Mediaboss Marketing

MADISON - Republican lawmakers are introducing new legislation that would decrease restrictions on firearms in Wisconsin by lowering the age to obtain a permit to carry a concealed weapon to 18 and allowing permit holders to have guns in vehicles on school grounds.

Both bills being circulated by Republican lawmakers for sponsorship in the state Legislature in recent weeks have been proposed before and likely will face hurdles under Gov. Tony Evers, who has said he supports the law as it's currently written.

Rep. Shae Sortwell, R-Two Rivers, said in an interview the bill to lower the age to obtain a concealed carry permit from 21 to 18 follows a recent federal appeals court ruling that said prohibitions on selling handguns to Americans under 21 violates the Second Amendment.

"The (ruling) made it pretty clear you can't make arbitrary laws that say one adult does not have the same rights as other adults," Sortwell said.

A divided U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit in Richmond, Virginia, said July 13 that a 1968 law that banned the sale of handguns to people under 21 years old but permitted the sale of shotguns and rifles to those same peoplewas an arbitrary restriction that put 18- to 20-year-olds in second-class status under the Second Amendment. The decision is likely to be appealed and may reach the U.S. Supreme Court.

"When do constitutional rights vest? At 18 or 21? 16 or 25? Why not 13 or 33?" wrote Judge Julius Richardson, nominatedto the court by former President Donald Trump. "In the law, a line must sometimes be drawn. But there must be a reason why constitutional rights cannot be enjoyed until a certain age."

Richardson'sopinion drew a criticaldissent from Judge James Wynn, who was nominated by former President Barack Obama.

"The majority's decision to grant the gun lobby a victory in a fight it lost on Capitol Hill more than fifty years ago is not compelled by law," Wynn wrote. "Nor is it consistent with the proper role of the federal judiciary in our democratic system."

Sortwell sees Wisconsin's concealed-carry law that was implemented in 2011 and requires permit-holders to be 21 as having similar problems.

"Individuals who are old enough to legally own and possess a handgun are also old enough to obtain a concealed-carry permit, and it is our obligation as the state legislature to ensure equality before the law," Sortwell wrote in a memo to colleagues seeking support for the legislation.

"If this is about self defense, why should my 18-, 19-, 20-year-olddaughter be more at risk to criminals than my 21-year-olddaughter?" he said in an interview last week.

Attorney General Josh Kaul, through a spokeswoman, did not immediately respond to whether he agreed with Sortwell's interpretation of the ruling.

A spokeswoman for Evers also did not immediately respond to whether the governor would sign the proposed legislation. While running for governor in 2017, Evers said he would act as a "goalie" for similar proposals being introduced at the time.

Kids in Wisconsin dont need more guns near or around schools, said Evers, who was state superintendent at the time, about a similar bill that was ultimately unsuccessful.

At that time, Republican lawmakers were debating legislation that would allow Wisconsin residents tocarry concealed firearms without getting training or state permits, and would have endedthe states ban on tasers and allow some people to bring guns onto school grounds.

"We will be introducing legislation to ensure that parents who hold a concealed carry permit dont accidentally violate the law when picking up or dropping off their child in their school parking lot," Rep. Rob Brooks, R-Saukville, and Sen. Andre Jacque, R-De Pere, said earlier this month in a memo to colleagues seeking support for the legislation.

The bill would require the vehicle be locked and the firearm be out of sight.

During the 2017 debate on the more expansive bill, the Wisconsin Association of School Boards at the time had adopted a resolution that stated the group opposed any legislation that would expand the ability to carry firearms on school grounds beyond sworn law enforcement officers.

"Historically, the majority of school board members have expressed a belief that guns and children are not a good mix," Dan Rossmiller, a lobbyist for WASB, said Monday. "While we are aware of concerns from parents who hold concealed carry permits who may violate the law when picking up or dropping off their child, our members have not responded to the introduction of previous, similar legislative proposals by changing the existing WASB resolution. For that reason, I expect our position, as it has been in the past, would be to oppose this new legislation."

Critics ofthe state's concealed carry law andMilwaukee Police officials also have expressed concerns about criminals obtaining permits or those without criminal records carrying firearms for criminals.

In 2015, formerMilwaukee Police Chief Edward Flynn pointed to a permit holder who had a habit of turning up at shooting and homicide scenesserving as a human holster which resulted in charges against him.

Jim Palmer, executive director for the Wisconsin Professional Police Association, said Monday his members have yet to evaluate the new proposals.

