Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Constitutional Carry legislative initiative flyer

  1. #1
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. Wisconsin Carry, Inc. - Chairman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,197

    Constitutional Carry legislative initiative flyer

    attached is a "Constitutional Carry" legislative initiative flyer.

    This document was created with the intention that it would be distributed to friends and freedom minded Wisconsinites.

    It is NOT intended to be spammed to legislators via email.

    IT IS a good document to give to a legislator IF you have had a chance to have a personal conversation with them and they requested more information.

    As I was speaking with my new assemblyman, he requested a document containing this information and I put this together and sent it to him. (but again, I don't know if spamming this to your legislator unsolicited is a good idea)

    Printing it out and mailing it to your legislator with a hand-written note that you'd like them to consider it is probably more appropriate.

    Of course having said all that, its a free country, do with it as you wish.

    WCI is planning to have 10's of thousands of these printed up for mass distribution also.

    In the meantime, this is a good document also to print up a stack of (its intended to be printed 2 sided) and taken to your local gun store and placed on the counter (with the proprietor's permission of course)

    Carry On
    Attached Files Attached Files
    Last edited by Wisconsin Carry, Inc. - Chairman; 12-03-2010 at 12:07 PM.
    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.

  2. #2
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818
    Good idea Nik.

    I found a few small screw ups in there though. May I suggest that you get it proofread by someone (who’s a lot better at it than me) before you print thousands of copies? So far I've noticed:

    Paragraph 1: “The 2 options for conceal (should be concealed? )carry……” Actually, this goes back and forth between conceal and concealed througout the pamphlet even in the same context.

    Paragraph 3: “Permit taxes (fee’s)…” should be fees (no apostrophe) I believe.

    Paragraph 8: “Law #2: Repeal of (should be or) alter…….”


    There may be more as I'm not a particularly good proofreader...
    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

  3. #3
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. Wisconsin Carry, Inc. - Chairman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,197
    Good catches, I edited the document.
    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.

  4. #4
    McX
    Guest
    you left out steenkin!- as in dont need no.
    Last edited by McX; 12-01-2010 at 04:45 PM.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Madison, ,
    Posts
    34
    Nice, but would also like to see something about Castle Doctrine/Stand Your Ground legislation IMHO.

  6. #6
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. Wisconsin Carry, Inc. - Chairman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,197
    Quote Originally Posted by gdyslin View Post
    Nice, but would also like to see something about Castle Doctrine/Stand Your Ground legislation IMHO.
    Understood.

    Castle Doctrine
    State Park Ban
    Restaurant carry (restaurants that serve alcohol)
    government owned building carry (no reason not to be able to carry in a library)

    Was only trying to hit the "major" laws that need changing. If I stop and think about it there are probably several more to add to the list, but I was crunched for space on that document as it was.

    As for Castle Doctrine, that is a more complex topic that many people are not familiar with and likely needs a document all its own to do it justice.

    And last disclaimer, the inclusion of certain topics/laws on that flyer should in NO way mean they are the only Wisconsin gun laws we take issue with.
    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.

  7. #7
    Regular Member GlockRDH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    north of the Peoples Republic of Madison
    Posts
    626
    maybe include something about it already 'being constitutional to use a firearm for defense' and having a 'permitting type of CC' would introduce challengable problems since no other constitutional rights in WI require a permit.... If im not mistaken the state constiution mentions it as 'defense' and NOT 'self-defense' (see the difference??)

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    93

    I have some concerns here

    Mr. Clark

    I do appreciate the work you are currently doing and have done in the past but I have some concerns about the new flyer. To use the premise that CCW legislation is a "virtual certainty" is like counting chickens, even though I hope that you are right, I can't see the benefit of publicizing something that isn't a certainty, no matter how close to one it may be. I also thought that an override of Doyle's Veto was a "virtual certainty" and even paid and attended mandatory training in Wisconsin before the Sherman flip-flop. As someone who believes that more laws equals more problems I strongly support the repeal of the laws on concealed carry, transportation of a firearm, and the gun free school zone. I think that a stronger case can be made for repeal based on McDonald v. Chicago and the infringement of an individual constitutional right than the concept that we should do it because "shall issue" is the bare minimum that will be passed so we should really push for constitutional carry. The legislature should pass constitutional carry because it is the best option available to the citizens of Wisconsin at this time. Also to end the flyer with a threat seems petty, reflects negatively on everything you have said, and is in my opinion not based in reality. Are we really going to vote against incumbents or worse for a bunch of democrats next election if the legislature only passes "shall issue"? Just some things to think about. If there is anything I can do, let me know.

  9. #9
    Wisconsin Carry, Inc. Wisconsin Carry, Inc. - Chairman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,197
    To use the premise that CCW legislation is a "virtual certainty" is like counting chickens, even though I hope that you are right, I can't see the benefit of publicizing something that isn't a certainty, no matter how close to one it may be.
    First, from conversations I've had with dozens of legislators and their staff (including our governor elect) I do genuinely believe conceal carry is a virtual certainty this legislative session. I would never state anything I didn't genuinely believe.

