CCW a Felony?

[springfield 1911]

When it comes to crime ,enforce the laws already on the books .

We don't need to keep creating laws till our rights are gone.
The problem seems to be the court system in dealing with repeat offenders - career criminals.

 

[CharleyCherokee]

The problem with your suggestion is that some places have ridiculous misdemeanors. For instance in the city I live in it is a misdemeanor to spit on the sidewalk. This is punishable by $500 and up to a year in prison. So it could happen that because I spit on the sidewalk I'm now a felon because my firearm got covered while I was getting out of the car in front of a policeman. I'm of the mind that once someone has served their time and paid their fine they should not have to continue to pay for their past mistakes. I see no reason to make CCW a felony under any circumstances.

 

[JJC]

Permit fee?

I was talking to somebody today about the possible suggested fee for a CCW permit.

This person said that the fee was too high and was not affordable.

Strange thing was I ran into this person just coming out of a store with two cartons of cigarettes and a case of beer.

This person was somewhat angry with me when I suggested that they give up smoking for a week or two and the fee would be covered.

It all comes down to priorities.

JMHO

JJC

 

[jrclen]

We have enough felonies on the books now. None of which seems to be reducing crime. I see this law being used against otherwise law abiding citizens rather than against criminals. Let's just enforce the laws we already have.

 

[BROKENSPROKET]

I was talking to somebody today about the possible suggested fee for a CCW permit.

This person said that the fee was too high and was not affordable.

Strange thing was I ran into this person just coming out of a store with two cartons of cigarettes and a case of beer.

This person was somewhat angry with me when I suggested that they give up smoking for a week or two and the fee would be covered.

It all comes down to priorities.

JMHO

JJC

Anyone who smokes or drinks should not complain about a $50 fee. But realize $50 for some will not mean giving up alcohol and nicotine for a time, but food or clothing for themselves and thier children. How about a senior citizen that already has to choose between food or perscriptions. That is why I want the permit fee waived for anyone that qualifies for public assistance programs.

 

[BROKENSPROKET]

Not to be too critical since you admit to still be developing your thoughts on this, but let me get this straight. Someone who has said on this forum that they will support recalling the governor unless the governor signs a constitutional carry bill (whether or not the legislature even passes one) now wants to make the exact same act a felony for certain non-felons?

I think this illustrates an important phenomena. The "political continuum" is really a circle. The most liberty minded of us are often the most likely to become the worst authoritarians (myself included). I have noticed that in other permit states you are most likely to be challenged for your permit by another permit holder (since we know best what to look for). I think that this is an excellent reminder that we will all need to be on guard not to become the enemies of other peaceable people’s freedoms once we finally obtain our own.

Also related to the above, I hope that you decide to give Governor Walker a pass on all this assuming that he signs the current substituted bill. It could simply be that our pro-gun elected officials sincerely believe that the quickest way for us to get constitutional carry is through a two step process by passing the best possible permit bill now (which also improves open carry) and come back for constitutional carry in the near future. Please also give some thought to this.

Walker has done absolutely great things for the future of the state of Wisconsin, to the point that I would call him a hero. But, I will not simply give Walker a pass on this issue becasue of that. I don't feel that he has earned enough political points to be the allocator of Constitutional Rights. I have aproximately 6 months to contemplate this. I gave my word and it will be very difficult for me to retract from that. It may come down to desperately wishing I never see a Recall Walker petition because I don't want to sign it, but if I am asked, I will becasue I said I would. If anyone can get Gov. Scott Walker on record saying that he may publicly support Constitutional Carry in a year or two after the anti-gun liberals see the blood won't be running in the streetsor something like that I would be inclined to change my mind. I swear this, Wisconsin will not be the 49th state to get Constitutional Carry.

Chief Flynn is a piece of **** but I have profound respect for Sheriff Clarke. I want them to have the tools to go after gangbangers while protecting and advancing the law-abiding citizens Constitutional Rights.

The conversation now needs to be how do we give law enforcement the tools to go after criminals and getting Constitutional Carry. Constitutional Carry in the purest sense creates a greater burden on law enforcement which gives criminals an advantage. There has to be a way for anyone that can legally posses a firearm to carry one open or concealed without a permit and give law enforcement tools to reduce and deter gang activity. We have to come up with better solutions for law enforcement than the anti-gun liberals.

I would love to flood Milwaukee with permit holders and watch crime drop. Then we can make the arguement from a Wisconsin experience. Permits didn't reduce crime. Guns in the hands of citizens did. Criminals will realize that the consequences are now much greater. The question won't be "will I get caught" or "will I get convicted", but "will I survive my attempt to commit a crime". Now I am singing to the choir. I'll shut up now.

 

[Aknazer]

I would just like to point out that CCW=Concealed Carry of a Weapon, and the definition of a "Weapon" is any item that can be used offensive or defensively to harm another. Which means that one could get hit with a CCW charge for something like carrying a knife in their pocket (and really, most people do carry pocket knives) along with any other item the person might have for defensive use. Personally I find it too vague and rather stupid. Another law also isn't going to stop criminals, which means it just becomes another law to be potentially used against LACs. Instead the initial laws should be strong enough rather than adding on redundent additional charges such as these.

