January 9, 2012

Madisonians — including Police Chief Noble Wray — fret about the new concealed carry law in action.

Our local liberal rag, the Cap Times, displays and magnifies the worrying for its skittish readers.
What really trips Wray's trigger is the lack of a meaningful training requirement. Republican Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen prepared rules requiring four hours of training courses, but fellow Republicans thought even that low bar overly onerous and GOP Gov. Scott Walker agreed. Says Wray, "I thought four hours was a bare minimum," adding that almost all state law enforcement officials agree.
What exactly do you do for 4 hours? It seems as though the point of making it 4 hours was to deter people from exercising their rights. That is, it wasn't really to serve the state's legitimate interest in safety, but for the purpose or effect of placing a substantial obstacle in the path of the citizen who chooses to carry a gun. (Do you recognize the italicized words? Google them if you don't, especially if you enjoy irony, the exposure of hypocrisy, and fun stuff like that.)
Madison's concealed gun crowd has to be minuscule, I'd guess. After all, it's hard for me to imagine the biomolecular chemistry professor or the pediatric oncologist yearning to tote a concealed sidearm. So how many are seeking permits in Madison?
I love the smug elitism. Madison people are all professors and doctors. Not even just run-of-the-mill professors and doctors. We're a steaming mass of biomolecular chemistry professors and pediatric oncologists. It's those lowlifes from beyond the gleaming city's limits who want guns. Ugh! These benighted folk want to cling to some guns along with their religion. They don't belong here, just like that fiend Scott Walker and all the Republicans in the legislature don't belong here. They are bringing their what's-the-matter-with-Wisconsin values to our beautiful city!

The author of the Cap Times piece — Paul Fanlund — tries to find out how many Madisonians there are among the the 67,000 who have applied for permits and is surprised to learn that it's illegal to disclose that information. Law-abiding gun owners actually have privacy interests the state wants to protect. What a surprise! But it would be so interesting to know what loathsome, Republican-voting communities they came from. Surely not the teeming-with-physicists-and-oncologists Madison!

Fanlund quotes Chief Wray:
"What I can't understand is how come we have not evolved beyond the point that the best way to protect ourselves is a gun? How come we cannot come up with something that is less destructive and less permanent."
I don't know, Chief. I'm pretty evolved myself, being a Madisonian professor, but I don't know. I do have a question for you though: Why haven't the police — the police you lead — eliminated crime in our neighborhoods? Why are there still rapes and robberies? Why are there still gangs? Why haven't your police evolved to the point where you have solved these problems for us? Because, I know that I, personally, would love to depend on government for all my personal protection. How come you cannot come up with something?

134 comments:

EMD said...

"What I can't understand is how come we have not evolved beyond the point that the best way to protect ourselves is a gun? How come we cannot come up with something that is less destructive and less permanent."

What's that saying about police and minutes and seconds again?

Bob Ellison said...

Powerful stuff, Professor. Great writing.

Joe said...

(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew)

“Gunfight at the OK Corral! Blood in the Streets!! The Old West over Baskin-Robbins !!! ELEVENTY1111” Does anyone ever get a new play book out to the Left?

Sorun said...

Oh yeah, there are professors and doctors also. When I think of a typical Madison resident, it's more like Mr. Zopittybop-bop-bop

jrberg3 said...

"What I can't understand is how come we have not evolved beyond the point that the best way to protect ourselves is a gun?"

I think the next most logical question to Chief Wray is to ask why do your officers carry a gun then?

Hell, their motto is "to protect and serve" and they use a gun as a protective weapon, so why can't I do just the same thing to protect myself, my family and perhaps my innocent fellow citizens.

TosaGuy said...

Madison police incident reports

YoungHegelian said...

When I was a good liberal teenager growing up in northern Alabama, it used to piss me off how the high school did everything it could to get around the ban on school prayer & the desegregation orders that had come down from the SCOTUS.

Now that I'm a conservative adult and live in the liberal DC suburbs, it pisses me off to see, when it comes to guns & statehood for the District of Columbia, the liberals who waxed wroth at the benighted South now seem to think that a SCOTUS ruling is, at best, a suggestion.

Youngblood said...

"What I can't understand is how come we have not evolved beyond the point that the best way to protect ourselves is a gun?"

It's called physics.

Skipper said...

Let the police disarm first and we'll talk about it.

MadisonMan said...

What I can't understand is how come we have not evolved beyond the point that the best way to protect ourselves is a gun? How come we cannot come up with something that is less destructive and less permanent.

See, I have evolved. My powers of illusion approach those seen on Talos IV. But I'm subtle, and all about nuance.

Mike said...

Something along the line of "When you need help from the police in seconds, they are only 15 minutes away."

A poor paraphrase, but it encapsulates the thought. N.b. the recent story about an 18 year old single mom in either Texas or Oklahoma calling 911 to ask if it was "okay to shoot" when two men were trying to break in to her house. She'd apparently barricaded herself in her child's bedroom. The guys broke in throught the front door. When the first one came into the bedroom, she applied the 12 guage solution center mass. Fortunately the 911 center had told her "Do what you have to do". If they'd told her "wait till the police get there" we'd have a different dead person--maybe two dead persons.

Paul Zrimsek said...

Madison people are all professors and doctors.

Indeed, the bloody gang conflict between the Professors and the Doctors is referred to in the editorial.

edutcher said...

The problem, which seems to elude all the good little Lefties, is not firearms in the hands of law-abiding citizens.

It's firearms in the hands of the unprincipled, envious members of the underclass that the Left has done so much to create.

But addressing that would be raaaacisssst.

Ann Althouse said...

"What I can't understand is how come we have not evolved beyond the point that the best way to protect ourselves is a gun? How come we cannot come up with something that is less destructive and less permanent."

