Of course, it’s a state issue, but I agree with Trump here.
“I’m not advocating guns in classrooms,” Trump said. “But remember, in some cases … trained teachers should be able to have guns in classrooms.”
Category: Firearms
Campus Carry Coming in Texas
The Texas A&M University System proposed rules Wednesday that would allow students, employees and others with handgun licenses to carry concealed weapons into classrooms, residence halls and other facilities, with some exceptions, starting Aug. 1, when a contentious state law takes effect.
“No rule proposed by any Texas A&M System member prohibits a licensed holder from carrying a concealed handgun in classrooms or residential facilities owned and operated, or leased and operated, by the institution,” says a summary of the proposed rules put out by Texas A&M.
By contrast, the University of Texas at Austin — where the “open carry” law has provoked debate and protests — guns are being banned for the most part in on-campus residence halls, under rules proposed by UT President Gregory L. Fenves.
Mississippi Passes Constitutional Carry
Today, the Mississippi House voted 85-35 to concur with Senate amendments to House Bill 786, sending the legislation to Governor Phil Bryant (R) for his expected signature. Despite months of misleading attacks by New York gun control advocate and billionaire Michael Bloomberg and his anti-gun state groups, Everytown for Gun Safety and Moms Demand Action, lawmakers overwhelmingly approved HB 786 this session. Thank you to those NRA members and Second Amendment supporters who contacted their elected officials in support of HB 786 throughout the legislative process!
Wisconsin Issues 300,000th CCW License
And still no “Wild West”… hmmmmm…
Wisconsin’s concealed carry program passed a major milestone earlier this month – issuing permit number 300,000 since the program began in 2011.
The state Department of Justice announced that the permit was issued on March 24, following a period of heavy activity that kicked off the year. The agency said applications have been coming in this year at “record high levels” and that “interest in firearm ownership shows no signs of subsiding.”
No Drinking at DNR Shooting Ranges
The DNR owns eight formal ranges around Wisconsin and operates about half of them; local clubs operate the others in partnership with the agency. No uniform rules apply, though the agency has been working since 2013 to develop some, said Keith Warnke, the DNR’s shooting sports coordinator.
DNR officials plan to present a wide-ranging package of regulations to their board next month that would prohibit the possession and consumption of alcohol on the ranges as well as prohibit shooters from using fully automatic weapons and tracer ammunition. Incendiary, exploding and breakable targets would be banned, although clay trap targets would be allowed. Shooters would have to unload their weapons when they’re off the firing line.
Warnke said the rules were spurred by a desire for consistency rather than any specific problems. Most of the regulations mirror rules at private ranges and gun clubs, he said.
I’m mixed on this, but lean toward the regulations as long as they are implemented correctly. On the one hand, this is a regulation in search of a problem and the DNR admits as much. On the other hand, having booze on the range is a very bad idea. That being said, many, if not most, ranges in Wisconsin have a club house of some sort in which booze is served, but every one I’ve seen already expressly forbids taking booze to the actual range or drinking before your weapon is unloaded, cased, and stored. There is also a strong social stigma against those who mix drinking and shooting.
As for the exploding targets and automatic weapons, those are usually not allowed except at specific ranges anyway because they are so destructive and a pain to clean up.
I suspect that these DNR regulations are redundant to the rules already in place at most ranges, so I don’t really have a problem with them setting uniform rules for DNR ranges anyway.
DOJ Files Brief in Wisconsin Carry v. City of Madison
Remember that this is one of the cases on the docket for the Supreme Court this session.
Today, in Wisconsin Carry, Inc. v. City of Madison, Attorney General Brad Schimel filed a motion supporting Wisconsin Carry’s argument that state law preempts certain municipal gun regulations, namely, Madison’s Transit and Parking Commission’s rule banning all weapons from its Madison Metro buses.
Attorney General Schimel argues, contrary to Madison’s claims, that a municipality cannot delegate power that it does not have, and that municipalities do not have the power to regulate firearms in ways more stringent than state law. Since state law allows people to possess and transport firearms in vehicles, Madison may not ban them from its buses.
