• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Legislative support for open and concealed carry grows after memo

Mike

Site Co-Founder
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
8,706
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
imported post

http://www.kenoshanews.com/scripts/edoris/edoris.dll?app=server&com=sqlxml&tem=d_subject.tpl&topicid=15187

SNIP

Sen. Robert Wirch, D-Pleasant Prairie, criticized the timing of Van Hollen’s opinion, but he was not about to argue with the content.

“I think the timing was poor, bringing it out right when the 10th anniversary of Columbine was out there,” Wirch said. “But I think that he’s on pretty solid legal grounds with this.” . . .

Wisconsin and Illinois are presently the only two states in the nation that do not allow for some sort of concealed carrying of firearms. The Legislature has twice passed concealed carry bills in recent years, only to see them fall to Gov. Jim Doyle’s vetoes.

I’m hopeful that perhaps this advisory note will be a catalyst to move the Legislature back to the table to debate this issue and to consider finalizing some laws, in regard to concealed carry,” Sen. Neal Kedzie, R-Elkhorn, said Thursday.. . . he said he believes it is inevitable that Wisconsin will one day adopt concealed carry.

In the meantime, Wirch said he is comfortable with the current law that Van Hollen believes allows for open carry.
 

smithman

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
718
Location
Waukesha, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Had the CCW passed a few years ago, we would be used to that and it is likely that we would not be able to exercise our open carry rights as freely as we now are able to. What I am saying is that there would be less support for OC as a means to carry regularly since most people prefer to conceal anyways. With CCW already on the books, there would be no need for most people to push for AG memos or other resolutions to recognize the open carry of firearms.

By delaying the passage of CCW, governor Doyle has helped us secure our right to OC as part of our daily routine! And yes, the Wisconsin Patriots predicted this would happen and it is the backbone behind what they are doing. Once enough people take to the streets lawfully armed and carrying openly, then there will be legislation drafted to allow people to conceal after legislators are badgered about people carrying guns openly. And then we will have BOTH methods available to us...one a right (OC) and one a priveledge (CC), with the CC having reciprocity with other states. Then we will be like Ohio or Michigan with one right and one priveledge, based on how the person chooses to carry. People should have both methods available to them anyways, its person preference.

In my early days as a gun owner, I was a pro-CCW only person. This is partly due to the NRA's influence on my thinking that the ony way to carry was concealing. However I have become more fond of OC as a regular means of carry so that even when travelling to states with licenced OC/CC I choose to carry openly. It is also a statement of expression, showing people and law enforcement that those with guns are not a threat. In the old days, CCW laws were passed to FORCE people to carry onpenly!
 

Max

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
335
Location
, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

I agree with you smithman. I would like to see CC as an addition to our gun rights no as a replacement. One a right, on a privilege. I feel confident they will try to replace OC with CC though.
 

44Brent

Regular Member
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
772
Location
Olympia, WA
imported post

In the old days, CCW laws were passed to FORCE people to carry onpenly!

Can you provide more information (sources) about this? I would like to read up on this.

Thanks.
 

Teej

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2008
Messages
522
Location
, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

44Brent wrote:
In the old days, CCW laws were passed to FORCE people to carry onpenly!

Can you provide more information (sources) about this? I would like to read up on this.

Thanks.
It's common knowledge.

Concealed weapons laws started out of fear of attacks by newly-freed slaves. Open carrying was never made illegal (at least in WI) - concealed carry was, and not just of firearms.
 

Max

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
335
Location
, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

The story goes that conceal carry was banned in Wisconsin 135 years ago because it was thought that carrying a concealed weapon was dubious behavior and it gave a conceal carrier an unknown advantage over an unarmed person. If you carried a weapon, you should let everyone know you are armed, was the philosophy of the time.
 

skamp

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Feb 18, 2009
Messages
196
Location
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

about the timing:

i think it was PERFECT timing. and here is why. columbine was allowed to happen because the teachers are all disarmed ( a reason to drop the "school zone" law).
if any of those teachers at that school were armed (openly or concealed) it would NEVER have gotten as bad as it did.. the second those guys walked into a classroom with guns out.. they would have been put down.. and instead of headlines for umpteen people killed.. it would have been teacher is a hero..

just my $0.02
 

sccrref

Regular Member
Joined
May 11, 2007
Messages
741
Location
Virginia Beach, VA, , USA
imported post

skamp wrote:
about the timing:

i think it was PERFECT timing. and here is why. columbine was allowed to happen because the teachers are all disarmed ( a reason to drop the "school zone" law).
if any of those teachers at that school were armed (openly or concealed) it would NEVER have gotten as bad as it did.. the second those guys walked into a classroom with guns out.. they would have been put down.. and instead of headlines for umpteen people killed.. it would have been teacher is a hero..

just my $0.02
I do not think that I can argue with logic such as this.
 

Trigger Dr

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2007
Messages
2,760
Location
Wa, ,
imported post

Be careful that if and when legislation is passed, that OC is prohibited in the law.
 

