What if we have to settle for Permit Carry?

Dear Friends,

Please keep in mind that when it comes to allowing the right to carry a concealed firearm for lawful purposes of protecting self and others, Wisconsin is one of two absolute "right denied" States. Any move toward getting concealed carry is a good move.

I absolutely believe that permit-free carry (with optional permit for those who travel or to account for Federal GFSZ problems) is the right way to go. But, I agree with another member who believes this may be DOA for this legislative session. We can always press the fight closer to election time when the legislators will be all ears.

So, a permit system that is "shall issue" would be a major step for Wisconsin - and a step in the right direction. Thus, it might be a good idea to keep the "tax" limited to the actual cost of administering the program. As for training, the fact is that many States base reciprocity on what is involved in another State's permit process. Utah permits are accepted by so many States because 1) - Utah does daily background checks. 2) Utah requires firearm familiarity and safety training, and 3) Utah requires training in UT and Federal Firearms Law.

So, with the costs of training come the benefits of reciprocity. For those who do not travel, this is unimportant. For others, it is extremely important - especially those who travel to Maine, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Florida, Michigan, and Colorado. These States only recognize permits from Residents of the States they honor.

To my friends who will not get a WI permit "out of principle", please reconsider. Which is the higher principle - not getting a permit out of one principle, or, accepting the move in the right direction and going out into the day to day world knowing you can lawfully carry a firearm for the purpose of protection of self and others?

I know that I will feel safer in WI when WI gets concealed carry, whether by permit or permit-free. I will feel less safe if WI ultimately goes with a permit system and those who could get a permit do not do so out of "principle".

This should not even be a discussion, With Rights, Guaranteed under Federal and State constitutions come Risks, Our Founding Fathers understood this, It's called Freedom. What we are looking at is pay to play.

JPM84092 Thank you, will consider and weigh though the thought of it would be like taking a deep breath while under water.

To answer the original question, if WI goes to a permit system, then to renew my UT permit I will have to get a WI permit.
Before that necessity is forced on me... I don't know. Probably would.
Depends on how the other laws are being changed, esp. car carry.
I prefer to aim for Constitutional Carry.
Failing that, at the very least we should get recognition of any permit issued by any state for any adult, resident or not.

Teej said:

Constitutional Carry will NOT override the federal GFSZA... If we don't get WI permits, we don't get to go through school zones.

Click to expand...

Except unloaded & encased, as we do now. Could cause traffic tieups. And I'd want the gov't to post signs informing citizens of where their rights end, since we need to know in order to be law-abiding.
Or we could get a law passed like (MT?) saying "for the purposes of the federal "GF"SZA, anyone who is legal to posess a firearm under federal law is considered to be licensed to carry in WI".
Or we could get a sensible set of national rep's who will see that the "GF"SZ act isn't doing anything useful, & restrict it to just the buildings, or abolish it altogether.
Don't hold your breath. :uhoh:

grinner said:

Why would I be eager to participate in something I despise?

Click to expand...

Because some other states only honor home-state permits, or require a home-state permit in order to get their non-resident permit. If you travel, that can be a consideration.
Also, increasing the numbers of permit holders will show how many of us there are.
Combine that with the maintenance or decrease of rate of violent crime, & the anti's will be SOL when it comes to the next step: Constitutional Carry.
Of course, millions of dollars would have been wasted to get that far, and once the beurocracy is in place I don't see it being dissolved.

safcrkr said:

I need to carry IN my vehicle... I'm not walking to MI, nor walking much while I'm in MI, and most of my customers in MI would be unhappy with OC. Out of sight out of mind with CC.

Click to expand...

As I said above, you can still carry unloaded & encased.
Dealing with unhappy customers is another problem, which you're already facing.

I for one, will get the permit...Im anticipating that there will be a lawsuit/legal challenge to 'permitting' individuals to exercise a right...

GlockRDH said:

I for one, will get the permit...Im anticipating that there will be a lawsuit/legal challenge to 'permitting' individuals to exercise a right...

Click to expand...

Yes, but lawsuits are expensive. Constitutional Carry will be far cheaper.

MKEgal said:

As I said above, you can still carry unloaded & encased.
Dealing with unhappy customers is another problem, which you're already facing.

Click to expand...

Right now, I'm doing that in MI as well as WI. When either of these laws pass, I'll be loaded and uncased in WI. If one bill pases, I'll be loaded and uncased in WI, having to stop at the wayside just below the MI border to unload and encase my gun before crossing state lines. With the other law, I'll just keep on truckin from one state into the other. Now do you see why I want a permit, even though most here don't. That's why I back an AZ/AK style law. Most here back Vermont type law.

