User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 3/12/2015 12:32:20 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Senate committee had their public hearing on SB 35 (handgun wait) yesterday, executive session is today at 1:30pm... in which they'll likely vote on it.   |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2015 12:54:06 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Senate committee had their public hearing on SB 35 (handgun wait) yesterday, executive session is today at 1:30pm... in which they'll likely vote on it.
I wonder if the Assembly Committee will take up the Senate Bill with the amendment made and not have a vote on the Assembly Bill. The senate amendment gives DOJ 5 days to complete the check instead of the Federal 3 days. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2015 3:33:37 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I wonder if the Assembly Committee will take up the Senate Bill with the amendment made and not have a vote on the Assembly Bill. The senate amendment gives DOJ 5 days to complete the check instead of the Federal 3 days. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Senate committee had their public hearing on SB 35 (handgun wait) yesterday, executive session is today at 1:30pm... in which they'll likely vote on it.
I wonder if the Assembly Committee will take up the Senate Bill with the amendment made and not have a vote on the Assembly Bill. The senate amendment gives DOJ 5 days to complete the check instead of the Federal 3 days. I knew that would happen, as that was the only objection DOJ had to the bill. They currently have 5 days, and they claimed that 77% of the fail-to-pass checks didn't come until the 4th or 5th day. The bill would've dropped it down to 3, like NICS. No big deal IMO, as most are done in minutes. If you're held up for 5 days now under current law, you'd be held up the same amount of time. So, if you pass right through now (I've always cleared in minutes... 10 times in past 5 years), you'll be leaving the store with your new gun in less than 48 hours. I've bought 3 handguns since I got my CCW license, and cleared the check before the dealer hung up the original call, all 3 times. 
I don't believe both bills need to make it through the respective committees to become law. If the full Senate passes it's version, that version then goes to the Assembly for concurrance. The reason they submit duplicate bills, is to double the chances of one getting through committee and to the floor... or so I've been told. ETA: Did they vote on it, and if so, was it 3 (R) YEA to 2 (D) NO as I expected it to be? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2015 4:57:41 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I knew that would happen, as that was the only objection DOJ had to the bill. They currently have 5 days, and they claimed that 77% of the fail-to-pass checks didn't come until the 4th or 5th day. The bill would've dropped it down to 3, like NICS. No big deal IMO, as most are done in minutes. If you're held up for 5 days now under current law, you'd be held up the same amount of time. So, if you pass right through now (I've always cleared in minutes... 10 times in past 5 years), you'll be leaving the store with your new gun in less than 48 hours. I've bought 3 handguns since I got my CCW license, and cleared the check before the dealer hung up the original call, all 3 times.
I don't believe both bills need to make it through the respective committees to become law. If the full Senate passes it's version, that version then goes to the Assembly for concurrance. The reason they submit duplicate bills, is to double the chances of one getting through committee and to the floor... or so I've been told. ETA: Did they vote on it, and if so, was it 3 (R) YEA to 2 (D) NO as I expected it to be? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Senate committee had their public hearing on SB 35 (handgun wait) yesterday, executive session is today at 1:30pm... in which they'll likely vote on it.
I wonder if the Assembly Committee will take up the Senate Bill with the amendment made and not have a vote on the Assembly Bill. The senate amendment gives DOJ 5 days to complete the check instead of the Federal 3 days. I knew that would happen, as that was the only objection DOJ had to the bill. They currently have 5 days, and they claimed that 77% of the fail-to-pass checks didn't come until the 4th or 5th day. The bill would've dropped it down to 3, like NICS. No big deal IMO, as most are done in minutes. If you're held up for 5 days now under current law, you'd be held up the same amount of time. So, if you pass right through now (I've always cleared in minutes... 10 times in past 5 years), you'll be leaving the store with your new gun in less than 48 hours. I've bought 3 handguns since I got my CCW license, and cleared the check before the dealer hung up the original call, all 3 times.
