View Full Version : Concealed Carry Override Vote Tuesday
Rocket Power
01-30-2006, 05:27 PM
The vote is tomorrow
So get on the phones and call your assemblyman and tell them to vote FOR the over ride. :headbang
If you don't know whop your guy is find out here:
Who are my Legislators ? (http://165.189.139.210/WAML//)
http://www.themilwaukeechannel.com/politics/6498297/detail.html
If you're against the CCW bill, just pretend it's any old tuesday and disregard the message :goof
Hopefully these people will keep their word this time and vote the way the say they are going to. If all goes well and people keep their promise this time it SHOULD pass no problem this time!!! :thumbsup
DirtyMax
01-31-2006, 11:57 AM
What time is the vote supposed to be?
Not sure on an exact tume, sometime this afternoon. We should hear something by dinner time at the latest.
GRM-REPR
01-31-2006, 12:36 PM
With Jerkoff Jim Doyle at the helm, he will threaten the remaining dumocraps to not vote in the assembly for it. Thats fine, it will hurt him even more come election time. Then Scott Walker can ok it next year.
It didnt get passed. :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: to the damnocrats. Pieces of sh!t.
DirtyMax
01-31-2006, 03:07 PM
Buncha flipflop fockers. :chair:
wikked
01-31-2006, 04:58 PM
It would have passed...but 2 Democraps changed their mind at the 11th hour... so effin gay.
USMARINE1108
01-31-2006, 05:11 PM
It didnt get passed. :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2: to the damnocrats. Pieces of sh!t.
Wouldnt that have made WI the 32 state to allow CC?
Wouldnt that have made WI the 32 state to allow CC?
More like the 47th.
HITMAN
01-31-2006, 09:09 PM
To that godamn worthless no-good puss-bag of a governor Jim "Cocksucker"Doyle and the rest of those good-for-nothing phucking dumbocrats: :fire :flipoff2: :fire :flipoff2: :fire :flipoff2: :fire :flipoff2: :fire :flipoff2: :fire :flipoff2: :fire :punch: :chair: :punch: :chair: :punch: :chair: :punch: :chair: :punch: :chair:
animal
01-31-2006, 09:44 PM
To that godamn worthless no-good puss-bag of a governor Jim "Cocksucker"Doyle and the rest of those good-for-nothing phucking dumbocrats: :fire :flipoff2: :fire :flipoff2: :fire :flipoff2: :fire :flipoff2: :fire :flipoff2: :fire :flipoff2: :fire :punch: :chair: :punch: :chair: :punch: :chair: :punch: :chair: :punch: :chair:
yeah no ****. ****** worthless pos's.
I think we should ban dicass in retaliation. :mad:
Wouldnt that have made WI the 32 state to allow CC?
BlueBullet is right, WI is one of the 4 states that doesent have CC legal yet. Ive herd that the Supreme Court is starting to push on WI to get it passed and if they dont the Supreme Court will come into play and make it legal. Thing being is that if they do (SC) then it wont be the way that the Shitheadcrats want it to be and then they will be pissed and wonder why in the fuk did they not just pass it some time ago.
As for those 2 pussies that backed donw to O' Doyle again in the cacus today and sucked O'Doyles little prick, they were suppose to vote to get rid of the Veto and they are the 2 that fuked everyone over. I was listning to MArk Belling on the radio today after this all happened and he was having a field day on these people. Fuking pieces of sh!t. Burn in hell you fukin sellouts!!! :flipoff2: :flipoff2: :flipoff2:
LIL EVO
01-31-2006, 11:05 PM
Yeah, this is a little out of line
Berettaspeed
02-01-2006, 12:03 AM
^ agreed
it doesn't bother me either way, but i think its a good idea, the CC law. as long as people vote based upon what they believe and not because everyone else is. gotta give respect for what they believe and standing for it. but since we don't know why they changed their minds i guess i can't say... for those who are against it and now say ok i guess since its going to happen anyways need to be replaced, cause they could do it again with something different.
