Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 153

Thread: Questions for Gubernatorial Candidates

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481

    Post imported post

    Not only as a candidate but as a seated Governor, should you win the election, What is your position on the following issues?

    1)Open Carry in Wisconsin.

    2)Concealed Carry in Wisconsin.

    3)The unconstitutional transportation laws (concerning fire arms) in the State of Wisconsin.

    4) The unconstitutional School Zone Restriction Laws (concerning fire arms) in the State of Wisconsin.

    5) A No Compromise Concealed carry/OpenCarry non-permitted system in Wisconsin.
    (The U.S. Supreme Court decided the citizens are not required to register, train or be permitted to exercise their rights)

    Please keep in mind this is not a forum of lobbyist. However we are all law abiding citizens who are ready to cast our votes and support the candidate that respects and recognizes our rights and the fact that we are granted those rights by the State and U.S. Constitutions before and after they take office. It is also lawful and "NOT" disorderly for law abiding citizens to exercise those rights.



  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481

    Post imported post

    Bump Bump!

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481

    Post imported post

    Lets keep this on top and available. Maybe we can get them all to answer these questions.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2

    Post imported post

    Hello Jim,

    As your future governor my desire is to make Wisconsin one of the top 5 states

    to live in, in regards to our Constitutional Second Amendment rights.

    The Second Amendment states, "A well regulated militia being necessary to the

    security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be

    infringed." This ammendment protects our right to keep and bear arms from

    infringement by the federal goverment.

    1) Open Carry in Wisconsin. Answer: I am all for it.

    2) Concealed Carry in Wisconsin. Answer: I am all for it.

    3) The unconstitutional transportation laws (concerning fire arms) in the state of WI.

    Answer: I am not for anything that is unconstitutional.

    4) The unconstitutional School Zone Restiction Laws (concerning fire arms) in the

    state of WI. Answer: I am not for anything that is unconstitutional.

    5) A No Compromise Concealed carry/Open Carry non-permitted system in Wisconsin.

    Answer:Yes, I am for it. Exceptions would be:mental illness, violent felons (rape, battery, assault, substance abuse, murder, etc.) I also believe we would need guidelines for children.

    note: I included "etc." in case I missed something obvious--I do notbelieve inunreasonable exceptions here.

    An example of how I think?

    If a woman wants to go for a run in theevening or early morning,would a rapist think twice if that woman had a loaded gunon her hip? If a armed robber wanted to rob a store owner and saw the store owner with a loaded gun on his hip would the robber think twice? I believewhen law-abiding adult citizens (of right mind) are protected; society will be a safer place to live. Studies have actually shown that.

    I saw parts of Doug's movie and it is obvious to me that we need to make changes

    tothe WI statutes 941 & 167so that our Second Amendment rights are not

    being violated.

    All the Best!

    Mark Todd

    www.marktoddforgovernor.com



  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    The Northwoods, lakeland area, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,170

    Post imported post

    Mr Todd. Thank you for joining us.

    Just to clarify your stance:

    5) A No Compromise Concealed carry/Open Carry non-permitted system in Wisconsin.

    Answer:Yes, I am for it. Exceptions would be:mental illness, violent felons (rape, battery, assault, substance abuse, murder, etc.) I also believe we would need guidelines for children.

    note: I included "etc." in case I missed something obvious--I do notbelieve inunreasonable exceptions here.
    Do you mean that if someone has the legal ability to own and purchase a firearm under current state & federal laws. That you will back carry options the same as Alaska & Vermont currently have available? (no permitting required to carry openly or concealed as long as you have the legal ability to own or posess a firearm)

    VT & AK do have carry permits available to their residents so they can legally carry instates that have a reciprocal agreement, but are not required if in those 2 states
    4) The unconstitutional School Zone Restiction Laws (concerning fire arms) in the

    state of WI. Answer: I am not for anything that is unconstitutional.

    I believe the "1,000' School Zone Ban" has already been determined to be unconstitutional at the federal level. What plan of action would you take to have the current WI law repealed in a timely manner?

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481

    Post imported post

    Welcome to the forum Mark,

    Thanks for taking the time to respond to the posted questions.

    I am sure that after you viewed Doug's video you can understand how the fire arms laws in Wisconsin are a mess.

    The transportation laws and the school zone restriction laws both infringe on our rights to carry. Hopefully these will be changed in the future. The sooner the better.

    Please feel free to frequent the forum and join in.