I don't believe both bills need to make it through the respective committees to become law. If the full Senate passes it's version, that version then goes to the Assembly for concurrance. The reason they submit duplicate bills, is to double the chances of one getting through committee and to the floor... or so I've been told. ETA: Did they vote on it, and if so, was it 3 (R) YEA to 2 (D) NO as I expected it to be? Exactly. I believe the exec is over but I don't know the count yet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2015 5:57:22 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Exactly. I believe the exec is over but I don't know the count yet. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Senate committee had their public hearing on SB 35 (handgun wait) yesterday, executive session is today at 1:30pm... in which they'll likely vote on it.
I wonder if the Assembly Committee will take up the Senate Bill with the amendment made and not have a vote on the Assembly Bill. The senate amendment gives DOJ 5 days to complete the check instead of the Federal 3 days. I knew that would happen, as that was the only objection DOJ had to the bill. They currently have 5 days, and they claimed that 77% of the fail-to-pass checks didn't come until the 4th or 5th day. The bill would've dropped it down to 3, like NICS. No big deal IMO, as most are done in minutes. If you're held up for 5 days now under current law, you'd be held up the same amount of time. So, if you pass right through now (I've always cleared in minutes... 10 times in past 5 years), you'll be leaving the store with your new gun in less than 48 hours. I've bought 3 handguns since I got my CCW license, and cleared the check before the dealer hung up the original call, all 3 times.
I don't believe both bills need to make it through the respective committees to become law. If the full Senate passes it's version, that version then goes to the Assembly for concurrance. The reason they submit duplicate bills, is to double the chances of one getting through committee and to the floor... or so I've been told. ETA: Did they vote on it, and if so, was it 3 (R) YEA to 2 (D) NO as I expected it to be? Exactly. I believe the exec is over but I don't know the count yet. It was on Wisconsin Eye, live at 1:30pm.... but I didn't go there until 2:30pm, and it was already over.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2015 7:52:32 PM EDT
[#6]
SB35 passed committee, and is available for scheduling before the full Senate. There were 2 amendments, but I cannot open the PDFs for some reason, I just get a black screen, so I don't know what the 2nd is. But both amendments passed by a 5-0 vote, and the bill passed the committee vote, 3-2.
http://insession.legis.wisconsin.gov/senate and click on "session history", upper left in blue. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/12/2015 8:25:15 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
SB35 passed committee, and is available for scheduling before the full Senate. There were 2 amendments, but I cannot open the PDFs for some reason, I just get a black screen, so I don't know what the 2nd is. But both amendments passed by a 5-0 vote, and the bill passed the committee vote, 3-2. http://insession.legis.wisconsin.gov/senate and click on "session history", upper left in blue. The amendment is there now but I frankly don't understand what it exactly does. I wish I didn't miss the hearing. Edit: I was on my phone and only saw the first page I get a F- for reading comprehension today. The Amendment is Universal Background Checks and an extension of the hotline to all firearms sales. The amendment has NOT been adopted. Rather the vote was to recognize its introduction for a vote by the full senate. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2015 9:39:12 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The amendment is there now but I frankly don't understand what it exactly does. I wish I didn't miss the hearing. Edit: I was on my phone and only saw the first page I get a F- for reading comprehension today. The Amendment is Universal Background Checks and an extension of the hotline to all firearms sales. The amendment has NOT been adopted. Rather the vote was to recognize its introduction for a vote by the full senate. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: SB35 passed committee, and is available for scheduling before the full Senate. There were 2 amendments, but I cannot open the PDFs for some reason, I just get a black screen, so I don't know what the 2nd is. But both amendments passed by a 5-0 vote, and the bill passed the committee vote, 3-2. http://insession.legis.wisconsin.gov/senate and click on "session history", upper left in blue. The amendment is there now but I frankly don't understand what it exactly does. I wish I didn't miss the hearing. Edit: I was on my phone and only saw the first page I get a F- for reading comprehension today. The Amendment is Universal Background Checks and an extension of the hotline to all firearms sales. The amendment has NOT been adopted. Rather the vote was to recognize its introduction for a vote by the full senate. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2015 10:11:19 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Which communist piece of shit put that in? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
