Posted: 2/5/2012 11:38:37 AM EDT
|
So I have a question for the HTF hive. Once we get past the recalls....assuming Walker stays and the legislature stays favorable, what legislation should we be pushing for? Or should we start the discussions now with our legislators?
I have two items to push: 1. Exempt CCW holders from the 48 hour waiting period for handgun purchases. It should be safe to assume most CCW holders have a firearm, so the 48 hour waiting period serves no purpose. We can still agree to the back ground check at $13 fee, just get rid of the 48 hour wait. 2. Remove the requirement for CLEO authorization to purchase a MG. BATF is removing the CLEO sign off for NFA, so we can sell this as just aligning WI law with those of AG Holder and Mr Obama.....how can Democrats argue against that? Discuss |
| Yep. Those would be the two. 1 should already have been included in the Concealed Carry Bill. I don't know if it was even considered. The whole MG CLEO authorization mess really needs to be fixed too. Unfortunately, I think that just the word "machine gun" is going to scare some legislators away. |
|
Make it so that if you limit CCW in your business. The sign must be 18" x 12" bright yello. Placed no more that 3 feet from the bottom of the pedestrian entrance and no more that 7 feet above the bottom of the pedestrian entrance and within 1 foot to the side of the pedestrian entrance. If the entrance is 5 feet or wider 2 signs must be place to each side of the pedestrian entrance and no more than 7 feed apart. So if you had a 10 foot entrance you would need a sign to each side and then one posted in the middle.
If you pull you car into a building like a garage or car dealership to get it worked on each lane entrance must be marked with a sign. How bad is it the no one makes a bright yello no CCW sign that 18" x12". 
|
|
1) standardized signs for posting. I hate having to scan the entrance. Blaze orange 8.5x11 sheet of paper with a statue citation and black lettering minimum 1-2" high saying NO FIREARMS. none of this opaque BS where it says no concealed guns, no firearms without permit, etc. And no more 3"x3" vynil lettering stuck way down underneath the 50 other items posted on the door.
2) elimination of rules surrounding alcohol and CCW. After reading the GD post, I tend to agree. If you're a moron after a drink or two, you're a moron before. I'm ok with CCW up to the legal limit of driving, .08 BAC. I don't want to have to disarm every time I want to sample a beer with dinner. 3) elimination of background checks for current and valid CCW holders. I already pay sales tax when buying a gun; the DOJ already provides penalties for not notifying and surrendering the lisc in the event that I become ineligible. |
|
Quoted: Make it so that if you limit CCW in your business. The sign must be 18" x 12" bright yello. Placed no more that 3 feet from the bottom of the pedestrian entrance and no more that 7 feet above the bottom of the pedestrian entrance and within 1 foot to the side of the pedestrian entrance. If the entrance is 5 feet or wider 2 signs must be place to each side of the pedestrian entrance and no more than 7 feed apart. So if you had a 10 foot entrance you would need a sign to each side and then one posted in the middle. If you pull you car into a building like a garage or car dealership to get it worked on each lane entrance must be marked with a sign. How bad is it the no one makes a bright yello no CCW sign that 18" x12". And change it so stores that dont allow it only can ask you to leave and only can have you charged for tresspassing IF you refuse to leave. Although I still like my idea of making stores that dont want to allow ccw be forced to paint thier buidlings a specific formula of bright pink (which I will come up with and patent and costs $10K/gal of which I get 90% of it  . Hey I want to have a huge firearm collection and got to fund it somehow).
|
|
I say push for the elimination of the handgun hotline along with their $13 background checks and 48 hour hold and use NICS like it was designed. The federal system is in place to give us our firearms near instantly, without any type of waiting period. Lets push to save money and free the DOJ up for more important stuff, the antiquated system needs to go and CCL holders don't need any special privileges.