"When it comes to gun control issues, our organization has generally been split on those, largely due to distinctions between officers that serve rural areas and those that serve in more urban areas," he said, speaking generally. "In our experience, urban officers tend to be more concerned about gun violence than their rural counterparts, who dont experience the same degree of gun crimes."

John Fritze of USA Today contributed to this report.

Contact Molly Beckat molly.beck@jrn.com. Follow her on Twitter at @MollyBeck.

Our subscribers make this reporting possible. Please consider supporting local journalism by subscribing to the Journal Sentinel at jsonline.com/deal.

See more here:
Bills would lower concealed carry age to 18, allow permit holders to have guns in cars on school grounds - Milwaukee Journal Sentinel

American sprinter ShaCarri Richardson received perhaps the worst advice upon failing her drug test for marijuana.

Though she publicly apologized, she wasnt wrong. The United States Anti-Doping Agency's cannabis policies and the federal prohibition of marijuana are wrong and a waste of resources. But this country has a real hard time admitting that.

Richardson's disqualification from the Olympics is a gross injustice and they are taking away everything shes earned. The federal prohibition on marijuana has damaged American lives for half a century; this is the latest and most egregious example of it. Theyve taken a woman who is an American hero and gutted her.

She should be fighting this in court. The United States Olympic Committee is based in Colorado Springs. They are under the jurisdiction of the U.S. District Court of Colorado. Richardsons legal option would be to file a TRO (temporary restraining order) and injunction, seeking that the court order the United States Olympic Committee reinstate her on the team.

She would fight the TRO on grounds of 14th Amendment Equal Protection. Equal protection means that the rules and laws apply equally to everyone. Regarding cannabis, however, the rules are not applying equally to everyone.

For example, I represent 25-year-old Jonathan Wall, whos currently in jail for growing and selling weed. Theres a multibillion-dollar industry in the United States, with many people and corporations growing and selling weed all over the country. Its a violation of equal protection for one person to be able to do something in the United States while another person cannot.

It violates equal protection that Richardson could take one hit of pot and lose everything while other people in the country are making millions of dollars from growing, distributing, and selling it. Yet, while they get rich, she is deprived of everything she has earned.

Second ground would be the Fifth Amendments Taking Clause, which states: "Private property [shall not] be taken for public use, without just compensation."

To take her career and future earnings away from her causes a potential Fifth Amendment violation under the takings clause. Her career was a lifetime in the making. Earning it and going through the Olympic trials and everything else that shes done to deserve a spot on the Olympic team, thats her property. Yet, the government is taking it from her without due process. Its like going to a doctor or lawyer and saying, Were taking your license or coming to your house and saying, Were taking your home because you took a hit of pot in the backyard and cannabis is federally illegal.

This is a gross injustice and that they are taking away everything shes earned.

Its undeniable that the U.S. government has a much easier time punishing people of color than white people. The federal prohibition on pot has been a failed policy. Its been a racist policy. The very roots and motives of the drug war and the federal prohibition on cannabis are racist. This is just a continuation of a policy that is fundamentally racist, in a more high-profile setting.

President Joe Biden said: Rules are rules. But, as we saw in the past, just because something is a rule does not mean its brutally wrong and unjust. Do you want to argue Rules are rules to Jim Crow? Think about the lives that have been destroyed because of the federal prohibition of marijuana.

Rules are rules is one of the most intellectually and morally bankrupt arguments that you could ever offer because this country has a history of using unjust rules to damage people of color. And thats exactly what's happening here.

But it shouldnt be happening here. ShaCarri should be fighting it. As a representative of our country, it would be the most patriotic thing she could do.

More here:
How Sha'Carri Richardson Can Sue Her Way Back Into the Olympics - The Daily Beast

A tentative contract has been reached between representatives of the union representing Columbus police officers and the city that includes a large payout for officers in exchange for somechanges to how alleged police misconduct investigationsare carried out, The Dispatch has learned.

Members of the Fraternal Order of Police Capitol City Lodge No. 9are currently voting on the proposed contract through Saturday night. If the contract is approved by the members of the union, Columbus City Council would then vote on whether to accept the contract perhaps as soon as Monday, the body's last meeting before its summer break.

FOP Local 9 leaders say they will not comment publicly about the tentative contract until after it is voted on by membership, which includes about 1,900 members from officers up to commanders.

