Advertisement

Archive for Saturday, February 12, 2011

Kansas law change may allow even blind to carry concealed

February 12, 2011

Advertisement

In the state of Kansas, to carry a concealed firearm you need a gun — preferably something that fits nice under your jacket, in your pocket or perhaps in your purse.

You also need a license, the state’s seal of approval that you can hide a firearm on your person.

What’s less clear is whether you need eyesight. It certainly is suggested, unquestionably helpful. But following a change in state law, it is no longer clear whether it is required.

Kansas legislators during the last session approved a number of changes to the state’s concealed carry law. One of them was that people who are renewing their license no longer have to take any sort of test to prove they’re still proficient with a firearm.

The changes also removed language from the law that gave the attorney general the right to deny applicants a license if they “suffer from a physical infirmity which prevents the safe handling of a weapon.”

A spokesman for Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt — whose office oversees the concealed carry program — conceded this week that the office is uncertain whether it has the authority to deny a concealed carry license renewal for any physical reason, even if the applicant is blind.

“We are currently working to determine the intent of the Legislature when this change was made during the 2010 legislative session,” Jeff Wagaman, deputy chief of staff for Schmidt, said in a statement.

About 30,000 Kansans are licensed to carry concealed firearms. The fact that none of them may ever have to prove to the state again that they can safely fire a weapon brought varying reactions, depending upon which side of the gun debate you’re on.

“From my experience, the people who have a license are people who continue to practice with this,” said George Pisani, a Lawrence resident who is a concealed carry instructor and supporter of the law change. “They are cognizant of the fact that if they ever have to use a weapon to protect themselves that vision is pretty important. I think there is a lot of self-policing that goes on.”

Brian Malte, director of state legislation for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, isn’t surprised by the change. He said he sees gun lobbyists across the country successfully persuading state legislatures to remove training requirements and other regulations related to concealed carry.

“I call it the walking, talking slippery slope,” Malte said. “That’s the gun lobby. They set up a system that involves weapon proficiency and testing and then they work bit by bit to repeal each piece of it until it leads to what they have in Arizona, where you don’t even need a permit.”

• • •

What the change unquestionably has led to in Kansas is an absurd question by a journalist: Can a blind man legally have a concealed carry permit in Kansas?

That’s the question the Journal-World posed to the Kansas attorney general’s office after a review of the statutes no longer appeared to contain any provisions allowing the state to factor in a person’s physical ability or proficiency when renewing a license.

To be clear, a test is still required for new applicants. Those who have never had a license in the state are required to attend an eight-hour class, and to successfully hit 18 of 25 targets from distances ranging from 3 yards to 10 yards. That class and test have been eliminated for people seeking to renew.

Kansas concealed carry licenses are valid for four years. That brings up the possibility that during the four-year period the person’s physical condition has changed to the point that he could no longer pass that test.

Or think of it this way: The person gets his license when he’s 40. Forty years later, he’s on his 10th renewal cycle and is now 80 years old. Could he still pass the test?

To take it one step further, what if he has gone blind in those four years or 40 years? If he sent in his application, would it get renewed?

After about two days of searching the statutes, Wagaman at the attorney general’s office essentially said the office wasn’t sure.

“We appreciate you pointing this out,” Wagaman said in a response to an e-mail that asked the question about a blind applicant and several others.

• • •

Granted, it probably isn’t likely that someone who is blind will seek to renew a concealed carry permit. But lots of people know of someone’s grandmother or grandfather who insists they can still drive despite declining eyesight. Replace the car with a gun, and that scenario might be more likely.

Or what if a daughter calls the attorney general’s office and says her elderly father who is renewing his concealed carry permit has Parkinson’s disease to such a degree that he can’t hold a cup of tea, let alone a gun? Could the state require that applicant to take a proficiency test?

Again, Wagaman said he was unsure, and said the office was trying to determine the legislative intent. Schmidt, before being elected attorney general, was a member of last year’s legislature and voted for the changes.

The state’s renewal application does require an applicant to swear to several facts under the penalty of perjury. But none of them is related to their ability to safely handle a weapon. That, too, was changed during the last legislative session.

Previously, applicants had to swear that they met all the requirements of a specific section of the state’s concealed carry code. Prior to last year, that section included the clause that affirmed the applicant “does not suffer from a physical infirmity which prevents the safe handling of a weapon.” That language has been stricken from the law.

• • •

Legislators had varying reactions to the changes. Rep. Paul Davis, D-Lawrence and the House Minority Leader, didn’t vote for the changes but said he understands that people do not want to have to go through unnecessary bureaucracy to have a state license renewed. But he said a change requiring people retake the test after a certain number of years have lapsed from their original test may be warranted.

Rep. Forrest Knox, R-Altoona, did support the law changes — Knox is the legislator who plans to introduce legislation limiting the ability of universities and local governments to post “no gun” signs on their buildings — but he said this week some of the scenarios that could arise by not testing deserved thought.

“I think there are some valid questions there,” Knox said.

But he stopped short of saying he would seek to make changes to the law.

“I have a lot of confidence in the average Kansan,” Knox said. “I think a lot of people who have concealed carry don’t carry that much because they realize the gravity of it. It is a tremendous responsibility. I trust people in general.”

• • •

Making any change to the law may be tough. The National Rifle Association, which helped craft the state’s original concealed carry law and the most recent changes, said the proficiency issue was overblown.

Jordan Austin, the Kansas state lobbyist for the NRA, said his organization likely would oppose changes that even stopped short of requiring full proficiency testing for renewals. For example, everybody who renews a concealed carry license must go to a Kansas driver’s license office to get their picture taken. All Kansas driver’s license offices have eye testing machines. But Jordan said the NRA likely would oppose any effort to make concealed license holders take an eye test upon renewal.

