WI: Customer fires at two robbers - now ordered to meet with DA [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : WI: Customer fires at two robbers - now ordered to meet with DA


RussP
02-01-2012, 04:39
MILWAUKEE- The customer who fired at two robbers on Milwaukee's north side Monday night could find himself in trouble. (http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/138435769.html)

Police are looking into:

Whether that man had a concealed weapon
The customer may have broken the law by having a weapon inside Aldi because
The store has signs forbidding guns.


Folks, please remember that advocating, condoning, suggesting, implying illegal carry violates GT Rule #1, No illegal content, no matter how subtle you try to be.

RussP
02-01-2012, 04:50
Do “No Gun Signs” Have the Force of Law? “YES” (http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/wisconsin.pdf)

Please read the Handgunlaw.us Wisconsin (http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/wisconsin.pdf) page before posting to understand the law in Wisconsin.

Thanks...

HerrGlock
02-01-2012, 04:51
Now there's a person who actually lived "Better tried by 12 than carried by 6"

Stay tuned to see how this exciting episode turns out :supergrin:

IndyGunFreak
02-01-2012, 04:59
Most of what I'm reading (granted, it's peoples postings and responses to that article) seems to suggest this is a civil infraction w/ a fine of up to 1k.

IGF

EAJuggalo
02-01-2012, 07:35
IGF that is my understanding as well, although it is possible they would attempt to revoke his permit because of this.

Patchman
02-01-2012, 16:30
Aldi?

An Aldi recently opened near my parent's house. I've never been there but my parents have and were not impressed with what were on the shelves.

I'll stop by this week after visiting my parents and see if this store has a "No Guns" sign.

windplex
02-01-2012, 16:41
Aldi?

An Aldi recently opened near my parent's house. I've never been there but my parents have and were not impressed with what were on the shelves...

same company as trader joe's

we in WI are watching this with great interest.

Patchman
02-01-2012, 17:17
Aldi?

An Aldi recently opened near my parent's house. I've never been there but my parents have and were not impressed with what were on the shelves.


same company as trader joe's


OK, my parents told me they were a Germany company, selling mostly European products.

I figured European management = anti gun.

Mudshark100
02-01-2012, 18:08
My local Aldis has no signs.

mj9mm
02-01-2012, 18:20
if the store management has a concious, maybe they will rethink their policy:whistling:

KingWalleye
02-01-2012, 19:15
I hope the good guy was smart enough to "lawyer up" before meeting with the DA's office.

geoemery
02-01-2012, 20:15
The ant-gun and anti-CC will try to hang him, especially for firing at the poor misguided youth. The media in Green Bay is already trying to make it sound that soon the streets will be running red in blood. I know a guy with has a son who is deputy in the southeast WI. His son said anyone caught violating the signs would be thrown in jail. Some areas of WI feel protecting yourself is a crime. I should also say DOJ and training material has stressed not to use deadly force for only property protection. Inside a vehicle or home is different due to castle law.

Bruce M
02-01-2012, 20:16
I hope the good guy was smart enough to "lawyer up" before meeting with the DA's office.
Anybody have any idea how much "lawyering up" might cost?

Mister_Beefy
02-01-2012, 22:30
I hope the case is dismissed, and if not he gets the lightest sentence possible.

TDC20
02-01-2012, 23:58
I sure hope if the DA tries to hang him, the good people of Wisconsin see to it that this DA is no longer employed by the people, and that he has to go back to his previous life chasing ambulances.

huggytree
02-02-2012, 04:05
when will people figure out that a NO Firearms sign = rob me i wont resist

i do not go into any business that has a sign unless i have no other options

the bad guys were pointing a gun at people...his shooting was justified........i think they should fine him $100 for carrying in a NO Carry business and call it even.....he's a hero! and maybe saved lives.....

Bren
02-02-2012, 04:23
It's a shame that a store that is against concealed carry got the benefit of a customer carrying concealed. Of course, both him and the employees may have been in danger, so it's not like he clearly had a choice.

Seems to me Wisconsin allows open carry, so if he claims he uncovered his gun when he went in, he's good to go...or if he remains silent.

EAJuggalo
02-02-2012, 05:29
Yet another reason why it's important to contact those businesses that do post and have a conversation with them or their corporate headquarters. To the best of my knowledge Aldi's are not posted in MN or IN, which would lead me to question why this one is in WI. At the minimum this guy is going to be fined $1000 with a possiblity of going to prison, all because he disregarded the law and carried where he wasn't supposed to.