I would like to see a defined limit for drinking and carrying .08 would be fine, but I wouldn't want to open that can of worms. Let the first court case decide before we give the dems another crack at it, we got bar carry in with the package but if held on it's own it's a tough sell. With the Aldi's incident a push for common signage and placement would be great, the original bill had it in there but it was bastardized in one of the re-write's. Fix the definition of a concealed weapon so that a firearm doesn't need to be on the dashboard for non-CCL holders. You can transport a loaded firearm, load, unload and have one in a vehicle it just has to be above the window line 
Make the no guns signs a "suggestion" with no legal weight. Do a huge push for Constitutional Carry it's just the right thing to do and if it don't work, the other fixes should slide right through again.
|
|
Quoted:
Would a version of the stand your ground be something worth pursuing, or is it not needed with what we already have on the books? Holly crap, I can't believe I forgot about that. YES, we need a good stand your ground law. Anyplace I have a legal right to be. All the other stuff is just fluff compared to this. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Would a version of the stand your ground be something worth pursuing, or is it not needed with what we already have on the books? Holly crap, I can't believe I forgot about that. YES, we need a good stand your ground law. Anyplace I have a legal right to be. All the other stuff is just fluff compared to this. I wasn't sure if I was off base in suggesting it. I was blown away when we got our castle doctrine, but with conceal carry, I'd love to have some stronger protections should I need to protect myself or my family, and not worry about some potential poo storm coming my way. |
|
Quoted:
So I have a question for the HTF hive. Once we get past the recalls....assuming Walker stays and the legislature stays favorable, what legislation should we be pushing for? Or should we start the discussions now with our legislators? I have two items to push: 1. Exempt CCW holders from the 48 hour waiting period for handgun purchases. It should be safe to assume most CCW holders have a firearm, so the 48 hour waiting period serves no purpose. We can still agree to the back ground check at $13 fee, just get rid of the 48 hour wait. 2. Remove the requirement for CLEO authorization to purchase a MG. BATF is removing the CLEO sign off for NFA, so we can sell this as just aligning WI law with those of AG Holder and Mr Obama.....how can Democrats argue against that? Discuss Here's one- exempt CCW holders from background checks. ATF allows for it and even has a special place on the 4473 to put in someone's CCW permit as an exemption to a background check. Mike |
| In addition to eliminating the 48 hr handgun "wait" for everyone, a current & valid CHL should eliminate the NICS check altogether. This is already in effect in 22 other States. http://www.atf.gov/firearms/brady-law/permit-chart.html. But before this can happen, the BATF must put WI on it's "alternative list" of States where this is allowed under federal law. The main criteria for being on that "list" is that NICS is used to get the CHL (which we have already). |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
So I have a question for the HTF hive. Once we get past the recalls....assuming Walker stays and the legislature stays favorable, what legislation should we be pushing for? Or should we start the discussions now with our legislators? I have two items to push: 1. Exempt CCW holders from the 48 hour waiting period for handgun purchases. It should be safe to assume most CCW holders have a firearm, so the 48 hour waiting period serves no purpose. We can still agree to the back ground check at $13 fee, just get rid of the 48 hour wait. 2. Remove the requirement for CLEO authorization to purchase a MG. BATF is removing the CLEO sign off for NFA, so we can sell this as just aligning WI law with those of AG Holder and Mr Obama.....how can Democrats argue against that? Discuss Here's one- exempt CCW holders from background checks. ATF allows for it and even has a special place on the 4473 to put in someone's CCW permit as an exemption to a background check. Mike  I was typing (and finding the link) while you were posting.
|
|
Machinegun Modernization Act....which would bring Wisconsin's outdated (pre-NFA) laws up to date to match current NFA laws.