    The benefit of stating that it is a virtual certainty:

    If people are worried they may end up with "nothing" again like they did under Doyle and a democrat controlled legislature that played games and tricks to deny our rights they will, out of fear, take the "safe" bet and just push for shall-issue.

    There are many people who in principle support constitutional carry, but would happily settle for shall-issue rather than get nothing.

    My message to those people (and trust me, its the majority) is that shall-issue is the LEAST we'll get. I genuinely believe that based on all the information I have available to me.

    We need those people to not be afraid to ask for what they WANT, not out of fear settle for what they perceived as the 'safe bet'.

    Under a democratic controlled legislature, WCI may well be pushing for shall-issue right now. If we assessed the political environment and thought "nothing" was a political reality, we would have a different strategy. Our action plan is based upon the current political reality, not the past political realities under different administrations.

    To tell people "you may get nothing" would scare them into the 'baby step' of shall-issue. That is based upon feedback I've gotten from hundreds of WCI members who want to conceal carry and would settle for shall-issue to get it if that was the safe bet.

    Also to end the flyer with a threat seems petty, reflects negatively on everything you have said, and is in my opinion not based in reality. Are we really going to vote against incumbents or worse for a bunch of democrats next election if the legislature only passes "shall issue"? Just some things to think about. If there is anything I can do, let me know.
    It is not petty. It is not a threat. Its just a practical reminder to legislators that the news media has a VERY short memory but gun owners do not. Not a threat at all. Sorry you perceived it that way. The reminder was put in the document because I have spoken to a very influential "old school" republican legislator in Madison who SAYS he supports constitutional carry in principle but said "the media would have a field day with it". It is not a threat to share that the media has a short memory and gun owners do not. I think I'm offering sage advice.

    From a logical standpoint a legislator should consider that they should not sacrifice principle to please the media (who are sure to play the gun myth fear tactics) but rather consider that in 2 years the myths will all be debunked if they pass constitutional carry. IF they sell out and pass shall-issue gun owners will not forget and WCI's mission will CONTINUE to be constitutional carry. We will HAVE to replace those legislators with MORE freedom minded ones.

    Legislators need to know that they are accountable to the voters.

    If legislators sell out our rights, we can vote in primaries next cycle for MORE freedom minded republicans, libertarians, or independents who DO support true freedom.

    What should the message we send to legislators be? "don't worry, if you pass shall-issue despite your constituents requests, we'll vote for you anyway?"
    Last edited by Wisconsin Carry, Inc. - Chairman; 12-02-2010 at 12:30 AM.
    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.

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    93
    Quote Originally Posted by Wisconsin Carry, Inc. - Chairman View Post
    What should the message we send to legislators be? "don't worry, if you pass shall-issue despite your constituents requests, we'll vote for you anyway?"
    I think that the best message to send is that Wisconsin's incongruent and unconstitutional firearm laws should be repealed not amended and that all the legislators willing to stand up against the media and fear mongering will be rewarded with continued and increased support from your organization and its members in the future.

  11. #11
    Founder's Club Member Brass Magnet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    2,818
    Quote Originally Posted by Wisconsin Carry, Inc. - Chairman View Post
    If people are worried they may end up with "nothing" again like they did under Doyle and a democrat controlled legislature that played games and tricks to deny our rights they will, out of fear, take the "safe" bet and just push for shall-issue.

    There are many people who in principle support constitutional carry, but would happily settle for shall-issue rather than get nothing.

    My message to those people (and trust me, its the majority) is that shall-issue is the LEAST we'll get. I genuinely believe that based on all the information I have available to me.

    We need those people to not be afraid to ask for what they WANT, not out of fear settle for what they perceived as the 'safe bet'.
    THIS ^^^^^^^^
    is what I keep telling people who worry about it. This is exactly right. Push for what you want and don't let them know you'll settle for less.

    Do you go to a car dealer and tell them that you'd like to pay a certain amount but would settle to pay more? NO!!

    I think this is the key; going forward, for getting other more restriction permissive gun groups on our side.
    R[ƎVO˩]UTION

    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

    Lex malla, lex nulla

  12. #12
    Regular Member paul@paul-fisher.com's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Chandler, AZ
    Posts
    4,047
    Quote Originally Posted by Brass Magnet View Post
    Do you go to a car dealer and tell them that you'd like to pay a certain amount but would settle to pay more? NO!!
    +1

  13. #13
    Guest
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    in your pants
    Posts
    397
    Quote Originally Posted by Brass Magnet View Post
    THIS ^^^^^^^^
    is what I keep telling people who worry about it. This is exactly right. Push for what you want and don't let them know you'll settle for less.

    Do you go to a car dealer and tell them that you'd like to pay a certain amount but would settle to pay more? NO!!

    I think this is the key; going forward, for getting other more restriction permissive gun groups on our side.
    I've been using almost that exact analogy for quite a while wrt fighting for constitutional carry! so... +1000!!!!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •