Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Wisconsin Carry Inc. is suing the WI DOJ for their 'creative' rule making.

  1. #1
    Regular Member paul@paul-fisher.com's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chandler, AZ
    Posts
    4,047

    Thumbs up Wisconsin Carry Inc. is suing the WI DOJ for their 'creative' rule making.

    From Nik Clark.

    Today Wisconsin Carry, Inc. filed a lawsuit against the Wisconsin Department of Justice. A copy of that lawsuit is attached to this posting.
    On June 1st, the Wisconsin Dept. of Justice without notice issued a host of new "permanent" rules with regard to the issuance of concealed carry licenses and training requirements.

    Wisconsin Carry believes that some of those requirements fall outside of the bounds that Act 35 defined.

    If you already have your concealed carry license, why should you care?

    Everyone will need to renew their license in a few years. The new rules leave a LOT of subjectivity in their interpretation.

    Looking at the larger context of government machinations we see increasing use of "executive powers" and "rulemaking" by departments of government to make laws do things they were not intended to do and restrict things they were not intended to restrict. From the IRS to the NSA we see that agencies of the government are taking significant authority to push the limits of statute (or outright ignore them) and "fill in the blanks" and make rules that substantially affect the implementation of duly passed legislation.

    Wisconsin currently has a relatively pro-gun legislator and governor (and trust me, its NOT as pro gun as it claims to be)

    In a few years, as the electoral composition changes, there are significant opportunities for the executive branch of state government to do what we see being done at the federal level whereby government agencies are affected by the political positions of the executive branch. This poses a risk to your freedom.

    We (collectively) fought hard for the most expansive right-to-carry legislation we could here in Wisconsin. While we continue to fight for constitutional carry we SHOULD NOT stand by and watch the legislation already passed be chipped away at by bureaucrats.

    Scenario: Scott Walker runs for president and wins. Election to fill governor's seat. Anti-gun politician wins governors seat. He goes to the DOJ to 'pressure' them to clamp down on "all these permits being issued" so they go looking at the "rules" to see where they can "re-interpret" the rules and they see this: (this text is now required on certificates for training)

    ---This course includes, at a minimum, instruction on and practices the studentís comprehension of: 1) Firearm safety rules; 2) Safe firearm and ammunition use, handling, transport, and storage; 3) Legally permissible possession, transportation, and use of firearms, including use of deadly force; and 4) Techniques for avoiding and controlling violent confrontations.---

    So the DOJ decides its time to audit all the classes of instructors across the state to see if they are "practicing the students comprehension" of those topics and they decide that the ONLY way to "practice" the comprehension of those topics is a TEST. So every class then has to have a test and if someone doesn't score a certain ranking on the test, they fail the class?

    This is just ONE example of how the DOJ could, in the future, use the text of these new permanent rules, to tangibly affect your kids, your friends, your families ability to get a CCL.

    Its imperative we push back against the over-reach now.

    https://www.facebook.com/download/61...%20%285%29.doc
    Last edited by paul@paul-fisher.com; 06-14-2013 at 03:29 PM.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Ellsworth Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,213
    Quote Originally Posted by paul@paul-fisher.com View Post
    Yep. The same tactics Obummer has allowed agency heads to do. Why hasn't any of the legislature caught on to this yet?

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by paul@paul-fisher.com View Post
    Sorry, this page isn't available
    The link you followed may be broken, or the page may have been removed.


    fyi, what i get

  4. #4
    Regular Member Interceptor_Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,839
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Sorry, this page isn't available
    The link you followed may be broken, or the page may have been removed.


    fyi, what i get
    You have to be signed in to facebook in order to get the document.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Milwaukee Wisconsin
    Posts
    542
    We have a topic here about the public hearings last summer, for the permanent DOJ rule chapters Jus 17 & 18.

    http://forum.opencarry.org./forums/s...=1#post1783308

    The quote from Nik Clark regarding:

    On June 1st, the Wisconsin Dept. of Justice without notice issued a host of new "permanent" rules with regard to the issuance of concealed carry licenses and training requirements. ...
    Seems to have forgotten these public hearings nearly a year ago.

    There were not many reports back from those who attended the hearings. Comments could also be submitted directly to the DOJ.

    The most recent public hearing was before the Joint Committee for Review of Administrative Rules (JCRAR). It was held May 1, 2013. http://docs.legis.wi.gov/raw/cid/968002

    The permanent rules were passed by JCRAR in Executive Session May 1, 2013. http://docs.legis.wi.gov/raw/cid/968073

    You can use the JCRAR web page to monitor proposals before the commitee. http://legis.wisconsin.gov/Pages/com...ms.aspx?c=1034
    Wis. CCL #5x Springfield XDM 3.8 Compact .40 S&W, Utah CFP

  6. #6
    Regular Member Interceptor_Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,839
    Quote Originally Posted by E6chevron View Post
    There were not many reports back from those who attended the hearings.

    The Hearings were BS. The DOJ was only going through the motions and was not interested in feedback from the general public unless it supported their preconceived agenda. There were "trainers", "hunters" and "sport shooters" who wanted more training to be required and those are the only opinions that the DOJ wanted to hear.
    Our elected Representatives in Madison stabbed us in the backs by allowing this Administrative Code to go into effect.

  7. #7
    Regular Member NoTolerance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Posts
    297

    Re: Wisconsin Carry Inc. is suing the WI DOJ for their 'creative' rule making.

    Nik announced the first hearing, seeking an injunction on the rules until the lawsuit has been heard, during his Well Armed Radio broadcast tonight. July 8th in Waukesha. He'll be posting the details about the hearing on Facebook, probably tomorrow, for those that might wish to attend to show support.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Madison, Wisconsin, ,
    Posts
    214
    So with the rule changes in place now, will a pre-June 1st WCI class certificate be recogized with the new application?

  9. #9
    Regular Member NoTolerance's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Milwaukee, WI
    Posts
    297

    Re: Wisconsin Carry Inc. is suing the WI DOJ for their 'creative' rule making.

    Quote Originally Posted by trailblazer2003 View Post
    So with the rule changes in place now, will a pre-June 1st WCI class certificate be recogized with the new application?
    We've been told by persons at the DoJ that yes, they will, so long as the new application is used.

    Should anyone run into issues, it's easy enough to make an addition to an existing certificate to add the required wording to it or to send out a replacement certificate.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Madison, Wisconsin, ,
    Posts
    214
    Quote Originally Posted by NoTolerance View Post
    We've been told by persons at the DoJ that yes, they will, so long as the new application is used.

    Should anyone run into issues, it's easy enough to make an addition to an existing certificate to add the required wording to it or to send out a replacement certificate.
    Thanks, i'll be sure to pass that along, and any issues i'll report back as well.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •