• 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.

SB93 and Reciprocity

bobcat

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2007
Messages
167
Location
Great Lakes, , USA
What's the story on reciprocity for SB93? I did a search on the pre-enrolled pdf of SB93 and came up dry. Can anyone direct me to language on this? Were amendments not edited into SB93 in the pre-enrolled version?

Feel free to comment if you have specific knowledge. A comment on another thread here said it would take another legislative bill. Sounds strange, I would think that would have been addressed in SB93 and/or amendments.

Pardon me if I don't understand the intricacies of the Wisconsin legislative processes.

Looking forward to being 'legal' in the Dairyland.

BTW, congrats to all of you for seeing this through, especially those in the trenches. It's been a long hard road. For those of you purists that have a bone to pick with bits of this bill, remember that you've gotten a big portion of your Liberty back. There will be other legislative sessions for 'fine tuning' and hopefully a clean Constitutional Carry bill.
 

protias

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
7,308
Location
SE, WI
No one knows what states will accept a WI permit or whose permit WI will honor as the DOJ has not made that decision yet.
 

Yooper

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2008
Messages
800
Location
Houghton County, Michigan, USA
What's the story on reciprocity for SB93? I did a search on the pre-enrolled pdf of SB93 and came up dry. Can anyone direct me to language on this? Were amendments not edited into SB93 in the pre-enrolled version?

Feel free to comment if you have specific knowledge. A comment on another thread here said it would take another legislative bill. Sounds strange, I would think that would have been addressed in SB93 and/or amendments.

Pardon me if I don't understand the intricacies of the Wisconsin legislative processes.

Looking forward to being 'legal' in the Dairyland.

BTW, congrats to all of you for seeing this through, especially those in the trenches. It's been a long hard road. For those of you purists that have a bone to pick with bits of this bill, remember that you've gotten a big portion of your Liberty back. There will be other legislative sessions for 'fine tuning' and hopefully a clean Constitutional Carry bill.

I'm not quoting the exact language of the law, but it says that as long as the person who has the permit submitted to a background check to get the permit..... In essence, MOST states will be honored by WI, there are a few however that a background check isn't mandated by law. But from what I've read, those people can submit to a background check if they choose to carry in WI
 

apjonas

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2006
Messages
1,157
Location
, ,
C'mon Guys

It’s real easy to find.

175.60 License to carry a concealed weapon. (1) DEFINITIONS. In this section:
….
(f) Out−of−state license" means a valid permit, license, approval, or other authorization issued by another state if all of the following apply:
1. The permit, license, approval, or other authorization is for the carrying of a concealed weapon.
2. The state is listed in the rule promulgated by the department under s. 165.25 (12) and, if that state does not require a background search for the permit, license, approval, or authorization, the permit, license, approval, or authorization designates that the holder chose to submit to a background search.
(g) Out−of−state licensee" means an individual who is 21 years of age or over, who is not a Wisconsin resident, and who has been issued an out−of−state license.

The key question is the interpretation of (f)(1). Does “concealed weapon” mean a license for any specific weapon qualifies or the license must be for a “weapon” as defined in Wisconsin law (handgun, Taser, non-switchblade knife or billy club) or the license must be for any possible concealed weapon? For instance, a Michigan CPL certainly would meet the background check/training requirements but since the possession, much less concealed carry of a Taser or billy club is unlawful in Michigan does this mean that (A) a Michigander cannot carry at all in WI, (B) cannot carry a Taser or billy club (pistols only), or (C) can carry anything a Cheesehead could? Given that the requirements for a WI license are the same regardless of the weapon to be carried and a MI CPL is for a type of concealed weapon, in my opinion “C” is the correct answer. But you never know how bureaucrats will see it.

My guess on a several states -
Honored in WI - AK, AZ, FL, IA, ID, MI, MN, MO, NM, TX, UT
Not Honored in WI - AL, ME, MD, IN, WA (training issue)
Residents of non-honored states, IL and VT may use a non-resident (FL, MN, UT are likely choices) permit in WI.

That is recognition.


175.60 (18) RECIPROCITY AGREEMENTS. The department may enter into reciprocity agreements with other states as to matters relating to licenses or other authorization to carry concealed weapons.

