Most all of what they've done exceeds the authority of the DOJ as spelled out in the law. They've made it mandatory in their rules that a class be a minimum of 4 hours long. The law as passed left the definition of a safety course and the course contents up to the instructors. People should be trained to a STANDARD and not to a time limit.
They also require a lot of information be included on a course completion certificate which is not required by the law itself. NRA certificates in particular have limited space for inclusion of the information required now by the DOJ under their rules.
While they accept DNR training as required by law, as one form of "safety course"... they have also banned online training which is every bit as effective as a "instructor-led" class as they now specify must be done in their rules. In fact in Minnesota and many other states, DNR training is now delivered ONLINE. Yet, the DOJ will accept that but ban another form of online training that actually is better suited for a carry course (I.e. covering safety, ethics and responsibilities when carrying a firearm in public, legal use of deadly force, Wisconsin firearm laws including the new Act 35 law. and how to apply for permits. None of which is covered in a DNR course.
Minnesota, Colorado, Iowa, and Virginia are among the states that also accept online training courses as acceptable proof of training. I anticipate most if not all of those states will be recognized by the DOJ as the background checks provided to applicants is similar to that of Wisconsin. That being the case, Wisconsin will be accepting as valid, permits held by people that took an online course yet the WI DOJ will bar Wisconsin residents from partaking in 21st Century content delivery for a class. I would also bet many of their attorneys have taken online courses to maintain their certifications for the bar - but again - what's good for them is not good for you.
And there's more. I'm not the only one with this opinion, Senator Pam Galloway (author of Act 35) wrote in her response to Van Hollen's proposed rules: "... legislators in a bi-partisan fashion, passed a bill that did not include a set number of hours for training course." She went on to say "By going far beyond the legislative intent, the Attorney General is usurping the power of the State Legislature and engaging in activism unlike I've seen before."
As a company who has trained hundreds perhaps thousands of Wisconsinites in Utah and Multistate carry courses we do have an interest in how your government moves forward in recognizing all citizens (Wisconsin and out of state) right to bear arms.
