Posted on 08/28/2003 1:56:50 PM PDT by jdege
By TOM KERTSCHER
tkertscher@journalsentinel.com
Last Updated: Aug. 28, 2003
Racine - In what may be the first action of its kind in the country, a Racine alderman said Thursday that the Racine Common Council will approve a resolution opposing legislation to allow Wisconsin residents to carry concealed weapons.
Two national organizations that also oppose concealed carry say it would be the first time a U.S. city has formally opposed such a bill.
But state Rep. Scott Gunderson (R-Waterford), one of the sponsors of the weapons bill, said it will easily pass the Legislature and be sent to Gov. Jim Doyle in October. Doyle has expressed opposition to the so-called concealed-carry proposal, but Gunderson said he is not assuming the governor will veto the bill.
Racine Ald. Pete Karas said he will introduce his resolution to the Racine Common Council on Tuesday and the council likely will vote on it Sept. 16. A majority on the 15-member council already supports the resolution, given that seven have signed on as co-sponsors, he said.
Karas said the resolution is not an anti-gun statement but opposes the concealed-carry proposal because it would lead to more gun crimes and gun accidents. The resolution is important because it will underscore how most Wisconsin residents oppose allowing concealed weapons to be carried, he said.
Karas agreed that the Legislature is likely to approve the bill, but said he expects Doyle to veto it. He said he wants to build opposition in case the Legislature would attempt to override a veto.
Gunderson acknowledged that polls have indicated most Wisconsin residents oppose a concealed-carry law. But he said that is only in the abstract, and that once people learn that the bill requires weapons training, an FBI background check and the issuance of a permit, they support the measure, he said.
Spokesmen for two Washington, D.C.-based national organizations that oppose concealed-carry - the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence and the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence - said they believe no American city has formally opposed a concealed carry bill before it was enacted into law.
Cities have tried to restrict concealed-carry laws, "but this is the first time that I know of a city that got ahead of the curve," said Khalid Pitts, state director of the coalition.
Richard Baker, treasurer of the Greenfield-based Wisconsin Concealed Carry Association, which was formed to support the bill, said opposition such as the Racine resolution is misplaced because 44 states already allow concealed weapons to be carried.
"At this point it's kind of like having this huge debate over issuing people drivers licenses and having them go out on the road," he said.
Spokesmen for two Washington, D.C.-based national organizations that oppose concealed-carry - the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence and the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence - said they believe no American city has formally opposed a concealed carry bill before it was enacted into law.
Oh?
Hey, two lies for the price of one!
That said, from what I know, I THINK the city of Racine isn't the nicest town around.
And a third, just for good measure.
The resolution is important because it will underscore how most Wisconsin residents oppose allowing concealed weapons to be carried, he said.
Wisconsin residents oppose allowing concealed weapons to be carried,
Which is why, after the Democrat-controlled Senate boxed up the bill last session, preventing a vote, they elected enough more Republicans to put them in control of the Senate, this session.
The fact that it has had exactly the opposite effect in dozens of states where it's been legal for years does not seem to have influenced this decision. Where knowledge is abandoned, ignorance must suffice, I suppose.
But then, "gun control" has never been about truth, crime or safety anyway, but simply about control.
How many of those victims wouldn't be, had they had the ability to legally carry concealed firearms?
IS Wisconsin the next Kalifornia?
Wisconsin is the next Minnesota - the soon-to-be 36th shall-issue state (unless Missouri over-rides One-Time-Bob's veto, and gets it done first.)
Minnesota and Wisconsin were the liberal twins - states initially settled in by German socialists fleeing the failed revolution of 1848, and which have always had a leftist flavor to their politics.
But both have recently turned solidly Republican, and the liberals don't like it, at all.
We'll see. Jim Doyle is Gray Davis without the anchorman hair. As attorney general, he proposed an anti-terrorism bill that would have banned all ammunition that could be used in a weapon capable of firing more than one shot.
On the plus side, the State Supreme Court just loosened the ban on carrying a concealed weapon and recommended that a new law be passed. (Previously it had been illegal to carry concealed even in your own home.) Any CCW law needs to be passed with a veto-proof majority, since Doyle will veto it and lean on the Dims to sustain the veto.
I agree and I grew up there.
Wisconsin has a Republican House and Senate - so the tricks that were necessary to force a floor vote in the Minnesota Senate will not be necessary, but a Democratic governor, so a veto is possible.
I'm not at all certain that Wisconsin can override a veto, right now. But I am certain that if they do not, the pro-gun forces are going to win considerably, in the 2004 election.
The opposition of "inner-city"-type politicians makes more sense when you take into account that CCW results in the MIDDLE-CLASS being armed, which has certain implications:
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.