Master Doug Huffman
Banned
imported post
davegran wrote:
davegran wrote:
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
ICarry to push for Constitution Carry (no permit aka Vermont style) in Wisconsin?
- Thread starter SAK
- Start date
paul@paul-fisher.com
Regular Member
imported post
davegran wrote:
I am not speaking for Nik but I think what he is saying is that we need to start thinking about where our individual 'line in the sand' is.
Personally, what I want (not necessarily will settle for) us unrestricted carry, whether I choose to OC or CC, anywhere I choose. Would I 'settle' for a courthouse prohibition? Don't know yet, depends on the other parts of the bill.
The other thing that is 'discuss able' is whether WI would issue a voluntary CC permit so that states that aren't as open minded as we plan on being can give us reciprocity.
Once again, just tossing out suggestions.
davegran wrote:
I am not speaking for Nik but I think what he is saying is that we need to start thinking about where our individual 'line in the sand' is.
Personally, what I want (not necessarily will settle for) us unrestricted carry, whether I choose to OC or CC, anywhere I choose. Would I 'settle' for a courthouse prohibition? Don't know yet, depends on the other parts of the bill.
The other thing that is 'discuss able' is whether WI would issue a voluntary CC permit so that states that aren't as open minded as we plan on being can give us reciprocity.
Once again, just tossing out suggestions.
Wisconsin Carry Inc. - Chairman
Wisconsin Carry, Inc.
imported post
SAK wrote:
Fair enough. no one disagrees that a permit is a privilege and no one is confusing a privilege with a right. Many people call a permit system a "compromise" so I just wanted to clarify what you meant by the verbage you used in your initial post. Thank-you for doing so.
Wisconsin Carry doesn't support any exchange of one right for another, nor an exchange of a right for a privilege, but we do support any step forward. If we don't get non-permitted carry this time around, we will continue to push for it. It worked in Alaska and Arizona, states that went from permitted carry to non-permitted right to carry.
SAK wrote:
Fair enough. no one disagrees that a permit is a privilege and no one is confusing a privilege with a right. Many people call a permit system a "compromise" so I just wanted to clarify what you meant by the verbage you used in your initial post. Thank-you for doing so.
Wisconsin Carry doesn't support any exchange of one right for another, nor an exchange of a right for a privilege, but we do support any step forward. If we don't get non-permitted carry this time around, we will continue to push for it. It worked in Alaska and Arizona, states that went from permitted carry to non-permitted right to carry.
Wisconsin Carry Inc. - Chairman
Wisconsin Carry, Inc.
imported post
You've clearly mis-understood my intention
Certainly could but we'd have to agree in principle on many things first. That is what I was trying to do understand in this thread before your mis-accusations of my trying to start a "turf war."
I was trying to clarify what "no compromise, not give up an inch" REALLY means. I know that a huge percentage of our membership is eager for even a permit system that expands their opportunity to carry. This is a very large group of people who hold that belief and rather than disenfranchise them by saying "its non-permit or nothing" I want to understand what "no compromise, not give up an inch means" Shawn clarified.
Wisconsin Carry is 100% volunteer. Not a soul gets compensated a penny for their time. As such, the only thing that is important to us and our members is the advancement of rights. Our income, our livelihood is not dependent on donations. If freedom is advanced our goal is achieved. It doesn't matter who advances it. We will work with organizations that share these values and commit to a volunteer structure.
Wisconsin Carry doesn't "own" the franchise on gun rights advancement in Wisconsin. nor does the NRA, nor WI-Force, nor WI Gun Owners or anyone else.
You've clearly mis-understood my intention
Certainly could but we'd have to agree in principle on many things first. That is what I was trying to do understand in this thread before your mis-accusations of my trying to start a "turf war."
I was trying to clarify what "no compromise, not give up an inch" REALLY means. I know that a huge percentage of our membership is eager for even a permit system that expands their opportunity to carry. This is a very large group of people who hold that belief and rather than disenfranchise them by saying "its non-permit or nothing" I want to understand what "no compromise, not give up an inch means" Shawn clarified.
Wisconsin Carry is 100% volunteer. Not a soul gets compensated a penny for their time. As such, the only thing that is important to us and our members is the advancement of rights. Our income, our livelihood is not dependent on donations. If freedom is advanced our goal is achieved. It doesn't matter who advances it. We will work with organizations that share these values and commit to a volunteer structure.
Wisconsin Carry doesn't "own" the franchise on gun rights advancement in Wisconsin. nor does the NRA, nor WI-Force, nor WI Gun Owners or anyone else.
Spartacus
Banned
imported post
I for one appreciate Nik stepping in and putting some perspective on Shaun's original post. Please allow me to bring my small guns to bear on this issue as well.
Knocking on doors and handing out pamphlets is busy work and a waste of time which will lead to burn-out. The best thing we can do at this point is continue to OC and witness to those we come into contact with on a daily basis while WAITING to see the outcome of the SCOTUS ruling and the pending WI Carry Inc. litigation in the state of WI.
Without instigating a "turf war", I could remind the readers of this thread that Shaun is a resident of Illinois and that the "I" in ICarry stands for Illinois. As far as I know SAK only became interested in our particular plight when he saw limited results in his home state and the possibility of movement and membership for his organization in Wisconsin. He also has pending legal problems in Illinois and no financial accountability for ICarry which is not incorporated and so donations may very well be used for his living and to pay legal expenses.
Shaun, I've met you and like you very much but the thing to do if you were indeed altruistic is to throw your support and membership behind WI Carry and not attempt end-arounds as you have in this thread. If I am mistaken in anything I have said about ICarry or yourself personally, allow me to apologize in advance.
I for one appreciate Nik stepping in and putting some perspective on Shaun's original post. Please allow me to bring my small guns to bear on this issue as well.
Knocking on doors and handing out pamphlets is busy work and a waste of time which will lead to burn-out. The best thing we can do at this point is continue to OC and witness to those we come into contact with on a daily basis while WAITING to see the outcome of the SCOTUS ruling and the pending WI Carry Inc. litigation in the state of WI.