“I don’t ever see that being an idea that we would endorse,” Austin said. “It is not necessary. Why should you be required to maintain some sort of correct vision to exercise a right? You could have left your glasses at home, you could wear contact lenses. It is a subjective standard set by a government agency.”

For the NRA, Austin said, the issue comes down to the Second Amendment. He said recent Supreme Court rulings have affirmed that people have a right to own a gun for protection. He believes that right extends to people being able to carry a weapon concealed, and questions whether concealed carry licenses should even be a part of state laws in the future.

Several states, with Arizona being the most prominent, no longer require individuals to have a license to carry concealed firearms. Austin believes that eventually will be the law in Kansas too.

“I see Kansas going in that direction in the not too distant future,” Austin said. “It probably won’t happen this legislative session, but I wouldn’t doubt that it gets considered soon.”

Comments

tunahelper 3 years, 10 months ago

most law abiding citizens who own firearms are better shots than most law enforcement officers.

RoeDapple 3 years, 10 months ago

Here, let me fix that for you. Most law abiding citizens who own firearms (and fire at least 1200 rounds per year in their carry gun) are better shots than most law enforcement officers. Try to remember the targets you shoot those tight little patterns on seldom if ever shoot back. Or shoot first.

coderob 3 years, 10 months ago

I'd like to read the study they did to figure out that one.

Bob Forer 3 years, 10 months ago

Huh? I used to target practice practice with a few friends who happened to be police officers. They were all fine marksmen.

aero_steve 3 years, 10 months ago

My first thought was WTF then I remembered there are Braille keypads at most drive though ATMs.

notanota 3 years, 10 months ago

Yes, because someone can use the ATM by sitting in the driver side rear seat without having to get out of the car or tell the driver their PIN.

gccs14r 3 years, 10 months ago

Not to mention that it's easier to not have to worry about how many of which keypads are in stock for repairs. Design them to all use the same keypad and stock only that one.

beeshlii 3 years, 10 months ago

let me feel your body (braille) and decide which part i can shoot....lol....

Daniel Dicks 3 years, 10 months ago

<Rep. Forrest Knox, R-Altoona, did support the law changes — Knox is the legislator who plans to introduce legislation limiting the ability of universities and local governments to post “no gun” signs on their buildings — but he said this week some of the scenarios that could arise by not testing deserved thought.

“I think there are some valid questions there,” Knox said.>

               Naah! What could possibly go wrong here? Blind people just need extended magazines to avoid missing whatever they can't see.

Majestic42 3 years, 10 months ago

Wow, only took an hour and a half for the extended mag "point" to come up. We should make this the new Godwin's Law. It's only a matter of time before "Hurr Durr extended magazines are for killers derp" comes up in any gun discussion.

Fred Mertz 3 years, 10 months ago

So, being blind means you are to be denied your Constitutional rights? I know blind people who are quite responsible and who could pass the test. Under certain circumstances they could safely discharge a weapon to protect themselves. Why deny them their right?

Fatty_McButterpants 3 years, 10 months ago

Maybe because aiming is a key component of that right? Hmm...

beeshlii 3 years, 10 months ago

what if you were in wrong place, wrong time the blind man or women shoots? you just happen to be there?

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 3 years, 10 months ago

"Several states, with Arizona being the most prominent, no longer require individuals to have a license to carry concealed firearms. Austin believes that eventually will be the law in Kansas too."

You don't need a permit in Afghanistan or Somalia, either.

Majestic42 3 years, 10 months ago

implying guns make a society uncivilized

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 3 years, 10 months ago

No-- that they don't make them civilized-- or safe.

Majestic42 3 years, 10 months ago

They certainly help. And your "analogies" to war-torn countries are a bit like apples and oranges.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 3 years, 10 months ago

Gun control works quite effectively in many countries, but that's because they aren't as inherently violent as we are.

Making guns more easily available will not change that, and won't make us any safer.

But I'm not a big proponent of gun control because I don't think it'd be any more effective here than it is in Mexico, or would be in Somalia or Afghanistan. We'd still go right on shooting each other to death.

PalinPalms 3 years, 10 months ago

these words are so little , can't see them anymore, but at least they move to the right

beeshlii 3 years, 10 months ago

thank God USA is still free country. thanks my son ex marine , and our arm forces.

Kevin Randell 3 years, 10 months ago

Ok......I am just a little disappointed here. Not ONE "hitting the broadside of the barn" comment.

tomatogrower 3 years, 10 months ago

I'm with you OKJ. I have a blind friend in Texas who would be making jokes left and right about this article, and wouldn't consider it disrespectful. Gun nuts just don't have any sense of humor.

RoeDapple 3 years, 10 months ago

Why seeker! I'm surprised you didn't say the last "three" words! That's why I prefer to be thought of as a "weapons enthusiast"

triplegoddess13 3 years, 10 months ago

Driving isn't a civil liberty or protected by any law.

Jimo 3 years, 10 months ago

Every year there's a contest for Stupidiest State. And every year Kansas is a semi-finalist. It's far more entertaining than American Idol and sadder than Biggest Loser.

Seriously Kansas: let someone else take the crown this year.

Isn't it amazing we spend millions annually to lure business and industry to Kansas (and millions more in uncollected tax revenues) just to make up for Kansas' often well deserved reputation?

Trusting self-regulating blind gunmen? As the Gipper said - Trust but verify.

coderob 3 years, 10 months ago

I think blind people walking around with guns and NRA members walking around with guns are equally scary.

