Monday, December 14, 2015

Collin Bruanel: I Don't Need No Stinking Badges!

Did the Manitowoc County GOP chair just cop to a felony?

"Collin Braunel Bernie Starzewski, while I was on council what would you have thought of me carrying? I carry a hangun every day at work yet I am a civilian. I also am heavily trained. Interestingly enough I carry no license. [...]
December 13, 2015 Manitowoc Herald Times Reporter facebook page 



 (1) Any person who goes armed with a firearm in any building owned or leased by the state or any political subdivision of the state is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.
 (2) This section does not apply to any of the following:
[a-d police former or current]
(e) A licensee, as defined in s. 175.60 (1) (d), or an out-of-state licensee, as defined in s. 175.60 (1) (g).

941.23 Carrying concealed weapon.
 (2) Any person, other than one of the following, who carries a concealed and dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor:  [a-c again police former or current]
[...]
(d) A licensee, as defined in s. 175.60 (1) (d)

In other words... No license = ILLEGAL 

Maybe Mr. Braunel does not understand that a State issued permit is required for concealed carry?  Yet he claims he has been fully trained.  One would expect that training might include information about the governing law.

Then too when he first took office in 2010 concealed carry was not legal anywhere in Wisconsin and only became legal in 2011 after the Republicans took over and passed it so it might depend on when he carried in city hall too.

Mr. Braunel appears to be laboring under the illusion that his job as a security guard alone entitles him to carry his weapons anywhere he likes.  Unfortunately, the reverse is true. 

Mr. Braunel is REQUIRED to have a permit for it gun at work!
Linkedin page

Wisconsin Statute 440.26 clearly states that a license is in fact required and in particular as it relates to "dangerous weapons" used on the job by security guards.
(3m)Rules concerning dangerous weapons. The department shall promulgate rules relating to the carrying of dangerous weapons by a person who holds a license or permit issued under this section or who is employed by a person licensed under this section. The rules shall meet the minimum requirements specified in 15 USC 5902 (b) and shall allow all of the following:
(a) A person who is employed in this state by a public agency as a law enforcement officer to carry a concealed firearm if s. 941.23 (1) (g) 2. to 5. and (2) (b) 1. to 3. applies.
(b) A qualified out-of-state law enforcement officer, as defined in s. 941.23 (1) (g), to carry a concealed firearm if s. 941.23 (2) (b) 1. to 3. applies.
(c) A former officer, as defined in s. 941.23 (1) (c), to carry a concealed firearm if s. 941.23 (2) (c) 1. to 7. applies.
(d) A licensee, as defined in s. 175.60 (1) (d), or an out-of-state licensee, as defined in s. 175.60 (1) (g), to carry a concealed weapon as permitted under s. 175.60.
Mr. Braunel is not a current or former law officer.  With no license to carry he is NOT permitted to carry a weapon on the job.

Be that as it may, Mr. Braunel was asking what I would have thought if he was carrying a weapon in Manitowoc City Council chambers with no license.  My answer is, that if he did so he was in violation of the law as even under the most liberal reading of the statute it at least a misdemeanor.

At the same time violations of the licensing requirement for security guards carry some hefty penalties:
 (8)Penalties. Any person, acting as a private detective, investigator or private security person, or who employs any person who solicits, advertises or performs services in this state as a private detective or private security person, or investigator or special investigator, without having procured the license or permit required by this section, may be fined not less than $100 nor more than $500 or imprisoned not less than 3 months nor more than 6 months or both. Any agency having an employee, owner, officer or agent convicted of the above offense may have its agency license revoked or suspended by the department. Any person convicted of the above offense shall be ineligible for a license for one year.
Mr. Braunel has a lot of explaining to do.




8 comments:

  1. How quickly you forget about you shooting a duck out of season!!! Living in glass houses and throwing stones again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well Hello, Wally!
      I have not heard from you since you retracted your previous posts on the same warn out topic on my Mike Howe expose'.
      http://manitowocmegaphone.blogspot.com/2013/02/villains-scapegoats-and-hypocrites-when.html
      I thought you had perhaps learned something but I guess not.
      Unfortunately Mr. Braunel appears to be in violation of Wis. Stat. 440.26.
      Maybe you should tell him to go get his cc permit?
      Odd a big gun wielding Republican doesn't have one especially when its required for his job, isn't it?

      Delete
    2. Seems to be that Mr. Dueno is asking to be sued. Unless he has some proof? I've seen him admit he has none before, so I guess he wants to give Bernie a lot of money.

      Delete
    3. Its of little concern to me as even the blog where the allegations were made no longer exist. However even if it were true it would carry all the weight of a traffic ticket.
      It has become his little Benghazi.
      On the other hand if Bruanel is really parading around with a "dangerous weapon" at work without the required license he would be in serious trouble.

      Delete
  2. I deleted my comments because you edited them to say things that I didn't say!

    You're right that it was a minor issue, that's why I could never figure out why you went through so much to try to hide it? Calling people lyers, threatening to sue people if they didn't remove the posts, claiming that the time stamps were wrong. The infraction you did do is something that happens quite often because the regulations can be confusing. If you would have just admitted that you messed up and didn't realize you shot it out of season we all would have forgotten about it long, long ago. But when you're so set on refusing to admit what you did it makes you look foolish.

    Go ahead and sue me, I have access to the screen shots where he admits it and I have members of the old forum who will testify that he said he did it. But like I said the fact that he did it is not really a big deal, the big deal is that he refuses to admit he did wrong.

    And for the record I don't see where Colin admitted to carrying in a public building, nor did he admit to carrying concealed. You do not need a permit to open carry. Is that what he's implying? Probably not but there is nothing he said that shows he did carry concealed or in a state owned business.

    DJ be careful because if Bernie (the Internet Duck Commander) stops quickly you're going to end up with your head up his rear end with how much butt kissing you do. Seriously every time he posts something you have to come on and tell him how right he is.

    Bernie please be enough of a man to not edit my posts to make it look like I said something I didn't say. Either leave them as is or delete the whole post if you don't want to hear opposing opinions.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As for Braunel admitting to something you need to read the blog again. He stated very plainly that he did NOT have a license but still carries a gun every day at work. Unfortunately for Mr. Braunel a CC permit is required by State Statute 440.26 to have one. The Penalties for not having the required licenses under that statute is 3 to 6 months in prison and/or $100 to $500.

      Every day that he carries that weapon at work he is in violation of State law.

      Delete
    2. I am reposting this comment as a reply:

      Its interesting that you would claim that I edited your comments because that is exactly what happened in the great "duck" incident.

      Unfortunately Wally, unlike that BBS where the allegations were made blogger.com does not allow moderators (or original posters) to edit comments here. It does however send me emails of all the original comments which I still have if you wish to see them.

      As for suing anyone I never said anything of the sort. In fact I said quite the opposite. Having run for office I officially became a public figure. As such people can make all manner of outrageous defamatory comments about me and there is simply nothing I can do about it except point out the venom and hope the public sees it for what it is. If I were to ever sue anyone certainly your friends Sladky, Brey and the Mayor would qualify if it were legally possible. You might want to check out some of my previous blogs to see their personal attacks on me which of course you have participated in with the same tag "Duck Commander".

      Delete
  3. Its interesting that you would claim that I edited your comments because that is exactly what happened in the great "duck" incident.

    Unfortunately Wally, unlike that BBS where the allegations were made blogger.com does not allow moderators (or original posters) to edit comments here. It does however send me emails of all the original comments which I still have if you wish to see them.

    As for suing anyone I never said anything of the sort. In fact I said quite the opposite. Having run for office I officially became a public figure. As such people can make all manner of outrageous defamatory comments about me and there is simply nothing I can do about it except point out the venom and hope the public sees it for what it is. If I were to ever sue anyone certainly your friends Sladky, Brey and the Mayor would qualify if it were legally possible. You might want to check out some of my previous blogs to see their personal attacks on me which of course you have participated in with the same tag "Duck Commander".

    ReplyDelete