There doesn’t appear to be limitation on this ability, so Michigan could be covered under a reciprocity agreement.
 

press1280

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2008
Messages
399
Location
Eastern Panhandle,WV ,
If WI has a 24 hour database to look up CCW permits, then WV and WI should be able to get a reciprocity agreement, as WV doesn't do recognition, only reciprocity.
There are a few states(CO and FL I know) that will automatically recognize any state's permit that in turn recognizes theirs.
WA doesn't recognize(or won't sign agreements) with any states that don't fingerprint.
 

Captain Nemo

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
1,029
Location
Somewhere, Wisconsin, USA
Training should not be an issue. People from states that don't have a traaining requirement can take the MD Police Training Commission Firearms Safety Training Course on the internet. Took me about 30 minutes including printing the certificate. It's free. As far as I can tell, but IANAL, that course is acceptable under para 4.1.c of ss175.60.
 

apjonas

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2006
Messages
1,157
Location
, ,
DoJ

is responsible for the administrative side of the new law. While I agree that there is no explicit requirement that an out of state license require training to be recognized, it is illogical to require WI residents to undergo training for a permit while allowing OOS licensees to carry in WI having not met a similar requirement. You can probably extend this to any OOS license that fails to meet any requirement imposed for the issuance of a WI license. Please do not jump up and down and scream about the words in the statute. The text of the statute is very important but sometimes interpretation goes beyond the text, something I think most people will acknowledge even if they don't like it. I am not saying that I support such an interpretation and policy, only that I think it will likely be so.

Some other potentially problem areas:

1. As stated elsewhere the statute [175.60(1)(f)(1)] the definiton of an OOS license, requires that "The permit, license, approval, or other authorization is for the carrying of a concealed weapon."

Should the limiting factor be the scope of the license, WI law or both?

A KY CCDW is valid for items beyond those covered by a WI license but nobody would argue that a KY CCDW holder may carry a switchblade in WI. Thus the boundary of WI law is a limiting factor.

In MI, a CPL is issued and valid only for the carrying of a concealed pistol. Is is an "OOS license" under the WI statute? I think so. Even though it doesn't cover every concealed weapon (as defined by WI) in its issuing state, it does cover at least one. But DoJ may have a different view.

2. 175.60(2)(d) says "For purposes of 18 USC 922 (q) (2) (B) (ii), an out−of−state licensee is licensed by this state."

Pretty straightforward, right? The problem is that the ultimate interpretation of this provision and its effect is likely to be done in a federal court. WI cannot interpret federal law by state statute. Some poor schmoe is going to rely on this and be arrested carrying in a school zone in Milwaukee with only a Florida CCW.

This issues and others, if and when they arise, will be dealt with by court decision and additional legislation. These concerns are on the edge of the concealed carry issue and won't impact the vast majority of WI licensees but since somebody asked.....

One last thing, nobody should try to be too clever by half and carry in WI on a OOSL, if you can plausibly be described as a WI resident. There is no hard and fast set of criteria for making such a determination but if things go south and it is found you are a WI resident, your other permit is going to be as useful as the proverbial screen door in a submarine. Violation of the concealed carry law, GFSZ x 2, etc. are possibilites - it ain't worth it.
 
Last edited:

Eagle2009

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2011
Messages
66
Location
United States
Last edited:

protias

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
7,308
Location
SE, WI
Remember, those carrying under reciprocity commit a federal crime everytime they travel armed on a public sidewalk, road, or highway which passes within 1000 feet of a school's property line because of the Federal Gun Free School Zones Act of 1995.

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?81674-Gun-Free-School-Zones-Act-of-1995


Here is an ATF Letter Confirming This:

www.handgunlaw.us/documents/batf_school_zone.pdf

awgeez3.jpg





And when has anyone been arrested, charged, and convicted for a federal felony for merely carrying?
 

hermannr

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2011
Messages
2,327
Location
Okanogan Highland
Interestingly you say you think that "training" should be an issue in recognition...that is not what the law demands...only a BI by the issue state in question.

Recognition and reciprosity are two different concepts. ID recognizes WA, but WA does not recognize ID, so their is no offical "receprosity" but there is recognition on the part of ID. (ID has provision for an special 18 year old CPL)

Will WI recognize WA (no training)? According to the law as I read it, yes.

