Less than four months after a state appeals court upheld the law that makes it a crime for everyone except police officers to carry a concealed weapon, two defendants are once again challenging the law, claiming the right-to-bear-arms amendment to the state constitution takes precedence over the law.

Last Thursday, two cases were opened before the state Supreme Court, and in both the defendants claimed they needed a weapon of some sort for self-defense and protection.

Wisconsin’s 130-year-old ban on carrying concealed weapons was nullified by a 1998 constitutional amendment mandating a right to keep arms, attorneys told the state Supreme Court Thursday.

The current law banning concealed weapons for civilians has been in effect since the 1870s.

In the last term, the state Supreme Court ruled on two similar cases, without modifying or clarifying the current law. Both cases involved the concealed weapons law conflicting with the right-to-bear-arms amendment.

In one of the cases, the Supreme Court ruled a man’s claim of self-defense did not permit him to carry a concealed weapon while changing a tire in a dangerous neighborhood.

The second case did not require the court to determine whether the concealed-weapons law or the right-to-bear-arms amendment took precedence, because the amendment was not in effect when the defendant was arrested.

One of the cases that was opened Thursday involved Munir Hamdan, 56, a grocery-store owner who was charged with a misdemeanor for carrying a concealed weapon. Hamdan claimed self-defense, because the store at which he works is in a high-crime neighborhood.

Hamdan was arrested in November 1999 after police began questioning him at his family-owned food market to ask him about his alcohol sales. Officers found Hamdan carrying a loaded .32-caliber revolver.

“We’ve got a statute here that’s so messed up,” Hamdan’s lawyer, Chris Trebatoski, told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. “Get rid of the thing. Legislature, do your job. Fix it.”

Hamdan survived three armed robberies between the years of 1997 and 1999.

“You’re telling storekeepers in the city of Milwaukee … the only way you can have a gun is if people can see it,” Trebatoski said. “You’re telling people, this store is free rein. Go for it.”

In the hearing, Justice David Prosser said he was concerned about how the current law effects homeowners who keep firearms in cabinets.

Justice Jon Wilcox agreed with Prosser.

“It doesn’t seem to me to be reasonable that if you’re going from place ‘A’ to place ‘B’ in your own place of business that you can’t carry it,” Wilcox said.

Just over a year ago, two Wisconsin politicians sponsored legislation aimed at allowing those who pass background checks and receive proper training to carry concealed weapons. Rep. Scott Gunderson, R-Town of Norway, and Sen. Dave Zien, R-Town of Wheaton, argued that possible criminals would be less likely to commit crimes if they knew their victims could be armed.

The bill was rejected before the Supreme Court in July.

The other case that went before the Supreme Court Thursday involved a Milwaukee man who was convicted in May 2000 of the same charge after officers searched his car and found two guns and marijuana in his car. Phillip Cole, 29, argued he needed the guns for protection.

Currently, 44 states allow some sort of concealed carry for self-defense. Thirty-three of those states have laws similar to the one that was proposed by legislators Gunderson and Zien last year, that allow concealed weapons to those who meet certain requirements but bar people from carrying in places such as taverns, schools and airports.

If the court rules in favor of either defendant, its decision could clarify the right-to-bear-arms amendment approved the 1998 Wisconsin referendum.