Majestic42 3 years, 10 months ago

Just because you don't understand something doesn't mean you should be afraid of it.

coderob 3 years, 10 months ago

Pal, that someone really thinks that more guns are the answer to gun violence is a scary thought without a doubt. If you want to kill weeds, you've got to pull them out at the root. Encouraging gun ownership does just the opposite.

Majestic42 3 years, 10 months ago

So what, pray tell, is the answer to gun violence? PROTIP: It's about defense.

pyrofighter 3 years, 10 months ago

Read the book "More Guns Less Crime" by John Lott. Taking the guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens isn't the answer. You'll never disarm the criminal. Law abiding citizens have the right to protect themselves. The police can't protect you, nor have any obligation to protect you.

pyrofighter 3 years, 10 months ago

Have you considered criminals walking around with guns? They scare the hell out of most people. Not me. I have my conceal carry liscense.

Fred Mertz 3 years, 10 months ago

The biggest problem with the issue of gun ownership and possession is a general misunderstanding that gun ownership, possision, carry, etc. is not a privilege it is a right. Privileges like driving can have a higher level of restrictions placed upon them then rights.

Restrictions, conditions and infringement of rights must be very limited.

If you don't like the second amendment then change it, but until it is changed, it is a right and must be honored like all our other rights.

Keep in mind once we accept that limiting a Constitutional right because of a disability we set a precedence. No other rights are safe from the predjudices or ignorance of society. Want to make sure the mentally ill's rights are not infringed then support the rights of gun owners even those with disabilities. Let the person with the disability decide if they want to and can carry safely.

Want to protect the Constitutional rights of the transgendered? Then stand up for everyone's Constitutional rights. To do otherwise says that it is okay to infringe the rights of others if you have predjudice and bias.

Fred Mertz 3 years, 10 months ago

I am embarrasseed for you. It is undisputable that the 2nd amendment is a right and not a privilege and anyone who thinks otherwise is obviously very ignorant about the Constitution and what a right is.

You do have the option to update the Constitution and it has been done dozens of times so go for it. BTW, you can identify the changes to the Constitution by looking for the word "amendment."

thefisherman 3 years, 10 months ago

They may not have had automobiles as we know them, but they did have horse and carriage. Oddly, the right to transportation via horse and carriage did not make it into the constitution. How very strange. They must have considered it a privilege reserved for those with the means and abilities to operate them.

Peacemaker452 3 years, 10 months ago

Actually, they probably thought that there was no way the government would get involved in mundane things like simply transporting yourself from one place to another. I imagine that they did not considered such things as legitimate functions of government and did not anticipate the corrupt mission creep the government would use to grow to its present size.

Flap Doodle 3 years, 10 months ago

If you are terrified by the thought of law-abiding citizens legally carrying firearms, you should go down to Mexico. Guns ownership is tightly restricted down there. Only the bad guys are packing.

coderob 3 years, 10 months ago

Guess where the bad guys get there guns from, Snap? Our guns flow south like their drugs flow north. Besides, there are plenty of other countries that have gun bans but aren't violence plagued. Take most of Europe for example.

Majestic42 3 years, 10 months ago

The only guns flowing from the USA to Mexico are trafficked by our good ol' ATF. So the FAIL is on you. Also, Europe isn't violence-plagued? I'm sure there's plenty of dead Europeans who would beg to differ.

monkeyspunk 3 years, 10 months ago

I would like to see some proof of your first statement. I would wager you have none or you are misunderstanding a source. The ATF is training the Mexicans to identify these weapons so that they can be traced back to sources in the US.

According to a recent report by the Wilson Center, the most common firearm seized in Mexico that has been traced back to the US is the AK-47 and AR-15 semi-automatic clones. The most common of the two rifles are the Romanian AK and the Bushmaster AR-15. Neither used by the ATF.

Of 75,000 firearms seized in Mexico in the last three years, 80% came from the United States, according to the Mexican gov't.

Your statement about the ATF, is just plain ignorant. http://www.wilsoncenter.org/news/docs/U.S.%20Firearms%20Trafficking%20to%20Mexico-%20Goodman%20Final.pdf

Majestic42 3 years, 10 months ago

The ATF has been allowing "straw purchasers" to purchase firearms that are then sold in Mexico. http://www.scribd.com/doc/47909152/ATF1-1

Smalltalk 3 years, 10 months ago

Search for "Project Gunwalker" and "Project Gunwalker Scandal" and you will find that when the Gun Dealers questioned some sales they were told by BATFE agents to let them go through. Apparently Sen. Grassely(sic) of Iowa is trying to get information on this but is being Stonewalled by Feds. Something about getting Border Patrol agents killed in an ambush making BATFE shy. As for your numbers on firearms seized (75,000) and traced (approximately 32,000) how did you get 80%. I think that while figures never lie, the Liars are doing a lot of figuring!

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 3 years, 10 months ago

I suspect that you don't believe any statistics that don't tell you what you want to hear.

pyrofighter 3 years, 10 months ago

Yep look at the Swiss. Everyone over 18 is issued by the their Gov a Sig Sauer 556 semi automatic rifle, and requred to practice with it. When was the last time the Swiss were in a war? Get your facts straight coderob. Educate yourself about how and why this country was born. Read the Constitution.

greenworld 3 years, 10 months ago

Cant be any different than people that can see that shoot at the first thing that moves.

PalinPalms 3 years, 10 months ago

Remember the bible says " Justice is Blind, "

verity 3 years, 10 months ago

Chapter and verse, please.

OK, that really is funny.

jessanddaron 3 years, 10 months ago

Snap crackle, have you ever been to Mexico? And no, I'm not talking about a gated resort in Cancun. I don't know where you come up with this notion that most citizens don't own firearms but that is completely inaccurate. Try going to a city like Tijuana or Guadalajara and you will come back with a completely different opinion. Since they can't trust the police down there, they protect themselves.

