Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 31

Thread: Madison Is At It Again. AB-9 Gun Legislation

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Ellsworth Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,213

    Madison Is At It Again. AB-9 Gun Legislation

    Many f you listen to Nick Clark Chairman of WI carry on Well armed radio. He has emailed us on AB-9 that will allow off duty and retired leos privileges that we don't have in CCing. This is OUTRAGEOUS!

    Greetings in Freedom,

    With the help of one of our members we've been keeping close tabs on Rep. Joel Kleefish's ASSEMBLY BILL 9.

    This bill would grant SPECIAL PRIVILEGES to OFF DUTY AND FORMER police officers. It would TRAMPLE private property rights.

    AB 9 would allow OFF DUTY and FORMER police officers to IGNORE private property "no guns" postings. So if a restaurant or store was posted, while YOU AND I would be trespassing to carry beyond "No guns" signs, off-duty and former cops would be allowed to ignore them.

    Private property rights are the foundation of many of the basic rights we enjoy as free citizens. This trampling of private property rights must be stopped.

    FURTHERMORE, Joel Kleefish's bill would allow off-duty and former police officers to carry on school grounds WITHOUT PERMISSION (they can already carry on school grounds WITH permission)

    Last spring speaking with Joel personally, he promised me 2 things:

    1) If we support his bill, he would strip the private property language out of it
    2) if we support his bill he PROMISED to introduce an amendment that would allow ALL CCW holders to carry on school grounds.

    Both of these promises have been broken and ASSEMBLY BILL 9 is just another example of GOVERNMENT acting in the best interest of GOVERNMENT.

    I think we've all had enough of that kind of legislation coming out of Washington, and its SAD to see it coming out of Madison.

    Wisconsin Carry will support NO legislation that offers special carry privileges to OFF-DUTY and FORMER police officers unless CCL holders are included. Over 200,000 law-abiding citizens in Wisconsin have jumped through the government hoops, obtained their government mandated training, paid their concealed carry license permit TAX and registered themselves in the government database in order to exercise their human-right to self-defense which was already guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment.

    History has proven that schools are prime targets for mass murderers. There is **no** reason a former cop should be allowed to carry on school grounds when he or she goes to watch their kids or grand-kids school sporting events, but you and I are prohibited from that same level of protection.

    THERE IS A PUBLIC HEARING ON THURSDAY REGARDING THIS LEGISLATION

    Wisconsin State Capitol
    Thursday, October 10, 2013
    10:00 AM
    300 Northeast
    Assembly Bill 9
    Relating to: law enforcement officers who are on duty, off-duty law enforcement officers, and former law enforcement officers and going armed with firearms.
    By Representatives Kleefisch, Danou, Jacque, Mursau, Stroebel, Bernier, Born, Swearingen, A. Ott, Brooks, Tranel, Nerison, Bies, Weatherston, Kaufert, Thiesfeldt, Jagler, Schraa, T. Larson, Knodl and Czaja; cosponsored by Senators Gudex, L. Taylor and Kedzie.

    PLEASE CONTACT THE LEGISLATORS LISTED ABOVE. They either signed on as "co-authors" or "co-sponsors" of this legislation. Ask them to WITHDRAW their support of it. Please be POLITE. MANY OF THESE LEGISLATORS HAVE BEEN MISLEAD that this law only closes a "loophole" and makes Wisconsin law comply with a federal law called "LEOSA" (Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act) THIS IS NOT TRUE. This legislation goes FAR beyond "LEOSA" and grants special privileges to former cops that LEOSA SPECIFICALLY does NOT include.

    Granting special privileges to off-duty and former cops that allows them to ignore FUNDAMENTAL private property rights and carry where law-abiding concealed carry license holders cannot is a path to tyranny.

    Ask your legislators to stand for the rights of ordinary citizens, not government.

