Gun Laws As Attorney-Client Privilege?
BY Herschel Smith
10 years, 2 months ago
So says Green Bay:
A group promoting gun owner rights in Wisconsin is suing the city of Green Bay in a dispute that stems from restrictions on guns inside a popular farmers market.
Wisconsin Carry Inc. has asked a judge in Brown County Circuit Court to order Green Bay city officials to relinquish public records that might indicate whether the city has a policy on carrying guns in the open.
The same group previously sued Ashwaubenon and Madison after both municipalities arrested individuals suspected of improperly carrying guns in public.
Nik Clark, president of Wisconsin Carry Inc., said a member of the organization complained this summer after he was told he couldn’t open-carry a gun in a Green Bay downtown farmers market. Police officers told him that guns were not permitted at the Saturday morning event, Clark said.
Afterward, Wisconsin Carry asked the city police department for copies of any procedures or directives on the subject. The department declined, citing attorney-client confidentiality.
Clark said his group decided to file suit because, he said, Green Bay residents have a right to know their city government’s policy on controlling open-carry of guns.
I’m not a lawyer, but this has got to be the most oddball, peculiar application of attorney-client privilege I have ever heard. Surely they don’t mean that laws and regulations are not subject to public knowledge and scrutiny? That would be absurd.
More than likely they mean that the officers who stopped the gentlemen didn’t have a basis for doing so and they don’t want to divulge their vulnerability to anyone. For the stop to have been legitimate there would have to be a specific regulation pertaining to this establishment and/or the establishment would have to post. Wisconsin is an open carry state with complete state preemption and has only weak stop and identify laws (the one stopped need not follow the request even though an officer can ask for identification).
Perhaps someone who is more familiar with Wisconsin law can weigh in, but it appears to me that the police acted improperly and fear just the sort of lawsuit they are currently facing.
|
|
On September 22, 2014 at 9:39 am, Paul b said:
Attorney – City Attorney
Client – City Police department
Case – Law was correctly enforced or not.
That would make disclosure of the law attorney client privilege although it should be disclosed during discovery before the case goes to trial. Assuming that is the line of logic they are following.
One reason I did not find debating to be of interest is you argued a point the argument had little bearing on common sense or logic. The argument was usually about the internal logic of the argument.
I suppose an argument could be made that debate has aided the fall of the western society.
On September 22, 2014 at 11:04 am, Archer said:
IANAL, but my opinion (worth every cent you’re paying for it) is three parts:
a) the city either has no such “No OC/Guns” policy, or maintains it illegally (due to state pre-emption); and,
b) it was therefore an improper stop/identify request; and,
c) the city knows it.
The assertion of “privilege” merely copies the example Prez. 0bama provided when granting executive privilege over the “Fast & Furious” documents. Based on that precedent, Green Bay’s reiteration, and cases from other towns/cities, I can only assume that “privilege” is being redefined to mean “we authorities don’t have to release anything that makes authorities look bad, but you proles have no such rights against incriminating information”.
Plan accordingly.
On September 22, 2014 at 5:59 pm, BTPost said:
It is simple, make them “Arrest You”, or “go on your way” Those are the ONLY Two choices they have, and if they have some other hidden agenda, it will come out in Court, when they try and convince the Judge, that you were breaking some SPECIFIC Statute. If they fail to bring you to Trial, then you sue them, Individually, and Collectively, for False Arrest, as well as a Civil Rights violation, in Federal District Court. Nothing will get their attention, faster than a Civil Rights Violation Suit, in Federal District Court, where the Damages can be in the High 6 Figures.