• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Weapons license fee increases.

MKEgal

MKEgal

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
4,383
Location
in front of my computer, WI
Gray Peterson said:
None of my licenses, especially the ones that say "weapons", have never had any guns on them. How is that registration?
Click to expand...

I know there's at least one state (can't recall at the moment... got up too early again this morning to go shopping) that requires registration of the gun itself, with the paper to be carried with the gun, and each separate gun has to have its own permit.
 
LR Yote 312

LR Yote 312

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2010
Messages
458
Location
God's Country, Wi
J.Gleason said:
Registration. That's right registration. That is what a permit is. Your name gets put on a list.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

Dont forget some States only allow you to carry the firearm listed on the permit.

Dont some States require you to submit a fired and recovered bullet or you have to turn your side arm over for them to fire and collect so the bullet will be in their database????
Wouldnt this be a direct violation of the 5th Amendment???.

Your providing evidence to use against yourself just like ya would be if you ran your mouth at time of arrest.

LR Yote
 
J

J.Gleason

Banned
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
3,481
Location
Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
Permits=Registration
Registration=Confiscation

There will be a record that you have a permit. At that point it will not matter what type of firearm or weapon you have. If the tyrannical government wants them they will come knockin. And by the way I have spoken with some former New Orleans LEO and they did start their searches with the use of permit lists and registered firearms at the start. Then they moved to the door to door sweep and you can call it what ever you like. I call it confiscation.
 
hardballer

hardballer

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2009
Messages
925
Location
West Coast of Wisconsin
J.Gleason said:
This is what we have to look forward too because there are so many in this state that will give anything to get their hands on a ccw permit. They are blind to the reality that after getting that permit there will be increased fees, mandated training and guess what? Registration. That's right registration. That is what a permit is. Your name gets put on a list. Get use to it because if the mentality of the people involved in this movement does not change to support Constitutional Carry/Non-Permitted Carry that is exactly what life will be like for all of us.
Click to expand...

J.Gleason said:
Clearly for Registration purposes
Click to expand...

J.Gleason said:
Permits=Registration
Registration=Confiscation

There will be a record that you have a permit. At that point it will not matter what type of firearm or weapon you have. If the tyrannical government wants them they will come knockin. And by the way I have spoken with some former New Orleans LEO and they did start their searches with the use of permit lists and registered firearms at the start. Then they moved to the door to door sweep and you can call it what ever you like. I call it confiscation.
Click to expand...
What he said...
 
hardballer

hardballer

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 16, 2009
Messages
925
Location
West Coast of Wisconsin
I cannot believe some of what I am hearing here. The only way we get what we want is to make it known... Period. I don't really care how it is done someplace else. I know how I want it done here. Constitutional Carry is the only acceptable answer. Open Carry is fine and I am very comfortable with it but I would like Concealed Carry at times too. It would be great to carry a back up or not worry if my coat covers my main carry gun.

Why would any of you be OK with new onerous laws and hoops to jump through. Why would you be OK with increased bureaucracy, OK with fees of any kind or big brother watching your every move. This is not what my struggle for the 2A is all about. Nor is it legal. What part of shall not be infringed do you not get. It is an infringement if I cannot afford a license to carry a gun.

As far as I am concerned, those who are lobbying for a licensed and mandatory training law should be boycotted forever. These; I have words for them that are not allowed here, folks are in it for the bucks and they see this as a way of guaranteeing their financial future at the expense of our rights. Traitors.

Hardballer out!
 
J

J.Gleason

Banned
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
3,481
Location
Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
hardballer said:
I cannot believe some of what I am hearing here. The only way we get what we want is to make it known... Period. I don't really care how it is done someplace else. I know how I want it done here. Constitutional Carry is the only acceptable answer. Open Carry is fine and I am very comfortable with it but I would like Concealed Carry at times too. It would be great to carry a back up or not worry if my coat covers my main carry gun.

Why would any of you be OK with new onerous laws and hoops to jump through. Why would you be OK with increased bureaucracy, OK with fees of any kind or big brother watching your every move. This is not what my struggle for the 2A is all about. Nor is it legal. What part of shall not be infringed do you not get. It is an infringement if I cannot afford a license to carry a gun.

As far as I am concerned, those who are lobbying for a licensed and mandatory training law should be boycotted forever. These; I have words for them that are not allowed here, folks are in it for the bucks and they see this as a way of guaranteeing their financial future at the expense of our rights. Traitors.

Hardballer out!
Click to expand...

+1000
 
Gray Peterson

Gray Peterson

Founder's Club Member - Moderator
Joined
May 12, 2006
Messages
2,236
Location
Lynnwood, Washington, USA
LR Yote 312 said:
Exactly.

Dont forget some States only allow you to carry the firearm listed on the permit.
Click to expand...

Three states: California (specific serial number), Nevada (make model caliber, will be eliminated next year), New York.

Dont some States require you to submit a fired and recovered bullet or you have to turn your side arm over for them to fire and collect so the bullet will be in their database????
Click to expand...

No. DC has such a requirement for even buying a gun but that is currently under challenge in Heller II. No state requires that you give a ballistic sample with your carry gun.

Wouldnt this be a direct violation of the 5th Amendment???.
Click to expand...

Yes.
 
