Egg on face and foot in mouth... Appleton Post-Crescent Haz it...
Originally Posted by Van Hollen
Egg on face and foot in mouth... Appleton Post-Crescent Haz it...
If the fools would have passed Constitutional Carry as written, there would have been no need for any of this. Then again, who is more the fool...the fool, or the fool who follows him? The fools know who they are, or they would were they not so foolish.
In God I trust. Everyone else needs to keep your hands where I can see them.
If you go into a store, with a gun, and rob it, you have forfeited your right to not get shot - Joe Deters, Hamilton County (Cincinnati) Prosecutor
I ask sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few politicians. - George Mason (father of the Bill of Rights and The Virginia Declaration of Rights)
public transparency??? Does that mean we can see right through it?The rulemaking process and its built-in delays are designed to ensure deliberation and public transparency.
DOJ can only publish the rules on the 1rst or the 15th of the month. It didn't make 10/1, so the rules will be published 10/15 or 11/1 (or maybe 12/15, or 2/1/12, or........<sigh>).
If the rules require any revision to certifications already issued, etc. it's going to be a scramble.
I don't think DOJ is deliberately trying to obstruct Act 35. Everything they've said, though, implies that this is all a monumental PITA that's been dumped on their poor overworked state-paid a**es. There's not a word recognizing the importance of acting swiftly, mentioning avoiding causing pre-November 1 chaos, etc.
Politically, I think Van Hollen is missing an opportunity to seen as a supporter of a new law that affects a heck of a lot more people in Wisconsin than the lawbreakers, LEOs and lawyers DOJ usually dances with.
I had talked to the DOJ a couple of weeks ago and just from that conversation, THEY ARE CLUELESS. I do have the feelin we will get crapped on in the end.
Last night I had quite a long conversation w/ my information source, & from what he said of their attitude, this fits 100%. They don't even admit they need help.Originally Posted by protias
As IK pointed out, instructors can issue stickers with any 'required' wording.Originally Posted by labomba
I still think it'd be simpler to teach the people processing the applications what the law says is acceptable.
I do.I don't think DOJ is deliberately trying to obstruct Act 35.
Their law specialists (lawyers) don't seem to be able to read the plain English of the law as well as we normal people can.
They seem determined to make implementation of this law as difficult & costly as possible for the citizens of WI.
The latest thing I'm told they're going to try to require are a photo & fingerprints.
The law says they can't*,
the law doesn't say those are required**,
but they'll try.
The department may not impose conditions, limitations, or requirements that are not expressly provided for in this section on the issuance, scope, effect, or content of a license.
A license document for a license issued under this section shall contain all of the following on one side:
1. The full name, date of birth, and residence address of the licensee.
2. A physical description of the licensee, including sex, height, and eye color.
3. The date on which the license was issued.
4. The date on which the license expires.
5. The name of this state.
6. A unique identification number for each licensee
The forms shall require the applicant to provide only his or her name, address, date of birth, state identification card number, race, sex, height, and eye color...
Originally Posted by MLK, JrOriginally Posted by MSG LaigaieOriginally Posted by Proverbs 27:12Originally Posted by Proverbs 31:17
ISSUANCE AND SCOPE OF LICENSE. (a) The department shall issue a license to carry a concealed weapon to
any individual who is not disqualified under sub. (3) and who completes the application process specified in sub.(7).
(7) SUBMISSION OF APPLICATION. An individual may apply for a license under this section with the department
by submitting, by mail or other means made available by the department, to the department all of the following:
(a) A completed application in the form prescribed under sub. (5) (a).
(b) A statement that states that the information that he or she is providing in the application submitted under
par. (a) and any document submitted with the application is true and complete to the best of his or her knowledge.
(c) A license fee in an amount, as determined by the department by rule, that is equal to the cost of issuing the
license but does not exceed $37. The department shall determine the costs of issuing a license by using a 5−year planning period.
(d) A fee for a background check that is equal to the fee charged under s. 175.35 (2i).
(e) Proof of training as described under sub. (4) (a).
There is no mention of fingerprints or photograph, both of which are entre to extended databases precluded/avoided by §175.60(2m)(c) prohibiting requiring SSN.
You all should be ashamed of yourselves.
We are lucky to have a DOJ that is soooooooooooooo devoted to our best interests they work till their fingers bleed.
Mark my words. When we (finally) get our permits to exercise our Constitutional Right, in about a year and a half if we are lucky, they will be the B-E-S-T permission slips money can buy.
"Don't interfere with anything in the Constitution. That must be maintained, for it is the only safeguard of our liberties."
"Some time ago, a bunch of lefties defied the law by dancing at the Jefferson Memorial, resulting in their arrests. Last week, a bunch of them pulled the same stunt and - using patented Lefist techniques - provoked the Park Police into having to use force to arrest them."
People who sought out courses more specific to handguns shouldn't be penalized for having made that investment. There's no way the course they took could be any LESS relevant to CCW than DNR's hunter safety course. Just sayin'!
EDITED TO ADD: THE ABOVE IS NOT INTENDED IN ANYWAY TO DISRESPECT HUNTING OR DNR'S EXCELLENT SAFETY COURSE. "FIELD CARE OF HARVESTED GAME" IS SIMPLY PROVIDED AS AN EXAMPLE OF THE MANY HUNTER SAFETY COURSE TOPICS MANDATED BY DNR THAT ARE NOT RELEVANT TO PEOPLE TAKING COURSES IN ORDER TO OBTAIN A CCP.
Last edited by LaBomba; 10-02-2011 at 07:25 PM. Reason: Assisting the comprehension-impaired among us.
Hey...nobody is holding a gun to anyone's head, and forcing them to take Hunters Safety; now are they???
Or maybe your just mad because there's no "field care of sniveling Anti-hunters" ???
Bale da Hay
"Have you Spanked a leftist today; it's the Right thing to do!!!"
Within the gates before a man shall go,
(Fully warily let him watch,)
Full long let him look about him;
For little he knows where a foe may lurk,
And sit in the seats within.
Havamal (Bellows translation)
Last edited by LaBomba; 10-02-2011 at 06:21 PM. Reason: Certainty that Lurchiron wouldn't understand my snarky comment anyway.
Last edited by Interceptor_Knight; 10-02-2011 at 06:15 PM.