Majestic42 3 years, 10 months ago

So by "they," you mean the drug cartels, right?

DillonBarnes 3 years, 10 months ago

You know what bugs me the most. They use that danged picture for every concealed carry story! Not to mention it's only a little .22 LR, come on!

Majestic42 3 years, 10 months ago

It's the LJWorld. They only effort they put into these CCW stories is how to best use inflammatory language to get the liberals to come comment and make themselves feel better.

yourworstnightmare 3 years, 10 months ago

The fastest way to pass gun control measures is to encourage hoards of young black and hispanic men to apply for and receive CC permits.

yourworstnightmare 3 years, 10 months ago

Is that what you conclude from my statement? Interesting...

yourworstnightmare 3 years, 10 months ago

Mr. Pisani said: “They are cognizant of the fact that if they ever have to use a weapon to protect themselves that vision is pretty important. I think there is a lot of self-policing that goes on.”

Whew! For a second there I thought gun nuts were really idiotic.

pizzapete 3 years, 10 months ago

I have an image of Ray Charles pulling out a gun and shooting at a shop lifter in the movie the Blues Brothers. What a classic movie.

sr80 3 years, 10 months ago

i'm just spinning in a mindboggling vortex of legislative stupidity.this takes the cake,no ifs,ands or buts!!!!!man oh man!!!!!

Flap Doodle 3 years, 10 months ago

In other news: "GENEVA — Neutral Switzerland is among the best-armed nations in the world, with more guns per capita than almost any other country except the United States, Finland and Yemen.

At least 2.3 million weapons lie stashed in basements, cupboards and lofts in this country of less than 8 million people, according to the Geneva-based Small Arms Survey.

On Sunday, Swiss voters made sure it stays that way, rejecting a proposal to tighten the peaceful Alpine nation's relaxed firearms laws.

The decision was hailed as a victory by gun enthusiasts, sports shooters and supporters of Switzerland's citizen soldier tradition...."

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/top/all/7425601.html

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 3 years, 10 months ago

You forgot the part about military service being compulsory for all Swiss men, and that they are required by law to keep their weapons in their homes.

If we had something similar, it would probably come much closer to fulfilling the 2nd Amendment than the NRA guns-for-all and all-for-guns mentality.

overthemoon 3 years, 10 months ago

Swiss gun laws...I'd love to have their laws. More restrictive in purchasing and carrying guns around.

"To carry firearms in public or outdoors (and for an individual who is a member of the militia carrying a firearm other than his Army-issue personal weapons off-duty), a person must have a Waffentragschein (gun carrying permit), which in most cases is issued only to private citizens working in occupations such as security.

It is, however, quite common to see a person serving military service to be en route with his rifle.

Conditions for getting a Carrying Permit

There are three conditions:

* fulfilling the conditions for a buying permit (see section below)
* stating plausibly the need to carry firearms to protect oneself, other people, or real property from a specified danger
* passing an examination proving both weapon handling skills and knowledge regarding lawful use of the weapon

The carrying permit remains valid for a term of five years (unless otherwise surrendered or revoked), and applies only to the type of firearm for which the permit was issued. Additional constraints may be invoked to modify any specific permit. Neither hunters nor game wardens require a carrying permit.

Transporting guns

Guns may be transported in public as long as an appropriate justification is present. This means to transport a gun in public, the following requirements apply:

* The ammunition must be separated from the gun, no ammunition in a magazine.
* The transport has to be direct, i.e.:
      o For courses or exercises hosted by marksmanship, hunting or military organizations,
      o To an army warehouse and back,
      o To and from a holder of a valid arms trade permit,
      o To and from a specific event, e.g. gun shows.[8]

pace 3 years, 10 months ago

I think blind people need their guns when they go out to shoot fish.

mom_of_three 3 years, 10 months ago

So we do a little eye test every 6 years (?) for driver's license, but it isn't required for a gun license renewal?

livinginlawrence 3 years, 10 months ago

Seems a bit silly, doesn't it?

Perhaps I'm just a biased, cursed liberal who shouldn't bother trying to understand the ins and outs of gun rights, but I can't help but feel that eyesight likely plays a pretty important part when it comes to operating a firearm safely and with sound judgment.

Not that I perceive this as posing any sort of imminent threat to public safety. I am curious, however, how many blind people would actually consider it worthwhile to defend their rights to gun ownership and or concealed carry. To me, it seems within reason that if someone were to lose their ability to see (or never have it in the first place), they could be ruled out as candidates to be deemed worthy of safely wielding a gun.

BigPrune 3 years, 10 months ago

Blind Ray stopped a thief at Ray's Music Exchange. I do not know if the link will work, but there is no swearing or anything "adult" in the clip. Of course Dan Akroyd and John Belushi are in it as well. http://www.mefeedia.com/movie/10931390

CycleRider 3 years, 10 months ago

Wow, mountain out of a mole hill much?

Let's see. About 30,000 Kansas residents are licensed to carry concealed. Of those, how many at any given time might go blind and still carry and use their firearm? Personally, I'm not going to lose any sleep over this possiblity. And if a person is truly concerned about this possibility, they should really worry about:

How many drivers are currently licensed in the state of KS? According to the web, there are appoximately 2.8 million Kansas residents. Just for a round number, let's say that 1/2 of those are licensed and drive on a daily basis. That would be about 1.4 million people driving 4000 lb projectiles on the road each and every day. Shouldn't you be appalled that they only require a vision check every 6 years for these people? Can you imagine how many people are driving around on a DAILY basis with impaired vision since their last check? So, with this in mind, should we require vision checks for licensed drivers every 3 years? Or 1 year? How about we install a vision checking device in all new cars sold that would require a vision test before every engine start? I hope everyone understands just how deadly 2 thousand pound vehicles really are and the real risk that there are licensed drivers that have no business being on the road because of vision impairment. Yet, I haven't seen a front page article in the LJ World pointing out just how deadly of a situation this really is or any discussion on doing something about it.

