Constitutional carry

[Captain Nemo]

This post is aimed at those that think constitutional carry will be as long and arduous as getting concealed carry passed and to those that believe constitutional carry must be approached a piece at a time so as to not be conspicuous. It is aimed at those that think that constitutional carry will be as elusive as the proverbial carrot and that we should settle for our shall carry privilege.

The year 2011 was a tremendous year for us. The passage of Act 35, Act 51 and the recent Castle Doctrine law dramatically heralded our right to personal protection by use of weapons.

Many review Act 35 and Act 51 only in terms of licensing for concealed carry under the new statute 175.60. Or for the carry of uncased firearm in a vehicle during the activity of hunting. The Acts are much more than that. They make changes to a number of other state statues. Changes that have a direct impact to and endorsement of constitutional carry. I list some of them below. Those that I do list are those I feel are pertinent to handgun carry for the act of personal protection.

Act 35 (2011)

SECTION 3. 23.33 (3) (e) of the statutes is amended
to read:
23.33 (3) (e) With any firearm in his or her possession
unless it is unloaded and enclosed in a carrying case or
unless the firearm is a handgun, as defined in s. 175.60 (1)
(bm), or any bow unless it is unstrung or enclosed in a carrying
case.

Comment: Carry of a loaded and visible handgun on an ATV not prohibited.


SECTION 21. 66.0409 (6) of the statutes is created to
read:
66.0409 (6) Unless other facts and circumstances that
indicate a criminal or malicious intent on the part of the
person apply, no person may be in violation of, or be
charged with a violation of, an ordinance of a political
subdivision relating to disorderly conduct or other inappropriate
behavior for loading, carrying, or going armed
with a firearm, without regard to whether the firearm is
loaded or is concealed or openly carried. Any ordinance
in violation of this subsection does not apply and may not
be enforced.

Comment: Localities may not charge disorderly conduct, barring mitigating circumstances , for the singular act of carrying a loaded firearm, concealed or visible.

(2) ISSUANCE AND SCOPE OF LICENSE. ss175.60
(c) Unless expressly provided in this section, this section
does not limit an individual’s right to carry a firearm
that is not concealed.

Comment: Recognition that visible carry is constitutionally protected.

SECTION 55. 941.23 (2) (e) of the statutes is created
to read:
941.23 (2) (e) An individual who carries a concealed
and dangerous weapon, as defined in s. 175.60 (1) (j), in
his or her own dwelling or place of business or on land
that he or she owns, leases, or legally occupies.

Comment: The concealed weapon prohibition statute does not apply to these conditions.

Act 51 (2011)

Section 1. 23.33 (3) (e) of the statutes, as affected by 2011 Wisconsin Act 35, is renumbered 23.33 (3c) (a) and amended to read:
23.33 (3c) (a) With No person may operate an all-terrain vehicle with any firearm in his or her possession unless it the firearm is unloaded and enclosed in a carrying case or unless the firearm is a handgun, as defined in s. 175.60 (1) (bm), or any bow unless it is unstrung or enclosed in a carrying case.

167.31 (2) (a) (intro.) Except as provided in sub. (4), no person may place, possess, or transport a firearm, bow, or crossbow in or on a motorboat with the motor running, unless the one of the following applies:
1. The firearm is unloaded or is a handgun, as defined in s. 175.60 (1) (bm),

Section 11. 167.31 (2) (b) of the statutes, as affected by 2011 Wisconsin Act 35, is renumbered 167.31 (2) (b) (intro.) and amended to read:
167.31 (2) (b) (intro.) Except as provided in sub. (4), no person may place, possess, or transport a firearm, bow, or crossbow in or on a vehicle, unless the one of the following applies:
1. The firearm is unloaded or is a handgun

Section 13. 167.31 (2) (c) of the statutes, as affected by 2011 Wisconsin Act 35, is amended to read:
167.31 (2) (c) Except as provided in sub. (4), no person may load a firearm, other than a handgun, as defined in s. 175.60 (1) (bm), in a vehicle or discharge a firearm or shoot a bolt or an arrow from a bow or crossbow in or from a vehicle.