I've been involved with getting CC in WI since 2003. I know quite a bit about the laws in other states, as a result. I hold two permits from other states. The shall-issue permit bill that we have now pending in WI, is IMO, the 2nd best shall-issue permit law in the shall-issue states that require permits!!! Only Indiana, with a $10 lifetime permit, no training, is better. And Indiana has had shall-issue CCW since the 1970s.

If we're "stuck" with a permit law, at least it's one of the best there is.

In a perfect world, we'd get both bills to pass, so we can have both Constitutional carry and permits for those who want them for reciprocity.

However, I think most would like a couple of amendments-a Texas 30-06 signage, and the montana recognizence of legal carriers being considered permitted.

rcav8r said:

In a perfect world, we'd get both bills to pass, so we can have both Constitutional carry and permits for those who want them for reciprocity.

However, I think most would like a couple of amendments-a Texas 30-06 signage, and the montana recognizence of legal carriers being considered permitted.

Click to expand...

In a perfect world we wouldn't even be having this discussion. There'd be no such thing as a CC permit anywhere in the U.S. It'd be like Vermont from sea to shining sea, just like the 2nd amendment says.

True that!

If we get constitutional carry, fighting for and getting an optional permit system to go out of state will be exponentially easier then getting a permit system first and trying to get constitutional carry.

Getting a permit system later would be easy in my opinion (once we have carry it's just administration) and as much as I know how much you guys that travel a lot need one, I would hope you would see how fighting for constitutional carry now is more important; we may never get this chance again.

Oh and to stay on track, If we end up with the permit system then yes I will have one.

grinner said:

I'd rather get a permit from another state and use reciprocity to carry any way I want in WI.

Click to expand...

It does not work that way. WI will not recognize a permit for a WI resident unless it was issued by WI.

MKEgal said:

To answer the original question, if WI goes to a permit system, then to renew my UT permit I will have to get a WI permit.
.

Click to expand...

Only if WI begins to honor the UT permit.

Interceptor_Knight said:

It does not work that way. WI will not recognize a permit for a WI resident unless it was issued by WI.

Click to expand...

Does it read that way in the bill???? I (living in PA) can carry in PA with either my UT or my AZ permits. There is no "must have PA license to carry in PA" restriction in PA. There are states that do have it, but it is written into law.

jpm84092 said:

I know that I will feel safer in WI when WI gets concealed carry, whether by permit or permit-free. I will feel less safe if WI ultimately goes with a permit system and those who could get a permit do not do so out of "principle".

Click to expand...

Well as long as you feel safer, that's the important thing. Don't worry about my rights being trampled on. It's all about you.

And as someone who earns money from permitting systems, I'm not surprised you support them.

Interceptor_Knight said:

WI will not recognize a permit for a WI resident unless it was issued by WI.

Click to expand...

Oops... see my post #40 below. Any nonresident w/ a permit is OK, and in fact exempted from the federal "GF"SZ act. WI residents, however, must have a WI permit. :cuss:

See page 25, lines 7 & 8 of the 2033 bill (they're identical).

Unfortunately, that blanket approval of every permit, combined with WI intent to issue permits, means that some of us will be required to get a WI permit in order to renew certain licenses of our own.
If they'd just recognize any permit without trying to reinvent the wheel in WI, it'd be better.
(Still better to have Constitutional Carry, of course.)

Someone in another thread pointed out this tidbit:

they all stipulate in a statute, that either open carry or concealed carry are NOT to be considered as DC. In fact, the permit bill goes so far as to punish any LEO with a class C misdemeanor who does otherwise.

Click to expand...

grinner said:

Well as long as you feel safer, that's the important thing. Don't worry about my rights being trampled on. It's all about you.

And as someone who earns money from permitting systems, I'm not surprised you support them.

Click to expand...

Did you by chance happen to catch his fees? The lowest cost for the class I have EVER heard of. It's not like the instructor certification was free. But I'm sure he is just rolling in the dough charging so little...

Correct me if I am wrong, but to the best of my knowledge the Republican party platform as well as the NRA has endorsed Constitutional Carry; exclusively as their official stance during this round of elections and therefore legislative session.

I am not alone in my conviction that should our elected public servants (and that is all they are) deviate from their stated agenda which got them elected to serve the populous, they WILL be voted back out.

The time for accountability in public representatives is long overdue.

mrjam2jab said:

Does it read that way in the bill???? I (living in PA) can carry in PA with either my UT or my AZ permits. There is no "must have PA license to carry in PA" restriction in PA. There are states that do have it, but it is written into law.

