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

Thread: Wis. Stat. 941.23 unconstitutional

  1. #1
    Regular Member MamaLiberty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Newcastle, Wyoming, USA
    Posts
    885

    Smile Wis. Stat. 941.23 unconstitutional

    I couldn't find any mention of this here and thought you'd like to see it.

    http://www.examiner.com/wisconsin-gu...l?render=print

    Wis. Stat. 941.23 unconstitutional
    * October 14th, 2010 12:56 pm CT
    * By Gene German, Wisconsin Gun Rights Examiner

    Sometimes life is funny. I doubt average people get out of bed in the morning thinking to them self, “today I think I’ll change the world”.

    Average people however, do change the world.

    The open carry effort in Wisconsin began in March of 2007 in a hotel meeting room in Sheboygan. Dick Baker who is an average guy had led the Wisconsin Concealed Carry Association for many years and he was disappointed Jim Doyle had been reelected. Dick was thinking it would be another four years before we had a chance to pass a concealed carry law. Dick did not recognize just how valuable Jim Doyle’s veto’s of two conceal carry bills were to changing Wisconsin and guaranteeing our carry rights.

    We also had Wis. Stat 941.23 (the states open carry law), the Wisconsin Constitution Article 1, Section 25 (which protected the law per the Hamdan decision), and J B VanHollen as the new Attorney General.
    I will not knowingly initiate force. I am a self owner.

    Let the record show that I did not consent to be governed. I did not consent to any constitution. I did not consent to any president. I did not consent to any law except the natural law of "mala en se." I did not consent to the police. Nor any tax. Nor any prohibition of anything. Nor any regulation or licensing of any kind.

  2. #2

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481
    COMMENTS REMOVED BY MODERATOR: No attacking other gun rights groups / activists.

    We just need to be in his ear before [the training lobbyists] and help him to understand that all we need do is repeal 941.23 and nothing more. No Permits, No fees, No mandated training.

    Now with that said, the state could offer say a coupon for a discounted voluntary training class in the event that the carrier would decide they needed some additional training. Just a thought but the details would have to be worked out of course.
    Last edited by J.Gleason; 10-19-2010 at 04:38 PM.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Somewhere, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,029
    J.Gleason said:

    "all we need do is repeal 941.23 and nothing more. No Permits, No fees, No mandated training".

    "Now with that said, the state could offer say a coupon for a discounted voluntary training class in the event that the carrier would decide they needed some additional training. Just a thought but the details would have to be worked out of course".

    I agree our argument should be for the repeal of 941.23 which would give us choice of carry. I feel a permit requirement with mandatory certification would be acceptable for the purposes of reciprocity but for that purpose only.

  5. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Nemo View Post
    J.Gleason said:

    "all we need do is repeal 941.23 and nothing more. No Permits, No fees, No mandated training".

    "Now with that said, the state could offer say a coupon for a discounted voluntary training class in the event that the carrier would decide they needed some additional training. Just a thought but the details would have to be worked out of course".

    I agree our argument should be for the repeal of 941.23 which would give us choice of carry. I feel a permit requirement with mandatory certification would be acceptable for the purposes of reciprocity but for that purpose only.
    So that certification would be similar to the certification of LEO here in Wisconsin. That certification I might add is not recognized or needed in any of the other states.

    The more we promote reciprocity permits, the more control the government has over us. If you are legal to carry in Wisconsin, what makes you illegal to carry in say Minnesota, South Dakota, Colorado or any other state? Your firearm does not operate differently from state to state. Firearm safety does not change from state to state.
    Permits in themselves are an infringement and nothing more. No matter what state your in, you are an American and your Constitutional Rights are the same from state to state.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481
    Quote Originally Posted by J.Gleason View Post
    COMMENTS REMOVED BY MODERATOR: No attacking other gun rights groups / activists.

    We just need to be in his ear before [the training lobbyists] and help him to understand that all we need do is repeal 941.23 and nothing more. No Permits, No fees, No mandated training.

    Now with that said, the state could offer say a coupon for a discounted voluntary training class in the event that the carrier would decide they needed some additional training. Just a thought but the details would have to be worked out of course.
    Didn't see the personal attack on this one, only stated the truth and I believe the fact the Gene German is also an Examiner in Minnesota may have had something to do with my comments being removed. I guess the truth hurts.

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193
    OCDO Rule (12) has obviously been expanded and its statement will likely soon be updated. Our disruptor has pretty well been silenced now - if the expanded Rule (12) is applied evenhandedly - as we are all "gun rights activists".

