Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 108

Thread: Exercising Constitutional Carry?

  1. #1
    Regular Member anmut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Stevens Point WI, ,
    Posts
    879

    Exercising Constitutional Carry?

    My eyes were opened to the OC movement and regulations last year. The more I've learned the more I've come to the conclusion that most of you have - that is that OC is great, CC could be great depending on how the law is pushed through but in reality what the citizens of this state deserve is Constitutional Carry.

    CC is still in the distance and Constitutional Carry (I believe) is only possible if we had a conservative, small, liberty minded government in WI. Now unless Madison drops into the center of the earth suddenly I don't see that happening in the next 50 years.

    So are we as advocates willing to not exercise this right until the law is changed or are we obligate to exercise even under penalty of law what we believe is right under the Constitution?

    Is there any chance for Constitutional Carry in this super blue state or are we better off just moving to Alaska or Arizona?

  2. #2
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. Wisconsin Carry, Inc. - Chairman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,197
    The Wisconsin Republican Party platform was changed this year to remove the words "permit" from the right to carry platform.

    So anyone running in the Republican Party should be asked if they support the party platform when it comes to right to carry.

    I can only speak for my assembly district, (the 84th) but both leading Republican candidates support Alaska, Vermont, Arizona style human right to carry. (i hesitate to use constitution carry because rights precede the constitution and the constitution doesn't enumerate all of our rights, only a few)

    As to whether its possible. A year ago I would have said no. Now I think it is.

    I don't even think it would be a LOT of work. Just a little work by a lot of people.

    If every person on OCDO and every WCI member contacted the candidates in their district and made sure they understood "human right to carry" and that the Republican platform supports human right to carry I think its got a great shot.
    www.wisconsincarry.org Wisconsin Carry, Inc. is not affiliated with opencarry.org or these web forums. Questions about discussion forum policy or forum moderation should be directed to the owners of opencarry.org not Wisconsin Carry, Inc.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193
    Quote Originally Posted by anmut View Post
    So are we as advocates willing to not exercise this right until the law is changed or are we obligate to exercise even under penalty of law what we believe is right under the Constitution?
    Quote Originally Posted by RULES
    (15) WE ADVOCATE FOR THE 'LAW-ABIDING' ONLY: Posts advocating illegal acts of any kind are NOT welcome here. Even if you feel that a law is unconstitutional we do not break it, we repeal it or defeat it in the courts.
    Quote Originally Posted by RULES
    (13) MULTIPLE ACCOUNTS ARE NOT ALLOWED: Signing up multiple accounts (or alts) is a tactic employed by spammers and trolls and not legitimate members. Doing so will result in the banning of all accounts involved.
    .

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    La Crosse, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,185
    Its funny that you should be the one posting Rule 13 Dougie...

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    50
    Although I never see it discussed, we Nevadans already have "constitutional carry." Article 1, Section 11 of the Nevada State Constitution makes that abundantly clear.

    "Sec. 11. Right to keep and bear arms; civil power supreme.
    1. Every citizen has the right to keep and bear arms for security and defense, for lawful hunting and recreational use and for other lawful purposes."

    Please note that our Nevada right to keep and bear arms is significantly different than our 2nd Amendment right. In Nevada our State Constitution specifically says we have the right to bear arms "for security and self defense." And, there is no reference to militias.

    There is no possible interpretation of that section that would disallow the personal carrying of firearms. If you don't have your gun with you, you can't defend yourself with it. Period.

    Everyone should be aware of their own State's Constitutional provisions.
    Last edited by VegasGeorge; 08-28-2010 at 12:09 PM.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    La Crosse, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,185
    ^^^ In a perfect world we could just get the restrictive statutes removed or amended and WI would indeed have constitutional carry.

    However this is Wisconsin the Land of 100,000 laws, and even though some may be optimistic about Constitutional Carry right off the bat, I'm thinking it will be an uphill battle all the way.

  7. #7
    Regular Member anmut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Stevens Point WI, ,
    Posts
    879
    Quote Originally Posted by Doug Huffman View Post
    .
    Doug - i was only posing the question for debate. Also, this is the only account I have, don't know what you are making reference to.