In regards to felons, either they should be "rehabilitated" and get all of their rights back, or they are too dangerous for society and shouldn't be released from prison. Though for that to work the system would need to work towards rehabilitating people, targeting the proper drivers of crime, and things to disuade people from crime (such as more death penalties instead of life in prison)

The conversation now needs to be how do we give law enforcement the tools to go after criminals and getting Constitutional Carry. Constitutional Carry in the purest sense creates a greater burden on law enforcement which gives criminals an advantage. There has to be a way for anyone that can legally posses a firearm to carry one open or concealed without a permit and give law enforcement tools to reduce and deter gang activity. We have to come up with better solutions for law enforcement than the anti-gun liberals.

Unless a crime has been commited there is no law to enforce. Once a crime has been commited then the cops should go after the person who commited the crime. The punishment for that crime should be strong enough to disuade repeat offenders. Making additional laws for the sole intent of increasing the punishment of the initial law doesn't do anything except make it easier to catch otherwise LACs and increase the whole "police state" issue. One example would be the "tool" of no-knock warrants. Originally designed to prevent people from destroying evidence, they are now being used more and more in cases where they aren't even needed. If police need a better tool I would say give them a three-strike system for gang bangers where if you get 3 strikes for gang related activities you get executed.

 

[MKEgal]

If police need a better tool I would say give them a three-strike system for gang bangers where if you get 3 strikes for gang related activities you get executed.

There has to be a way for anyone that can legally posses a firearm to carry one open or concealed without a permit and give law enforcement tools to reduce and deter gang activity.

I was curious (those who know me are now saying "uh oh"), so I went poking through the WI statutes to see what they said about "gangs".
Going by the letter of the law, the protestors who occupied & damaged the Capitol could be considered a gang.

939.22(9)
"Criminal gang" means an ongoing organization, association or group of 3 or more persons, whether formal or informal, that has as one of its primary activities the commission of one or more of the criminal acts... specified in s. 939.22 (21) (a) to (s);
that has a common name or a common identifying sign or symbol;
and whose members individually or collectively engage in or have engaged in a pattern of criminal gang activity.

939.22(21)(m) Criminal damage to property, as prohibited in s. 943.01

943.01 Damage to property
943.01(2)(e) The property damaged is on state-owned land and is listed on the registry under sub. (5).
943.01(5) The department of natural resources shall maintain a registry of prominent features in the landscape of state-owned land. To be included on the registry, a feature must have significant value to the people of this state.

Betcha the Capitol is on that list... Only argument is whether the damage is a 'primary activity'.

Criminals will realize that the consequences are now much greater. The question won't be "will I get caught" or "will I get convicted", but "will I survive my attempt to commit a crime".

AMEN!
Wonder how many criminals being shot it will take before they wise up & only attack each other?

 

[KBCraig]

As they would call it at northeastshooters.com, this is an "out yourself thread".

If you believe any free adult who is not currently behind bars should be debarred the right to keep and bear, you've outed yourself.

If you keep adding further restrictions where you think it would be a good idea to restrict people from owning, keeping, or bearing, you're just digging the "out yourself" hole deeper.

No law has ever prevented anything; laws can only forbid it. Laws prohibiting criminals from carrying guns do not prevent that from actually happening.

News flash: laws only affect those who obey them.

Next news flash: most "felons" have never harmed anyone. But, thanks to the Wars on (Some) Substances, millions of people who have never harmed nor threatened anyone have found themselves unable to legally use arms to protect themselves. The police have no duty to protect them either.

If it's your position that such defenseless people should be defenseless, you've outed yourself.

 

[BROKENSPROKET]

I was curious (those who know me are now saying "uh oh"), so I went poking through the WI statutes to see what they said about "gangs".
Going by the letter of the law, the protestors who occupied & damaged the Capitol could be considered a gang.

Betcha the Capitol is on that list... Only argument is whether the damage is a 'primary activity'.

I like your spin.

AMEN!
Wonder how many criminals being shot it will take before they wise up & only attack each other?

The truth is whatever tools Law Enforcement has will not prevent crime nearly as much as an armed citizenery.

Lest I advocate the culling of violent criminals through self-defense. No repeat offender and no burden on tax-payers in these tough economic times.

 

[McX]

Strange thing was I ran into this person just coming out of a store with two cartons of cigarettes and a case of beer.

now there's an arguement for CC if i ever saw one; protecting valuable consumer comodities!

 

[GlockRDH]

there are to many laws that are only used as 'tools' when it comes to conviction and enforcement...make the 'permit' and 'training' part of that.... someone gets caught committing a crime with a firearm and they HAVE NOT had 'training' nor a 'permit' use THIS as the enhancer...thus leaving EVERYONE else alone...

