Follow the latest on my Twitter feed! x.com/AttyTomGrieve Good news! The Wisconsin DNR has repealed the rule thanks to the Wisconsin institute for law and liberty's lawsuit and no doubt the pressure from viewers watching this video like you!
As a Wisconsinite I had never heard of this restriction. It's almost impossible to go anywhere at all without violating that, even my own home. Prioritize WI.
Right and as a Wisconsinite too, I’ve never heard of anyone using a gun to claim a fish. Almost everyone I know won’t keep a Muskie even for the wall. They will take measurements, pictures and throw it back. This is another embarrassment of what WI has turned into.
DNR has really botched the cwd problem too, the reported deer/vehicle incidents is massive compared to tag harvest, I see more dead deer on the roads than in the freezer
Wisconsinites STOP voting BLUE!! How many other examples of cities (or states) going to complete shit after voting blue endlessly do we need to see??? Look at any west coast major city! They all vote blue endlessly and they are all shit holes (quite literally)!!!! This will continue to happen if people can’t swallow their pride and admit they were wrong in their political opinions… and change to voting red!
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.... Pure violation of the 14th Amendment.
@@bobbie4862 The DNR for all its flaws in the state of WI was the ENVY of American outdoorsmanship . They are one of the best set ups for managing game all over the country. However since the WI DNR chose to allow an Wolf Advocate group who openly says they want to use Wolves to get gun control passed and remove humans from hunting now manage our States game from afar they have sunk to amazing lows as of late. The currently state of the WI DNR is that of which seems to be doing all the wrong things for all the wrong reasons and those reasons seem to have less and less to do with managing game and more to do with managing the feelings of people who do not partake in WI outdoor hunting and fishing at all. By allowing other reasons for game management programs besides the well being of the game populations in the state and allowing Activist groups to stop active and managed hunts in live time they have pretty much given up being game managers and turned into just another enforcement arm of the Police and are falling for the same radical politics the currently police system is falling for . I would like to think that actual WI DNR officers that have been with that group for a long time would eventually stand up for the game they were put there to manage but instead they seem to embrace the Woke idealism that has infected everything in 2024 and refuse to stir the pot to expose why that does not work in the real world.
I grew up in Wisconsin in the 1950s and 1960s. My uncle was an enthusiastic Musky fisherman. He carried a .38 special snub-nose in his tackle box every time he went fishing, just in case he hooked a Musky. He wouldn’t believe how far off the rails Wisconsin has gone. This is a big deal for every Wisconsinite. A lot of fishing is done where bears are prevalent. Is the Wisconsin DNR insane? I would never go unarmed in bear country.
The regulation is from 1999. Crazy that nobody noticed for 25 years. My guess is it’s supposed to mean something other than what it appears to say, because it has obviously never been enforced as it’s written.
And DO NOT allow any forfeiture to a game warden! He is not a judge, and cannot hold court, and cannot seize lawfully owned property. Only a judge can do that!
@@2fathomsdeeper I may state the wardens can confiscate your equipment if they want to. It takes something like poaching or taking a game animal without a license but yes they will take your stuff.
There is NO State where you are allowed to "fish" with a firearm... I would presume it's not a fish issue, but a safety issue... but if I'm out in the woods fishing, and I have my pistol with me incase I run into a bear, a warden is going to look damn foolish giving me a citation for maybe fishing with my gun if I don't have any fish with bullet holes in them... he'd better have video evidence...
IN 1770's THE FOREFATHERS REMOVED THOSE JACK _ _ S's , they've WEASELED their WAY BACK IN AND ARE CALLING themselves, democrats, they NEED TO BE REMOVED AGAIN 😊😊
The judge that said the 2nd ammendment doesn't exist here is an idiot and should be removed from the bench. The Constitution is the law of the land and New York is inclided in this land!
I feel you, down here in Oklahoma the game wardens act like gods. They come onto private property as they wish and I heard they have set up cameras on private land. They argue that they have to ensure laws are being followed. These 3 letter organizations need to be reeled in.
@@MrOldclunkerNot even remotely, their not legally capable of restricting our rights. You know to “Keep and bare arms” bit. What it doesn’t say is unless your state decides otherwise. They can get fqd and pound sand.
@MrOldclunker your comment is nonsensical. So some guy gets drunk and illegally does his gun so you think the rest of the people should have to give up their firearms? No. Just No.
Tom, YES!!! please prioritize any forthcoming treachery by Darth Kaul. As a Wisconsinite since 2000 after escaping IL (I always say my FIB card was formally revoked after living here for 20 years...lol), I have enjoyed much more 2A freedom from my adopted state than my birth state ever recognized. We are fortunate that our legislature has held back most of the liberal craziness (and the courts did their job finding KR innocent), I knew something nefarious was being devised by our liberal Governor and his minions...they've been too quiet about 2A issues.
@@prismblack9631I wasn't referring to the current DNR regulation that Tom is talking about in the video, but to his fast-tracking of the possible "soft announcement" of administrative rules that may constitute felony charges in WI that he mentioned starting at at 5:27.