Customer Kills Goblin
Good.
Investigators said the shooting happened at the store in White Center at approximately 5:45 a.m. local time. Witnesses said the man entered the store and swung a hatchet toward the customer before turning his attention to the clerk.
As the assailant attacked, the customer pulled out a pistol and fired, hitting the suspect. The clerk suffered minor injuries to his stomach and the suspect was pronounced dead at the scene.
The customer who shot the suspect is described as a 60-year-old Seattle man who visits the store every morning to get coffee. His name was not immediately released.
Authorities said the man who shot the attacker had a concealed carry permit and likely would not face charges as a result of his action.
Perhaps we should consider waiting periods for hatchets.
Company Required Employees to Arm Themselves
ATLANTA (AP) — The decision by the owner of a small insurance company to require his employees to carry firearms at the office has sparked a debate: Would having a gun on the job make you safer, or is it inviting violence into the workplace?
Lance Toland said his three offices, based at small airports in Georgia, haven’t had problems with crime but “anyone can slip in these days if they want to. I don’t have a social agenda here. I have a safety agenda.”
When a longtime employee, a National Rifle Association-certified instructor who’s been the company’s unofficial security officer announced her retirement, Toland wanted to ensure the remaining employees were safe. He now requires each of them to get a concealed-carry permit, footing the $65 bill, and undergo training. He issues a Taurus revolver known as “The Judge” to each of them. The firearm holds five rounds, .410 shells that cast a spray of pellets like a shotgun.
Gun Control Fantasy Study
Ha!
Paris (AFP) – Gun deaths in the United States can be slashed by over 90 percent through universal application of laws requiring background checks of buyers and easy tracing of every bullet fired, researchers said Thursday.
Conducting a background check on every single gun buyer could more than halve the national gun death rate from 10.35 to 4.46 per 100,000 people, said a paper in The Lancet medical journal.
Background checks for all ammunition purchases would cut the rate to 1.99 per 100,000 people, and “firearm identification” to 1.18 per 100,000.
Firearm identification requirements oblige manufacturers to store images of the unique markings that every gun makes on the bullets it fires, for cartridges at crime scenes to be easily traced to the gun that fired them, and hence its owner.
So if we shred the Constitution and have universal gun registration and a massively expensive infrastructure for the testing and identification of all fired bullets (which already failed in Virginia for obvious reasons), we will be able to lower the number of murderous criminals who use guns?!?!? Great!
Oh, but not really…
But the authors conceded that once laws are implemented, they could take “many years” to start having the desired effect.
Commenting on the study, David Hemenway of the Harvard School of Public Health said the authors had failed to calculate the potential impact of factors like poverty, alcohol consumption and mental health.
And the study was unable to examine actual changes in gun deaths before and after the passing of any given law.
Family Kills Goblin
Another example of guns saving lives.
“According to the homeowner,” police said, “he was bound in the bathroom by the suspect. The homeowner said he was able to free himself, fought with the suspect and sustained a stab wound to the back side of his shoulder.”
The man, his wife and his child were held in the bathroom, police said. The situation turned when the wife was allowed to leave the bathroom at some point, police said.
“The wife returned with a handgun and fired one shot believing to strike McCloud. After the husband’s bonds were cut by the wife, the husband took control of the weapon and fired additional shots striking McCloud,” police said. “The family then ran outside and flagged a motorist and asked them to call 911.”
When investigators arrived at the scene just after 7 a.m., they found McCloud in the tub with multiple gunshot wounds.
Anti-2nd Amendment Groups Sue PA Over City Rules
This is why choosing good judges is so important – particularly judges who sit on a Supreme Court.
PHILADELPHIA (Reuters) – Pennsylvania gun control advocates on Wednesday asked the state’s top court to knock down a 2014 law allowing gun-rights lobbying groups to sue cities that adopt gun restrictions and recoup legal costs if they prevail.