I don't know, Chief. I'm pretty evolved myself, being a Madisonian professor, but I don't know. I do have a question for you though: Why haven't the police — the police you lead — eliminated crime in our neighborhoods?


Not to mention all those Radicals threatening 60 year old video cam-toting conlawprofs.

jrberg3 said...

"After all, it's hard for me to imagine the biomolecular chemistry professor or the pediatric oncologist yearning to tote a concealed sidearm."

What if the biomolecular chemistry professor is experimenting on mice and the loonies from PETA or ALF are threatening him and his family? Or perhaps the pediatric oncologist has taken out a restraining order aginst her ex-husband who has violently threatened her in the past? I guess those situations only happen with the rubes outside Madison.

EDH said...

"That is, it wasn't really to serve the state's legitimate interest in safety, but for the purpose or effect of placing a substantial obstacle in the path of the citizen who chooses to carry a gun."

Apples and oranges. It's not like some one can be killed by having an abortion.

Rumpletweezer said...

The police, don't you know, have all kinds of "special training" in the use of guns. That's why, nationwide, police are involved in more accidental shootings than people who have concealed carry permits.

TWM said...

"The police, don't you know, have all kinds of "special training" in the use of guns. That's why, nationwide, police are involved in more accidental shootings than people who have concealed carry permits."

Do you have a link to that statistic because I'd like to read it.

I assume you mean you mean accidental discharges, not shootings which implies someone was actually shot.

Is that total number of accidental shootings or as a percentage? Do concealed carry permit holders have to report accidental shootings as to police officers?

Henry said...

I was curious about what the 4 hours of training was supposed to cover. I would bet that most people applying already know how to use firearms. Do they need 4 hours of training to learn how to conceal them?

According to the Department of Justice, "Proof of training is still required." But proof of a number of hours, instructor signature, and some other technical requirements are eliminated.

Click on the "Emergency Rules" link to read the actual text of the Order subject to the edits I've summarized above.

Multiple types of training are accepted. For example:

(a) A certificate or affidavit documenting that the applicant has successfully
completed the department of natural resources’ hunter education program or a substantially
similar program that is established by another state, country, or province and is recognized by the
department of natural resources.


Here's my guess at the real issue. A firearm user may already have one of the many certificates accepted as proof of training. Or their permit signifies such training. However, they are less likely to have an instructor signature and/or proof of four hours of training. The rules, as written, would force valid gun permit holders to repeat instruction they've already taken.

That's only a guess on my part. Any Wisconsin hunters care to verify?

TMink said...

"That is, it wasn't really to serve the state's legitimate interest in safety, but for the purpose or effect of placing a substantial obstacle in the path of the citizen who chooses to carry a gun."

Indeed.

It reminds me of that crazy civilization that spent themselves saying it was "for the children" when really they were making their children their debt servants.

Oh wait, that is us.

Trey

TWM said...

"I was curious about what the 4 hours of training was supposed to cover. I would bet that most people applying already know how to use firearms. Do they need 4 hours of training to learn how to conceal them?"

A bad assumption. Many first time concealed carry folks are not that familiar with handguns and certainly not familiar with drawing one from a holster, especially a concealed one.

Also, at least here in Tennessee, much of the class is on the legal use of deadly force in a situation and shoot/don't shoot senarios.

That is something that is a benefit to a holder.

Pogo said...

I signed up for a concealed carry class.

Just 3 years ago I didn't have even one gun.

Something's changed, and it ain't just Obama.

"Jan 5, 2012
The FBI performed a record number of instant background checks on would-be firearm buyers in 2011 as Americans went on an apparent gun-buying spree, according to new government data.

The FBI said it fielded nearly 16.5 million queries from firearms sellers last year, checking that customers buying guns did not have criminal records or other red flags that made them ineligible to purchase weapons.

That was up 15 percent from 2010 ...and the highest number of annual screenings performed since 1998, when the checks went into effect.
"

Just like the 1970s, we are seeing a spike in concern about crime, even as we are told that crime is down.

Of course, we are also being told the unemployment rate is down, too.

Jim Ellison said...

The concise quote (I got from Instapundit I don't recall his source): "When seconds count the police are only minutes away."

Shanna said...

We have a concealed carry training requirement in Arkansas and I don't think it's that big of a deal.

Chuck66 said...

Why does the aparthied state of Madison only graduate 48% of its African-American children. Haven't we evolved farther than that, where peoples are colored are truely equal in the eyes of Madison Public Schools?

Chuck66 said...

AA, you seem to be similiar to several of the National Reveiw contributers (and other now-conservative or libertarian writers).

They were liberals in their youths, and then went to college. They saw the stupidness and narrowmindedness of the ruling elites. And the repressive nature of those types. Several have said it was over-the-top liberals that turned them conservative.

cubanbob said...

Next thing you know in order to exercise another constitutionally right, the right to vote, Madison will require a photo ID, proof of english language competence and literacy and a poll tax.

Kirk Parker said...

I have another concern here: just how illiterate and/or insular does Wray want to present himself as being?

1. There are huge variances in what different states require before granting concealed-carry permits, including (a) several states with no training requirement at all (PA, WA, maybe a few others, (b) at least one state--UT--where the training is almost purely classroom, and the only gun-handling required is that you know how to safely *unload* a typical revolver and semi-auto, and (c) those with variously-stringent requirements for actual range time.

2. Doesn't the chief (or any of his subordinates) know how to google things, to see if there are any documented differences correlated with the different training regimens cited in #1? (This goes to the "illiterate" part of my opening.)

3. There are a variety of national organizations for law enforcement, and at least one specifically for police chiefs. Doesn't he belong to any these? And if he does, don't they ever talk about these things among themselves? (This obviously goes to the "insularity" part.)