 

[davegran]

there are to many laws that are only used as 'tools' when it comes to conviction and enforcement...make the 'permit' and 'training' part of that.... someone gets caught committing a crime with a firearm and they HAVE NOT had 'training' nor a 'permit' use THIS as the enhancer...thus leaving EVERYONE else alone...

So the young, single mom who has her Grampa's 1911 from WWII and can't afford a permit and training and has to work 2cnd shift in a bad part of town is either without protection when she gets out of work, or ends up with the same severity of penalty as her attacker? I don't think so we want that to happen, do we?

 

[paul@paul-fisher.com]

There are already laws on the books that apply to possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime that state "Whether or not the firearm is used to assist in the commission of said crime"

Adding more won't do any good.

I believe Flynn's point and while I'd rather not agree with him, there aren't mandatory sentences for the law. What he says he want, and what I think would actually be better are two separate thing. He wants a new law with a minimum sentence for unlicensed cc. What I would most likely agree to (have to think about unintended consequences) is to change the enhancement law to include minimum sentences.

As I told Kedzie, Nass and August yesterday, carrying a gun, by itself, should NEVER be a felony. Carrying a gun while doing some other crime should be no more than an enhancer.

 

[jrclen]

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

And now we are demanding new felonies concerning these infringements? Look how far we have come. :banghead:

 

[Flipper]

I am also trying to work it out in my head, but I'm not particularly sympathetic to the idea of making CCW a felony for anyone who does not possess a permit.

First, it enshrines the idea of PERMITTED concealed care ONLY. This may create a psychological barrier among legislators that will make it difficult to EVER establish constitutional carry in the future. They will say, "What? You want us to recognize as a constitutional right something we currently consider a felony??" As a potential obstacle to future constitutional carry, I object to it.

Secondly, weapons-- guns in particular-- are already demonized enough in the heads of many people. This will only increase the perception of weapons as something evil.

To my thinking it is a step in the wrong direction. Anything inspired by Chief Ed Flynn, and his Massachusetts police state mentality, ought to be examined very carefully and with a huge dose of skepticism.

The only acceptable form of this law to me would be to make it a felony to conceal a gun by a person who is not legally able to possess a firearm. That way they can pile another felony charge on top of what is already a felony. That wouldn't particularly bother me because it isn't a way to come down hard on law-abiding people.

Very much agree here. Flynn is interested in making legal carry as difficult as possible while getting to prone law bidding gun carriers and take their right to carry and other rights forever away.

 

[lockman]

OK, I am going in 2 different directions. Shotgun, what do you think?

First Direction:
Waive the permitting fee and background check fee for anyone on Foodshare, with dependants of Badgercare, etc... any program that has income eligability limits. Also anyone on VA Benifits.

Second Direction:
Make CCW without a permit a Forfeiture by anyone without a criminal record and without criminal intent.

If without criminal intent a civil fine similar to a parking ticket would be more in order.

Make CCW without a permit a Felony by anyone previously convicted of a Class A, B, or C Misdemeanor.

Still making a felony out of previous non-criminal or quasi-criminal behavior that would not prohibit the possession of firearms .

Make CCW without a permit a Felony by anyone who uses a firearm in the commission of any Misdemeanor or Felony.

Now this one puts the burden on an offender who is committing a criminal offense with the firearm.

Make CCW without a permit a Felony by anyone who possesses a firearm during the commission of any Misdemeanor or Felony.

Not merely possess, but USE!. With the laws on the books today, federal and state I can see the potential to be nabbed on a misdemeanor, perhaps DWLS, and get a felony for ccw, not acceptable.

In light of a good Castle Doctrine or Stand Your Ground legislation to protect victimns to use weapons in self-defense, this makes sense to me. But if anyone wants to pick at it, please do.

I want my position to be well reasoned and articulated, because I am going to take my tent to Madison and establish a suburb to Walkerville and call it Fitzwalkerstan, and become a full time lobbyist for a week on this issue.

Response is in bold itallics within the quote.

 

[Drakon]

Make CCW without a permit a Felony by anyone previously convicted of a Class A, B, or C Misdemeanor.

Make CCW without a permit a Felony by anyone who uses a firearm in the commission of any Misdemeanor or Felony.

Make CCW without a permit a Felony by anyone who possesses a firearm during the commission of any Misdemeanor or Felony.

FYI.....A Disorderly Conduct charge can be classified a Class B Misdemeanor. Under this logic you would be charged with a felony simply for carrying.

 

[jrclen]

It's been mentioned in this thread already, but this is a trap. And our so called gun rights advocates here are walking right into it. Making concealed carry without a permit a felony will make it much harder to get constitutional carry in the future. Anti CC Luther Olsen set the stage for this with his statement on the day SB93 passed the committee. Chief Flynn, also is pushing for this. That alone should run a large red flag up the pole.

 

[oak1971]

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

And now we are demanding new felonies concerning these infringements? Look how far we have come. :banghead:

Nowhere in the Constitution does it grant the government the power to suspend the Constitutional rights of its people, be they criminals or not.