Firearms advocates, including the National Rifle Association, contend the law is necessary to prevent gun owners from becoming ensnared by a patchwork of municipal ordinances that violate their right to bear arms.
Gun control advocates challenged the law on a technicality – that it passed as part of what they called an unrelated piece of legislation.
Debating Universal Background Checks
Despite the frequent calls for expanded background checks after mass public shootings, there is no evidence that background checks on private transfers of guns would have prevented any of the attacks that have taken place since at least 2000. Nor is there any statistical evidence that indicates that these mass public shootings are rarer in states with background checks on private transfers. What we do find is that fatalities and injuries from mass public shootings increased in states after they imposed background checks on private transfers. States with background checks on private transfers tended to have relatively low rates of murders and injuries from mass public shootings before the passage of background checks on private transfers and that these rates became relatively high afterwards.
There are real costs of expanding background checks to private transfers. In particular, the fees on private transfers. Law-abiding poor blacks who live in high crime urban areas and who benefit the most from protecting themselves will be the ones most likely priced out of owning guns for protection.
Without some benefits in terms of either reduced crime or mass public shootings, it is hard to see how these rules pass any type of cost-benefit test.
Iowa Considers Child Handgun Bill
I had no idea this was even a law.
The Youth Safety & Parental Rights Act (House File 2281), which was among five gun proposals under discussion earlier this week, has been a contentious issue — dividing even supporters of the Second Amendment. If successful, people under the age of 14 would be permitted to handle “a pistol, revolver or the ammunition” in the presence of an adult.
Current law prohibits anyone under 14 to use handguns, and plenty of Iowans want to keep it that way.
Before the Hawkeye State’s House of Representatives passed the bill with a 62-36 vote on Tuesday, several lawmakers provided impassioned pleas to reject the bill in the name of children’s safety.
14 seems really old to be allowed to handle a handgun. I was shooting handguns much younger than that and many people even start competing younger than that. Under the proper supervision of an adult is where kids learn to safely handle firearms.
Dean Resigns Over Advancing Civil Rights
Shucks. He’ll be missed 
A dean at the University of Texas is stepping down over a new state law which will allow concealed handguns to be carried on university campuses.
Frederick Steiner said the policy was not “appropriate” for higher education and “did not make logical sense”.
Texas passed the legislation last year and it goes into effect in August.
[…]
But for Frederick Steiner, dean of the Texas School of Architecture, guns should not be allowed on university grounds.
“I grew up believing there was an appropriate place for guns and it was not in a place of higher education and higher learning,” he told Fox News.
“I thought I would be responsible for enforcing a law I don’t believe in,” said Mr Steiner, who has been at the school since 2001. He says he plans to return to the University of Pennsylvania, but not until the law is passed in August.
Shifting Support
The Marquette Law School poll is out today. It has been one of the more accurate polls over the past few years. The horse race stuff is about as one would expect. The only thing of note is that Trump, while still leading, has less support in Wisconsin than he has in some other states. This is indicative of the fact that Wisconsin Republicans have become more conservative over the past few years. But this was the most interesting part to me:
Guns continue to be an issue in both state and national politics. In 2012, three Marquette Law School Polls asked whether respondents favored or opposed “legalizing possession of concealed weapons” while such legislation was under debate. Between 46 and 47 percent supported legalizing concealed carry, while between 49 and 51 percent opposed the proposal. Concealed-carry legislation was passed and became law in 2012.
In the current poll, respondents were asked if they favor or oppose the “current law allowing residents to obtain a license to carry concealed handguns.” Sixty-three percent favor the current concealed-carry law, while 31 percent oppose it. Those with a gun in their household support the concealed-carry law by 80 percent to 18 percent, while those without a gun in the house oppose the law by 47 percent to 43 percent.
To the Republicans in the Wisconsin legislature who are pussyfooting around things like repealing the minimum markup law – this is what leadership does for you. They passed concealed carry despite the fact that the people were split down the middle on it. They passed it because it was the right thing to do and the opposition to it was based on emotion – not facts. Conservatives and Republicans forcefully made their arguments and passed the legislation. Now, 5 years later, a full two-thirds of the people support it, and are more likely to support those politicians who support it. Why? Because many of them saw that their emotional arguments against it were incorrect in the face of the reality of living in state with concealed carry.