HexHead
02-02-2012, 06:06
when will people figure out that a NO Firearms sign = rob me i wont resist

i do not go into any business that has a sign unless i have no other options

the bad guys were pointing a gun at people...his shooting was justified........i think they should fine him $100 for carrying in a NO Carry business and call it even.....he's a hero! and maybe saved lives.....

Here in TN, while it is a misdemeanor to carry past a no guns sign, there is also a law that if you have to use a gun to protect yourself, you won't be charged with carrying in a prohibited place.

vafish
02-02-2012, 06:12
Originally Posted by KingWalleye (http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?p=18518705)
I hope the good guy was smart enough to "lawyer up" before meeting with the DA's office.
Anybody have any idea how much "lawyering up" might cost?

Depending upon how far you have to take it costs.could easily be $20,000-$50,000 decent attorney will run you $300 per hour so just a trip to.the da's office will be at least $1,500.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

vista461
02-02-2012, 10:52
Yet another reason why it's important to contact those businesses that do post and have a conversation with them or their corporate headquarters. To the best of my knowledge Aldi's are not posted in MN or IN, which would lead me to question why this one is in WI. At the minimum this guy is going to be fined $1000 with a possiblity of going to prison, all because he disregarded the law and carried where he wasn't supposed to.

The fine maybe, but since this is a posted business and not a Prohibited place, it's only a class B forfieture. Unless they go after something other than just carrying in a posted business.

azron
02-02-2012, 11:11
There is also the question as to if the sign met the legal requirements of the law, ie. 5" x 7" and posted at all entrances in a prominent location where any individual entering the business can reasonably be expected to see it.

windplex
02-02-2012, 11:29
i shop at trader joes and havent seen a no carry sign same parent corp as aldi.

the head of ccw-wi was interviewed and raised the point of improper signage or such a defense.

makes me wonder if this group is marshalling resouces to help the first person i am aware of in this situation since the ccw law came into effect. seems like it would be a useful precident and worth investment by groups and people other than ccw person involved. i think i'll send some $ his way.

windplex
02-02-2012, 11:35
my money says some "no carry" stores have made the decision based on percieved risk of law suits were they to allow ccw and something happened one way or another.

makes me question if there is such a law, in any state, that protects the business from law suits (similar in effect to the castle doctrine) so that an employer that allows employee ccw or a store that allows patron ccw and this right is exercised in the business and deemed a good shoot?

seems like such a law would expand companies that allow ccw.

i work for an employer that is a hunter but is unlikely to allow ccw under any circumstances -- we got the notice long before the law went into effect. we also have had guns pulled on our property before the law's passing.

2pid1
02-02-2012, 17:18
If I were that guy I would consider suing Aldi. No security and a sign forbidding self protection in a state that guarantees the right to keep and bear arms.

nelsone
02-02-2012, 19:42
Well, suing Aldi's is just plain ridiculous. It's private property, and as such the owners can require anything of the people who choose to go in there. You don't want to disarm, wear plaid, or belch the National Anthem? Then don't go into places that post those requirements for entry.

MakeMineA10mm
02-02-2012, 20:03
Well, suing Aldi's is just plain ridiculous. It's private property, and as such the owners can require anything of the people who choose to go in there. You don't want to disarm, wear plaid, or belch the National Anthem? Then don't go into places that post those requirements for entry.

I think you miss the point. It's another avenue to make a point with them about the issue.


the bad guys were pointing a gun at people...his shooting was justified........i think they should fine him $100 for carrying in a NO Carry business and call it even.....he's a hero! and maybe saved lives.....
What they should do is fine him $1 for carrying in a posted business. Everybody's happy - business gets to keep their sign so they can use it as a defense against being sued by a miscreant or the dead miscreant's family, while the DA is saying loud-and-clear: I'm going to let people defend themselves.