Highlights of the new contract:

Mayor Andrew J. Ginther's office did not respond to questions from The Dispatch about where the money for the pay increases and the buyouts will come from. However, sources have speculated to the newspaper that the buyout money will from from federal COVID-19 relief funds.

"We are encouraged to have reached a tentative agreement through the collective bargaining process, but it is important to let the process play out free of interference and for members to cast their vote," Ginther said in a prepared statement.

The new Civilian Police Review Board, approved by 74% of voters in November 2020 and seated by Ginther and City Council earlier this year, was expected to be a sticking point in negotiations. Ginther and other city leaders had said publicly they expected to negotiate language into the contract that would take away some of the police union's power in investigations and give more authority to the review board and newly created Inspector General position.

More: Columbus police union seeks to stop interviews with officers in protest misconduct probe

However, the language in the proposed contract shows no significant deletions from the contract approved in 2018. There is some new language connected to the Civilian Review Board and Office of Inspector General.

More: Read the FOP's 2018contract with the city

According to the tentative contract agreement, the review board will not have subpoena power. Officers can be ordered by the police chief as under previous contracts, or bythe Office of the Inspector General to appear and participate in investigations into allegations of misconduct or behavior that are not criminal in nature.

If an officer is suspected of criminal misconduct, they cannot be forced to participate because of Fifth Amendment rights against self-incrimination.

More: Columbus police union seeks to stop interviews with officers in protest misconduct probe

Civilian Review Board representatives can be present at departmental hearings for officer discipline before the Director of Public Safety, according to the proposed contract. Those hearings would continue to not be open to the public.

An investigator from the Office of the Inspector General can also observe criminal investigations, according to the proposed contract, but neither the Inspector General or the Civilian Review Board can conduct investigations into alleged criminal misconduct.

The proposed contract would requiresuspensions, demotions or terminationsto be kept in an officer's personnel record for eight years, compared to the six years required under the current extended contract. That means if an officer is to receive progressive discipline, a suspension is kept on their record to be used for eight years.

In July, Ginther told The Dispatch that the city would be pushing for increases in the length of times complaints stay in an officer's personnel file andmandatory post-incident drug and alcohol testing after a shooting or deadly use of force.Drug and alcohol testing is included in the tentative new contract.

More: What we know about charges against three Columbus police officers from 2020 protests

In late December, Ginther said the top priority as it related to the Civilian Review Board was to make sure it had subpoena power and the ability to make recommendations to the chief about officer discipline.

The new contract also would increase the ability for body cameras to have a two-minute look-back window with audio. The department's body cameras currently have a 60-second lookback feature that does not include audio.

This lookback feature proved important in the shooting death of Andre Hill, an unarmed Black man, by former Columbus police officer Adam Coy in December. Coy's body camera was not activated at the time of the shooting, but captured video without audio of the incident. Coy has since been fired and indicted on charges of murder, felonious assault and reckless homicide. He has a scheduled status conference hearing Wednesday on his case.

More: Columbus City Council expands body cam requirement for police working with state, feds

When the police union's contract had expired with the city in December 2017, it took until November 2018 for terms to be finalized. That process involved having a fact-finder issue a report about resolving key issues surrounding pay raises, pension premiums and insurance coverage. That contract was ultimately approved by City Council in January 2019 and became retroactive to Jan. 1, 2018. The Columbus Division of Police has continued to operate under the expired contract during the negotiation process, which began in mid-2020, but was stalled by COVID-19.

More: Read the FOP's 2018-2020contract with the citythat members continue to work under

Should either side reject the tentative agreement, the negotiation process would proceed to the factfinding process.

A factfinder would be hired to examine the proposed changes to the contract from each side and issue a report as to resolutions to those issues. The union and City Council would have to vote to accept the changes outlined in the factfinder's report or the process would then go to binding arbitration. An arbitrator would be selected by mutual agreement and whatever the arbitrator decides would be the final contract terms.

Columbus firefighters agreed to take no pay raise in 2021 because of the COVID-19 pandemic, but will receive a 2.5% raise in 2022 and 3.5% raise in 2023, in accordance with the terms of the contract approved in November by International Association of Fire Fighters Local 67, which has more than 1,550 members. The cost of that three-year contract to the city was expected totalmore than $20.1 million.

bbruner@dispatch.com

@bethany_bruner

Go here to read the rest:
Columbus and police union reach tentative 3-year contract calling for 14% raises, buyouts - The Columbus Dispatch

Vivek Hallegere Murthy

White House/Silicon Valley -(AmmoLand.com)-In the course of White House press briefings, Second Amendment supporters got good news, but they also found themselves facing a much greater short-term danger. The good news is that Jen Psaki probably handed enough evidence to prove that Silicon Valley has been acting as a proxy for the federal government to pretty much ensure former President Trump will win his court case.

