belt(hip), once you sit down in your car and close the door, the car body causes the "Openly" carried handgun to be hidden.  This is the paradox of having a concealed firearm and possibly being cited for doing so while "Open" carrying.

If I'm not mistaken, the 1st time she was arrested she had a LOADED handgun in a case, in her car's passenger compartment. Is this not the same person who OC'd at her church, and got arrested as she was driving away from that church? She was qouted in the newspaper as saying she thought this was legal, because the guy who sold her the gun told her so. Now you're saying she's an instructor for UT and NRA? Cannot be the same person... no UT or NRA instructor would have a loaded handgun in a vehicle in WI because the seller said it was OK, and not have enough knowledge to know this was a clear violation of both 167.31 & 941.23. Something just doesn't add up. Don't get me wrong... I'm no big fan of either statute, but they are what they are. Don't like 'em, elect people who will repeal them.

You noticed. You have a talent for understatement.

Where did I say that her act of open carrying was illegal? The circumstances in this specific incident were irresponsible and selfish. She may have achieved some satisfaction for herself and some of her cheerleaders but although she may have won her battle, she sure hasn't done anything to help win the war. There's three sides out there. The pro gun, the anti gun, and the middle of the road fence post sitters. When someone pulls a stunt like this, tell me who the people sitting on the fence are going to sympathize with?
And son, DON'T put words into my mouth. I AM NOT against open carry. A clairvoyant you ain't.

She had a loaded handgun in a case in her trunk.  Yes it's the same person.  Remember that incident was over a year ago.  She has obviously gotten far better education since then.  And she obviously got her instructor certifications AFTER that.  A lot can happen in 15 months....  :p

So?  What's your point?

Um, you don't choose to carry your gun because you think one place in particular is safer than another or more dangerous than another.  Most intelligent people will avoid places they think could be trouble.  However, we carry everywhere because that's the funny thing about criminals and psychos.  They will bring violence any time, anywhere, against any person who happens to be in their way.  How about you go ask the people at IHOP carson city, or that salon in california, or the people in crandon WI, or the people at Viginia Tech if they "feared something may happen"?  Because until it happened I bet every single one of them would answer they never thought it would happen to them.

That's the difference between people like you and people like me.  You think that some places are "safe" and somehow "immune" to such acts.  Yet there are constant reminders that occur all the time that remind us that NO PLACE is "safe".  Which is the whole reason we carry.  If you don't understand that, you might want to avoid any gun forums altogether, and maybe instead go over to the brady campaign forums or join WAVE.

Once again, all things that make no difference.  She was lawfully and legally carrying, and doing so for the same reason anyone carries.  Again, I think you are on the wrong forum if you somehow feel that carrying for self-defense is "wrong" and "poking the bear".

There are various ordinances and possibly even laws that you would be breaking by doing that act.  The 1st amendment does not protect you from things that are illegal.

Your posts say otherwise when you can't comprehend why she would openly carry her firearm, REGARDLESS of where she carries it.  Again, psychopaths and criminals will commit crimes anywhere and any time.  

You just got done telling me how you never said that you don't like open carry yet you follow that up with this gem.  So now "open carry" is a "stunt"?

You didn't.  But you obviously think it's "wrong" to open carry.  If you don't understand why I say that, you should read your own posts very carefully.
And those circumstances are?  I'm just curious since you keep saying this, yet NO ONE, not even me, KNOWS what actually happened.  Yet you have already convicted her as if you were judge and jury.  So please tell me what she did that was "irresponsible and selfish"?  And tell me how you know that that is what she did since you weren't there?

Once again calling open carry a "stunt like this"?  Oh but that's right, you never "said" you don't like open carry.  

Nobody put words into your mouth.  Your actions did that for you.  Once again you have convicted this woman, judge, jury, and executioner, by saying everything I have quoted YOU yourself saying.  Yet YOU have no idea what ACTUALLY happened.

Yet you have already convicted her for "pulling a stunt like this" and saying she was "irresponsible and selfish".  Do you hear yourself talk?

Then why do you refer to the act of openly carrying as "pulling a stunt" and "poking the bear"?

I know this and you know this but your average person would assume that if it is not covered on your hip and you are open carrying when you get in your car you are good to go.  

Quick question for anyone.  If I am open carrying  on my porch talking to a leo then walk in my house and close the door with no windows in it.  Am I now ccw?  If not how is a car any different?  

Next question did this woman get a ccw charge?  did she lose her gun?

Not trying to troll just wondering

I should join WAVE????? Wow, just wow... Son, you're hopeless. You keep asking the same questions over and over regardless of the answers that I give. You've repeated the phrase "poking the bear" so many times your starting to sound like a parrot. I regret even using some of these terms because you become so obsessed with them. I'm going to have to throw in the towel. You win. Time to go back to your other forum and practice some Rah, rah, rah! ...cheers for a job well done. Speaking of WAVE, thank the cheerleaders for giving WAVE another incident to add to their web page. In a previous post you used the term 'class act'. Right now, somehow 'class act' just doesn't quite say it.  Stay safe

No ccw charge as of yet.

As for your question it's a moot point. You can lawfully ccw without a permit on your own property and in your home.  :)

ok then private bussiness with no sign posted but you have no permit and not in a school zone.  I think you know what I meant but are being difficult as the norm with arfcom.

Could you please link me to your claim of property and home not that I don't believe you but I would like to show n
someone else.  

