DOJ Admin Code

[Captain Nemo]

This isn't really a specific comment but I've been pondering the significance of all the chatter concerning training. It's obvious that the legislature put the training requirements into Act 35 to placate those legislators concerned about it and of course to give the governor the warm fuzzies. In doing so it made the requirements as minimum as could be expected. Look at the reality. Anyone with a hunters education certificate qualifies. That reaches out to about 1,000,000 hunters. Anyone that has had small arms training in the military, national guard or reserves qualifies (that qualification reaches back at least 66 years). How many millions of living persons does that cover? Anyone that has had military law enforcement or security training is qualified. Any persons that have attended an organational event i.e. project Appleseed qualifies. Anyone that has taken any of the NRA or NSSF courses qualifies (some of those go back 40 years). Anyone that has a outstate permit, current or expired, has complied with the training requirement (many members of this forum already have MN, MI,UT and/or FL permits). I don't have the foggiest idea how large the total number of already qualified persons is. I'm sure that it is thousands of times larger than the number of people that will apply for a permit. Certainly there will be some wanting a CC license that don't have qualified training, but I wonder how large that number really is statewide? I suspect the largest numberof not qualified persons fall into a certain nitche. Probably mostly young adults in the larger metropolitan areas. Females probably make up the highest number of unqualified perons statewide. Information coming from trainers and instructors that their course sign ups for voluntary training are very high, indicate that number will be down significantly by Nov. 1.


Don't misunderstand my post. It does not imply that we should say it's not a significant problem and roll over and ignore it, especially when the DoJ seems to be perched on the tree above us with knife and fork in hand. I write it only to put some perspective to reality.

My opinions.

 

[Da Po-lock]

Hunters safety is only one of many that are mentioned in the statute. Why would any of the others need a special certificate and not hunters safety?

EXACTLY! ! ! !

And who really can put much stock in heresay from someone who knows someone who supposedly talked to someone from the DOJ ?

One would thing the DOJ would require confidentiality and NOT have someone on the inside yapping to someone who then blabs it all over the internet.

Would be interesting to call the DOJ and ask them if someone there is telling others outside the department what will be required.

I think I'll do that Monday.

 

[paul@paul-fisher.com]

With all due respect to the OP, this is BS. The statute is already quite clear on what is acceptable proof. By insisting on specific requirements on a certificate they are overstepping the statute. I'm thinking somebody is going to need to push this issue.

I do not believe that the OP is saying that the NRA, for example, has to change their certificates.

Anyhow, I will be sending in the MD training and if they deny my permit, I will be suing and we will let a judge decide.

 

[mrjam2jab]

I do not believe that the OP is saying that the NRA, for example, has to change their certificates.

Anyhow, I will be sending in the MD training and if they deny my permit, I will be suing and we will let a judge decide.

but he is saying just that:

1) Whatever any class/organization has issued as far as certificates goes, won't cut it. Period. Classes will need to reissue new certificates when the time comes because the DOJ will be requiring a certificate with some very specific language making reference to law that has not been drafted yet. This should, and almost certainly will, be done well in advance to allow time for the courses to go about this reissuing process in time for folks to apply on November 1. The administrative code should be quite clear as to what these certificates require and the DOJ is planning on posting a 'model certificate' on their site.

NRA certs come from NRA Central...they are all the same no matter what state they are issued. DOJ wants "specific language" which means somebody is going to have to change the NRA certs.

 

[paul@paul-fisher.com]

That's awesome. We will see if the DOJ can add to the law. I have most of my lawsuit thought out. Just need some specifics and a denial letter.

I have already notified the DOJ that if they deny my application I will sue. The cool thing is I get to sue in my home county, not Dane county.

 

[GlockMeisterG21]

In reference to the OP, this tracks with what I've been getting out of the DOJ.

 

[mrjam2jab]

That's awesome. We will see if the DOJ can add to the law. I have most of my lawsuit thought out. Just need some specifics and a denial letter.

