Wi. concealed carry

The Wi legs. was supposed to vote on overriding the Concealed Carry veto today. Did anyone hear how the vote went?

The vote was delayed until tomorrow. See this link for details.

http://www.wisconsinconcealedcarry.com/html/01_21_04-novote.html

Jon J.

Senate Veto Overridden! Common sense prevails.

The bill goes back to the assembly for thier vote. It’s looking like a close vote there.

Jon J.

Common sense on which side? I haven’t been following this much.
Thanks,
Steve

Well, 46 other States have acknowledged the Constitutional Rights of Citizens to keep and bear arms and have laws that allow law abiding citizens to carry handguns in public. Wisconsin is next in line. I am certainly on the “For” side of the issue.

Here in Minnesota, the naysayers were all wrong. Their “Blood Running Through the Streets” predictions never came true. Actually, not a single case of a permit holder shooting anyone.

Here is a link to the current story from an impartial source….(I think)

http://www.jsonline.com/news/state/jan04/201767.asp

That’s what I was thinking it was, but I wasn’t sure. Not arguing one point vs another, just trying to get info. Eventhough, I wasn’t a proponent of the MN conceal law, I wasn’t against it. I just wasn’t sure if they went about the notification process the right way. Meaning that I don’t like that you have to both verbally, and through signage, notify people if they are allowed to carry on certain premises.
Steve

Steve, here is another link to key provisions of the bill. Looks like similar signage requirements in Wisconsin as in Minnesota. However, in Minnesota nearly all of the businesses who originally put up signs have now taken them down.

Key Provisions.

Jon J.

Jon thanks for the info. Most people sem confident that the Assembly will pass the override as well. I’m starting to look for an approved course.I have heard that a lot of the sherrifs are going to try to opt out of the system. am I right that it requires a 2/3 county vote for them to do that?

From what I’ve read, it looks like the Sheriff can just opt out. No other voting needed. But all that means is that sheriff is out of the licensing program. All you need to do is go over to the next county and get licensed. Once you are licensed, you can carry in any county in the state.

There is a lot of momentum for the passage of the law. IF for some reason it does not go through, there will be a LOT of current legislators looking for a new job along with the Governor come election time.
Jon J.

Jon, There are a lot of rumors flying around over here. I was told that 65 sheriffs have said they will opt out. I don’t know how many counties we have but that seems like a lot. It may be a hassle to find a county to apply in .

A hassel well worth the effort. And rumors are just that!

I’m not sure how much time you spend on this side of the river, but did you know that you do not need to be a Minnesota resident to get a permit to carry over here? Very easy process if you are interested in info, let me know.

I am watching this legislation closely. Unlike fishing regs that apply no matter what side of the river you are on,(fishing in a boat) the gun laws don’t. I can’t carry on the WI side of the river. So I hope this passes soon and WI honors MN permits.

Jon J.

Quote:

---

I can’t carry on the WI side of the river.

---

Most rod lockers (in walleye boats) have reserve space for a marinecoat 12ga shorty.

I’m not going to argue this one side or the other, but one important thing to remember is that the United States Constitution guarantees citizens the right to keep and bear arms to “form a well organized militia to oppose an oppresive government”. Nowhere in the constitution does it state that citizens have the right to carry a firearm for personal protection, so the arguement by the pro side should be based on the need for citizens to be able to carry a firearm for personal protection needs, not based on a constitutional amendment that doesn’t apply to personal protection.

Actually, the constitutional issues are far more complicated than either side makes them out to be, largely due to the forced passage of Amendment 14.

Actually Wadsworth, yours is an interpretation of those few words. If you research the writings and opinions of many of the framers of the constitution, you will find that their intent in the Second amendment is clearly in support of law abiding citizens owning, possessing, and carrying weapons to assure their “life, libety, and the pursuit of happiness.” There are writings that go much further back in time indicating the rights of man including and specific to rights of an individual to protect himself from harm. This right is strongly linked to and supports my view of second ammendment rights. You and I will forever disagree on the merits and meaning of the Second Amendment.