The bad news is that Surgeon General Vivek Murthy has upped the ante over the short term by claiming that misinformation about COVID-19 is an imminent and insidious threat to our nations health. Of course, Murthy has a prescription that includes suggestions for social media companies.

Remember how the Centers for Disease Control were pushing gun control? It was so bad Congress wisely pulled the plug on funding for that pseudo-science, much to the chagrin and anger of anti-Second Amendment extremists like Senator Ed Markey (D-MA), who want to take us back to the bad old days of politicized medicine.

(As an aside, the CDCs blatant anti-Second Amendment propaganda may be a big reason why they arent entirely trusted with regards to COVID and vaccines. Let this be a lesson to Second Amendment supporters who, in this media environment must take a higher level of care about how we come across to our fellow Americans, like avoiding the use of dubious quotes.)

The big question is, of course, whether Murthy would declare activism for our Second Amendment rights as misinformation if CDC goes back into the business of being propagandists for gun control. We cant put that past them, especially given how Silicon Valley censorship has affected things already.

Think about how CDC has suppressed information about the use of firearms for self-defense in the past. Or remember how Arthur Kellerman claimed that a firearm was 43 times more likely to be used to kill you than to be used for self-defense? Right now, if Murthy calls efforts to point out Kellermans BS misinformation, you can bet that Silicon Valley will be censoring in moments.

As we now know, Kellerman got that figure by only counting those homicides that were ruled self-defense. But as Massad Ayoob or any other competent self-defense instructor would quickly tell you, you dont have to kill an assailant to have successfully defended yourself. Dont take my word for it: The NRAs Armed Citizen over the years has examples of armed bad guys fleeing or surrendering when they realize there is an armed good guy, with no shots fired by the good guy at all.

Second Amendment supporters need to urge their Representative and Senators to block any CDC effort to attack the First and Second Amendments in the name of public health. In addition, they need to work to defeat anti-Second Amendment extremists at the federal, state, and local levels at the ballot box as soon as possible.

About Harold Hutchison

Writer Harold Hutchison has more than a dozen years of experience covering military affairs, international events, U.S. politics and Second Amendment issues. Harold was consulting senior editor at Soldier of Fortune magazine and is the author of the novel Strike Group Reagan. He has also written for the Daily Caller, National Review, Patriot Post, Strategypage.com, and other national websites.

Read the original post:
Will The Biden Regime Call Second Amendment Activism Misinformation? - AmmoLand Shooting Sports News

Jul. 20ATHENS A jury that had listened to hours of detailed financial testimony Monday in the public corruption trial of Limestone County Sheriff Mike Blakely was not present to hear the judge warn the final witness of the day that he had a Fifth Amendment right to remain silent and avoid self-incrimination.

It was the sixth day of the trial and the first day in which witnesses were called in the state attorney general's prosecution of the 10-term sheriff on 11 felony counts of theft and ethics violations.

Retired Judge Pamela Baschab had the jury leave the courtroom before issuing the Fifth Amendment warning to Trent Willis, founder and CEO of Red Brick Strategies in Huntsville. Red Brick assisted Blakely in his successful 2014 reelection campaign.

Willis, it turns out based on the colloquy between the lawyers as they argued motions to the judge, is the subject of an investigation involving the disappearance of funds from the campaign account of state Rep. Richie Whorton in 2018, a campaign that Red Brick Strategies managed. A separate investigation involving Willis or his associates was mentioned but not described.

In a whispered sidebar with Baschab while Willis remained on the witness stand, Assistant Attorney General Clark Morris, head of the attorney general's anti-corruption unit, appeared to alert the court to the pendency of the investigations and the possible need for Willis to be advised he had a right not to incriminate himself. Baschab had the jury escorted to the jury room and then placed her head in her hands.

After the jury left, Morris acknowledged the investigations, but said Willis is not receiving any special treatment as a result of testifying in the Blakely case.

Blakely defense attorney Marcus Helstowski complained that information about the investigations was not turned over to the defense despite discovery requests early in the case. Morris said her anti-corruption unit did not know about them because a different unit of the office was handling them.