Naturally, the no waiting to purchase handguns for CCW holders. Permit CCW holders to carry ANY weapon. Permit ANY weapon to be loaded in a vehicle that is not concealed (concealed only with a permit). Remove any verbiage that makes it unlawful to discharge a firearm from a vehicle. Stand your ground law...basically extend castle doctrine. We should not have to run in fear if threatened. |
|
Quoted:
Machinegun Modernization Act....which would bring Wisconsin's outdated (pre-NFA) laws up to date to match current NFA laws. Naturally, the no waiting to purchase handguns for CCW holders. Permit CCW holders to carry ANY weapon. Permit ANY weapon to be loaded in a vehicle that is not concealed (concealed only with a permit). Remove any verbiage that makes it unlawful to discharge a firearm from a vehicle. Stand your ground law...basically extend castle doctrine. We should not have to run in fear if threatened. I like all of this. How about doing what Montana(?) did and make new machine guns built and kept within the boarders of the state legal to own/operate...at least...that's the last i heard on that. |
|
Quoted:
How about doing what Montana(?) did and make new machine guns built and kept within the boarders of the state legal to own/operate...at least...that's the last i heard on that. IIRC, Montana's law at best only covered Title I firearms, and at worst, had no weight of law. I.e Montana LEO's may have obeyed it, but ATF made it clear they would still prosecute. Been a while since I read that whole ordeal, but that's my recollection. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
How about doing what Montana(?) did and make new machine guns built and kept within the boarders of the state legal to own/operate...at least...that's the last i heard on that. IIRC, Montana's law at best only covered Title I firearms, and at worst, had no weight of law. I.e Montana LEO's may have obeyed it, but ATF made it clear they would still prosecute. Been a while since I read that whole ordeal, but that's my recollection. o....sucks. 
|
|
Quoted:
Machinegun Modernization Act....which would bring Wisconsin's outdated (pre-NFA) laws up to date to match current NFA laws. . That's way too unsanitized. A title like that begs for trouble and cold feet. Simply slide a statute revision into another bill. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Machinegun Modernization Act....which would bring Wisconsin's outdated (pre-NFA) laws up to date to match current NFA laws. . That's way too unsanitized. A title like that begs for trouble and cold feet. Simply slide a statute revision into another bill. unsanitized? You'd figure liberals would be all for replacing our old, antiquated machinegun laws.
|
|
Quoted:
So I have a question for the HTF hive. Once we get past the recalls....assuming Walker stays and the legislature stays favorable, what legislation should we be pushing for? Or should we start the discussions now with our legislators? I have two items to push: 1. Exempt CCW holders from the 48 hour waiting period for handgun purchases. It should be safe to assume most CCW holders have a firearm, so the 48 hour waiting period serves no purpose. We can still agree to the back ground check at $13 fee, just get rid of the 48 hour wait. While I fully support this, here's the problem as I understand it. I transferred a handgun to a guy who had his CCL. When I got the handgun hotline on the phone I asked them if I needed to do the check since he has a nice brandy new CCL. They told me that the database that holds all the information about who has a license and whether or not it's valid is locked down tighter than fort knox and only a handful of people had access to it. Using a CCL in lieu of a background check would require allowing them to access the CCL database for almost anybody. If I remember correctly privacy regarding CCL's was a major issue for a lot of people. Freeing up access to that database may cause a problem there. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
So I have a question for the HTF hive. Once we get past the recalls....assuming Walker stays and the legislature stays favorable, what legislation should we be pushing for? Or should we start the discussions now with our legislators? I have two items to push: 1. Exempt CCW holders from the 48 hour waiting period for handgun purchases. It should be safe to assume most CCW holders have a firearm, so the 48 hour waiting period serves no purpose. We can still agree to the back ground check at $13 fee, just get rid of the 48 hour wait. While I fully support this, here's the problem as I understand it. I transferred a handgun to a guy who had his CCL. When I got the handgun hotline on the phone I asked them if I needed to do the check since he has a nice brandy new CCL. They told me that the database that holds all the information about who has a license and whether or not it's valid is locked down tighter than fort knox and only a handful of people had access to it. Using a CCL in lieu of a background check would require allowing them to access the CCL database for almost anybody. If I remember correctly privacy regarding CCL's was a major issue for a lot of people. Freeing up access to that database may cause a problem there. Why? More precisely, why would anybody need to access the database? That's the whole point of using a CCL in lieu of NICS or DOJ. No need for any interaction between FFL & NICS or DOJ. The CCL is proof of passage of a background check. The FFL simply records the CCL's number on the 4473 instead of getting a "proceed" code from a phone call (there is no "phone call"). The feds already allow this, why shouldn't the State of WI, when 22 other States do? |
|
I would like to see the elimination of wording specific signs.
