Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 8/17/2005 8:38:04 AM EDT
Friends,

The opposition to CCW from civil servants (Police Chiefs & Sheriffs) is not unexpected. Just once I wish some reporter would ask them what there obligation is in protecting the individual. Hint: There is no obligation. In law enforcement thats called a "CLUE"!

You can make a difference with at least some of these people in leadership positions.

Make sure that your local club, which may be used by police departments for training, supports your position on CCW.

If they don't support your right, you should shouldn't be providing them a convient place to conduct training. I am not suggesting we make enemies of our friends in law enforcement. Simply try and get a bit more grass roots support for our cause.

I recently had a chance to review the range calender for several SE Wisconsin clubs and the all had significant activity from local police and even US Marshalls. Why should they get usage of your range when they don't support your rights?

Take action now! Get your club to pass a resolution enforcing the ideas presented above. You can make it happen!

Jeff
Link Posted: 8/17/2005 9:30:56 AM EDT
Burning bridges is the worst thing you can do. If you say we're not going to allow you to use our facility to train, because we don't like the oppinion of your Chief or the Sheriff you are burning bridges. It doesn't hurt the top dogs, it hurts the guys on the street who may have to use that training to save lives. The vast majority of the officers who come to our range to train are very pro gun and pro CCW. I would not want to see them barred from using our facility because their boss is a asshat. Doing something like this is not a win win, it's a lose lose.

What the Sheriff's and police Chiefs feel about CCW is inconsequntial as long as WE are pushing the politicians to pass the legislation. The problem is that most of the groups in this state don't want to do anything that is not thier own idea. The idea was floated here and is still kicking mind you, of doing defense walks. The same thing that waas done with great effectiveness in Ohio. AdrianUSP9 took the time to put together some great material regarding it, and WCCA said tey'd take it over, nothing has happened on it since. And probably won't, because it doesn't fit with what they think should be done.

We are now in my eyes at the stage of "by any means nessessary" to get CCW. The current situation is that we have been following one route, and that route is taking to damn long. We have not pushed from other directions. And we need to do that. We shjopuld not need legislation to be able to CCW to me thats plan and simple becuase the state constitution does not say how we may or may not carry, just simply that we have the right to. There is nothing that says the legislature has the ability to determine how we may or may not carry. As such we should be able to carry any damn way we please, which is what the current crop of court cases could give us.

There has not been enough of pushing the court cases or looking for alternate means to put preassure on politicians regarding CCW. And until we put that preassure on we won't see shit. WCCA has done a great job of pushing for CCW through ONE avenue, but it's only being pushed through one avenue and thats one of the biggest problems. The WSC said they'd fix the issue if the legislature failed to do so, and they did, now i expect fully that the court should keep it's promise.
Link Posted: 8/17/2005 9:53:16 AM EDT
Uhhhhh ..........

Ronnie Barrett gave the notion some appeal, but this is different.
I don't know if our club's board has the power to exclude law enforcement, but I sure as hell know that the membership would thin to half or less if the facility suddenly took an anti-leo stance.

Preventing individual street cops from training looks anti-cop rather then pro rights.
I don't think it'll further the cause any at all, and I don't want any part of anything that makes my local cops into adversaries.

Most cops are pro gun, the jerkoff chiefs get political aspirations and say dumb shit like this.

Welcome to the board.
Link Posted: 8/18/2005 7:16:16 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Throttle-Junkie:
Most cops are pro gun



What T-J said. It's not 100%, but it's much more than 50%. And excluding LE from your range won't do anything to promote good relations with your local agencies, or give you an opportunity to meet and educate LE who are undecided or anti-CCW.

If you're going to go ahead with the idea anyway, I'd check whether your range used any Robert-Pittman funds (or whatever the heck that Federal law is). I don't believe you can exclude the public (which includes LE agencies) from using the range if those funds were used in construction.
Link Posted: 8/23/2005 7:25:36 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/23/2005 7:28:59 AM EDT by 9divdoc]
This same group approve of and support AG Peg 'the keg' Lautenschlagger after she totaled
a state vehicle she was not entitled to drive...let alone drive drunk and after popping tranqualizers
and anti depressants. (Gee WI's top cop needs & has a script for psych meds???)

No surprise they endorse what Peg 'the keg' and our Vietnam War protester Governor Doyle
have to say about honest WI tax payers having firearms for family and home defense...
Link Posted: 8/23/2005 9:00:54 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 9divdoc:
This same group approve of and support AG Peg 'the keg' Lautenschlagger after she totaled
a state vehicle she was not entitled to drive...let alone drive drunk and after popping tranqualizers
and anti depressants. (Gee WI's top cop needs & has a script for psych meds???)

No surprise they endorse what Peg 'the keg' and our Vietnam War protester Governor Doyle
have to say about honest WI tax payers having firearms for family and home defense...



+1
Link Posted: 8/27/2005 5:37:33 PM EDT

Originally Posted By RavenJeff:
Friends,

The opposition to CCW from civil servants (Police Chiefs & Sheriffs) is not unexpected. Just once I wish some reporter would ask them what there obligation is in protecting the individual. Hint: There is no obligation. In law enforcement thats called a "CLUE"!

You can make a difference with at least some of these people in leadership positions.

Make sure that your local club, which may be used by police departments for training, supports your position on CCW.

If they don't support your right, you should shouldn't be providing them a convient place to conduct training. I am not suggesting we make enemies of our friends in law enforcement. Simply try and get a bit more grass roots support for our cause.

I recently had a chance to review the range calender for several SE Wisconsin clubs and the all had significant activity from local police and even US Marshalls. Why should they get usage of your range when they don't support your rights?

Take action now! Get your club to pass a resolution enforcing the ideas presented above. You can make it happen!

Jeff



Most rank & file support CCW
Link Posted: 8/29/2005 7:01:33 AM EDT
It's a shame that our CLEO's cannot uphold the constitution like they swore to do so.
Link Posted: 8/29/2005 10:24:27 AM EDT

Originally Posted By DavidK:
It's a shame that our CLEO's cannot uphold the constitution like they swore to do so.



Very true, but remember, right now, even the courts have said things like the CCW prohibition are constitutional. So right no, they are at least in their eyes, and of course just because the courts say it's constitutional doen't mean it is.

But to say don't let any LEO use yer range to train is not the answer. It's not the beat cops that set policy. We shooter as a community need to support those cops on the street by allowing them to get training that will save thier life or maybe one day ours. By not letting them, we are hurting ourselves, and our communities.
Link Posted: 8/29/2005 11:23:47 AM EDT

Originally Posted By photoman:

Originally Posted By DavidK:
It's a shame that our CLEO's cannot uphold the constitution like they swore to do so.



Very true, but remember, right now, even the courts have said things like the CCW prohibition are constitutional. So right no, they are at least in their eyes, and of course just because the courts say it's constitutional doen't mean it is.

But to say don't let any LEO use yer range to train is not the answer. It's not the beat cops that set policy. We shooter as a community need to support those cops on the street by allowing them to get training that will save thier life or maybe one day ours. By not letting them, we are hurting ourselves, and our communities.



I agree and disagree. If I owned a shooting range, I wouldn't let LEO's use it, until they answered some questions, are you for guns, do you believe in CCW, do you believe in gun registration, etc...

Depending on those answers, they'd be let in or thrown out.

-David
Top Top