@@MrOldclunkerLmao, imagine willingly saying 'I too enjoy spending my free time bootlicking for people I've never met, getting afraid of things I don't understand, and hanging out with my wife's boyfriend playing Smash Bros. in my man cave that has all my Funkopops'
My grandfather would always carry a little 25 caliber in his tackle box for the exact reasons you mentioned. Thank you for getting the information to the people!
It is my opinion that _Bruen_ covers the possession and carry of firearms PERIOD, in all cases of legal purposes. If the Statute say no firearms while fishing, the application must be while actively engaged in the activity of fishing. I must say that even then, the statute might be found unconstitutional, as one has the right to carry for the purpose of self defense, even while fishing.
We get that. Have not you got that the anti-freedom anti-liberty Left doesn’t give a flying F_ _ k about the law, your ‘rights’ or about you. They would gladly put you in a reeducation camp ! They don’t care what you said
@@MrOldclunker it didn't say no firearms while fishing... it said "used for the PURPOSE of fishing"... meaning you'd have to be caught with a fish with a bullet hole or be caught shooting at fish... and in that case you should have your gun taken away... you're stupid and dangerous...
This regulation has been around for 25 years, so it looks like it’s a case where it has never been enforced the way it was actually written. Who knows what it is actually supposed to mean.
@@prismblack9631 Yes, for 25 years no one was able to challenge it under the current SCOTUS standard. When new precedent is established, old laws come up for review under the new standard. While Bruen destroys this 25 year old law. No biggie, _McDonald v Chicago_ destroyed laws that had been around for over 100 years, which were valid under _US v Cruikshank._
@MrOldclunker *might be used for fishing. Not is used for fishing. If you have a firearm, it damn well could "might be used" at anytime, therefore protection firearms are not allowed near any waters at all according to the tyrannical dnr.
As a Wisconsinite, this regulation does not surprise me. Wisconsin is a red state with two large blue pimples on our lower region. It's from these large blue pimples on our lower region that the rest of the state's freedom is stripped away. In the red part of the state (most of the state) the DNR is loved just a little more than the police are loved in Madison or Milwaukee.
Same with Illinois and Minnesota. Chicago controls the Illinois. While the twin cities control Minnesota. It’s disgusting how 1 urban center has enough “votes” to politically control the entirety of the state. Watching elections is hilarious when 90% of the state votes Republican but the city voted Democrat so the whole state goes blue 😂 look at any blue state. They’re almost all red throughout most of them, they’re only blue in the cities.
This is exactly what the founding fathers didn’t want to happen. They didn’t want the major population centers controlling the politics of the nation, but here we are. They’re doing exactly that. We need to expand the Electoral College.
If it makes you feel any better, the regulation is 25 years old and apparently has never caused a problem before. Just keep doing what you’ve been doing since 1999.
The tyrant judge that said that the 2nd amendment does not exist in their court should be removed from the bench, disbarred and banned from ever holding any position related to the law.
Can't wait for the challenge to fail for standing. "Oh we don't enforce it that way" should never be an excuse for an unconstitutional law. Personally I think we need legal reform where the state shouldn't be allowed to challenge standing on a facial challenge. We have the right to know if a law on the books could be constitutional under ANY circumstance.
The gun controllers are some of the stupidest people in the world. Maybe you have yhe firearm for protection. They would rather you get attacked by a bear or snake than defend yourself.
Last I checked the constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land in America. And any statue, rule or law that tries to thwart or Infringe upon The Right Of The People To Keep And Bear Arms is unconstitutional.
Wildlife is public property, and the government has a legitimate interest in regulating hunting and fishing. But the mere possession of a firearm on or near bodies of water is not a threat to that property any more than possession anywhere else. Possession is specifically protected by the Second Amendment.
@@big0bad0brad High water mark, most states declare that streams, rivers, and lakes are public property up to and including the high water mark of the banks.
If you go to the oral arguments in Bruen, they bring up carrying in the wilderness. This will fall. You have a right to self-defense in public. The waters are public.
What the heck does banning firearm with taking a fish have to do with possession of a firearm on lakes, shoreline, near water, camping next to water…. I’ll answer that. It has nothing to do with it. This is a blatant attempt at banning firearms possession. There would be unsafe use of firearm shooting at any angle above nearly straight down into the water. So, there may have been incident of fisherman launching a bullet a ways from the boat and caused ricochet causing injury or damage. How in the world does that lead to banning possession of firearms ? In Wisconsin you could almost literally throw a rock and hit water. Who the hell makes these idiotic rules? A clue for you; there are 1000’s of similar laws on the books. This is out of control!
Unfortunately that is not correct. The legislature can allow unelected commissions the authority to make enforceable laws whether you want to call it a rule or whatever. In my state if the wildlife commission wants to change the daily limit of fish, it doesn’t have to call the state legislature back into session. The legislature by enacted law, signed by the governor, has the unelected authority to set bag and possession limits, means of taking fish and game, licensing fees, etc. Yes those have the force of law no matter what they are called since the elected legislature made it a crime to violate a wildlife commission rule. Yes, there has to be an law passed by the legislature. That law says that the commission appointed by the governor can set limits. They still have to comply with the Constitution which is the issue.
The way our ccw is written carry is specifically permitted on state lands and waters to include places where hunting is banned. Never even heard of this. To the best of my knowledge its not enforced or checked etc. Not shooting fish is a no brainer.
