WI issues temp regs on "shall issue" carry permits
Story here. The story doesn't give enough detail for any meaningful comment.
The AG claims authority to establish "training standards" requiring four hours' instruction b/c the legislation specifies 'training' but does not specify course content.
The NRA objects, saying that the legislation does NOT require any training whatsoever, but that such training may be voluntarily taken.
There are also some issues with the amount and content of training documentation; the AG is requiring a number of 'check-boxes/fill-in-the-blanks' that NRA's standard form does not currently have.
Posted by: dad29 at October 15, 2011 09:20 AM
Political suicide? Governor Walker just signed off on the "emergency" regs.
Now comes the after-the-fact public hearing on permanent regs. That'll be fun.
Posted by: Law Prof at October 15, 2011 11:17 AM
Why is this so hard? 48 other States have some sort of statutes on the books. Florida has been doing this since 1987. Why re-invent the wheel. Just copy and paste.
Posted by: Chuck at October 15, 2011 12:56 PM
Why didn't they pass constitutional carry?
Posted by: 5thofNov at October 15, 2011 04:29 PM
Now for the answer: BECAUSE THE NRA GOT INVOLVED!!!! Good job guys~!
Posted by: 5thofNov at October 15, 2011 04:32 PM
Isn't a standing jump from no issue to Constitutional carry without precedent, plus rather a lot for "the political process" to do at once?
As a proposal out there at the same time as shall issue it does, though, provide a nice opportunity for shall issue to be the "compromise" all too many politicians love.
And once you get both shall issue and some experience of no blood in the streets you get a chance to go for Constitutional carry, as has been the pattern in Alaska and Arizona.
Posted by: Harold at October 16, 2011 10:51 AM