Wisconsin Concealed Carry's Big Day

[mikeb302000]

http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2011/oct/31/national-rifle-association/nra-says-wisconsins-concealed-carry-permit-rules-r/">The Journal Sentinal reports on the concealed carry legislation which goes into effect today in Wisconsin.

The NRA was upset at rumors that Wisconsin’s Department of Justice would require live-fire training and mandate at least four hours of safety instruction overall. Meanwhile, critics feared that online video courses might be deemed enough to get a permit.

Some of those rumors were unfounded -- permit applicants need not fire a gun (as in Minnesota), and training must be face-to-face with a certified instructor. The four-hour length was approved, though, in the emergency rulesissued by Wisconsin Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen.

Nevertheless, despite the specific rules that drew criticism from gun advocates, Wisconsin’s overall law is still in the Top 10 for ease of access to permits, according to Nik Clark, head of Wisconsin Carry Inc., a nonprofit gun-rights organization.

The NRA and the Wisconsin Carry folks oppose live-fire training and feel four hours in the classroom is too much. Is that incredible, or what?

If these gun-rights people had any sense they'd be the ones crying for more qualifying requirements not less. The laxity of concealed carry laws are directly related to the frequency of incidents involving CCW permit holders. They say they're too few to worry about, we say they're too many, but the fact is whatever the true percentage, they are largely preventable.

The counter-intuitive thinking which leads most gun-rights people to fight against common sense regulations is always surprising, but I think I understand where it comes from. Years ago the NRA began a campaign which basically said any and all gun control laws were evil because they violate the 2nd Amendment Rights of American citizens. The real reason for their campaign of propaganda was the "slippery slope theory" and a good bit of paranoia.

This was picked up by the mindless masses, NRA members and other gun owners, and repeated over and over again with reference to gun registration and gun-owner licensing, with regards to eliminating private sales of guns, about the AWB of course, magazine capacity, and every other restriction or regulation you can think of.

The irony is that through the years of practicing this united effort against the "gun controllers," they've lost sight of reality. Case in point, Wisconsin Concealed Carry. The requirements are so lax that Wisconsin went from one of only two states to not allow it to among the top ten most lenient. This will guarantee blowback which will be used by their critics against them.

The real problem is this is not an academic exercise or an argument over the dinner table. Lives are at stake. There will be more incidents of domestic violence against women, there will be more incidents of disgruntled employees going berserk, there will be more trouble in bars. Then the proponents of the legislation will cherry pick stats and manipulate the facts in order to appease their critics and please their followers. And meanwhile, people will have unnecessarily suffered and died.

What's your opinion? Is this a good day in Wisconsin or a bad one?

Please leave a comment.
http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/">(cross posted at Mikeb302000)

[Scuba]

1. Is there data to support your assertion that "There will be more incidents ...

...of domestic violence against women, there will be more incidents of disgruntled employees going berserk, there will be more trouble in bars.



Most States have a couple years experience with concealed carry. Should be some data to consider.

[jmg257]

2. What are the requirments needed to get a CC permit in Wisconsin?

Why is it considered one of the most lenient?

[AtheistCrusader]

7. Because it looks like Washington State, and will have reciprocity with us.

High-five, Wisconsin. Nicely done.

[ileus]

3. Good day.....sounds like you don't want to live there now, better move someplace safe.

[aikoaiko]

4. Here is a link to the article for those who do not wish to click on blind links

http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2011/oct/31/national-rifle-association/nra-says-wisconsins-concealed-carry-permit-rules-r/

[spin]

8. Thanks. I distrust all blind links from a person in Italy. (n/t)

[mikeb302000]

20. you blind link guys are full of it

the first link I provided is plainly identified as the original source of the post.

[friendly_iconoclast]

25. And yet Vermont, with the laxest gun laws in North America, *isn't* 'Somalia With Snow Tires'

An edited version of this, as true now as it was then:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=118&topic_id=348178#348217

[spin]

26. How do I know this for sure?

The use of blind links is considered very bad practice among the web development community. It is employed as a way to make money by increasing traffic to a particular site by tricking people into clicking on a link to something they want to view, then redirecting them to somewhere they more than likely do not want to go (or to something that they probably dont want to appear on their screens). This technique is apparently employed by a great many illegal software and adult content web sites, and their partner web sites that redirect to them in exchange for money or link-back traffic.

So be wary of any site that uses blind links!

Article date: 25th January 2011
http://www.detoxcomic.com/articles/blind-links.html

(note that I did not use a blind link.)

