• 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.

ASSEMBLY Vote on SB92

Da Po-lock

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2011
Messages
131
Location
Green Bay, WI
I just got off the phone with Rep. John Klenke (Green Bay) and he told me the following:

The Assembly will finish budget items tomorrow (Thur. 6/16) and will NOT have time to get to Concealed Carry this week. Said that CC / SB93 will probably take up a full day.
I explained the Senate did it in just a few hours yesterday

He feels that SB93 will easily pass, that lots of his fellow Reps. are already talking favorably of it.

Said the 25-8 margin in the vote yesterdsy was a clear signal to the Assembly of what the people want. I reminded him we CLEARLY and OVERWHELMINGLY told them what we want at the hearings in both Wausau AND Madison, as well as all of the contacts with the Senators from us "We the People". I explained these amendments CLEARLY go against not only our Constitution(s) but the oaths ALL of these Senators took when they were sworn into office.

He told me he is definately going to vote FOR our CC Bill when it gets to the Assembly, and that he is all for our right to protect ourselves.

He stated he is glad to see training is a part of the bill. I explained I OPEN CARRY in Green Bay and all over the place, as well as thousands of others with NO TRAINING and there are NO OK corral shootouts going on. He kind of chuckled and said "Do you really ?"

I questioned hom on AB69 Castle Doctrine, WHY is it sitting for 3 months and nothing getting done. At first he said he did'nt know much if anything about it. Then amazingly
AND DISTURBING to me he told me there was no way AB69 Castle Doctrine will be even looked at this session. He said everyone will be "too tired out" to get into anything that big". I explained MY LIFE, MY LOVED ONES LIVES and OUR WELL BEING are wayyyyyy more important than all of them being "a little pooped out". I further explained that MY employer really does'nt care if I am tired or not, he wants the job DONE on HIS terms. I as HIS employer EXPECT the same.

All in all, he seemed to be plesant enough to talk to....BUT......We'll see.

We seem to have a week to contact ALL of our Representatives and urge them to support SB93 AS IT WAS AMENDED when it comes up for a vote next week.

Also start / continue to hammer them on AB69 Castle Doctrine and WHY nothing has been done for the last 3 months.

..................Don't know what to think Po-lock
 
Last edited:

GLOCK21GB

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 22, 2009
Messages
4,347
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
I just called Klenke's office & ask that he also support SB93 in it's current form he said either late this week or early next week it would be voted on..., I also asked about AB69 i was told no executive session had yet been planned so I asked that it be looked into.

The Committee chair for AB 69 The castle doctrine is Rep Jim Ott @ 608-266-0486 he is the guy you would have to hammer.
 
Last edited:

Grant Guess

Regular Member
Joined
May 30, 2011
Messages
217
Location
Wisconsin, United States
if a statewide referendum is held on the question of whether the legislature
should authorize concealed carry without a license and a majority of the voters voting
at the referendum vote to approve the question, the license issued under this section
shall be optional and shall convey no additional rights under wisconsin state law to
carry a firearm that is concealed than an individual who does not have a license
issued under this section has to carry a firearm that is concealed.


:d


.
 

jpm84092

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2010
Messages
1,066
Location
Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
2 hours of Firearms Training from a Nationally recognized organization - hmmm. It looks like I am going to have to return to Wisconsin and teach the NRA Basic Pistol Course at ridiculously low prices.
 

Jason in WI

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2010
Messages
542
Location
Under your bed
I'm in for a referendum! Let people carry under the permit for a few years so the sheeple can see the sky isn't falling and put it up for a vote!

We all know there will be no "Wild West" so once we prove it to the fence sitters it should be all good.

Then again its going to take all my will power to keep me from hunting at the zoo when I get a permit....lol (Was Larson for real?)



Sent from my DROID2 GLOBAL using Tapatalk
 

XDFDE45

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 18, 2009
Messages
823
Location
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA
I'm in for a referendum! Let people carry under the permit for a few years so the sheeple can see the sky isn't falling and put it up for a vote!

We all know there will be no "Wild West" so once we prove it to the fence sitters it should be all good.

Then again its going to take al my will power to keep me from hunting at the zoo when I get a permit....lol (Was Larson for real?)



Sent from my DROID2 GLOBAL using Tapatalk
I think that it what you meant :p.
 

davegran

Regular Member
Joined
May 1, 2009
Messages
1,563
Location
Cassville Area -Twelve Miles From Anything, Wiscon
:d
if a statewide referendum is held on the question of whether the legislature
should authorize concealed carry without a license and a majority of the voters voting
at the referendum vote to approve the question, the license issued under this section
shall be optional and shall convey no additional rights under wisconsin state law to
carry a firearm that is concealed than an individual who does not have a license
issued under this section has to carry a firearm that is concealed.
.
Where did this language come from, Grant?
 

MKEgal

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
4,383
Location
in front of my computer, WI
Grant Guess said:
http://donpridemore.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/11s01261.pdf
Think he is offering this amendment to AB126...
I am assuming that they are going to act on SB93 or am I missing something?
That PDF applies to AB126; I think that's pretty much dead, since SB93 covers much of the same ground & has already passed the Senate. At least, I hope it's dead.

It's been sitting in committee since mid-May. No committee votes, no amendments, nothing other than fiscal estimates. (8 at last count.)

Let's not let them mangle SB93 in the Assembly; it got mangled enough getting to a vote in the Senate.
Right now, SB93 is in the Assembly committee on rules. I can't find when they meet next, but I suspect they have to have a vote to pass it to the full Assembly first, then it can be passed by the Assembly, then the Gov can sign it, then we can wait 4 months :mad:, then we can behave more like free people.
 
Last edited:
M

McX

Guest
i just have to.............i realy do; so some assembly is required................?
 

Grant Guess

Regular Member
Joined
May 30, 2011
Messages
217
Location
Wisconsin, United States
OK, here's the skinny directly from Rep Pridemore's office and I will quote:

Hello Grant, this is Christy from Rep. Don Pridemore’s office. I apologize for not getting back to you sooner. The Assembly is in session today, so the office has been busy.

Essentially, one of the main differences between the Substitute Amendment 126 and SB93 has to do with a proposed statewide referendum. Rep. Pridemore supports constitutional concealed carry. He is not, however, in favor of proposed permit requirements. Rep. Pridemore does not believe that an individual should have a permit for a Constitutional right. Additionally, an individual’s name should not be on any unnecessary government list when it comes to this issue. In the substitute amendment, Rep. Pridemore proposed a required referendum on the 2013 fall general election, which would have required asking if the public wants to continue the permit and training requirements for concealed carry.

It is my understanding that at this point Substitute Amendment 126 is still valid. SB93, or Senate Substitute Amendment 2, still has to pass through the Committee on Rules sometime in the near future. The final version must also still pass by both houses. The good news is that we are at least getting closer to establishing a version of concealed carry law in Wisconsin, which is a huge step for the state.

Actually, the Pridemore Amendment also changes the training mandate as I have outlined earlier.
 
Top