Ben, you are factually incorrect. Scott Walker did take action based on our calls and emails. He asked his legal counsel to give him a legal opinion on the validity of the parks ban. The answer he got from the legal counsel that was SHARED IN A LETTER to me and other members here was that his legal counsel said basically what others have said. Its a gray area, and it hasn't been tested in court, so no one knows.
Furthermore, Scott Walker cannot "strike down" a pre-empted ordinance. Scott Walker can sign or veto legislation that the county board sends to his desk.
As I've suggested before, if you want to change the county parks ban, call your county supervisor. THAT person could introduce legislation at the county level to do so. I assure you that if the county board passed an ordinance repealing the county parks weapons ban, Scott Walker would sign it. I KNOW this because I have spoken at length with Scott Walkers staff.
I can also confirm that Scott Walker would not sacrifice open-carry for conceal carry. I asked his chief of staff this question directly on the phone a month or so ago. Without my even leading the question his staff member said "that would sacrifice to much, why would you sacrifice a right for a privilege" Which is my though exactly.
I'm not about to start the ******* match that we had on this forum a half year ago about candidates, but at the same time, I can't in good conscience sit back and let mis-information be perpetuated on the subject.
Having said all that, I know Mark Neumann is pro-gun also.
For the gun issue, I personally don't know which candidate Mark Neumann or Scott Walker would be "most" pro-gun. Thats just an honest answer. Either Walker or Neumann would be a good choice on the gun issue.
We all know Barrett WOULD NOT.
Barrett is anti-gun, anti-open-carry,and anti-concealed carry.
THAT I'm sure we can all agree on.