Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 33

Thread: Flynn wants to let retired police officers carry guns, Vilmetti MJS

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Flynn wants to let retired police officers carry guns, Vilmetti MJS

    http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/102034068.html
    Quote Originally Posted by Excerpt
    The state's Department of Justice was among the first Wisconsin agencies to certify its retirees. Currently 18 can carry concealed weapons, according to department records.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    GREEN BAY, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    288
    I spoke to a retired GBPD officer in Best Buy the other day and he informed me that he was required to be certified annually and pay 100.00 in order to carry concealed.
    If that is any indication as to what it could cost us, annual cert and a C note, I'm on board!
    Not that I believe in Mandatory certification, however some kind of "Active Shooter" scenario coupled with a type of "How to Respond" would be more appropriate.
    Until you have been in a training environment, actively engaged, under stress and let's throw a "malfunction" into the scene. DBL feed, jamb, mis-feed, no fire and so forth.
    All the reading and video watching in the world will give you a platform to start, but 99% of us do not have access to a Facility to perform these fluid or dynamic movements.
    This is just my humble opinion.
    I know there are those of you out there that resist this opinion, that's cool too, I respect that! However those of "us" that have had Training know what I'm talking about. It has served to keep some of us alive and able to come home, in one piece!
    A Tactical Mind is a Sound Mind!

  3. #3
    Founder's Club Member protias's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    SE, WI
    Posts
    7,318
    It doesn't matter what he says, they already can.
    No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. Thomas Jefferson (1776)

    If you go into a store, with a gun, and rob it, you have forfeited your right to not get shot - Joe Deters, Hamilton County (Cincinnati) Prosecutor

    I ask sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few politicians. - George Mason (father of the Bill of Rights and The Virginia Declaration of Rights)

  4. #4
    Regular Member paul@paul-fisher.com's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chandler, AZ
    Posts
    4,047
    Quote Originally Posted by qball54208 View Post
    I spoke to a retired GBPD officer in Best Buy the other day and he informed me that he was required to be certified annually and pay 100.00 in order to carry concealed.
    If that is any indication as to what it could cost us, annual cert and a C note, I'm on board!
    Not that I believe in Mandatory certification, however some kind of "Active Shooter" scenario coupled with a type of "How to Respond" would be more appropriate.
    Until you have been in a training environment, actively engaged, under stress and let's throw a "malfunction" into the scene. DBL feed, jamb, mis-feed, no fire and so forth.
    All the reading and video watching in the world will give you a platform to start, but 99% of us do not have access to a Facility to perform these fluid or dynamic movements.
    This is just my humble opinion.
    I know there are those of you out there that resist this opinion, that's cool too, I respect that! However those of "us" that have had Training know what I'm talking about. It has served to keep some of us alive and able to come home, in one piece!
    A Tactical Mind is a Sound Mind!
    I understand what you are saying but I don't pay or have to be trained to OC, what does covering my weapon with my shirt do that makes it necessary to pay for a permit or get training?

  5. #5
    McX
    Guest
    flynn want to let retired cops carry guns...............because they are just so much better than the rest of us.

  6. #6
    Campaign Veteran
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    SOuth Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    503

    Angry Wheres the puking icon when ya need it?

    Well............... the rift between the rights of the common man and that of the supreme government powers continues to grow.......

  7. #7
    Regular Member anmut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Stevens Point WI, ,
    Posts
    879
    Quote Originally Posted by qball54208 View Post
    I spoke to a retired GBPD officer in Best Buy the other day and he informed me that he was required to be certified annually and pay 100.00 in order to carry concealed.
    If that is any indication as to what it could cost us, annual cert and a C note, I'm on board!
    Not that I believe in Mandatory certification, however some kind of "Active Shooter" scenario coupled with a type of "How to Respond" would be more appropriate.
    Until you have been in a training environment, actively engaged, under stress and let's throw a "malfunction" into the scene. DBL feed, jamb, mis-feed, no fire and so forth.
    All the reading and video watching in the world will give you a platform to start, but 99% of us do not have access to a Facility to perform these fluid or dynamic movements.
    This is just my humble opinion.
    I know there are those of you out there that resist this opinion, that's cool too, I respect that! However those of "us" that have had Training know what I'm talking about. It has served to keep some of us alive and able to come home, in one piece!
    A Tactical Mind is a Sound Mind!
    The issue has always been:
    - CC through permits and taxes = OK?
    then...
    - Firearm purchases through permits and taxes
    - Ammunition purchases through permits and taxes
    - Firearm accessories through permits and taxes

    Ultimate goal of government = to modify the law enough that only the very rich and motivated will have enough to "pay for their right."