EAJuggalo
02-02-2012, 21:44
my money says some "no carry" stores have made the decision based on percieved risk of law suits were they to allow ccw and something happened one way or another.

makes me question if there is such a law, in any state, that protects the business from law suits (similar in effect to the castle doctrine) so that an employer that allows employee ccw or a store that allows patron ccw and this right is exercised in the business and deemed a good shoot?

seems like such a law would expand companies that allow ccw.

i work for an employer that is a hunter but is unlikely to allow ccw under any circumstances -- we got the notice long before the law went into effect. we also have had guns pulled on our property before the law's passing.
You mean like this provision in the WI law:

(b) A person that does not prohibit an individual from carrying a concealed weapon on property that the
person owns or occupies is immune from any liability arising from its decision.
(c) An employer that does not prohibit one or more employees from carrying a concealed weapon under sub.
(15m) is immune from any liability arising from its decision.
Note: I put the immunity clause from WI Law here so that people will know that by allowing someone to
carry a concealed firearm on their property does not open them to liability.

Direct from www.handgunlaw.us

limitdliability
02-02-2012, 22:58
Edit:
Nevermind...looks like EAJuggalo beat me too it!

But anyway, to chime in. As long as the shoot is ruled justified and all is good on that end, they *should* only issue this individual for a Class B forfeiture (as defined in the Trespass to Land CCW (http://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/943/II/13/1m) section added by Act 35) that all of us were made aware of when we got our license. While I don't think what he did is 'wrong' he knowingly violated a law...simple as that.

It's only a slap on the wrist for the shooter (not a criminal offense)/he gets to keep his license while Aldi's gets to save face 'enforcing' their silly corporate policy and everyone walks away.

NEOH212
02-03-2012, 02:09
My local Aldis has no signs.

Same here. I wouldn't shop there either way. :puking:

Gary1911A1
02-03-2012, 02:26
He should lawyer up and keep his mouth shut. That being said I don't go where I'm not wanted. Second $15000 would be cheap compared to going to court. Hope he comes out OK.

sourdough44
02-03-2012, 04:19
On the news this A.M. they said sources indicate Aldi is unlikely to press any charges. I doubt if the DA will either once they check into his permit & all the details.

Quarter Tank
02-03-2012, 05:12
never been in an Aldis, although because of this drove by the one nearest me yesterday to see if a No Gun sign was posted and didnt see one.

1911ES
02-03-2012, 05:38
Here again, as is many other scenario's ...... we're suppose to just let the robbers walk in a place of business, and do as they please.

Not saying the customer was right, but the law abiding business owners and citizens today better start standing up for themselves, or every city will be over run by theives and druggies ......:psycho::scared:looking for easy money.

golls17
02-03-2012, 09:40
There will be no charges. My guess is they know it wouldn't hold in court, and they don't want to set a precedent for ignoring "no guns" signs.

He was, in fact, a concealed carry permit holder, got it 2 weeks earlier and took a refresher course the weekend before.

http://www.wisn.com/news/30365551/detail.html

My favorite part:

He said as the robber grew more agitated, he backed up, took his gun from its holster before he another customer in his line of fire."There was a gentleman behind the suspect, I nodded for him to get out of the way. Thank God he saw and got out of the way, and that's when I had to fire at the gentleman," Nazier said. "The cashier was fearing for her life, I was fearing for my life as well as many other people. I did what I could, got a good shot off. Thankful he survived and was caught a short time after."

RussP
02-03-2012, 09:44
This report is dated news, Customer worried about both sides of law after breaking up robbery (http://www.todaystmj4.com/news/local/138435769.html), but it said the customer reached out to Wisconsin Carry and GT member xxpilot, Nik Clark, chairman of Wisconsin Carry, Inc. (http://www.wisconsincarry.org/default.html#)

windplex
02-03-2012, 10:16
You mean like this provision in the WI law:

(b) A person that does not prohibit an individual from carrying a concealed weapon on property that the
person owns or occupies is immune from any liability arising from its decision.
(c) An employer that does not prohibit one or more employees from carrying a concealed weapon under sub.
(15m) is immune from any liability arising from its decision.
Note: I put the immunity clause from WI Law here so that people will know that by allowing someone to
carry a concealed firearm on their property does not open them to liability.

Direct from www.handgunlaw.us

perfect. i wonder how many businesses are aware of this? im guilty of not knowing it and im in wi. i focused on how it affected me and i dont own a business. i suppose as a property owner it still applies to me. good to know thank you!

Pop Smoke
02-03-2012, 12:40
And this will rapidly become the example of why NO business should ever be allowed to post their location without assuming any and all damages resulting from criminal action at their location.