Moparjim
02-01-2006, 08:10 AM
Doyle is a complete piece of crap. One guy is stonewalling a law that the clear majority of the country has had great results with, and that the majority of the state wants. Probably catering to a few big interest groups or individuals that line his pockets with money. Read the paper this week on what a piece of arrogant crap this guy is - the travel agency that gave him $20,000 and lo and behold his agency gets the preferred travel contract for the whole state government with no competitive bid.
Even funnier, when called on it and it all came to light, the dirtbag at first flat out said he's keeping the money and his special friends were keeping the contract still with no competitive bids. After being in the paper all week and numerous politicians and parties speaking out against his CLEAR corruption, it got even better - now he decided the "fair" way to resolve the issue is to cancel the agency's ill gotten contract with the state......but HE"S STILL KEEPING THEIR MONEY. Apparently he even screws his friends lol.
DirtyMax
02-01-2006, 08:31 AM
But you're forgetting all the other good things our esteemed governor Doyle has done lately.... :rolleyes: :chair:
Just to name a few...
Concealed carry, ethanol mandates, Indian gaming contract sham, government contracts awarded to those who contribute the most to campaign funds, giving big-time support to the WEAC in return for campaign contributions. And much more
The Five Seven
02-01-2006, 08:34 AM
Hi all,
These two pissants (read the following) are the reason and like a few of you stated, they are up his a** and kissing it. They flipped obviously because Doyle has something over them! We need to vote these leakers out in November.... The following is from **** Baker @ www.wisconsinconcealedcarry.com which I received in an e-mail from him.
Two Democrats broke their promises to you: Representative Terry Van
Akkeren of Sheboygan, who voted for this bill in 2003, voted for the veto
override in 2004, and voted for the bill last month; and Representative John
Steinbrink of southeastern Kenosha county, who voted for the bill in
2002, voted for the bill in 2003, voted to override Doyle's veto in 2004, and
also voted for the bill last month. :wtf
Clearly, Governor Doyle's wields iron-fisted control over members of
his party, :hump2: even if his own selfish agenda means those members will suffer the ultimate sacrifice at the polls in November. (He needs to leave)
Lets say goodbye to them in the next election!
....................... Skeeter
^ agreed
it doesn't bother me either way, but i think its a good idea, the CC law. as long as people vote based upon what they believe and not because everyone else is. gotta give respect for what they believe and standing for it. but since we don't know why they changed their minds i guess i can't say... for those who are against it and now say ok i guess since its going to happen anyways need to be replaced, cause they could do it again with something different.
DirtyMax
02-01-2006, 09:08 AM
Lets say goodbye to them in the next election!
I agree. Hopefully Scott Walker gets the nod. He seems a little more down to earth. Plus, unlike Chrome Dome, he was born in the 1900's.
Yeah, this is a little out of line
HA!! Yeah sure. :thumbsup
Berettaspeed
02-01-2006, 10:13 AM
Hi all,
These two pissants (read the following) are the reason and like a few of you stated, they are up his a** and kissing it. They flipped obviously because Doyle has something over them! We need to vote these leakers out in November.... The following is from **** Baker @ www.wisconsinconcealedcarry.com which I received in an e-mail from him.
Two Democrats broke their promises to you: Representative Terry Van
Akkeren of Sheboygan, who voted for this bill in 2003, voted for the veto
override in 2004, and voted for the bill last month; and Representative John
Steinbrink of southeastern Kenosha county, who voted for the bill in
2002, voted for the bill in 2003, voted to override Doyle's veto in 2004, and
also voted for the bill last month. :wtf
Clearly, Governor Doyle's wields iron-fisted control over members of
his party, :hump2: even if his own selfish agenda means those members will suffer the ultimate sacrifice at the polls in November. (He needs to leave)
Lets say goodbye to them in the next election!
....................... Skeeter
thats bunk..
if its ture then i would be like goodbye... see i don't keep up on all these little details.....
