In brief:

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.

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.

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.

Why didn't they pass constitutional carry?

Now for the answer: BECAUSE THE NRA GOT INVOLVED!!!! Good job guys~!

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.