Will WA recognize WI? maybe, I see nothing in the law to prevent it. RCW 9.41.073 states a permit from any state that has manditory fingerprint BI of criminal and mental heath, and will only issue to persons over 21.

Official reciprosity is not necessary in either state if your state of issue meets the requirements. Neither state says "training" is necessary to recognize another state's CPL.
 
Last edited:

MKEgal

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
4,383
Location
in front of my computer, WI
paul said:
I read your writeup here a couple times plus the bill and didn't see a word about training being required for reciprocity.
+1 (Although as someone else pointed out, technically we're talking about recognition.)

apjonas said:
I agree that there is no explicit requirement that an out of state license require training to be recognized, it is illogical to require WI residents to undergo training for a permit while allowing OOS licensees to carry in WI having not met a similar requirement.
+1 Yet that's how the law is.
Someone from PA can carry in WI, though the PA permit doesn't require training.
I can use my PA permit to get a WI permit, [ditto].
Yet there are people squawking about how the MD course doesn't meet the training requirements for WI.
:cuss:

2. 175.60(2)(d) says "For purposes of 18 USC 922 (q) (2) (B) (ii), an out−of−state licensee is licensed by this state."
Some poor schmoe is going to rely on this and be arrested carrying in a school zone in Milwaukee with only a Florida CCW.
Show us where this has happened elsewhere.
Vermont, maybe, where it's impossible for citizens to meet the requirements of the federal law.

Heck, show us any thug in WI, arrested for carrying in a school zone (probably among other crimes) who was convicted even of the state crime, let alone charged w/ the federal one.

I haven't heard of anyone, nationwide, who's been convicted under the federal law.
Actually, I don't know of anyone who's been charged for it.
Wonder who in the DOJ would be the right person to answer a FOIA about that? :confused:
 
Last edited:

Eagle2009

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2011
Messages
66
Location
United States
You all will find this interesting. This is an internal Milwaukee police department E-mail legally obtained by "Wisconsin Carry" through an open records act request. In this E-mail, the police are describing Gun Free School Zones Act as the "silver bullet" to arrest otherwise lawful carriers. Now that it's more difficult for them to use the state law, who is to say they wont use the federal law?

View attachment milwaukeepdtalkgfsza.pdf
 
Last edited:

hermannr

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2011
Messages
2,327
Location
Okanogan Highland
Eagle2009:

State/local LE does not have juristiction to arrest under Federal law, just like the FBI and ATF do not have juristiction to arrest under state law.

Get off your school zone kick will you. You have no idea what you speak of
 
Last edited:

apjonas

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2006
Messages
1,157
Location
, ,
Tsk Tsk Tsk

Eagle2009:

State/local LE does not have juristiction to arrest under Federal law, just like the FBI and ATF do not have juristiction to arrest under state law.

You are incorrect. At least as it pertains to criminal offenses. I don't know about civil - and please do not post that a person can never be arrested for a civil offense. It isn't that frequent but it can and does happen.

Get off your school zone kick will you. You have no idea what you speak of

I regret that you are upset but please remain calm. Could you tell me specifically where I stated something that is untrue? It must be an alleged fact, opinions are just opinions.
 
Last edited:

Eagle2009

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2011
Messages
66
Location
United States
Eagle2009:

State/local LE does not have juristiction to arrest under Federal law, just like the FBI and ATF do not have juristiction to arrest under state law.

Get off your school zone kick will you. You have no idea what you speak of

State/local LE can arrest for federal violations. Everything I have said about the Federal Gun Free School Zones Act is a fact, and has been documented through court cases and official letters. If you have documentation that proves anything I've said about the law wrong, I'd like to see it. You can pretend this doesn't exist, but it doesn't change the facts.
 

apjonas

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2006
Messages
1,157
Location
, ,
When You Get to the Point

State/local LE can arrest for federal violations. Everything I have said about the Federal Gun Free School Zones Act is a fact, and has been documented through court cases and official letters. If you have documentation that proves anything I've said about the law wrong, I'd like to see it. You can pretend this doesn't exist, but it doesn't change the facts.

of being able to post more than once in thread without contradicting yourself, I'll be glad to engage.
 
Top