I know, it's not nearly as exciting as an article about the miniscule number of CHL licensees who just might go blind and still have a license and actually carry.

Sparko 3 years, 10 months ago

Since Kansas needs jobs and to emphasize economic viability, concealed carry for the sight impaired seems like a natural point of emphasis. My goodness. The bind leading the blind sounds about right for the GOP in 2011.

chzypoof1 3 years, 10 months ago

Unfortunately most of you, like Bozo, have nothing to back up your "gun control" works stories. Ask the people in the UK that are restricted from owning any weapons. They can't defend themselves. Crime is at an all time high (just read that last week) over there, yet they can't have guns....crazy

By the way...I challenge ALL of you to PROVE that a person with a CCL committed a crime or injured someone with their firearm. Just one link. come on....provide something to back up your story.....

One nutjob in AZ does not a justification make...

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 3 years, 10 months ago

"Unfortunately most of you, like Bozo, have nothing to back up your "gun control" works stories."

I've made no such claim. What I've stated is that concealed carry won't make us any safer.

jessanddaron 3 years, 10 months ago

A Shawnee resident was arrested over the weekend for abusing his concealed carry license by firing his gun into the ground just feet from two teenagers.

Shawnee police said about 11 p.m. Saturday, officers responded to a disturbance in the 14600 block of 50th Street and found a man had fired a "warning shot" into the ground near a group of teenagers loitering in front of his house.

The homeowner was the one who called the police to the scene in the first place, Capt. Rob Moser said, saying there were multiple high schoolers he had confronted for causing problems in the neighborhood. The teens were hanging out in the roadway in front of, and adjacent to, the man's residence.

The man called 911 as he went outside to confront the kids, Moser said. He advised dispatch that he had a concealed carry license and was in possession of a handgun. As officers were en route, dispatch received another 911 call from a neighbor who advised a shot had been fired.

After securing the scene and talking to witnesses, officers established that the man exited his home with his handgun, approached the teens, who were standing in the roadway, and informed them not to go anywhere because he had called the police.

"When some of the kids started to walk away, the home owner decided to fire a round into the ground to let them know, as he put it, that he was serious," Moser said.

Two of the teens, 18 and 17, were about 10 feet from the man when he fired the round. Though no one was injured, the man was subsequently taken into custody for Aggravated Assault and transported to the Johnson County Adult Detention Center, Moser said.

Moser said this is a reminder that a concealed carry license does not allow residents to fire a gun whenever they want.

"While legal possession of a firearm to protect yourself or another from a deadly threat is permitted, the firing of a warning shot to scare someone, or in this case attempt to keep them from running, is not only inappropriate, it's criminal activity," Moser said. "Aggravated Assault is intentionally placing another person in reasonable apprehension of immediate bodily harm by use of a deadly weapon."

...If this is what CCH is about then you "Americans" have your priorities backwards.

Majestic42 3 years, 10 months ago

That is NOT what CCW-holders should do. His actions were inappropriate and do NOT speak for the CCW community as a whole. Idiot (the shooter, not you).

H_Lecter 3 years, 10 months ago

I can't imagine there being any discussion on this issue. If we care about equality, of course we'll allow the blind to have concealed carry permits. It's unfortunate enough that they have to live without sight; who are we to selfishly deny them legally concealing their handguns?

Armored_One 3 years, 10 months ago

Manditory vision tests, period. Manditory proficiency checks every 3 years.

If you can't see properly, you are more of a hazard than anything else. If you can't hold the firearm steady, the same thing as above applies.

Rights have requirements on them, or at least they should. You should have to prove you deserve the right to do certain things. You have to prove you can safely operate a 4-6 thousand pound missle before the give you a driver's license. Nobody seems to complain about this one.

If you can cause an imminent deadly threat with something, should have to prove you have the physical control, visual accuity and mental capacity to operate said item correctly.

Heck, you have to take tests to prove you can operate a forklift correctly.

I swear... politicians surrender self respect and integrity to do their job, and even that is a tongue-in-cheek observation. I'm pretty sure I wouldn't make it more than one term, due to seriously upsetting a great number of people with more power than the average resident of Kansas, but I would love to get into politics, if only to rock the boat.

Nothing wrong with drawing a line in the sand, and being more than willing and capable of knocking back anyone that tries to cross it simply to say they could. We teach our children that we shouldn't tolerate some things in this life, but once you get elected, you have to tolerate everything?

Just like that old song goes...

If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything...

Fred Mertz 3 years, 10 months ago

And what tests would you propose before someone can exercise their First amendment right? Perhaps an IQ test or maybe an English grammar test?

While we are at it, lets put some restrictions on someone seeking an abortion. What tests or restrictions would you support for that right?

Pass a civics test before voting?

Despite the fact the government does it, you cannot require a test for someone to exercise their Constitutional rights.

overthemoon 3 years, 10 months ago

"Rights have requirements on them, or at least they should."

Agree, though I would say that there must be a balance between 'rights' and 'responsibilities' and the distinction between the two is not black and white.

Fred, we already say that a convicted felon loses the right to vote, to possess and carry a gun. We already limit arms to a certain degree. You can't buy a surface to air missile launcher, right? If you have a history of mental illness, you can't, in most states, buy a gun legally. I believe that I have a right to expect that anyone carrying a gun has the basic ability to control their use of it.