Without instigating a "turf war", I could remind the readers of this thread that Shaun is a resident of Illinois and that the "I" in ICarry stands for Illinois. As far as I know SAK only became interested in our particular plight when he saw limited results in his home state and the possibility of movement and membership for his organization in Wisconsin. He also has pending legal problems in Illinois and no financial accountability for ICarry which is not incorporated and so donations may very well be used for his living and to pay legal expenses.
Shaun, I've met you and like you very much but the thing to do if you were indeed altruistic is to throw your support and membership behind WI Carry and not attempt end-arounds as you have in this thread. If I am mistaken in anything I have said about ICarry or yourself personally, allow me to apologize in advance.
J.Gleason
Banned
imported post
Spartacus wrote:
First off any door to door interaction would definitely NOT be a waste of time. There are many people these days that don't read the paper or watch tv. There are even many who don't listen to talk radio. So knocking on their door may be the only way to get a chance to educate those people. Any effort is good effort.
As far as SAK's personal issues, do you have any proof of the very serious accusations of embezzelment that you are making in a public forum? ICarry was formed before WCI. There is no harm in the two joining forces to bring the fight to the front lines.
IMHO, SAK has some very good ideas. It would seem that if NIK were to just step up and make the decision that WCI could not work together with ICarry that NIK would be overstepping his authority as a board member of WCI. I am sure that wasn't his intention as surely the decision would have to be made by the entire board.
As far as a permitted system goes, I have always been a strong advocate for constitutional carry. That will never change for me. I believe we should not compromise at all period.
BNH was correct in his idea that we need to repeal these laws that impose these restrictions on us. This would be much more of a common sense approach and would be much more likely to be successful.
Facts are facts, a permitted system for the ake of requiring a state resident to ccw changes your right to a privilege. I have absolutely no problem with the state issuing any requested permit for reciprocity. However, that is all the permit should be for. The fee should be no more than say twenty five dollars for that reciprocity permit which would be good for say five years, although I do believe that someday those permits will no longer be necessary either.
Other than that we as Americans should be left to our right to carry any way we choose. That includes in a vehicle and a GFSZ. I would have no issue with having to check your gun in a court house. But I think anyone should be able to carry into a public out house.
I continue to hear many argue that we need to take this one step at a time and get a permitted system for ccw first. I disagree. With the states that have taken these steps already it is evident that there will be no blood baths in the streets. It doesn't take every state to go through all of the hoops before this becomes common practice.
We have to get away from this mentality that Wisconsin is different and we need to take baby steps to do everything. The fact of the matter is wee all pay enough taxes already and enough of that tax money is wasted on these ridiculous bills they are trying to pass already. Simply repeal or abolish these unconstitutinal laws we have already. All it takes is some campaigning and a damn vote of the majority. Even better lets petition to get it on the ballot for election time. Let the people make the decision for constitutional carry. That takes the heat off the politicians and we have our uninfringed rights. Everyone is happy.
Personally I would like to hear from John Monroe and this other Attorney for WCI (Olsen I believe is the name) as to what steps we need to take to get this on the ballot for this year and not ten years from now. We can't just keep saying we will try for next year. These politicians all know that the people have that "theres always next year mentality." That is why they keep putting off voting on these important issues like the Castle Doctrine.
The time is now, we need to fight to get a package on the ballot as a referendum to repeal the unconstitutional gun laws and include the passage of the castle doctrine, a reciprocity permit, the abolishment of the GFSZ and the transprotation laws.
It worked for the RKBA in the state constitution it can work the same way now. Or do we just sit back and keep talking about it? If we need the backing of a legislator then lets pick someone very pro gun and go for it. Alan Lasee is done after this year maybe we can get him to push for the referendum or what ever steps to get things started. He is very pro gun and he has nothing to lose.
Spartacus wrote:
I am not so sure there were any "Turf War" thoughts involved in Nik's post but it does seem there are definitely some "Turf War" comments in yours.
First off any door to door interaction would definitely NOT be a waste of time. There are many people these days that don't read the paper or watch tv. There are even many who don't listen to talk radio. So knocking on their door may be the only way to get a chance to educate those people. Any effort is good effort.
As far as SAK's personal issues, do you have any proof of the very serious accusations of embezzelment that you are making in a public forum? ICarry was formed before WCI. There is no harm in the two joining forces to bring the fight to the front lines.
IMHO, SAK has some very good ideas. It would seem that if NIK were to just step up and make the decision that WCI could not work together with ICarry that NIK would be overstepping his authority as a board member of WCI. I am sure that wasn't his intention as surely the decision would have to be made by the entire board.
As far as a permitted system goes, I have always been a strong advocate for constitutional carry. That will never change for me. I believe we should not compromise at all period.
BNH was correct in his idea that we need to repeal these laws that impose these restrictions on us. This would be much more of a common sense approach and would be much more likely to be successful.
Facts are facts, a permitted system for the ake of requiring a state resident to ccw changes your right to a privilege. I have absolutely no problem with the state issuing any requested permit for reciprocity. However, that is all the permit should be for. The fee should be no more than say twenty five dollars for that reciprocity permit which would be good for say five years, although I do believe that someday those permits will no longer be necessary either.
Other than that we as Americans should be left to our right to carry any way we choose. That includes in a vehicle and a GFSZ. I would have no issue with having to check your gun in a court house. But I think anyone should be able to carry into a public out house.
I continue to hear many argue that we need to take this one step at a time and get a permitted system for ccw first. I disagree. With the states that have taken these steps already it is evident that there will be no blood baths in the streets. It doesn't take every state to go through all of the hoops before this becomes common practice.
We have to get away from this mentality that Wisconsin is different and we need to take baby steps to do everything. The fact of the matter is wee all pay enough taxes already and enough of that tax money is wasted on these ridiculous bills they are trying to pass already. Simply repeal or abolish these unconstitutinal laws we have already. All it takes is some campaigning and a damn vote of the majority. Even better lets petition to get it on the ballot for election time. Let the people make the decision for constitutional carry. That takes the heat off the politicians and we have our uninfringed rights. Everyone is happy.
Personally I would like to hear from John Monroe and this other Attorney for WCI (Olsen I believe is the name) as to what steps we need to take to get this on the ballot for this year and not ten years from now. We can't just keep saying we will try for next year. These politicians all know that the people have that "theres always next year mentality." That is why they keep putting off voting on these important issues like the Castle Doctrine.
