Hearings in July, 2012 on Permanent Concealed Carry Rules

We should put our heads together and decide what, if anything we want changed about the permanent administrative rules (JUS 17 & JUS 18), that implement some of the statutes changed/created by WI 11 ACT35 (Concealed Carry/ Personal Protection Act).


There is info about this on the LEGISLATIVE tab, of the DOJ Concealed Carry Web page, http://www.doj.state.wi.us/dles/cib/ConcealedCarry/ConcealedCarry.asp.

-------------------------------------------

It includes information about the proposed permanent rules, as well as the hearings that will be held on them.

These are the proposed permanent rules. http://www.doj.state.wi.us/dles/cib/ConcealedCarry/proposed-permanent-rules-2012.pdf

The current emergency rules prepared Nov. 8, 2011 are:
http://www.doj.state.wi.us/dles/cib/ConcealedCarry/jus17-jus18-jcrar-20111108.pdf

Economic & Fiscal Impact, Problems addressed by the rule, Public comments received before May 4, 2012, Comparison with approached being used in neighboring states, are here: http://www.doj.state.wi.us/dles/cib/ConcealedCarry/license-authorizing-ccw.pdf


Here is the hearing notice and an analysis of the program status in Wisconsin and surrounding states.
http://www.doj.state.wi.us/dles/cib/ConcealedCarry/notice-rulemaking-hearings.pdf

DOJ will hold public hearings at the times and places noted below.

Date: Monday, July 16, 2012
Time: 10:00 a.m.
Location: Superior Police Department
1316 North Fourteenth Street
Superior, WI 54880
http://mapq.st/PElgYB

Date: Tuesday, July 24, 2012
Time: 11:00 a.m.
Location: Green Bay Police Training Center
307 South Adams Street
Green Bay, WI 54301
http://mapq.st/Nd88EU

Date: Wednesday, July 25, 2012
Time: 10:00 a.m.
Location: Waukesha County Technical College
Business Building Room B130/B140
800 Main Street
Pewaukee, WI 53072
http://mapq.st/LKTKnj

------------------------------------------

Comments on the emergency and permanent rules should be submitted by no later than 4 p.m. on August 1, 2012, and can be faxed to (608) 267-2223 to the attention of David Zibolski, emailed to zibolskidb@doj.state.wi.us, or mailed to the attention of David Zibolski at the Wisconsin Department of Justice, P.O. Box 7857, Madison, WI 53707-7857.

Here are some of the changes, that I have seen, from the current emergency rules, to the proposed permanent rules. If I have overlooked any change, make a post, and I will update this post #2. Additions/Changes are in bold.


CHAPTER JUS 17: LICENSES TO CARRY CONCEALED WEAPONS

17.03 Definitions

(7) “Firearms safety or training course” means a course of instructor-led training that provides a certificate or affidavit of successful completion satisfying the content requirements of s. Jus 17.05(2)(a) and that, at a minimum, instructs on, and practices the student’s comprehension of, firearm safety rules; safe firearm and ammunition use, handling, transport, and storage; legally permissible possession, transportation, and use of firearms, including use of deadly force; and techniques for avoiding and controlling violent confrontations.

(8) “Instructor-led” means training that is conducted face-to-face individually or in groups with an instructor-student ratio that does not exceed 50 students per instructor and in which instructors actively guide students through each lesson, answer questions, facilitate discussion, and provide feedback on activities and/or assignments. Learner-led or self-directed learning—the delivery of learning experiences to independent learners who lead and manage their own experience, delivered via web pages, multimedia presentations, computer applications, online presentations, or similar methods—is not instructor-led.

(12) “National or state organization that certifies firearms instructors” means any association, partnership, corporation, or limited liability company that is registered, certified, or has an appointed agent on file with the department of financial institutions or has equivalent legal recognition in another state; that customarily or regularly provides training and certification for firearms instructors; and that requires its certified instructors to demonstrate the ability and knowledge required to teach a firearms safety or training course, as defined in sub. (7).


Jus 17.05 Training and documentation requirements.

(1)...
(i) A copy of a DD Form 214, “Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty,” issued by the United States Department of Defense, showing that the applicant has received an honorable discharge or a general discharge under honorable conditions from the United States armed forces, reserves, or national guard after completion of basic or officer training or a certificate of completion of basic or officer training with a service record of successful completion of small arms training and certification.

(2)(a) Except as otherwise provided in sub. (1), for purposes of satisfying the requirements of sub. (1)(b), (c), (d), (e), (f), or (g), a certificate or affidavit supplied by the instructor or organization providing a firearms safety or training course documenting that the applicant has successfully completed a firearms safety or training course must include all of the following information:
1. The applicant’s name.
2. The name of the firearms safety or training course.
3. The date on which the applicant completed the firearms safety or training course.
4. The name of the instructor who taught the firearms safety or training course to the applicant and the name of the agency or organization that certified the instructor.