When the first amendment is abused in the attempt to intimidate or harm, it is no longer 'you can say whatever you want'. There are many restrictions on abortion to the point that the right granted by law is getting shredded piece by piece to the point of being null. The worst of which are people who stretch their first amendment rights to the line of intimidation and disruption of the peace and interference with anothers personal rights.

think_about_it 3 years, 10 months ago

What an inflamitory headline ljworld. You should be ashamed.

And "rights have limits". O M G Rights are rights.

Majestic42 3 years, 10 months ago

I agree with the head being inflammatory. The inclusion of the world "even" makes it a little leading.

Flap Doodle 3 years, 10 months ago

Wondering if Chad ever upgraded that mouse gun he used while applying for his carry permit. That being said, in a sticky situation, a .22 you have with you is of more use than a .44 sitting in your safe at home.

DillonBarnes 3 years, 10 months ago

Yep, same damn picture every time.

Dear LJWorld.com

I would be more than happy to come down for a visit and allow you to take some new pictures.

-Dillon

RugerLCP 3 years, 10 months ago

That's probably a violation of the TOS

drederick_tatum 3 years, 10 months ago

how do I go about legally purchasing and owning my own bazooka

sr80 3 years, 10 months ago

go join the taliban,they will give you the latest US model that's out.

Smalltalk 3 years, 10 months ago

The question of whether or not a visually handicapped person should be able to use a firearm or other weapon to defend their life should be a No-Brainer. Only those who get upset about "Those People" not riding at the "Back of the Bus" would wish to force a handicapped person to be a victim.

As for the weapon handling capability of a Visually Handicapped person that would surely be something that would have to be determined by that person. While I have limited personal experience with what are classed as the Blind I think from that limited experience that most can pinpoint locations with sound. Yes, that means the Blind won't be shooting the eyes out of a fly at 1000yds but if you are planning on getting close they might give you a problem.

overthemoon 3 years, 10 months ago

but how do you know the sound is coming from the person that needs the shootin'?

bearded_gnome 3 years, 10 months ago

What the change unquestionably has led to in Kansas is an absurd question by a journalist: Can a blind man legally have a concealed carry permit in Kansas?

---may not conceal, but if you're blind, you want that sawed-off shotgun to stop the baddie trying to get into your house. no trouble with precise aiming then.
and ... you'll stop him.

p.s. VA tech has a vehicle that blind people are driving today.

ivalueamerica 3 years, 10 months ago

Send Babies home from the hospital with little loaded guns.

Give them to nursing homes to Alzheimers patients.

Pass them out as favors to trick or treaters.

yankeevet 3 years, 10 months ago

Its getting to be like the wild wild west anymore!!!

Flap Doodle 3 years, 10 months ago

Yeah, just look at all the Dodge City-style shootouts between concealed permit holders that have happened right in Lawrence since concealed carry became legal. Oh, wait, there haven't been any.

rtwngr 3 years, 10 months ago

“I call it the walking, talking slippery slope,” Malte said. “That’s the gun lobby. They set up a system that involves weapon proficiency and testing and then they work bit by bit to repeal each piece of it until it leads to what they have in Arizona, where you don’t even need a permit.”

Yeah, there are a lot of problems with the blind people of Arizona and their concealed carry laws.

snoozey 3 years, 10 months ago

If you think about it, all weapons are concealed to the blind, so...

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 10 months ago

I just renewed my CCHL and was surprised there was not a requirement for retraining and qualification. Retraining should be a requirement; if someone goes blind then they'll never be able to qualify again. They could also add an additional question to the renewal application asking "Do you have any disbility that will keep you from safely operating a firearm?"

Final thought: epidemic of gun violence, huh? Where are people coming up with this misinformation? There is no epidemic of gun violence. As a matter of fact, violent crime has been steadily declining in thie country for quite some time now. Most gun deaths come from suicide and more Americans are killed in car accidents than by guns....

Just a bunch of fear mongering by the anti-gun wing nuts. Why you mad, Bro?

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr58/nvsr58_19.pdf

"The age-adjusted death rate in 2007 was 760.2 deaths per 100,000 U.S. standard population, a record low value that was 2.1 percent lower than the 2006 rate of 776.5."

"Since 1980, the age-adjusted death rate has decreased every year except 1983, 1985, 1988, 1993, and 1999."

By rank, the 15 leading causes in 2007 were: 1. Diseases of heart (heart disease) 2. Malignant neoplasms (cancer) 3. Cerebrovascular diseases (stroke) 4. Chronic lower respiratory diseases 5. Accidents (unintentional injuries) 6. Alzheimer’s disease 7. Diabetes mellitus (diabetes) 8. Influenza and pneumonia 9. Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome and nephrosis (kidney disease) 10 Septicemia 11. Intentional self-harm (suicide) 12. Chronic liver disease and cirrhosis 13. Essential hypertension and hypertensive renal disease (hypertension) 14. Parkinson’s disease 15. Assault (homicide)

The 15 leading causes of death in 2008 (Table B) were as follows: 1 Diseases of heart 2 Malignant neoplasms 3 Chronic lower respiratory diseases 4 Cerebrovascular diseases 5 Accidents (unintentional injuries) 6 Alzheimer’s disease 7 Diabetes mellitus 8 Influenza and pneumonia 9 Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome and nephrosis 10 Septicemia 11 Intentional self-harm (suicide) 12 Chronic liver disease and cirrhosis 13 Essential hypertension and hypertensive renal disease 14 Parkinson’s disease 15 Assault (homicide)

Smalltalk 3 years, 10 months ago

And since 1980 there has been an increase in Concealed Carry and the ownership of guns by the peaceful citizens. Looks like More Guns = Less Crime!

pyrofighter 3 years, 10 months ago

Thanks for taking the time to inform the uninformed. I doubt that it will get through to them though.