The time is now, we need to fight to get a package on the ballot as a referendum to repeal the unconstitutional gun laws and include the passage of the castle doctrine, a reciprocity permit, the abolishment of the GFSZ and the transprotation laws.
It worked for the RKBA in the state constitution it can work the same way now. Or do we just sit back and keep talking about it? If we need the backing of a legislator then lets pick someone very pro gun and go for it. Alan Lasee is done after this year maybe we can get him to push for the referendum or what ever steps to get things started. He is very pro gun and he has nothing to lose.
Shotgun
Wisconsin Carry, Inc.
imported post
Whoa! Slow down JG! Spartacus said nothing about "embezzlement" nor did he imply that SAK ever did anything illegal in the slightest. Where did that come from?
Whoa! Slow down JG! Spartacus said nothing about "embezzlement" nor did he imply that SAK ever did anything illegal in the slightest. Where did that come from?
Spartacus
Banned
imported post
J.Gleason wrote:
Mr. Gleason, are you a member of ICarry or WI Carry and can you list any of the events or fundraisers you have attended in the past year or so?
If you can't (and I know that you can't), then why would anyone believe that you would get out and knock on doors to promote the cause?
You sir, are an internet armchair warrior. Perhaps you and Masterbater Doug should start your own OC organization?
.
.
J.Gleason wrote:
If you want use a big word like embezzlement you should learn how to spell it. I never used that word. What I did say is that ICarry is not incorporated and therefore has no board of directors which means no oversight of how donations are spent. Money is spent entirely at SAK's discretion without any objections.
Mr. Gleason, are you a member of ICarry or WI Carry and can you list any of the events or fundraisers you have attended in the past year or so?
If you can't (and I know that you can't), then why would anyone believe that you would get out and knock on doors to promote the cause?
You sir, are an internet armchair warrior. Perhaps you and Masterbater Doug should start your own OC organization?
.
.
paul@paul-fisher.com
Regular Member
imported post
Spartacus wrote:
OK, why are we fighting? This doesn't help our cause. Why don't we use all this pent up energy for something worthwhile?
Spartacus wrote:
OK, why are we fighting? This doesn't help our cause. Why don't we use all this pent up energy for something worthwhile?
SAK
Regular Member
imported post
The intent of the thread was to see how people felt about the idea of actively pushing for no-permit and doing it now in a planned campaign manner. I think sometimes posts on the net can be misunderstood, misinterpreted, etc.
Let's clarify a few things. I never took any offense to what Nik said. I realize he was trying to understand deeply into our stance and make sure we weren't going to be too narrow-minded about this. I think that's been clarified and I think we're both on the same page not only in understanding but also in philosophy.
As far as working together, we always have been lol. This has never been about one organization or the other and it never will be. It's not hard to tell what someone's motives are and if they really care about the cause or have been steered off into worrying more about their name/organization. I've certainly never gotten a bad vibe from anyone in Wisconsin Carry. It's actually been REFRESHING every time working with Wisconsin residents. It's like climbing out of a smokestack and getting a breath of fresh air. We're joined in Wisconsin through the exercise of our rights - open carry. It's a beautiful thing.
We're just sharing ideas here. In the 5 years I've been doing this in Illinois, I've noticed that in-fighting occurs when one person or one identity feels method A is the most effective and another person or identity feels method B is the most effective. They argue and argue and argue and fight. Bottom line is both methods may be effective and both may be necessary. I'm only talking of my experience in Illinois, so please do not think I'm talking about Wisconsin at all. But I'm putting this out there to warn you that this comes up.
I became both a victim and perpetrator of the arguing over method A vs method B. Since then, I've learned that there is room for BOTH methods and there's no need to argue nor does it serve any cause. So now, while perhaps I believe in method B more, I will still do everything I can to support method A. I may spend my own time focusing on B, but I will still help those and do what I can for method A. I'm not going to crap on method A or try to stifle it or anything.
Just keep this in mind as we get closer to change. Let's not allow a no-permit vs. permit rift to be created. People can work on what they want and respect others and even help others. Ideally we should be working with a no-permit system in mind for the future. Maybe it's not next year, maybe we get a permit system first, but SOMETIME in the future I think the vast majority of us here would agree that a no-permit system would be best.
As far as ICarry goes we are 100% volunteer right now as well. That may change at any time, but it's not going to change secretly or sneakily. That's something we would discuss with the members. It's going to come down to whatever is best for the cause. We would probably benefit greatly from having an administrative assistant type person to answer the phone, take memberships, process stuff, organize stuff, sift through data and organize information, etc. We're very flexible and leave everything on the table.
We're not a non-profit at this time, and that too has its advantages. We can endorse anyone, donate, etc as we see fit. Our hands aren't tied when it comes to political involvement. However, we're looking into becoming a non-profit so that could also change at any time. Flexible.
As far as money goes, we are putting out monthly reports (reminds me I need to work on them) so paid members can see where it all goes. Those are posted on the site in the members area so any member can view and download them. I think we're ahead of the curve on this one, as I've personally never been a member of any organization that made it so easy to see detailed, itemized expenditures. Most places try to hide what they spend money on - we don't.
The "I" did originally stand for Illinois along with the I as in first person I Carry A Pistol. It made sense to lump the last two "red states" on the map without concealed carry together. Perhaps the single best thing I ever did. Now ICarry can use the DAMNED FINE EXAMPLE that YOU are setting up in Wisconsin for Illinois. And, I get to open carry up in Wisconsin
I've been an advocate of open carry since 2005 after I first read an article that John Pierce wrote about it. A major lightbulb lit up in my mind when I read his article, and I realized how much of a positive impact open carry can have. Open Carry goes straight to the root of the problem of the bias against guns. No other action and certainly no other words come close.
I carry in Illinois. There aren't too many people who do. Most gun owners are afraid of getting arrested, even for carrying according to what the law says! I've met with people who've been arrested, I'm friends with people like Chris Morley who have been arrested, and I've been arrested myself. My legal battle has been ongoing for 4 years. During this time I've been fighting felony charges. I've paid more in legal costs in the last few years than was paid as a 25% down payment on my home. I also got a lot of help from people, financially, and couldn't have done it without them.
