CCW Passes the Senate!!

Maybe this is me being a party pooper, or a purist. But it is not constitutional carry, and while it is a step forward, it is not a complete win. It is just a step in the rite direction. There is still a lot of fight left, and I for one will not be taking a back seat and waiting to see what happened. I will keep pushing until we have the freedoms that we have been fighting for.

So you can sit back and cheer for the little bit we have gotten, but keep in mind as you sit with the false glory that there is a lot more to come.

Grant Guess said:

Has anyone heard any inklings as to what the intent is of any of the GOP in the Assy??

Click to expand...

I think there were 17 assemblymen who were cosponsors of the original SB93.

CalicoJack10 said:

Maybe this is me being a party pooper, or a purist. But it is not constitutional carry, and while it is a step forward, it is not a complete win. It is just a step in the rite direction. There is still a lot of fight left, and I for one will not be taking a back seat and waiting to see what happened. I will keep pushing until we have the freedoms that we have been fighting for.

So you can sit back and cheer for the little bit we have gotten, but keep in mind as you sit with the false glory that there is a lot more to come.

Click to expand...

I completely agree. I am not happy about the permit or required training, and of course, the restrictions.

Congrats on getting this through the senate. I know it's not the best bill, but it is a lot better than what the vast majority of the states have. And, at least it's ALL a step forward, and there were no steps back in the bill (such as restricting OC).

I just wanted to remind you all, to please check with tribal governments before carrying on tribal land. Being sovereign nations, they can refuse to recognize your carry permits, and perhaps even carrying without a permit. Several tribes in the SW corner of the country refuse to recognize carry permits. From what I understand, as long as you remain on a road traveling though, they can't do anything because they are considered state/county property, but if you were to be on land within the tribal boundary, they you're subject to their laws.

This "was" the assembly bill and we should pick this apart to see what they may decide to add that is more restrictive yet: https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2011/related/proposals/ab126

There are no amendments pending that i can identify and I am not sure if they will allow them on the floor...?

CalicoJack10 said:

Maybe this is me being a party pooper, or a purist. But it is not constitutional carry, and while it is a step forward, it is not a complete win. It is just a step in the rite direction. There is still a lot of fight left, and I for one will not be taking a back seat and waiting to see what happened. I will keep pushing until we have the freedoms that we have been fighting for.

So you can sit back and cheer for the little bit we have gotten, but keep in mind as you sit with the false glory that there is a lot more to come.

Click to expand...

+100 right there.

I suspect that some in the Assembly will try to tack on similar amendments that were tried in the senate. However, I did not see anything that sent up a red flag regarding the assembly bill AB126 compared to SB93 that passed yesterday.

http://www.nraila.org/media/PDFs/summaryofbills2011RTC3.pdf

CalicoJack10 said:

Maybe this is me being a party pooper, or a purist. But it is not constitutional carry, and while it is a step forward, it is not a complete win. It is just a step in the rite direction. There is still a lot of fight left, and I for one will not be taking a back seat and waiting to see what happened. I will keep pushing until we have the freedoms that we have been fighting for.

So you can sit back and cheer for the little bit we have gotten, but keep in mind as you sit with the false glory that there is a lot more to come.

Click to expand...

I believe we all agree with you. Even the NRA, while taking credit, said it was a PPA.

Yooper said:

Congrats on getting this through the senate. I know it's not the best bill, but it is a lot better than what the vast majority of the states have. And, at least it's ALL a step forward, and there were no steps back in the bill (such as restricting OC).

I just wanted to remind you all, to please check with tribal governments before carrying on tribal land. Being sovereign nations, they can refuse to recognize your carry permits, and perhaps even carrying without a permit. Several tribes in the SW corner of the country refuse to recognize carry permits. From what I understand, as long as you remain on a road traveling though, they can't do anything because they are considered state/county property, but if you were to be on land within the tribal boundary, they you're subject to their laws.

Click to expand...

I felt this was worth repeating. If you think school zones and 1,000 foot perimeters were conflicting to define and avoid just wait until you try to identify the boundaries of The Nations and associated tribal lands. You may or may not be okay on limited access freeways, but open access roadways and stopping for gas/food/bathroom/fireworks/casino could potentially lead to a few issues. And I'm thinking the signage requirement may not apply.

As to the pending permit system, I'm still debating if it is constitutional or subjegative (sp?). I'll wait and see for now, no cause to celebrate as things stand. I won't hold a party just because the school bully stopped taking my lunch money. (Don't worry if you don't understand my analogy, I'm probably three steps to the side with my viewpoint.)