    Ultimate goal for Anmut = to not lose any more Constitutional Rights via Pay To Play Government models and to free up current rights by voting in like-minded officials.

  8. #8
    Regular Member anmut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Stevens Point WI, ,
    Posts
    879
    Quote Originally Posted by paul@paul-fisher.com View Post
    I understand what you are saying but I don't pay or have to be trained to OC, what does covering my weapon with my shirt do that makes it necessary to pay for a permit or get training?
    + 1000

  9. #9
    McX
    Guest
    the concept is insulting to me; they are now retired common citizens, and have no police authority, yet they are elevated above me in rights. sounds like the makings of a lawsuit.

  10. #10
    Regular Member anmut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Stevens Point WI, ,
    Posts
    879
    Quote Originally Posted by McX View Post
    the concept is insulting to me; they are now retired common citizens, and have no police authority, yet they are elevated above me in rights. sounds like the makings of a lawsuit.
    Not only retired but elderly in some cases... Same goes with driving privileges - watch your local police reports and you'll see what I see, young AND old people smashing into things with their vehicles. But who takes the brunt of the insurance hit? Young people. Because who controls the insurance prices? Old people!

    I'm way past being taxed for being young (32) but I still think this is a travesty.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Cudahy, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    326
    Quote Originally Posted by Doug Huffman View Post
    Hey Doug, Will they be able to carry in in the Free Zones ? Nothing about that was in the paper..

  12. #12
    Regular Member paul@paul-fisher.com's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chandler, AZ
    Posts
    4,047
    Quote Originally Posted by range rat View Post
    Hey Doug, Will they be able to carry in in the Free Zones ? Nothing about that was in the paper..
    According to the WI GFSZ statute, no. The only exceptions for LEOs is while on duty.

  13. #13
    Regular Member littlewolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    A, A
    Posts
    349
    Quote Originally Posted by McX View Post
    flynn want to let retired cops carry guns...............because they are just so much better than the rest of us.
    Not only that but how many people did they PO in the 30 .years they were on the force? but I think they should carry open like the rest of us until we get cc. I'm retired military,small arms instuctor,I don't get to cc .I'm just a nobody like they are.
    Owner Little Wolf Firearms , US ARMY RETIRED 101st Airborne & 84th DIV TRNG Small arms instructor.
    Remember , Gun Control is " USING BOTH HANDS!"

