Hmm, I appreciate your efforts Morley but, We do not need a CCW law. We need to repeal the statute prohibiting CCW.
We don't need more laws and with a CCW law comes permits and fees.
Everyone needs to stop and think before speaking with any more media or reporters.
It looks like we are all stumbling over each other. Let's all get on the same page here so we can move on and walk together.
REPEAL 941.23! That is what we need to do! Now lets do it!
That should be all you have to say to a reporter or your legislator, period. Stop all this talk about a new ccw law.
J. its not that simple. Its VERY VERY VERY difficult to get media to write in the proper syntax and get it "right".
Honestly, some reporters just "assume" that the only way to conceal carry is a conceal carry law.
Never forget, if you don't read the news paper you are uniformed. If you DO read the newspaper you are misinformed.
Mr. Davis called me regarding this story. I gave him 100% factual information yet teh final news product doesn't get it completely right. Not "way" wrong, but for example:
People with guns must not be within 1,000 feet of a school zone, state park, government building, or a place serving alcohol. Business owners are allowed to refuse entry to anyone openly carrying a handgun
I can assure you I very specifically told Mr. Davis that you can't carry within 1000ft of a school UNLESS you are on private property.
He chose to just write that you can't carry "within 1000 ft of a school".
I also shared with Mr. Davis that you CAN carry in a place that serves alcohol with the permission of the owner/manager. He chose to just write that you can't carry in "a place serving alcohol"
If you want to nit-pick, there are plenty of things to nit-pick in the article. In a perfect world, reporters would send you their copy before they go to press with it and you can make sure they got it right/quoted you property. In the real world, I can tell you "NOT gonna happen"
It may be for brevity, simplicity, the ease of spoon-feeding the non-educated, or it may be that the news media doesn't have the time to REALLY understand what they are reporting on to where they have the understanding themselves to get it right in the short time they have to write a story and get their news product on the shelf and move on to the next story. I don't know, but trust me when I say it takes a mix of phenomenal skill and/or luck to get media to print a perfectly accurate message. To this day, I don't think I've ever had an interview where what was written/reported was what I felt was the whole story I gave/accurate representation of what I gave them.
It is what it is. I am not going to try to hang the media. Rather I'd just remind people its drive-by media reporting, not white-paper research. White paper research doesn't sell. Reporters are just doing their job. Their job is not to write research, its to put a story out there that contributes to a marketable newspaper/tv news program/etc. Research and news are not the same thing.
In a vehicle, firearms must be unloaded, cased, and out of the driver's reach.
We also know this isn't true
Again, not hanging the reporter on this one, just pointing out that its news, not research.
As for "conceal carry law" or "signing a conceal carry bill", in order to repeal 941.23, would you not have to introduce a bill to repeal 941.23 and get it signed into law?
Don't jump to conclusions that just because someone says conceal carry law/conceal carry bill they are SUDDENLY flushing VT/AK/AZ style right to carry. You don't know what the person REALLY said vs. what was reported AND you are also assuming what the person meant by "conceal carry law".