Want to post your business? Fine. You need to register it with the State Attorney General's Office so it's clearly posted on a website for law abiding citizens to check so they don't even consider pulling onto your property and will not spend money in your business. Also, since you decided to basically remove any possibility of patrons to your business of being able to defend themselves adequately from violent and potentially armed (threat or use of...) criminals within your business you must also sign an acknowledgement for the Attorney General's Office stating that you understand and accept that should a crime occur on your business property or within the business itself that you, the business, are completely liable for any and all damages resulting from that criminal activity. This is non-negotiable and shall be a required part of any and all, but not limited to, business license applications. renewals, non-profits, and any entity possessing a facility, fixed or portable, that is open to the public or by private membership. Should you refuse these terms your business license shall not be renewed upon expiration based upon your lack of interest in patron safety.


I do appreciate business owners that decide to post. So much so that I don't patronize them unless I'm left with no other option. That said, if you posted your business and a criminal act that started there spills over and impacts me at another location nearby you had better face legal action for such a posting that just invites criminals who will carry firearms and other weapons into your facility. Why? Because criminals don't obey the law, so what the hell is that sign going to stop....NOTHING!

Bren
02-03-2012, 14:13
I notice the Aldi's manager said: "...you're not suppose to take a concealed weapon inside the store unless you're a police officer?" and "Even if he had a gun permit, he wasn't suppose to be in the store with a weapon."

Best I recall, Wisconsin allowed open carry, even before they had CCW. That means the "no CCW" signs might have legal effect on concealed carry, but that's not the same as saying you can't go in the store with a gun.

Nice to see the POS manager of the POS store appreciates the guy preventing a robbery or murder in their store.

Here's the latest: Appparently the DA told the guy he wouldn't be charged.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2842015/posts

beatcop
02-03-2012, 15:06
On topic- don't shop at "posted" location...done deal

Off topic- with his wife...takes 7 shots at guys with shotguns and hits one...prob not the best choice, glad it all worked out for him.

golls17
02-03-2012, 19:22
Bren, the signs around here typically say "no firearms" or "no weapons" or something to that effect. I am yet to see anything that specifies open vs. concealed.

At the local outdoor stores, most say guns must be checked at the door, then underneath says it does not apply to those legally carrying a weapon for self defense (I like those signs!)

Turk
02-04-2012, 00:50
QUOTE FROM THE ARTICLE:
"James Wells, a regular at the Aldi's, appreciates what the man did, but he argues the law is the law. "That's the main question. Why did he have a gun you're not suppose to take a concealed weapon inside the store unless you're a police officer?" asked Wells. "Even if he had a gun permit, he wasn't suppose to be in the store with a weapon.""

Wow, one of the customers (James Wells) appreciates what the man did! I mean all he did was probably save him from a 12 gauge shotgun blast. But, you know, the law is the law.

Gary1911A1
02-04-2012, 01:55
QUOTE FROM THE ARTICLE:
"James Wells, a regular at the Aldi's, appreciates what the man did, but he argues the law is the law. "That's the main question. Why did he have a gun you're not suppose to take a concealed weapon inside the store unless you're a police officer?" asked Wells. "Even if he had a gun permit, he wasn't suppose to be in the store with a weapon.""

Wow, one of the customers (James Wells) appreciates what the man did! I mean all he did was probably save him from a 12 gauge shotgun blast. But, you know, the law is the law.

Wouldn't it be something if Wells or the employee sues the permit holder for emotional distress in civil court. That's another potential reason I don't go where I'm not wanted and my permit is for me and mine.

JuneyBooney
02-04-2012, 02:14
I am glad won't be charged so I guess he did good and he is a Muslim.. and he was previously in a lot of trouble but he did good in this incident.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/crime/aldi-customer-wont-be-charged-in-shooting-sk42et0-138688529.html

NEOH212
02-04-2012, 03:20
I notice the Aldi's manager said: "...you're not suppose to take a concealed weapon inside the store unless you're a police officer?" and "Even if he had a gun permit, he wasn't suppose to be in the store with a weapon."

Best I recall, Wisconsin allowed open carry, even before they had CCW. That means the "no CCW" signs might have legal effect on concealed carry, but that's not the same as saying you can't go in the store with a gun.