SB35 passed committee, and is available for scheduling before the full Senate. There were 2 amendments, but I cannot open the PDFs for some reason, I just get a black screen, so I don't know what the 2nd is. But both amendments passed by a 5-0 vote, and the bill passed the committee vote, 3-2. http://insession.legis.wisconsin.gov/senate and click on "session history", upper left in blue. The amendment is there now but I frankly don't understand what it exactly does. I wish I didn't miss the hearing. Edit: I was on my phone and only saw the first page I get a F- for reading comprehension today. The Amendment is Universal Background Checks and an extension of the hotline to all firearms sales. The amendment has NOT been adopted. Rather the vote was to recognize its introduction for a vote by the full senate. Sen. Taylor and the amendment failed 3 no / 2 yes. It will not be brought up again as I said. Record of Committee Proceedings |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2015 11:30:55 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Sen. Taylor and the amendment failed 3 no / 2 yes. It will not be brought up again as I said. Record of Committee Proceedings Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
SB35 passed committee, and is available for scheduling before the full Senate. There were 2 amendments, but I cannot open the PDFs for some reason, I just get a black screen, so I don't know what the 2nd is. But both amendments passed by a 5-0 vote, and the bill passed the committee vote, 3-2. http://insession.legis.wisconsin.gov/senate and click on "session history", upper left in blue. The amendment is there now but I frankly don't understand what it exactly does. I wish I didn't miss the hearing. Edit: I was on my phone and only saw the first page I get a F- for reading comprehension today. The Amendment is Universal Background Checks and an extension of the hotline to all firearms sales. The amendment has NOT been adopted. Rather the vote was to recognize its introduction for a vote by the full senate. Sen. Taylor and the amendment failed 3 no / 2 yes. It will not be brought up again as I said. Record of Committee Proceedings That's good. The page I was looking at just said amendments were introduced by a 5-0 vote, but the record of SSA2 being defeated that you linked wasn't up yet. Now I see the strategy.... allow it for a committee vote, so as to vote it down now.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2015 12:55:13 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That's good. The page I was looking at just said amendments were introduced by a 5-0 vote, but the record of SSA2 being defeated that you linked wasn't up yet. Now I see the strategy.... allow it for a committee vote, so as to vote it down now.
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
SB35 passed committee, and is available for scheduling before the full Senate. There were 2 amendments, but I cannot open the PDFs for some reason, I just get a black screen, so I don't know what the 2nd is. But both amendments passed by a 5-0 vote, and the bill passed the committee vote, 3-2. http://insession.legis.wisconsin.gov/senate and click on "session history", upper left in blue. The amendment is there now but I frankly don't understand what it exactly does. I wish I didn't miss the hearing. Edit: I was on my phone and only saw the first page I get a F- for reading comprehension today. The Amendment is Universal Background Checks and an extension of the hotline to all firearms sales. The amendment has NOT been adopted. Rather the vote was to recognize its introduction for a vote by the full senate. Sen. Taylor and the amendment failed 3 no / 2 yes. It will not be brought up again as I said. Record of Committee Proceedings That's good. The page I was looking at just said amendments were introduced by a 5-0 vote, but the record of SSA2 being defeated that you linked wasn't up yet. Now I see the strategy.... allow it for a committee vote, so as to vote it down now.
I know in the assembly, a no vote on an amendment makes it non germane if they try to bring it up on the floor. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2015 5:40:05 PM EDT
[#12]
Soooo... Can I carry a Microtech now or what?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2015 5:42:41 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Soooo... Can I carry a Microtech now or what?  |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/13/2015 5:46:56 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You don't already have one?
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Soooo... Can I carry a Microtech now or what?
CARRY legally
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/14/2015 3:38:49 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
CARRY legally Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Soooo... Can I carry a Microtech now or what?
CARRY legally For shizzle i can now legally carruy my wilson combat darrell raplh auto????? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2015 6:40:08 PM EDT
[#16]
Good. I have an old hand injury on my right (dominant) hand that makes folders annoying. Arizona didn't give a rip about my 3" push button. But as soon as I come to Wisconsin, OMGFASTBLADEWHATABOUTTHECHILDREN??!