@@graywind4326I agree. It’s nearly impossible to not hunt or carry guns near water, I’ve used a boat to get to hunting spots. I’ve never even heard of this rule or seen it enforced
Yes. As a Wisconsin resident very interested in your updates about any changes to gun laws/administrative rules here. Thank you. Keep up the good work.
Are they talking about the "Firearm" being able to be use for fishing or are they referring to the "body of water" that may be used for fishing? If so, no more waterfowl hunting? Was that what was intended? You can't deer hunt anywhere is a river if the river might be used for fishing? And if they're talking about the gun....you can shoot anything with a gun.
This law has been in effect for almost 25 years, they are talking about using the firearm for fishing purposes. And yes we are allowed to hunt in and along waterways.
If Dnr tries to arrest you call sheriffs department and ask that they areest the warden. The warden is in possession on the same water and last time i checked they quality as a person . There is no exemption in the code for law enforcement.
The fact that this "regulation" was promulgated by the DNR is really irrelevant. It's not the source of the law that matters, it's whether or not it directly implicates the second amendment. This definitely does. If I choose to go canoeing/camping in Wisconsin, I need to have the ability to defend myself. This regulation would deny me that right.
All these states have figured out they can Ignore SC Rulings. With Zero Consequences. Other than the Hand Wringing that goes on afterward. We get the Gov. we Deserve.
Tom, I’m stunned but not surprised. I have a 250 yard range in my back yard a mere 100 feet from what I know the DNR would see as a fishing stream. And with Wisconsin an advocate of the open fields doctrine WOW this is nuts. Thanks Evers and AG Kaul
This feels particularly odd because we have a MASSIVE issue with invasive carp that you’re asked to kill if you come in contact with. I, like many, have used firearms to dispatch them when they come to shallow reeds to spawn. It’s weird that suddenly what we were told was helping deal with insurmountable invasive carp species is suddenly being made illegal by the same people who told us that it was helpful to do it.
"For All Lawful Purposes, //such as self defense//" This phrase is not a limitation ** TO ** self defense... there should not be restrictions on the keep of any arm at any point save inside a clear envelope of security such as at the courthouse or airport. Restrictions on using firearms for the purpose of hunting or fishing, similar to restrictions on using firearms for the purpose of "premeditated manslaughter", may be legal. ... defense of self from grave bodily harm from one hyped up on drugs, a grizzly bear, or a fish is different than the intentional hunting of such...
My mom and dad came from Northern Wisconsin. My mom's Dad was a Muskie hunter. He Always carried a .22 caliber High Standard Sentinel revolver. My Dad caught a big one in the Gile Flowage, a man-made lake crested by damming the Montreal river. They returned Home covered in blood. Grandpa had to shoot the Fish to subdue it. It was a 40+ In fish. Lots of great memories. My brother inherited the revolver. I got my grandfather's Ithaca shotgun.
This is facts. I read the same study. They also did the same study in New York, Colorado and California. Turns out, they are all suffering the same shortage in appendages. The state of California has deemed anything over 3 inches abnormal and has been known to cause serious injuries. Yea, I guess they were trying to scare women into going small 👍👍
If you want to help, two options 1) Visit and donate to Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty! will-law.org/ 2) If money is tight, go drop a 5 star review at Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty on Google, let them know you appreciate their work and that Tom sent you! Stay safe
Hi Tom, I have rather Blick view on Wisconsin, (Maybe other States to...NY, Cal.?) This is Classic case of putting "wage" of "foot" in the DOOR! (the Door guarding our Freedoms...) If they get "away" with that (!) The next regulations Are Comming....😮😢
You make it sound as having a gun near water is illegal. Or you can't have a fishing pole and a gun near water? BC if it's just being near water with a gun, then explain duck hunting legality. There is a way to bring it down.
Same here. All these bullshit laws are unconstitutional. Shall not be infringed. I’m seriously thinking about quitting my job and living off of hunting/ fishing/farming. For Every hour I work my taxes are funding tyranny. I know my tax dollars don’t make any difference but I still feel guilty for paying taxes that I know will not be spent properly.
just sell the guns . why you need them? isn't a knife or some other weapon sufficient for protection? oh i know what it is. you dont want to relinquish that "authority" of being a gun owner. like a "crutch" you can "count on" when things "dont go in your favor". BRO I KNOW. once that "feeling" is no longer there and you come back down to normalcy that you cant infact "fuck up anyone anymore" . you gonna relax and calm down. thats all. "yeah i got these giant invisible ballls because i own a gun" . come on dude. no other reason to own a gun other than to exert "authority".
![Eminem - Somebody Save Me (feat. Jelly Roll) [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Vwa0HenQMi4/mqdefault.jpg)
Follow the latest on my Twitter feed! x.com/AttyTomGrieve
Good news! The Wisconsin DNR has repealed the rule thanks to the Wisconsin institute for law and liberty's lawsuit and no doubt the pressure from viewers watching this video like you!
Damn. That would make duck hunting somewhat problematic.
… or deer hunting near any waterway.
lol. Yeah, they never know, you "might" be fishing.
I was thinking the same thing as I was watching the video...
Plus us that float the rivers while deer hunting.