And you know what? I wouldn't have done it any differently. I always stood up for what I believed in, what I knew was the truth and was right, I followed the law, and I followed my heart. I follow the law, and I won't allow anyone to dissuade me from doing that. I won't be intimidated or coerced on the issue of self-defense. I wasn't born in Nazi German - the country my ancestors fled to escape possible death - nor was I born where my wife was born - Soviet Russia. I'm an American, and my freedom from intimidation and coercion is worth fighting for to me.
Sorry if I went off on a tangent there. I love Wisconsin, love open carry, and love pushing for the restoration of rights up there! There's no immediate action we need to take at this moment, we're just talking and exchanging ideas.
As an aside, my mother's side of the family is who fled from Nazi Germany to escape the likelihood of being sent to the death camps. My fathers side of the family is also predominantly German. My great grandfather was actually from Waukesha. Our last name was spelled Kranich and I believe he changed the spelling to make it closer to how it sounds. We spell and pronounce it Kran-ish now. The story goes that my great grandfather was headed to Hollywood to go into show business (he was born in the year 1900) and I guess he left Waukesha and made it as far as Rockford :lol::lol::lol: I was pretty young when he died, but I remember playing cards with him - he loved cards!! Now my grandfather, father, and I were all born and still live in Rockford. I have a child on the way, and I believe he's a boy, but either way that child will also be born in Rockford
The intent of the thread was to see how people felt about the idea of actively pushing for no-permit and doing it now in a planned campaign manner. I think sometimes posts on the net can be misunderstood, misinterpreted, etc.
Let's clarify a few things. I never took any offense to what Nik said. I realize he was trying to understand deeply into our stance and make sure we weren't going to be too narrow-minded about this. I think that's been clarified and I think we're both on the same page not only in understanding but also in philosophy.
As far as working together, we always have been lol. This has never been about one organization or the other and it never will be. It's not hard to tell what someone's motives are and if they really care about the cause or have been steered off into worrying more about their name/organization. I've certainly never gotten a bad vibe from anyone in Wisconsin Carry. It's actually been REFRESHING every time working with Wisconsin residents. It's like climbing out of a smokestack and getting a breath of fresh air. We're joined in Wisconsin through the exercise of our rights - open carry. It's a beautiful thing.
We're just sharing ideas here. In the 5 years I've been doing this in Illinois, I've noticed that in-fighting occurs when one person or one identity feels method A is the most effective and another person or identity feels method B is the most effective. They argue and argue and argue and fight. Bottom line is both methods may be effective and both may be necessary. I'm only talking of my experience in Illinois, so please do not think I'm talking about Wisconsin at all. But I'm putting this out there to warn you that this comes up.
I became both a victim and perpetrator of the arguing over method A vs method B. Since then, I've learned that there is room for BOTH methods and there's no need to argue nor does it serve any cause. So now, while perhaps I believe in method B more, I will still do everything I can to support method A. I may spend my own time focusing on B, but I will still help those and do what I can for method A. I'm not going to crap on method A or try to stifle it or anything.
Just keep this in mind as we get closer to change. Let's not allow a no-permit vs. permit rift to be created. People can work on what they want and respect others and even help others. Ideally we should be working with a no-permit system in mind for the future. Maybe it's not next year, maybe we get a permit system first, but SOMETIME in the future I think the vast majority of us here would agree that a no-permit system would be best.
As far as ICarry goes we are 100% volunteer right now as well. That may change at any time, but it's not going to change secretly or sneakily. That's something we would discuss with the members. It's going to come down to whatever is best for the cause. We would probably benefit greatly from having an administrative assistant type person to answer the phone, take memberships, process stuff, organize stuff, sift through data and organize information, etc. We're very flexible and leave everything on the table.
We're not a non-profit at this time, and that too has its advantages. We can endorse anyone, donate, etc as we see fit. Our hands aren't tied when it comes to political involvement. However, we're looking into becoming a non-profit so that could also change at any time. Flexible.
As far as money goes, we are putting out monthly reports (reminds me I need to work on them) so paid members can see where it all goes. Those are posted on the site in the members area so any member can view and download them. I think we're ahead of the curve on this one, as I've personally never been a member of any organization that made it so easy to see detailed, itemized expenditures. Most places try to hide what they spend money on - we don't.
The "I" did originally stand for Illinois along with the I as in first person I Carry A Pistol. It made sense to lump the last two "red states" on the map without concealed carry together. Perhaps the single best thing I ever did. Now ICarry can use the DAMNED FINE EXAMPLE that YOU are setting up in Wisconsin for Illinois. And, I get to open carry up in Wisconsin
I've been an advocate of open carry since 2005 after I first read an article that John Pierce wrote about it. A major lightbulb lit up in my mind when I read his article, and I realized how much of a positive impact open carry can have. Open Carry goes straight to the root of the problem of the bias against guns. No other action and certainly no other words come close.I carry in Illinois. There aren't too many people who do. Most gun owners are afraid of getting arrested, even for carrying according to what the law says! I've met with people who've been arrested, I'm friends with people like Chris Morley who have been arrested, and I've been arrested myself. My legal battle has been ongoing for 4 years. During this time I've been fighting felony charges. I've paid more in legal costs in the last few years than was paid as a 25% down payment on my home. I also got a lot of help from people, financially, and couldn't have done it without them.
And you know what? I wouldn't have done it any differently. I always stood up for what I believed in, what I knew was the truth and was right, I followed the law, and I followed my heart. I follow the law, and I won't allow anyone to dissuade me from doing that. I won't be intimidated or coerced on the issue of self-defense. I wasn't born in Nazi German - the country my ancestors fled to escape possible death - nor was I born where my wife was born - Soviet Russia. I'm an American, and my freedom from intimidation and coercion is worth fighting for to me.
Sorry if I went off on a tangent there. I love Wisconsin, love open carry, and love pushing for the restoration of rights up there! There's no immediate action we need to take at this moment, we're just talking and exchanging ideas.
