Posted on 12/14/2005 6:49:06 AM PST by Diana in Wisconsin
The (WI) state Assembly passed a bill early today that would let Wisconsin residents carry hidden guns and knives after Republicans scaled the plan back to ensure enough support from Democrats to override the governor's looming veto.
The Assembly voted 64-32 to pass the measure after attaching an amendment that sets up more training for gun owners, tightens restrictions on carrying concealed weapons while drinking and sets up new school zones where concealed weapons would be illegal.
The bill next goes to the state Senate. That body approved a version of it last week, but the Assembly amendment changed the language and both houses must approve an identical version.
The Senate is scheduled to return on Jan. 17. If the Senate passes the bill, it would then go to Gov. Jim Doyle, who can sign it into law or veto it.
Wisconsin is one of four states that don't allow residents to carry concealed weapons. The bill would let state residents who pass firearms training and get permits carry concealed handguns, knives, billy clubs and electric shock weapons in most public places. Exceptions include schools, taverns and police stations.
Doyle, a Democrat, already has killed similar concealed carry legislation in 2003 and has pledged to nix this version, too. The changes Republicans made to the bill mean nothing, Doyle spokeswoman Melanie Fonder said.
"It doesn't make anyone safer," she said.
Legislators can override a gubernatorial veto with a two-thirds vote in each house 22 votes in the Senate and 66 in the Assembly. Republicans control the Senate 19-14 and the Assembly 59-39 with a vacancy in the 33rd District seat.
The GOP has been tweaking the bill for days to make it more attractive to Democrats and bolster an override try.
Senate Republicans added an amendment that allows police officers to check if the owners of vehicles they stop are concealed carry permit holders and ban people with a blood alcohol content of .08 percent or higher from carrying.
The Senate passed the measure 23-10, giving Republicans one more vote than they need to override Doyle's veto.
But Democrats kept complaining drunk people would be allowed to carry hidden guns, people might lie on permit applications and permit holders got no additional training after they went through the initial course.
Assembly Republicans spent about four hours late Tuesday evening crafting another amendment. This one would prohibit anyone with a blood alcohol limit of .02 percent or higher from carrying a concealed weapon; ban concealed weapons within within 100 feet of school premises, including school buses as they drive by, unless the carrier was driving through the area; charge anyone who lies on a permit application with a felony; and create four-hour refresher training courses for gun permit holders every five years.
The move worked. The amendment passed overwhelmingly, 71-25, and six Democrats joined the GOP in voting to pass the full bill.
Republicans still fell two votes short of the 66 they needed to get veto-proof on the roll call tally.
But Rep. Mary Williams, R-Medford, who was registered in support of the bill, didn't vote, and Scott Newcomer won a GOP primary in the 33rd District Tuesday. He faces Democrat Patrick Byrne in the Jan. 10 general election, but the 33rd includes parts of Waukesha and leans heavily Republican.
If Newcomer wins the general election, Assembly Republicans would have 60 votes with Williams added to the mix. If the six Democrats stay with them, they would have the 66 votes to override.
The bill is SB 403.
Wisconsin Concealed Carry Ping!
But if Demorats are just "stringing" you along and change their vote - there goes another year and endless time wasted with these tries due to the sleazy party.
You gotta get rid of your current governor.
Live thread: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1539463/posts
See how your Assembly Critter voted.
| WISCONSIN ASSEMBLY 2005-2006 SESSION Speaker Gard SB 403 BY ZIEN CARRYING A CONCEALED WEAPON CONCURRENCE AYES - 64 NAYS - 32 NOT VOTING - 0 PAIRED - 2 |
|
|
|
| IN CHAIR: GOTTLIEB |
| PAIRED AYE: WILLIAMS, M. PAIRED NAY: WASSERMAN |
| VACANT DISTRICT(S): 33 |
| SEQUENCE NO. 415 Wednesday, December 14, 2005 3:07 AM |
Well, we've been waiting 130 years as it is to get THIS close; another year won't kill us if need be, but we will more than likely have the votes to override Doyle, as he'll veto this.
At 3:10 am this morning, the state Assembly passed the Personal Protection Act shall-issue concealed carry bill by a vote of 64 to 32.