    Turning away from these pathetic expressions have been easy of late. My print copy of Angelo Codevilla's Advice to War Presidents: A Remedial Course in Statecraft has arrived. In the first paragraph of the first chapter is this, apropos...
    Quote Originally Posted by Codevilla
    Each abstraction or euphemism distorts an unpleasant fact of life, makes impossible things seem possible, unmanageable ones seem manageable. The sum of them shields our statesmen's axioms against common sense.
    We are awash in bathos and pathetic fluff.
    Last edited by Doug Huffman; 10-19-2010 at 04:54 PM.

  8. #8
    Regular Member johnny amish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    High altitude of Vernon County, ,
    Posts
    1,025
    Quote Originally Posted by J.Gleason View Post
    So that certification would be similar to the certification of LEO here in Wisconsin. That certification I might add is not recognized or needed in any of the other states.

    The more we promote reciprocity permits, the more control the government has over us. If you are legal to carry in Wisconsin, what makes you illegal to carry in say Minnesota, South Dakota, Colorado or any other state? Your firearm does not operate differently from state to state. Firearm safety does not change from state to state.
    Permits in themselves are an infringement and nothing more. No matter what state your in, you are an American and your Constitutional Rights are the same from state to state.
    Well said. I don't think I could agree with this more.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    AZ
    Posts
    221
    All i can say is that i hope the statute is removed. I think i would much rather have the choice to conceal carry or open carry whenever i felt like it.

  10. #10
    McX
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by HolyOrangeJuice View Post
    All i can say is that i hope the statute is removed. I think i would much rather have the choice to conceal carry or open carry whenever i felt like it.
    the orange juice that is Holy speaketh the truth.

  11. #11
    bhancock
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by J.Gleason View Post
    So that certification would be similar to the certification of LEO here in Wisconsin. That certification I might add is not recognized or needed in any of the other states.

    The more we promote reciprocity permits, the more control the government has over us. If you are legal to carry in Wisconsin, what makes you illegal to carry in say Minnesota, South Dakota, Colorado or any other state? Your firearm does not operate differently from state to state. Firearm safety does not change from state to state.
    Permits in themselves are an infringement and nothing more. No matter what state your in, you are an American and your Constitutional Rights are the same from state to state.
    Yup, exactly. In fact just traveling to Appleton last weekend I found myself a little edgy about what may be the local policy or customs and I travel to MN and MI as well but can't keep up on all the different laws of a given locality. We need to be able to travel the states and have the laws governing the restrictions be consistent, and they should be few and narrow in scope.

  12. #12
    Regular Member paul@paul-fisher.com's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chandler, AZ
    Posts
    4,047
    I was looking at the case notes:

    8
    08-09-2010
    Letters/correspondence

    Additional Text:

    from Asst Attorney General to the court
    I wonder what the content of that letter was? Can we do an open records request? It might be an opinion from Van Hollen that 941.23 is unconstitutional (pure conjecture).

    Anyhow, can we ORR it?

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Somewhere, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,029
    The certification I mentioned has nothing to do with LEO certification. It was meant that proof of completion of a firearms safety and/or profieciency course and/or issued permit are required before reciprocity will be honored. Call it infringement or call it what you may but none of the other 49 states honor reciprocity to carry a firearm unless you have proof that you are authorized to carry a firearm. None of the other states have reciprocity with Wisconsin because Wisconsin has no mechanism in place to provide that proof. The following web site will give you more information on reciprocity than you probably want to know.

    http://www.carryconcealed.net/

    I admit that the reciprocity speaks only of concealed carry and this forum ideology is open carry. I don't think many of us are, at this particular time, bold enough to open carry as non-residents in other states on the argument that it is our constitutional right without some proof that we are not prohibited from carrying a firearm in our home state.
    Last edited by Captain Nemo; 10-20-2010 at 02:06 AM.

  14. #14
    Regular Member 1245A Defender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    north mason county, Washington, USA
    Posts
    4,381

    huh?

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Nemo View Post
    The certification I mentioned has nothing to do with LEO certification. It was meant that proof of completion of a firearms safety and/or profieciency course and/or issued permit are required before reciprocity will be honored. Call it infringement or call it what you may but none of the other 49 states honor reciprocity to carry a firearm unless you have proof that you are authorized to carry a firearm. None of the other states have reciprocity with Wisconsin because Wisconsin has no mechanism in place to provide that proof. The following web site will give you more information on reciprocity than you probably want to know.

    http://www.carryconcealed.net/

    I admit that the reciprocity speaks only of concealed carry and this forum ideology is open carry. I don't think many of us are, at this particular time, bold enough to open carry as non-residents in other states on the argument that it is our constitutional right without some proof that we are not prohibited from carrying a firearm in our home state.
    we all have a 2A right to open carry in 29 states!! residency is not required!
    EMNofSeattle wrote: Your idea of freedom terrifies me. So you are actually right. I am perfectly happy with what you call tyranny.....

