1 2 3 > 
1 of 3
Bang!  Bang!  You’re dead!!!!
Posted: 30 January 2014 05:42 PM   [ Ignore ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  796
Joined  2012-10-10

http://m.cjonline.com/news/2014-01-30/new-kansas-gun-bill-erases-local-limits-guns

The so called “conservatives” rail against “big government”.  They don’t want the Federal government involved in anything.  Those same conservatives are now wanting the State to become “big brother” and be able to override any local ordinances.  Urban areas, such as KCKS, Johnson County, Wichita, etc. have limits on where you can carry a concealed handgun.  Some municipalities what to know if their City employees are carrying at work.  The Repubs in Topeka have decided that is not in concert with the NRA lobby.  So, legislation will be ramrodded through, by the Brownback administration, that will give complete control over the carrying of firearms to the State.  We just had our legislature pass a law that says Kansas does not have to abide by Federal gun laws.  Those same legislators seem to know better than Washington and know better than county governments, city governments, and school boards.  We are so blessed to have such awesome minds in that small body of the Kansas Legislature!!! 

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 January 2014 06:23 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  738
Joined  2013-07-13

Until we have a big shoot-out in a public place.  Those innocent deaths are the only thing that will take these guns out of the hands of the frightened half-wits.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 January 2014 08:58 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  289
Joined  2012-10-10

Yeah, the shooting of all those first graders really made the politicians sit up and take notice and realize something had to be done.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 30 January 2014 09:12 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  738
Joined  2013-07-13

I meant in Kansas.  Connecticut actually has passed some good laws since.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 February 2014 01:25 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  479
Joined  2012-10-10

Good link to the proposed bill.

The concept of a uniform law to cover the state is similar to arguments on traffic laws.  You can talk on your cell phone in Riley County and RCPD will ignore, but in the city limits you get a ticket.  So the concept of uniform traffic laws and uniform gun laws has some merit for debate. 

I was in a couple of the major sporting goods chain stores over that past few months.  I noticed they have cross bows that would have been very effective during the 100 years’ war.  I guess those will not be banned, they have scopes and seem to be more lethal than any single shot .22. Add in the 3D printer and the guy in Texas that printed, in plastic, the components to make an AR-15 fully automatic and printed his own 30 round magazines.  He also created a single shot pistol all in plastic with a nail as a firing pin.  It appears the art of crafting laws to ban weapons of any or all types becomes next to impossible. Maybe they can craft laws to impact public safety.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 02 February 2014 06:49 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  738
Joined  2013-07-13

No.  The State wants to force municipalities to allow any yahoo to tote a gun anywhere he wants.

This is actually infringing on the rights of those who don’t want to have to deal with a gun toting coward at a high school basketball game, or when they come into the city offices to pay their utility bills.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 February 2014 06:32 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
Member
Rank
Total Posts:  21
Joined  2012-10-29

Why cant they just pass a law that the criminals will abide by. That is when we will see real results. Something like shooting people is against the law. That will stop all that gun violence.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 February 2014 09:13 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  738
Joined  2013-07-13

I remember a time when grown men WEREN’T such cowards that they had to carry a gun to the grocery store.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 February 2014 07:06 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  479
Joined  2012-10-10

Bob:  Excellent comment.  Some concealed carry may have been in order at Ray’s Market.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 February 2014 07:24 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  796
Joined  2012-10-10

“Bob:  Excellent comment.  Some concealed carry may have been in order at Ray’s Market.”

And had any number of innocents hurt or killed due to some gun-totin’ vigilante thinkin’ he/she is the reincarnation of Barney Fife??  This armed robbery resulted in the loss of money… material items which can be replaced.  To have some untrained “cowboy” start a gunfight could have seen far more devestating loss than a few dollars.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 06 February 2014 09:33 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  738
Joined  2013-07-13

For every coward with a gun, the probability of innocent death by gunshot compounds exponentially.

No guns in the room, the probability is zero..

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 February 2014 02:35 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  534
Joined  2014-02-09
Randall Baughman - 06 February 2014 09:33 PM

For every coward with a gun, the probability of innocent death by gunshot compounds exponentially.

No guns in the room, the probability is zero..

These seem to be emotional and irrational statements. Police officers carry guns for their own protection, not to protect you. Does this mean they are cowards too? The comment starts to sound foolish. Rather than compounding exponentially, many of the studies involving concealed carry holders indicates the opposite. Try Googling the subject online and learn some of the facts about gun violence rather than your off-the-mark comments. Although some studies are debatable, the general indication is that they are far less likely to commit crimes of violence or gun-related crimes…by a significant percentage when compared to the general population or even police officers. Even the critics agree there is no indication the CCL holders are MORE prone to commit crimes of violence. No evidence whatsoever. So your statement is simply wrong.