I belabor all this because there are no mysteries here--Consider my very own lovely, firearm-friendly state of Washington--one of the no-training-requirement ones, where you can be issued a Concealed Pistol License literally without ever having seen a handgun in real life, much less touched or fired one. We have just a low a rate of accidental and intentional misuse by permit-holders as the states with more stringent requirements. (Hint for the google-lazy: pretty much everywhere, these rates are down in the statistical noise anyway.)

So given this, really the Chief has only two possible positions: (1) "We're stupid, we didn't know this" or (2) "Wisconsinites are a worse class of people than Washingtonians and will go nuts without a stringent training requirement, even though you guys seem to manage it just fine".

So which is it, buddy?

Original Mike said...

" ...it's hard for me to imagine the biomolecular chemistry professor or the pediatric oncologist yearning to tote a concealed sidearm."

This physics professor intends to get a permit. Why? Because when seconds count, the police are minutes away.

"What exactly do you do for 4 hours?"

I've wondered this too (and I think you hit on the right answer to the 4 hour requirement). I took hunter safety class when I was a kid. There ain't a whole lot of stuff to go over.

Roman said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
TWM said...

"I've wondered this too (and I think you hit on the right answer to the 4 hour requirement). I took hunter safety class when I was a kid. There ain't a whole lot of stuff to go over."

I did too, but I'm pretty sure concealed carry holders are not going to use their handguns for hunting Bambi.

Chuck66 said...

So folks in Madison who are associated with the college don't need a hand gun, ever?

What if you are a math grad student and you work in a building with some Dept of Defense contracts. What if home-grown domestic terrorists from Madison decide to attack the building and kill you, but this time using hand weapons instead of a bomb.

Roman said...

Four hours seems a bit low, or to a person with firearms training, too high. How about the training for journalists? While it was many years ago, I was told: 'the pen is mightier than the sword.'

Chuck66 said...

Nawww, that could never happen. No one is ever murdered on the UW-Madison campus.

Curious George said...

"Kirk Parker said...

So given this, really the Chief has only two possible positions: (1) "We're stupid, we didn't know this" or (2) "Wisconsinites are a worse class of people than Washingtonians and will go nuts without a stringent training requirement, even though you guys seem to manage it just fine".

So which is it, buddy?"

Dude, the real answer is 3) I'm the police chief in a liberal town and I would like to keep the job.

Michael Haz said...

This is simply brilliant writing:

I don't know, Chief. I'm pretty evolved myself, being a Madisonian professor, but I don't know. I do have a question for you though: Why haven't the police — the police you lead — eliminated crime in our neighborhoods? Why are there still rapes and robberies? Why are there still gangs? Why haven't your police evolved to the point where you have solved these problems for us? Because, I know that I, personally, would love to depend on government for all my personal protection. How come you cannot come up with something?

Well done, Althouse.

holdfast said...

In some states the licensing requirement to purchase a pistol and to carry concealed is similar or part of a graduated process, so you might as well get the CC permit even if you don't intend to carry regularly.

When I did my pistol permit class in a liberal state it was a day of training - about 6 hours - including a very little range time. A lot of the class was basic gun parts, handling and physics - useful for the novice but rather old hat for the 50% of the class that was either (like me) ex-military or an experienced shooter from a less-regulated state.

Practically speaking, I didn't really mind the class, but philosophically speaking, the need to devote an entire day and pay a significant fee would be a pretty high barrier to entry for some folks looking to exercise their second amendment rights.

DaveW said...

I was curious about what the 4 hours of training was supposed to cover. I would bet that most people applying already know how to use firearms.

Nope. There's an elderly woman in my neighborhood with no experience at all in firearms that wants to get a concealed carry permit right now. Nancy is the head of our ARC in our homeowners association.

And for what it's worth, 4 hour is not excessive. I know here in Texas it used to be 8 hours. You spend the time learning how handguns work, learning how to sight a target, how to carry it properly, how to load and unload it, how to secure it and spend some time actually shooting it to get accustomed to the thing, that sort of thing.

A few hours spent in firearm saftey isn't wasted time at all if someone wants to carry a gun in their purse. It's a Saturday well spent and a lot more fun than a defensive driving course.

In the USMC we spent a full week at the range.

Fernandinande said...

What exactly do you do for 4 hours?

15 minutes of learning for newbies, then whatever. Guns and gun usage are dick-simple.

Article: In my chat with Wray, he acknowledges constitutional gun rights, but says his concern is that whenever you add guns to the community, legal or otherwise, the peril grows.

So I gather the police, including Wray, are ditching their guns so as to make the "community" safer.

Oh, wait, they're Special, so it doesn't count. How could I forget?

Joshua R. Poulson said...

4 hours is exactly the minimum length of the NRA "Home Firearms Safety" course.

Kirk Parker said...

Curious.

Touche! :-)

Although the real trick is to pose the unacceptable alternatives to force *him* to come out and say that.

Yiddishe Bloyger said...

Texas mandates 10 hours. The problem with this is three fold.

First, the ten hours is often not really ten hours.

Second, even when ten hours is ten hours, it usually includes plenty of "filler," such as entertaining or humorous videos. The reason is that the mandated content can be adequately covered in well under ten hours.

Third, the training that is mandated does not come close to preparing people who carry to react correctly and safely to an actual incident of violence. If Jane Doe is walking down the streets of Dallas and has to use her gun to protect herself, the training she received in her CHL class will prove next to worthless. Preparing for the real thing is something carriers have to do outside the CHL class.

Four hours or ten hours, either way it's really just an administrative hoop.

But Chief Wray is being disingenuous to complain about the hours anyway, because he really thinks we should be more mature than needing a gun.

Chief Wray: I don't know why I haven't evolved to the point of wanting to be easy prey for predators. But I don't intend to start now.

Henry said...

@DaveW and @TWM -- From my reading, the training requirement is broad-based: The applicant has to take some kind of hunter or firearms-safety course.

The eliminated requirements that the course be 4 hours, involve "testing" and that applicants have instructor signatures doesn't appear to have any connection to the type of training that is accepted.