    “If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

    Stand up for your Rights,, They have no authority on their own...

    All power is inherent in the people,
    it is their right and duty to be at all times ARMED!

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Somewhere, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,029
    1245A defender:

    Please cite those 29 states that allow open carry by non-residents without fear of arrest and/or without a permit.

    This is the list I have as it applies to citizens of the respective states. I doubt that the requirements of open carry for non-residence more relaxed.

    Permissive Open Carry States which means the states have passed full preemption regarding all firearm laws. These states permit open carry to all law-abiding citizens without a criminal record without any special permit or firearms license. The open carry is legal for a citizen on foot or in a motor vehicle. The states that allow this are Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Arizona, New Mexico, South Dakota, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Virginia, Alaska and Kentucky.

    Licensed Open Carry States allows open carry to all law-abiding citizens once they apply and are approved for a permit or firearms license. They can also carry on foot or in their motor vehicle. The states that require a permit or license for open carry are Utah, North Dakota, Minnesota, Iowa, Indiana, Tennessee, Georgia, Maryland, New Jersey, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Hawaii and Massachusetts.

    Anomalous Open Carry States open carry in these states are generally lawful, but the state itself may have other stiff restrictions to deter citizens from carry a firearm open. The laws in these states are very grey and could cause you a lot of problems if you go toting a gun around openly. The states that have a lot of grey area on open carry are Washington, Oregon, Nevada, California, Colorado, Missouri, Kansas, Louisiana , Mississippi, Alabama, North Carolina, Nebraska, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Maine, Delaware and New Hampshire. You shouldn't carry open firearms in these states just to avoid a charge of bringing terror to the people which only requires a citizen to see you carry open firearms and saying they are in fear. You will get charged.

    Non-Permissive Open Carry States which means these states don't allow open carry of firearms or is only lawful under very limited situations such as hunting, traveling to and from a hunting site or in self defense. The laws are very grey in these states and you risk being arrested if you carry a firearm in the open. These states consist of Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Illinois, South Carolina, New York and Florida
    Last edited by Captain Nemo; 10-20-2010 at 06:27 AM.

  16. #16
    Regular Member 1245A Defender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    north mason county, Washington, USA
    Posts
    4,381

    yes

    your lists have 29 states that have no laws against OC.
    but some states do restrict the OCer in more ways than others, calif, oregon, colorado.
    states that have no laws against OC do not have any restrictions as to residency.
    we all are citizens of the USA, we all are covered by the constitution and the 2nd amendment.
    many of the states you listed with GREY areas dont belong on that list,
    washington is my state, we enjoy full state preemption,
    restrictions against are uniform in most states, no carry in jails, courts, schools, others/etc.
    i would have no fear of OCing here in my town or in culvers with the madison 5.
    there is always a chance of getting jacked up by the cops, no matter where you are.
    reciprocity of CC permits has nothing to do with the open carry for self defense of firearms.
    in our country you do not need a permit from this state or that to exercise your rights.
    you dont need to carry proof that your are not prohibited from carrying a gun, it is your right.
    we in the USA are still presumed to be innocent until proven guilty!
    EMNofSeattle wrote: Your idea of freedom terrifies me. So you are actually right. I am perfectly happy with what you call tyranny.....

    “If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

    Stand up for your Rights,, They have no authority on their own...

    All power is inherent in the people,
    it is their right and duty to be at all times ARMED!

  17. #17
    Founder's Club Member bnhcomputing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,709
    IF WI repeals 941.23 (or the courts do it for us) so that we have "Constitutional Carry" although I prefer "Free Carry" many other states will do the same within a few years (UT, WY, MN) to name a few.

    It is time for WI to stop "following" the lobbyists and special interests and stand up for ourselves.

    REPEAL of 941.23 is possible but only if we stand together.

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193
    Quote Originally Posted by bnhcomputing View Post
    It is time for WI to stop "following" the lobbyists and special interests and stand up for ourselves. REPEAL of 941.23 is possible but only if we stand together.
    That ain't going to happen, standing together, while statist advocates and scofflaws are tolerated and encouraged here.