Story continues

"It is embarrassing to our office that this happened," Morris said, and explained that at the time the Attorney General's Office was "siloed" so information on the activities of one unit was not shared with other units.

Blakely's lawyers made a motion that Willis be disqualified as a witness because of the prosecution's failure to notify the defense earlier of the investigations, and that the jury be advised to disregard the testimony that came before he was advised of his rights. The defense also moved for a mistrial, which was denied.

Baschab advised Willis his testimony was suspended until 9 a.m. today, and she advised the lawyers to file briefs outlining their positions on whether he could continue his testimony.

Red Brick Strategies

Before the abrupt end to his testimony, Willis had been providing details on a $4,000 check Red Brick Strategies had issued to Blakely and which, according to other testimony, Blakely deposited into his personal account.

Willis said he reached an arrangement with John Plunk, a lawyer in Athens, and Blakely that Red Brick would handle consulting for Blakely's campaign, which would include designing advertisements, direct mail campaigns and related political work.

Willis said his firm generally works for Republicans. Blakely is a Democrat. Willis said he feared that if campaign disclosures with the Secretary of State's Office showed his firm had received payments from Blakely's campaign account, it would undermine his ability to work with future Republican candidates.

To avoid this issue, Willis said, it was agreed that Plunk would pay Red Brick, rather than the campaign committee. He said it was his expectation that these would be reported as "in-kind contributions" from Plunk to the Blakely campaign, so Red Brick would not appear on the forms.

He said Plunk or a company associated with Plunk made five of the six monthly payments agreed upon at $3,500 each, and he invoiced Plunk for the final $3,500 payment on Nov. 7, 2014, days after Blakely won the election.

Willis said Blakely's campaign committee issued a check for $7,500 to Red Brick on Nov. 14, 2014. In separate testimony, Blakely campaign treasurer Tom Watkins said he issued this check at Blakely's request. According to Willis, Blakely contacted Willis and asked if he could receive a refund for the $4,000 overpayment. Also on Nov. 14, Red Brick issued the $4,000 refund check to Blakely. According to separate testimony, the check was deposited in Blakely's personal account three days later.

Willis testified he signed the check, but Blakely filled in the amount and payee. Asked by Morris why he would give Blakely a blank check, Willis responded he trusted him because "this is the sheriff of Limestone County."

According to phone records, Willis and Blakely spoke twice on Nov. 13, 2014, and eight times the following day.

The testimony was relevant to a count in the indictment alleging that Blakely stole money from his campaign account. Blakely's treasurer testified that if a refund was due, it should have been deposited in the campaign account, not Blakely's personal account.

Campaign contributions

Earlier in the day, the testimony focused on two other campaign contributions.

Blakely was endorsed by the local Realtors organization and received a $1,500 donation from the Alabama Realtors Political Action Committee in December 2014, a month after Blakely had won the election. According to testimony from bank officials Monday, Blakely deposited the money into his personal banking account at Bank Independent, not the campaign account at First National Bank. Blakely's campaign treasurer said he always made the deposits into the campaign account. He said he never reported the PAC contribution to the state because he did not know about it.

Austin Hinds, who is an owner of Austin Hinds Motors in Marshall County, testified he contributed $2,500 to Blakely in November 2017. A copy of the check listed its purpose as "reelection donation." Blakely deposited the check into his personal account, according to banking records. The campaign treasurer testified he did not report the contribution on campaign finance reports because he did not know about it.

In February 2018, campaign treasurer Watkins said, Blakely told him he had received $2,500 in cash as a contribution from Hinds. According to questions by the prosecution, Blakely told Watkins this was just days after one of the sheriff's subordinates was notified that Blakely was being investigated. Blakely gave Watkins a $2,500 check drawn on Blakely's personal account and Watkins deposited it in the campaign account, listing it on state records as a contribution from Hinds made Feb. 2, 2018.

Proceedings began Monday morning with a motion to dismiss filed by one of Blakely's attorneys. Nick Heatherly argued that the charges alleging that Blakely stole from his campaign accounts should be dismissed because Blakely was effectively the owner of the accounts and could not steal from himself. He said the allegations only amounted to violations of the Fair Campaign Practices Act, not theft, and that charges filed under that law were time-barred because they were filed beyond the statute of limitations.

Baschab denied the motion.

eric@decaturdaily.com or 256-340-2435. Twitter @DD_Fleischauer.

Read more here:
Judge in Blakely trial suspends testimony by witness under investigation - Yahoo News