    There are also events and picnics that you are welcome to attend, I am sure you will gain much support since you have been the only candidate to date that has come forward and expressed their positions on these issues.

  7. #7
    Founder's Club Member springfield 1911's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Racine, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    484

    Post imported post

    Don't want to burst any bubbles but , Should our legislature remain the same anti's in control, pro gun bills will never make it to the floor for a vote let alone make it out of committee. I'm just saying it's not like a pro gun Gov. can sign an executive order to expand our rights.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJQ34JTqk0I

    In the ashes burns an ember of liberty, We are the fuel to ignite the ember into a flame of liberty.

    The embodiment of our founding fathers will not be found in one man , But in Many.

    ****** give it away ( Our rights ) prostitutes sell it (Mandated training).

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    The Northwoods, lakeland area, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,170

    Post imported post

    springfield 1911 wrote:
    Don't want to burst any bubbles but , Should our legislature remain the same anti's in control, pro gun bills will never make it to the floor for a vote let alone make it out of committee. I'm just saying it's not like a pro gun Gov. can sign an executive order to expand our rights.
    Sort of, but the governor can lean on people to get things done, "One hand washes the other" in modern politics. it is B.S. but that is how it works

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481

    Post imported post

    But he sure can wield the power of the Veto pen!

    One other thing we all need to remember. There is not much time really between now and the 2010 elections.

    We need to get things done if we want these laws to change.

    The way I see it is, we can get behind someone who has the balls to come onto a forum like this and make his stand on the issues or we can keep waiting for the other so called pro gun candidates that sit back and say they are in favor of these law changes while behind closed doors, knowing that when or if they are elected they will look the other way and all will be forgotten.

    Where is Walker? Where is Nuemann? or any of the others that claim they are in favor of gun rights?

    If we get behind someone who has come forward and stands up for gun rights now, That individual will have a greater chance of winning.

    Look at our numbers! We can make a difference!

    Wasting our time on Walker or Nuemann will leave us kicking ourselves in the arse after elections. I don't know about all of you but I for one am sick to death of all of the empty promises. That is all the career politicians know.....empty promises.

    A candidate that is not a career politician, but a family man who understands our rights to self defense and our 2nd Amendment rights, a man who knows how important jobs are in this state...... That is someone worth supporting.

    If coming on this forum and standing his ground on these issues looks to be a negative to some people, then tell me this, When is a good time to do that?
    If this man didn't win the elections because of his position on these issues, I would still have more respect for him then the other candidates.

    It is kind of like Nik said about throwing money in a pot for some ones legal fees when they won't even file suit. It is a waste of money and resources. That is what it will be supporting Walker or Nuemann.

    Doug said, "The only politician worth voting for is one that bleeds political blood for your cause, even unto defeat."

    It seems to me that Mark Todd has taken the step towards bleeding political blood for the cause without provocation and whole heartedly.

    That makes him a measuring stick for the others and right now I don't see them measuring up.

    We need to stop procrastinating ourselves to death and quit looking a gift horse in the mouth.

  10. #10
    Campaign Veteran GlockMeisterG21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Pewaukee, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    637

    Post imported post

    Welcome to the forum Mark! It's always gratifying to see a candidate take the time to listen and talk to the people he would serve if elected. If only we could see more of that with the officials already in office.

    You have stated that you are against anything that would be considered unconstitutional and I am glad to hear it. But do you believe that the laws stated in numbers 3 and 4 of J.Gleason's post are unconstitutional?

    Thank you for taking the time to come and answer some of our questions and I look forward to hearing your veiws.
    “The 1911 pistol remains the service pistol of choice in the eyes of those who understand the problem. Back when we audited the FBI academy in 1947, I was told that I ought not to use my pistol in their training program because it was not fair. Maybe the first thing one should demand of his sidearm is that it be unfair.” — Col. Jeff Cooper, GUNS & AMMO, January 2002

  11. #11
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818

    Post imported post


    I also welcome you to the forum Mark. Thanks for taking some time out of you schedule to check it out. I believe that Mark probably hasn’t had time to look at the laws as relating to firearms in the state as closely as we have and that’s probably the reason for his answers to #3 and #4. When I got the ordinance changed in my city, the police chief was busy looking up laws on his blackberry to answer the questions of the city council. We have to remember that there are a lot of laws and issues out there besides our own and we do know our own little corner very well when others may have only touched on it.