Everybody thats law abiding should be able to carry self protection, not just mace or pepper spray. The right to bear arms means that the desighners of the constitution already had thier own arms, on them and in thier homes just in case the time came where they had to protect themselves and didn’t want anyone trying to take them from them because they knew it was a neccesity. I don’t think back then there was any law concerning a concealed weapon and im shure alot of people had a weapon on them eigther concealed or not. Bankers, lawyers, old grandfathers and mothers im shure had thier protection too especially if they went on a trip of any sort. They depended on this self protection because they, and were, alot of times not close to any peace officer or any kind of help should the time arise where they needed it. Robbery eigther while traveling or at home, assult too keep them from getting beat up by thugs that were around then too, any form of intent to harm that individual. Most people back then realized they had to have protection and it was a neccesity to cary self protective arms. It was eigther that or possibly get killed. Im shure back then it was looked at as a total necessity to have protection by alot more people than some might realize. I think most police officers would have no arguement with law abiding citizens haveing a weapon on them for thier own protection. Im shure some have seen victims or serious injury, from robbery where they themselves said if this victim only had an arm for thier protection this kind of serious beating, or killing, wouldn’t have taken place and felt sorry for this victim. Should a law or laws be passed not allowing the public the right to carry arms and put the pubilc in a position as where if they couldn’t carry a weapon for thier protection then the lawmakers who passed these laws should be held responsible for the injuries of that person from that assult and should be able to be sued for damages for not allowing anyone to carry personel protection. I think if the lawmakers were faced with the possibility of a serious lawsuit they might think twice about making any laws that would put them in that position. We’ve all herd of alot of diffrent secenerios where someone needed personel protection at that time. Anyone who thinks that the laws should be changed in favor of the right not to bear arms should consider taking a serious look at what happens to a country if they don’t have this right. I can name many countries that don’t have the right to bear arms and i know i don’t want to live there. Everyone should have the total full right to protect themselves and anyone thats with them otherwise this country would then be full of potential victims of anything and the lawmakers know it!

The only people that I know of in my neighborhood that are carrying concealed weapons are the guys who were always in trouble with the law when they were teenagers. In this case, not good. I do own guns but I keep them at home. Thats good enough for my personal needs. The only concealed weapon I carry is a fishing pole in my car for emergencies [fishin fix].

Thanks, Bill

I agree Bill.

Bill and MossyDan, The US supreme court has ruled that the 2nd amendment was intended to and does indeed guarentee idividuals the rights stated within it. I would hold them up as a higher authority in constitutional law than the average joe.

Dan I read you post and realized I missunderstood you. my bad.

hey yellowdog, i misunderstand things too, no big deal, later

Bill, I agree with your right to carry a device in your truck to satisfy your habit. (fishing) Do I understand you correctly? Do you feel I should not carry my Glock 22c because some trouble makers in your area are carrying? In my mind, especially if they are armed, that would make it more appropriate for me to carry. Just my, not so subtle, opinon. I could be wrong, but I don’t think so. Please keep in mind the difference between being armed (legally), to protect yourself and being armed ( illegally) with the intent to harm others.
BTW, Bill keep up the good work with the posts and links. I try to keep up with all your posts but it appears we may not agree on this one?

I personally would prefer that nobody but law enforcement people carry concealed guns and have the punishment for crimes committed with guns be severe which hopefully would scare most people from using them. I guess I’m scared of the possibility of someone drunk or even just mad shooting someone where if you weren’t allowed ro carry the guns that person wouldn’t have the opportunity to do something stupid like shoot someone if he didn’t have the gun on him. I have no interest in debating this subject as it won’t do us any good. It has passed so its a reality wether I like it or not. Its just my personal feelings and fears on the subject, thats all.

Thanks, Bill

Quote:

---

and have the punishment for crimes committed with guns be severe which hopefully would scare most people from using them.

---

Bill, prison sentences for crimes committed using a firearm are more severe now than at any time in the history of the United States. Minimum mandatory sentences of 10 years to life do not seem to mean much to criminals. Also, since the passage of the Minnesota Personal Protect act, violent crime in Minnesota has dropped to levels not seen since 1960! (See these recent stories as reported by WCCO.com)

http://wcco.com/siteSearch/local_story_004154803.html

http://wcco.com/siteSearch/topstories_story_236120349.html

http://wcco.com/siteSearch/local_story_365105734.html

http://wcco.com/siteSearch/local_story_005082656.html

46 other states have passed similar legislation and fears of “Shootouts in the Streets” have simply not materialized. This is a trend sweeping across the country and will continue until all states comply with the US Constitution. Legally licensed, law-abiding citizens do not go around shooting people! It’s that simple. Legally licensed, law-abiding citizens scare the freeking hell out of criminals!

Jon J.

I’m sure hoping it stays that way Jon.
Thanks, Bill

I think of the mistakes that some dumb morons make too bill if they had a weapon, i feel the same as you. Idiots don’t need guns, tempers flare etc and with punishment for those people after a temper flare people will identify with self discipline more as time goes by. Theres sometimes a catch 22 downside to quite a few laws. I know most people will discipline themselves and the dumb ones like they are now will pay the price. I’d like to think that as time goes by people going to be harmed might not be, as the harmers will think twice weather a persons holding or not. I read this story a few years ago about an old gal who was going to be robbed and she pulled out a daranger from her purse, the robbers ran and the police were called. They identified who the robbers were and were sent to the bighouse. She saved herself. I feel the same as you bill we have guns go off here in town too and those people belong in jail and alot of them do go there to, It would be very comfortable not to have to think about serious protection. Maybe someday, Im also on your side.

The problem with saying that the authors of the constitution meant this or that, is that either side can argue what they think the authors meant. Both sides of the issue will say “it’s clear that the authors of the constitution really meant this”, and interject whatever they think will help their cause. That’s the problem with allowing courts and judges to continually change “what the authors of the constitution really meant, therefore, we should pass or not pass this bill”

All constitutional arguments aside, if a majority of voters want CC laws passed, they should pass! And it’s pretty clear that voters want CC, but legislators and police don’t.