The Assembly will be under pressure from the senate, the Governor & their constuents to pass SB93 like it is currently. I expect it to pass the Assembly in it's current state. Then we will get our Permits to carry concealed by late October / Early November..

Glock34 said:

The Assembly will be under pressure from the senate, the Governor & their constuents to pass SB93 like it is currently. I expect it to pass the Assembly in it's current state. Then we will get our Permits to carry concealed by late October / Early November..

Click to expand...

I agree.

It is not a pefect billbut it is a good bill. In fact a very good bill compared to the restrictions in many "Shall issue" states. It is a very good first step. I think we can live with it until we finally get true constitutional carry in the future. There is encouragement form Galloway that she isn't through with that pursuit. Even she admitted that going from strict prohibition of concealed carry to constitutional carry may have been too big a bite. other bright spots are that the bill is actually a hybred between permitted concealed carry and constitutional concealed carry. As the bill states, no permit or training is required to conceal carry in ones home, business or on ones property (land). Now that the strict prohibition of concealed carry is relaxed I think that makes the permit process subject to state supreme court scrutiny. How can the legislature say that open carry is constitutionaly protected and that concealed carry is constitutionaly protected in home, business and property but not on public territory? That does not make sense. It is on public property that the need for security and defense as protected by the constitution is most needed. It defies logic, but then again we are talking about the Wisconsin legislature. SB93 is the first step. My opinion is this bill is prime fodder for a challenge of constitutionality. Stay tuned for Act II and keep the pressure on.

Remember, Article I Section 25 does not differentiate between open carry and concealed carry only the legislature and supreme court do. Nor does the amendment caantain the prase "subject to reasonable regulation".

I'm very happy with this bill. I'm sure we will have a law on the books by then end of June.

Congratulations Wisconsin

Congratulations Wisconsin! I concur with others who believe that, while this is not Constitutional Carry, it is a step in the right direction. Having grown up and lived in Wisconsin for most of my life, I too believe that going directly to Constitutional Carry may have been a bit much for a State that has not allowed citizens to carry concealed firearms. Maybe after no episodes for a year or so, the matter can be revisited and Constitutional Carry can get the support it needs to pass. Remember that three of the other Constitutional carry States started with a permit system (AK, AZ, & WY).

Does anyone know what SB93 says about reciprocity?

jpm84092 said:

.
Does anyone know what SB93 says about reciprocity?

Click to expand...

The rumor has it that Wisconsin will recognize everybody who does not have, nor is, a yellow cat with an M-4 from Utah.:lol:

jpm84092 said:

Does anyone know what SB93 says about reciprocity?

Click to expand...

At this moment, the DOJ needs to make a list, however, the criteria is permits that require training or have optional training and the permit holder opted in.

phred said:

The rumor has it that Wisconsin will recognize everybody who does not have, nor is, a yellow cat with an M-4 from Utah.:lol:

Click to expand...

dont mess with kitty

I have read the legislative summary of SB93 as amended.

Link: https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2011/related/lcamendmemo/sb93

It is in layman English. Having an out of state permit qualifies as training.

WI DOJ shall compile a list of States that require a background check, or for whom the applicant had opted in and submitted to a background check. These will be the States that WI will recognize. UT is one of the "super six" in the eyes of BATF because UT repeats background checks every 24 hours.

I have posted separately to my CFP class. And, once the Bill becomes law, I can travel back to WI and conduct the NRA Pistol course (again at dirt cheap fees for members of WI Carry).

the well-armed kitty said:

Remember that three of the other Constitutional carry States started with a permit system (AK, AZ, & WY).
Does anyone know what SB93 says about reciprocity?

Click to expand...

Anyone know where to look for info on how long it took those 3 states to get CC?

As for reciprocity, as it stands now WI will recognize every permit.
That could change.
What annoys me is that on the effective date of the law, out-of-state residents will be able to carry concealed, but WI residents have to wait for their permits.
Seems lopsided.

YEA! HIP HIP HURRAH! Looks like the P.P.A. will finally become law, The old bone of the Old Guard and N.R.A. can finally be buried they no longer have a fight over what had been lost X 3. There is a porterhouse out there that we have been waving right in front of them perhaps now they will see it.

I remember the first time I open carried in public, The true freedom that I felt , I'm torn between giving up that feeling forever never to be regained or succumb to the permit because of the school zone transport without a permit, Now if your vehicle becomes part of being your castle and don't have to do the dance. Oh well.

Glock34 said:

The Assembly will be under pressure from the senate, the Governor & their constuents to pass SB93 like it is currently. I expect it to pass the Assembly in it's current state. Then we will get our Permits to carry concealed by late October / Early November..

Click to expand...

i agree with that as well