  19. #19
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Nemo View Post
    The certification I mentioned has nothing to do with LEO certification. It was meant that proof of completion of a firearms safety and/or profieciency course and/or issued permit are required before reciprocity will be honored. Call it infringement or call it what you may but none of the other 49 states honor reciprocity to carry a firearm unless you have proof that you are authorized to carry a firearm. None of the other states have reciprocity with Wisconsin because Wisconsin has no mechanism in place to provide that proof. The following web site will give you more information on reciprocity than you probably want to know.

    http://www.carryconcealed.net/

    I admit that the reciprocity speaks only of concealed carry and this forum ideology is open carry. I don't think many of us are, at this particular time, bold enough to open carry as non-residents in other states on the argument that it is our constitutional right without some proof that we are not prohibited from carrying a firearm in our home state.
    Nemo, I normally hold everything you post with great weight as I appreciate you knowledge and experience. However, the certification you speak of is exactly the same thing that LEO here in Wisconsin have to have in order to be hired by a department here in Wisconsin. That certification is only required by Wisconsin and in fact is not needed or recognized in any other state.
    That is just Wisconsin's way of infringing upon a candidate for a LEO position getting an LEO job here in Wisconsin.
    There are many out there that have not been hired in time before their certification has expired (2 Years) and now are not eligible to be hired as LEO's in Wisconsin. It is ridiculous. Many of those who have been hired because they were within their certification are the lowzy officers we have on the streets today and that is simply because they were hired because they know someone. Even some of the departments are not satisfied with the certification and make the candidates go through an additional academy, I.E. Milwaukee, State troopers, etc.
    Any candidate that can prove through their transcripts that they have had the courses can get an LEO job in any other state whether their certification has expired or not. So what good is the certification.
    Permits for reciprocity or anything else are much the same in that they are only good for a selected period of time.
    Then the government sucks some more money out of your wallet and gives you a new one. Does it mean you are more qualified? No, it simply means you paid the money.
    As far as proof that you are authorized to carry a firearm, all you need is the fact that you are not a felon and are of age. All of that can already be found through your Drivers Permit. (See we already have a permit)
    As far as ConcealedCarry.net it is a great site and does have a lot of information for anyone looking for training. They are also advocates for mandated training so I will not place much faith in anything I read there as it most assuredly fits their agenda.
    Think of it this way, ALL of the other states have eyes on Wisconsin right now over this issue and What Wisconsin does in the near future will cause a ripple effect throughout the country. By simply repealing 941.23 and allowing Free Carry, many other states will follow suit. After all for as long as Wisconsin has held out and with the other states such as Arizona who have successfully changed their firearms laws without blood in the streets the time is now!

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Somewhere, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,029
    j.Gleason:
    The certification you speak of is not what I meant. A person can be certified in any number of things. I for example am certified as a qualified computer engineer and have a certificate to show it. The certification I spoke of is mearly a certificate produced by the state of Wisconsin that the holder is lawfully allowed to possess and carry a firearm. It would be no more than words to that effect and contain an indication that a background check has been performed. Carry in most other states, open or concealed, by a non-resident would likely not be honored without such evidence. It is not an infringement of any rights. In fact it is a type of validation that a person has the right to exercise the right to keep and bear arms in Wisconsin. I'm not talking about any mandatory training, weapon profieciency or permits. I'm talking only about a certification from the state that a person is in good standing and may lawfully carry a firearm. Perhaps you are too close to the LEO certification process to comprehend that of which I speak.

    If we are successful in getting 941.23 repealed so that we have true choice of carry under the umbrella of Art I section 25 then it is my opinion we will need some document attesting to that right, and to our character before firearm carry reciprocity will be honored with Wisconsin by most other states.

  21. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Nemo View Post
    j.Gleason:
    The certification you speak of is not what I meant. A person can be certified in any number of things. I for example am certified as a qualified computer engineer and have a certificate to show it. The certification I spoke of is mearly a certificate produced by the state of Wisconsin that the holder is lawfully allowed to possess and carry a firearm. It would be no more than words to that effect and contain an indication that a background check has been performed. Carry in most other states, open or concealed, by a non-resident would likely not be honored without such evidence. It is not an infringement of any rights. In fact it is a type of validation that a person has the right to exercise the right to keep and bear arms in Wisconsin. I'm not talking about any mandatory training, weapon profieciency or permits. I'm talking only about a certification from the state that a person is in good standing and may lawfully carry a firearm. Perhaps you are too close to the LEO certification process to comprehend that of which I speak.