Nice to see the POS manager of the POS store appreciates the guy preventing a robbery or murder in their store.

Here's the latest: Appparently the DA told the guy he wouldn't be charged.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2842015/posts

I guess the manager forgot to tell the robbers that guns weren't allowed in the store because it's a gun free zone. :whistling:

At least we can rest easy knowing that the only people that will have a gun in a gun free zone will be those that violate the law.

This is paradoxical.

In a free country where we are guaranteed the right to keep and bear arms, in order to not violate the law (in this case) one must give up their right to self defense in order to comply with the law. On the flip side, in order to defend one self, one would have to violate the law. :faint:

Am I the only one that has a problem with seeing any logic with these gun free zones?

I understand the argument about the owner of private property supposedly having the right to say no guns. The problem that I find with that is the very right that the Second Amendment guarantees to each of us. No where in the second amendment does it make a exception for private property. The second amendment is law just like the rest of the bill of rights.

If it's law, which it is, and it's in the constitution, which it is, then it's the supreme law of the land and no other law or policy can be made contrary to it. Being that it's a guaranteed right, the last time I checked, no one is permitted to violate a guaranteed right. Being that it's a guaranteed right, the Government is obligated to protect it, and yes, even if your on private property. Where is that private property located? In some other country where the United States Constitution doesn't apply, or on US soil?

If it's the latter, then it applies. Laws are in place that guarantee minorities the right to not be bared from a public place and that's not in the constitution. But God forbid that it be violated. But a guaranteed right like the right to keep and bear arms can be? I have a real problem with that and from what I read, isn't what the founding fathers that drafted the Constitution and bill of rights had in mind.

I know that there are many of you that will tell me that I have it all wrong and flame me. I'm not trying to start a argument with any of you nor am I trying to offend anyone. I have a real belief that the meaning of the Constitution has been lost especially in the bill of rights. When I read about any American not being permitted to exercise a basic guaranteed right under the constitution, It just back's up my belief that I've outlined here.

Sure, anyone can ask or tell me to leave their property or forbid me from being there or coming back. I'm fine with that. But to tell me that solely on the premise that I'm legally armed, then that's just plane wrong and a direct violation of my constitutional rights.

So which right outweighs the other?

The right of the store owner to forbid guns on the premises?

Or

The right of the individual to self defense to not be killed by a criminal?

Which is it? Defend a principal or defend your life?

Bren
02-04-2012, 04:59
Bren, the signs around here typically say "no firearms" or "no weapons" or something to that effect. I am yet to see anything that specifies open vs. concealed.


Yes, but here those are given legal effect under concealed carry law. There is no open carry law. So anywhere that you can't CCW because of a sign, you can still open carry because there is no law saying those sighn can proohibit OC, not matter what the sign says.

In short, if you see a posted sign (I haven't in about 10-15 years) all you have to do is uncover to be legal.

RussP
02-04-2012, 05:49
I am glad won't be charged so I guess he did good and he is a Muslim.. and he was previously in a lot of trouble but he did good in this incident.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/crime/aldi-customer-wont-be-charged-in-shooting-sk42et0-138688529.htmlThat's an interesting article, JB, very interesting, as is the customer, Nazir Al-Mujaahid.

The DA acknowledged that the law allows use of reasonable force in threatening situations. He went on the say, "regardless of whether the shooter has a concealed-weapons permit." Hmm, is that an acknowledgement of open carry in Wisconsin?

He, the DA, used a word that injects an interesting variable to a self defense scenario when he said, "He disrupted an act that potentially exposed himself and others to great bodily harm." Potential, "capable of development into actuality," according to www.merriam-webster.com (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/potential).

The DA went on to say that video footage from the store showed Nazir acted reasonably and in a controlled manner during the encounter. Why is that noteworthy? Earlier stories mentioned he had only had his carry permit for two weeks. That is true. What the earlier stories failed to mention was Nazir has always been a gun-rights supporter who previously openly carried his firearm. After Wisconsin adopted a concealed carry law last year, he applied for his permit and received it the middle of January this year.

Nazir says in the article that since he started carrying concealed, he does not patronize places with signs banning weapons. He had never stopped at that store before and did not notice the sign at Aldi prohibiting weapons in the store, and that if he had, he would have gone elsewhere.

