• 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.

It looks like SC is considering CC?!?!?!

CalicoJack10

CalicoJack10

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
559
Location
Arbor Vitae
I have a friend that works at the JD distillery, and he said that he has been reading that TN is quietly discussing CC. Not that it will do him any good at work since they have federally bonded warehouses. But as far as Wisconsin goes.......................

Until recently it was kinda like teaching a monkey to read, sure you can do it, but when you have 15 people screaming at the monkey, it will never really happen.
 
P

protias

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
7,308
Location
SE, WI
CalicoJack10 said:
I have a friend that works at the JD distillery, and he said that he has been reading that TN is quietly discussing CC. Not that it will do him any good at work since they have federally bonded warehouses. But as far as Wisconsin goes.......................

Until recently it was kinda like teaching a monkey to read, sure you can do it, but when you have 15 people screaming at the monkey, it will never really happen.
Click to expand...

Why would a federally bonded warehouse prevent him from carrying?
 
Last edited:
jpm84092

jpm84092

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2010
Messages
1,066
Location
Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
paul@paul-fisher.com said:
http://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess119_2011-2012/bills/3292.htm

So.... WI, what's up?

AK, VT and AZ have it. UT, KY and SC are considering it.

Let's GO!!!!!!
Click to expand...

Way to go SC - now, if we can get this information to Wisconsin legislators it is one more brick on the pile to show that CC is the way to go (with an optional permit system for those who wish to travel to other States or enter a Federal Gun Free School Zone). - Sorry, but CC does not eliminate the Federal GFSZ regulation.
 
A

apjonas

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2006
Messages
1,157
Location
, ,
To Most People

Citizen said:
What does this acronym signify? :p:)
Click to expand...

CC (an initialism, not an acronym) would be concealed carry. However to the Opencarriati, it is "constitutional carry" - which has almost as many definitions as it does supporters. Some claiming the right to carry anything, anytime, anywhere, by anybody. I think they should change to ConstCar (a true acronym) or something else to avoid confusion. Any ideas? 2ACarry, MaxCarry, Harry Caray? Holy Cow! Cubs Win! Cubs Win!
 
paul@paul-fisher.com

paul@paul-fisher.com

Regular Member
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
4,049
Location
Chandler, AZ
apjonas said:
CC (an initialism, not an acronym) would be concealed carry. However to the Opencarriati, it is "constitutional carry" - which has almost as many definitions as it does supporters. Some claiming the right to carry anything, anytime, anywhere, by anybody. I think they should change to ConstCar (a true acronym) or something else to avoid confusion. Any ideas? 2ACarry, MaxCarry, Harry Caray? Holy Cow! Cubs Win! Cubs Win!
Click to expand...

I believe Citizen was being silly. If you notice, he highlighted my capitalization of the word GO. He also had a (stick out tongue) and (smile) emotion. I believe he was referring to a thread I had started in the Vermont forum where I used the abbreviation VT asking a question and someone took me to task because they 'assumed' I meant Virginia Tech (In a Vermont forum).

Or I could be reading stuff into it.
 
C

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
paul@paul-fisher.com said:
I believe Citizen was being silly. If you notice, he highlighted my capitalization of the word GO. He also had a (stick out tongue) and (smile) emotion. I believe he was referring to a thread I had started in the Vermont forum where I used the abbreviation VT asking a question and someone took me to task because they 'assumed' I meant Virginia Tech (In a Vermont forum).

Or I could be reading stuff into it.
Click to expand...

You're pretty close. I was being silly about the OP in this thread. It is all full of initialisms. There are almost as many initialisms as whole words.

Sorry. Seeing so many initialisms packed into one post, I couldn't resist being silly.

Of course, it wouldn't have worked if you had not used all caps for the last word.

:D
 
MKEgal

MKEgal

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
4,383
Location
in front of my computer, WI
jpm84092 said:
CC does not eliminate the Federal GFSZ regulation.
Click to expand...
If they do it right it does.
IIRC, Montana (?) has a state law worded something like:
For the purposes of the Federal GFSZ Act, all residents of the State are hereby considered to be licensed to carry (may specifically say guns or concealed weapons) if they are over 18 (not sure- may be 21) and have not been convicted of a felony or adjudicated mentally incompetent.
 
jpm84092

jpm84092

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2010
Messages
1,066
Location
Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
Hi MKE Gal,

I was not aware of that Montana Law.

IF - WI were to enact similar legislation, that might be a way to get beyond the Federal GFSZ law, but I suspect it might still need to be "tested in the courts".

As you wrote: "if they do it right". However, I do not see a reference to the federally required "background check". So, it may indeed take a "test in the courts" to sort that one out.
 
P

phred

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2010
Messages
768
Location
North Central Wisconsin, ,
Let's put it here, too

From Montana

45-8-360. Establishment of individual licensure. In consideration that the right to keep and bear arms is protected and reserved to the people in Article II, section 12, of the Montana constitution, a person who has not been convicted of a violent, felony crime and who is lawfully able to own or to possess a firearm under the Montana constitution is considered to be individually licensed and verified by the state of Montana within the meaning of the provisions regarding individual licensure and verification in the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act.
Click to expand...

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...chool-Zone-law

If Montana can do it, why not Wisconsin

Also, link to Montana's firearms laws
http://www.doj.mt.gov/enforcement/cr...ledweapons.asp

http://www.mtssa.org/mtlaws.phtml?co...1,+342+M.C.A.
 
paul@paul-fisher.com

paul@paul-fisher.com

Regular Member
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
4,049
Location
Chandler, AZ
phred said:
Let's put it here, too

From Montana



http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...chool-Zone-law

If Montana can do it, why not Wisconsin

Also, link to Montana's firearms laws
http://www.doj.mt.gov/enforcement/cr...ledweapons.asp

http://www.mtssa.org/mtlaws.phtml?co...1,+342+M.C.A.
Click to expand...

There we go! No license needed. I asked the same on the VT forum and so far the only response I have received is that they just 'trust' that the Feds won't charge someone without an additional crime.
 
jpm84092

jpm84092

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2010
Messages
1,066
Location
Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
paul@paul-fisher.com said:
There we go! No license needed. I asked the same on the VT forum and so far the only response I have received is that they just 'trust' that the Feds won't charge someone without an additional crime.
Click to expand...

Paul, I am not so sure I "trust the feds" that much. I "get it" about the additional crime, but still, depending on the "party in power" on the federal level, this is not a good thing. My house in WI is in a rural area, but my family lives in Janesville where one must be very careful to avoid a Federal GFSZ, especially considering that under the Federal definition, there are a multitude of Churches that operate a "Sunday School" that meets the Federal definition of a parochial school.
 
paul@paul-fisher.com

paul@paul-fisher.com

Regular Member
Joined
May 24, 2009
Messages
4,049
Location
Chandler, AZ
jpm84092 said:
Paul, I am not so sure I "trust the feds" that much. I "get it" about the additional crime, but still, depending on the "party in power" on the federal level, this is not a good thing. My house in WI is in a rural area, but my family lives in Janesville where one must be very careful to avoid a Federal GFSZ, especially considering that under the Federal definition, there are a multitude of Churches that operate a "Sunday School" that meets the Federal definition of a parochial school.
Click to expand...

That is fines, however, we can do what MT has done. Also, WCI is challenging the Federal GFSZ in court as we speak.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top