I found this story this morning to be interesting:

Lies, Myths and Downright Stupidity
Stossel’s List of Popularly Reported Misconceptions

Myth No. 3 — Guns are Bad
America is notorious for its culture of gun violence. Guns sometimes do cause terrible harm, and many kids are killed every year in gun accidents. But public service announcements and news stories make it seem as if the accidents kill thousands of kids every year.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, however, fewer than 100 kids 15 and under are killed in gun accidents every year. Of course that’s horrible, and I understand why demonstrators say we need more gun control.
But guess what? The Centers for Disease Control recently completed a review of studies of various types of gun control: background checks, waiting periods, bans on certain guns and ammunition. It could not document that these rules have reduced violent crime.
The government wants to say things like the Brady Gun Control Law are making a difference, but they aren’t. Some maximum security felons I spoke to in New Jersey scoffed at measures like the Brady law. They said they’ll have no trouble getting guns if they want them.
A Justice Department study confirmed what the prisoners said. But get this: the felons say that the thing they fear the most is not the police, not time in prison, but, you, another American who might be armed.
It’s a reason many states are passing gun un-control. They’re allowing citizens to carry guns with them; it’s called concealed carry or right to carry. Some women say they’re comforted by these laws.
Many people are horrified at the idea of concealed carry laws, and predict mayhem if all states adopt these laws.
But surprise, 36 states already have concealed carry laws, and not one reported an upsurge in gun crime.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/2020/2020/myths_john_stossel_040123-8.html

I watched Stossel’s report and couldn’t believe what I was watching…. CBS is generally a very liberal station and to air a program in which Guns are shown in a positive light and gun control in a negative light….. was astonishing…the whole episode was excellent!!

Good points everyone…………good points. This is an issue that comes down to personal conviction and personal comfort.

I’m on the side that doesn’t carry themselves…………….but knows what Jon and Chappy are saying is true. Results is results.

Hollywood has made my kids afraid of the woods and society afraid of ‘the wild west”. With all the cop shows, murder mysteries, westerns, horror flicks, hospital soaps, and more of the like, people who aren’t “in to” this issue are impressed by this idea of “everyone” having a gun.

The truth is that most will still choose to NOT carry a gun. Just because MN passed the law doesn’t mean I build a fortress out of my Blazer and be ready for the next encounter at the local saloon.

But this is true…………..

Remember when there was suddenly no death penalty? Murders rose to an all time high! Was CC legal then? Not for the averge citizen.

Without the law, “Joe Hot Head” goes out on a Saturday night and finally has “enough”. Knowing the people in any given bar are not going to be armed, because it’s not lawful, this offender can waltz in knowing that they’ll walk out alive. There’s nothing to stop them……………at least not on any man’s solo effort. Legalize this and trust me, the guys that have the heart to kill knows the guys that have the heart to kill. They can no longer walk into an establishment and know beyond all doubt that they’ll walk away. They now have to consider that the other guy is packin’ too!

For the love of their own skin, an new alternative is sought. Not always found or practiced, but definitely sought.

Congressman Bob McEwen actually clears it up the best. The greater the government, the less our quality of life. Telling us we can’t carry is government control and there is evidence all around the globe that prove 100% of the time……………it’s undisputable………….that the greater the government, the lesser the quality of life. Less freedom, less independence, less luxury, less community, less self-sufficiency, and yes………….higher crime because if increased poverty and desperation.

I DON’T CARRY……………….. I believe my life is in the hands of my Lord and He will determine all things. My plans mean nothing. It won’t matter if I’m carrying or not if my time is up. When it’s time to go home………….it’s time to go home and I won’t allow myself to live in fear.

Legalizing CC does not breed murderers. We already have them and they don’t need anyone’s permission. CC protects the would-be victims from those that already walk amongst us. It’s long awaited legislation for the protecion of VICTIMS. Those inclined to kill…………..will…………….with or without legislation. So, do you believe in leaving the victims helpless, without choice? Or are you willing to give someone a chance to defend themselves? Putting yourself and your personal choices aside…………..are you willing to make that decision for someone else, who may be physically unable to have any other option?

I choose not to carry. But it’s my choice, for me…………me only………….for now. But I refuse to let my preferences be liable for the victimization of the elderly, physically challenged, and innocent women that are flat helpless against the strength of their attackers. Just because I don’t want to carry doesn’t give me the right to say that they can’t. If I voted against it, I would have nightmares knowing that the next “Dru Schadeen” (sp?) wasn’t able to protect herself from the lunatic mind of a 3rd tier offender! If the girl chooses not to carry, that’s her choice…………….but she should at least have a choice. It’s Freedom. Peace. Liberty. Preservation. A CHOICE.

………… I think I just broke a sweat!