There is more in the article that is of real interest, including Nazir's checkered past. That he discusses in detail here, The Old "At Risk" Youth Phenomenon (http://nazir411.blogspot.com/).

RussP
02-04-2012, 05:52
Another thought: Could this event lead to revising the law removing the legal weight of the signs?

azron
02-04-2012, 06:40
We in Wisconsin have always been "able" to open carry as there was no state law against it, but if you did you could expect to be stopped and questioned by an officer maybe even cited with disturbing the peace, because someone who doesn't know the states laws is going to call the cops saying there is a man with a gun.

As to the signs disallow the concealed gun not disallowing the open carried one, not 100% accurate in Wisconsin. The statues for the criminal trespass, the Class B forfeiture of up to $1,000, that you can be cited for by ignoring the sign is stated in a way that would cover both concealed and open carry ("while carrying a firearm or with a particular type of firearm"). https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/943/II/13

azron
02-04-2012, 06:53
Another thought: Could this event lead to revising the law removing the legal weight of the signs?

I would hope that would be the case.

What I think will most likely happen though is that the law regarding the sign becomes more clarified to include a specific sign and specific posting requirements other than a 5 x 7 that is displayed in a prominent location at all entrances where a person can "reasonably" be expected to see it.

I have noticed a lot of places definition of the word "reasonably" is totally different than websters or mine :) and some folks cant measure either. Apparently a lot of businesses don't consider the exterior doors the entrance to their property but do consider the interior set of doors the entrance.

The state fell down on the signage part of the law, they should have designed a simple sign with a picture and wording and said this is the sign you have to use and is the only legal one. They also should have specified it must be posted on all exterior doors/entrances at a height no lower than 36" and no higher than 60" or something like that to give us CC folks a specific item to look for, right now it is a crap shoot as to where a place may be posted.

EAJuggalo
02-04-2012, 08:47
NEOH, your right to keep and bear arms applies right up to the point you come onto my property. You have no right to force your beliefs and choices on me on my property. We all have free choice in our associations and for the most part whom we conduct business with. No one is requiring you by force of law to disarm and patronize this business, there are many other options out there from which to purchase groceries, right down to home delivery if you choose.

Can anyone in the Milwaukee area or elsewhere in WI check their Aldi's and see if they are all posted or if it is just this one? I'd be very curious as to why this one was posted when they are not in either MN or IN.

JuneyBooney
02-04-2012, 09:20
Another thought: Could this event lead to revising the law removing the legal weight of the signs?

I think it could because under most state's laws the businesses have to comply with state regulations for their licenses. There are guidelines they have to follow to be within the scope of law. The video must show the long guns clearly in play and these would scare most "soccer moms" into the understanding that guns are needed to protect good people too. So this shooting does seem to help the gun rights movement in WI. I bet those signs will be amended to allow ccw people.

steveksux
02-04-2012, 13:43
I am glad won't be charged so I guess he did good and he is a Muslim.. and he was previously in a lot of trouble but he did good in this incident.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/crime/aldi-customer-wont-be-charged-in-shooting-sk42et0-138688529.html
You're assuming he's Muslim because his name is Nazir Al-Mujaahid? You're profiling.. :shame: :tongueout::rofl:

Interesting, I went to the web site of where the guy took his CCW training, turns out its the same guy that taught the class I took my Brother in Law to... Or the guy has the same name...

Randy

Clay1
02-04-2012, 19:53
tagged

huggytree
02-05-2012, 10:12
glad to hear nothing is going to happen to him.....so i guess having a sign posted means nothing if you carry anyways and use the gun......i find it very strange they didnt fine the guy $1,000 for carrying where a business posted......im hoping WI lowers its fine to $200........im seeing MORE signs now a few months after the law passed...its getting to a point where you cant go anywhere with a gun...which makes the law worthless....even in conservative area's....WI is overall too liberal....i am still refusing to go to businesses with no carry signs unless i have no choice.

azron
02-05-2012, 11:16
Huggy, the one thing we have not been told yet is if the posted sign met the laws posting requirements on size and location. From reading some of the comments on the journals stories folks were saying the sign may have been improperly posted ie not easily seen.

If that were the case then it would make sense that he did not receive a fine as the sign has to be 5" x 7", posted at all entrances in a prominent location that anyone can reasonably be expected to see. I know at least half (if not more) of the signs/postings I have seen do not meet the requirements.