Peacemaker452 3 years, 10 months ago

Blind concealed carry permit holders are almost as big of a threat to Kansas as voter fraud, illegals getting in state tuition and mountain lions roaming the streets.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 10 months ago

Bwaaaahahahahahahahaaaaaa! Yeah, right. People only kill each other using guns. Stop it with the ignorant comments....I'm mean, they're funny as heck, but I'm trying to eat lunch and I only have one hour.

Majestic42 3 years, 10 months ago

Yeah, didja hear about the guy in Brooklyn who went on a rampage with that high-capacity....knife?

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 10 months ago

Maksim Gelman, accused of killing 4 in stabbing, carjacking spree caught after daylong manhunt. The knife-wielding madman who killed four people during a day-long rampage of stabbings, carjackings and hit-and-runs was nabbed in Times Square moments after he knifed a straphanger.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/ny_crime/2011/02/12/2011-02-12_cops_continue_hunt_for_brooklyn_sicko_who_left_4_dead_2_injured_in_stabbing_carj.html

Homeless man stabs three in Sayreville Burger King. An apparently homeless man armed with a six-inch steak knife randomly stabbed three customers at a Burger King in Sayreville on Saturday, police said.

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2011/02/homeless_man_stabs_three_in_sa.html

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 10 months ago

If we outlaw forks and spoons then the epidemic of obesity will end....diabetes and heart disease wouldn't be in the top 10 either.

sr80 3 years, 10 months ago

i am sitting here looking at all the cables going to my computer and thinking of the boston stranger.if someone wants to kill, they will kill with whatever is available!!!!

chzypoof1 3 years, 10 months ago

Bozo/others: Still waiting on the links from the Legal, CCL holders killing people. I only have so much time until everyone gives up on this thread and just assumes that guns are super scary...

Tick tock...

Flap Doodle 3 years, 10 months ago

Does anybody know where I could find a man-purse that'll hold a long-slide 1911?

Majestic42 3 years, 10 months ago

That would have definitely made The Terminator much more interesting.

arizonajh 3 years, 10 months ago

Chzypoof1

There have been 288 people killed by CCL holders since May 2007 including 9 law enforcement officers, 18 mass shootings and 25 muder-suicides according to the Violence Policy Center. You can read the details about each case here.

http://www.vpc.org/ccwkillers.htm

Majestic42 3 years, 10 months ago

Except only 86 of those 288 actually "count."

Bryan Moore 3 years, 10 months ago

I am sorry but I didn't get that from reading the site, why do 202 not "count"? Chypoof1 asked for a link "from the Legal, CCL holders killing people". I was also responding to Chypoof1's, "...I challenge ALL of you to PROVE that a person with a CCL committed a crime or injured someone with their firearm". I provided a link to show they have. Chypoof1 said “a person” even under your interpretation I provided "86" people. If it is 86 or 288 what is your point? Are 86 murders by CCL holders is OK then?

And just so you know arizonajh1 is my office and arizonajh2 is my home computer.

Majestic42 3 years, 10 months ago

Suicides, dropped charges, pending charges, and self-defense charges don't really count.

Bryan Moore 3 years, 10 months ago

From the site,

"Since May 2007, concealed handgun permit holders have killed at least 282 individuals--including nine law enforcement officers--in 193 incidents in 28 states. In more than two-thirds of the incidents (134) the concealed handgun permit holder has already been convicted, committed suicide, or was killed in the incident. Of the 59 cases still pending, the vast majority (47) of concealed handgun permit holders have been charged with criminal homicide, two were deemed incompetent to stand trial, two incidents were unintentional shootings, and eight incidents are still under investigation. Of the 193 incidents, 17 were mass shootings where concealed handgun permit holders claimed the lives of 73 victims.

Evidently six more have been added between the two releases. Where on the site do you get that only 86 count? Can you offer a breakdown as you see it? Committing suicide after you have killed people does count. Is the Tucson shooter one of those that you would say does not count because the charges are "pending"? You still don't address the fact that CCL's do commit murder unlike what Chzypoof1 was claiming and that was the point of my post.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 10 months ago

Compare and contrast:

From January 2010 through September 2010 the National Police Misconduct Statistics and Reporting Project recorded 3,814 unique reports of police misconduct that involved 4,966 sworn law enforcement officers and 5,711 alleged victims.

* 3,814 – Unique reports of police misconduct tracked
* 4,966 - Number of sworn law enforcement officers involved (263 were sheriffs or chiefs)
* 5,711 - Number of alleged victims involved
* 193 – Number of fatalities associated with tracked reports
* $213,840,800 – Estimated amount spent on misconduct-related civil judgments and settlements

And that's only 9 months from 2010. So, people who're licensed for concealed carry really don't seem like that big of a problem.

http://www.injusticeeverywhere.com/?page_id=3336

Just sayin'.