    I believe that Doug’s video helps people that are more unfamiliar with the laws get a better grasp on them; so, in that spirit, and to consolidate things a little better for Mr. Todd I’ll try to explain ourselves on #3 and #4 a little better below.



    [/b]That the Wisconsin Constitution, Article I, Section 25 guarantees:[/b]"The people have the right to keep and bear arms for security, defense, hunting, recreation or any other lawful purpose."[/i]

    [/b][State V. Cole[/b] “First, based on the text of the constitution and the legislative history of the amendment, we note our agreement with both parties that Article I, Section 25 of the Wisconsin Constitution grants an individual, rather than a collective, right. As already noted, we accept the proposition that the right to bear arms amendment recognized a fundamental right.”]
    [/i]
    [/b]

    That Wisconsin Stat. § 948.605 is unconstitutional:[/b]

    The many overlapping “school zones” that Wisconsin state statute § 948.605 creates, eviscerate the right of the people in urban areas to bear arms for defense and for any other lawful purposes.



    [“Case law reveals that while the right to bear arms for lawful purposes is not an absolute, neither is the State's police power when it eviscerates this constitutionally protected right.Article I, Section 25 does not establish an unfettered right to bear arms. Clearly, the State retains the power to impose reasonable regulations on weapons, including a general prohibition on the carrying of concealed weapons. However, the State may not apply these regulations in situations that functionally disallow the exercise of the rights conferred under Article I, Section 25.” State V. Hamdan[/b]]
    [/i]


    Although law abiding citizens follow the law, criminals commonly ignore the law and the area within 1000 feet of school property is not free of gun related crime.

    The need of the people; for self defense in these areas, substantially outweighs the states need to enforce the statute.



    That the Wisconsin Stat. § 948.605 is in direct conflict with Wisconsin Stat. § 941.23:[/b]

    § 948.605 provides that for a citizen to walk through a school zone; that person must have their firearm unloaded and enclosed within a carrying case.

    [see Wisconsin Stat § 939.22 (10) “Dangerous weapon” means any firearm, whether loaded or unloaded…]

    [/i]Because a person walking through a school zone with a firearm is governed by both statutes compliance with one is lack of compliance with the other.[/i]



    State v. Alloy,616 N.W.2d 525 (Wis. App. 2000) (affirming concealed carry conviction of man possessing handgun in a vehicle in conformity with Wisconsin Stat. § 167.31 because “Alloy's argument is based on the false assertion that he was trapped by a conflict between Wis. Stat. § 167.31 and Wis. Stat. § 941.23. A person transporting a firearm is governed by both statutes. To comply with § 167.31, the person must encase the weapon. To comply with § 941.23, he or she must place the enclosed weapon out of reach. See State v. Asfoor, 75 Wis.2d 411, 433-34, 249 N.W.2d 529 (1977). A person complying with § 167.31 is not required to violate § 941.23. The encased weapon can be lawfully transported out of reach.”)


    [/i]
    A person walking with an encased, unloaded firearm cannot walk with the weapon out of reach.



    [State v. Keith[/b], 175 Wis. 2d 75, 498 N.W.2d 865 (Ct. App. 1993). ]The elements for a violation of s. 941.23 are: 1) a dangerous weapon is on the defendant’s person or within reach; 2) the defendant is aware of the weapon’s presence; and 3) the weapon is hidden.[/b]][/i]







    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

  12. #12
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481

    Post imported post

    I have a phone call in to the campaign headquarters for both Walker and Nuemann.

    I left a message with Walkers Secretary and a Voice mail for Mark Nuemann.

    Now we just have to wait and see where they stand.

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481

    Post imported post

    Still waiting, and by the way neither Walker or Nuemann list gun rights as an issue on their websites.



  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    2

    Post imported post

    Hello everyone,

    Thank you very much, Jim, for the phone call. Thank you Brass Magnet for the

    clarification.

    To answer Nutczak- Yes, I support "no permitting required" to carry openly or

    concealed as long as you have the legal ability to own or possess a firearm.

    The 1000 School Zone Ban as well as all the illogical WI laws mentioned above and

    explained in Doug's movie do need to be addressed. I believe 3 and 4 do infringe

    on our 2nd Amendment rights to keep and bear arms. Bottom line: I believe the

    2nd Amendmentallows innocent people to protect themselvesbecause criminals will

    find arms/guns regardless. I will commit to getting something done within the 1st

    90 days in office regarding these issues.Can youall committo doing what you

    canso that I have the opportunity to do this?

    All the best!

    Mark Todd





  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    The Northwoods, lakeland area, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,170

    Post imported post

    You have now gotten my full attention and support, and that is no small task.

    What can i do to help forward your campaign up in the northwoods area of the state?

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    A G00gle site search of www.marktoddforgovernor.com for "firearms" returned no hits.

    A G00gle site search of www.marktoddforgovernor.com for gun returned
    http://www.marktoddforgovernor.com/e...n-control.html
    http://www.marktoddforgovernor.com/i...d_hunting.html

    Please disassociate guns and the Second Amendment from hunting.

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481

    Post imported post

    Mark Todd wrote:
    Hello everyone,

    Thank you very much, Jim, for the phone call. Thank you Brass Magnet for the

    clarification.

    To answer Nutczak- Yes, I support "no permitting required" to carry openly or

    concealed as long as you have the legal ability to own or possess a firearm.

    The 1000 School Zone Ban as well as all the illogical WI laws mentioned above and

    explained in Doug's movie do need to be addressed. I believe 3 and 4 do infringe

    on our 2nd Amendment rights to keep and bear arms. Bottom line: I believe the

    2nd Amendmentallows innocent people to protect themselvesbecause criminals will

    find arms/guns regardless. I will commit to getting something done within the 1st

    90 days in office regarding these issues.Can youall committo doing what you

    canso that I have the opportunity to do this?

    All the best!

    Mark Todd



    Doug Huffman wrote: A G00gle site search of http://www.marktoddforgovernor.com for "firearms" returned no hits.

    A G00gle site search of http://www.marktoddforgovernor.com for gun returned
    http://www.marktoddforgovernor.com/e...n-control.html
    http://www.marktoddforgovernor.com/i...d_hunting.html

    Please disassociate guns and the Second Amendment from hunting.







    I think he pretty much did that here.

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    Here, in front of a sympathetic audience.

    Has anyone else read marktoddforgovernor.com critically, have you?

    Shall I post Alexander Pope's Essay on Criticism in its entirety?

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481

    Post imported post

    Doug Huffman wrote:
    Here, in front of a sympathetic audience.

    Has anyone else read marktoddforgovernor.com critically, have you?
    Yes I did, and while he does talk about hunting he also talks about our right to self defense and the fact that criminals will less likely target some one who is or who they may think is armed. The title of the Paragraph is Guns "AND" Hunting.

    If you read the article about the "proper and useful use of gun control" the article is about self defense.

    We are always going to have the issue with hunting because hunting is a big issue in Wisconsin.

    Like I said before we can procrastinate ourselves to death right up to election time and then we can all sit here on this forum and whine that we ended up with 4 more years of the same ole @#$%.

    When do we step forward to promote change rather then just sit here and talk about it?

    The other candidates have all been invited personally to come to this forum and none of them have made the effort.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Appleton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    22

    Post imported post

    Mark, you have my vote as well as my support.

  21. #21
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818

    Post imported post

    J.Gleason wrote:
    The other candidates have all been invited personally to come to this forum and none of them have made the effort.
    That all by itself makes me steer towards Mr. Todd, and if his words above ring true he has my support. If he ends up being endorsed by the LP or RLC, it would be evenbetter.
    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    nowhere
    Posts
    631

    Post imported post

    I hope i won't put my foot in my mouth with what i'm about to say. LOL

    thank you Mark Todd for signing up here and asking for our support. I've always been of the opinion that making it illegal or difficult to carry firearms just put more power into the criminals hands as they will carry regardless if it's legal or illegal. but how are law abiding citizens supposed to protect themselves if we get in trouble for defending ourself???

    I have already read enough to peak my interest in following your progress and show my support in whichever way I can. Up until recently I have supported the right to own guns AND carry, but personally never quite felt the need to. Unfortunately the criminals have changed my mind for me, as i have had my property burglarized 2 times now in the past 6months costing me in excess of nearly $20,000. And what's worse is that my wife and 6month old child where in the house sleeping while this happened.

    After a situation like that, how am I not supposed to fear for the safety of my family??? How do i know if next time they won't enter into my house and endanger my wife and child??? Or what would have happened if any one of us would have left the house or come home during the time of the burglary??? Would I currently still be alive to read and write this had I walked in on the criminals???

    Sad to say I also know to many people who's friends, family members or even wifes have been raped in relatively public areas. Such criminal activities could very well have been prevented or stopped if people had the right to defend themselves.