    We ask that you make 2 contacts. First EMAIL JOEL KLEEFISH: Rep.Kleefisch@legis.wisconsin.gov

    Tell Joel that off-duty and former police officers shouldn't be a special class of citizens that have "government privileges" to ignore private property rights. Tell Joel that YOU should have the same right to carry for protection that a former police officer does when you go to your kids school events.

    2nd. Email or call YOUR legislator if they in the following list:

    Chris Danou,(Trempealeau) Rep.Danou@legis.wisconsin.gov
    Andre Jacque, (DePere) Rep.Jacque@legis.wisconsin.gov
    Jeff Mursau, (Crivitz) Rep.Mursau@legis.wisconsin.gov
    Duey Stroebel, (Saukville) rep.stroebel@legis.wisconsin.gov
    Kathleen Bernier, (Chippewa Falls) Rep.Bernier@legis.wisconsin.gov
    Mark Born, (Beaver Dam) Rep.Born@legis.wisconsin.gov
    Rob Swearingen, (Rhinelander) Rep.Swearingen@legis.wisconsin.gov
    Jim Ott, (Mequon) Rep.OttJ@legis.wisconsin.gov
    Edward Brooks, (Reedsburg) Rep.Brooks@legis.wisconsin.gov
    Travis Tranel, (Cuba City) Rep.Tranel@legis.wisconsin.gov
    Lee Nerison, (Westby) Rep.Nerison@legis.wisconsin.gov
    Garey Bies, (Sister Bay) Rep.Bies@legis.wisconsin.gov
    Thomas Weatherston, (Racine) Rep.Weatherston@legis.wisconsin.gov
    Dean Kaufert, (Neenah) Rep.Kaufert@legis.wisconsin.gov
    Jeremy Thiesfeldt, (Fond Du Lac) Rep.Thiesfeldt@legis.wisconsin.gov
    John Jagler, (Watertown) Rep.Jagler@legis.wisconsin.gov
    MIchael Schraa, (Oshkosh) Rep.Schraa@legis.wisconsin.gov
    Thomas Larson, (Colfax) Rep.Larson@legis.wisconsin.gov
    Daniel Knodl, (Germantown) Rep.Knodl@legis.wisconsin.gov
    Mary Czaja; (Irma) Rep.Czaja@legis.wisconsin.gov
    cosponsored by Senators:
    Richard Gudex, (Fond Du Lac) Sen.Gudex@legis.wisconsin.gov
    Lena Taylor (Milwaukee) Sen.Taylor@legis.wisconsin.gov
    Neal Kedzie (Elkhorn) Sen.Kedzie@legis.wisconsin.gov

    Phone numbers are available from the following listing if you prefer to call:

    http://legis.wisconsin.gov/Pages/leg-list.aspx?h=a

    Use the following link to find your state legislators:

    http://legis.wisconsin.gov/pages/waml.aspx

    IF YOU ARE FREE ON THURSDAY, PLEASE CONSIDER ATTENDING THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THE STATE CAPITOL.

    Feel free to email me with any questions. nik@wisconsincarry.org

    Carry On,

    Nik Clark
    Chairman/President - Wisconsin Carry, Inc.
    www.wisconsincarry.org
    nik@wisconsincarry.org


  2. #2
    Regular Member Lephi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Cudahy, WI, USA
    Posts
    11

    Madison Is At It Again. AB-9 Gun Legislation

    So are you against this because it tramples on property rights? or because it allows current and former LEO to but not CCL holders?

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Ellsworth Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,213
    Quote Originally Posted by Lephi View Post
    So are you against this because it tramples on property rights? or because it allows current and former LEO to but not CCL holders?
    Your second point is what I am having a hard time with. I thought this was over when act 35 debates dealt a blow to this issue. many members of this forum including Nick Clark fought this issue. Why is this an issue again. I wonder if it is being pushed upon by the likes of Flynn. So they would get full constitutional privileges while we will be relegated second class? No way!