And trapping
Please make the Wisconsin update a priority!
As a Wisconsinite I had never heard of this restriction. It's almost impossible to go anywhere at all without violating that, even my own home. Prioritize WI.
Right and as a Wisconsinite too, I’ve never heard of anyone using a gun to claim a fish. Almost everyone I know won’t keep a Muskie even for the wall. They will take measurements, pictures and throw it back. This is another embarrassment of what WI has turned into.
DNR has really botched the cwd problem too, the reported deer/vehicle incidents is massive compared to tag harvest, I see more dead deer on the roads than in the freezer
Wisconsinites STOP voting BLUE!!
How many other examples of cities (or states) going to complete shit after voting blue endlessly do we need to see???
Look at any west coast major city! They all vote blue endlessly and they are all shit holes (quite literally)!!!! This will continue to happen if people can’t swallow their pride and admit they were wrong in their political opinions… and change to voting red!
@@ekimnamdets6946Yeah the WI DNR is kinda known for being pretty incompetent
That puddle near your driveway after it rains could be considered a body of water according to the idiots in charge.
Shall Not Be Infringed!! 2024!!
Unconstitutional. So NO. The gov't can get fuk'd
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States....
Pure violation of the 14th Amendment.
Amen. A government voiding its own laws in no government at all.
But what ya gonna do when they come for you?? I always fish strapped, wtf??
@@kimmichaels899 Do what the Constitution tells you to do. Fight back and refuse them.
Stop paying taxes. You're funding your own tyranny. I stopped paying taxes and stopped paying for licenses.
The DNR should be de-funded because once they start misusing their power there is no reason to keep them around !!!
The WI DNR was the best in the country until they sold out and let people tell them how many wolves lived here.
The dnr has been abusing their power for a while.
Youre not going to do anything other than sit online and cry though
@@bobbie4862 The DNR for all its flaws in the state of WI was the ENVY of American outdoorsmanship . They are one of the best set ups for managing game all over the country. However since the WI DNR chose to allow an Wolf Advocate group who openly says they want to use Wolves to get gun control passed and remove humans from hunting now manage our States game from afar they have sunk to amazing lows as of late. The currently state of the WI DNR is that of which seems to be doing all the wrong things for all the wrong reasons and those reasons seem to have less and less to do with managing game and more to do with managing the feelings of people who do not partake in WI outdoor hunting and fishing at all. By allowing other reasons for game management programs besides the well being of the game populations in the state and allowing Activist groups to stop active and managed hunts in live time they have pretty much given up being game managers and turned into just another enforcement arm of the Police and are falling for the same radical politics the currently police system is falling for .
I would like to think that actual WI DNR officers that have been with that group for a long time would eventually stand up for the game they were put there to manage but instead they seem to embrace the Woke idealism that has infected everything in 2024 and refuse to stir the pot to expose why that does not work in the real world.
Gun control isn't about guns, it's about control...
how do we make sure the elites are also holding their end of the bargain by not owning any guns? do we need to visit them? "we might have to"
I grew up in Wisconsin in the 1950s and 1960s. My uncle was an enthusiastic Musky fisherman. He carried a .38 special snub-nose in his tackle box every time he went fishing, just in case he hooked a Musky. He wouldn’t believe how far off the rails Wisconsin has gone. This is a big deal for every Wisconsinite. A lot of fishing is done where bears are prevalent. Is the Wisconsin DNR insane? I would never go unarmed in bear country.
The regulation is from 1999. Crazy that nobody noticed for 25 years. My guess is it’s supposed to mean something other than what it appears to say, because it has obviously never been enforced as it’s written.
The identity of the DNR employees who made these changes should be made public.
Should be easy enough with a foia request
Fired, retirement entailed, banned from public service.
Wisconsin voted in a Democrat governor and the governor asked for this.
@@SSHitMan The administrative code at issue was created in 1999. At that time the governor of Wisconsin was Tommy Thompson who is a Republican.
@@Extem1 RINOs aren't real big on the 2A either, they don't like the peasants being armed.
As a resident of Wisconsin, I need answers as to why my rights are being threatened. Unconstitutional to the fullest, shall not be infringed.
Idk ask the commiefornia transplants who moved here
As a Coloradan who has family in WI, fight like hell against any and all anti-gun lobbies.
Quit electing democrats
The DNR doesn't have constitutional power to write or edit laws. This is another example of how corrupt the state of Wisconsin is.
Tar and feather has nothing to do with firearms but it's very effective against those committing tyranny
And DO NOT allow any forfeiture to a game warden! He is not a judge, and cannot hold court, and cannot seize lawfully owned property. Only a judge can do that!
@@2fathomsdeeper I may state the wardens can confiscate your equipment if they want to. It takes something like poaching or taking a game animal without a license but yes they will take your stuff.
Yes I want to know more about Wisconsin gun laws and any other bureaucratic non-sense that's going on.
So wrong, going after the honest and turning them into a felon
There is NO State where you are allowed to "fish" with a firearm... I would presume it's not a fish issue, but a safety issue... but if I'm out in the woods fishing, and I have my pistol with me incase I run into a bear, a warden is going to look damn foolish giving me a citation for maybe fishing with my gun if I don't have any fish with bullet holes in them... he'd better have video evidence...