Leadership has a price, but it also has a benefit.
Over 7% of Adult Wisconsinites Have CCW
It’s nice to see people exercising their rights.
Wisconsin has an adult population (21 or over) of about 4.4 million. Roughly 1 out of every 16 Wisconsin adult residents now has a concealed carry permit.
There was one manslaughter homicide by a citizen with a permit — who claimed self defense, but was convicted by a jury– in the last four years. That translates into a homicide rate for permit holders of about .22 homicides per 100/000 people per year. That’s less than 1/13 of the homicide rate for Wisconsin on average.
Hopefully Wisconsin can advance constitutional carry so that these kinds of milestones become meaningless.
Irrational Push for 48-Hour Waiting Period
Fortunately, this has very little chance of success.
MADISON (WKOW) — In the wake of the recent tragedy involving a Metro Market employee who was gunned down by a former coworker, there’s been a renewed interest to restore a law for a 48-hour hand gun waiting period.
State Rep. Chris Taylor (D-Madison) says it’s become her calling to bring it back soon, especially after the phone call she received Saturday morning from victim Caroline Nosal’s mother, Jane.
Our 27 News cameras were rolling when Jane Nosal called Kathryn Larson as she was interviewing Rep. Taylor on her efforts to re-introduce the repealed measure. What happened next was a spontaneous conversation; between a lawmaker and a heartbroken mother, an unrehearsed emotional exchange –one mother to another.
“This is so senseless, and so devastating,” Rep. Taylor told Jane Nosal as the two teared up and cried about Tuesday’s murder outside the Metro Market.
The suspect, Christopher O’Kroley, was fired from the grocery store on Monday. According to the criminal complaint and Madison Police, O’Kroley bought a gun at a store. A little more than 24 hours later, police say he killed Nosal.
“I don’t think waiting 48 hours to purchase a handgun is a huge burden, I don’t think if you ask the parents of the young woman killed that they will say that it is too much of a burden,” Rep. Taylor said about her work to re-introduce the 48-hour wait-period law.
You’ll notice that the entire rationale for reinstating the 48-hour waiting period is based on emotion. Taylor had an emotional conversation, so the rest of us have to be regulated.
In truth, she’s right. The 48-hour waiting period isn’t a huge burden. It’s annoying, but not a huge burden. It’s also useless as a crime prevention measure. The notion that waiting another 24 hours would have prevented the killer from acting is completely hypothetical. He might have cooled off. He also might have stewed in his own juices a bit longer and decided to kill more people. Or he may have done exactly what he did – just a day later. We will never know.
The 48-hour waiting period is also completely arbitrary. It isn’t based on any evidence whatsoever. Why 48 hours? Why not 72? 3 weeks? Why just handguns? Would this killer have been less deadly if he had bought a shotgun instead? Again, the rule was completely arbitrary and useless, which is why we did away with it.
The 48-hour waiting period is just a useless hurdle for gun owners that makes anti-gun folks feel like they are “doing something.” Well, I’d rather not be hassled just to make Rep. Taylor feel better.
Virginia Reverses Concealed Carry Reciprocity Recognition
Huh.
In an unexpected turn, the Democratic governor of Virginia struck a deal with Republicans to continue recognizing gun carry permits from 25 states despite the state attorney general’s decision late last year to do away with the recognition.
The deal, which will be moved through the legislature and signed by Gov. Terry McAuliffe, will restore the reciprocity agreements Virginia has with dozens of states. In exchange for restoring the agreements, Republicans have agreed to prohibit those with a protective order against them from carrying a firearm during the life of the order and to staffing gun shows with state police officers specifically dedicated to performing voluntary background checks on private gun sales. The deal would also keep Virginians who can’t obtain Virginia carry permits from using another state’s permit to carry in Virginia.