I have already notified the DOJ that if they deny my application I will sue. The cool thing is I get to sue in my home county, not Dane county.

Good luck with that.

 

[GlockRDH]

hey Paul...i wonder if a suit such as yours may be better filed in Clark county with THAT judge...(who happens to like CC)

 

[paul@paul-fisher.com]

hey Paul...i wonder if a suit such as yours may be better filed in Clark county with THAT judge...(who happens to like CC)

That is an idea. Unfortunately, I believe I have to file where I live?

 

[neoinarien]

Hunters safety is only one of many that are mentioned in the statute. Why would any of the others need a special certificate and not hunters safety?

...

 

[neoinarien]

EXACTLY! ! ! !

And who really can put much stock in heresay from someone who knows someone who supposedly talked to someone from the DOJ ?

One would thing the DOJ would require confidentiality and NOT have someone on the inside yapping to someone who then blabs it all over the internet.

Would be interesting to call the DOJ and ask them if someone there is telling others outside the department what will be required.

I think I'll do that Monday.

And it's exactly because of people like this that I wonder why I bother. And it's exactly because of people like this, who DO dump on the knowledgeable people why many knowledgeable people stay away.

 

[neoinarien]

I talked to the founder of armedbadger.com. A great guy to chat with. You can read about his thoughts on our talk on the similar thread on his site.

http://www.armedbadger.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=912

 

[GlockRDH]

That is an idea. Unfortunately, I believe I have to file where I live?

YOU could do the draft..and someone in THAT county file it.

 

[BROKENSPROKET]

Hunters safety is only one of many that are mentioned in the statute. Why would any of the others need a special certificate and not hunters safety?

Because a hunter's safety education certificate are issued from another government agency in the state?

 

[BROKENSPROKET]

That is an idea. Unfortunately, I believe I have to file where I live?

Currently, you would have to file in DAne County. That is until SB117(http://legis.wisconsin.gov/2011/data/SB-117.pdf) makes it into law, then you could choose a county.

801.50(3) Except as provided in this subsection, all actions in which
the sole defendant is the state, any state board or commission, or
any state officer, employee, or agent in an official capacity shall
be venued in Dane County unless another venue is specifically
authorized by law. All actions relating to the validity or invalidity
of a rule shall be venued as provided in s. 227.40 (1).

 

[BROKENSPROKET]

That's awesome. We will see if the DOJ can add to the law. I have most of my lawsuit thought out. Just need some specifics and a denial letter.

I have already notified the DOJ that if they deny my application I will sue. The cool thing is I get to sue in my home county, not Dane county.

Nope. You have to file in Dane County. I cited the statute in a previous post.

 

[sheller]

And it's exactly because of people like this that I wonder why I bother. And it's exactly because of people like this, who DO dump on the knowledgeable people why many knowledgeable people stay away.

You are absolutely correct, sir. That is why there is only a handful of sue happy, paranoid regular posters left here. You would be better off not bothering.

 

[BROKENSPROKET]

And it's exactly because of people like this that I wonder why I bother. And it's exactly because of people like this, who DO dump on the knowledgeable people why many knowledgeable people stay away.

You are absolutely correct, sir. That is why there is only a handful of sue happy, paranoid regular posters left here. You would be better off not bothering.

I agree completely. I am a couple of posts away from taking a long vactation from this forum.

 

[paul@paul-fisher.com]

Nope. You have to file in Dane County. I cited the statute in a previous post.

I really don't make this **** up:

175.60(14m) APPEALS TO THE CIRCUIT COURT. (a) An individual
aggrieved by any action by the department denying
an application for, or suspending or revoking, a
license under this section, may appeal directly to the circuit
court of the county in which the individual resides
without regard to whether the individual has sought
review under the process established in sub. (14g).

 

[BROKENSPROKET]

I really don't make this **** up:

I will be watching to see how that goes for you.