  8. #8
    Regular Member anmut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Stevens Point WI, ,
    Posts
    879
    The issue always is; that it is easier to make a law against then it is to repeal that law down the road. Especially when ego-driven bureaucrats are thrown into the mix.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193
    Repealing laws is a horrible stumbling block for even the best intentioned. South Carolina used the pro-NRA laws in existence when the grassroots gun rights movement started, now they're pretty well stuck with ccw. OC/CC will be an up hill battle through entrenched NRA anti-freedom slaves (like Spartacus).

    Notice how <deleted> jumped right in, he follows me around like a dog wanting to be kicked, being more attention than he gets at work.
    Last edited by Doug Huffman; 08-28-2010 at 02:29 PM.

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    La Crosse, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,185
    Quote Originally Posted by Doug Huffman View Post
    Repealing laws is a horrible stumbling block for even the best intentioned. South Carolina used the pro-NRA laws in existence when the grassroots gun rights movement started, now they're pretty well stuck with ccw. OC/CC will be an up hill battle through entrenched NRA anti-freedom slaves (like Spartacus).

    Notice how <deleted> jumped right in, he follows me around like a dog wanting to be kicked, being more attention than he gets at work.
    It doesn't surprise me that you kick your dog.

    The uphill battle will be in liberal legislature NRA or not.

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193
    Never had a dog. I don't like them, they're too slavish.

  12. #12
    Regular Member paul@paul-fisher.com's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chandler, AZ
    Posts
    4,047
    Quote Originally Posted by VegasGeorge View Post
    Everyone should be aware of their own State's Constitutional provisions.
    NV doesn't require a permit for OC or CC?

    WI has a constitutional right to carry. Article 1 Section 25 "The people have the right to keep and bear arms for security, defense, hunting, recreation or any other lawful purpose."
    Last edited by paul@paul-fisher.com; 08-28-2010 at 03:14 PM.

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193
    NV permits ccw with fee and training. OC is 'tradition'.

  14. #14
    Regular Member paul@paul-fisher.com's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chandler, AZ
    Posts
    4,047
    Quote Originally Posted by Doug Huffman View Post
    NV permits ccw with fee and training. OC is 'tradition'.
    Then, using my definition at least (the only one that matters, ask my wife ) that isn't Constitution Carry. My definition is the only 'permit' I need to carry OC or CC is the Constitution.

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193
    Hence the lower-case "cc" that I suggest that we adopt as convention. Concealed carry is "cc" or "ccw" while Constitutional Carry is CC! Thanks for noticing.

  16. #16
    Regular Member BROKENSPROKET's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Trempealeau County
    Posts
    2,187
    Quote Originally Posted by Spartacus View Post
    Its funny that you should be the one posting Rule 13 Dougie...
    Quote Originally Posted by anmut View Post
    Doug - this is the only account I have, don't know what you are making reference to.
    I think that Doug's unspoken point is that several WCI-BOD Members have multiple accounts.

    ADDED: I think the rule should apply to SPAMMERS and ANTI-GUN TROLLS. Anyone else without malicious intent should not be in question.
    Last edited by BROKENSPROKET; 08-28-2010 at 06:12 PM.

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193
    Quote Originally Posted by BROKENSPROKET View Post
    Anyone else without malicious intent should not be in question.
    From my correspondence with Administrator, he seems to agree, using his term "nefarious" and allowing two identical usernames for a particular user.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Somewhere, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,029
    The following link describes the Nevada firearm laws. We do not want to copy Nevada. Be especially noting of the part that describes concealed carry on your person. Such devices as purses, fanny packs, briefcases etc are not allowed, even if manufactured for the purpose of carrying a concealed weapon.

    http://www.nsrpa.us/legal/nevlocal.html

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    La Crosse, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,185
    Quote Originally Posted by BROKENSPROKET View Post
    I think that Doug's unspoken point is that several WCI-BOD Members have multiple accounts.

