A few thoughts.
First lets deconstruct Gene's "announcement"
First he says:
The good news is that legislators have come to appreciate that Constitutional carry is now and always has been the law of Wisconsin and yes, some restrictions apply.
So Gene tries to 'spin' the definition of constitutional carry meaning open-carry is constitutional carry with all its restrictions. AND he says legislators have "come to appreciate" that it is part of Wisconsin law. So legislators appreciate open-carry by that statement.
THEN he says:
For reasons we can probably blame on the education system, demands for “Constitutional carry” have been sent to a few legislators. I can not think of a better way for those people to loose all their credibility and become irrelevant in Madison than to waste a legislators’ precious time needlessly asking for something they already have. Legislators are also sensitive to the growing unfavorable public opinion of open carriers
This comment is beyond non-sense. Gene doesn't get to change the definition of constitutional carry to "open carry with all its restrictions" and then claim that people asking for constitutional carry "loose (sic) all their credibility".
Anyone in Wisconsin knows that open-carry does not fit the definition of constitutional carry and is so restricted that it doesn't fit the definition of constitutional carry because with so many restriction (vehicle carry ban, gfsz ban, conceal ban) you can't practically exercise the right.
It appears Gene doesn't want to acknowledge that PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO PAY FOR A PERMIT NOR BE FORCED TO TAKE HIS CLASS in order to conceal carry.
As to "souring" of open carry. I am curious "who" is getting sour of open carry?
As an individual, I have had nothing but positive experiences open-carrying all over the state.
The response from people is overwhelmingly positive and most people have a greater respect for the right of people to carry and see that guns "don't just jump out of holsters and go off". I've had people who've never been around guns comment that after the initial surprise at SEEING a gun, it wasn't a big deal at all.
As groups we've had events and had similar comments from non-carrying customers coming in to establishments that they have a positive reaction to it.
I'm confident there are people who saw me carrying that didn't like it and DON'T respect the right to carry, but I believe these are the minority. These are the 26%'ers who didn't vote for Art. 1 Sec. 25 in the 1998 referendum.
So I am curious what politicians who've been sent to Madison under the wave of tea-party backed support for more freedom minded smaller government lower-taxes are going to take stock in the 26 %'ers.
I'm curious what Madison legislators haven't learned over the past 2 years that the VOCAL MINORITY of the past that use to impose their will on us all is NOT the horse to hitch your wagon to.
All that said... IF the general public is souring of open-carry (which I don't think the majority really are at all, quite the contrary) bit IF the general public is souring of open-carry FINE. Pass constitutional carry. Let people carry concealed. Problem solved.
What is next? Is Gene going to claim people are BEGGING to have to get a permit instead? Is Gene going to try to claim that the people have risen and demanded a tax on their right to carry?
Realistically, those who stand to profit from mandatory training aside, what individual that wants to carry concealed wouldn't prefer to do so for free without having to register?
My personal opinion. I think Gene German is souring of open-carry. I think Gene German is souring of people exercising their right to carry without having to go through his training class and obtain a government permit.
I think Gene German is souring over the support that REAL constitutional carry has garnered. Just the fact that Gene is addressing constitutional carry speaks volumes.
And I've noticed over the past 3 months since the election talking with all the people I have in Madison and elsewhere across the state including leaders of other gun rights groups that EVERYONE seems to think they have an "in" in Madison and EVERYONE claims to be "the one" who's got the ear of legislators.
Honestly, I've heard 3 different groups position themselves that they've got the inside track, they are writing the bill, and "their" bill is a done deal.
I submit that is just wishful thinking. Everyone wants you to BELIEVE what they tell you so you stop contacting your legislators.
I offer that IF any group REALLY had the inside track and was
confident they REALLY had the ear of "the" legislators to introduce their bill AND get it passed why are they out so vigorously stirring the pot for support? To use Gene German's logic... I can't think of a better way for a gun lobbyist to waste their time than go seeking support if their shall-issue bill is a shoe-in.
I submit that we REMAIN tossed up between shall-issue and constitutional carry.
Groups are out seeking support because they KNOW no one has it locked up.
Instructor based groups that have a goal of shall-issue KNOW they need more support to fend off constitutional carry. If they had it locked up, they wouldn't be addressing constitutional carry all of a sudden.
The dog has been wagged. Constitutional Carry is on their radar.
Whether we get constitutional carry or have to settle for shall-issue remains up to individuals to contact their legislators, educate them on what constitutional carry is, and ask them to support it.