For years, liberals across the country have been doing everything within their power to restrict the rights of private citizens to own and carry guns for protection. The left has made a conscious effort to try and shame supporters of the Second Amendment for daring to exercise their constitutional rights, and numerous liberal legislators have tried to make it very difficult to own a gun in America.
Now, the Wisconsin Supreme Court just ruled that individuals in Madison have the right to carry a firearm for protection on city buses. Specifically, the court ruled that local officials cannot pass gun laws that are stricter than state law.
Wisconsin Supreme Court decides local officials can’t make rules that are stricter than state’s concealed-carry law. https://t.co/Pbzu90KaEY
— AP Central U.S. (@APCentralRegion) March 7, 2017
#Wisconsin Supreme Court Affirms Right to Carry a Firearm for Self-Defense on Madison Buseshttps://t.co/zvglR3fiVi #2A
— NRA (@NRA) March 8, 2017
From NRA-ILA:
Today, in a 5-2 ruling, Wisconsin’s Supreme Court found that the Madison County Transit’s current carry prohibition on their buses is illegal. The ruling affirms the right of law-abiding passengers to carry a firearm for self-defense on Madison County buses, like they are currently allowed to do on buses run by other local transit agencies.
Since 2005, passengers have been forced to disarm when traveling on Madison buses even though state law preempts such a prohibition by local municipalities. Wisconsin Attorney General Brad Schimel filed an amicus brief stating that the Madison ban “conflicts with, defeats the purpose of, and goes against the spirit of state law.”
Despite attempts by the city of Madison to argue that the Wisconsin preemption law doesn’t cover “agency rules,” the city will now need to put an end to its enforcement of the illegal prohibition.
Individuals who choose to use public transportation or are unable to travel in private conveyance should not be prevented from carrying a firearm for self-defense. This illegal prohibition unnecessarily disarmed law-abiding individuals and is thankfully being stopped.
The two liberals on the court who dissented argued that “the majority opinion expanded the law’s intent to fit its purpose. She argued Metro Transit’s policy does not amount to an ordinance or resolution.”
While the left may try to infringe on Second Amendment rights, it’s good to know that the Wisconsin Supreme Court stepped in and saw that the liberal city of Madison had overstepped its authority in trying to restrict when and where someone can carry a gun for protection.
Do you hope that more state Supreme Court step in and strike down local ordinances that try and limit gun rights? Share your thoughts below!
Police will tell you that they cannot defend you and it’s your responsibility to do so. This is a good decision because Madison buses are just as dangerous as other common carriers and your Second Amendment right does not stop at the door of a bus!
Any citizen should be able to defend themselves from intrusion or assault. I live in a Sanctuary state and we are not allowed to carry anything unless you have specific permission. “Yeah, try and get it”. All we can have is pepper spray. I wont go out at night by myself.
The next thing should be commuter trains…If Chicago had this for public transportation, it would be safe again.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court just ruled that individuals in Madison Wisconsin have the right to carry a firearm for protection on city buses. Specifically, the court ruled that local officials cannot pass gun laws that are stricter than state law. AND THE STATE CANNOT PASS ANY LAWS THAT VIOLATE THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND IN OUR CONSTITUTION, ESPECIALLY THE SECOND AMENDMENT. And that’s logical and that’s the TRUTH!
Terrific!
One of the most liberal cities in the disunited States affirms the second amendment?
Zoots and aloors…….!!!
Next thing you know they will strike the “gay Marriage” absurdity, and create another class of civil union that will allow gays to join in a “third way”, a tactic so beloved by the left, that allows them the benefits and privileges that they accuse married heterosensuals of having that they don’t.
We can only hope that common sense will once again reign ‘supreme’.
exactly what part of shall not be infringed is not clear?
The concept must be applied to cities of all states of the U.S.A., since the ruling is supported by the U.S. Constitution. Nor can a mayor, who acts as emperor of a city, or a MOSSAD agent such as R. Emanuel of Chicago, declare the city a “sanctuary city”, violating immigration law and the U.S. Constitution.
Dual citizens who pledge 1st allegiance to a foreign nation, or an entity that alleges itself to be a nation, such as “Israel”, qualify for deportation. To remain in the USA they should be required to pledge 1st allegiance to the USA, and drop dual citizenship.
i do not think the u.s. should be a country with the dual citizenship rule.
Damm right you are either an us citizen or not no duel citzenship