I herd on the radio this morning that the Supreme Court is about to get involved in this matter, if you think about it we are being denyed out constutional rights with this whole ban BS. Iam not saying anything more about this. Ive stated my opnion on how we are being screwed. :rolleyes:
92lxcoupe
02-01-2006, 11:14 AM
All I have to say right now about this is :headbang
Less than 20% of Wisconsin's population approves of CCW. As lawmakers, they are supposed to represent the population, not the lobbyists.
All I have to say right now about this is :headbang
Less than 20% of Wisconsin's population approves of CCW. As lawmakers, they are supposed to represent the population, not the lobbyists.
JCWA commin outta the woodwork to make a statement... :stare
GRNDNL
02-01-2006, 12:01 PM
All I have to say right now about this is :headbang
Less than 20% of Wisconsin's population approves of CCW. As lawmakers, they are supposed to represent the population, not the lobbyists.
Where did you hear that?......Got a link or something?....
I heard on the radio that 80-85% approved of CCW, I have no proof of that and I don't beleave everything I hear on the radio......
Pantera99GS
02-01-2006, 12:36 PM
Where did you hear that?......Got a link or something?....
I heard on the radio that 80-85% approved of CCW, I have no proof of that and I don't beleave everything I hear on the radio......
Yeah in my extremely scientific poll (friends and family :) ), all who I talked to seemed to be in favor? I dont especially want to carry myself, but I'm all for normal law-abiding people doing it. I just don't get the logic of "well if we outlaw them, nobody will have one!"..yes because criminals REALLY give a **** what the laws are. :chair:
DirtyMax
02-01-2006, 02:20 PM
Where did you hear that?......Got a link or something?....
I heard on the radio that 80-85% approved of CCW, I have no proof of that and I don't beleave everything I hear on the radio......
Yes, I'd like to see this as well. I can believe 20% of the people whose last name is Doyle but many people I've spoken with favor it.
subliminal1284
02-01-2006, 02:41 PM
Some of the people up here are so [beep] retarded, they think if this law gets passed ANYONE can carry a gun but that isnt so. You have to pass a criminal background check and go to the same training as police officers do to carry a gun. Do you really think someone that has 3 felonies and cant get the permit to legally carry a gun is gonna care? Hell no, hes gonna do it anyway. Before I moved up here some guy in FL attempted to rob a pharmacy for money and drugs, the pharmacist shot him right there on the spot :) I am not republican and im sure as hell not democrat I just believe its law abiding peoples constitutional right to carry weapon to protect themselves.
DirtyMax
02-01-2006, 03:15 PM
Do you really think someone that has 3 felonies and cant get the permit to legally carry a gun is gonna care? Hell no, hes gonna do it anyway.
EXACTLY!!!
Ding, Ding, Ding... We have a winner!!!! :thumbsup
All I have to say right now about this is :headbang
Less than 20% of Wisconsin's population approves of CCW. As lawmakers, they are supposed to represent the population, not the lobbyists.
I have yet to meet a cop who does not approve of CCW. Only the cheif of Milwaukee and Madison disapprove.
Some of the people up here are so [beep] retarded, they think if this law gets passed ANYONE can carry a gun but that isnt so. You have to pass a criminal background check and go to the same training as police officers do to carry a gun. Do you really think someone that has 3 felonies and cant get the permit to legally carry a gun is gonna care? Hell no, hes gonna do it anyway. Before I moved up here some guy in FL attempted to rob a pharmacy for money and drugs, the pharmacist shot him right there on the spot :) I am not republican and im sure as hell not democrat I just believe its law abiding peoples constitutional right to carry weapon to protect themselves.
Instant justice saves the taxpayers money.
HITMAN
02-01-2006, 10:28 PM
All I have to say right now about this is :headbang
Less than 20% of Wisconsin's population approves of CCW. As lawmakers, they are supposed to represent the population, not the lobbyists.
:rolleyes:
If ignorance is bliss, then you must be floating on the fringes of paradise... ;)
92lxcoupe
02-02-2006, 09:42 PM
I was pretty sure I saw the statistics in the Journal Sentinal, but I cannot find them now so my point is moot. I also searched to find any statistics regarding approval/disapproval in Wisconsin, but came up empty.
