I've taken this info from a few posts made to this site. You could have looked up the infomation easily.
Although the Supreme Court has not ruled on the enforceability of the
revised Federal GFSZA; the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has. They
specifically reviewed the changes made by Congress following the SCOTUS
decision in United States v Lopez and they found the amended version to
be constitutional in 2005.
See United States v Dorsey.
In 2007, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
actually upheld a conviction for a gun that a woman had stored in her
home. Her home just happened to be within 1000 feet of a school, and it
happened to be excluded from the "private property" exception because
it was part of a housing project.
See United States v Belen Nieves-Castano
http://www.lexisone.com/lx1/caselaw/...=y&l1loc=FCLOW
Here are links to a few more federal convictions that were upheld under
the current Federal GFSZA. I realize they're not dealing with the
Wisconsin law, but I'm sure they would be useful if you ever get a
chance to challenge the Federal GFSZA.
United States v Danks (1999)
United States v Tait (2000)
United States v Haywood (2003)
United States v Smith (2005)
United States v Weekes (2007)
United States v Benally (2007)
United States v Cruz-Rodriguez (2008)
____________
In addition I have a letter from the BATF that confirms that your NON-RESIDENT CCW PERMIT does not exempt you from the GFSZ unless you are in the state that issued it.
So if you have a UTAH non-resident CCW permit, you are NOT exempted from the GFSZ when you CCW in any other state than Utah.
There is significant pressure NOT to make this information public because it would upset the applecart, but most people don't know they are at risk of being convicted of a felony for the GFSZ statute when they carry with their non-resident permits in states other than that which issued the permit.
Of course I'm sure all CCW permit holders trust the government to use its discretion and not prosecute you for something like that (sarcasm)
_______________
Here is some more information passed along to me from my out of state contact. Links to each case:
Here are the updated links to the Federal GFSZA Convictions. I have been
unable to locate the United States v Benally Case Again.
United States v Danks
(1999)
http://openjurist.org/221/f3d/1037/u...v-jordan-danks
United States v Tait (2000) (Attempted prosecution of an Alabama permit
holder)
http://openjurist.org/202/f3d/1320/united-states-v-tait
United States v Haywood
(2003)
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-3rd-circuit/1270681.html
United States v Dorsey (2005) (Upheld the revised law as constitutional)
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1067767.html
United States v Smith (2005)
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-1st-circuit/1379992.html This case says
that the mere movement of the gun's component parts in Interstate
Commerce is enough to satisfy the jurisdictional element needed for
conviction.
United States v Nieves-Castaño (2007)
http://openjurist.org/480/f3d/597/un...-nieves-castao A woman
was convicted for having a gun in her home; which happened to be within
1000ft of a school.
United States v Weekes
(2007)
http://www.lexisone.com/lx1/caselaw/...=y&l1loc=FCLOW
United States v Benally (2007) I have been unable to find an active link
to this case.
United States v Cruz-Rodriguez (2008)
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-1st-circuit/1166100.html