Calypso Facto said...

Madison's concealed gun crowd has to be minuscule, I'd guess. After all, it's hard for me to imagine the biomolecular chemistry professor or the pediatric oncologist yearning to tote a concealed sidearm

The Madison crime rate of 3.88 per 1,000 per year is 40% higher than the state average, Mr. Smugness.

Sorun said...

I think four hours of training is a good idea. I grouse-hunted once with a guy who was unaware of where his shotgun barrel was pointed (at me). Don't assume common sense like "never point a gun..." is common to everyone. People need to be told stuff.

Clarification of the laws is useful also.

Hagar said...

Perhaps because the crooks have not evolved to the point of recognizing that violence is not the best way to separate me from my property?

ErnieG said...

...and the police are only minutes away.

And when they do show up, they won't need a gun. Just a piece of chalk.

TMink said...

Yiddishe wrote: "the training that is mandated does not come close to preparing people who carry to react correctly and safely to an actual incident of violence."

I agree.

And yet, despite the upwelling of concealed carriers, there has not been an upwilling of the wild west type shoot outs and inappropriate use of firearms that we were all warned about.

Maybe the emphasis should be put on screening out people who are not capable of that type of decision making rather than boring the people who are capable of it for 4 hours.

Maybe no instruction is needed at all. That does not make a lot of sense to me, as I think the training would offer something worthwhile, but has anyone done the research to see is states with longer training have fewer problems?

No, nobody has done the reseach, as simple as it would be. Politics is quite afraid of data and reality.

Evidently.

Trey

EMD said...

The Madison crime rate of 3.88 per 1,000 per year is 40% higher than the state average, Mr. Smugness.

Imagine Mr. Smugness trying to live In Youngstown, Ohio.

purplepenquin said...

Remember the story about the Madison man who hid his handgun in the oven, and then forgot it was there when he turned the oven on?

Pop Quiz: Was that man a police officer or a concealed-carry-permit civilian?

Scott M said...

Pop Quiz: Was that man a police officer or a concealed-carry-permit civilian?

Answer: He was an idiot.

Yiddishe Bloyger said...

TMink has provided an excellent research idea. Perhaps the Obama administration would be willing to provide some grants .... nah.

Seriously, though, it would be interesting to see what really correlates with safer concealed carry. Excellent suggestion.

Original Mike said...

What's your point, Penquin? That a course should run through all the stupid things you might do? Because that is an infinite set.

Sorun said...

Pop Quiz: Was that man a police officer or a concealed-carry-permit civilian?

It was former police chief Richard Williams.

traditionalguy said...

So Madison's elite thinkers really still think that guns in the hands of good people will create dangers for them, but that guns in the hands of bad people is nothing new and therefore is nothing to worry about.

I don't believe them.

Lem said...

..the purpose or effect of placing a substantial obstacle in the path..

The argument against voter id.

I don't have to google it.

David Blaska said...

It is the Progressive mindset at work: the people cannot be trusted -- especially those who waited long years for the passage of a law, submitted $50 so the state could pry into their backgrounds to determine their suitability, then take instruction (still required, although the number of hours are not specified) for the privilege of exercising their 2nd Amendment rights. Such people must be paranoid racists.

TWM said...

"Practically speaking, I didn't really mind the class, but philosophically speaking, the need to devote an entire day and pay a significant fee would be a pretty high barrier to entry for some folks looking to exercise their second amendment rights."

I don't know. If a person can afford the three hundred or more it cost to buy a decent handgun and holster and wants the responsibility of carrying one safely and knowing when and how they can legally defend themseleves with it(and it IS a responsiblity), it doesn't seem like too much time and money. Certainly not enough to deter someone I think.

I'm all for concealed carry, but I'm also for the people carrying to know what they are doing.

Jay said...

What really trips Wray's trigger is the lack of a meaningful training requirement

Why?

There is no evidence that "training" would prevent any sort of misuse.

Given his other comments, this police chief sounds like an imbecile.

Lem said...

If disarming is so evolutionary/visionary.. how come the police wont take the lead?

Original Mike said...

"After all, it's hard for me to imagine the biomolecular chemistry professor or the pediatric oncologist yearning to tote a concealed sidearm."

Seems to me, it's more likely to be a liberal arts professor who has "evoled" past the desire to defend oneself.

Jay said...

What I can't understand is how come we have not evolved beyond the point that the best way to protect ourselves is a gun?

Chief, why don't you take a trip to London and find out?

I mean, you might actually witness some property crime in action or be assaulted.

But don't worry, it is "less permanent" as they don't have handguns.

Sigivald said...

After all, it's hard for me to imagine the biomolecular chemistry professor or the pediatric oncologist yearning to tote a concealed sidearm

Because, after all, part of a Doctorate is learning to hate and fear firearms with an irrational passion, right?

garage mahal said...

Remember the story about the Madison man who hid his handgun in the oven, and then forgot it was there when he turned the oven on?

Yes! Like photo ID, we MUST safeguard against this and impose severe restrictions on handguns. Like memory tests, aptitude tests, that sort of thing. JUST.IN.CASE!

We don't know if it's happening all over, but it very well may be!

Crimso said...

How about 4 hours of some sort of certified civics instruction before being allowed to vote?

I don't have a carry permit (yet; my preferred weapon is a Remington Model 11, so I need some practice with something smaller and less effective), but just last year I was locked in my office (I'm a "biomolecular chemistry professor") when a shooting occurred right outside my building.

I still couldn't have been armed on campus though, so the permit wouldn't have mattered. OTOH, I could have made Molotov cocktails in about a minute.

Jay said...

Madison's concealed gun crowd has to be minuscule, I'd guess

Maybe.

Wisconsin residents have overwhelmed the state Justice Department with so many concealed weapon permit applications agency officials say they probably won't meet deadlines for issuing approvals this month despite pulling dozens of employees from other tasks to help.