As an aside, my mother's side of the family is who fled from Nazi Germany to escape the likelihood of being sent to the death camps. My fathers side of the family is also predominantly German. My great grandfather was actually from Waukesha. Our last name was spelled Kranich and I believe he changed the spelling to make it closer to how it sounds. We spell and pronounce it Kran-ish now. The story goes that my great grandfather was headed to Hollywood to go into show business (he was born in the year 1900) and I guess he left Waukesha and made it as far as Rockford :lol::lol::lol: I was pretty young when he died, but I remember playing cards with him - he loved cards!! Now my grandfather, father, and I were all born and still live in Rockford. I have a child on the way, and I believe he's a boy, but either way that child will also be born in Rockford
Wisconsin Carry Inc. - Chairman
Wisconsin Carry, Inc.
imported post
Attorneys are good resources for lawsuits and litigation.
Legislative initiatives are a different animal. Thats what elected legislators are for. People would need to contact their legislators for action regarding new laws/repealing laws.
http://www.legis.wisconsin.gov/w3asp/waml/waml.aspx
It goes without saying that Wisconsin Carry will be working the legislative side as well. That is already happening. As I said earlier in this post however there is what we want, and what we can get. We don't know exactly what either will be now, but I can share with you what Wisconsin Carry has publicly stated with regards to our philosophy moving forward. That is:
We push for the most expansive right-to-carry legislation that we can get introduced, hopefully that will be non-permit carry. However, we will, at the end of the day support any legislation that DOESN'T sacrifice the rights we currently have but DOES expand the opportunities to carry.
It is only honest and in the interest of full disclosure that I would state again what we've said publicly all along, that if anyone joined Wisconsin Carry hoping that we would settle for ONLY non-permit right to conceal carry and anything less, we will come out against. I'm sorry, that is not the position of our organization. We are willing to support shall-issue permit legislation for CC as long as that legislation doesn't trade out the right to open-carry we already have. Once we get shall-issue with a permit, we will continue to press for non-permit right to carry. That has worked in several other states. I do not know of another state that went from outlawed CC to non-permitted CC. I do know that both Alaska and now AZ went from shall-issue permit to non-permit right to carry.
That is not to say Wisconsin couldn't be the first, but I hope that the gun rights crowd wouldn't divide itself between those who would settle for NOTHING but non-permit carry and come out against a good shall-issue permit law as a step forward. (keeping in mind thats not the end of the fight)
I am not sure what the process is for getting a referendum on a state-wide ballot in Wisconsin (if there even is one) that will require more research. But honestly, if you think in one year, you'd get a majority of voters in Wisconsin to vote in favor of a non-permit right to carry law, in a state-wide referendum, I don't think that's a good probability of success. If you want to try, I would never discourage you from doing so, but as an organization I wouldn't be acting in the fiduciary capacity of our members if I allocated tons of resources (time and money) to an "all or nothing non-permit ballot initiative". That is not to say its not a noble endeavor in theory.
Wisconsin Carry must assess the probabilities of success in all areas and decide what battles can be won and what the best use of the resources (time and $) of our officers and board members who are all volunteers as well as members who also act as volunteers.
I would never discourage ANYONE from undertaking what they felt was the best course of action for freedom. There are infinite numbers of ways to advance freedom. Joining a group like Wisconsin Carry is only 1 way that some people choose to leverage to advance freedom.
Others choose other methods.
Attorneys are good resources for lawsuits and litigation.
Legislative initiatives are a different animal. Thats what elected legislators are for. People would need to contact their legislators for action regarding new laws/repealing laws.
http://www.legis.wisconsin.gov/w3asp/waml/waml.aspx
It goes without saying that Wisconsin Carry will be working the legislative side as well. That is already happening. As I said earlier in this post however there is what we want, and what we can get. We don't know exactly what either will be now, but I can share with you what Wisconsin Carry has publicly stated with regards to our philosophy moving forward. That is:
We push for the most expansive right-to-carry legislation that we can get introduced, hopefully that will be non-permit carry. However, we will, at the end of the day support any legislation that DOESN'T sacrifice the rights we currently have but DOES expand the opportunities to carry.
It is only honest and in the interest of full disclosure that I would state again what we've said publicly all along, that if anyone joined Wisconsin Carry hoping that we would settle for ONLY non-permit right to conceal carry and anything less, we will come out against. I'm sorry, that is not the position of our organization. We are willing to support shall-issue permit legislation for CC as long as that legislation doesn't trade out the right to open-carry we already have. Once we get shall-issue with a permit, we will continue to press for non-permit right to carry. That has worked in several other states. I do not know of another state that went from outlawed CC to non-permitted CC. I do know that both Alaska and now AZ went from shall-issue permit to non-permit right to carry.
That is not to say Wisconsin couldn't be the first, but I hope that the gun rights crowd wouldn't divide itself between those who would settle for NOTHING but non-permit carry and come out against a good shall-issue permit law as a step forward. (keeping in mind thats not the end of the fight)
I am not sure what the process is for getting a referendum on a state-wide ballot in Wisconsin (if there even is one) that will require more research. But honestly, if you think in one year, you'd get a majority of voters in Wisconsin to vote in favor of a non-permit right to carry law, in a state-wide referendum, I don't think that's a good probability of success. If you want to try, I would never discourage you from doing so, but as an organization I wouldn't be acting in the fiduciary capacity of our members if I allocated tons of resources (time and money) to an "all or nothing non-permit ballot initiative". That is not to say its not a noble endeavor in theory.
Wisconsin Carry must assess the probabilities of success in all areas and decide what battles can be won and what the best use of the resources (time and $) of our officers and board members who are all volunteers as well as members who also act as volunteers.
I would never discourage ANYONE from undertaking what they felt was the best course of action for freedom. There are infinite numbers of ways to advance freedom. Joining a group like Wisconsin Carry is only 1 way that some people choose to leverage to advance freedom.
Others choose other methods.
Spartacus
Banned
imported post
paul@paul-fisher.com wrote:
Hey Paul. This isn't a fight but a discussion and in any discussion truth is the ultimate goal. Nik's and my posts contained nothing but the truth which is very worthwhile.
Various posters on these BB boards remind me of guys at the range... some right on target, the majority not so bad, and the rest couldn't hit the broad side of a barn.