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Cudahy, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    326
    Quote Originally Posted by McX View Post
    flynn want to let retired cops carry guns...............because they are just so much better than the rest of us.
    WISCONSIN CHIEFS OF POLICE ASSOCIATION
    LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ANNUAL REPORT
    2005-2006 Legislative Session
    August 10, 2006
    Chief Ed Kondracki
    WCPA President
    La Crosse Police Department
    400 La Crosse Street
    La Crosse, WI 54601
    Dear Chief Kondracki:
    The WCPA Legislative Committee experienced an up and down year. The session was not as
    hectic as usual for the second year of a Legislative Session, and legislators seemed to focus on a
    small select number of topics such as TABOR, Concealed Carry, Defining Marriage, etc. The
    committee addressed several issues of state-wide concern to both our membership and the
    residents of our individual jurisdictions. The committee reviewed many Senate and Assembly
    Bills which would have a direct impact on the law enforcement community. The following is a
    brief list of the more significant issues that the Legislative Committee tracked on behalf of the
    WCPA membership.
    Primary Legislative Proposals Reviewed by the Legislative Committee from August
    2005 to August 2006.
    The Law Enforcement Officer’s Safety Act – HR 218
    As chair of the Legislative Committee, I continue to spend a great deal of time on this particular
    issue. This federal law passed several years ago and was so poorly written that it has been
    extremely difficult for police agencies across the country to implement the law in its current
    version. We continue to receive correspondence from many retired and former law enforcement
    officers demanding an answer for what they view as our association stone walling the
    implementation of the Federal Law in Wisconsin. I have met with representatives from the
    Attorney General’s Office, grass roots groups, and Legislators to explore options for
    implementation. The most expedient method of implementing the federal law would have been
    for the legislature to embrace the Attorney General’s recommendations to change state law giving
    the Training and Standards Board the authority to create a uniform firearms qualification standard
    for former and retired police officers who wish to qualify to carry a concealed weapon. As I have
    reported on several occasions, nothing will proceed on implementing this law until the legislature
    decides to stop playing political football with the issue and stop laying the blame on law
    enforcement’s door step.
    Chief Ed Kondracki
    Page 2
    We continue to work with stakeholders on this issue to find a reasonable solution while protecting
    our membership and the public who we have taken an oath to protect.
    “The Personal Protection Act” Assembly Bill 763 – Senate Bill 403 (Concealed Carry)
    This proposal which has been introduced in various versions for the past five consecutive
    Legislative Sessions is related to permitting state residents and licensed permit holders from other
    states to carry concealed weapons in our state ending a 144 year public policy prohibiting
    concealed weapons from being carried in our state.
    Assembly Bill 763 and Senate Bill 403 passed both houses. Governor Jim Doyle vetoed the bill
    and the Assembly was not able to override the Governor’s Veto. This has been the result for the
    past two legislative sessions.
    Wisconsin is now one of two states which do not have a Concealed Carry Law. Illinois is the
    other state.
    During this year’s legislative session, the primary legislative authors of this bill have announced
    their plans to release a new version during next year’s legislative session. They have indicated
    that their new version of the bill will have fewer restrictions than the version vetoed by the
    Governor this year. I believeWisconsin will be the battle ground state for the NRA on this issue
    because they feel Wisconsin is more vulnerable than Illinois.
    A lot will depend on the outcome of the Gubernatorial Election in November. If Governor Doyle
    is returned to office, it will be difficult for the Republican controlled legislature to override his
    veto on this legislative proposal. If Mark Green wins the Governor’s Office, he has already
    indicated that he will sign a concealed carry bill if it makes it to his desk.
    Our association participated with the Wave (Wisconsin Anti-Violence Effort) organization in an
    effort to ensure this proposed legislation did not pass. In May Governor Doyle commended
    WAVE for efforts in making Wisconsin a safer place to live.

  15. #15
    Regular Member paul@paul-fisher.com's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chandler, AZ
    Posts
    4,047
    So.... The short interpretation of this is we want to be able to get a cc permit but we don't want the public to have the same right.

    I love hypocrisy.

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481
    Quote Originally Posted by qball54208 View Post
    I spoke to a retired GBPD officer in Best Buy the other day and he informed me that he was required to be certified annually and pay 100.00 in order to carry concealed.
    If that is any indication as to what it could cost us, annual cert and a C note, I'm on board!
    Not that I believe in Mandatory certification, however some kind of "Active Shooter" scenario coupled with a type of "How to Respond" would be more appropriate.
    Until you have been in a training environment, actively engaged, under stress and let's throw a "malfunction" into the scene. DBL feed, jamb, mis-feed, no fire and so forth.
    All the reading and video watching in the world will give you a platform to start, but 99% of us do not have access to a Facility to perform these fluid or dynamic movements.
    This is just my humble opinion.
    I know there are those of you out there that resist this opinion, that's cool too, I respect that! However those of "us" that have had Training know what I'm talking about. It has served to keep some of us alive and able to come home, in one piece!
    A Tactical Mind is a Sound Mind!
    That is not the requirement for a retired LEO to CCW. They are covrered under LEOSA and while they have to pay for the training refresher course through the department they retired from or any other qualified instructor that is the only cost. The ID is issued either through the former department or the AG's office. There are no other costs for the ID or permit if you want to call it that.

    LEOSA also covers active Police Officers and Corrections Officers
    Last edited by J.Gleason; 09-02-2010 at 12:07 PM.

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193
    Quote Originally Posted by protias View Post
    It doesn't matter what he says, they already can.
    That's LEOSA, a federal law that must be implemented in state law. Remember, we live in sovereign states - or used to.

  18. #18
    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
    That's LEOSA, a federal law that must be implemented in state law. Remember, we live in sovereign states - or used to.
    That is not how I read it. It looks like preemption or am I missing something?

