Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 36

Thread: Loaded guns in Home daycares

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin, ,
    Posts
    836

    Post imported post

    Somebody I know who has a licensed home daycare told me about some new rules the state department of health & family services are trying to pass. One of them states that if ANY person (the day care provider, employees, other residents of the house hold, or even visitors) is found to have a loaded firearm in their possession the daycare license will be revoked. It does not allow for ANY exceptions or circumstances.


    So yesterday I went to the hearing the state had on these rules changes. There were a couple hundred people there. Those that testified were mainly concerned with rules regarding fences and pets and such.

    I was the only guy who stood up and testified in favor of loaded guns in a daycare!

    I explained why a daycare worker may need one, why the rule was unfair to others in the household who don't even work with children, and why the rule was unconstitionally vague. I explained that the Wisconsin State Supreme Court ruled that business & home owners could legally carry a concealed weapon on their property. I stated that the department doesNOT have the authority to implement any rule which is contrary to a Supreme Court ruling. I then supplied a copy of the ruling.Jill Chase, the Director ofthe Bureau of Licensingwas there and she did not appear happy that I was explaining these facts to all the people who were there.. Tough ****!!


    And hundreds of people said "who is this nut wanting loaded guns in daycares" right? Nope! I got a round of applause.

    Later on I had several people come up to me and say things like "my husband is a cop. Are they trying to say he can't have his off duty on him" and "I'm a hunter. If someone sees me putting my rifle in my truck is my wife going to lose her license".

    But the most impresive one was from a petite lady about 60 years old: "I'm there all alone with the children. What if theres a home invasion. How do I protect the children?" I told her that was an excellent point, and I really wished she had gone up and testified to that.

    Theres going to be more hearings on this. I may not make the next one. If anyone else here can, please do, and please speak!!


    http://www.dhfs.state.wi.us/rl_dcfs/CCRuleRevision.HTM

  2. #2
    State Researcher lockman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Elgin, Illinois, USA
    Posts
    1,202

    Post imported post

    100+ for PK!!! After all he did it for the children!

  3. #3
    State Researcher dng's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , , USA
    Posts
    1,290

    Post imported post

    Scary idea! Taking guns away from homeowners because they watch children and the governmentwants to "protect" the children. (does the term "Big Brother" come to mind?) What a backwards way to look at it the situation! If the firearm is safely stored, they there is no danger to the children, and they are actually safer with the gun in the house because the caregiver can defend them self against an intruder. If we give the government an inch on gun control, they will take a mile. I'm glad that it went well for you. Keep us up to date with how this goes, if you are able.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Gary, Indiana, USA
    Posts
    518

    Post imported post

    Nice, except that you failed to mention that to take away the guns of homeowners who have daycares in their homes is a flagrant violation of the 2nd Amendment. As for the city of Milwaukee, people's second amendment rightsshouldn'tall of a sudden be rendered invalid simply because their home is also a daycare.

  5. #5
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Indiana, USA
    Posts
    1,606

    Post imported post

    I'm not telling anyone to sit there and take the legislation being thrown at them, but you said loaded firearms, which is entirely depended upon this operative term, what is the definition of loaded?

    Basically if you carried in condition 3 you would be okay?

    I'm glad you stood up and made you case, I think people like knowing their children are safe...

    Maybe they could start an "armed daycare":P

  6. #6
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    , Indiana, USA
    Posts
    1,606

    Post imported post

    I am also going to go out on a limb here...

    With home daycare's parents should ask these questions, are there firearms in the home, how are they stored etc... because we all know that improperly stored firearms and children improperly taught about the dangers of these weapons when used neglectfully can be fatal to children, to anyone.

    The thing is, that the 2A is the right to keep and bear arms, and I think the way they around this, is that it does say "the right to keep and bear loaded arms"... anyone else?

    If parents asked the questions first, thats fine, let them decide... the state shouldn't be making the decision for them.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    pkbites wrote:
    Theres going to be more hearings on this. I may not make the next one. If anyone else here can, please do, and please speak!!
    http://www.dhfs.state.wi.us/rl_dcfs/CCRuleRevision.HTM
    Thank you.

    The linked URL includes,

    You may send written comments on the proposed rules (no later than 4:30 p.m. on December 17, 2007) to:

    DCFS Bureau of Regulation and Licensing Child Care Rule Revisions
    1 W Wilson Street Room 534
    PO Box 8916 Madison,
    WI 53708-8916 email:
    [email]plicbrlco@dhfs.state.wi.us
    ]
    and

    Child Care Center Rule Revisions (108 pages - 353 kb - PDF document) http://www.dhfs.state.wi.us/rl_dcfs/...akingOrder.pdf
    If I am able to wade through 108 pp to the relevant passage then I'll note it here. In any case I'll send an e-mail at least.

    Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. LAB/NRA/GOP *******

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    http://www.dhfs.state.wi.us/rl_dcfs/...akingOrder.pdf

    Formatting such as strikeout and underline does not copy. Read the original for such.