I can tote an AK pistol with a drum, but my 3" pocket knife had to live at a friend's place in Arizona. That's dumb. Mike |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/16/2015 7:50:58 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I know in the assembly, a no vote on an amendment makes it non germane if they try to bring it up on the floor. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The amendment is there now but I frankly don't understand what it exactly does. I wish I didn't miss the hearing. Edit: I was on my phone and only saw the first page I get a F- for reading comprehension today. The Amendment is Universal Background Checks and an extension of the hotline to all firearms sales. The amendment has NOT been adopted. Rather the vote was to recognize its introduction for a vote by the full senate. Sen. Taylor and the amendment failed 3 no / 2 yes. It will not be brought up again as I said. Record of Committee Proceedings That's good. The page I was looking at just said amendments were introduced by a 5-0 vote, but the record of SSA2 being defeated that you linked wasn't up yet. Now I see the strategy.... allow it for a committee vote, so as to vote it down now.
I know in the assembly, a no vote on an amendment makes it non germane if they try to bring it up on the floor. It was as if a million Liberal voices cried out in agony, & then were suddenly silenced. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/17/2015 10:08:00 AM EDT
[#18]
Anyone have any further updates on the progress of SB35?. When will it reach the Senate floor for a vote? After coming this far, I'd really hate to see this piece of legislation "die on the vine" so to speak. TIA for any updates provided. Regards, Gary
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/17/2015 10:53:21 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Anyone have any further updates on the progress of SB35?. When will it reach the Senate floor for a vote? After coming this far, I'd really hate to see this piece of legislation "die on the vine" so to speak. TIA for any updates provided. Regards, Gary No word yet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/17/2015 1:52:22 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Anyone have any further updates on the progress of SB35?. When will it reach the Senate floor for a vote? After coming this far, I'd really hate to see this piece of legislation "die on the vine" so to speak. TIA for any updates provided. Regards, Gary LOL. It won't die. We just had an election last fall, all the newbs are settling in... and most importantly, the 2015 Legislative Session is just getting underway. Remember the CCW bill in 2011? It was SB93. Bills are numbered in order of submission. IIRC, it didn't have committee hearings until May, and got passed in June, signed into law on July 11th, took effect on Nov. 1st. SB35 is months ahead of that bill in the time frame of the process, and is likely to be far less time consuming in the floor debates & vote. It might even have what's known as a "voice vote", instead of tallying up the votes for an official count. And it likely will take effect immediately after signing & publication, as there's no "process" to be set up like there was for SB93, with issuing CC licenses. It'll just be the deletion of the 48 hours wait when buying a handgun. edit: expect the Dems in both Senate & Assembly to throw all kinds of anti-gun "amendments" at the bill, in a futile attempt to get one to stick. There'll be AWBs, magazine capacity limits, background checks on private sales.... the whole gun banners' wish list will be trotted out for display, and quickly shot down. They must do this - it's in their rule book, otherwise their talking points get no publicity, and Repubs cannot be portrayed as evil puppets of the big/bad/NRA and corporate America in the guise of the gun companies. yada yada yada |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/19/2015 7:29:50 PM EDT
[#21]
So switchblades are legal now?
Thanks V OUT |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/19/2015 8:57:16 PM EDT
[#22]
On the radio today Scott L. Fitzgerald (senate leader) said they would take up the 48 hour waiting period in April or May, but did not think there was any real opposition to it.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/19/2015 9:32:38 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So switchblades are legal now? Thanks V OUT V, A bill has been circulated for cosponsor. I figure it will be introduced officially in the next two weeks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/20/2015 10:08:24 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
V, A bill has been circulated for cosponsor. I figure it will be introduced officially in the next two weeks. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So switchblades are legal now? Thanks V OUT V, A bill has been circulated for cosponsor. I figure it will be introduced officially in the next two weeks. Got it. The initial post reads like it already happened. V OUT |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2015 10:40:27 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
V, A bill has been circulated for cosponsor. I figure it will be introduced officially in the next two weeks. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
So switchblades are legal now? Thanks V OUT V, A bill has been circulated for cosponsor. I figure it will be introduced officially in the next two weeks. Any new news on this? I called my rep and senator after I saw this here. Not sure where I can look that info up, google isn't much help, and the .gov websites are horrendous. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2015 11:37:00 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Any new news on this? I called my rep and senator after I saw this here. Not sure where I can look that info up, google isn't much help, and the .gov websites are horrendous. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So switchblades are legal now? Thanks V OUT V, A bill has been circulated for cosponsor. I figure it will be introduced officially in the next two weeks. Any new news on this? I called my rep and senator after I saw this here. Not sure where I can look that info up, google isn't much help, and the .gov websites are horrendous. Absolutely nothing is moving with the budget going on right now. It will not be online until it is introduced.