@@t.c.2776actually in flordia you need to be fishing in order to open carry
How about we ban bureaucrats!
That makes so much more sense.
And, finally *F J B*
So Jo doesn't control the DNR
@@ILovePancakes24he doesn't control anything 😂
@@ILovePancakes24 FJB anyways.
IN 1770's THE FOREFATHERS REMOVED THOSE JACK _ _ S's , they've WEASELED their WAY BACK IN AND ARE CALLING themselves, democrats, they NEED TO BE REMOVED AGAIN 😊😊
With lakes and streams being "Gun-Free Zones" there's no reason for DNR rangers to carry firearms as well.
I wonder how many concealed carry owners have broken that law without realizing it. Especially out of staters.
The judge that said the 2nd ammendment doesn't exist here is an idiot and should be removed from the bench. The Constitution is the law of the land and New York is inclided in this land!
This video isn't about NY.
Wrong video dude. This isn't about the Derek Taylor case
What stupid respondants! Tom specifically mentioned NY and the whacko judge.
You were entirely on target with your comment! (Pun intended.)
@@Enjoyer.762that judge was mentioned in this video by Tom
@@ecobasetech4558same response
They must have taken some tips from ATF. So tired of bureaucrats passing "laws" without the benefit of legislative action.
I feel you, down here in Oklahoma the game wardens act like gods. They come onto private property as they wish and I heard they have set up cameras on private land. They argue that they have to ensure laws are being followed. These 3 letter organizations need to be reeled in.
Wisconsin isn't the state to fuck with in these regards.
It could all start in Wisconsin
Wisconsin’s AG has got to go.
But this has been on the books for 25 years. ? Did we need Bruen to challenge this, or has it never been enforced?
@@mountainjeffthe code was supposed to have been updated to be in compliance with CC law passed in 2010. It’s not valid.
Yes he is a F ing lefty hack that frees criminals and sues and charges anyone who supports MAGA!!
This will go to the Wisconsin Supreme Court and they will keep the ban. The Democrats are taking over the entire state with the SC and redistricting
And why does my right to bear arms end at waterside? This has nothing to do with shooting fish and is an obvious overreach!
@MrOldclunker So you approve of government over reach then. Always taking rights and freedoms away in the name of safety and security.
@@MrOldclunkerNot even remotely, their not legally capable of restricting our rights. You know to “Keep and bare arms” bit. What it doesn’t say is unless your state decides otherwise. They can get fqd and pound sand.
@MrOldclunker your comment is nonsensical. So some guy gets drunk and illegally does his gun so you think the rest of the people should have to give up their firearms? No. Just No.
@@MrOldclunker BS, your reaching.
@@MechanicalMafioso Just carry anyway, if anything, keep it concealed but readily accessible.
Tom, YES!!! please prioritize any forthcoming treachery by Darth Kaul. As a Wisconsinite since 2000 after escaping IL (I always say my FIB card was formally revoked after living here for 20 years...lol), I have enjoyed much more 2A freedom from my adopted state than my birth state ever recognized. We are fortunate that our legislature has held back most of the liberal craziness (and the courts did their job finding KR innocent), I knew something nefarious was being devised by our liberal Governor and his minions...they've been too quiet about 2A issues.
Actually this regulation predates you moving to Wisconsin, it was written in 1999.
@@prismblack9631I wasn't referring to the current DNR regulation that Tom is talking about in the video, but to his fast-tracking of the possible "soft announcement" of administrative rules that may constitute felony charges in WI that he mentioned starting at at 5:27.
It is The Bill of RIGHTS.....NOT the Bill of PERMISSIONS !
Yes! Please make the Wisconsin update a priority!
If you are not an elected representative then it should illegal for you to make any "rule" that can take my property or money.
OR INFRINGE ON ANY RIGHT.
And it should have to go through legislation… overreach and all that..
And our God given rights.
Regulations are not laws. Only our elected representatives can make laws. And this is the crux of the matter.
Awaiting the overturning of Chevron deference.
vote 'em all out , your life and liberty depends on it.
Wisconsin is a Constitutional Open Carry State.
They have no authority to tell me I can't carry while hunting, fishing, or hiking.
Definitely prioritize the WI Update
Commies, the whole lot of them.
Fact,
Aye
Their not commies. Do your homework.
@MadMomma-kj9ks idiot if you think otherwise. Grow a brain. As of this post, 127 people agree with me.
Commies yes
Yes Tom!!! Fast track telling me what our AG will do to turn me into a felon!
Sounds like more treason.
Free men don't ask permission.
@@MrOldclunker happily divorced. Thanks for opening that door to warn more free men not to make that mistake with bias family courts.
@@MrOldclunker Typical democrat, unable to address the issue so instead attacks the messenger. Pathetic.
@@MrOldclunkerLmao, imagine willingly saying 'I too enjoy spending my free time bootlicking for people I've never met, getting afraid of things I don't understand, and hanging out with my wife's boyfriend playing Smash Bros. in my man cave that has all my Funkopops'
@@MrOldclunker 15 sheckles have been deposited into your account.
I dont see how any state can make laws against the 2nd Amendment period!
Because we allow them to. We continuously vote them back in.