Hopefully the DA down there posts the full reasoning behind not charging the guy as that would clear up a whole lot of questions.

limitdliability
02-05-2012, 11:26
This is good news. I'm curious too about the signage.

Azron - I'm curious, what aspect of the requirements for these signs you are seeing missing?

geoemery
02-05-2012, 13:28
About half of the businesses posted I've seen do not meet the required posting criteria. I've seen single or a few doors for multi entrances and posted away from the entrance. I tend to believe most business heard the media say they could post and didn't check the actual requirements.

JuneyBooney
02-05-2012, 13:34
You're assuming he's Muslim because his name is Nazir Al-Mujaahid? You're profiling.. :shame: :tongueout::rofl:

Interesting, I went to the web site of where the guy took his CCW training, turns out its the same guy that taught the class I took my Brother in Law to... Or the guy has the same name...

Randy


The article actually said he was a Miuslim. But I am impressed that he was a Muslim because we normally view them as terrorists. :whistling: I do believe in profiling but I prefer to call it "stereotyping and it does work even though liberals don't want to admit it. :faint:I do think that if he had not shot the guy and hit a bystander that the story may have been different.

huggytree
02-05-2012, 15:01
Huggy, the one thing we have not been told yet is if the posted sign met the laws posting requirements on size and location. From reading some of the comments on the journals stories folks were saying the sign may have been improperly posted ie not easily seen.

If that were the case then it would make sense that he did not receive a fine as the sign has to be 5" x 7", posted at all entrances in a prominent location that anyone can reasonably be expected to see. I know at least half (if not more) of the signs/postings I have seen do not meet the requirements.

Hopefully the DA down there posts the full reasoning behind not charging the guy as that would clear up a whole lot of questions.

almost all of the posting ive been seeing are exactly the same...its a window sticker and its most likely exactly 5x7.....other than the Milwaukee Zoo every business ive seen has the EXACT same window sticker....maybe Antigun groups are handing them out for free...or local police dept's

if the sign doesnt meet the requirement i assume we can carry there... i may start carrying a tape measure

golls17
02-06-2012, 09:41
Another thought: Could this event lead to revising the law removing the legal weight of the signs?

I think this had a factor in why the shooter didn't get charged. I can't help but wonder if the DA thought this might work its way up through the ranks and turn into case law that the signs no longer hold legal weight. Heaven forbid the gun owners should get another victory in WI...

eracer
02-06-2012, 09:55
NEOH, your right to keep and bear arms applies right up to the point you come onto my property. You have no right to force your beliefs and choices on me on my property. We all have free choice in our associations and for the most part whom we conduct business with. No one is requiring you by force of law to disarm and patronize this business, there are many other options out there from which to purchase groceries, right down to home delivery if you choose.

Can anyone in the Milwaukee area or elsewhere in WI check their Aldi's and see if they are all posted or if it is just this one? I'd be very curious as to why this one was posted when they are not in either MN or IN.We live in a nation of laws, and if State or local laws supercede my rights as a US citizen as guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment, I will abide by those laws.

So, if the State permits a business that is open to the public (i.e. is not a private club or private domicile) to prohibit the otherwise lawful carry of a handgun, I will abide by that law.

But here in Florida, where there is no such law, I will carry in any place that is open to the public, and where such carry is not otherwise prohibited by State of Federal law. The owner of any business that is open to the public who chooses to inform otherwise can play pretend all they want. And I will not carry in anyone's home, should they choose to inform me that it's not welcome.

The 'Private Property' apologists always forget the fundamental difference between PRIVATE property, and property that someone (or some entity) owns which is open to the public.

ColdSteelNail
02-06-2012, 10:13
I'm glad this thing ended the way it did. With the perps carrying shotguns it could have ended in a shootout with several people wounded or killed. I believe Aldi's should choose to not press charges and be just glad their employees were not hurt.

RussP
02-06-2012, 10:16
The 'Private Property' apologists always forget the fundamental difference between PRIVATE property, and property that someone (or some entity) owns which is open to the public.What is that fundamental difference?

