Opinions are changing

Editorial from the Wausau Daily Herald

http://www.wausaudailyherald.com/article/20110512/WDH06/105120355/Our-View-Put-reasonable-limits-bill-concealed-guns?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|Opinion|s

Our View: Put reasonable limits in bill for concealed guns

In a pre-election interview with the Wausau Daily Herald's Editorial Board last year, then-candidate Pam Galloway said that as she'd traveled the district, one of the key requests she'd heard from her constituents was for a concealed carry law in Wisconsin.

Give her credit for fulfilling a campaign promise. Galloway, now a Republican senator from Wausau, has introduced along with Rep. Jeff Mursau, R-Crivitz, a bill that would allow Wisconsin residents to carry concealed firearms. A public hearing on the proposal is being held today in Wausau and Madison, and the bill is thought to be on the fast. track to passage.

--Moderator edited to comply with Fair Use/copyright Rule #11--

Click to expand...

This editorial is quite different than ones printed with the bills that Doyle vetoed. Before it was a "blood in the streets" kind of thing and now they look at at least some of the facts. (bolded part). However they do not look at enough of the facts such as all of the states that do not require training or permits and their lack of problems because of the non-mandates.

I think WCI's push for Constitutional Carry and the open carry movement has had a tremendous influence on how people are now thinking about concealed carry and firearms in general. Their demands and comments are less severe than they were only 5 or 6 year ago. The ice has been broken and the water is even warming up. The fact that training was not included in the proposed bills is a result of that change in opinion. I still expect to see many attempts to include mandatory training, even though statistics and logic are not there to support it I do not think the editorial's "common sense restrictions" are valid, but it is their way of showing opposition to something that they never would have accepted a few years ago.

A huge thanks to all of you who had a part in this.

phred said:

I think WCI's push for Constitutional Carry and the open carry movement has had a tremendous influence on how people are now thinking about concealed carry and firearms in general. Their demands and comments are less severe than they were only 5 or 6 year ago. The ice has been broken and the water is even warming up. The fact that training was not included in the proposed bills is a result of that change in opinion. I still expect to see many attempts to include mandatory training, even though statistics and logic are not there to support it I do not think the editorial's "common sense restrictions" are valid, but it is their way of showing opposition to something that they never would have accepted a few years ago.

A huge thanks to all of you who had a part in this.

Click to expand...

And I think this is the point! In all negotiations, you ask for the stars and settle for the moon. If we had spent the last 18 months saying "I want concealed carry with 8 hours of training and a $500 per year permit fee", we would get less than that. Today, there is a REAL possibility that we will get Constitutional Carry or at least the best permit system in the land! Once again, I'm not willing to give up the fight, even if a permit bill passes. I will come back at the elected folks and say, "good 1st step, let's get it done right!'.

I agree phred. Definitely a different tone.

paul@paul-fisher.com said:

And I think this is the point! In all negotiations, you ask for the stars and settle for the moon. If we had spent the last 18 months saying "I want concealed carry with 8 hours of training and a $500 per year permit fee", we would get less than that. Today, there is a REAL possibility that we will get Constitutional Carry or at least the best permit system in the land! Once again, I'm not willing to give up the fight, even if a permit bill passes. I will come back at the elected folks and say, "good 1st step, let's get it done right!'.

Click to expand...

A year ago or even less, constitutional carry was just being defined and put into words as far as Wisconsin is concerned. Today one of the two bills, SB93, with 8 senate co-sponsors and 23 assembly co-sponsors, is being discussed at a hearing in Wausau. Who would of thought!!

If something good does pass, I see a HUGE get together in our future.

I can tell you as an "Insider" that a good portion of the permit side of things is from instructors here in Wisconsin, as well as a couple from states around us.

I think it would be awesome to do a MASSIVE get together. Like pick a weekend and really make an event of it. Good idea.

Paul:

Excellent post.

metalman383 said:

If something good does pass, I see a HUGE get together in our future.

Click to expand...

Kegger Party!!!:banana:






with n/a beer...:cuss:

oak1971 said:

Kegger Party!!!:banana:






with n/a beer...:cuss:

Click to expand...

I'll go to a kegger, but since I'll drink more, I will not carry.

if 48 states have some form of a concealed carry law, it is hard to argue that instituting one in Wisconsin would cause some kind of disaster. Given all the states that came before us, by now there would be data showing increased incidences of police shootings or other violence in states that have instituted the laws -- and those data simply don't exist.

Click to expand...

So someone there can think, instead of reacting w/ emotion.

any concealed carry law that is passed most certainly should be subject to the kinds of commonsense restrictions that the great majority of other states have instituted
...
obvious safety checks that would protect all of us

Click to expand...

But they didn't think hard enough. :banghead:
Look at the states that _don't_ restrict the peaceful exercise of this right, and see if there have been any problems with that method.
Since there haven't, there's no reason WI should have restrictions, or any other state for that matter.
I've posted responses @ the article.