@@gifthorse3675the problem isn’t that they keep getting voted in, it’s that their tyranny isn’t treated as such
they cant
@@SoloRenegade Yet, they do...all the time.
@@darkgardener9577 doesn't make it legal. SCOTUS has already ruled that all laws that violate the US Constitution are void.
My grandfather would always carry a little 25 caliber in his tackle box for the exact reasons you mentioned. Thank you for getting the information to the people!
WI DNR is terrible... not the officers, but the Madison office!
A big "yes" to prioritizing the Wisconsin update please
"All laws, rules and practices which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void" Marbury v. Madison
Only If you have a Gov. who pays Attention to Laws, Rules & Practices. We No longer have that.
Do not comply, do not forfeit, do not pay fines.
Propose a bill to cut the DNR budget by 50%.
That will get their attention.
It is my opinion that _Bruen_ covers the possession and carry of firearms PERIOD, in all cases of legal purposes. If the Statute say no firearms while fishing, the application must be while actively engaged in the activity of fishing. I must say that even then, the statute might be found unconstitutional, as one has the right to carry for the purpose of self defense, even while fishing.
We get that. Have not you got that the anti-freedom anti-liberty Left doesn’t give a flying F_ _ k about the law, your ‘rights’ or about you. They would gladly put you in a reeducation camp ! They don’t care what you said
@@MrOldclunker it didn't say no firearms while fishing... it said "used for the PURPOSE of fishing"... meaning you'd have to be caught with a fish with a bullet hole or be caught shooting at fish... and in that case you should have your gun taken away... you're stupid and dangerous...
This regulation has been around for 25 years, so it looks like it’s a case where it has never been enforced the way it was actually written. Who knows what it is actually supposed to mean.
@@prismblack9631 Yes, for 25 years no one was able to challenge it under the current SCOTUS standard. When new precedent is established, old laws come up for review under the new standard. While Bruen destroys this 25 year old law. No biggie, _McDonald v Chicago_ destroyed laws that had been around for over 100 years, which were valid under _US v Cruikshank._
@MrOldclunker
*might be used for fishing.
Not is used for fishing. If you have a firearm, it damn well could "might be used" at anytime, therefore protection firearms are not allowed near any waters at all according to the tyrannical dnr.
As a Wisconsinite, this regulation does not surprise me. Wisconsin is a red state with two large blue pimples on our lower region. It's from these large blue pimples on our lower region that the rest of the state's freedom is stripped away. In the red part of the state (most of the state) the DNR is loved just a little more than the police are loved in Madison or Milwaukee.
😂
Apparently this regulation is from 1999. Crazy that it’s been around that long without being noticed.
As a Milwaukee resident I have to say that you drawing a parallel between my city and a pimple is insulting... To pimples.
Same with Illinois and Minnesota. Chicago controls the Illinois. While the twin cities control Minnesota. It’s disgusting how 1 urban center has enough “votes” to politically control the entirety of the state. Watching elections is hilarious when 90% of the state votes Republican but the city voted Democrat so the whole state goes blue 😂 look at any blue state. They’re almost all red throughout most of them, they’re only blue in the cities.
This is exactly what the founding fathers didn’t want to happen. They didn’t want the major population centers controlling the politics of the nation, but here we are. They’re doing exactly that.
We need to expand the Electoral College.
Unelected officials acting like legislators, making laws, clear over-reach.
As someone from Wisconsin i am getting sick of this crap.
If it makes you feel any better, the regulation is 25 years old and apparently has never caused a problem before. Just keep doing what you’ve been doing since 1999.
We need to change things in this country so that un-elected boards can never enforce anything that is not passed by a vote of the people.
Prioritize wisconsin
Let them open the fouth box of liberty and see how they like it when "The People" follow the guidance of our founding fathers.
The tyrant judge that said that the 2nd amendment does not exist in their court should be removed from the bench, disbarred and banned from ever holding any position related to the law.
Can't wait for the challenge to fail for standing. "Oh we don't enforce it that way" should never be an excuse for an unconstitutional law. Personally I think we need legal reform where the state shouldn't be allowed to challenge standing on a facial challenge. We have the right to know if a law on the books could be constitutional under ANY circumstance.
The gun controllers are some of the stupidest people in the world. Maybe you have yhe firearm for protection. They would rather you get attacked by a bear or snake than defend yourself.
Dude they don’t give a rip about anyone’s safety but their own.
Last I checked the constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land in America.
And any statue, rule or law that tries to thwart or Infringe upon The Right Of The People To Keep And Bear Arms is unconstitutional.
There shall be no law restricting the citizens from bearing arms.
Wildlife is public property, and the government has a legitimate interest in regulating hunting and fishing. But the mere possession of a firearm on or near bodies of water is not a threat to that property any more than possession anywhere else. Possession is specifically protected by the Second Amendment.
And by the Wis Constitution
They will have a hard time enforcing this on private property.
most people here do not fish on public property A, and B what the water touches, including the water itsellf, is not private property.
No they won't. They don't care and use SWAT. They want gun owners disarmed and dead.
Nope, not with the open fields doctrine. Your fair game, pardon the pun.
@@BoxMediaDrone First of all, proofread your comment. Second of all, the banks are not necessarily public property.
