Friday, December 26, 2008

State Issues 15 Concealed Carry Permits

Good for the AG.

MADISON, Wis. (AP)—The Wisconsin Department of Justice has issued 15 concealed-weapons permits to retired agents, the only former state police officers to receive the privilege.

Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen said he hopes the decision will show other state agencies they can do the same, as allowed under a 2004 federal law. But most haven’t issued permits because they say the state hasn’t listed consistent standards to do so.

If only now Wisconsin would shed the double standard and allow law-abiding citizens the same rights afforded under the Constitution and sanctioned for these special few.

(5) Comments
Posted by Owen at 1413 hrs
Firearms + Law + Politics + Politics - Wisconsin

  1. Right on Owen.  What about us mere mortals??  I believe that my life and the lives of my family members are just as important, have just as much value and are worth saving as those of retired (or active) police officers.  Wisconsin Patriots are working hard to stop police harassment of those who choose to open carry in Wisconsin (completely legal) so that we have a means to exercise the basic human right to defend oneself.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 26, 2008 at 1529 hrs


  2. Looks like no toys for tots this Christmas.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 26, 2008 at 1531 hrs


  3. Does anybody understand “equal protection under the law”?  Van Hollen wants to give certain “non-officers” a CCP but won’t allow certain “other non-officers” (us) to get a CCP in Wisconsin.

    At least we have Open Carry in Wisconsin.  However, some law enforcement is unaware or ignorant to that fact.  It’s time for many of us “other non-officers” who wish to have personal security in public to begin regular open carry.  Go to www.wisconsinpatriots.com to learn more about your right to bear arms in Wisconsin.

    Posted by smithman on December 26, 2008 at 1630 hrs


  4. Right on. The belief that citizens don’t need firearms because the police will protect is untrue. The police cannot protect all people from crimes. When it comes to stopping crimes, individuals are ultimately responsible for themselves and the lives of their loved ones. In addition to the fact that police can’t protect us all, it comes down entirely to the fact that they don’t HAVE to come when you call. Legally, it is not their duty to protect us from crimes. Besides, the existing ‘gun control’ laws do not stop criminals from getting guns and using them. So why would we be expected to live without a weapon to defend ourselves?
    It’s silly to disarm innocent people while the criminals are armed and to disarm victims when too often police are unable to protect them from crimes.

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 27, 2008 at 1400 hrs


  5. One problem with concealed carry states is all the exceptions to where you can legally carry.  For example in Minnesota businesses can ban employees or customers from carrying firearms on their property and many post such signs.  Are you going to respect the business or property owner’s “rights” or is your “right” to carry more important?  (When smoking is debated business owners’ rights always comes up.)  Proponents of concealed carry don’t give this angle of the topic much thought.  How much good will your gun be out in your car in the parking lot if a maniac comes in shooting up the place (mall, work, church, etc.)?

    Posted by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) on December 27, 2008 at 1815 hrs


Commenting is not available in this channel entry.