• 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.

News: "Proponents hope concealed carry issue finally gains approval in Wisconsin"

scm54449

Opt-Out Members
Joined
Jun 17, 2010
Messages
220
Location
Marshfield, WI

protias

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
7,308
Location
SE, WI
So who are these "majorities" Jeri? Since 48 states have conceal carry, it seems we are in the minority. Wait, since we are a minority, do we get special treatment? Like government grants?
 

MKEgal

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
4,383
Location
in front of my computer, WI
I think that overall it was a pro-rights piece.
Wish it were open to comment without subscribing to the paper!

Jerri stated a few opinions, but no facts. Those polls she talks about on the 3rd page were rigged so only their members could vote, since she didn't like getting feedback from anyone who disagreed with her.

Past polls have shown majorities don't want it
What about the landslide support for the WI Constitutional amendment that protects our RKBA? How can she ignore that public opinion?

And why should public opinion matter one whit when we're talking about restoring rights?
 

Flipper

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 21, 2009
Messages
1,140
Location
, Wisconsin, USA
(Partial quote.....Jerri stated a few opinions, but no facts. Those polls she talks about on the 3rd page were rigged so only their members could vote, since she didn't like getting feedback from anyone who disagreed with her.

What about the landslide support for the WI Constitutional amendment that protects our RKBA? How can she ignore that public opinion?

And why should public opinion matter one whit when we're talking about restoring rights?

She's been doing this for the past 15 years and no one has challenged her ....until now. The Joyce Foundation has to be concerned about getting value for their invested dollar, as well as getting worried about the increasing light being shined on their shadowy anti-Second Admendment network.
 

CalicoJack10

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
559
Location
Arbor Vitae
The truth of the matter is that I DO hope that it goes to public opinion, because teh Wisconsin Public has been showing law makers that we want this right to be constatutional since at least 15 years ago. When i turned 18 there was a vote in place to see what the people thought of concealed carry, and more than 85% of wisconsin residents were in favor. I don't think that much has changed.
 
M

McX

Guest
i was kinda hoping the title of the thread would have been Constitutional Carry, instead of just CC. Especially since alot of states even very recently have begun to discuss Constitutional Carry, when i added them up, with the ones that already are, we have the potential to have 9 Constitutional Carry states in the future, maybe this would exert pressure on Wisconsin to be right up there, instead of 200 years behind.
 

Krusty

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2010
Messages
281
Location
Trempealeau County, Wisconsin
i was kinda hoping the title of the thread would have been Constitutional Carry, instead of just CC. Especially since alot of states even very recently have begun to discuss Constitutional Carry, when i added them up, with the ones that already are, we have the potential to have 9 Constitutional Carry states in the future, maybe this would exert pressure on Wisconsin to be right up there, instead of 200 years behind.

If we were just 200 years behind, we would undoubtedly have many more rights and freedom than we do today. But the broadcasts were very easy to listen to.

On another note, lots of the permit talk centers around "proof" that someone is "proficient". I for one can produce plenty of "proof". But I also know that this is NOT what they really want. They want more tax revenue. The only "proof" that THEY will "accept" is a few, or several, U.S. GRANT pictures!

Carry On, Carry often!
 

Running Wolf

Campaign Veteran
Joined
May 10, 2009
Messages
391
Location
Corner of No and Where
"Bonavia said it might be time for new polls to show the wishes of the majority before lawmakers tackle the issue."

I would love to see a state-wide poll conducted on this topic. I'm pretty sure WAVE would be very surprised at the results . . .
 

protias

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
7,308
Location
SE, WI
"Bonavia said it might be time for new polls to show the wishes of the majority before lawmakers tackle the issue."

I would love to see a state-wide poll conducted on this topic. I'm pretty sure WAVE would be very surprised at the results . . .
74% in favor or something like that. ;)
 

Yooper

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2008
Messages
800
Location
Houghton County, Michigan, USA
The anti-gun lady essentially admitted that allowing concealed carry won't cause any issues. She stated "Individuals that carry guns don't increase public safety and they don't increase their own safety." Let's assume she's 100% correct. She didn't say that the publics, or the individuals safety is LESS because of concealed carry, only that it doesn't increase their safety.

Of course, I believe that even if (though I know it's not true) that allowing citizen to carry increased the crime rate, I'd still be in favor of it, because some bad things to happen in free countries (though I'd argue that MORE bad things happen in non-free countries, except there, the criminal is the government), and it's protected by the state and federal constitution. Assuming there wasn't any constitutional protections for carrying, if, as admitted by the anti-gun lady, that it doesn't decrease the individual or publics safety, it should still be allowed because why should something be banned, if by banning it there is no affect on crime? It's like saying that those who carry pencils in their pockets are no more safe than those who don't, even though if everyone carried pencils in their pockets there would be no more, or no less crime than what there currently is.
 
Top