Constitutional Carry Moving Along in Wisconsin

From NRA:

The amended bill, sponsored by state Senator Pam Galloway (R-Wausau), allowed law-abiding citizens to carry concealed without a license for self-defense in the same manner as is available to the citizens of four other states.  It also included the option of obtaining a concealed weapons license, for those who must pass through school zones or who want to be able to carry a firearm for self-defense while traveling in a number of other states through reciprocal agreements.

Wisconsin is already a state where one can open carry without a license constitutionally, and the courts seemed primed to declare a right to carry concealed in that manner if the legislature did not address the issue. I’m glad that a constitutional carry bill seems poised to be placed on the Governor’s desk.

10 thoughts on “Constitutional Carry Moving Along in Wisconsin”

  1. No, constitutional concealed carry is done for. The bill, SB93, went to the Finance Committee yesterday, and they amended it to need a permit and training. While obviously not ideal, it’s not as bad as it sounds since the permit is good for five years and costs a max of $37, and the training is pretty open.

    The state’s standard hunter safety course counts, military training counts, training from various certified instructors counts, etc. Most anyone who has hunted will already have taken the hunter safety course sometime during the previous decades.

    Open carry will also get a boost since guns currently must be locked in the trunk in a car. This bill allows in-car carry. You will be able to conceal carry on your own property or business without a permit. It also loosens or eliminates the dreaded 1000′ school zone (criminal safe zone) restriction.

    This is as good as the bill is going to get. The Republicans need to pass it now before the recall elections start in July. It satisfies the “permits and training” crowd. Plus, Republicans won’t have any fingers pointed at them for allowing “blood in the streets constitutional carry.” So it’s a political win in that regard. It’s fast-tracked to get voted on in the Senate on Tuesday.

  2. For anyone curious how eye-rolling some of the things are that senators say at a Finance Committee about concealed carry, here’s the video from it.

    Lena Taylor apparently doesn’t know what she wants from the bill, and does her best to appear to never have seen the bill before, but the real winner is heavy-on-the-sarcasm Tamara Grigsby with things like invoking how “the children” now won’t be safe at school. The two apparently put a lot of faith in “no guns” signs stopping criminals. Lena drops some n-words around 1hr7m. Oh, and one asks for an explanation of who is considered to be a resident of the state. Amazing.

    I love this guy’s comment after someone said the vote was 12-4 with no Dems voting for it. “That says it all right there about the disdain of Democraps about our Constitution, doesn’t it? Permits and training required, and still not one voted for expanding citizens’ rights. Keep it up donkeys, you expose your anti-Americanism more every day.”

  3. Alas, I’m bound to Illinois and may never get any decent acknowledgement of my 2nd amendment rights.

  4. I haven’t followed this closely but it sounds like a good thing.

    After a couple of years with no blood in the streets perhaps Constitutional Carry will be politically feasible.

  5. “Constitutional carry,” euphemism for “no requirements at all.” It’s a joke. Only fanatical Libertarians and extremist gun-rights advocates would consider such a thing good.

  6. Go Libertarians and gun-rights advocates! Woooooo!

    WI already has constitutional open carry except in a car, and Vermont has had constitutional concealed carry for, what, 100 years or so. Meanwhile, when I want to read about crime and murder with guns, I’ll watch the Chicago news.

  7. Hey mikeb302000,

    How’s the weather in Italy you troll? Are you breaking the gun laws in Italy? Just as you confessed you had done sometime in America?

    I think it’s hilarious that gun-rights you define as extremist and fanatic are rights at a level only about half as vigorous as contemporary abortion-rights in America.

  8. mike302000, when you can convince me that the government consists of angels, and everyone else are devils, then I will agree with you on Constitutional Carry. Meanwhile, the fact that Vermont has had Constitutional Carry since it was created as a State, even though Vermont is a Socialist Paradise, illustrates two things:

    1. Constitutional Carry isn’t just a Libertarian and/or extremist-gun-right position.

    2. Constitutional Carry won’t create a seething blood-bath of anarchists shooting each other. To get that, you need to move to New York City, or Washington D.C., or to Chicago–ie, places where guns have been banned.

  9. SB93 was pitched, and the WI Senate caught it. And passed it. Surprisingly bipartisanly, I might add. Lots of tries to get amendments added to it that were shot down, lots of calls for changes to it that didn’t happen, but then they voted for it.

    Next stop: the Assembly.

Comments are closed.