Click to expand...

YES, it is written into the actual bill.

MKEgal said:

Not true. The 2 bills that require permits, as they stand now, would allow anyone to carry using any permit from any state. The bills are identical.
.

Click to expand...

Please read the whole actual bill people, especially if you are going to attend a hearing so that you know what you are talking about.....

If you are trying to cite something, cite the actual Statute # and not a general description of the bill. If you are a WI resident, you MUST have a WI permit....

175.60 License to carry a concealed weapon. (1) DEFINITIONS. In this
section:
(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.
(2g) CARRYING A CONCEALED WEAPON; POSSESSION AND DISPLAY OF LICENSE
DOCUMENT OR AUTHORIZATION. (a) A licensee or an out−of−state licensee may carry a
concealed weapon anywhere in this state except as provided under subs. (15m) and
(16) and ss. 943.13 (1m) (c) and (1n) and 948.605 (2) (b) 1r.

Click to expand...

bluehighways said:

Correct me if I am wrong, but to the best of my knowledge the Republican party platform as well as the NRA has endorsed Constitutional Carry; exclusively as their official stance during this round of elections and therefore legislative session.

Click to expand...

That would be news because the NRA (last I heard) was backing the permit bill and not Constitutional Carry. There is something going on in the assembly too, and it's not good. Hopefully we'll hear more soon.

Interceptor_Knight said:

YES, it is written into the actual bill.



Please read the whole actual bill people, especially if you are going to attend a hearing so that you know what you are talking about.....

If you are trying to cite something, cite the actual Statute # and not a general description of the bill. If you are a WI resident, you MUST have a WI permit....

175.60 License to carry a concealed weapon. (1) DEFINITIONS. In this
section:
(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.
(2g) CARRYING A CONCEALED WEAPON; POSSESSION AND DISPLAY OF LICENSE
DOCUMENT OR AUTHORIZATION. (a) A licensee or an out−of−state licensee may carry a
concealed weapon anywhere in this state except as provided under subs. (15m) and
(16) and ss. 943.13 (1m) (c) and (1n) and 948.605 (2) (b) 1r.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I read that merely as a definition as to an out of state permittee....as OOS permittee is mentioned throughout the statute. What I'm looking for is a section that paraphrased reads:

"Recognition.
A valid permit or license issued by another state to any
nonresident of this state shall be considered to be a valid
permit or license to carry weapons issued pursuant to this
chapter"

Oops... you're right. See page 25, lines 7 & 8, which say that WI residents must have WI permits. :cuss:
So much for relying on what they say their bill does!
(It'd help if people would give page & line references when we're discussing provisions.)

And according to pg. 26, lines 10-14, anyone who's carrying concealed off their own property must have with them both the state-issued carry permit AND another state-issued photo ID (DL or simple ID). Why not make the permission slip a photo ID itself? :banghead:

Lines 16-21, same page, require that when you're carrying concealed & a LEO "requests" to see your permit & ID you must show it. No RAS needed. :cuss:
Or maybe the fact that you're suspected to be carrying concealed, & it's a crime not to have a permit, is RAS? :cuss:

So if you refuse, would the officer think you're not carrying (because if you were carrying you'd have to show ID), or would the officer think you're carrying but breaking the law by refusing to show ID?
And how does that jive with court decisions saying that people can't be stopped just to see if they have a license for an activity, and can't be charged for refusing to ID themselves (see my sig)?

Based on their allowed time for the design of a card & application form, there's no way the paperwork would be available in less than 2 months from when the bill passes. The effective date of the bill would be 4 months after passage.
So even if this passes, our rights are on hold for at least 5 months. (They'd have 21 days to issue or deny a license once the paperwork is in.)

Pg. 31, lines 4-9 deal with an "emergency license" - someone can go to court (how long does it take to get a court hearing??) and ask a judge for an immediate license.
How much faster & simpler it would be with Constitutional Carry?!

Pg. 34, lines 22-25 talk about how a LEA can't

sort or access information regarding vehicle stops, investigations, civil or criminal offenses or other activities or other activities involving the agency based on the status as licensees of any individuals involved.

Click to expand...

I disagree with that, since there will be no way to show that people carrying legally are extremely law-abiding.
Though it seems to conflict w/ pg. 41, lines 13 & 14.

Electric weapons are only legal on your own property or if you have a license.

Pg. 56 lines 7-10 grant licensure to nonresident out-of-state license holders for the purpose of the federal "GF"SZ act. That's cool.

IF they're going to force permits on us, I want something in return.
Doing away with the waiting period (for everyone, not just permit holders) would be a good start.