Gray Peterson

Gray Peterson

Founder's Club Member - Moderator
Joined
May 12, 2006
Messages
2,236
Location
Lynnwood, Washington, USA
J.Gleason said:
Permits=Registration
Registration=Confiscation

There will be a record that you have a permit. At that point it will not matter what type of firearm or weapon you have. If the tyrannical government wants them they will come knockin. And by the way I have spoken with some former New Orleans LEO and they did start their searches with the use of permit lists and registered firearms at the start. Then they moved to the door to door sweep and you can call it what ever you like. I call it confiscation.
Click to expand...

You only proved my point: If they didn't have a "registration list" they would have done house to house anyway. A lack of registration of guns in New Orleans did not save people's guns.

hardballer said:
I cannot believe some of what I am hearing here. The only way we get what we want is to make it known... Period. I don't really care how it is done someplace else. I know how I want it done here. Constitutional Carry is the only acceptable answer. Open Carry is fine and I am very comfortable with it but I would like Concealed Carry at times too. It would be great to carry a back up or not worry if my coat covers my main carry gun.
Click to expand...

Hey, I never disagreed with the idea of no permit carry at all. That is my preferred outcome.

Why would any of you be OK with new onerous laws and hoops to jump through. Why would you be OK with increased bureaucracy, OK with fees of any kind or big brother watching your every move. This is not what my struggle for the 2A is all about. Nor is it legal. What part of shall not be infringed do you not get. It is an infringement if I cannot afford a license to carry a gun.
Click to expand...

Though the current state of the gun carry law in Wisconsin is presently unconstitutional because of the numerous restrictions on open carry, if the Legislature were to significantly reduce the laws that effect unlicensed open carrier, especially the laundry list of infringements that are currently under court challenge, and still disallow concealed carry, it would be within the state's power. See Robertson v. Baldwin, District of Columbia v. Heller, and the cases cited by the Heller court with approval (State v. Andrews, State v. Reid, State v. Nunn, State v. Kerner)

The problem is that we're conflating political language and legal language. They are distinctly different. For example, the political code words "Castle Doctrine" is a legal code word for "Stand your ground".

As far as I am concerned, those who are lobbying for a licensed and mandatory training law should be boycotted forever. These; I have words for them that are not allowed here, folks are in it for the bucks and they see this as a way of guaranteeing their financial future at the expense of our rights. Traitors.

Hardballer out!
Click to expand...

Luckily, if in the unlikely event that training somehow makes it into the bill, WCI has already stated that they have instructors willing to do so, gratis to both member and non-member alike. The "training lobby" will find itself unable to compete with people who are willing to donate their time and treasure to the overall causes, versus lining their own pockets.
 
J

J.Gleason

Banned
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
3,481
Location
Chilton, Wisconsin, USA
Gray Peterson said:
You only proved my point: If they didn't have a "registration list" they would have done house to house anyway. A lack of registration of guns in New Orleans did not save people's guns.
Click to expand...
Don't believe I proved any of your points. The fact is the NOPD initially started looking at registered firearms owners first and then went on to do a door to door sweep. The initial search of registered owners was to remove weapons they knew for a fact were present. Then they went on to do the door to door sweep picking up everything in between. The LEO searching for the registered owners were a separate group from the ones doing the door to door. Registration only helps the tyrannical government.
 
Gray Peterson

Gray Peterson

Founder's Club Member - Moderator
Joined
May 12, 2006
Messages
2,236
Location
Lynnwood, Washington, USA
jpm84092 said:
Gray Peterson said:
Three states: California (specific serial number), Nevada (make model caliber, will be eliminated next year), New York.

Can you provide a source on Nevada doing away with the make, model, caliber listing on their permit? Many thanks.
Click to expand...

First, I used the incorrect word. The word is "may", not "will".

Second, Legislative and lobbyist sources in Carson City.
Click to expand...
 
Gray Peterson

Gray Peterson

Founder's Club Member - Moderator
Joined
May 12, 2006
Messages
2,236
Location
Lynnwood, Washington, USA
paul@paul-fisher.com said:
Really? That is what you read into me saying 'please'?

Basically what I was saying is that the rules state you should cite sources, all I'm asking is that you use one that can be verified.
Click to expand...

Here is the rule:

(5) CITE TO AUTHORITY: If you state a rule of law, it is incumbent upon you to try to cite, as best you can, to authority. Citing to authority, using links when available,is what makes OCDO so successful. An authority is a published source of law that can back your claim up - statute, ordinance, court case, newspaper article covering a legal issue, etc.

My statement is not a rule of law, as the law currently doesn't exist. Therefor, the cite to authority rule does not apply in this circumstance. Now, when the law takes effect and I post that it has taken effect, I then would be required to actually cite the enrolled and signed bill which goes into effect. Not a moment before.
 
paul@paul-fisher.com

paul@paul-fisher.com

Regular Member
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
4,049
Location
Chandler, AZ
Gray Peterson said:
Here is the rule:

(5) CITE TO AUTHORITY: If you state a rule of law, it is incumbent upon you to try to cite, as best you can, to authority. Citing to authority, using links when available,is what makes OCDO so successful. An authority is a published source of law that can back your claim up - statute, ordinance, court case, newspaper article covering a legal issue, etc.

My statement is not a rule of law, as the law currently doesn't exist. Therefor, the cite to authority rule does not apply in this circumstance. Now, when the law takes effect and I post that it has taken effect, I then would be required to actually cite the enrolled and signed bill which goes into effect. Not a moment before.
Click to expand...

Cool! So, what you are saying is you have no support for your statement, no newspaper article, no press release. Fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top