I will make some updates to the op this week.
EDIT: Here is the info AB142 SB102 Representative Kathy Bernier and Senator Terry Moulton Definition of a switchblade knife; Possession requirements This bill excludes from the definition of switchblade knife a knife with closure-biased springs that require physical force to be applied to the blade in order to open the knife. This bill exempts from the prohibition qualified law enforcement officers, qualified former law enforcement officers, and persons who have a license to carry a concealed weapon, including certain out-of-state licenses. Assembly 3/27/2015 Referred to Committee on Criminal Justice and Public Safety Senate 3/27/2015 Referred to Committee on Judiciary and Public Safety AB142 SB102 |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2015 1:43:46 PM EDT
[#27]
Excellent, thanks for the links. I'm a newb when it comes to legislation. I'm reading that this does 2 things. It specifies "assisted" openers as not being "switchblades" which was kind of gray before even though you could freakin buy em at wal mart. AND allows CCL/LEO's, etc to carry any switchblade. Is that correct-ish?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/9/2015 1:57:30 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Excellent, thanks for the links. I'm a newb when it comes to legislation. I'm reading that this does 2 things. It specifies "assisted" openers as not being "switchblades" which was kind of gray before even though you could freakin buy em at wal mart. AND allows CCL/LEO's, etc to carry any switchblade. Is that correct-ish? I believe that is correct.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/12/2015 4:46:25 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I believe that is correct.
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Excellent, thanks for the links. I'm a newb when it comes to legislation. I'm reading that this does 2 things. It specifies "assisted" openers as not being "switchblades" which was kind of gray before even though you could freakin buy em at wal mart. AND allows CCL/LEO's, etc to carry any switchblade. Is that correct-ish? I believe that is correct.
Can't wait for this to be passed.. I've had my eye on a few different autos for years now... |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2015 2:14:55 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Can't wait for this to be passed.. I've had my eye on a few different autos for years now... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Excellent, thanks for the links. I'm a newb when it comes to legislation. I'm reading that this does 2 things. It specifies "assisted" openers as not being "switchblades" which was kind of gray before even though you could freakin buy em at wal mart. AND allows CCL/LEO's, etc to carry any switchblade. Is that correct-ish? I believe that is correct.
Can't wait for this to be passed.. I've had my eye on a few different autos for years now... I look forward to getting mine back! It's lived with a friend in Arizona for years, and I'd love nothing more than to have it in my pocket again. Mike |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2015 7:34:11 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I look forward to getting mine back! It's lived with a friend in Arizona for years, and I'd love nothing more than to have it in my pocket again. Mike Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Excellent, thanks for the links. I'm a newb when it comes to legislation. I'm reading that this does 2 things. It specifies "assisted" openers as not being "switchblades" which was kind of gray before even though you could freakin buy em at wal mart. AND allows CCL/LEO's, etc to carry any switchblade. Is that correct-ish? I believe that is correct.
Can't wait for this to be passed.. I've had my eye on a few different autos for years now... I look forward to getting mine back! It's lived with a friend in Arizona for years, and I'd love nothing more than to have it in my pocket again. Mike Well, after spending the first 30-some-odd years of my life in new yorkistan, things out here in WI are already pretty good. But this one, I just find silly. Really? I can carry a loaded 10mm and extra mags, but a knife will get me put in the clink? Just seems silly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/13/2015 8:06:54 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well, after spending the first 30-some-odd years of my life in new yorkistan, things out here in WI are already pretty good. But this one, I just find silly. Really? I can carry a loaded 10mm and extra mags, but a knife will get me put in the clink? Just seems silly. Your attitude has been noted, comrade...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2015 1:17:11 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Well, after spending the first 30-some-odd years of my life in new yorkistan, things out here in WI are already pretty good. But this one, I just find silly. Really? I can carry a loaded 10mm and extra mags, but a knife will get me put in the clink? Just seems silly. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Excellent, thanks for the links. I'm a newb when it comes to legislation. I'm reading that this does 2 things. It specifies "assisted" openers as not being "switchblades" which was kind of gray before even though you could freakin buy em at wal mart. AND allows CCL/LEO's, etc to carry any switchblade. Is that correct-ish? I believe that is correct.