Maybe not.

Pogo said...

Self defense, like light bulbs, trans fats, and operating cell phones, is a matter too important and complex to be left to the average citizen.

It's a wonder, really, that we can manage to get out of bed without harm each morning.

Scott M said...

Missouri requires a training class that requires range time. For the cert class I took, that involved shooting through two clips of .22 that my fee had paid for as part of the class.

Of the day-long seminar-style class, there was plenty of good info that I, a life-long firearms user, welcomed. In particular, the discussions on the thresholds for pulling the weapon and the conversations about what happens post-shooting were the most valuable.

The only thing I found to be onerous was the fact that the paperwork cannot be handled through the mail or through satellite offices. I had to drive to the county seat (about 35 minutes for me) to be fingerprinted and to both sign my paperwork...and then come back another day to pick up the endorsement.

MaggotAtBroad&Wall said...

My guess is Madison has a demographic which is similar to that of the state of Vermont - a bunch of over-educated, affluent, old, white liberals yearning for the 1960s.

Vermont is noted for its very liberal concealed carry laws. No permit is required. No training. No payoff of a fee to the state. No waiting period. They treat gun ownership and carry as the right that it truly is.

Ever heard about out of control Vermont gun fights? Out of control random shootings? Out of control gun crimes of any kind in Vermont?

Neither have I.

In fact, a 1997 study showed the only state in the union with fewer violent crimes committed per capita than Vermont was North Dakota. The same study showed Vermont's murder rate is the fourth lowest. I remember Howard Dean, of all people, once brag about Vermont's low crime rate and mentioned its loose CCW laws in the same breath. Really.

purplepenquin said...

errr, I'm sorry Mr. Mahal but that wasn't the point I was trying to make. Rather, what the previous police chief did is just one example of folks who have lots&lots of "training" in firearms but still end up doing stupid stuff with a gun.

Requiring a class/course in order to exercise our Second Amendment rights smacks of a poll tax/literacy test, especially when it has been shown that no amount of "training" can make up for "common sense"

Curious George said...

CCW required a valid drivers licence or state ID card. Plus $$$.

Can we expect cries of protest from the left that blacks, students, and the elderly are disenfranchised?

Will the Penguin post about how little access there is in many counties in WI?

Of course not.

Jay said...

purplepenquin said...
errr, I'm sorry Mr. Mahal but that wasn't the point I was trying to make


Welcome to the club!

Jay said...

Vermont is noted for its very liberal concealed carry laws. No permit is required. No training.

And I bet it is like the wild, wild, West up there!

Right wing wackos waving guns around, shootouts in bars, a bunch of dumb rednecks with no training firing off rounds randomly!

Right?

RIGHT???

Tyrone Slothrop said...

It's not unreasonable to require a minimum of training before a citizen may carry a gun, as long as the training is free.

Althouse means to evoke the argument made by liberals that ID requirements are an unfair barrier to voting, and I applaud her calling out the hypocrisy of those liberals.

Carrying a gun is not the same as voting. I think you could do at least some good in four hours of training, as long as the state doesn't charge a lot of money as means to exclude people from exercising their rights, as was done in D.C.

Pogo said...

"I think you could do at least some good in four hours of training"

I disagree.
The state gets way too involved in my life.

Time for them to back off. This is as good a place as any.

If they think I can't choose light bulbs, they're too stupid to offer a useful gun class.

Matthew said...

So. Who has actually Googled: "the purpose or effect of placing a substantial obstacle in the path."

I did. LOLs were had.

An Edjamikated Redneck said...

Althouse means to evoke the argument made by liberals that ID requirements are an unfair barrier to voting, and I applaud her calling out the hypocrisy of those liberals.

Carrying a gun is not the same as voting.


Absolutely right.

You can do a helluva lot more damage with a vote than you can a fire arm.

Take the Obummer regime for example.

Matthew said...

Not about voting, if my Google-fu is strong.

TML said...

This post, on its own, just rang the tip bell to the tune of $50 for the Professor. Bravo. Good time to chip in everyone. Brutal smackdowns like this need to be rewarded.

slarrow said...

What I can't understand is how come we have not evolved beyond the point that the best way to protect ourselves is a gun?

Who's he talking about here? The predator, the bad guy causing the danger? I think that guy has evolved just fine, adapting to prey on the weak and defenseless.

Is it the victim, then, who hasn't evolved? Again, I think they're evolving just fine with concealed carry. You don't evolve in a vacuum--it's in response to your environment. If your predator is looking for easy prey, don't be easy prey. If your attacker is larger, younger, faster, and more prone to violence than you are, you have to counter those attributes, not the ones you wish applied. To that end, "God made man, but Colt made men equal."

Matthew said...

Maybe he means we should evolve eye lasers.

Pogo said...

The stupidity is in thinking that people 'evolved' at all.

We're the same as our forebears, perhaps more arrogant, but no less governed by our passions than when the cave paintings were done.

The Enlightened Emperor has no clothes.

EMD said...

Maybe he means we should evolve eye lasers.

You mean you haven't?

hombre said...

Althouse wrote: How come you cannot come up with something?

Or: "How come your cops still carry?"

Police Chiefs who pander to lefties are poison to their profession.

purplepenquin said...

Will the Penguin post about how little access there is in many counties in WI?

Of course not.


*sigh*

Once again the poo-throwing monkey doesn't even bother to read what is actually written, but rather he simply sees who is responding in the thread and then responds based on what his personal bias tells him that person will say.

It seems clear that he doesn't really care about having a discussion, but rather wants (needs?) a whipping boy for all the pent-up anger he is carrying around...

Scott M said...

Maybe he means we should evolve eye lasers.

OOOOO....I would trade in flying cars and orbital hotels for eye lasers.

Scott M said...