RussP
02-06-2012, 10:19
almost all of the posting ive been seeing are exactly the same...its a window sticker and its most likely exactly 5x7.....other than the Milwaukee Zoo every business ive seen has the EXACT same window sticker....maybe Antigun groups are handing them out for free...or local police dept's

if the sign doesnt meet the requirement i assume we can carry there... i may start carrying a tape measureOkay, 'kwikrnu', you do that. Make certain you inform the business owner that they need to correct the size of their signs. Why not just carry correct signs to hand out? :cool:

ETA: Just remembered that some may not relate to the 'kwikrnu' reference. kwikrnu is an infamous figure on internet gun forums, banned from just about all of them. Google his screen name and/or his real name, Leonard Embody. Anyway, early in Leonard's exploits, one focus was on the size of the signage on parks and businesses. He said that even though the language was correct, that unless the sign was exactly the correct dimensions, the sign was confusing, to him.

windplex
02-06-2012, 10:22
i too hope to read the full explanation of this decision.

im not holding my breath that wi will reduce the legal standing of signs. i do ho9pe this sets a president re signed properties.

and frankly do we want a state riding rough shod over property rights? i dont.

on an amusing note -- this guy announced he is avaoiable for speaking engagements and created a website for himself due to this experience.

windplex
02-06-2012, 10:27
On topic- don't shop at "posted" location...done deal.
agreed


Off topic- with his wife...takes 7 shots at guys with shotguns and hits one...prob not the best choice, glad it all worked out for him.

isnt his hit rate about the same as police? 20%

7 shots and one leg hit, 1 head graze

windplex
02-06-2012, 10:35
the car dealership i work at has the following decal signs, from top down:

"circle around a revlover with line through it

NO FIREARMS

allowed on these premisses"


these signs were supplied by champion products -- we ordered and paid for them.

hamster
02-06-2012, 14:04
I don't know about the Aldi in question, but the one I used to shop at had very tricky posting. It had a sign on the door with a bunch of text saying things like "no shoes, no shirt no service, no sunday wine sales, etc... and at the very bottom no firearms."

They don't use the standard gunbuster sign we all look for here in ohio. Had I not taken the time to actually read the sign (or had the door swung open before I could finish), I'd never know.

I think that if stores do want to prevent folks from entering with firearms, then there should be some standard to how and where they post.

Clay1
02-06-2012, 16:26
I'm glad this thing ended the way it did. With the perps carrying shotguns it could have ended in a shootout with several people wounded or killed. I believe Aldi's should choose to not press charges and be just glad their employees were not hurt.

The shotgun was unloaded, if it were loaded this situation could have gone terribly wrong. The guy fired 7 rounds at 20' and hit the guy in the leg and grazed his forehead. If the instance says anything to me it says that most people should practice more. I know that shooting at the range at paper and shooting at a person is different with a huge addreniline dump, but 20' and 7 rounds and no center of mass hits????

I'm glad that no one else was hurt too.

Rick

TKOFaith
02-08-2012, 08:51
I think this had a factor in why the shooter didn't get charged. I can't help but wonder if the DA thought this might work its way up through the ranks and turn into case law that the signs no longer hold legal weight. Heaven forbid the gun owners should get another victory in WI...

I'm sure the DA (funny how that stands for both District Attorney and Dumb ***) is probably anti-gun. However the State's Attorney General is pro-gun, a fact that surely wouldn't be lost on the DA. So, I'm sure that if the sign didn't meet regs, future case law probably did come into play.

limitdliability
02-08-2012, 10:25
almost all of the posting ive been seeing are exactly the same...its a window sticker and its most likely exactly 5x7.....other than the Milwaukee Zoo every business ive seen has the EXACT same window sticker....maybe Antigun groups are handing them out for free...or local police dept's

if the sign doesnt meet the requirement i assume we can carry there... i may start carrying a tape measure

Just wanted to make sure everyone is on the same page here..the law is very vague on the specifics of the signage, only stating that it must be AT LEAST 5x7 and it must inform people that weapons or firearms are prohibited (and of course the previously mentioned bit about location).

So yes, this means the gas station down the street that used Word 2007 to print "NO GUNS" in 32pt Arial on an 8.5x11 pink piece of paper and taped it to the only double door entrance is in compliance.

Also, as far as charges go, its my understanding that the DA was only involved as far as charges related to the actually shooting. Anything regarding carrying in the store in violation of the signage *should* have been left up to Aldi's representatives. This is a trespass violation that requires the property owner to press charges...law enforcement cannot enforce trespass charges without a complainant.