Can't wait for this to be passed.. I've had my eye on a few different autos for years now... I look forward to getting mine back! It's lived with a friend in Arizona for years, and I'd love nothing more than to have it in my pocket again. Mike Well, after spending the first 30-some-odd years of my life in new yorkistan, things out here in WI are already pretty good. But this one, I just find silly. Really? I can carry a loaded 10mm and extra mags, but a knife will get me put in the clink? Just seems silly. Also illegal is a "gun" designed to shoot blanks only, or any other "replica" of a firearm. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2015 2:22:44 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Also illegal is a "gun" designed to shoot blanks only, or any other "replica" of a firearm. Huh? So you're telling me that I can have a REAL gun, loaded with blanks, but I can't have a starter pistol?! Not that I WANT a starter pistol, but still - that sounds even more asinine than the knife law!! |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/14/2015 6:05:14 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Huh? So you're telling me that I can have a REAL gun, loaded with blanks, but I can't have a starter pistol?! Not that I WANT a starter pistol, but still - that sounds even more asinine than the knife law!! Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Also illegal is a "gun" designed to shoot blanks only, or any other "replica" of a firearm. Huh? So you're telling me that I can have a REAL gun, loaded with blanks, but I can't have a starter pistol?! Not that I WANT a starter pistol, but still - that sounds even more asinine than the knife law!! Yup. In the late 1990s, I tried buying a .32 caliber, blank firing only, revolver to use for dog training. The company said it could not ship it to me as WI was on their list of states where it was illegal. So I checked it out... true. So I bought a REAL .32 H&R revolver, and bought some blanks. A-OK. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2015 2:05:03 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yup. In the late 1990s, I tried buying a .32 caliber, blank firing only, revolver to use for dog training. The company said it could not ship it to me as WI was on their list of states where it was illegal. So I checked it out... true. So I bought a REAL .32 H&R revolver, and bought some blanks. A-OK. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Also illegal is a "gun" designed to shoot blanks only, or any other "replica" of a firearm. Huh? So you're telling me that I can have a REAL gun, loaded with blanks, but I can't have a starter pistol?! Not that I WANT a starter pistol, but still - that sounds even more asinine than the knife law!! Yup. In the late 1990s, I tried buying a .32 caliber, blank firing only, revolver to use for dog training. The company said it could not ship it to me as WI was on their list of states where it was illegal. So I checked it out... true. So I bought a REAL .32 H&R revolver, and bought some blanks. A-OK. At least you got a .32 revolver out of the deal.
Here is an update on the 48 Repeal and the Switchblade Carry Committee on Criminal Justice and Public Safety Public Hearing 4/23/2015 10:30 AM 225 Northwest Assembly Bill 142going armed with a switchblade. Committee on Criminal Justice and Public Safety executive session 4/23/2015 10:31 AM 225 Northwest Assembly Bill 49 waiting period for handgun purchases. Assembly Bill 142 going armed with a switchblade. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2015 5:08:24 PM EDT
[#37]
With 41P looming, is there anything being discussed about a "shall issue" LEO sign off law?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/17/2015 7:32:45 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
With 41P looming, is there anything being discussed about a "shall issue" LEO sign off law? Not that I have heard but I will try to find out. I doubt much more will be introduced until the budget is done at the end of May. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2015 9:01:30 AM EDT
[#39]
Moving right along....