Campus carry bill should be a no-brainer
My column for the West Bend Daily News is online. Here it is:
The Wisconsin Legislature is back in session for a short time before they go home for the year to run for re-election. This November, a third of the Senate and every seat in the Assembly is on the ballot. Normally this session is a quiet one in which only mundane and procedural initiatives are addressed as legislators seek to avoid controversy before asking the citizens for their votes.
Some legislators, however, are willing to risk controversy in order to advance bills to better Wisconsin. Senate President Mary Lazich, R-New Berlin, and Rep. Robert Brooks, R-Saukville, introduced a bill last week to allow more latitude for people licensed to carry a concealed weapon in Wisconsin to carry their weapons on K-12 school grounds.
Under current law, people who are licensed are permitted to carry their weapons in most places in Wisconsin, including college campuses, restaurants, stores, taverns and any private property unless the owners prohibit it. But they are not allowed to carry their weapons on K-12 campuses at all — even locked and unloaded in their vehicles. It is a crime to do so.
Lazich’s and Brooks’ bill would allow licensed people to carry their concealed weapons on campus grounds and leave it up to local school boards to decide if they would allow people to carry their weapons in school buildings.
The immediate problem the bill seeks to solve is that roughly 5 percent of Wisconsinites are licensed to carry concealed weapons and they become instant felons if they drop off their kids at school with a gun with them. There is no rational reason why parents who carry a weapon, who pose no danger to anyone who is not trying to harm them, should have to surrender their constitutional rights or run afoul of the law just to drive through a parking lot while transporting their kids.
But the bill also addresses the larger problem of blanket prohibition of firearms in schools. By allowing local school boards the latitude to define the parameters by which people will be allowed or prohibited to carry weapons in schools, those school boards would have more tools available to them for addressing school safety while being responsive to their constituents’ wishes.
For example, a school district could allow only former military or law enforcement personnel to carry their weapons. Or perhaps allow it for everyone, but only after registering with the office. Or maybe only allow district employees to carry weapons. Or the school district could maintain an absolute ban on weapons. Whatever the case, the proposed law would put that decision into the hands of locally elected leaders.
As expected, the anti-liberty crowd has gone into full fever pitch at the mere suggestion of allowing guns in schools. Mayor Tom Barrett, who presides over the city ranked as the seventh most dangerous in America in 2015 (up from 10th place in 2014), went as far as to call the measure “insane,” as if his prescriptions to mitigate violent crime have been successful.
We have heard these lamentations before. We heard them before concealed carry was passed into law in 2011. We heard them before Texas allowed open carry this year. We have heard them every time people seek to exercise and protect their Second Amendment rights. And those lamentations and predictions of doom have universally failed to come true. In fact, even now, 18 states already allow guns in schools with no or minor conditions and there have not been any negative consequences in those schools.
All constitutional rights are subject to some restrictions. The standard should be whether or not the government has a vital interest in restricting a right. In this case, there is no data to support the contention that allowing licensed concealed-carry holders to carry their weapons on campus decreases safety. In contrast, there is some reason to believe that allowing campus carry would enhance safety by allowing a good guy with a gun to mitigate the damage caused by a bad guy with a gun.
Unfortunately, the Republican leadership in the legislature has already signaled that this bill is not likely to see a vote in this session. They are not willing to risk controversy — even if the facts and tenets of liberty are on their side. If that proves to be the case, let us hope this is one of the first bills brought up when they are ready to get back to serious lifting of the people’s business.
Bill to Allow Schools More Control of Guns on Campus
Excellent. Let’s hope they can get this passed.
Madison, WI – A bill circulated today by State Senator Mary Lazich (R-New Berlin), Representative Rob Brooks (R-Saukville) and Representative Jesse Kremer (R-Kewaskum) would give public and private K-12 schools the ability to allow or ban concealed carry holders from carrying concealed weapons on school property. In response, Rep. Jesse Kremer issued the following statements:
[…]
“My goal with this bill is to give our schools the tools to protect our kids and those who have watch over them. I urge my colleagues to support this important measure.”