search
top

NRA Strategy for Wisconsin Includes Constitutional Carry

NRA announced today they are shooting for the moon in Wisconsin, and going for constitutional carry:

Past legislative efforts to secure the Right to Carry always assumed that a veto override would be necessary.  Attempting to secure two-thirds majorities required the NRA and other proponents to accept amendments during the legislative process that sought to place additional restrictions on the good citizens of Wisconsin and would have impeded their ability to protect themselves.  With the makeup of the incoming legislature, these unnecessary concessions should no longer be necessary.

The NRA will strive to make Wisconsin’s 2011 Right to Carry law one of the strongest in the country.  The experience of 40 other Right to Carry states has eliminated any question as to whether citizens can be trusted to act safely and responsibly.  The laws of Vermont, Alaska and Arizona will be used as the model.  The latter two, in particular, will set the standard with systems that recognize the citizens’ constitutional right to carry firearms for self-defense along with a provision that will provide for the streamlined issuance of a state permit that can be used for reciprocity purposes in other states while traveling.

This is good news. The Courts appeared to be ready to toss the carry law anyway, and it would be a shame not to help that process along. Also, I think this puts to rest any of the accusations that NRA was never committed to constitutional carry.

9 Responses to “NRA Strategy for Wisconsin Includes Constitutional Carry”

  1. Shawn says:

    What makes them even think they can get this through? Arizona in itself was a pain and thats one of the most pro-gun states in the union. There going to have to have a senate AND house version just in case one is spoiled. Just like what happened in Arizona. And are they even certain the Scott will even sign it? I mean he like all politicians can make all the promises they want but when the bill is on the desk (considering it even gets passed by the house and senate which I personally doubt even with its new makeup) what will he do then?

    Brewer did it for votes and for no other reason. Otherwise she would of just let it pass without signature. Sure Scotts camapign promise was the same. I’d like for it to happen but I just don’t see it. Even with what could be considered total republican control.

  2. Sebastian says:

    NRA generally isn’t that reckless with their legislative strategy. If anything, they are often accused of being too cautious. I wouldn’t think they’d push it if they didn’t think they had a chance to pass it.

  3. Sebastian,

    I will publicly give the NRA props for taking this step. Even though they may not win (and I hope they do), they’re at least making the effort.

    Now, if they’ll just try to do something about that damnable Hughes amendment, I just might join!

  4. Shawn says:

    Hey I’m all for it but its not that they may not have the votes. It always boils down to one asshole ruining it. Just like what happened with SB 1102 in Arizona. Luckily someone did a “strike everything” and reintroduced it without the citizenship thing. It’s just I would expect some libtard to pull something like that. Or the wording gets messed up and shot down due to a technicality.

    Besides there are how many states where this is going to be attempted next year?

  5. Wes says:

    I’ve heard a couple interviews of WI state representatives since the election, and when someone has asked about concealed carry, they matter-of-factly said, “Yep, we’re gettin’ that,” like it’s a done deal.

    The WI Attorney General is a gun guy and concealed-carry guy and very popular, and with my ear to the ground, I’d say even the “non-gun” people are pro-concealed carry with some kind of training. The governor has always been the main one shooting down concealed carry. Why did the people let him? I think partially because the rest of the gun laws are so open, and partially because, other than the cesspool called Milwaukee, people aren’t exactly in fear for their lives in most of WI to have worried about it much. (imo)

    So, WI is going to get concealed carry. What kind I s’pose is up for debate yet, of course. Just like in that video linked above, WI has no gun registration or permits or anything else of the sort other than a 2-day handgun waiting period, so I do think a no-permit concealed carry has a good chance.

  6. Wes says:

    I’d like to add, though, that, once again, even with an R in front of his name, the new governor, Scott Walker, is not the biggest friend to gun rights. He’s better than what else has been available, but he’s said he wants people to have permits for guns. Why would you need a permit to conceal carry but not to open carry? I’m not sure. I’m also not sure if he’s crazy enough to try to need a permit for long guns, too. He’s from the Milwaukee area, so it kind of makes sense since I think there’s something in the water there.

  7. gene willis says:

    open and conceal carry is what wisconsin should have.and as far as scott walker passing the right to carry,will give him a chance.after all,doyle supported the rights for police and felons to only carry in this state.we voted for this in i think it was 1998 and was shot to hell by doyle and his obediant lap dogs.if walker sides with the anti gun liberals,then this state is dead as far as human rights go.

  8. Wes says:

    I read a little more on it, and it appears Scott Walker has said, and would, sign constitutional carry if it is put in front of him. But he’d also sign other forms of concealed carry, too, if it is put in front of him. That aside, and like I said… on his own, he’s not exactly a champion of gun rights from what I’ve seen. I guess Walker is a step in the right direction for the state, but he is far from ideal.

    The easiest and most common-sense thing for WI would indeed be to simply eliminate the one line in the law that separates open carry from concealed carry. No new administration would be needed, no new taxes, permits, classes, etc. And I’d like to see the arguments that say I am fit to wear a gun on my hip yet am unfit to have one in my pocket.

    I often see WI get a lot of flack for not having concealed carry, but, I’ll say it again, a lot of people don’t realize how few other gun laws the state has. I can definitely see WI getting constitutional carry.

top