*sigh*

Once again the poo-throwing monkey doesn't even bother to read what is actually written, but rather he simply sees who is responding in the thread and then responds based on what his personal bias tells him that person will say.

It seems clear that he doesn't really care about having a discussion, but rather wants (needs?) a whipping boy for all the pent-up anger he is carrying around...


Which is just a longer and more passive/aggressive way of going "neener, neener" back at him.

Lem said...

Google

the purpose or effect of placing a substantial obstacle in the path..

I should have followed the professors instructions..

Chip Ahoy said...

Yes, I do recognize the italicized words the purpose or effect of placing a substantial obstacle in the path so I did not Google them. And, yes, I do enjoy irony. The real irony that takes several steps to complete and involves at least two parties and always leads to unpredictable and unexpected results, that shit cracks me up. But this is not that so I do not enjoy it.

Original Mike said...

"What I can't understand is how come we have not evolved beyond the point that the best way to protect ourselves is a gun?"

I continue to be amazed at this statement. I guess what Chief Wray means is; "Aren't you people smart enough to stay indoors after dark?".

Revenant said...

What I can't understand is how come we have not evolved beyond the point that the best way to protect ourselves is a gun?

Do the police in Madison not carry guns anymore?

If they do, why?

Scott M said...

"What I can't understand is how come we have not evolved beyond the point that the best way to protect ourselves is a gun?"

I continue to be amazed at this statement. I guess what Chief Wray means is; "Aren't you people smart enough to stay indoors after dark?".


I believe what the Chief was trying to explain was how frustrated he was that here we are, a decade after the completion of the Human Genome project, and we still don't have talons, fangs, and armored scales. I'm almost sure of it.

Although, be honest. If we all did, it would still require an equalizer, so you're right back to claw-handed, chitonous, horned people walking around with Glocks.

Pogo said...

Just try firing a pistol with talons.

Pogo said...

For the geeks here:

"Do the Madisonians have large talons?"

Scott M said...

Just try firing a pistol with talons.

Ideally, it should be grafted on, which I'm sure the Chief considered and thus frustrated our lack of genetic manipulation, ie, our evolution, even further. You can specially design pistols for talons, but the economies of scale (no pun) are going to kill you.

TANSTAAFL said...

Rember, when seconds count, the police are only minutes away.

DaddyBear said...

On the 4 hours of training, that's how much we get here in Kentucky. For the first two hours or so, you're watching a video lecture that basically goes over the concealed carry, castle doctrine, and lethal force laws in the Commonwealth. A lot of time is given to the places you can and cannot carry, both concealed and openly. (Open carry is legal without a permit here) Another hour is spent on basic gun safety (4 rules, safe storage), then you get an hour on the range to show you know how to safely and accurately utilize your firearm and maintain it.

The law part of it is so that no-one can legitimitely use the "But I was never told defense", and I did learn quite a bit. The safety training was pretty much refresher for me, but not for all of the people getting the class. Some were brand new to guns, some were old shooters who finally decided to get a permit, but had never heard the standards put to them so directly. The range time was a good way to make sure they weren't sending someone who didn't know how to be at least minimally safe with a pistol out into the steets.

So yeah, 4 hours was a good investment of my time.

Curious George said...

"purplepenquin said...
Will the Penguin post about how little access there is in many counties in WI?

Of course not.

*sigh*

Once again the poo-throwing monkey doesn't even bother to read what is actually written, but rather he simply sees who is responding in the thread and then responds based on what his personal bias tells him that person will say.

It seems clear that he doesn't really care about having a discussion, but rather wants (needs?) a whipping boy for all the pent-up anger he is carrying around..."

The fact is that I did not read your post before I placed mine shortly after it. So your assumptions are all false...as usual. That said, while you take every opportunity to post all the hardships of obtaining ID when it comes to voting, you haven't mentioned it here in regard to CCW...as I predicted. And Ms. Althouse's post is about the hypocrisy of the left...you being one of the examples.

toby said...

The "Madison man who put his gun in the oven" and then preheated the oven for a frozen pizza, causing it to discharge, WAS THE POLICE CHIEF OF MADISON @ the time. I believe he had weapons training. You can't make this shit up.

cokaygne said...

How much play is the story about the young Oklahoma widow who shot an intruder after asking 911 for permission getting in Wisconsin media?

Seeing Red said...

Yes! Like photo ID, we MUST safeguard against this and impose severe restrictions on handguns. Like memory tests, aptitude tests, that sort of thing. JUST.IN.CASE!

We don't know if it's happening all over, but it very well may be!



Nahhh, just make a photo ID a requirement for buying Drano or Liquid Plumber.

Seeing Red said...

I continue to be amazed at this statement. I guess what Chief Wray means is; "Aren't you people smart enough to stay indoors after dark?".


A fat lot of good it did those subjects in England. The Village Idiots wanted to turn off the street lamps to save energy & pounds.

Deb said...

I don't know, Chief. I'm pretty evolved myself, being a Madisonian professor, but I don't know. I do have a question for you though: Why haven't the police — the police you lead — eliminated crime in our neighborhoods?
This is going to be my answer to my hysterical liberal friends when they question why I need to carry a firearm.

wv: hysta. No kidding.

Cedarford said...

Rumpletweezer said...
The police, don't you know, have all kinds of "special training" in the use of guns. That's why, nationwide, police are involved in more accidental shootings than people who have concealed carry permits.

In fairness to cops, their training on firearms use law, tort liability related to gun use, and actual hands on is far more extensive than the typical provate citizen. And any higher incident rate reflects risk divided into net opportunities where risk of mishap could happen.
In other news, the risk of dying or being injured in a crash of an Alaskan bush plne is far higher for Alaskan bush pilots than the average Alaskan or tourist using such planes to get around!

Dad29 said...

What exactly do you do for 4 hours?

Review the law so as to know what one MAY and may NOT do, where one MAY or may NOT carry, etc.