Shaun, nobody is negating your very fine efforts for the cause, its just that your motives appear conflicted and you don't really have a game plan. Within a few weeks of WI Carry getting incorporated they filed a lawsuit against the State of Wisconsin that has the attention of 2A supporters everywhere and have raised awareness across the whole country. Hundreds of people have joined and we should have thousands within the year at this rate.
.
.
spelling edit
paul@paul-fisher.com wrote:
Hey Paul. This isn't a fight but a discussion and in any discussion truth is the ultimate goal. Nik's and my posts contained nothing but the truth which is very worthwhile.
Various posters on these BB boards remind me of guys at the range... some right on target, the majority not so bad, and the rest couldn't hit the broad side of a barn.
Shaun, nobody is negating your very fine efforts for the cause, its just that your motives appear conflicted and you don't really have a game plan. Within a few weeks of WI Carry getting incorporated they filed a lawsuit against the State of Wisconsin that has the attention of 2A supporters everywhere and have raised awareness across the whole country. Hundreds of people have joined and we should have thousands within the year at this rate.
.
.
spelling edit
SAK
Regular Member
imported post
I don't think I or the other board members are conflicted, and we definitely have a game plan. That plans been in place since last year, and it's worked very well so far
Check out www.icarry.org/mission.html and that should tell a little bit more about what we're about.
We're a growing resource that firearms owners can use to advance their rights. For example, posting events on our calendar, posting news articles about events, posting press releases like the one Wisconsin Carry posted about their lawsuit. Communication is a big part of this. So take advantage of what we have to offer I wish I had time to post every news story and every event, but I do not. When events/news are posted, I will publish them, and then I will send them out in an email. That alone is time consuming. Currently I spend 40+ hours a week on advancing gun rights - so any help here and there even on simple things like posting events makes a HUGE difference.
My personal focus is on reaching new people. When those people are reached, we need to hook them and send and receive information with them.
My estimates are that we reach about 10,000 or more people right now - mostly firearms owners, mostly in Illinois, but the rate of Wisconsin leads is increasing nicely. Illinois has a much greater population than Wisconsin, so don't let it get you down. I would have to do the math to see which state has a higher percentage, but offhand I think the per capita response from Wisconsin is greater than from Illinois. How do you like that
I don't think I or the other board members are conflicted, and we definitely have a game plan. That plans been in place since last year, and it's worked very well so far
Check out www.icarry.org/mission.html and that should tell a little bit more about what we're about.
We're a growing resource that firearms owners can use to advance their rights. For example, posting events on our calendar, posting news articles about events, posting press releases like the one Wisconsin Carry posted about their lawsuit. Communication is a big part of this. So take advantage of what we have to offer
I wish I had time to post every news story and every event, but I do not. When events/news are posted, I will publish them, and then I will send them out in an email. That alone is time consuming. Currently I spend 40+ hours a week on advancing gun rights - so any help here and there even on simple things like posting events makes a HUGE difference.My personal focus is on reaching new people. When those people are reached, we need to hook them and send and receive information with them.
My estimates are that we reach about 10,000 or more people right now - mostly firearms owners, mostly in Illinois, but the rate of Wisconsin leads is increasing nicely. Illinois has a much greater population than Wisconsin, so don't let it get you down. I would have to do the math to see which state has a higher percentage, but offhand I think the per capita response from Wisconsin is greater than from Illinois. How do you like that
J.Gleason
Banned
imported post
Spartacus wrote:
As far as whether I am a member of WCI or not really is none of your business but yes I am a member. As far as what events I have shown up at ther have been a few when my job allows me time off for it. Sorry to disappoint you I do have a family to support as well. That may not be the case for some of you and thereore it is easier for those people to attend these events. I did also attend a couple of events in appleton for a candidate in hopes that he would get somewhere as he was very supportive of our cause and in fact more supportive then any other candidate out there. Where were you? OH yeah you weren't there.
When you start making accuzations as to what SAK is doing with the funds that people donate and suggesting that he is using those funds and membership dues for his personal use, that seems like embezzlement to me. (There I got the typo for ya).
"He also has pending legal problems in Illinois and no financial accountability for ICarry which is not incorporated and so donations may very well be used for his living and to pay legal expenses."
Your words not mine.
Main Entry: em·bez·zle Pronunciation: im-ˈbe-zəl, em-Function: transitive verb Inflected Form(s): em·bez·zled; em·bez·zling -(ə-)liŋEtymology: Middle English embesilen, from Anglo-French embesiller to make away with, from en- + besiller to steal, plunderDate: 15th century : to appropriate (as property entrusted to one's care) fraudulently to one's own use <embezzled thousands of dollars>
— em·bez·zle·ment -zəl-mənt noun
— em·bez·zler -z(ə-)lər noun
I have also written numerous letters and have actually gotten the ordinance for carrying firearms in my town suspended and have that in writing from the city attorney.
I am also working on another issue concerning firearms that would more than likely not interest you at this time so there is no point in telling you about it because it would not concern you.
I also am currently spending countless hours making the GFSZ maps for jrm who will use those maps in the lawsuit for the GFSZ's.
Incidently, I know this is really none of your business but I will share with you that I can legally CCW under the federal law and technically I could just look the other way and not care whether you or anyone else here ever gets the right to legally ccw. While I have the right to ccw I most always OC because it educates the public. So with that in mind with what little efforts you think I have contributed to the cause, technically I didn't have to do anything at all.
I have done so because I believe that everyone should have the same rights to ccw or ocw period.
So what have you done? Besides talk big @#$% with your keyboard.<Cricket chirp>
Spartacus wrote:
Well I was willing to get out and knock on some doors since I am now on vacation, but since you have taken it upon yourself to speak for me then I have now decided that I am not interested in doing anything that you may have any participation in.
As far as whether I am a member of WCI or not really is none of your business but yes I am a member. As far as what events I have shown up at ther have been a few when my job allows me time off for it. Sorry to disappoint you I do have a family to support as well. That may not be the case for some of you and thereore it is easier for those people to attend these events. I did also attend a couple of events in appleton for a candidate in hopes that he would get somewhere as he was very supportive of our cause and in fact more supportive then any other candidate out there. Where were you? OH yeah you weren't there.