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154
    Six and a half months languishing in committee, in the Judiciary Committee, and now shuffled off to Criminal Justice, with little but the Holiday Season remaining in the Session? There are six days of floor before 12 Dec bills to Governor. Criminal Justice has a Public Hearing on Thursday on AB 9 and AB 165 and no meeting presently scheduled for the remainder of the year.

    Never trust a politician.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  5. #5
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    Quote Originally Posted by Lephi View Post
    So are you against this because it tramples on property rights? or because it allows current and former LEO to but not CCL holders?
    Both is the logical answer. Public schools do not have private property rights, by definition.

    Simplicity itself.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Interceptor_Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,839
    This Proposal only applies to those former LEOs who are authorized to carry concealed under 18 USC § 926B also known as the "Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act".

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154
    Then it must be a good thing - NOT Either we are equal or we are not.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Interceptor_Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,839
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    Then it must be a good thing - NOT Either we are equal or we are not.
    I was simply clarifying what we are facing/opposing/outraged about..., not justifying the BS...

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    popple butte
    Posts
    349
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    Six and a half months languishing in committee, in the Judiciary Committee, and now shuffled off to Criminal Justice, with little but the Holiday Season remaining in the Session? There are six days of floor before 12 Dec bills to Governor. Criminal Justice has a Public Hearing on Thursday on AB 9 and AB 165 and no meeting presently scheduled for the remainder of the year.

    Never trust a politician.
    I have never trusted Hugh Jarmis anyway.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin, ,
    Posts
    836
    The DOJ has suggested that some of this might be already legal:


    34.
    Can an off duty active law enforcement officer carry a concealed weapon in a
    business which prohibits concealed weapons?

    Probably yes. The hesitation is because this is a murky area of the law. It is generally
    accepted that law enforcement officers are able to carry a concealed weapon anywhere in
    the state at any time, though department policy might prohibit it. Therefore it would seem
    that in the absence of a statute limiting the law enforcement exception to
    an officer on active duty (e.g. the school grounds prohibition), an off duty police officer could carry in
    a business, which prohibits concealed carry through appropriate posting



    36.
    Can an employer prohibit an employee, who is also a law enforcement officer, from
    carrying a concealed weapon on the job?

    No. The Act allows an employer to prohibit a CCW license holder from “carrying” on the
    job but the prohibition does not extend to active law enforcement officers. 175.60(15)



    https://wilenet.org/secure/html/reso...ccw_faq_le.pdf

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Ellsworth Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,213

    Nik's Comments On pkbites Post

    Quote Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
    The DOJ has suggested that some of this might be already legal:


    34.
    Can an off duty active law enforcement officer carry a concealed weapon in a
    business which prohibits concealed weapons?

    Probably yes. The hesitation is because this is a murky area of the law. It is generally
    accepted that law enforcement officers are able to carry a concealed weapon anywhere in
    the state at any time, though department policy might prohibit it. Therefore it would seem
    that in the absence of a statute limiting the law enforcement exception to
    an officer on active duty (e.g. the school grounds prohibition), an off duty police officer could carry in
    a business, which prohibits concealed carry through appropriate posting



    36.
    Can an employer prohibit an employee, who is also a law enforcement officer, from
    carrying a concealed weapon on the job?

    No. The Act allows an employer to prohibit a CCW license holder from “carrying” on the
    job but the prohibition does not extend to active law enforcement officers. 175.60(15)



    https://wilenet.org/secure/html/reso...ccw_faq_le.pdf
    I asked Nik to comment on pkbite's post. I agree with Nik's thoughts.

    It is my opinion that if this was already legal, they (the police) wouldn't be lobbying for this bill. THEY ARE. I know they are because a police chief from SE Wisconsin contacted me asking us to DROP our opposition to the bill.

    So clearly THEY aren't so sure its legal either and i'm not interested in a new law to remove any doubt.

    Second, when you look at the bill as a whole, its clear what the intent was. The bill specifically includes FORMER law-enforcement officers in its privileges. So its clear (to me) this isn't about clarifying law, its about expanding the privileges of the "ruling class".

