• 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.

What if Wisconsin didn't need a CCDW "license" ?

Brass Magnet

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

Statesman wrote:
Interesting. I read it the first time and it did not make sense to me (over my head I think, I'm slow at times). If there is no prior restraint, what authorizes them to fine you $50? Maybe I am misunderstanding "prior restraint".


Prior restraint generally means that you must get the goverments permission before doing something. For example, we have to have background checks when purchasing a firearm. We don't need to have a background check to exercise free speech, or to be able to exercise our 4th or 5th amendment rights. In the example of the 1st amendment,we don't wear gags and can only speak after getting permission. One certainly can yell "fire" in a crowded theatre, but there will be later consequences to that action.

In my example, one can carry without any training whatsoever, with only a small consequence. At that time the person can still choose whether or not to get the training.

I don't see why something so simple asa hunters safety card couldn't qualify you for the Certificate of training.

Not ideal, but better than some permit options.
 

Statesman

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 20, 2008
Messages
948
Location
Lexington, Kentucky, USA
imported post

What would stop the government from making it increasingly difficult to pass the test?
Nothing. However, if they continue making it more difficult to pass the training, they will have lawsuits on their hands to the effect of denying 2nd amendment rights beyond a reasonable amount of testing.

If OC is legal w/o any training, how does a piece of cloth that covers it (shirt) turn me into an individual that needs REQUIRED training?
That's been my question all along!

What would the training requirements be? Shoot 70% at 15ft? or Shoot good enough to be in the running for an IDPA win?
That's up to the people who propose the bill. If you guys don't start with the right to carry in the first place, which is preferred, I'd suggest everyone get involved and set some reasonable standards. Look around at other state requirements.

Get the least amount of restrictions possible, even if a permit is needed, then work on getting the restrictions, and ultimately the permit removed, as they did in Alaska.
Agreed
 
Top