When you start making accuzations as to what SAK is doing with the funds that people donate and suggesting that he is using those funds and membership dues for his personal use, that seems like embezzlement to me. (There I got the typo for ya).
"He also has pending legal problems in Illinois and no financial accountability for ICarry which is not incorporated and so donations may very well be used for his living and to pay legal expenses."
Your words not mine.
Main Entry: em·bez·zle Pronunciation: im-ˈbe-zəl, em-Function: transitive verb Inflected Form(s): em·bez·zled; em·bez·zling -(ə-)liŋEtymology: Middle English embesilen, from Anglo-French embesiller to make away with, from en- + besiller to steal, plunderDate: 15th century : to appropriate (as property entrusted to one's care) fraudulently to one's own use <embezzled thousands of dollars>
— em·bez·zle·ment -zəl-mənt noun
— em·bez·zler -z(ə-)lər noun
I have also written numerous letters and have actually gotten the ordinance for carrying firearms in my town suspended and have that in writing from the city attorney.
I am also working on another issue concerning firearms that would more than likely not interest you at this time so there is no point in telling you about it because it would not concern you.
I also am currently spending countless hours making the GFSZ maps for jrm who will use those maps in the lawsuit for the GFSZ's.
Incidently, I know this is really none of your business but I will share with you that I can legally CCW under the federal law and technically I could just look the other way and not care whether you or anyone else here ever gets the right to legally ccw. While I have the right to ccw I most always OC because it educates the public. So with that in mind with what little efforts you think I have contributed to the cause, technically I didn't have to do anything at all.
I have done so because I believe that everyone should have the same rights to ccw or ocw period.
So what have you done? Besides talk big @#$% with your keyboard.<Cricket chirp>
J.Gleason
Banned
imported post
Wisconsin Carry, Inc. - Chairman wrote:
Wisconsin Carry, Inc. - Chairman wrote:
Wisconsin Carry Inc. - Chairman
Wisconsin Carry, Inc.
imported post
James,
John Monroe is from Atlanta, GA, and I know state referendum laws vary by state, so he wouldn't be a good resource to ask.
As for Joe Olson, he's a litigator and constitutional law expert. I'm not sure if he is an expert in election law and ballot initiatives, but I WILL ask for sure. I don't want to assume he wouldn't know either. He is an expert in constitutional law, and thats how he is a resource for WCI. He can advise us on the kinds of lawsuits WCI may choose to file in the future with respect to people who's rights have been violated.
When people are harassed or arrested (members or non-members) we hope they will contact us and we can research the situation, decide if there is an opportunity for WCI to get involved, consult with our legal resources (like Joe) and take the best course of action.
We have 3 situations right now (outside of the lawsuits already filed) we are monitoring for possible legal action.
In this regard, I offer you an absolute unequivocal assurance, the current lawsuit and petition is not the only action we will take.
We are working through lots of possibilities. We will take an "all of the above" approach. legal options, legislative options, free-market pressure (boycott) options, public awareness/media campaign options, etc.
@Davegran:
We formed Wisconsin Carry because other groups would not do what we were willing to do. It would have been much easier to join another group willing to file a federal lawsuit against Wisconsin's GFSZ and find an existing group to support the members like Frank and Dave who's rights were violated (and continue to be violated). There was no group willing to do so. That's why we formed Wisconsin Carry. To take action that was not being taken.
Since being formed, we have, unfortunately had to deal with groups attempting to leverage our actions for the gain of their organization and to profit their organization.
When WCI was awarded the damage award against Racine, a gun rights group IN Wisconsin posted a news article on their website about the damage award and in the text of the article where it said "a gun rights group was awarded a damage award" the "gun rights group" was an active link to the membership application of THAT other gun-rights group. No mention of WCI. Of course when we became aware of that, we took issue with it and they promptly removed the misleading active link to their membership form. But its unfortunate that while we committed at our inception to working with other groups, other groups were taking advantage of our efforts to bolster their for-profit organizations
WCI organized rallies where other gun-rights groups came and distributed their information to our prospective members. Certainly its a free country and they are free to do so, but I'm sure you can understand why we are quick to defend what we've done and the action we've taken. I'm sure people would agree that the group that was responsible for bringing people together deserves the resultant benefit from that event so they have resources and members to do more of the same but on a bigger and better scale in the future.
We have no interest in a "turf war", and such talk is divisive. As I've said repeatedly, WCI does NOT own the franchise on gun-rights in Wisconsin, nor does ICarry, nor does the NRA, nor does WI-Force, nor does the WI-Pro-Gun movement or Wisconsin Gun owners. But we are now VERY cautious of the motives of other organizations. People have limited resources and its crucial that they have accurate representation of who's methods are working so they can be judicious in allocating their support. We will continue to be very cautious of organizations we work with and offer no apologies for doing so.
WCI is exceptionally successful. We've existed for only 4 months and we have (i believe) a noteworthy resume and have achieved notable results. Our membership consistently grows at approximately 100+ members a month. We would never take credit for anything we didn't do, nor would be ever disparage the efforts of any other group. But we do think its critically important that people know the truth about who is accomplishing what so that they can accurately make decisions about which organizations their physical and or monetary support will be most effective.
When we achieve positive outcomes on behalf of members in court and other groups mis-represent that information to bolster their membership, its a detriment to the CAUSE of freedom. How can we continue to file lawsuits on behalf of members if the people who see those results are tricked into joining organizations that don't file and win those lawsuits?
When WCI expends a great deal of effort to organize a rally and other gun-rights groups show up and distribute their information, and (even if unintentionally) misleads participants and viewers of media coverage of who put that rally together, thats a detriment to the cause of freedom when attendees that are eager to be a part of the group that was able to put the rally together get siphoned off by a group that didn't put the rally together.
WCI commits to working with all groups that share our values and don't try to leverage our results for their gain. But we will be exceptionally cautious before doing so.
As chairman and president of WCI, I would not be doing my job and would be doing a disservice to our members and diminishing the value of their contributions and efforts on behalf of the cause if I didn't take action to assure the full credit for the results this organization achieves was accurately portrayed.
James,
John Monroe is from Atlanta, GA, and I know state referendum laws vary by state, so he wouldn't be a good resource to ask.