    Nik

  12. #12
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426
    I've already written my elected reps, and everyone on that list.
    If I had the money for gas, I'd go to the hearing Thurs.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lephi
    So are you against this because it tramples on property rights? or because it allows current and former LEO to but not CCL holders?
    Both.
    If a business decides they want their customers and staff to be vulnerable, that's their decision.
    Nobody should be able to override that, other than on-duty officers in the performance of their duties.
    And creating a class of citizens who are less than others is morally and legally wrong.

    Y'all might also be interested in AB165, which is seeking to allow WI DOJ to give former officers from out of state a privilege card, like they're already allowed to give former federal officers.
    I think that if the requirement is that they get a card from their former employer, they should get a card from their former employer.
    Or maybe they should get a regular ccl and work to improve conditions for everyone, themselves included.
    Quote Originally Posted by MLK, Jr
    The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort & convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge & controversy.
    Quote Originally Posted by MSG Laigaie
    Citizenship is a verb.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 27:12
    A prudent person foresees the danger ahead and takes precautions.
    The simpleton goes blindly on and suffers the consequences.
    Quote Originally Posted by Proverbs 31:17
    She dresses herself with strength and makes her arms strong.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin, ,
    Posts
    836
    Just out of curiosity:

    Those of you who are [correctly] citing the rights of private property owners, what is your opinion of the smoking ban which prohibits business owners from allowing an otherwise legal activity from taking place on their property?

    If you say anything except you oppose it, then you are a hypocrite!

  14. #14
    Regular Member Trip20's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Wausau Area
    Posts
    527

    Madison Is At It Again. AB-9 Gun Legislation

    Yep, smoking ban is garbage as well.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154

    Thank GOoDness this is about Open Carry, not open smoking enforced by thugs beclowned

    Do not take legal instruction from a cop, nor philosophical judgement. Law enforcement IS hypocrisy. Either we are equal or we are not.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin, ,
    Posts
    836
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    Either we are equal or we are not.
    What are you babbling about? I'm in agreement with those who oppose the special class these laws are trying to create/protect.

    But those who whine about private property rights, and then support such things like smoking bans on private property are trying to niche themselves into a protected class.

    One of the first things the communists did was erase private property ownership. You don't see that happening here?

    They began by first telling business owners that they were required to do business with everybody. Nobody should have to associate with anybody they don't wish to. If a businessman who is a bigot is too stupid to want to take money from someone because of who they are, so be it.

    Then they passed laws requiring businesses to allow certain animals in their stores. Did you know under the law miniature horses are legal service animals? Do you want a smelly horse walking around your bakery? Law says you have to.

    Then they passed laws prohibiting business owners from allowing legal activity from taking place in their place of business. Sure, bring your miniature horse into the bar but leave the Winstons in the car!

    And now they're trying to force businesses to allow someone to bring lethal weapons into the business just because of what that person does (or did) for a living. What makes a retired cop any more valuable than a guy who currently works the docks? NOTHING!

    If any of these things offends any of you, TOUGH! If you're going to talk about private property rights and protected classes of people, let's get serious!

    Usurping private property rights is textbook communism!

  17. #17
    Regular Member Plankton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Just north of the Sheeple's Republik of Madistan
    Posts
    414
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    Do not take legal instruction from a cop, nor philosophical judgement. Law enforcement IS hypocrisy. Either we are equal or we are not.
    Ruling class elitist Doug Huffman posting about hypocrisy. That's a good one Doug. Every post you make on this forum is in direct violation of forum rules. But that's OK, YOU'RE Doug Huffman. Wow.
    Liberty or death. We're sorry, there are no other options available at this time..........
    "Safety is the new Liberty, and recklessness is the new Freedom, and alcoholism is the new Doug Huffman."

