Letters

The Wisconsin Lawyer welcomes letters to the editor on any law-related subject, whether that subject has been a topic of a Wisconsin Lawyer article. The magazine publishes as many letters in each issue as space permits. Please limit letters to 500 words; letters may need to be edited for length and clarity.

Letters responding to previously published letters and to others' views should address the issues and not be a personal attack on others. Letters endorsing political candidates cannot be accepted.

Please mail letters to "Letters to the Editor," Wisconsin Lawyer, P.O. Box 7158, Madison, WI 53707-7158, fax them to (608) 257-5502, or email them.

Violence and the Justice System
Versus Gun Control

I am an attorney practicing law in Wisconsin, and I am writing this letter on my own behalf. As an attorney, I strenuously object to our Board of Governors taking a political position on handgun control under the guise of courthouse security.

Twenty years ago, I had just left the courtroom of then Circuit Judge Neal Nettesheim in the Waukesha County Courthouse when a prisoner being brought in for arraignment overpowered two deputy sheriffs and shot them dead right in the courtroom. The prisoner used the deputies' own handguns. I am in favor of security in our courthouses. I missed being involved in that incident by minutes.

The State Bar Commission on Violence and the Justice System has made certain recommendations to the Board of Governors, including:

1) Requiring handgun manufacturers to install safety features on all new handguns sold in Wisconsin so that guns can only be used by the purchaser.

I don't know what that means, but obviously most domestic violence cases committed with a gun involve a gun that the perpetrator purchased. What possible relevance does that have to courthouse security?

2) Banning the sale of cheap, easy-to-use junk guns, such as "Saturday Night Specials."

I don't know what constitutes a "Saturday Night Special," and obviously, neither does the Commission. I have a number of handguns, any one of which could be characterized as a junk gun or as a "Saturday Night Special." My handguns happen to be quality weapons; but physically and utility-wise they are identical to a "Saturday Night Special" or junk gun. They all shoot bullets. A $500 handgun can do the same damage as a $25 handgun, and both are readily available.

3) Support the current law prohibiting concealed weapons.

I happen to think there is a great deal of evidence establishing that in those states where concealed weapons are allowed crimes against women have radically decreased, and armed robberies have lessened. The thought that the victim might carry a gun has caused the criminal to reconsider certain types of crimes.

My point is that proper security measures at our courthouses similar to what has been done in our airports will make the political issue of gun control unnecessary. The airports have eliminated any problem with handguns. I object to my Board of Governors taking a political position on gun control that is opposed to my personal beliefs. The next obvious step for the State Bar to take would be to decide to donate $10,000 to the Democratic Party because President Clinton supports gun control.

Please stay out of politics. The State Bar of Wisconsin is supposedly a nonpolitical body. If we are going to enter the field of politics, then I want the right to no longer have to be a member of the mandatory Bar. My dues should not be used to sponsor a position I oppose. The handgun position taken by the Commission on Violence and the Justice System has no relevance to the basic issue of courthouse security, which is a nonpolitical issue.

There are many attorneys who are gun collectors, hunters or who just engage in the shooting sports, and, obviously, none of them are on this Commission.

The Board of Governors should support courthouse security, but strike those recommendations listed above supporting handgun control.

Dale W. Arenz
Delafield

I agree that the State Bar should not take positions that are political and unrelated to the purposes of the association as defined in both SCR 10.01 and 10.02. But there are several issues that are both political and related either to law reform and/or the efficient administration of justice.

I believe the bar would be derelict in its SCR duties if it ducked such issues merely because they have a political component. When you get right down to it, whether on the subject of marital property law or carrying a concealed weapon, there are very few issues that do not have some politics attached to them.

The Commission on Violence and the Justice System made a finding that much of the carnage on the streets and its aftermath in both the criminal and civil courts were due to injuries and deaths by firearms, primarily handguns. Rather than taking a "political" stance concerning the right to bear arms, the Commission took a safety approach, suggesting the banning of cheap and very dangerous handguns from importation into this state together with taking advantage of modern technology to assure that a handgun is fired only by its owner. The Commission's research demonstrated that many handguns are stolen and then used to commit crimes. The State Medical Society recently suggested the use of fingerprint technology to control the mechanical unlocking of handguns.

Violence has an enormous detrimental effect upon our system of justice including our courts and prisons. It directly affects the ability of our courts to deliver justice to the people and also affects the ability of our citizens to feel safe in the conduct of their business at their courthouses and other places where the governmental business of the public is transacted.

In summary, I feel that the Commission and the Board of Governors took a nonpolitical approach in recommending improvements in the safety of handguns sold in this state. If some people wish to label that position as "political" I would disagree and state that even if it is partly political, it nevertheless directly affects the efficient administration of justice and is a proper subject for law reform.

David A. Saichek
Past president