@@big0bad0brad High water mark, most states declare that streams, rivers, and lakes are public property up to and including the high water mark of the banks.
By all means, prioritize! We can't keep up on this insanity so we need advocates like you to keep us informed. Thank you for your work.
I believe now that the recent SCOTUS decision on Chevron will overturn this rule.
If you go to the oral arguments in Bruen, they bring up carrying in the wilderness. This will fall. You have a right to self-defense in public. The waters are public.
Defending one's self, has nothing to do with fishing... Even while fishing🤷♂
Tell me you have never left your house and back yard. without telling me you have never left your house and back yard
@@timothylarson8470 🖕You know nothing of my travels.🖕
@timothylarson8470 Your ignorance is palpable.
@@timothylarson8470 As a matter of fact, I have been in 49 of 50 states and sailed all 7 seas. What about you?
What the heck does banning firearm with taking a fish have to do with possession of a firearm on lakes, shoreline, near water, camping next to water…. I’ll answer that. It has nothing to do with it. This is a blatant attempt at banning firearms possession. There would be unsafe use of firearm shooting at any angle above nearly straight down into the water. So, there may have been incident of fisherman launching a bullet a ways from the boat and caused ricochet causing injury or damage. How in the world does that lead to banning possession of firearms ? In Wisconsin you could almost literally throw a rock and hit water. Who the hell makes these idiotic rules? A clue for you; there are 1000’s of similar laws on the books. This is out of control!
Yes I want to see what the AG's office is trying to do, ASAP!
Rules aren't laws and the DNR doesnt write legislature.
Unfortunately that is not correct.
The legislature can allow unelected commissions the authority to make enforceable laws whether you want to call it a rule or whatever.
In my state if the wildlife commission wants to change the daily limit of fish, it doesn’t have to call the state legislature back into session.
The legislature by enacted law, signed by the governor, has the unelected authority to set bag and possession limits, means of taking fish and game, licensing fees, etc.
Yes those have the force of law no matter what they are called since the elected legislature made it a crime to violate a wildlife commission rule.
Yes, there has to be an law passed by the legislature. That law says that the commission appointed by the governor can set limits.
They still have to comply with the Constitution which is the issue.
This is crazy. Wisconsin is my neighbor and I felt somewhat liberated when travelling there.
The way our ccw is written carry is specifically permitted on state lands and waters to include places where hunting is banned. Never even heard of this. To the best of my knowledge its not enforced or checked etc. Not shooting fish is a no brainer.
@@graywind4326I agree. It’s nearly impossible to not hunt or carry guns near water, I’ve used a boat to get to hunting spots. I’ve never even heard of this rule or seen it enforced
Yes. As a Wisconsin resident very interested in your updates about any changes to gun laws/administrative rules here. Thank you. Keep up the good work.
These people are traitors.
We need to have any and all information about an infringement to our rights!
Let's see the secret felony! Bring it on.
So basically atf is nipping all those inevitable “lost my guns in boating accident” in the bud before they roll out the really heavy gun regulations.
Defund Wisconsin.
This is what we get with a left supreme court, AG, and GOV.
Except this regulation was written in 1999. Insane that nobody noticed for 25 years.
Are they talking about the "Firearm" being able to be use for fishing or are they referring to the "body of water" that may be used for fishing?
If so, no more waterfowl hunting? Was that what was intended? You can't deer hunt anywhere is a river if the river might be used for fishing?
And if they're talking about the gun....you can shoot anything with a gun.
It's an excuse for Democrats in WI to confiscate firearms.
Who knows what they meant to say. The regulation is from 1999 and obviously they haven’t been out arresting all duck hunters for the last 25 years.
This law has been in effect for almost 25 years, they are talking about using the firearm for fishing purposes. And yes we are allowed to hunt in and along waterways.
If Dnr tries to arrest you call sheriffs department and ask that they areest the warden. The warden is in possession on the same water and last time i checked they quality as a person . There is no exemption in the code for law enforcement.
As a Wisconsinite I really appreciate news about our state. It’s hard for me to find state specific 2a news.
The fact that this "regulation" was promulgated by the DNR is really irrelevant. It's not the source of the law that matters, it's whether or not it directly implicates the second amendment. This definitely does. If I choose to go canoeing/camping in Wisconsin, I need to have the ability to defend myself. This regulation would deny me that right.
Bears or no bears.
Priotize the WI story from the AG plz
"Shall not be infringed!!!"
Not a law? Ignore their stupid regulations!
Bruen should apply as it covers all activities.
All these states have figured out they can Ignore SC Rulings. With Zero Consequences. Other than the Hand Wringing that goes on afterward. We get the Gov. we Deserve.
We need local authorities, like county Sheriffs, to actually stand against the DNR. This is getting beyond ludicrous.
Crazy... Florida Gun law says you can Open Carry traveling to/from Hunting, Fishing and Camping legally.
but wisconsin isnt florida. so it makes no difference
Unpopular opinion: i think Bruen should apply to any law in the U.S.
How is that an unpopular opinion?
@LGB-FJB cause I'm sure there's a lot of people on both sides who wouldn't like that. I can't speak for everyone, of course, but I'm just guessing
@@ocean7931
I think that 99.9% of pro Second Amendment people think that Bruen is correct.
Tom, I’m stunned but not surprised. I have a 250 yard range in my back yard a mere 100 feet from what I know the DNR would see as a fishing stream. And with Wisconsin an advocate of the open fields doctrine WOW this is nuts. Thanks Evers and AG Kaul
This was done prior to 2000. Thats 24 years ago. Its never been enforced unless maybe someone was shooting fish.
And we need to repeal the Open Field Doctrine. The Institute for Justice is working on it.
This feels particularly odd because we have a MASSIVE issue with invasive carp that you’re asked to kill if you come in contact with. I, like many, have used firearms to dispatch them when they come to shallow reeds to spawn.
It’s weird that suddenly what we were told was helping deal with insurmountable invasive carp species is suddenly being made illegal by the same people who told us that it was helpful to do it.
Thanks for the heads up! Keep up the great work you're doing!
"For All Lawful Purposes, //such as self defense//"
This phrase is not a limitation ** TO ** self defense... there should not be restrictions on the keep of any arm at any point save inside a clear envelope of security such as at the courthouse or airport.
Restrictions on using firearms for the purpose of hunting or fishing, similar to restrictions on using firearms for the purpose of "premeditated manslaughter", may be legal. ... defense of self from grave bodily harm from one hyped up on drugs, a grizzly bear, or a fish is different than the intentional hunting of such...
We have a lot of water in Wisconsin and we have a lot of firearms.
theres a pond and stream across the road from my house, county property, def an absurd ruling that needs to be sued into oblivion.
I think that Bruin covers all gun laws regardless of use.
Please tell us what our AG is trying to do to take away our 2A rights.
I'm here in the North Woods of Wisconsin.
Fast track the next video, please and thank you!!
- Godspeed
My mom and dad came from
Northern Wisconsin. My mom's
Dad was a Muskie hunter. He
Always carried a .22 caliber High
Standard Sentinel revolver. My
Dad caught a big one in the Gile
Flowage, a man-made lake crested by damming the Montreal river. They returned
Home covered in blood. Grandpa had to shoot the
Fish to subdue it. It was a 40+
In fish. Lots of great memories.
My brother inherited the revolver. I got my grandfather's
Ithaca shotgun.
Well, based upon recent scientific study that y'all heard here first, I guess the guys making the laws in Wisconsin have tiny appendages.
Read that article! True.
This is facts. I read the same study.
They also did the same study in New York, Colorado and California. Turns out, they are all suffering the same shortage in appendages.
The state of California has deemed anything over 3 inches abnormal and has been known to cause serious injuries.
Yea, I guess they were trying to scare women into going small 👍👍
@@rickwells5624 Ha! I'm amazed that CA hasn't ruled that members > 3" are carcinogenic for women!
Its a prerequisite for becoming a bureaucrat.
What does the size of their fingers have to do with anything?
If you want to help, two options
1) Visit and donate to Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty! will-law.org/
2) If money is tight, go drop a 5 star review at Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty on Google, let them know you appreciate their work and that Tom sent you!
Stay safe
Hi Tom, I have rather Blick view on Wisconsin, (Maybe other States to...NY, Cal.?) This is Classic case of putting "wage" of "foot" in the DOOR! (the Door guarding our Freedoms...)
If they get "away" with that (!) The next regulations Are Comming....😮😢
Crazy that this regulation is from 1999 and is just now coming to light.
@@prismblack9631 The dismantling started long time ago!(Carter...) In the 90's it was in full swing! The "woke-nes" was already there (!) Only hidden!
@@prismblack9631 It started long time ago.... in the 90's was in full swing...just hidden. Since 2008 is in the open....😮😢
You make it sound as having a gun near water is illegal. Or you can't have a fishing pole and a gun near water? BC if it's just being near water with a gun, then explain duck hunting legality. There is a way to bring it down.
WI here. Yes, let us know anything that pertains to WI legislation or bureaucratic rules.
Absolutely make the video on what the Wisconsin AG is up to
Don't live in Wisconsin but I'd still like to see it for the folks in Wisconsin.
There is no waterfowl hunting in WI?
As a resident of central WI, I appreciate your updates and politely ask for more WI news.
Thank you.
Keep Wisconsin info coming
Bro, i live in Wisconsin. I need to know how f'ed I am and what tyranny I am going to need to resist against.
Same here. All these bullshit laws are unconstitutional. Shall not be infringed. I’m seriously thinking about quitting my job and living off of hunting/ fishing/farming. For Every hour I work my taxes are funding tyranny. I know my tax dollars don’t make any difference but I still feel guilty for paying taxes that I know will not be spent properly.
Right? Dude can’t drop a bomb like that as a teaser
just sell the guns . why you need them? isn't a knife or some other weapon sufficient for protection? oh i know what it is. you dont want to relinquish that "authority" of being a gun owner. like a "crutch" you can "count on" when things "dont go in your favor". BRO I KNOW. once that "feeling" is no longer there and you come back down to normalcy that you cant infact "fuck up anyone anymore" . you gonna relax and calm down. thats all. "yeah i got these giant invisible ballls because i own a gun" . come on dude. no other reason to own a gun other than to exert "authority".
Yes. More, please.