[rl6214]

5. This is a great day for Wisconsin

And your hand wringing about disgruntled employees and domestic violence have absolutely nothing credible to back them up. People like you will manipulate the facts in order to do anything to slow advancement of gun rights.

[AtheistCrusader]

6. Washington (Liberal, solid blue state) has had no training requirement since what, 1971?

Your breathless hyperbole bullshit is amusing.

[ileus]

10. Blood in the streets!

[ManiacJoe]

17. Was there ever a training requirement in WA?

WA has had some type of CCW since the 1930s, right?

[AtheistCrusader]

22. I couldn't figure out when the statute was actually enacted, as it's been amended.

But not to my knowledge, no. No training requirement.

[MicaelS]

9. More fertilizer...

I'm shocked, truly shocked, (like in Rick's Place shocked) you didn't also claim that there would be rivers of blood in the streets, and shootouts over parking places. :sarcasm:

[ileus]

11. 10.10.10

[AtheistCrusader]

12. If you ain't crippled when you park here, you will be when you leave! blam blam blam

[spin]

13. It sounds to me like you have a Chicken Little Complex ...

and you have a habit of running around yelling, "The sky is falling. the sky is falling!"

[one-eyed fat man]

14. Is there blood in the streets yet?

You have your dancing shoes on.

[jmg257]

15. I think this is what some here refer to as "More Winning" and "seeing the writing on the wall".

As for Wisconsin, I don't see at all how a few hours of live-fire training would reduce incidents of domestic violence, employee beserk-iness, or bar fights.

Anyway, while shooting a handgun on a range is always fun, even tough NY doesn't have live-fire requirements for CC permits.

[Atypical Liberal]

16. CCW permit holders are hardly ever involved in crime.

Where I live (Alabama), no training is required whatsoever.

When you realize how seldom CCW permit holders are involved in any kind of crime, let alone firearm-related crime, it just isn't an issue worth worrying about.

The simple fact is, the tide is all on the side of firearm owners. States know that people who carry concealed weapons just aren't the problem. So now every state but Illinois allows concealed carry, and I predict Illinois will soon.

Next, many states are going to stop requiring permits for concealed carry at all. Why? Because they are going to discover, as Canada did with their long-arm registry, that it is a huge waste of money and resources because they people they are tracking are hardly ever involved in crimes.

It's a good day in Wisconsin.

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SteveM]

18. Gun-controller/prohibitionists regularly chant: "Fear, fear, fear!" And yet...

Our poster from Italy has just said:

"Lives are at stake. There will be more incidents of domestic violence against women, there will be more incidents of disgruntled employees going berserk, there will be more trouble in bars."

He doesn't use any data or arguments to support such; yet goes rather "anti-science" as if to immunize himself from the counter- arguments he is going to receive:

"Then the proponents of the legislation will cherry pick stats and manipulate the facts in order to appease their critics and please their followers. And meanwhile, people will have unnecessarily suffered and died."

As I've said before, the tactic of the extreme gun-prohibitionist is to interject vast quantities of "fear" into the debate -- even as they accuse their "opposites" of fear-mongering -- then use innuendo and slur to help paint this forum as "extreme" in hopes of disbanding it.

This is how a prohibitionist "profits from his own error."

[beevul]

19. Sparky, is your memory so short?

"The counter-intuitive thinking which leads most gun-rights people to fight against common sense regulations is always surprising, but I think I understand where it comes from. Years ago the NRA began a campaign which basically said any and all gun control laws were evil because they violate the 2nd Amendment Rights of American citizens. The real reason for their campaign of propaganda was the "slippery slope theory" and a good bit of paranoia."

"This was picked up by the mindless masses, NRA members and other gun owners, and repeated over and over again with reference to gun registration and gun-owner licensing, with regards to eliminating private sales of guns, about the AWB of course, magazine capacity, and every other restriction or regulation you can think of."

Did you forget authoring this:

"All right, I was exaggerating. If you guys suddenly cooperated with the common sense gun control laws that we propose and we saw a tremendous decrease in gun violence, we would naturally want stricter laws in order to lower even more the remaining gun violence. Eventually, I and most of the others would conclude that no guns at all in civilian hands is the best way to go."


"So, in order to ensure that the three-steps-down-the-line situation never happens, you resist..."

http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/2011/06/why-pro-gun-folks-wont-be-reasonable.html


You think its the NRAs fault, even though you admit where you and other like minded people would take things, given an opportunity.


You're a real piece of work, sparky.

[jmg257]

24. "...and a good bit of paranoia"...'the only thing we have to fear is fear itself'...well - that, and

idiots with a gun-control agenda.

When gun control is your hobby, you REALLY need to get a life.