Let the games begin...

[youngunz4life]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011...carry/#comment

the above link is from current foxnews national news. There are some interesting comments too. I am glad WI got their rights back, but the article states the CCW doesn't go into effect for 1/4 of a year. Hopefully everyone can just take a deep breath and relax. Any thoughts on the warranted, required training(if any)?

[Shane Tuttle]

Moving over to L&CR...

[kraigwy]

I'll address the "three month wait before the law goes into effect". I don't know about Wisconsin, but in Wyoming when a law is passed it doesn't go into effect until the start of the next physical year, in our case, July 1st after the law was passed. Wisconsin may have similar rules, I don't know.

An example, our last session the constitutional carry law was passed, it went into effect July first, (10 days ago).

As for training, I think everyone should seek training, there is lots of low cost or free training out there.

BUT

I'm against mandatory training. No where in the constitution does it say we can exercise our rights protected by the constitution IF WE GET TRAINING.

Another thing, training per se is useless unless one practices often, weekly, daily is better. Shooting is not like riding a bicycle. I've been trained, I shoot a lot, but too often I slack off in the winter (getting old) and I have to start over again come spring.

So mandatory training is nothing but a feel good rule that accomplishes nothing. If one cares he/she will train, if not, he/she wont, regardless whether its mandatory or not. Just look at our police departments, they have mandatory training, yet most cant shoot for crap.

[Webleymkv]

I agree with Kraig about the training issue. Here in Indiana, we have no training requirement (though many local police departments do offer classes for a small fee) and we don't seem to have undue problems. As Kraig pointed out, one must still practice regularly in order to maintain proficiency even after taking a training class. If someone is only willing to seek training because they are forced to, then they are unlikely to practice sufficiently to maintain proficiency.

[Romeo 33 Delta]

Well, I just took the Maryland course online and would have printed out the mail in form but my laptop is not compatible with my printer and my real computer is in the shop. When it's back, I'll do it again and do the print and mail routine just because I can.

I think Wisconsin, if they opt not to accept this particular program, would be wise to create one like it. I don't need all the Hunter Safety stuff because I'll NEVER hunt (haven't wanted to since 1969 when I stopped), but I shoot nearly every Monday thru Friday from April to November (if the temp is above 55 and it's not raining). I've done this for years, pistol and rife and have no plans to quit any time soon.

I really can't see where a 8 to 10 hours course is remotely necessary if all you're going after is a permit to carry concealed especially since you can, in Wisconsin, open carry without any kind of permit or training. Frankly, after passing a background check, I'm not sure why they don't just issue a permit, but that's just me.

I'd even push for a State Tax deduction for any and all costs associated with getting a permit since, notwithstanding the giberish that exists in our State Constitution, I have a problem with the State acknowledging the "right to keep and bear arms ......" as a fundamental right and then turn around and say that they can require a permit and charge you for it. Sounds like a "poll tax" to me ... but what do I know, I'm just an senior citizen, ex combat infantryman .

[Tom Servo]

I'm 50/50 on the training issue. I can count two occasions in the last two years in which I was almost injured or killed by an inattentive, incompetent person who had a license to carry.

The moral part of me objects to the idea of licensing carry in the first place, much less requiring a class. The practical part notices that people don't grow up shooting any more, and that it wouldn't hurt a significant portion of gun owners to take a couple of hours to sit through NRA First Steps, at the very least.

Now, if Wisconsin was requiring a 2-day $500 class, only offered in one facility, and only twice every six months, I'd certainly see a problem. However, if the criteria is as broad as I'm interpreting it, it's no harder than Florida.

There's political compromise involved with changes like this, and the mild training requirement doesn't seem too onerous.

(Who else briefly felt their blood turn cold when they saw the phrase "Web Training," though? )

[Romeo 33 Delta]

Well, I've done some more digging into the training requirements as they exist presently for Wisconsin Concealed Carry. It states that an honorable discharge is sufficient. That makes me more than happy. I've been around guns since I was 10 and got a Marlin 81DL for Christmas, shot on and off until 1967-68 when I got to shoot full time on "senior class trip" to S.E. Asia. After that I really got into shooting and now it's a full-time hobby. It's nice that the folks in Madison are taking my military service into account.

Tom, I appreciate your concern at having an idiot fail to show proper respect for a firearm, but I gotta' tell you that I fear training won't always take care of that. Every day I encounter a highway full of folks who have had hours of behind-the-wheel instruction. When you add in all the class time and after that, countless hours of "driving practice", most often on a daily basis, it represents a staggering number of hours when compared to what the most stringent firearms training course requires ... and they still act like idiots.

[CowTowner]

As a wise man (Ron White) once said, "You can't fix stupid."

[Al Norris]

And yet, though this truth would seem so clear, and the importance of a well regulated militia would seem so undeniable, it cannot be disguised, that among the American people there is a growing indifference to any system of militia discipline, and a strong disposition, from a sense of its burthens, to be rid of all regulations. How it is practicable to keep the people duly armed without some organization, it is difficult to see. There is certainly no small danger, that indifference may lead to disgust, and disgust to contempt; and thus gradually undermine all the protection intended by this clause of our national bill of rights." Justice Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States (1833)


But this enables the government to have a well regulated militia; for to bear arms implies something more than the mere keeping; it implies the learning to handle and use them in a way that makes those who keep them ready for their efficient use; in other words, it implies the right to meet for voluntary discipline in arms, observing in doing so the laws of public order. Thomas Cooley, General Principles of Constitutional Law (1880)

Not only did these two scholars see the problem, they implicitly rejected government control to achieve that end.

Simply stated, people who carry arms should voluntarily take training. Such training is taken to heart when this is done. Mandated training will help, but too many reject any training that is mandated, after the course is satisfied.

Fools and idiots will most likely continue to be fools and idiots.

[Eghad]

Here in Texas you have mandatory training. It is no great drag on the pocketbook or personal time.

1. You learn about use of force laws and what might happen as a CCW if you do certain things that might cause you to be charged with a felony.

2. You have to qualify with your handgun.

Police Officers have to qualify and take use of force classes. I do not think it is to much to ask a person to attend a 1 day class and take a written test to demonstrate some knowledge and skill. After all we have to do the same to
get a drivers license.

The test is not overly hard or designed to fail anyone.