BJA

Campaign Veteran
Joined
May 4, 2008
Messages
503
Location
SOuth Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

How those 18-20 going to be able to carry? IF they pass a bill it will most likely read 21+ so do we just get left out...? We need to DEFINATELY watch out for that!
 

6L6GC

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2007
Messages
492
Location
Newport News, Virginia, USA
imported post

Max wrote:
I agree with you smithman. I would like to see CC as an addition to our gun rights no as a replacement. One a right, on a privilege. I feel confident they will try to replace OC with CC though.

What!!!????!?!? How can you think that one mode of carry is a privilege? It annoys me when proponents of one mode of carry (open vs. concealed) feel that the other mode is just a privilege.

I'd wonder if anyone making such a statement could point out just which part of the second amendment addresses which mode of carry is a right and which is a privilege.

The right to carry a firearm is not dependent on the carry mode. Both modes of carry have pros and cons and each has its time and place. I do both andknow that it is my right to do so.
 

Mike

Site Co-Founder
Joined
May 13, 2006
Messages
8,706
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
imported post

6L6GC wrote:
Max wrote:
I agree with you smithman. I would like to see CC as an addition to our gun rights no as a replacement. One a right, on a privilege. I feel confident they will try to replace OC with CC though.

What!!!????!?!? How can you think that one mode of carry is a privilege? It annoys me when proponents of one mode of carry (open vs. concealed) feel that the other mode is just a privilege.
Except the case law across the US, as noted by Heller, generally says exactly this - that concealing your gun is not constitutionally protected.

However, the state courts of Vermont and Wisconsin have construed the state constitutional more strongly to protect even concealed carry for lawful purposes, see e.g., Hamdan; Vegas.

So, you have a point too, of course. But I think a lot of people want to emphacise OC as protected in order to make a statement to defend it so it is not banned - they have a strategic point as well.
 

opusd2

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2008
Messages
453
Location
Butt is in, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

If you doubt the state of hunting in jeopardy, just watch the DNR. Their laws become more strict, just as their active denial of animal population problems are becoming more and more prevalent.

We have had herd increases in deer, turkeys, wolves, bears, etc... that are not only reported as the opposite, but which are out of control and the lack of food and space is causing disease issues and many winter and vehicle kills. But the DNR claims they are actually low in number and are changing laws to raise the numbers while in urban areas the presence of these animals are causing municipalities to hire "sharp shooters" to take out some of the deer. Their lack of kills notwithstanding.

Add to it the rise in license fees by our buddy Doyle, and the deterrence to go hunting is increased even more.

Then there is the Hunter Education instructor who was fired because he informed his students of their legal rights hunting...

What does all this ranting mean as a response? That in Wisconsin we can't think that any of our rights are safe no matter how much of a common sense matter we think it is.
 

Sonora Rebel

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
3,956
Location
Gone
imported post

Max wrote:
The story goes that conceal carry was banned in Wisconsin 135 years ago because it was thought that carrying a concealed weapon was dubious behavior and it gave a conceal carrier an unknown advantage over an unarmed person. If you carried a weapon, you should let everyone know you are armed, was the philosophy of the time.

Not sure when CC became 'legal' in AZ... but it was for the exact same reason. A person openly bearing arms was obviously 'heeled' to the awareness of all. Carrying concealed was considered'sneaky'. Of course the weather (here) is still the driving dictator of open carry, whereas Wisconson wouldbe the near opposite for the same reason for a good percentage of the year.

Concealed carry is not Constitutionally protected... therefore 'permit' under 10A is issued by individualstates. AK and VT being exceptions, but again... it's a 10A thing.
 

Y2K

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 29, 2009
Messages
15
Location
Open Carry, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

:what:I will vote republican for governor, so we will have the right person in office. Therefore we will be treated fairly, and have our rights to be re-stored.
 

Nutczak

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Messages
2,165
Location
The Northwoods, lakeland area, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Y2K wrote:
:what:I will vote republican for governor, so we will have the right person in office. Therefore we will be treated fairly, and have our rights to be re-stored.:uhoh:
That didn't get us too far with J.B. Just becuase they are a republican, does not in any way that they will respect firearms owners rights.
 

Brass Magnet

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2009
Messages
2,818
Location
Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Nutczak wrote:
Y2K wrote:
:what:I will vote republican for governor, so we will have the right person in office. Therefore we will be treated fairly, and have our rights to be re-stored.:uhoh:
That didn't get us too far with J.B. Just becuase they are a republican, does not in any way that they will respect firearms owners rights.

Although I think Y2K was making fun.(.... the :uhoh:tipped me off....)

In a perfect world Constitutionalist (my favorite http://www.constitution.org/pol/us/consplat.htm), Libertarian, or Republican Liberty Caucus members would get my vote.

In reality I haven't looked at the candidates yet, but I'm guessing I'll have to settle forthe one that best exemplifies the ideals of those platforms...... Uh.... in other words....I hate it that my only choice is usually to just vote for the lesser of two evils.
:banghead:
 
Top