There were no guns in ANY room at Sandy Hook, but the probability of zero violence was not true, was it? I would accept your irrational statement if the gun-free room were heavily guarded outside the room with armed guards, such as our national lawmakers enjoy. Are those guards, or the lawmakers for that matter, cowards?

The characterizations of concealed carry holders as frightened half-wits or cowards is simply erroneous. No, they are not cop wanna-bes either. I know many CCL holders and none of them have that mentality. They are rational, (unlike some of the comments posted here), and are hard working Americans that you encounter many times a day and never even realize they are carrying a weapon. Saying that “any yahoo” can tote a weapon is another example of an emotional temper tantrum not grounded in fact. To legally carry, an applicant is subjected to fingerprinting with a state check as well as a national background check by the FBI. ANY of the following will deny a CCL license: felony convictions, misdemeanor domestic battery convictions, drug convictions, stays in a mental institution, or any court restraining order for domestic abuse, harassing or stalking. Applicants must study state laws and pass a written test and a gun proficiency test. It might make you feel better to exaggerate and provide erroneous statements, but you are still wrong.

Are either of you willing to admit your statements should be tempered somewhat because they have no basis in fact but display a petulant anger toward the 2nd amendment? I am guessing the answer is no…BTW, just exactly how many times have you “had to deal” with a legal CCL holder? Again, I am guessing zero.

Let’s keep it factual…what say you?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 February 2014 03:01 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  796
Joined  2012-10-10

Welcome, Rick!!  It’s always good to see new folks on the discussion board.

My point, if you read my post, was in response to Wynn’s comment that someone carrying may have ben “in order” during the holdup at Ray’s.  I totally disagree.  If a trained police officer had been there, that would have been one thing.  I’m not so convinced that everyone else that has applied for and rec’d a CCL would have handled the situation without some getting hurt or worse.  In this case, money was lost.  That is replaceable.  Human life is not.  For someone to start a shootout inside a grocery store puts too many lives in jeopardy.

I understand your 2nd Amendment rights… and mine.  I understand the process one goes through to legally obtain a CCL.  That process certifies a knowledge of current gun laws and a proficiency with a firearm.  It does not certify the CCL holder is trained in ‘shoot/don’t shoot’ or has the ability to assess potential for collateral damage. 

As far as my comment re the proposed State of Kansas legislation, I just am pointing out the hypocrisy.  The same group who doesn’t want big government… the same group who doesn’t want the feds interferring with local laws… the same group who doesn’t want regional cooperation… is the same group who feels it IS okay for Topeka to override local ordinances and resolutions set forth by local government entities.  It is very apparent we don’t like big government when it disagrees with us, but we applaud big government when they push our agendas.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 February 2014 03:54 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 13 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  534
Joined  2014-02-09

Well, I tried posting a reply and I got an error message.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 February 2014 04:07 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 14 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  796
Joined  2012-10-10

Try again.  The software choice of The Mercury is 1920’s technology.  I’m surprised we’re not posting using tin cans tied together with string.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 11 February 2014 04:11 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 15 ]
Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  534
Joined  2014-02-09

Larry, I’ll try again. My experience with CCL training is that drawing a weapon is only a “last resort” to save a life, and preferably only your life. You would be within your rights to shoot an armed robber if he was shooting at clerks, but the training (and the CCL holders I know) indicate that the only intervention would be to get out and call 911 in all other situations. Just because it is an armed robbery would not evoke a brandished weapon from CCL holders in most instances. Protecting the loss of money would not meet the standard. I am sure there is anecdotal evidence where holders were more involved in similar cases, but I still think they are relatively rare.

I did read your post…I am not sure it is hypocrisy we are talking about. Not wanting “big government” is not tantamount to wanting “no government.” If a government takes steps to protect a constitutional right is one thing, and is to be applauded…the reasons for uniformity in a state are real and necessary. It is not hypocrisy to say there are many things government should NOT be doing and are unwarranted. Your logic is flawed unless you have something more cogent as evidence.

Profile
 
 
   
 1 2 3 > 
1 of 3
 

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | The Manhattan Mercury, 318 North 5th Street, Manhattan, Kansas, 66502

Reproduction of any kind is prohibited without written consent.