Bryan Moore 3 years, 10 months ago

Not saying much considering from that site that only 1.2% (combined gun and murder counts, even assuming no overlap) had to do with guns. The others were civil rights, theft, sexual miss-conduct, automobile, etc. And according to the site you provided these are alleged crimes. That comes out to about 50 (your 193 includes traffic accidents, etc.) "alleged crimes" vs. 36 murder convictions or ongoing trials for murder committed by CCL holders many involving multiple victims during the same time period. The link I provided was for homicide convictions (including those who committed suicide during the act). Do we want to go and look at how many CCL's committed petty crimes and compare that or realize that we are talking about murders/shootings and not traffic tickets? The key stat would be how many police officers have been convicted of murder with using their gun vs. CCL's during any given time period.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 10 months ago

Not saying much? Huh, imagine that....You're comparing 4 years of CCL data to 9 months of police misconduct data.... Perhaps it would speak more to you if you looked at police misconduct and shootings back to May 2007 as you are with CCL holders. Here's police misconduct data from 2009:

http://www.injusticeeverywhere.com/?p=1569

The following report was generated from data gathered in the months of April 2009 through mid-December 2009. In the those 8.5 months there were:

3,445 – Unique reports of police misconduct tracked by the NPMSRP 4,012 – Law enforcement officers alleged to have engaged in misconduct. 261 – Law enforcement leaders (police chiefs or sheriffs) that were cited in those reports. 4,778 – Alleged victims of police misconduct cited in tracked reports 258 – Fatalities reported in connection with alleged instances of misconduct. 15.05 – Reported incidents of misconduct tracked per day on average or a report of misconduct every 96 minutes. $198,943,000 – Reported costs in police misconduct related civil litigation, not counting legal fees or court costs. 980.64 per 100,000 – Estimated average 2009 US police misconduct rate (PMR = officers implicated per 100,000 officers)

3,445 Reports; %5.2 shootings; equates to 179 police shooting incidents in 9 months of 2009. Add that to 2007, 2008, and 2010 then get back to me.

Majestic42 3 years, 10 months ago

"But, but, but, but, no one besides po-LEESE-men can shoot guns! They have special magic training that makes them more responsible than CCW-holders!" Please. If anything, most CCW-holders are MORE responsible and better shots than most LEOs. Not saying there aren't LEOs who take the firearm side of their duty seriously, but in order to get a CCW, a citizen usually cares enough to go above and beyond in terms of training.

arizonajh 3 years, 10 months ago

No I am not comparing 4 years to 9 months. I went through and tallied all the reports excluding those that were suicide without harm to others or that were dismissed for the same nine month period. Perhaps you don't understand the meaning of "same time period". I said 'That comes out to about 50 (your 193 includes traffic accidents, etc.) "alleged crimes" vs. 36 murder convictions or ongoing trials for murder committed by CCL holders many involving multiple victims during the same time period.

But I'm sure you never got that far before you started typing.

And yes, I'm sure that the police are involved in more shootings because that is part of their job. That is why they carry guns. Because when a bank or store is robbed or a property broken into they respond. No one is calling the cowboy with the gun down the street when the bank alarm goes off or Fred is beating Ethal .

Also the last sentence of my response was, "The key stat would be how many police officers have been convicted of murder with using their gun vs. CCL's during any given time period." I have gotten back to you. When you figure out how to read get back to me.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 10 months ago

Oh I'm going to get right back at you, player. There were, in total,18 months of data presented at the Injustice Everywhere web-site... Perhaps you don't understand what you're looking at. Where did you get the data to compare going back to May 2007?

That said, the whole point of my bringing up the cops is that even our perceived 'heroes' are prone to illegal activities. You see, we're all human and, therefore, not perfect or predictable.

Oh, BTW, if a concealed carry licensee were in the bank when the alarm goes off, or at the store when it's being robbed, then they may take action well before the po-po show.

Topekan With Permit Stops Robbery By Firing Shots http://www.wibw.com/localnews/headlines/51738527.html

Concealed carry permit holder shoots suspect http://www.ktka.com/news/2007/jan/22/concealed_carry_permit_holder_shoots_suspect/

Haters gonna hate.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 10 months ago

Kansas has 30,353 CCHL issued and Florida has about 700,000 concealed carry licensees; I doubt there are that many law enforcement officers nationwide. You need to normalize the data...

Flap Doodle 3 years, 10 months ago

Because you can always count of VPC for unbiased reporting....

Majestic42 3 years, 10 months ago

That's what I was getting at with only a few of their actual reported deaths actually "counting." Their stats are skewed within their own study. I didn't get any info anywhere else. That alone should make you skeptical of the rest of their site.

arizonajh 3 years, 10 months ago

Please provide the numbers to back your assertion that only a few count. The site breaks down your count - don't count already it says,

"In more than two-thirds of the incidents (134) the concealed handgun permit holder has already been convicted, committed suicide, or was killed in the incident. Of the 59 cases still pending, the vast majority (47) of concealed handgun permit holders have been charged with criminal homicide, two were deemed incompetent to stand trial, two incidents were unintentional shootings, and eight incidents are still under investigation."

Is the 134 already convicted, committed suicide or killed in the act the "few" you are talking about? The cases are listed and the details are shown. You can look up any individual case if you wish to research for bias.

Majestic42 3 years, 10 months ago

I'm curious as to what your motivations are.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 10 months ago

I think he's a dirty pig who's afraid a concealed carry licensee might have a chance to defend themselves against dirty pigs and other criminals.

arizonajh 3 years, 10 months ago

As opposed to a site called "injustice everywhere". They don't sound like they have an agenda at all!

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 10 months ago

The agenda, creep, is to track police misconduct across the country and report on it in an unbiased manner; something that has not been done in a public forum until 2009. The only people who would have a problem with that would be dirty pigs. You a cop?

beatrice 3 years, 10 months ago

So people are actually in favor of allowing the blind to conceal and carry? I didn't see that one coming.

gonzo53 3 years, 10 months ago

Has there been a rash of blind concealed carry holders shooting up the place? I may have missed those news stories.

Crazy_Larry 3 years, 10 months ago

Ted Nugent discusses the 2nd Amendment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1bEuq7irQA

I'm with Ted! The 2nd Amendment IS my concealed carry permit.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.