All Republican members of the Assembly voted for the bill, except for Republican Representative Mary Williams who was absent due to illness, and for the seat left vacant by Republican Representative Vrakas. That seat will soon be filled by a PPA supporter.
Democrats voting for the bill were the five who voted for the bill and the veto override last year: Representatives Barbara Gronemus, Marlin Schneider, John Steinbrink, Terry Van Akkeren, and Amy Sue Vruwink. Also joining Democrats in voting for the bill was Representative Mary Hubler of Rice Lake.
This brings us to exactly the number of votes we need for a veto override. And Representative Hubler made a public statement that, given the amendments she requested, she would vote for the bill and for a veto override.
Two Democratic representatives from solidly pro-gun districts did not vote for the bill: Representative Mike Sheridan of Janesville, and Representative Tom Nelson from the Kaukauna area.
There were several amendments added to the bill, including a provision that requires a brief "refresher" course upon the expirement of the five year permit; a provision that requires those carrying to have a blood alcohol level of less than .02%; a provision prohibiting carry by persons outside a motor vehicle less than 100 feet from a school, school playground, or property owned by a public school; and a provision that would make it a felony for any person to make a false statement on the application for a permit.
Many who receive these email alerts will be offended by the amendments that had to be accepted. Rest assured, so are the hundreds of WCCA volunteers who've worked literally thousands of hours over the past four years to get us this far.
However, in many respects this bill is less restrictive than the 2003/2004 bill. And, make no mistake, the anti-gunners tried their best. They tried to exempt the city of Milwaukee from an area where you could carry. When that failed, they tried to exempt all of Milwaukee county. They tried to exempt places where children play and alcohol is present--their so-called "Chuck E Cheese's" exemption. They tried to probibit carry at Miller Park stadium, the State Fair Park, and the Summerfest grounds.
They tried to prohibit carry at any facility where nurses work. They tried to prohibit carry at any place that could be called a "playground." They tried to make the list of permit holders available to the public, including the news media. They tried to make it illegal for an employee of a company to even have a firearm in his vehicle if it was in the company's parking lot. They tried to prohibit carry in any place that could be called a "financial institution." They tried to make all private property off-limits to carry, unless the owner of the property posted a "guns-welcome" sign.
And it went on, and on, and on.
Those who stayed up until the wee hours to listen to the debate know that there were many, many restrictions on carry that were shot down. Representative Gunderson did an exceptional job in getting the needed votes while shunting off amendments that would have turned this bill into a worthless piece of paper.
If we didn't have one of the most anti-gun governors in the country, such amendments wouldn't even be necessary.
But, the fact is, Governor James Doyle is indeed one of the most anti-gun governors in the country. If Governor Doyle had not been able to dupe many gun owners back in 2002 into believing that he was pro-gun, we would have a clean shall-issue concealed carry law right now.
That's history. Today is today.
Consider this: Governor Doyle right now has low approval numbers, but that does not mean that he can't win re-election. If he does, his power over members of his party in the legislature will only be stronger.
Here's an even more ominous possibility: twenty legislative Republicans will be retiring from office in 2006. If the Republicans should suffer even a net three-seat loss in the state senate, the concealed carry bill will never even get a committee hearing, much less a floor vote. It would be a repeat of 2002, when Democrat Majority Leader Chuck Chvala controlled the Senate and kept the bill from being voted upon.
If the Democrats win back the Senate, it will not matter who is governor: the Personal Protection Act will never see a vote.
With those two possibilities facing us, supporters of the bill decided that we would stand a better chance of getting an amended bill passed now, rather than gamble on what happens in the elections next November.
Because of the additional amendments, the bill now heads back to the Senate where members will vote to approve the amendments. There should be no fight there, and the amended bill should pass quickly.
And then, of course, Governor Doyle will veto the bill.
In the coming weeks, it is extremely important that you write, call and email your representatives to either thank them for their vote, or to urge them to reconsider their positions and vote to override Governor Doyle's veto. If Representative Gary Sherman could change his position last year and vote to sustain Doyle's veto then, with enough pressure from constituents, a legislator who voted against the bill today can change his or her position and vote to override the veto.
The first veto override session will take place in the Senate sometime in January, and then will be followed by an Assembly veto override vote.