IE, my place of work forbids "dangerous weapons" (my guns have safetys!) Taco bell near my house forbids "concealed firearms" (i will OC) other places say "no handguns". I will load and sling my SBR AR. While technically following the wording of the sign, these clearly are violations of the "spirit of the sign" (if there is such a thing), much like the "spirit of the law". If someone isn't careful in choosing the wording on their sign, i see it leading to someone being arrested for a knife too large in a business where "no concealed firearms" signs are posted. It's all BS and I would hope that they realize it's not working... /rant. |
|
Some of these are great additions to my initial list.....so how do we push them to into law?
We can work with NRA, Political Parties, individual legislators, etc, but what has been the most productive methods? I am comfortable pushing them down multiple avenues, but I would like to get feedback from anyone who has done something like this in the past....on any political topic. |
|
For me, I've seen good results with calling the reps for my area. Van Wangaard has been incredible to have in office and is a true 2a proponent. Bob Turner, on the other hand is a hard-line Dem, but I still contact him all the time and let him know that the way he votes affects the way I vote. Of course, the redistricting has really solidified his position in his district and I'm stuck in it. The good news is that he picked up some areas that keep Mason in, so there's a good likelihood that the republicans pick up another Racine county seat in the assembly.
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So I have a question for the HTF hive. Once we get past the recalls....assuming Walker stays and the legislature stays favorable, what legislation should we be pushing for? Or should we start the discussions now with our legislators? I have two items to push: 1. Exempt CCW holders from the 48 hour waiting period for handgun purchases. It should be safe to assume most CCW holders have a firearm, so the 48 hour waiting period serves no purpose. We can still agree to the back ground check at $13 fee, just get rid of the 48 hour wait. While I fully support this, here's the problem as I understand it. I transferred a handgun to a guy who had his CCL. When I got the handgun hotline on the phone I asked them if I needed to do the check since he has a nice brandy new CCL. They told me that the database that holds all the information about who has a license and whether or not it's valid is locked down tighter than fort knox and only a handful of people had access to it. Using a CCL in lieu of a background check would require allowing them to access the CCL database for almost anybody. If I remember correctly privacy regarding CCL's was a major issue for a lot of people. Freeing up access to that database may cause a problem there. Why? More precisely, why would anybody need to access the database? That's the whole point of using a CCL in lieu of NICS or DOJ. No need for any interaction between FFL & NICS or DOJ. The CCL is proof of passage of a background check. The FFL simply records the CCL's number on the 4473 instead of getting a "proceed" code from a phone call (there is no "phone call"). The feds already allow this, why shouldn't the State of WI, when 22 other States do? Just because you have a CCL in your hand does not guarantee that you didn't do something in the last week or month that now disqualifies you. The DOJ may revoke your license but you still have possession of the card. There's no way of knowing whether or not it's truly valid without doing a check, which requires access to the database. |
|
Quoted:
Just because you have a CCL in your hand does not guarantee that you didn't do something in the last week or month that now disqualifies you. The DOJ may revoke your license but you still have possession of the card. There's no way of knowing whether or not it's truly valid without doing a check, which requires access to the database. There's no check in all the other states. When I lived in ND, you show your CCW, and it's cash & carry. No call for confirmation, no background check, nothing. You have the card, so it is valid. I don't see a need to complicate it any more than that. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Just because you have a CCL in your hand does not guarantee that you didn't do something in the last week or month that now disqualifies you. The DOJ may revoke your license but you still have possession of the card. There's no way of knowing whether or not it's truly valid without doing a check, which requires access to the database. There's no check in all the other states. When I lived in ND, you show your CCW, and it's cash & carry. No call for confirmation, no background check, nothing. You have the card, so it is valid. I don't see a need to complicate it any more than that. It is the same in NV. Also I disagree with the 18'X12" NO CCW sign size. I think it should be 6 X10 FEET...