Bottom Line: We are not that far from constitutional carry. The above statutes support that we have the constitutional right to carry a loaded, visible or hidden, handgun in our homes, in our business, on our land, on our property. In addition to carry a loaded and visible handgun in or on our vehicles. The Castle Doctrine supplants this right by declaring we have the privilege of using weapons in those locations to protect person and property under the presumption of innocence.

The only locations we are prohibited from carrying a concealed handgun, besides those specific law enforcement and judicial locations detailed in ss175.60, are: Public and private locations that are duly posted IAW Act 35 (unfortunately our constitutional right to open carry got sucked into that vortex).

This and my original post is a call to arms that when the legislature reconvenes we must get vocal and convince one or more legislators that we aren’t that far from constitutional carry and that the costs to manage a licensing system is not reasonable. Convince one or more to take up the fight.

[paul@paul-fisher.com]

To get Constitutional Carry, this is what we need:

Repeal 941.23 (concealed carry without a license), 941.235 (government building carry), 941.237 (Class-B carry), 167.31 (car carry) maybe?

Assuming we don't get the Federal GFSZ repealed, we can change 948.605 as follows:

Repeal 948.605 (2)(b)1r, amend 1m to read "A person who possesses the firearm in accordance with 18 USC 922 (q) (2) (B) (i), (ii), (iv), (v), (vi), or (vii)." (this would allow CCL holders to carry INSIDE of schools).

If we get the Federal GFSZ repealed, then repeal 948.605 in its entirety.

[HandyHamlet]

[SIZE=2][FONT=arial]To get Constitutional Carry, this is what we need:

...

... a newly elected employee in the governor's office for starters.

[Law abider]

That's one of the things we need to change!

OK. Then what shall we do about this? http://freedomoutpost.com/2012/07/us...itution-to-un/

We need to pass this around all the 50 states in our open carry blog. I don't know how to post it at once on all the states blogs.

[AaronS]

... a newly elected employee in the governor's office for starters.

We could have ended up with a guy like our last Governor. I would guess you would not have wanted that?

This one has the balls, but as far as carry goes, it is brand new to Wisconsin. He was happy to make the first step.
He was (and I would guess still is) concerned about carry, no doubt. A lot of people in our state are. I think time will fix that.
After his first term, I think a push for full restoration of our gun rights (first time in about 150 years) would be in line.
After his first term, he will have a lot to look back on. The money he has saved our state, and the fact that we have not seen any growth in crime from lawful carry should give him something to think about. Working on him should be a lot easier.
Now if we could just start bringing in the jobs we all need... We might be set in a few years...

Walker has helped us make the first step. I have faith that we will be able to work with him to see the job done in full.
It is going to take time.
Two years is not enough time to convince the full state that lawful people should have rights returned to them that have been gone for so long.

[TaurusToter]

In my home, we are still rooting for Constitutional Carry. It's the way it should be, and the way it was written by the founders.

Doesn't matter who your rep's in government are, call them. Tell them you oppose anything but state and national Constitutional Carry. Call them, email them, harass the hell out of them. Tell your friends, and vote. There have been a select few people who were not associated with either Dem or Rep parties that served this country well. It's time for one of these parties to hand up a leader and get the word out. The federal government has been turned into a cash cow for it's employees/masters, and it simply needs to stop.

[DangerClose]

We could have ended up with a guy like our last Governor. I would guess you would not have wanted that?

I did not like that one.

Hell, he raised license plate fees so much I canceled my custom plates out of spite.

[TyGuy]

I'm a fan of Constitutional carry. You can find a pocket constitution here

http://www.amazon.com/Pocket-Constit...t+constitution

jk, but honestly CC is the way to go.

[HandyHamlet]

We could have ended up with a guy like our last Governor. I would guess you would not have wanted that?

This one has the balls, but as far as carry goes, it is brand new to Wisconsin. He was happy to make the first step.

-shrugs-
Our current employee in office is a liar. Boasted he would sign any carry law that came across his desk and then demanded permits and training at the last second. Never gonna get Constitutional Carry with a Governor like him. He cares not what the wishes of his employers are.