"This Tuesday, April 21, Senate Bill 35 is scheduled for full consideration by the Wisconsin state Senate. SB 35, authored by state Senator Van Wanggaard (R-21), would repeal Wisconsin’s antiquated 48-hour waiting period for handgun purchases...... " https://www.nraila.org/articles/20150419/wisconsin-senate-to-consider-48-hour-waiting-period-repeal-bill-on-tuesday |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2015 11:11:19 AM EDT
[#40]
So when Walker signs SB 35 does it go into effect immediately or is there a set time period before it does?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2015 4:46:49 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So when Walker signs SB 35 does it go into effect immediately or is there a set time period before it does? It goes into effect two days after it is signed. On the first day it is published by the Legislative Reference Bureau and on the second day it becomes effective. Before 2013 Act 2 it was up to 10 days. I believe effective dates can be specified in a bill. There are no specified dates in SB 35. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2015 4:53:34 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It goes into effect two days after it is signed. On the first day it is published by the Legislative Reference Bureau and on the second day it becomes effective. Before 2013 Act 2 it was up to 10 days. I believe effective dates can be specified in a bill. There are no specified dates in SB 35. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: So when Walker signs SB 35 does it go into effect immediately or is there a set time period before it does? It goes into effect two days after it is signed. On the first day it is published by the Legislative Reference Bureau and on the second day it becomes effective. Before 2013 Act 2 it was up to 10 days. I believe effective dates can be specified in a bill. There are no specified dates in SB 35. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2015 5:03:07 PM EDT
[#43]
If the Senate passes it, it still must be approved by the Assembly. I don't see any problems with it passing in either, but the Assembly still has to schedule it (which they won't do until it passes in the Senate). If all goes well, it should become law within a few weeks.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2015 10:43:55 PM EDT
[#44]
IIRC, the law has to be published by the sec of state first, and doug lafollete, being a uberliberal, will probably drag his feet out as long as possible on this?
(10 days?) |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2015 11:31:24 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
IIRC, the law has to be published by the sec of state first, and doug lafollete, being a uberliberal, will probably drag his feet out as long as possible on this? (10 days?) He lost his ten day waiting period last session. After the LRB publishes an act the day after it is signed, lafollete then has to put it in the journal the next day. I believe his remaining authority to publish is being taken away in the budget this year. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/20/2015 11:36:30 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If the Senate passes it, it still must be approved by the Assembly. I don't see any problems with it passing in either, but the Assembly still has to schedule it (which they won't do until it passes in the Senate). If all goes well, it should become law within a few weeks. There will be an Assembly session day in May I believe. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2015 10:46:42 AM EDT
[#47]
Assembly in session April 14 to 23, May 5 to 14, 2015.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2015 3:41:15 PM EDT
[#48]
It's on wiseye now. Risser is talking against the bill... "public safety more important than the inconveniences of handgun buyers yada yada yada" . This fossil needs to crawl in a corner and peacefully pass away. Dems are trying to tack on straw purchase & private sales amendments.
http://www.wiseye.org/Mobile/Stream1.aspx 2 Dem amendments shot down. Dems now discussing 3rd amendment, "universal" background checks on ALL private sales.  First two amendments were ruled not germane to the legislation. Neither is the 3rd, but we'll see what happens.
Universal background check amendment ruled not germane, and appeal by Lena Taylor denied, ruling upheld by 19-13 vote. Discussing the bill itself now, as unamended. Carpenter is now complaining again about gun crime in Milwaukee, concealed carry, the whole Dem complaint list. I expect every Dem to give a similar 10 minute anti-gun speech. Only on the 3rd, so this could take awhile before they vote. Now Larson's turn. He says this bill is bankrolled by gun manufacturers.
Bill passed by voice vote! Ordered immediately messaged to Assembly.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2015 4:20:31 PM EDT
[#49]
Boom.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/21/2015 4:29:08 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's on wiseye now. Risser is talking against the bill... "public safety more important than the inconveniences of handgun buyers yada yada yada" . This fossil needs to crawl in a corner and peacefully pass away. Dems are trying to tack on straw purchase & private sales amendments. http://www.wiseye.org/Mobile/Stream1.aspx 2 Dem amendments shot down. Dems now discussing 3rd amendment, "universal" background checks on ALL private sales. First two amendments were ruled not germane to the legislation. Neither is the 3rd, but we'll see what happens.
Universal background check amendment ruled not germane, and appeal by Lena Taylor denied, ruling upheld by 19-13 vote. Discussing the bill itself now, as unamended. Carpenter is now complaining again about gun crime in Milwaukee, concealed carry, the whole Dem complaint list. I expect every Dem to give a similar 10 minute anti-gun speech. Only on the 3rd, so this could take awhile before they vote. Now Larson's turn. He says this bill is bankrolled by gun manufacturers.
Bill passed by voice vote! Ordered immediately messaged to Assembly.
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