    SECTION 79. HFS 45.11 (10) (a) 6. is created to read:

    HFS 45.11 (10) (a) 6. The licensee, an employee, a volunteer, a household member or other person in regular contact with children has been determined by the department to be in possession of loaded firearms, or a controlled substance as specified under ch. 961, Stats., on or off the premises, or is involved in drug trafficking.
    Without reading any background material, this paragraph appears to criminalize malum prohibitum mere possession of a loaded firearm in the same way as possession of a controlled substance or drug trafficking and in spite of the Second Amendment and Article 25 of Wis. Constitution. Will a court rule that 'loaded' is not mentioned in either?

    SECTION 178. HFS 46.11 (9) (a) 6. is created to read:

    HFS 46.11 (9) (a) 6. The licensee, an employee, a household member or any other person in reqular contact with children in care has been determined by the department to be in possession of loaded firearms, or controlled substances specified under ch. 961, Stats., on or off the premises, or is involved in drug trafficking.
    Ditto
    SECTION 234. HFS 55.05 (6) (a) 5. and 6. are created to read:

    HFS 55.05 (6) (a) 6. The licensee, an employee, a volunteer, a household member or any other person in regular contact with the children has been determined by the department to be in possession of loaded firearms or controlled substances specified under ch. 961, Stats., on or off the premises, or is involved in drug trafficking.
    SECTION 237. HFS 55.05 (8), (9), and (10) are created to read:

    HFS 55.05 (8) LICENSE DENIAL OR REVOCATION. (a) The department may deny, revoke or suspend a license, initiate other enforcement actions specified in this chapter or in ch. 48, Stats., or place conditions on a license if the applicant or licensee, a proposed or current employee, a volunteer or any other person having regular contact with the children, is any of the following:

    9. Determined by the department to be in possession of loaded firearms, or controlled substances specified under ch. 961, Stats., on or off the premises, or involved in drug trafficking.
    SECTION 397. HFS 55.44 (9) (title) (intro.), (a), (b) and (c) are amended to read:

    HFS 55.44 (9) (title) RIFLERY FIREARMS and ARCHERY. Riflery Firearms and archery equipment may not be part of the program for used by children under 7 years of age. When riflery firearms and archery equipment are included in the program for older used by children over age 7, the following precautions for the protection of children under 7 years of age shall be observed: (a) The archery or rifle shooting range may be used only under the supervision of an a trained adult instructor;. (b) Other program activities shall be in an area away from the designated archery or rifle shooting range. The range shall be fenced in with rope or wire and marked with danger signs or flags;. (c) Rifles, Firearms, ammunition, and archery equipment shall be stored under lock and key when not in use; and. SECTION 398. HFS 55.44 (9) (d) is repealed and recreated to read: HFS 55.44 (9) (d) Children shall be closely supervised to ensure that all firearms, ammunition and archery equipment is used in a safe manner and to ensure that all unused ammunition is returned to the instructor.
    There are about three further mentions of firearms that are 'duplicates' of one of these noted mentions.

  9. #9
    State Researcher dng's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , , USA
    Posts
    1,290

    Post imported post

    just a guy, with a Glock wrote:
    Recently Massachusetts had legislation introduced making spanking a child a crime. That's what makes children more vunerable to accidents- NO DISCIPLINE.
    +1

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    To: plicbrlco@dhfs.state.wi.us
    Subject: Protest mention of firearms in HFS 45, HFS 46, HFS 55

    I protest mention of firearms in child care rules as back door extra-legal infringements of the Second Amendment and contrary to Article 1, Section 25 of the Wisconsin Constitution.

    Doug Huffman
    Washington Island
    Wisconsin 54246

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Waukesha, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    721

    Post imported post

    PK thank you for sticking up for the rights of lawful gun owners. ::respect::

    As a side note to everybody, this is a GREAT place to advertise any and all government meetings to help get better pro-gun attendance at those events....please let us know so we can support pro-gun efforts! Gun grabbers have a nasty way of showing up in great numbers to those kind of government meetings.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Waukesha, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    721

    Post imported post

    Another thought....I'm sure that some gun grabbers watch this site (keep your friends close but your enemies closer). Short of having an email list owned by somebody, is there any other good way to get info about government meetings and such to pro-gun members without advertising it to all the others who can read this site?

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,169

    Post imported post

    Once you turn your home into a commercial establishment, the character of the premises changes as does your position vis-a-vis regulators. The health department probably doesn't inspect your kitchen - but would if you turned it into a restaurant. I am not arguing pkbites' central point but am posting to ensure that everybody considers how your decisions impact your life.

  14. #14
    Founder's Club Member bnhcomputing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,709

    Post imported post

    I read the proposed rule changes and didn't find anywhere where this was limited to JUST the premises. If I missed that, could you point out where it says that please?

    If it doesn't specify the premises, then if my wife runs a daycare, I can no longer hunt or shoot even at the range, as I would be in possession of a loaded gun

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    I pray you commented to the address noted above.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin, ,
    Posts
    836

    Post imported post

    bnhcomputing wrote:
    I read the proposed rule changes and didn't find anywhere where this was limited to JUST the premises. If I missed that, could you point out where it says that please?