...

If you are openly carrying on a public sidewalk (legal) and step into a private business with no windows and the owner of said business has not informed you that they do not want guns on their property then you are still within you legal rights.

I'm still trying to figure out why everybody is arguing about her weapon when as of this time she's only been charged with loitering and prowling and obstructing. I have not seen any report stating that she has been or could be charged with a weapons charge.

From the OCDO thread:

Last I heard she was released on a PR bond. This will be interesting to follow, looks like we'll get clarity on the OC in a car confusion.

I am patiently waiting..

I don't drive a BMW, I drive a truck.  If I carry and I am in my truck no human being can see my gun on my person.  I feel that to be a fact and I am sure 99% of any jury would agree.

If I remove my gun from my person AKA no longer carry it, then the laws that apply to having a weapon inside a vehicle seem to be pretty clear here, very restrictive.  Now comes the terms of the new laws.  I think it is dangerous to think of carry in terms of where you velcro your gun on the dash or steering wheel.  If laws are left open to interpretation, then you should assume the interpretation of the professional who is paid to do just that, Cops, will win over your interpretation most times in court.

A major rule in combat is pick the battlefield.  She failed there too.  Not to mention no witnesses.  Her tactics seem to point to zero strategy.  No way to know but that looks like decisions being made from the emotional brain.  I will bet $20 her gun was NOT on her dash.

Really?  I live on a public street and anyone who parks on the curb in front of my house gets to see me looking at them.  Either from my driveway, front porch, front yard or neighbors driveway.  The dog may or may not be allowed to run in the yard as well.  I am not a Social worker, I can't tell a good person from a bad one just by looking at them soI assume the worst.

If you are not suspicious by nature, why even own a gun?  I understand suspicious which is why I practice out of sight out of mind.  I also have no bumper stickers on my truck.  I am not going to help you be sure my Green F-150 is the exact same F-150 you saw before with a bumper sticker or vanity plate.

One thing is certain from all these posts, she got the attention of the cops somehow.  If she was a guy we would be calling this a macho bullshit maneuver.  Since it is a Female she is just a nice person who is a trainer and possible activist, all be it an idiot activist.  

Sadly this new found ability to carry CCW is going to cost some people dearly.  Proceed slowly and sanely.  Things are bad enough as they are.  I admit, my plan is to sit back and watch the idiots grab all the attention as this starts to unfold and LEO's get use to the idea we may all be armed 24/7.

Then you also have to ask the same question from the perspective of the anti gun agenda.

To stay on your question, I honestly can not see any large organization like the NRA willing to be part of a trap so early after CCW having passed.  The potential downside is way to big.  When you are up by 8 points, you don't run for 2, you kick the PAT for one and play defense.

They're more than happy to take credit for other people's work.

i was referring to a public business such as the coffee shop she was sitting outside of(in her car)

IMO the NRA is legally OBLIGATED to get this car carry issue squared away.
i forget the gentleman's name, but he was a lawyer affiliated with the NRA, and was on news talk 1130 at 7-8am November 1 2011 telling people that it was 100% legal to carry openly in a vehicle now, be it moving or stopped. he even went to say what openly carrying means, in a OWB  holster or even sitting on the car seat next to you.

when they were the ones telling wisconsinites that it is OK to Open carry in a vehicle as of nov 1, the NRA has a ethical responsibility to enter this fight.
if they sit idly by i will strongly reconsider keeping my membership. they were on the frigin public radio saying that this is legal. fuck, i have been OC in my car since nov 1 because their attorney told me it was legal.

Yea NRA definitely needs to get involved in that, considering that it technically is NOT OK to have your gun in your car in a holster or sitting on your seat.  (unless you have your CCW license)

if it is not in plain view than the police need a search warrant to "discover" it in her car or perhaps just cause to conduct a search.  if they can see it while standing outside the vehicle it is obviously in plain view.  


i would think if the line is the edge of the door then anything under that line needs proper search warrants or probable cause.  anyway i label types like her attention whores.  they always gotta rub someone's nose in their personal agenda.  personally i hope she wins any court related law crap that mpd dumps on her but i still think she isnt a very bright person and definately not one i would want to associate with.  

unstable people with a political agenda seeking police attention isnt a recipe for success

Please review Carroll... You are not well informed.

I know, I am just stating I understand being suspicious.  Even in my corporate life, there has been plenty of crime at the workplace.  So I get a retail operation in an urban area being suspicious or nervous.  I get cops being suspicious or nervous.

I am still not 100% clear on all vehicle regs in this State but I have a routine that keeps me in compliance.  I am still not sure if I can put a loaded shotgun or rifle on my open truck tailgate, so I won't.  I am pretty sure I can't do it?  When we first moved here, I saw a lot of traps designed to lead gun owners to failure.  Surprising for a state with so many avid outdoorsmen.  So now things are getting better but you know many of the existing establishment won't adjust easily.  Surely they are dreaming and scheming on how to reverse or minimize these changes.

NRA giving bad advice, I never got it nor read it but I believe what people say here.  I don't think the NRA will lose much sleep over it and I am a member.  The reason I joined ARFCOM was to participate in this forum, observe and learn from people right here.

Beginning November 19th, you may place a loaded long gun on your open tailgate but may not have it there so long as the vehicle is in motion.  If it is unloaded you may drive with your long gun on the tailgate.  You may not place your loaded long gun in the cab.