(b) In addition to a certificate or affidavit meeting the requirements of par. (a), the documentation of training submitted by an applicant must include evidence sufficient to establish that the course completed by the applicant met the minimal instructional requirements described in s. Jus. 17.03(7). Evidence sufficient to establish that the course satisfied the requirements of s. Jus. 17.03(7) shall include one of the following:

1. A signed statement by the instructor who taught the firearms safety or training course to the applicant affirming that the course completed by the applicant was a firearms safety and training course as defined in s. Jus. 17.03(7); or <-- typo omission by DOJ

2. Information on the certificate or affidavit described in sub. (2)(a) indicating that the firearms safety and training course included instruction required by s. Jus. 17.03(7); or

3. A signed statement by the applicant as part of the application affirming that the applicant successfully completed a firearms safety or training course and describing the scope and contents of that course in a manner sufficient to determine whether the course included instruction required by s. Jus. 17.03(7).


Jus 17.08 Changes or updates to licenses.

(1) CHANGE OF ADDRESS. Written notice of a change of address from a licensee pursuant to s. 175.60(11)(b)1., Stats., shall be submitted on a form provided by the department. Upon receiving such notice of a change of address, the department shall update its license records with the new information. At the request of a licensee whose address has changed, the department shall issue the licensee a new license document containing the new address.

(2) NAME CHANGE. No later than 30 days after legally changing his or her name, a licensee shall provide the department with written notification of the name change on a form provided by the department. Upon receiving such notification, the department shall process the name change as a new application under s. Jus 17.04 and shall conduct a background check of the licensee under the new name. If the background check shows that s. 175.60(3)(b), (c), (d), or (e) applies to the licensee, the department shall revoke or suspend the licensee’s previous license under s. 175.60(14)(a) or (am), Stats., as appropriate. If the background check shows that s. 175.60(3)(b), (c), (d), and (e), Stats., do not apply to the licensee, the department shall issue the licensee a new license document containing the licensee’s updated information. If the licensee receives a new license from the department under this section, the licensee shall immediately deliver his or her previous license to the department either personally or by certified mail.

-------------------------------

At this time, I have not reviewed the proposed permanent rules for changes in:

CHAPTER JUS 18: CERTIFICATION OF FORMER FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS.

i think a CCL holder should be able to drive on school grounds for any legitimate purpose , with a loaded and concealed handgun in the car so long as the gun does not leave the car.

make it the same rules as other employers , so that teachers with a CCL can carry to school and leave their gun in the car like any other employee , without stopping a block away to unload and put the gun in a locked case

or so that parents can drop off children in the designated drop off areas in the parking lot, and not curb side.


simply removing the holstered gun and placing it in a compartment of the car or under the seat out of sight is better than removing , and unloading , the less handling the better.

i wonder why no hearing in south west or west Wisconsin ?

The Administrative rules, are supposed to fill out details, and provide procedures to implement the statutes.

They are not allowed to amend the statutes.

E6chevron said:

The Administrative rules, are supposed to fill out details, and provide procedures to implement the statutes.

They are not allowed to ammend the statutes.

Click to expand...

Apparently they believe that they can circumvent the Statutes by requiring more than intended regarding training. Our "friends" do not seem so friendly.

E6chevron said:

If I have overlooked any change, make a post, and I will update this post #2. Additions/Changes are in bold.

Click to expand...

“Instructor-led” means training that is conducted face-to-face individually or in
groups with an instructor-student ratio that does not exceed 50 students per instructor and in
which instructors actively guide students through each lesson, answer questions, facilitate
discussion, and provide feedback on activities and/or assignments. Learner-led or self-directed
learning—the delivery of learning experiences to independent learners who lead and manage
their own experience, delivered via web pages, multimedia presentations, computer applications,
online presentations, or similar methods—is not instructor-led.

Click to expand...

GreenCountyPete said:

i wonder why no hearing in south west or west Wisconsin ?

Click to expand...

Its a JCRAR Hearing where only those that can speak are 'invited'the to do so. This is dialogue between our legislators, who pass the laws, and the ageny heads that are charged with implenting them. OUR dialogue is with our legislators.

The current emergency rules, have a JUS 17.03(9). It's equivalent in the proposed permanent rules is JUS 17.03(8) The phrase:

individually or in groups with an instructor-student ratio that does not exceed 50 students per instructor and

Click to expand...

has been inserted into the proposed permanent rules. It was not in the current emergency rules.

----------------------------------------------------

BROKENSPROKET said:

Its a JCRAR Hearing where only those that can speak are 'invited'the to do so. This is dialogue between our legislators, who pass the laws, and the ageny heads that are charged with implenting them. OUR dialogue is with our legislators.

Click to expand...

No, that is not what the hearing notice says.

http://www.doj.state.wi.us/dles/cib/ConcealedCarry/notice-rulemaking-hearings.pdf
The Hearing notice states:

DOJ will hold public hearings at the times and places noted below.

Click to expand...

I plan to attend and testify at the meeting Wednesday July 25, 2012 in Pewaukee.

Would be nice if we can have a lunch afterwards in the area.