    I for one would like the right to protect my wife and child, and look forward to being able to USE my freedom and rights that my wife fought in the army for. Doesn't it seem a bit backwards that our soldiers are overseas fighting for THEIR COUNTRY, THEIR RIGHTS, THEIR FREEDOMS and OUR FREEDOMS, yet when they return home they are not allowed the RIGHT/FREEDOM that they just fought for with their life's???



    Personally i'm of the opinion, better to carry and never need it, then to need it and not have it.




    I hope to be able to continue living the rest of my life without ever having to defend my wife or child against gun violence, but would really hate the day that I loose one of them because I DID NOT HAVE THE MEANS OF PROTECTING THEM.



    Again,.........THANK YOU for your support, and look forward to you helping us have a SAFER home.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Fond du Lac, USA
    Posts
    141

    Post imported post

    Mark Todd wrote:
    Hello Jim,

    As your future governor my desire is to make Wisconsin one of the top 5 states

    to live in, in regards to our Constitutional Second Amendment rights.

    The Second Amendment states, "A well regulated militia being necessary to the

    security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be

    infringed." This ammendment protects our right to keep and bear arms from

    infringement by the federal goverment.

    1) Open Carry in Wisconsin. Answer: I am all for it.

    2) Concealed Carry in Wisconsin. Answer: I am all for it.

    3) The unconstitutional transportation laws (concerning fire arms) in the state of WI.

    Answer: I am not for anything that is unconstitutional.

    4) The unconstitutional School Zone Restiction Laws (concerning fire arms) in the

    state of WI. Answer: I am not for anything that is unconstitutional.

    5) A No Compromise Concealed carry/Open Carry non-permitted system in Wisconsin.

    Answer:Yes, I am for it. Exceptions would be:mental illness, violent felons (rape, battery, assault, substance abuse, murder, etc.) I also believe we would need guidelines for children.

    note: I included "etc." in case I missed something obvious--I do notbelieve inunreasonable exceptions here.

    An example of how I think?

    If a woman wants to go for a run in theevening or early morning,would a rapist think twice if that woman had a loaded gunon her hip? If a armed robber wanted to rob a store owner and saw the store owner with a loaded gun on his hip would the robber think twice? I believewhen law-abiding adult citizens (of right mind) are protected; society will be a safer place to live. Studies have actually shown that.

    I saw parts of Doug's movie and it is obvious to me that we need to make changes

    tothe WI statutes 941 & 167so that our Second Amendment rights are not

    being violated.

    All the Best!

    Mark Todd

    http://www.marktoddforgovernor.com

    Thank You Mark Todd for answering the questions and stating your thoughts.But it makes me scratch my bald head and say "Ah what about the fact that in WI. law we already have restrictions on firearms and the mentally ill,felons and children.I guess my question is "Are you looking to make more laws or restrictions ?

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Appleton, WI
    Posts
    276

    Post imported post

    32HR MAG wrote: Thank You Mark Todd for answering the questions and stating your thoughts.But it makes me scratch my bald head and say "Ah what about the fact that in WI. law we already have restrictions on firearms and the mentally ill,felons and children.I guess my question is "Are you looking to make more laws or restrictions ?


    I cant speak for him, but i dont think he meant that at all... i think he just wants to be clear, that he is all for everyone being able to carry, but he doesnt want it taking in the context that eleven year old's and felons are to be included as "everyone".

    hence his line "carry openly or concealed as long as you have the legal ability to own or possess a firearm"

    can we get rid of the bs 48 hour waiting period? (i'm originally from MI where unfortunately i had to register... they call it safety inspection... lol... but i could go in, pick out my gun, and walk out with it) if someone is going to commit a crime out of "anger".. (imagine that) why not say "oh... i have to wait 2 days for a pistol, but you will give me the AR, or shotgun now.. ok"



  25. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481

    Post imported post

    32HR MAG wrote:
    "Are you looking to make more laws or restrictions ?
    I think he has been very clear here that you can open carry or ccw as long as you are legally able to do so. He has mentioned abandoning the frivolous laws that we have now such as the transportation laws and the school zone laws.

    IMHO, That doesn't sound like making more to me.


    We all need to stop talkin the talk and start walkin the walk. We need to get behind a candidate and get busy.......and start today. There isn't much time.

    I have placed another call in to both Walker and Nuemann. Yet still no response.


Page 1 of 7 123 ... 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
  •