A trial court judge decides a concealed carry case on constitutional grounds.
Sure, it’s just a little ripple, currently disturbing only a very small pond in Wisconsin. But this could get interesting.
Anyhow, it’s an amazing thing these days to see any trial court even allow the constitution to be mentioned, let alone to honor the Bill of Rights. How many earnest pro se defendants are in prison now because they naively believed they could raise the Second Amendment as a defense — only to have their entire defense pitched out? Hollis Wayne Fincher comes to mind (he’s the subject of one of the articles in The Bad Attitude Guide to Good Citizenship), but he’s only one of many.
I think you have to bring up constitutional issues in a certain way. Usually via an attorney.
BTW, given the web site where the opinion was housed, I suspect the attorney in this case was a public defender.
wow…listen to the girly-men snivel…
At a recent neighborhood picnic (I was tagging along with my mom) an officer came by to answer questions, and informed everyone that “because the sight of a handgun disturbs some people, anyone carrying a gun can and will be charged with creating a public disturbance.”
I pointed out that there were certain fashions and hairstyles I found disturbing, and asked if I should report those as well. He just laughed. Haven’t decided yet if I will . . .
Ellendra,
I’m glad you had the guts to bring that up. How many people would end up in jail if everybody demanded that cops arrest anybody who offended or “disturbed” them? Egads.