Learn through countless repetitions that pulling and using a deadly weapon is the very LAST thing that one should do.

The book is called "In the Gravest Extreme" for a reason.

Cedarford said...

I did a firearms permit deal back in the mid-90s when I was in a job assignment that dealt with certain valuables and a workplace still stuck in a black ghetto area.
Seemed like a good idea to have some self-defense ready in that context.
To get it, I had to attend a full-day class, pass a test, followed by a couple hours on the range later in the month as scheduled..by group of 4 instructees per instructor. In class, about half the people were ex-military looking for some security job. A couple were elite ex-military...spec ops, Marine recon...A couple of people were in security work that had already taken company and state firearm training in another state, had existing concealed carry permits - but got no credit per our State's carry license laws.
A few former military did not know what they thought they knew on technical aspects of gun safety and firing, were bad shooters - but 90% of the class was a waste of time for most of us Vets. The section dealing with laws related to firearms was very useful, though, and we should have had more. The instructor actually gave us copies of police training on regs, liability on request that were outside the scope of the class's alloted time - which assumed the attendee was the lowest common denominator completely ignorant of anything about guns..including the components of an ammunition round.

Since the 90s, there is a little more common sense about honoring other states permits and transferring documents as proof of training.

DADvocate said...

Since I got my concealed carry license a couple of months ago, I've been involved in an uncountable number of gun fights.

0

george said...

I suspect if you were to find records of how many people have shot themselves in the foot in Madison you would have a pretty good estimate of how many leftist professors own guns.

Hey, if cherry picking tree ring data suffices for surrogate data in climate science then I would think my method of sussing out who carries a gun would be at least as accurate.

SunnyJ said...

This physics and neurology instructor will conceal carry in Madison.

If you want research on CC and gun laws...look no further than NYC. The strictist gun laws in the country, no CC permits, do not honor any other state permits...AND, drum roll...largest number of gun deaths and assaults per capita in the country.

Seems the thugs are getting their 4 hrs of training from somewhere other than the Dept of Natural Resources.

Revenant said...

Review the law so as to know what one MAY and may NOT do, where one MAY or may NOT carry, etc.

Why? If you carry a gun into an illegal location, you're the only one who suffers for it. So why require people to know that information? They've got ample incentive to learn it on their own.

Learn through countless repetitions that pulling and using a deadly weapon is the very LAST thing that one should do.

Once is enough. Also, you phrased it poorly; discharging the weapon should be a last resort, but drawing it is not. The vast majority of defensive uses of firearms consist of displaying them to the miscreant, who then runs away or surrenders.

If someone tries to rob you, drawing your gun (with the willingness, but not intent, to use it) should be the very first thing you do. Not the last. Anything else is more likely to get you hurt or killed.

furious_a said...

"Five day waiting period? Auuugghhh...but I'm angry now!!"
--Homer Simpson

Paul said...

Geeze Ann, we have CCW here in Texas for many YEARS and it ain't Dodge city!

No gunfights as the O.K. Coral, no Abilene shootouts, no nothing!

Florida is the same way.

I suspect the 'Madisonians' who are so afraid are simply afraid they can't control people they way they want them controlled.

For you see, as the founding fathers discovered, with a rifle in the hand one learns they are INDEPENDENT and can stand on their own two feet.

Karl said...

Rev't: The vast majority of defensive uses of firearms consist of displaying them to the miscreant, who then runs away or surrenders.

What is the source of this information?

I am not calling bullshit - just wondering what organization is measuring the efficacy of "flashing a piece"?

froggy said...

This 19-year resident of Madison (attorney by profession, educated at the UW Law School) fully intends to take responsibility for her own and her family's safety. I'm currently in the process of obtaining my CCW permit, much to my police chief's apparent chagrin and confusion. As others have pointed out, when seconds count, the police are only minutes away. Just as knowing the Heimlich can save a life when an EMT isn't handy, knowing how and when to use self-defensive measures could mean the difference between my life and death someday. I want to be prepared for that moment. Plus, it's fun to practice at the firing range!

Firehand said...

Reminds me a bit of one of the usual "You want a gun to substitute for your tiny penis" clowns; I asked if that included the gorgeous woman I just saw at the range discussing whether she'd prefer a H&K or a Smith & Wesson 9mm for her next pistol?

No, I didn't get an answer.

GetReal said...

"What exactly do you do for 4 hours? It seems as though the point of making it 4 hours was to deter people from exercising their rights. That is, it wasn't really to serve the state's legitimate interest in safety, but for the purpose or effect of placing a substantial obstacle in the path of the citizen who chooses to carry a gun."

You can't possibly be this dumb. Or maybe you've spent so much time in Madison that you don't understand anything about guns (despite your efforts to appear to stand above the liberals you so desperately want everybody to believe you hate)? Probably just about anyone who hunts on a regular basis can tell you about a hunter's safety class that they attended. And, if my stepfather, who is an avid hunter from Slinger, WI (and who forced me to attend a hunter's safety class), is typical (note: he is), then the people that have attended these classes think they are worthwhile. Who wants to walk around with a bunch of people that don't understand all of the dumb, unthinking things you could accidentally do with a gun?

Kirk Parker said...

SunnyJ,

Don't know where you're getting your information, but it's hopelessly out of date. These days NYC is squarely in the middle of the pack in terms of violence.

Kirk Parker said...

GetReal,

If you really want to make some headway, first try refuting the PA and WA experience.

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

SunnyJ,

Kirk Parker is right. NYC isn't even in the running for most gun violence any more. See here (admittedly this is 2006-07, but still).

You want to look at the second column, the per capita rate. Detroit remains the runaway winner, as usual; Baltimore's second, Oakland's third, Newark is fourth, and I think Miami is fifth. DC and St. Louis and Philly and Atlanta and (I think) Houston round out the top ten. NYC proper isn't even in the top twenty.

wv: flatwori. The flatworm that turned!