Date: Wednesday, July 25, 2012
Time: 10:00 a.m.
Location: Waukesha County Technical College
Business Building Room B130/B140
800 Main Street
Pewaukee, WI 53072
http://mapq.st/LKTKnj

E6chevron said:

The current emergency rules, have a JUS 17.03(9). It's equivalent in the proposed permanent rules is JUS 17.03(8) The phrase:
individually or in groups with an instructor-student ratio that does not exceed 50 students per instructor and
has been inserted into the proposed permanent rules. It was not in the current emergency rules.

Click to expand...

Does that mean I should hurry up and take one of those awesome 2000-person WI Carry classes before they ban them?

A CC license would be worth it just to avoid the $13 background check fee, if that were a rule. But that doesn't sound like something that can be inputted in this hearing.

DangerClose said:

Does that mean I should hurry up and take one of those awesome 2000-person WI Carry classes before they ban them?

A CC license would be worth it just to avoid the $13 background check fee, if that were a rule. But that doesn't sound like something that can be inputted in this hearing.

Click to expand...

Since this is regarding DOJ Administrative Rules, it is not something which would be discussed as that would require a WI Statute change.

DangerClose said:

Does that mean I should hurry up and take one of those awesome 2000-person WI Carry classes before they ban them?

A CC license would be worth it just to avoid the $13 background check fee, if that were a rule. But that doesn't sound like something that can be inputted in this hearing.

Click to expand...

DangerClose,
Where have 2,000-person Wi Carry classes been held in the past?

Under the proposed permanent rule, a minimum of 40 instructors would be required for a 2,000 person class.

https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/statutes/statutes/175/35
You are correct, the current statute: WI 175.35  Waiting period for purchase of handguns, does not exempt a CCL holder from the "Firearms restrictions record search" requirement for a handgun purchase. A different series of rules are involved in implementing that statute.

E6chevron said:

DangerClose,
Where have 2,000-person Wi Carry classes been held in the past?.

Click to expand...

I thought they had a few of them already, somewhere around Milwaukee. They're in posts around here somewhere.

DangerClose said:

I thought they had a few of them already, somewhere around Milwaukee. They're in posts around here somewhere.

Click to expand...

March 18th, Serb Hall, Milwaukee. The capacity of that hall was around 1000-1100. It looked full to me. WCI has had nothing else even close to that number at any other training class.

Would like to hear from those that attend the hearing in Superior, Monday July 16th.

Also, if you have input, either send a coment to DOJ, or attend the hearings Tuesday July 24th in Green Bay, or Wednesday July 25th in Pewaukee.

The republicans that we supported and that fought for us initially are already being brow-beaten down and forcing more rules on us. It won't be anymore than 5 years until WI has CC legislation like NY. Thank you legislators for fighting for liberty and defending the Constitution. </sarcasm>

Anmut,

The public hearing in Green Bay is probably closest to you, but you can also send in your comments. Be sure to be specific as to what areas of which subsection/paragraph you are objecting to, and how you would like it changed.

The legislators have already rejected some of the rules that were in the original proposed temporary emergency rules, and these portions removed, have not been put back in these proposed permanent rules.

FYI for anyone going to the Pewaukee (WCTC) meeting, they are a criminal-protective zone.
Leave your personal defense devices in your cars.
IIRC, the business building is attached to & to the right of the main entrance.

GreenCountyPete said:

or so that parents can drop off children in the designated drop off areas in the parking lot, and not curb side.

Click to expand...

Esp. since it's actually illegal under WI law for anyone not driving a school bus to stop along the curb nearest a school during school hours. Not that it usually gets you anything more than a stink-eye & yelled at by the teacher on bus patrol.

Plankton said:

March 18th, Serb Hall, Milwaukee. The capacity of that hall was around 1000-1100. It looked full to me.

Click to expand...

I counted rows x seats, added a bit for the people along the walls, & estimated 800.
Under the proposed rules, that would take 16 instructors. I think they had 4.
Somewhere around here I have a picture of someone sleeping in the back of the room.

The Green Bay hearing went well.
4 instructors including myself along with several others attending spoke out against the more stringent proposed increased training component of the Admin rules and objected to the DOJ attempting a back-door change to the Statute. Only 2 people who spoke supported more training and neither recognized that Admin rules are not supposed to supersede State Statute.

The Pewaukee DOJ rules hearing was pretty well attended.

The DOJ representative made it clear that the 50 students per instructor portion of the proposed permanent rule was a ratio. 10 instructors could teach a class of 500 students. He also mentioned that there would be several months interval between acceptance of the permanent rules and their effective date. This would allow people who had received training to get their applications in an approved under the current emergency rules.

Many people making comments wanted a range time requirement, and pointed out that military and hunting training, did not stress Use of Force, or Self Defense training. A few seemed to feel that uniform testing should be in place to verify that the applicant had learned what was presented in the training. One person felt that mental testing should be involved before issuing a Concealed Carry License. It was pointed out that this is not required for automotive driver's licenses, and many more are killed in this state by cars than by guns. Also, that driving a car is a privilege, carrying a gun is a right.