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481
    You are correct Paul, they are protected under the federal law HR 218 LEOSA.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_Enf...ers_Safety_Act

    I also have copies of the congressional hearings as well. I have done extensive study on this subject.

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Preemption is for legislators and jurists, not for cops and robbers.

    The same "preemption" as of local ordinances by the state, not up to us but to obey our wives, our municipality ordinances, our county ordinances, State law, Federal law, natural law and God's law.

    The law abides only the law abiding. It doesn't say the law abides only the federal law-abiding or natural law-abiding. It doesn't say "render unto Ceasar" only what he personally demands, you gotta render unto the tax collector too, and to your landlord and to your wife.

  21. #21
    Regular Member Thundar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    4,961

    LEOSA is Unconstitutional

    Under what part of the constitution does the US Congress have the authority to grant retired law enforcement officers immunity from state law?

    Don't bash me - I think that everyone should be able to carry openly or concealed in any part of these States united without the permission of any level of government, but I am not talking constitutional carry I am talking about a federal mandate that permits retired LEOs to commit what is a felony in some juristictions based on a federal get out of jail free card.
    He wore his gun outside his pants for all the honest world to see. Pancho & Lefty

    The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us....There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! ...The war is inevitable–and let it come! I repeat it, Sir, let it come …………. PATRICK HENRY speech 1776

  22. #22
    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
    The same "preemption" as of local ordinances by the state,
    OK, once again you are correct, they could be brought up on state charges but on appeal to the Federal court, the Federal court would dismiss the case. Is that more accurate Mr Huffman?

  23. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193
    Quote Originally Posted by paul@paul-fisher.com View Post
    on appeal to the Federal court, the Federal court would dismiss the case.
    First it has to get to Federal (appeals) court and then the court is not bound to convict prima facie.

  24. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481
    Quote Originally Posted by Thundar View Post
    Under what part of the constitution does the US Congress have the authority to grant retired law enforcement officers immunity from state law?

    Don't bash me - I think that everyone should be able to carry openly or concealed in any part of these States united without the permission of any level of government, but I am not talking constitutional carry I am talking about a federal mandate that permits retired LEOs to commit what is a felony in some juristictions based on a federal get out of jail free card.
    Well hopefully if more and more states adopt Constitutional Carry no one will need LEOSA and it will become a thing of the past. We all have a right to be able to protect ourselves it is just a shame that these underhanded legislators can't see that.

  25. #25
    Campaign Veteran Flipper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    , Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,140
    Quote Originally Posted by range rat View Post
    WISCONSIN CHIEFS OF POLICE ASSOCIATION
    LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE ANNUAL REPORT
    2005-2006 Legislative Session
    August 10, 2006
    Chief Ed Kondracki
    WCPA President
    La Crosse Police Department
    400 La Crosse Street
    La Crosse, WI 54601
    Dear Chief Kondracki:

    The Law Enforcement Officer’s Safety Act – HR 218
    "...... We continue to receive correspondence from many retired and former law enforcement
    officers demanding an answer for what they view as our association stone walling the
    implementation of the Federal Law in Wisconsin..."

    “The Personal Protection Act” Assembly Bill 763 – Senate Bill 403 (Concealed Carry)
    This proposal which has been introduced in various versions for the past five consecutive
    Legislative Sessions is related to permitting state residents and licensed permit holders from other
    states to carry concealed weapons in our state........
    concealed weapons from being carried in our state.
    Assembly Bill 763 and Senate Bill 403 passed both houses. Governor Jim Doyle vetoed the bill
    and the Assembly was not able to override the Governor’s Veto. This has been the result for the
    past two legislative sessions.....

    Wisconsin is now one of two states which do not have a Concealed Carry Law. Illinois is the
    other state.
    ---------

    Our association participated with the Wave (Wisconsin Anti-Violence Effort) organization in an
    effort to ensure this proposed legislation did not pass. In May Governor Doyle commended
    WAVE for efforts in making Wisconsin a safer place to live.

    Appears that WAVE (actually a front organization for Chicago's Joyce Foundation) has the Wisconsin Police Chiefs Association in its well funded pocket. Are your tax dollars being used to pay your local police chief's membership in an organization that lobbies against your constitutional rights? Is your local police chief in support of the Association's lobbying in a close patnership with WAVE?

Page 1 of 2 12 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
  •