As for Joe Olson, he's a litigator and constitutional law expert. I'm not sure if he is an expert in election law and ballot initiatives, but I WILL ask for sure. I don't want to assume he wouldn't know either. He is an expert in constitutional law, and thats how he is a resource for WCI. He can advise us on the kinds of lawsuits WCI may choose to file in the future with respect to people who's rights have been violated.
When people are harassed or arrested (members or non-members) we hope they will contact us and we can research the situation, decide if there is an opportunity for WCI to get involved, consult with our legal resources (like Joe) and take the best course of action.
We have 3 situations right now (outside of the lawsuits already filed) we are monitoring for possible legal action.
In this regard, I offer you an absolute unequivocal assurance, the current lawsuit and petition is not the only action we will take.
We are working through lots of possibilities. We will take an "all of the above" approach. legal options, legislative options, free-market pressure (boycott) options, public awareness/media campaign options, etc.
@Davegran:
We formed Wisconsin Carry because other groups would not do what we were willing to do. It would have been much easier to join another group willing to file a federal lawsuit against Wisconsin's GFSZ and find an existing group to support the members like Frank and Dave who's rights were violated (and continue to be violated). There was no group willing to do so. That's why we formed Wisconsin Carry. To take action that was not being taken.
Since being formed, we have, unfortunately had to deal with groups attempting to leverage our actions for the gain of their organization and to profit their organization.
When WCI was awarded the damage award against Racine, a gun rights group IN Wisconsin posted a news article on their website about the damage award and in the text of the article where it said "a gun rights group was awarded a damage award" the "gun rights group" was an active link to the membership application of THAT other gun-rights group. No mention of WCI. Of course when we became aware of that, we took issue with it and they promptly removed the misleading active link to their membership form. But its unfortunate that while we committed at our inception to working with other groups, other groups were taking advantage of our efforts to bolster their for-profit organizations
WCI organized rallies where other gun-rights groups came and distributed their information to our prospective members. Certainly its a free country and they are free to do so, but I'm sure you can understand why we are quick to defend what we've done and the action we've taken. I'm sure people would agree that the group that was responsible for bringing people together deserves the resultant benefit from that event so they have resources and members to do more of the same but on a bigger and better scale in the future.
We have no interest in a "turf war", and such talk is divisive. As I've said repeatedly, WCI does NOT own the franchise on gun-rights in Wisconsin, nor does ICarry, nor does the NRA, nor does WI-Force, nor does the WI-Pro-Gun movement or Wisconsin Gun owners. But we are now VERY cautious of the motives of other organizations. People have limited resources and its crucial that they have accurate representation of who's methods are working so they can be judicious in allocating their support. We will continue to be very cautious of organizations we work with and offer no apologies for doing so.
WCI is exceptionally successful. We've existed for only 4 months and we have (i believe) a noteworthy resume and have achieved notable results. Our membership consistently grows at approximately 100+ members a month. We would never take credit for anything we didn't do, nor would be ever disparage the efforts of any other group. But we do think its critically important that people know the truth about who is accomplishing what so that they can accurately make decisions about which organizations their physical and or monetary support will be most effective.
When we achieve positive outcomes on behalf of members in court and other groups mis-represent that information to bolster their membership, its a detriment to the CAUSE of freedom. How can we continue to file lawsuits on behalf of members if the people who see those results are tricked into joining organizations that don't file and win those lawsuits?
When WCI expends a great deal of effort to organize a rally and other gun-rights groups show up and distribute their information, and (even if unintentionally) misleads participants and viewers of media coverage of who put that rally together, thats a detriment to the cause of freedom when attendees that are eager to be a part of the group that was able to put the rally together get siphoned off by a group that didn't put the rally together.
WCI commits to working with all groups that share our values and don't try to leverage our results for their gain. But we will be exceptionally cautious before doing so.
As chairman and president of WCI, I would not be doing my job and would be doing a disservice to our members and diminishing the value of their contributions and efforts on behalf of the cause if I didn't take action to assure the full credit for the results this organization achieves was accurately portrayed.
blaze
New member
imported post
Just sitting here watching it snow, could get 2 - 4 inches.
Anyway, I believe we are getting a little tense over an issue that will not even be relevant unless we concentrate on getting the right people elected in November.
We all know how fickle Wisconsin is when it comes to elections. It is far from a gimme that Barrett will not win. I have to watch myself from becoming over confident about the upcoming elections. Lots can happen between now and Nov.
We have a golden opportunity this election cycle to really get some things turned around. It may be a long time until we have this good of a chance again.
Just saying we got to get er done in November before we worry about what we may want or get.
Just sitting here watching it snow, could get 2 - 4 inches.
Anyway, I believe we are getting a little tense over an issue that will not even be relevant unless we concentrate on getting the right people elected in November.
We all know how fickle Wisconsin is when it comes to elections. It is far from a gimme that Barrett will not win. I have to watch myself from becoming over confident about the upcoming elections. Lots can happen between now and Nov.
We have a golden opportunity this election cycle to really get some things turned around. It may be a long time until we have this good of a chance again.
Just saying we got to get er done in November before we worry about what we may want or get.
GLOCK21GB
Campaign Veteran
imported post
I hope this happens & will do my part..but I also have to say LOT'S OF LUCK.
I hope this happens & will do my part..but I also have to say LOT'S OF LUCK.
BROKENSPROKET
Regular Member
imported post
McX wrote:
McX wrote:
My opinion, Vermount style is the best way to go. NO PERMITS. PERIOD. That should be the 'end goal' for all 51 states.i'll take alaska style, hell i'll take arizona style, just give me something in my lifetime, and a small order of fries with it
Master Doug Huffman
Banned
imported post
Freedom to carry, like Vermont's, should be the objective of all freemen.
Abandon the sports metaphor of goals, teams, leaders, playing fields and styles. Think and act on your own and on ideas that you evaluate as good and effective.
Or be just a different shepherd's sheep. Leaders shepherd their sheep to the shearer.
Freedom to carry, like Vermont's, should be the objective of all freemen.
Abandon the sports metaphor of goals, teams, leaders, playing fields and styles. Think and act on your own and on ideas that you evaluate as good and effective.
Or be just a different shepherd's sheep. Leaders shepherd their sheep to the shearer.