Curmudgeon Al Campbell, 'Gun Law Surprise - Updated', GermantownNow.com

imported post

As much as I would like to see VT / AK style CCW it's never gonna happen , untill we replace every one in the state legislatures & thats not gonna happen either, so are you all saying that until you get a VT style CCW bill , that you don't want to have the ability to carry concealed in Wisconsin ? because you know that unrestricted CCW ain't gonna ever happen in this state. the fix is..........well, I can't say stuff like that, it would make me out to sound like a revolutionary.

imported post

Glock34 wrote:

because you know that unrestricted CCW ain't gonna ever happen in this state.

Click to expand...

Certainly not, thanks to the NRA and its clients.

imported post

Glock34 wrote:

As much as I would like to see VT / AK style CCW it's never gonna happen , untill we replace every one in the state legislatures & thats not gonna happen either, so are you all saying that until you get a VT style CCW bill , that you don't want to have the ability to carry concealed in Wisconsin ? because you know that unrestricted CCW ain't gonna ever happen in this state. the fix is..........well, I can't say stuff like that, it would make me out to sound like a revolutionary.

Click to expand...

If everyone has the same attitude as you, I am forced to agree with you.

Why does everyone feel VT/AK style carry is out of reach? We have a candidate for governor that would sign legislation to have VT/AK carry. All we need to do is get him elected. If he turns out to be a piece of crap in other aspects, we get him recalled.
I was taught "Government by the people, for the people" but all I have ever seen is the government going against the people that got them elected into office, and nobody getting recalled.

The single piece of legislation that would satisfy me right now is to not need to disarm before getting in my truck, on my snowmobile, or even on a bicycle. Once we get that, then we need to show how stupid the GFZ's are , and how it is unconstitutional. A solid castle doctrine would be a very nice step in the right direction, and have it cover a vehicle too.



Lets look to Florida for a minute, they have no open-carry, but they have licensed concealed carry. Kinda sucks, BUT!!! They allow vehicle carry with no permit or licensing, and they have one heck of a solid castle doctrine to protect law abiding citizens from prosecution when some scumbag tries to carjack them or rob their home. We got nothing!!

Illinois (AKA ILL-ANNOY) makes it illegal to defend yourself in any way whatsoever, if you are being attacked, by trying to defend yourself you are labled to be just as at fault as your attacker. So WI has it a little better than IL right now, but not much. Lets change that so IL is the last state in the country where criminals have carte blanch

imported post

In South Carolina all citizens not otherwise prohibited may carry a gun in their automobile's console or glove box as long as it is shut but not necessarily locked.

Unlawful carrying of handgun; exceptions. [SC ST SEC 16-23-20] [ ...]

a) secured in a closed compartment, closed console, closed trunk, or in a closed container secured by an integral fastener and transported in the luggage compartment of the vehicle; however, this item is not violated if the glove compartment, console, or trunk is opened in the presence of a law enforcement officer for the sole purpose of retrieving a driver's license, registration, or proof of insurance; or [ ...]

imported post

Vetted? Is that like corvetted?

imported post

Glock34 wrote:

As much as I would like to see VT / AK style CCW it's never gonna happen , untill we replace every one in the state legislatures & thats not gonna happen either, so are you all saying that until you get a VT style CCW bill , that you don't want to have the ability to carry concealed in Wisconsin ? because you know that unrestricted CCW ain't gonna ever happen in this state. the fix is..........well, I can't say stuff like that, it would make me out to sound like a revolutionary.

Click to expand...

Well first off, we can replace the state legislators at election time. All we have to do is pull together in this movement and let them know that if they don't get on board we will do everything we can to insure they receive less votes.

Secondly, we can have a VT/AK no compromise, non permitted system. What we need to do is demand it from our legislators. We need to be the squeeky wheel! We have the means and many of us have the ambition. We need to show up at our legislators door and bug the 5hit out of them until they get the message. Who's to say we can't picket outside their office?

The fact is we need to start campaigning NOW against any legislator that is against standing up for our gun rights.

Take a deep breath and stand strong. If we all put our heads together, we will come up with a campaign against the anti's.

The problem is getting members here to get out and do more then just sitting in front of the key board.

Like I said before we have some very knowledgeable members here, ( Lammie, Doug, Brass, I_K, just to name a few.) there should be no reason why we can't come up with a plan of attack so to speak. We just all need to put our heads together , get organized, agree to the tactics we choose and then do it.

Is there any law against picketing outside a legislators office? I think that would be a great attention grabber.

If this is doable, I think we should picket each one until they not only agree to end the GFSZ, the transportation restrictions, a no compromise CCW/OCW non permitted system and pass the castle doctrine, but until they actually follow through and do it.

imported post

J.Gleason wrote:

Well first off, we can replace the state legislators at election time. All we have to do is pull together in this movement and let them know that if they don't get on board we will do everything we can to insure they receive less votes.

Click to expand...

The seated legislators have ALREADY had all the opportunity needed to do what we demand that they do. Some have done what some have asked them to do and proposed various permitting schemes - further expanding the bulk of the Leviathan.

imported post

J.Gleason wrote:

Just another thought, years ago when DNR was created it was decided that you need to buy a license to fish and hunt. Now it is no longer a right but a privilege.

With that in mind they went from the fishing and hunting license to, you had to buy a trout stamp and a pheasant stamp, turkey permit, bear permit, etc, etc.

Guess what they will do for fire arms permits. How about a special stamp to carry a S&W for an added fee? or a Kimber stamp? for an added fee of course.

Another fee for a stamp to carry a semi auto as opposed to a wheel gun.

Get it?

No Compromise, EVER!

Click to expand...

Feel free to show me one state this has happened in..... States like Connecticut (a very Liberal state) has had CCW permitsforalmost100years, Yet not one state has EVER to the best of my knowledge tried what you state here.



You sound like the libs with their "blood in the streets" comments which are easily shown false,

imported post

I think that you read JG's hyperbole too narrowly and in the interest only of introducing your comment.

South Carolina is constantly tinkering with their Law Abiding Citizens Self-Defense Act of 1996, explicitly in legislation or by underhanded SLED 'policy' and seldom to a citizen's/freedom's interest.

imported post

Those that are so opposed to training and permit requirements, I would assume if such a measure passes you would have no part of it and not be applying for said permit, correct?

imported post

SprayAndPray wrote:

You sound like the libs with their "blood in the streets" comments which are easily shown false,

Click to expand...

OMG, a Lib! are you kidding me? what part of my statement made me sound like a Lib? Do you even know what a Lib is? You under estimate your Government and are very naive.

truly amazing.

imported post

Constitutionalist wrote:

Those that are so opposed to training and permit requirements, I would assume if such a measure passes you would have no part of it and not be applying for said permit, correct?

Click to expand...

I personally have no worries, I have been through three law enforcement academy's and am sure my training is sufficient. But for those who have not had training and may have financial issues where training is concerned, I will stand strong in my opinion that training should not be mandatory but voluntary.

imported post

J. Gleason a liberal? Now even I find that a little funny. I do not like to put labels on people, but liberal is one that just does not fit.

imported post

AaronS wrote:

J. Gleason a liberal? Now even I find that a little funny. I do not like to put labels on people, but liberal is one that just does not fit.

Click to expand...

agreed, calling Gleason a Lib, is like calling me a Gun Hating Obama supporter. both are VERY FALSE.