Wisconsin Carry Lawsuit Challenges Madison Metro Transit’s Ban Of Lawful Firearms On Buses

Madison Metro Transit
Wisconsin Carry Lawsuit Challenges Madison Metro Transit’s Ban Of Lawful Firearms On Buses
Wisconsin Carry
Wisconsin Carry

Wisconsin –-(Ammoland.com)- On November 19, 2013, Wisconsin Carry, Inc. sent a letter to Madison Metro Transit requesting  they rescind their “ban” on concealed /open carry on Madison Metro Transit buses.

A copy of that letter is available here:


Wisconsin Statute 66.0409 prohibits political subdivisions of the state including cities, villages, towns, and counties from enacting or adopting resolutions that regulate the possession, bearing, and transportation of firearms unless those ordinances or resolutions are the same as, similar to, and no more stringent than, a state statute.  Our legal team has exhaustively reviewed Wisconsin Statutes and finds no law that restricts the right of the people to possess and transport weapons on public mass transit. As such, we believe the Madison Metro Transit policy of prohibiting law-abiding people from legally carrying while they ride Madison Metro busses is preempted by statute and unenforceable.

Our attempt to avoid litigation and save the taxpayers of Madison the expense of funding the cost of defending Madison Metro’s indefensible policy was unsuccessful.   A civil lawsuit against the City of Madison was filed today in Dane County Circuit Court.

A copy of this lawsuit is available here:


Wisconsin Carry, Inc. believes it is imperative that municipalities abide state laws, even those they may have political opposition to.

Furthermore, the right to keep and bear arms is a right guaranteed by both our State and Federal Constitutions.  For many low-income individuals living in high-crime areas, mass transit is their only mode of transportation. Madison Metro Transit’s ban on lawful carry disproportionately disenfranchises low-income individuals from exercising their constitutional rights.

Individuals who rely on mass transit often begin and end their day with a ride on Madison Metro Buses.  The ban on lawful carry therefore, results in those individuals being unable to have the means of self-defense, as they go about their daily lives, that Wisconsin’s Act 35 has extended to the people of Wisconsin.

Nik Clark Chairman – Wisconsin Carry, Inc.
P.O. Box 270403
Milwaukee, WI 53227
[email protected]

Wisconsin Carry, Inc. is a non-profit corporation dedicated to the preservation and reclamation of the rights of law-abiding Wisconsin residents to carry in the manner of their choosing. We believe that “open carry” and “concealed carry” are choices to be made by law-abiding citizens based on their situation and preference. Wisconsin Carry, like many gun-rights organizations in Wisconsin, is investing a great deal of resources to get Wisconsin law changed to allow concealed carry this next legislative session by proposing Constitutional Carry. Wisconsin Carry, Inc. will continue to use legal recourse to deter unlawful treatment of law-abiding Wisconsin residents who currently exercise their right to open carry, and soon will exercise their right to concealed carry in Wisconsin. Visit: www.wisconsincarry.org

Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

The basic problem here is that the bureaurats have nothing at stake when they are guilty of malfeasance, as the taxpayers rather than the offenders get to foot the bill. It is time to start suing the individuals personally for civil rights violations, so there will be an personal incentive to follow the rules, rather than continuing to foster (enable) no accountability for the folks actually making bad decisions.

TSgt B

Sorry. Meant to say “could NOT pass”.


This nations communists just never let up .

TSgt B

A very similar set of circumstances exists in Toledo, Ohio. Ohio passed concealed carry effective April 9, 2004. These laws were passed as “general laws” of the state, and therefore, under the Ohio Constitution, municipal corporations (cities, towns & villages) and all other political subdivisions of the state could pass, or maintain in force, local rules, regulations or laws that are/were in conflict with “general laws”. This was further reinforced with the passage of Ohio Revised Code section 9.68 (preemption) which has been validated and upheld, TWICE, by the Ohio Supreme Court. The Toledo Area Rapid Transit Authority (TARTA) placed… Read more »