    If we are successful in getting 941.23 repealed so that we have true choice of carry under the umbrella of Art I section 25 then it is my opinion we will need some document attesting to that right, and to our character before firearm carry reciprocity will be honored with Wisconsin by most other states.
    Wouldn't this be nothing more than Registration?
    Registration is the first step towards Confiscation.
    I guess my point is this, If you drive in any other state as long as you have a drivers license you are OK, even though many states have different laws concerning traffic. Your license is still accepted without question.
    Same with walking down the street you have the right to do so. Without question.
    You also have the right to bear arms... Why should we have to be certified, registered or show proof? It is then no different then handing over your ID every time an LEO demands it. The only way to make change is to just do it and with that said as long as we keep giving in and accepting more permits, which automatically come with fees, we will never be rid of them. If every state in the country would understand this the tax payers would be a whole lot better off for it.
    Last edited by J.Gleason; 10-20-2010 at 10:29 AM.

  22. #22
    Regular Member davegran's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Cassville Area -Twelve Miles From Anything, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,565

    Question Source for List?

    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Nemo View Post
    ....

    This is the list I have as it applies to citizens of the respective states. I doubt that the requirements of open carry for non-residence more relaxed.

    ....
    Is there a single source for your very comprehensive list or did you have to assemble it from separate lists?
    Dave
    45ACP-For when you care enough to send the very best-
    Fight for "Stand Your Ground " legislation!

    WI DA Gerald R. Fox:
    "These so-called 'public safety' laws only put decent law-abiding citizens at a dangerous disadvantage when it comes to their personal safety, and I for one am glad that this decades-long era of defective thinking on gun issues is over..."

    Remember: Don't make old People mad. We don't like being old in the first place, so it doesn't take much to piss us off.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Somewhere, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,029
    j.gleason:

    Your example of a drivers license is similar to the kind of thing I'm talking about. I don't know what the term is for it but a vehicle operators license is valid in all states as a universal reciprocity. If you happen to be stopped by LEO in another state it is proof that you are qualified in your home state to operate a vehicle. That is proof in all 50 states that you are qualified to drive and is reciprocal in all the states, in fact throughout much of the world. In most states it is reciprocal for a limited time. If you change residency you must re-qualify your competency to drive according to that state's vehicle laws.

    Bear in mind that a drivers license is a privlege that, if valid, gives you the right to drive on any public road. It is not a fundamental right given by any constitution I am aware of. It carries with it all sorts of mandatory bells and whistles one must comply with. I of course would not support any of that for carry of firearms. I am only talking about a document that can be obtained at a person's request from the state so that he/she can use it to carry in other states that would recognize it as a valid qualification to carry a firearm. No firearm information, perhaps not even an address. Perhaps just name and physical information and state of origin and totally voluntary.

    The 2nd amendment, especially since the Heller and McDonald decisions, only guarantees that congress and the legislatures of the states can not deny any law-abiding individual the possession of arms and the right to keep them in their home. Beyond that the what, where, when and how is largely still left to the states. Right now there are roughly 250 lawsuits filed to challenge those conditions. The results of those challenges and mandatory change in state law will likely not be known or happen for years. ----My opinion

    .

  24. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    3,481
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Nemo View Post
    j.gleason:

    Your example of a drivers license is similar to the kind of thing I'm talking about. I don't know what the term is for it but a vehicle operators license is valid in all states as a universal reciprocity. If you happen to be stopped by LEO in another state it is proof that you are qualified in your home state to operate a vehicle. That is proof in all 50 states that you are qualified to drive and is reciprocal in all the states, in fact throughout much of the world. In most states it is reciprocal for a limited time. If you change residency you must re-qualify your competency to drive according to that state's vehicle laws.

    Bear in mind that a drivers license is a privlege that, if valid, gives you the right to drive on any public road. It is not a fundamental right given by any constitution I am aware of. It carries with it all sorts of mandatory bells and whistles one must comply with. I of course would not support any of that for carry of firearms. I am only talking about a document that can be obtained at a person's request from the state so that he/she can use it to carry in other states that would recognize it as a valid qualification to carry a firearm. No firearm information, perhaps not even an address. Perhaps just name and physical information and state of origin and totally voluntary.

    The 2nd amendment, especially since the Heller and McDonald decisions, only guarantees that congress and the legislatures of the states can not deny any law-abiding individual the possession of arms and the right to keep them in their home. Beyond that the what, where, when and how is largely still left to the states. Right now there are roughly 250 lawsuits filed to challenge those conditions. The results of those challenges and mandatory change in state law will likely not be known or happen for years. ----My opinion

    .
    It would definitely be a start as long as your name isn't placed on a register.

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

    http://www.carryconcealed.net/

    The information in the link was not totally accurate. I had to relocate Wisconsin and Arizona. Washington D.C. is not a state so I removed it from my list. I just tried to enter the site and noticed that the section on reciprocity is being maintained at this time so perhaps those changes are being made.

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
  •