V OUT |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Machinegun Modernization Act....which would bring Wisconsin's outdated (pre-NFA) laws up to date to match current NFA laws. . That's way too unsanitized. A title like that begs for trouble and cold feet. Simply slide a statute revision into another bill. "the machine gun prohabition modernization act" An act to protect wisconsin citizens by bring wisconsins 80 year old machine gun laws in sync with current federal law banning the transfer of machine guns to unliscenced individuals" ( we don't tell them the "wisconsin citizens" we are protecting are machine gun owners, the we are protecting them from prosecution , and the there is an exemption for pre -86 guns in federal law for "unliscenced individuals" Naming bills is an artform all it's own... 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So I have a question for the HTF hive. Once we get past the recalls....assuming Walker stays and the legislature stays favorable, what legislation should we be pushing for? Or should we start the discussions now with our legislators? I have two items to push: 1. Exempt CCW holders from the 48 hour waiting period for handgun purchases. It should be safe to assume most CCW holders have a firearm, so the 48 hour waiting period serves no purpose. We can still agree to the back ground check at $13 fee, just get rid of the 48 hour wait. While I fully support this, here's the problem as I understand it. I transferred a handgun to a guy who had his CCL. When I got the handgun hotline on the phone I asked them if I needed to do the check since he has a nice brandy new CCL. They told me that the database that holds all the information about who has a license and whether or not it's valid is locked down tighter than fort knox and only a handful of people had access to it. Using a CCL in lieu of a background check would require allowing them to access the CCL database for almost anybody. If I remember correctly privacy regarding CCL's was a major issue for a lot of people. Freeing up access to that database may cause a problem there. Why? More precisely, why would anybody need to access the database? That's the whole point of using a CCL in lieu of NICS or DOJ. No need for any interaction between FFL & NICS or DOJ. The CCL is proof of passage of a background check. The FFL simply records the CCL's number on the 4473 instead of getting a "proceed" code from a phone call (there is no "phone call"). The feds already allow this, why shouldn't the State of WI, when 22 other States do? Just because you have a CCL in your hand does not guarantee that you didn't do something in the last week or month that now disqualifies you. The DOJ may revoke your license but you still have possession of the card. There's no way of knowing whether or not it's truly valid without doing a check, which requires access to the database. Just because you pass a background check doesn't mean you did not commit a felony (or domestic battery) last night, last week, or last month, that hasn't "hit the system" yet. It comes down to lying on the 4473 and eventually getting caught doing so. If your CHL gets revoked, using it on a 4473 to buy a gun is also another serious crime. As others have said... it's the SOP in other States already. If it was a big issue, it would've been stopped by now by the feds.
Besides all that... how many times have you done a NICS or DOJ call for someone who was correctly denied because of a felony conviction? Felons don't get CHLs, felons don't buy guns from FFLs, they buy them on the street. If other states are any indication, the CHL revocation rate due to criminal acts that would disqualify firearm ownership is extremely low, something like a few hundreths of a percent. The fear of someone with a revoked CHL buying a gun from a FFL without a Brady check is a non-issue. |
|
Thanks again for everyone' s input. I am going to have some free time in the near future and thought pushing gun legislation would be a good hobby. Any ideas on pushing the elimination of the handgun hotline? Because the system is set up, there must be a process to get WI CCW added. I have a few paths I plan to work:
1. Letters to my US Congressmen and Senator Johnson. 2. Talk to NRA about it at the convention in April. Is this a topic for WI AG to push with BATFE? |
|
Quoted:
Thanks again for everyone' s input. I am going to have some free time in the near future and thought pushing gun legislation would be a good hobby. Any ideas on pushing the elimination of the handgun hotline? Because the system is set up, there must be a process to get WI CCW added. I have a few paths I plan to work: 1. Letters to my US Congressmen and Senator Johnson. 2. Talk to NRA about it at the convention in April. Is this a topic for WI AG to push with BATFE? Enforcement of the 48 hr wait on handguns in WI is the cause for the seperate DOJ handgun hotline. It's how the state can keep track of when the 48hrs starts and expires. When the Brady Law was enacted, waiting periods were federally mandated, but when NICS went on-line about 5 years later, waiting periods were no longer federally mandated, and were replaced by the instant checks of NICS. My point is that the 48 hr wait and handgun hotline are solely a result of state level legislation, and can be replaced at any time with a NICS check on handguns (same as long guns, with no "wait") as far as the Feds are concerned. As for "cash & carry without NICS" for CHL holders, that requires BATFE approval. AFAIK, BATFE's criteria is that - a CHL in that state requires a NICS check to obtain, and the CHL is valid for no more than 5 yrs. Whether or not BATFE would put WI on their "approved" list without a request to do so from WI's AG, I don't know. But I do believe that if the WI AG did request it, and WI met the criteria, BATFE would do so. But... the WI legislature would first have to eliminate the 48hr handgun wait (necessary if it were to apply to handguns), or create a CHL "exception" to the 48 hr wait legislation. This issue has never been raised in WI before, because we had no CHLs. Now that we do, this is the next logical step to strive for. Why should someone with a CHL need to wait 48 hrs? Why should anyone who passes NICS and can "walk away with" a shotgun/rifle need a 48 hr wait for a handgun? Only in the "mind of a liberal" does this make any sense. It defies logic that with a CHL I can carry a handgun concealed, almost anywhere... but I still must wait 2 days to possess one when I buy it. WTF????