    ADDED: I think the rule should apply to SPAMMERS and ANTI-GUN TROLLS. Anyone else without malicious intent should not be in question.
    They absolutely should be in question when sockpuppets tag-team each other to support a post to make it appear as though a majority supports the opinion.

  20. #20
    Regular Member BROKENSPROKET's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Trempealeau County
    Posts
    2,187
    Quote Originally Posted by Spartacus View Post
    They absolutely should be in question when sockpuppets tag-team each other to support a post to make it appear as though a majority supports the opinion.
    Anyone else without malicious intent should not be in question by Admintstration. You can question all you want.

  21. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    La Crosse, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,185
    Quote Originally Posted by BROKENSPROKET View Post
    Anyone else without malicious intent should not be in question by Admintstration. You can question all you want.
    I guess it depends on what your definition of malicious is. Lying about being someone else is enough for me. Dougie was banned for puppeteering and then let back on for whatever reason.

    We will see what John says about it as I have a PM in to him.

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Somewhere, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,029
    Another thing that is troublesome about the Nevada firearm laws and something we must take heed of, is that apparently they were drafted and campaigned by the special interest group Nevada State Rifle and Pistol Association. Which special interst group in Wisconsin will declare themselves the protector of our liberties when our expected new firearm laws are drafted? WCI, WGO, ODCO, Packing dot org, NRA, The High Road, The Sierra Club, Sisters of the Second amendment, Wisconsin Concealed Carry Asociation etc. etc. etc. What Wisconsin needs is a consortiunm of gun rights organizations so the most stringent scrutiny of the propsed laws can be made in the best interest of gun owners throughout the state. As an organization, be it ODCO or WCI we can't even keep a civil tongue between our selves or debate a subect without argument. I'm afraid expecting different gun rights organizations to come to a majority agreement let alone a consensus is akin to trying to whistle with a mouth full of crakers. As a result we will probably again throw ourselves to the mercy of the anti-gun legislature.
    Last edited by Captain Nemo; 08-28-2010 at 07:54 PM.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Baraboo, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    71
    Quote Originally Posted by Spartacus View Post
    ^^^ In a perfect world we could just get the restrictive statutes removed or amended and WI would indeed have constitutional carry.

    However this is Wisconsin the Land of 100,000 laws, and even though some may be optimistic about Constitutional Carry right off the bat, I'm thinking it will be an uphill battle all the way.
    It might be a battle but it is one we can win if we fight hard enough. We already have open carry without any permit, so remove the stupid vehicle part and school zone garbage, then allow is to conceal if we want. Seriously what is the big difference? Why should people need a permit to conceal a weapon when they dont need a permit to open carry one? How about just repeal the law totally, nothing could be easier. I think we need to get it right off the bat and try hard not to accept anything less, they sure hate to repeal or change laws, even unconstitutional/illegal ones.

    The state supreme court mostly agreed that the law prohibiting concealed carry is too vague and unconstitutional. Their opinions in the Hamdan case made that very obvious. To me unconstitutional means null and void from the date we added a right to keep and bear arms in our Constitution. The rights enumerated in our Constitution trump any statutes that conflict with them.

    But as advocates of the right to carry I think we all must not violate any laws what so ever, even ones that are clearly unconstitutional, not until the law is repealed or amended. I will admit that it often must be challenged to be repealed, and at this point they have made it clear that someone can conceal a weapon in their home or business. Even though you would be technically breaking the law as written, that is clearly an exception right now.
    Last edited by minuteman; 08-28-2010 at 09:06 PM.

  24. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    West Coast, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    306
    Lets get something straight. Constitutional Carry is this--- You carry what you want, how you want and where you want. No permits, fees or restrictions........PERIOD............There isn't a state in the country that has it, not even close. What part of "shall not be infringed" do any of you not understand? Please quit perverting the term. Thank you and have a Blessed day. CARRY ON

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Somewhere, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,029
    Woodchuck:

    Read the new Arizona laws that took effect July 29, 2010.

Page 1 of 5 123 ... 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
  •