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Ellsworth Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,213
    Quote Originally Posted by pkbites View Post
    What are you babbling about? I'm in agreement with those who oppose the special class these laws are trying to create/protect.

    But those who whine about private property rights, and then support such things like smoking bans on private property are trying to niche themselves into a protected class.

    One of the first things the communists did was erase private property ownership. You don't see that happening here?

    They began by first telling business owners that they were required to do business with everybody. Nobody should have to associate with anybody they don't wish to. If a businessman who is a bigot is too stupid to want to take money from someone because of who they are, so be it.

    Then they passed laws requiring businesses to allow certain animals in their stores. Did you know under the law miniature horses are legal service animals? Do you want a smelly horse walking around your bakery? Law says you have to.

    Then they passed laws prohibiting business owners from allowing legal activity from taking place in their place of business. Sure, bring your miniature horse into the bar but leave the Winstons in the car!

    And now they're trying to force businesses to allow someone to bring lethal weapons into the business just because of what that person does (or did) for a living. What makes a retired cop any more valuable than a guy who currently works the docks? NOTHING!

    If any of these things offends any of you, TOUGH! If you're going to talk about private property rights and protected classes of people, let's get serious!

    Usurping private property rights is textbook communism!
    Zats vy I von't open da business here because of da causes you cite. I did fight against the smoking ban. I believe the communists were the majority when that ban was created. We need to all get an ashtray, pay the fine and smoke in a restaurant/bar etc... not to get off topic... AB-9. AB165

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    83
    Full disclosure, this law applies to me, hard for me to be against it. Ready to be flamed for my position, but it is what it is. I have called my legislators and asked they support the bill.

    Question: Does it make any sense to say that Officer Joe can carry at place A, B, or C at 1PM on duty but cannot return at 6 PM while in plain clothes "off duty"?

    I seriously think the WI Carry emails (yes I have read them and get them) are overblown rhetoric (sp?). "Ruling Class", "Special Priviliges" blah blah blah. Hard for me to understand why a pro gun rights group is against expanding gun rights (albeit for some people), the fight never ends and can continue to include CCL holders (they should be as part of this bill IMHO). I DO think that CCL holders should be able to carry on public property (all of it, schools, colleges, etc). I also DO think that private property rights should be respected and taken out of the bill.

    They should be for this legislation as it moves things in the right direction, but work to fight to remove the private property part (not oppose the whole thing), and work to get CCL holders in the same areas...

    Just my rambling, incoherent, selfish thoughts...

    Cheers

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154

    America’s Ruling Class — And the Perils of Revolution, Angelo Codevilla

    Quote Originally Posted by svelectric View Post
    I seriously think the WI Carry emails (yes I have read them and get them) are overblown rhetoric (sp?). "Ruling Class", "Special Priviliges" blah blah blah.
    The only serious opposition to this arrogant Ruling Party is coming not from feckless Republicans but from what might be called the Country Party — and its vision is revolutionary.

    http://spectator.org/archives/2010/0...-and-the/print
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    83
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    The only serious opposition to this arrogant Ruling Party is coming not from feckless Republicans but from what might be called the Country Party — and its vision is revolutionary.

    http://spectator.org/archives/2010/0...-and-the/print
    You quoted me and provided a link, but to make what point? Not really trying to be a smart azz, but the high flying verbiage "arrogant Ruling Party" and "feckless Republicans" don't carry a lot of meaning to me...

    You're saying you're for this bill? Against it? Want it changed? Want to weave baskets?

    Sorry if I'm feeding the troll, I don't log in here a lot (shame on me), but have been studying a lot and working a lot...

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Ellsworth Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,213
    Quote Originally Posted by svelectric View Post
    Full disclosure, this law applies to me, hard for me to be against it. Ready to be flamed for my position, but it is what it is. I have called my legislators and asked they support the bill.

    Question: Does it make any sense to say that Officer Joe can carry at place A, B, or C at 1PM on duty but cannot return at 6 PM while in plain clothes "off duty"?