Kirk Parker said...

Michelle,

Whoa--what happened to Chicago and New Orleans? They use to be contenders...

SCOTTtheBADGER said...

Speaking as a police officer, a "Badge-er", if you will, in Wisconsin, I must state that the Madison Police Department is held in a certain amount of contempt by other police departments throughout the state. They are not so much police officers, as armed social workers. Of course, in a force of 300+ officers, you are going to find a lot of dedicated people, who take the job seriously, but that doesn't help when the command structure and the city hierarchy do not, and would rather play experimental sociology with the city.

In the county I live in, there are nights where there are a total of 3 city officers, 2 Troopers on the freeway, and 2 deputies on duty countywide, sometimes fewer. My backup can be 20 minutes away. I have ZERO problems with people being able to defend themselves, and hold off the nasties until I can get there. We "Badgers" can't be everywhere.

Firehand, if you have any input, get your friend to try both, but I think she will like S&W better. I have carried a HK USP45F for 11 years now, and would not carry any other weapon, but while Heckler & Koch is the top of the weapon foodchain, the grips are fairly substantial, and women's paws are smaller than our male paws. But if she has comfortably shoot an HK, HUZZAH! She will be very happy with it. But she will still want a 1911 someday, everyone does.

Michael McNeil said...

What exactly do you do for 4 hours?

According to a piece Reynolds linked to yesterday, “Concealed-Carry Myths,” it's vital to train with concealable weapons even if one is already experienced with firearms, but particularly if not:

“By their very design, compact, lightweight pistols and revolvers are easy to carry and difficult to shoot well. These guns demand you train and practice with them. You might be able to plink a soda can a 20 yards with a Ruger Mark III pistol, but that’s not likely to be the gun you’ll have on you when a bad guy shows up. Can you hit a soda can at 10 feet with your pocket pistol? […]

“It really is not possible to train yourself. You can practice on your own, but unless you’ve had professional instruction you are likely just ingraining bad habits. A good training course will teach you what to practice and the best ways to do so. […]

“If you are truly serious about defending yourself with a firearm and carrying one on a regular basis, there are several steps you should take. Apply for your CCW permit, purchase a quality firearm, get some training and then practice often.”

Carnifex said...

To hell with concealed carry, carry open like I do.

anyone willing to give up a little freedom for a little security deserves neither freedom nor security.--Ben Franklin

Rusty said...

"What I can't understand is how come we have not evolved beyond the point that the best way to protect ourselves is a gun? How come we cannot come up with something that is less destructive and less permanent."





Because, dumbass, there are still people in this world who will cut your throat and throw your body in as ditch because they want your coat.

Rusty said...

Karl said...
Rev't: The vast majority of defensive uses of firearms consist of displaying them to the miscreant, who then runs away or surrenders.

What is the source of this information?

I am not calling bullshit - just wondering what organization is measuring the efficacy of "flashing a piece"?



Anecdotally(?) speaking, yeah it worked for me twice. Bad guys like victims that won't hurt them. I'm not that victim.

Daniel Fielding said...

Chief Noble Wray is most likely an affirmative-action hire. Says exactly the right kind of stuff that Madison liberal crowd laps up. Fanlund and his liberal fellow-travellers perhaps dont see the irony in their words.

Robin said...

Massad Ayoob's book "In the Gravest Extreme" is a must read on the legal and practical aspects of self-defense although the advice on handgun selection is a bit obsolete.

Michael The Magnificent said...

The vast majority of defensive uses of firearms consist of displaying them to the miscreant, who then runs away or surrenders.

I believe his source is Dr. Gary Kleck. Some of his research is quoted and linked to here: LINK

Unknown said...

As responsible gun owners, I would hope we would all continually improve our skills and knowledge base regarding the proper use of firearms. However, I do not think it should be legislated as a requirement to utilize our Second Amendment rights. However, I am probably wrong because I am a physician from Racine and not a pediatric oncologist in Madison.

Michael The Magnificent said...

Also, I am a software engineer and small business owner, and I have my WI permit to carry concealed.

The fact that I am college educated does not immunize me to becoming a victim of violent crime.

Tully said...

I've had countless hours of formal firearms training and hold NRA instructor certifications in rifle, pistol, and shotgun shooting, basic firearms safety, and RSO, not to mention a fair amount of time as RPO over the decades. The state still required me to take their course to get my CCW because I was not a currently certified LEO or a retired lifer. It was annoying but not completely unreasonable.

Half the eight hour course covered the legal issues, the other was range time to demonstrate you could actually hit the broad side of something with a handgun.

Gathering all the required paperwork, getting the passport-type photos, and going by the sheriff's office for fingerprinting were more onerous than the required training. And the required fees really hurt, of course. It added up to a few hundred dollars and two days of time to get a four-year permit.

EMD said...

The vast majority of defensive uses of firearms consist of displaying them to the miscreant, who then runs away or surrenders.

I was told by a gun shop owner that the sound of a pump-action shotgun was enough to send the majority of intruders running.

Kirk Parker said...

Tully, what state?

Danno said...

Even in Madison, home to mostly freaks and libtards, i.e. "78 sq. miles surrounded by reality", (excl. the Meadehouse), a CCW can be necessary. UW-Madison student Brittany Zimmermann was murdered by someone who broke into her apt. as she came back for lunch, and the 911 folks were too stupid to send help. Like other commenters have said, the police are always minutes away when you need to have someone in seconds.

Michelle Dulak Thomson said...

Kirk,

Whoa--what happened to Chicago and New Orleans? They used to be contenders...

I think the fact that a lot of the population of New Orleans had at the time been recently evacuated to Houston is responsible for Houston's being in the top 10.

Chicago, I don't know. Maybe the books were cooked. They have a certain amount of expertise in that area in Chi-town.