Wisconsin’s unresolved gun control debates return to the spotlight as the November 3rd election creeps closer. As legislative candidates are surveyed on Second Amendment issues, the state’s open race for governor and legislative elections are all drawing attention due to candidates’ competing views on lawfully exercising the Second Amendment, the firearm industry, background checks and firearm possession altogether.
The stakes extend beyond campaign positions. Wisconsin’s next governor and legislature will determine which proposals receive consideration in 2027, with serious implications for gun owners, firearm retailers, manufacturers and shooting ranges.
U.S. Rep. Tom Tiffany (R-Wis.) and Democrat Milwaukee County Executive David Crowley are competing to succeed Gov. Tony Evers as the first new governor in the Badger State since 2019. Gov. Evers is not seeking another term.
Different Approaches to Firearm Policy
The candidates bring a stark contrast in different policy records to the governor’s race.
Rep. Tiffany has been a staunch supporter of Second Amendment rights and has a long track record to prove it. In fact, not only did NSSF award Rep. Tiffany an A+ grade on the 2026 NSSF Congressional Report Card, but he was also distinguished for going above and beyond and being named to the Dean’s List. He’s supported concealed carry reciprocity and opposed federal legislation expanding background check requirements. His congressional record also includes opposition to legislation pushing states to establish extreme risk protection orders, or so-called “red flag” laws. Conversely, the National Rifle Association has given County Executive Crowley an “F” rating, in part due to his full-throated support for universal background checks that establish a private firearm ownership registry, ERPOs and additional firearm storage requirements.
These opposing views reflect disagreements over the appropriate scope of firearm regulation. Supporters of additional restrictions argue that they can help prevent firearm-related violence. Opponents raise concerns about constitutional protections, due process rights, the deleterious effects additional requirements have on lawful firearm ownership and the fact that these requirements are ineffective in improving public safety because criminals ignore them.
The governor’s authority to sign or veto legislation makes those differences consequential, as Wisconsin’s next administration is set to inherit gun control preferences and questions that remained unresolved during Gov. Evers’ tenure.
Concealed Carry and Background Checks
Wisconsin’s 2025–26 legislative session illustrates the clash between freedom and gun control.
Republican lawmakers introduced Senate Bill 607 and Assembly Bill 609 in October 2025. The companion measures proposed eliminating the general requirement that otherwise eligible individuals obtain a state license before carrying a concealed firearm. The legislation also proposed eliminating some existing restrictions governing firearm possession and carrying in specified locations.
Assembly Bill 609 received a public hearing in January 2026, however, neither measure passed before the session ended on March 23, leaving Wisconsin’s existing concealed carry licensing requirements in effect.
The distinction is significant. Eliminating the licensing requirement would change the legal conditions under which eligible residents may carry concealed firearms and affect the role of the state’s existing licensing and training system.
Gov. Evers has for years advocated for universal background checks and extreme risk protection orders. Those proposals would expand existing requirements for certain firearm transfers and establish a process for courts to confiscate firearms when specified legal standards are met. There are concerns about the accused receiving proper due process rights and to get their firearms returned them quickly, if warranted. These ERPO laws raise separate questions about evidentiary standards, judicial procedures and opportunities to contest restrictions.
Wisconsin, and federal law, already requires background checks for purchases from licensed firearm retailers. But universal background check legislation would extend those requirements to additional private transfers, subject to the exceptions contained in any enacted law. Like usual, supporters of universal background checks and the gun ownership registry they require maintain that these measures could help prevent violence. Critics question their effectiveness and whether the proposed procedures adequately protect constitutional rights. After all, no criminal is submitting to a private background check when he or she illegally steals a gun or buys one on the black market.
The practical effects would depend on the precise legislation adopted. Additional transfer requirements could affect firearm purchasers and retailers, while court-ordered restrictions would establish new responsibilities for courts and law enforcement.
The Firearm Industry Has a Stake
Wisconsin’s gun control debate also reaches the established manufacturing and sporting industry. Henry Repeating Arms announced in 2025 that it would relocate all manufacturing operations from New Jersey to Wisconsin. The announcement underscored the state’s role in the national firearm manufacturing sector.
NSSF’s 2025 economic impact report estimates Wisconsin’s firearm and ammunition industry supported 8,735 jobs and generated more than $2.15 billion in total economic activity. Those figures provide context for proposals affecting lawful firearm commerce, manufacturing and recreational sport shooting. Regulatory changes can carry consequences beyond individual firearm owners, including compliance obligations for businesses and the availability of products and services. As seen often in recent years, firearm industry businesses won’t think twice about relocating away from an unfriendly, confrontational state regulatory environment to sunnier skies in another state that values them and respects the Second Amendment.
Wisconsin’s next legislature will determine which proposals receive hearings, amendments and floor consideration. The next governor will decide whether legislation that reaches his desk becomes law.
Wisconsin’s 2026 elections will not settle every question surrounding gun control or Second Amendment rights. They will determine who holds the authority to address those policy questions when the legislature reconvenes in 2027.
That is the central significance of the Nov. 3 election for Wisconsin’s firearm owners, firearm industry businesses and the hunting and sporting heritage community.
Larry Keane is SVP for Government and Public Affairs, Assistant Secretary and General Counsel of the National Shooting Sports Foundation.