    I seriously think the WI Carry emails (yes I have read them and get them) are overblown rhetoric (sp?). "Ruling Class", "Special Priviliges" blah blah blah. Hard for me to understand why a pro gun rights group is against expanding gun rights (albeit for some people), the fight never ends and can continue to include CCL holders (they should be as part of this bill IMHO). I DO think that CCL holders should be able to carry on public property (all of it, schools, colleges, etc). I also DO think that private property rights should be respected and taken out of the bill.

    They should be for this legislation as it moves things in the right direction, but work to fight to remove the private property part (not oppose the whole thing), and work to get CCL holders in the same areas...

    Just my rambling, incoherent, selfish thoughts...

    Cheers
    Can you please reboot yourself and get rid of flubber and in one sentence (10 words max) tell us where you stand with the issue?

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154
    Quote Originally Posted by svelectric View Post
    You quoted me and provided a link, but to make what point? Not really trying to be a smart azz, but the high flying verbiage "arrogant Ruling Party" and "feckless Republicans" don't carry a lot of meaning to me. You're saying you're for this bill? Against it? Want it changed? Want to weave baskets? Sorry if I'm feeding the troll, I don't log in here a lot (shame on me), but have been studying a lot and working a lot...
    You are the one that quoted as overblown rhetoric, "Ruling Class" and "special privileges". There is a Ruling Party against the country conservatives.

    I am "against" the politicians advancing this bill and "against" hysterics whipping their audience with it. Eternal vigilance is always needed, but maybe a little less for a bill six months in committee and only now floating to the top of the cesspool. I am against anything that drives the inequality wedge in society that is already fractionated and 'faction-ated' by education. Either we are equal or we are not.

    Studying and working are good excuses. I already did the studying and working and do log in here a lot. I recently studied Codevilla's books after being inspired by his essay. A challenge shortly after retiring from work, from my career, was working for the passage of South Carolina's 1996 Law Abiding Citizens Self Defense Act.

    The lowlife and porkchop point their troll-finger at many posters in Wisconsin, good people now gone because of their toxic and noxious rhetoric. If you would prefer I not read your posts, I can do that.
    Last edited by Nightmare; 10-09-2013 at 05:40 PM.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  24. #24
    Regular Member Interceptor_Knight's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,839
    Quote Originally Posted by svelectric View Post
    Question: Does it make any sense to say that Officer Joe can carry at place A, B, or C at 1PM on duty but cannot return at 6 PM while in plain clothes "off duty"?
    They are not acting in their "Official Capacity" as a LEO while off duty. They are just another civilian. Retirees are just former LEOs, not forever a privileged class. What makes zero sense is that CCL Licensees are prohibited from in or on the grounds of a school. Get rid of that prohibition and the off-duty and retired LEOs will also be included. Either Private Property owners have the right to refusal or they do not. Carving out a special exception just for off-duty and especially retired LEOs makes no sense...

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Ellsworth Wisconsin
    Posts
    1,213
    Quote Originally Posted by Nightmare View Post
    You are the one that quoted as overblown rhetoric, "Ruling Class" and "special privileges". There is a Ruling Party against the country conservatives.

    I am "against" the politicians advancing this bill and "against" hysterics whipping their audience with it. Eternal vigilance is always needed, but maybe a little less for a bill six months in committee and only now floating to the top of the cesspool. I am against anything that drives the inequality wedge in society that is already fractionated and 'faction-ated' by education. Either we are equal or we are not.

    Studying and working are good excuses. I already did the studying and working and do log in here a lot. I recently studied Codevilla's books after being inspired by his essay. A challenge shortly after retiring from work, from my career, was working for the passage of South Carolina's 1996 Law Abiding Citizens Self Defense Act.

    The lowlife and porkchop point their troll-finger at many posters in Wisconsin, good people now gone because of their toxic and noxious rhetoric. If you would prefer I not read your posts, I can do that.
    Yeseree!

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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