    If it doesn't specify the premises, then if my wife runs a daycare, I can no longer hunt or shoot even at the range, as I would be in possession of a loaded gun

    This is correct! Notice it doesn't say (at least I didn't see it. Correct me if I'm wrong) the criminal possession of a firearm. It doesn't seem to say anything about criminal charges.

    Does this mean a day care providers spouse can't be a cop or [armed] security officer?
    Or a hunter?

    What if the providers spouse get's a DC charge for open carry while not even on the premises? Does the provider get shut down while the spouse fights the charge?

    How does the state justify including household members who do things off premises?


  17. #17
    Founder's Club Member bnhcomputing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,709

    Post imported post

    My wife just had a thought:

    None of the parents of the kids in the day care could EVER possess a firearm either, as they would have regular contact with the children.

    This is the most liberal gun control effort I have seen to date.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin, ,
    Posts
    836

    Post imported post

    bnhcomputing wrote:
    My wife just had a thought:

    None of the parents of the kids in the day care could EVER possess a firearm either, as they would have regular contact with the children.

    This is the most liberal gun control effort I have seen to date.
    ALL of the new proposed rules (gun related or not) are the most vague regulations I have ever seen.

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    pkbites wrote:
    ALL of the new proposed rules (gun related or not) are the most vague regulations I have ever seen.
    That characterizes Wisconsin statutes in general, vagueness. South Carolina's were paragons of principled clarity in comparison. Is the RSB common in other states, or unique to Wisconsin as Brobadingnaggian 'flapper' to the legislature?

    Where else could the SSC work against Section 25 of Article 1 of the State Constitution and knowingly against the will of the people?

  20. #20
    Founder's Club Member bnhcomputing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,709

    Post imported post

    I sent an email to my state representatives. I heard back from my senator’s office today.



    1. The AG was not aware of this, but apparently is now watching it closely. I urge everyone on here to write to your reps, as I did, and to the AG.
    2. The NRA apparently is aware of this, but I never received any notice from them about this BEFORE the public comment time had passed. In fact, I still haven’t seen anything from the NRA on this subject, has anyone else?
    3. These rule changes take affect automatically if the Senate committee that oversees the bureau does nothing, so we NEED to turn up the heat on the state senate and DEMAND a public hearing.
    4. I am in the process of trying to forward this to EVERY gun club and outdoors organization I can find.
    5. Sent it to the US sportsmen’s alliance, no reply from them.



  21. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    Wisconsin? You're in Wisconsin and got a response from legislators?!

    The NRA/affiliates have their own agenda. Please work as a citizen activist and not as a member of a subscription-party. When you donate in-kind/money then the donee must toe your line. When they require a periodic subscription payment then you are required to support them whether or not your support their actions - this is where the GOP and NRA went astray.

    Look at the word 'subscription', you are 'under (sub) writing (script)' their actions even if you don't approve.

    Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA-AHSA *******

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Saukville, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    233

    Post imported post

    I often get personal emails back from Glenn Grothmann and Mark Gottleib when I write them. I'll drop them a line on this one if it's not too late already . . .

  23. #23
    Founder's Club Member bnhcomputing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,709

    Post imported post

    Got this EMail from Assembly Speaker Huebsch

    Thank you for your input regarding to the Child Care Licensing Rule changes. I appreciate knowing your views on this important matter.


    I share your views that this rule changes does raise some red flags. Our Legislative Council attorneys have reviewed the rule change and have noted valid concerns that need to be clarified during this process. When the Joint Committee on Review of Administrative Rules addresses this matter, the Department of Health and Family Services will be expected to respond and satisfy these concerns before the Committee takes action.

    Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts in this issue.

    Sincerely,

    Mike Huebsch

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Southern Illinois, Illinois, USA
    Posts
    364

    Post imported post

    Is SSC State Supeme Court or what? I wouldn't count on a firearm in condition 3 as unloaded. In Illinois a firearm with the magazine in the gun is considered loaded for transportation purposes, some states even consider having ammunition in the passenger compartment of a vehicle with the firearm as being loaded, though I don't believe Wisconsin is that extreme.

    When concealed carry is passed in Wisconsin watch out that daycare centers are not automatically made "gun free" "criminal protection zones".

  25. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    CCW is not going to happen in Wisconsin.

    941.23 Carrying concealed weapon. Any person except a peace officer who goes armed with a concealed and dangerous weapon is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor. Notwithstanding s. 939.22 (22), for purposes of this section, peace officer does not include a commission warden who is not a state-certified commission warden.
    (http://nxt.legis.state.wi.us)

    The NRA and its affiliates and subscribers have a vested interest in selling dispensations to this and any other infringement. The legislators have convinced the people that safety is paramount - especially in gun handling.

    Safety is a tyrant's tool; no one can be against safety.

    Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA *******


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
  •