Just because someone has not committed a felony yet does not mean they won't. In a study done in Texas between 1996 and 2001, 41 permit holders were arrested on murder or attempted murder charges, and 5314 other crimes were committed by permit holders. Obviously most of this was unrelated to thier guns or gun permits, but it does still show that not everyone with a gun permit is law obiding. Shortly after the study was published Texas passed a law making that prevented the public from obtaining information regarding permit holders. Coincidentally, this also prevented anyone from showing any correlation between gun permit owners and crime. It also hides the fact that in several instances gun permits may actually increase crime.
The next laws that usually follow CCW are the infamous "Make My Day" or "Shoot First" laws. These laws mask problems associated with CCW, because they are so vague in regards as to what constitutes danger or threats. If I am unarmed and get into an arguement with someone with a concealed weapon in the mall parking lot over a parking spot and make the other person feel "threatened," they have the right to shoot. Under normal laws this would be a crime, but under Shoot First it is not, thus "decreasing" crime when a crime has been committed.
subliminal1284
02-02-2006, 10:16 PM
Constitution clearly states "right to BEAR arms" Nuff said.
MurphysLaw88GT
02-02-2006, 10:39 PM
Goddambnnn! gheeeyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
UnderPSI
02-02-2006, 11:00 PM
Just because someone has not committed a felony yet does not mean they won't. In a study done in Texas between 1996 and 2001, 41 permit holders were arrested on murder or attempted murder charges, and 5314 other crimes were committed by permit holders.
Only 5,314 crimes by permit holders over a period of Five years in a state the huge state of texas.......... I would say thats not too bad
animal
02-02-2006, 11:15 PM
41 permit holders were arrested on murder or attempted murder charges, and 5314 other crimes were committed by permit holders.
It's pretty well known that if you are in a situation that you are forced to use your concealed weapon, you are arrested or the gun/permit is at least confiscated until they can sort out the situation. I would in fact, expect this to happen much like any other situation dealing with the death of one party. How many of those 41 arrests actually led to a guilty finding? I'd bet not near 41.
92lxcoupe
02-02-2006, 11:37 PM
Constitution clearly states "right to BEAR arms" Nuff said.
Actually, if you read it, it states:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
"Well regulated" implies at least some sort of gun control, and "Militia" implies a group responsible for the safety of the country. Nowhere does it state that in individual has the right to carry a concealed weapon. Our forefathers did nof forsee things such as CCW. Consequently the ammendment is too vague, which allows everyone their own interpretation.
I am not sure how many of the 41 were convicted. The other 5314 other crimes commited out of roughly 200,000 permit holders puts that statistic right around our normal crime rates. That shows that permit holders are no less likely to commit crimes than non permit holders. If everyone was arrested stopping a crime and only 41 people were arrested using their weapon to stop a crime, does the law actually work?
Another problem with the law is that the permit cost is between $350 and $600 depending on how extensive the background check is. The applicant is only required to pay $75 and the taxpayers pay the rest. The sponsors of this bill estimate that there will be 100,000 applicants the first year, so if you take the smaller cost it would equate to about $275,000 in extra taxes. I thought Republicans were supposed to reduce taxes, but this shows otherwise.
Jake B. (Killer Quad)
02-02-2006, 11:47 PM
:rolleyes:
If ignorance is bliss, ;)
why isnt this a country of happy people! :goof
HITMAN
02-04-2006, 01:27 AM
why isnt this a country of happy people! :goof
Because they're too stupid to realize that they're ignorant! :durr
American liberals:
http://img304.imageshack.us/img304/6802/stuck35ur.jpg
blackcar
02-05-2006, 01:58 PM
Re: regulated militia. A permit is a form of regulation. :durr Right now our "citizen militia" is outside that parameter. Most people who pack now don't much care about it's legality, & maybe don't care that there is already a law against shooting me or you. Would be nice to make the field a bit less tilted. :guns1
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.