That gives us just weeks to convince members of the Assembly that their chances of re-election this fall lie not with the governor, but with the massive numbers of gun owners in the state.
This has been a tough fight, and we've come a long way, too far to give up now.
We've reached the number of votes to defeat Doyle. Whether or not we win is up to you.
To get the contact information for your representative, go to http://165.189.139.210/waml/ and enter your address.
And, please forward this to every friend of Freedom that you know.
Thanks,
The Wisconsin Concealed Carry Association
What about people who live within 100 feet of school premises? What about people who drive past a school on a public road? What about a parent who picks their child up across the street from a school?
What good is a CCW law if they hang so many restrictions on the carry that you can be stripped of the permit for any silly violation?
I almost am for no bill and let the WI Sup Ct say the WI constitution allows self-defense, including going about armed.
Why on earth is it deemed necessary by the left to leave schools unprotected? How far would Klebold and Harris have gotten if a couple of teachers or office staff were carrying? Do these folks feel that school massacres are beneficial in the campaign to confiscate guns?
It also wouldn't hurt to write COURTEOUS letters to each one not supporting this bill, explaining the fallacies of their anti-CCW arguments and give them really stats of the successes of CCW in other states. Yes, there are those we simply won't convince but others may actually be on the fence and can be won over.
Lautenschlagger is staying far away from speaking her mind she fears her last days in office are drawing nigh and the Gov. needs her to stay viable just in case he needs a friend in law enforcement and prosecution...
imo
"I almost am for no bill and let the WI Sup Ct say the WI constitution allows self-defense, including going about armed."
Which other states went that route? I know we're in the last four to have CC, but I don't know how the other states went about it.
Thanks, Spunkets. E-Signed and sent. :)
Advice to anyone who is upset about the amendments (and the other compromises to get it passed in the Senate in the first place): take what you can get, wait a year or two, and then go back for more. It is the mirror image of what the hoplophobes have done for the last 3 generations, and it is a strategy that has worked well in Texas. Here we passed a pretty lousy carry law in '95, but it has been amended at least 3 times to make it more practical. Also, experience with concealed carry has shown that the holders of the permits (and, yes, the very idea of a permit rankles me) are far more law-abiding than the average person, and less likely to have negligent discharges than even the police. Such experience will doubtless be repeated in Wisconsin.
Bottom line: take what's on the table now and run. Get more later, after you've gotten tens or hundreds of thousands of licensees, and after many more people get guns.
See my #17. Take what you can get, go back for more later. Salami-slice the antis, just like they did to us.
You'll notice that no states have rescinded their carry laws, and many have gotten more "liberal" (which is to say, permissive). When confronted by years of facts, plus a growing number of regular shooters, the legislatures have no choice but to do this.
Regarding carrying w/o a license (other than a piece of parchment): while it sounds great in theory, I'd rather not be the test case. You get arrested, and have the pleasure of paying a defense lawyer tens of thousands of dollars for a result that is far from certain. Theoretically, you are 100% correct. However, we gun owners will sway more of the "I don't care/know anything about this" crowd to our side by playing by the rules (and, as is the case with carry legislation, by actually *making* the rules over time).
Just my $0.02.
Thank you. I agree. Take what we can get for now and go from there. And I don't even plan on getting a cc license. I don't want a handgun now, but do have a .22 and a shotgun for hunting. I never wanted a handgun in the house while my boys were growing up; too tempting, even if they had their own air pistols, BB guns, .22s, etc. as they were mature enough to handle each stage.
I think the only reason I would get a handgun is if I'm widowed and decided to still live out here in the boonies alone. The sound of DH or I chambering a shotgun shell heard by anyone that would be lurking around in the house in the dead of night, seems to be enough defense to me for now. ;)
I sat up and listened to this and thats not what I heard.
The fellow who had the floor and was speaking against the amendment had a lengthy conversation with the apparent originator of the amendment, the woman from the 75th, where he kept saying things like, "So, do I understand correctly that if Im driving by a bus or walking down the street and a bus drives past me that Im guilty of a class I felony and will spend 42 months in jail" and she kept responding affirmatively. He went on at some length about what a dangerous amendment that was for obvious reasons.
I didnt hear anything about "driving through" exceptions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.