Brookfield pays woman who brought gun to church $7,500

[The Shadow]

I don't mean to nitpick, but their strategy right now is to skip the CCW phase entirely, and go to AZ / AK style "constitutional carry". That means you can carry without a CCW, and you can get a CCW if you want one. The optional CCW would be useful mainly for reciprocity purposes.

As the CCW movement has gathered strength the NRA is pushing for stronger and stronger CCW laws. "Constitutional carry" is the new "shall issue"!

Well, whatever they end up with, it will still be better than California. The fact that Constitutional carry is being considered is leaps and bounds ahead of where California is at. At this point, no one in California would even consider going for Constitutional carry and are just now realizing that shall issue is achievable in the PRK.

[gratefuldog]

Yup!

I agree, and would add that they should start pursuing a % of the offending officer's retirement package. If 5% to 50% chunks of retirement started being awarded to the aggrieved, officers would start to think twice before stomping all over people's civil rights.

.

Agreed, the taxpayers should not be responsible for the offending officer's "mistake!"

[FF/EMT Nick]

Maybe I should quit my job and just OC all day until my money train pulls up and unjustly arrests me

well isn't that Sig worthy

[N6ATF]

LMFAO!

[Patrick-2]

I agree, and would add that they should start pursuing a % of the offending officer's retirement package. If 5% to 50% chunks of retirement started being awarded to the aggrieved, officers would start to think twice before stomping all over people's civil rights.

Just my $.02.

.

You were being sarcastic, but the truth of US civil rights law includes the ability to hold government officials individually responsible for their part in a deprivation of rights action. This means that they cannot hide behind the government shield and claim they were following orders. You can hold them personally responsible.

This is most frequently used in suits against police for racism and brutality.

2A is protected under 42 USC 1983. It is a civil right. And when the right is ruled to include public carry...officers may well be targeted for their individual role in denying your rights.

How many of them do you think will put their house and personal bank accounts on the line for the political desires of their bosses (or even themselves)?

Guys and gals...there is a plan. Sit back and let it unfold.

[Wherryj]

... Only if that donation is sent to a pro-gun education program. Most "Gun education" is just propagand and lies from the antis. Glad she won out and came out of it ok. Go wisconsin.

Well, that and the fact that she obviously lost some time, personal and/or business. She may have lost $7,500 financially, if not at least in frustration.

It's not a ludicrous amount, so in my opinion she deserves the money. There's no shame in it, and it doesn't diminish the "principle". The lawyer is just blowing smoke after losing a dog of a case.

[robcoe]

So they arrested someone for not committing a crime and they act shocked that she sued them?

Admittedly I am not big on open carry, but the police acted like idiots here.

[CCWFacts]

You were being sarcastic, but the truth of US civil rights law includes the ability to hold government officials individually responsible for their part in a deprivation of rights action. This means that they cannot hide behind the government shield and claim they were following orders. You can hold them personally responsible.

Yes but...

How many of them do you think will put their house and personal bank accounts on the line for the political desires of their bosses (or even themselves)?

None.

I'm not familiar with their contracts but I would assume that, as part of their employment, they get liability insurance from their employer. It's another free, untaxed benefit that they get. So even if the guy is found personally liable for $1mil, it's paid by the insurance. And going further I would guess that many of these insurance policies are "self insurance", meaning that the county / city just picks up the tab, drawing from money it has set aside for that purpose.

It's the same as with doctors, for example. They all need hefty malpractice insurance policies. Without those policies they wouldn't be able to do their jobs. Their employers pay for it. When a doctor loses a $1mil malpractice suit the money comes from the insurance carrier.