|
|
Quoted:
Only in the "mind of a liberal" does this make any sense. It defies logic that with a CHL I can carry a handgun concealed, almost anywhere... but I still must wait 2 days to possess one when I buy it. WTF???? My girlfriend works with a bunch of lib anti's, she was telling them how I open carried a handgun that was loaded with 18 rounds while I purchased an assault sporting rifle that came with two thirty round magazines and another handgun that only held 7. She asked which firearm do you think he left with? All the libs said the small handgun of course! They all were like when told I had to cool off for forty-eight hours before I could pick up the mouse gun.
Of course deep in their minds I shouldn't have been allowed to buy any firearms 
|
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So I have a question for the HTF hive. Once we get past the recalls....assuming Walker stays and the legislature stays favorable, what legislation should we be pushing for? Or should we start the discussions now with our legislators? I have two items to push: 1. Exempt CCW holders from the 48 hour waiting period for handgun purchases. It should be safe to assume most CCW holders have a firearm, so the 48 hour waiting period serves no purpose. We can still agree to the back ground check at $13 fee, just get rid of the 48 hour wait. While I fully support this, here's the problem as I understand it. I transferred a handgun to a guy who had his CCL. When I got the handgun hotline on the phone I asked them if I needed to do the check since he has a nice brandy new CCL. They told me that the database that holds all the information about who has a license and whether or not it's valid is locked down tighter than fort knox and only a handful of people had access to it. Using a CCL in lieu of a background check would require allowing them to access the CCL database for almost anybody. If I remember correctly privacy regarding CCL's was a major issue for a lot of people. Freeing up access to that database may cause a problem there. Why? More precisely, why would anybody need to access the database? That's the whole point of using a CCL in lieu of NICS or DOJ. No need for any interaction between FFL & NICS or DOJ. The CCL is proof of passage of a background check. The FFL simply records the CCL's number on the 4473 instead of getting a "proceed" code from a phone call (there is no "phone call"). The feds already allow this, why shouldn't the State of WI, when 22 other States do? Just because you have a CCL in your hand does not guarantee that you didn't do something in the last week or month that now disqualifies you. The DOJ may revoke your license but you still have possession of the card. There's no way of knowing whether or not it's truly valid without doing a check, which requires access to the database. Just because you pass a background check doesn't mean you did not commit a felony (or domestic battery) last night, last week, or last month, that hasn't "hit the system" yet. It comes down to lying on the 4473 and eventually getting caught doing so. If your CHL gets revoked, using it on a 4473 to buy a gun is also another serious crime. As others have said... it's the SOP in other States already. If it was a big issue, it would've been stopped by now by the feds.
Besides all that... how many times have you done a NICS or DOJ call for someone who was correctly denied because of a felony conviction? Felons don't get CHLs, felons don't buy guns from FFLs, they buy them on the street. If other states are any indication, the CHL revocation rate due to criminal acts that would disqualify firearm ownership is extremely low, something like a few hundreths of a percent. The fear of someone with a revoked CHL buying a gun from a FFL without a Brady check is a non-issue. You're absolutely correct. As I said originally I fully support the idea of using CWL in lieu of a 48 hour wait and check. This would open whole to markets to us dealers. Many customers will not drive much more than a half hour to hour to buy a hand gun, then wait 48 hours and drive again. What I posted is what was explained to me by a handgun hotline operator. As an FFL, my only concern is that my ass is covered. I really don't want to be putting guns into the hands of people who would use them for illegal purposes. |