Advertisement

Archive for Friday, February 10, 2012

Kansas Senate leader rejects bill to allow guns on college campuses

February 10, 2012

Advertisement

The Kansas Senate leader said Friday he had no interest in a bill that would allow concealed carry of weapons on college campuses.

“I think it’s a bad idea,” said Senate President Steve Morris, R-Hugoton. He said combining concentrations of young people and guns doesn’t make sense.

House Democratic Leader Paul Davis of Lawrence, whose district includes Kansas University, said, “I think that we need to let the Regents institutions police those issues themselves. They know what the security concerns are, better than the 165 legislators.”

While KU and other Regents schools oppose the proposal, Davis said he has heard more from community colleges wanting to make sure the bill doesn’t become law.

This week, House Bill 2353 was approved by the House Federal and State Affairs Committee and is headed to the full House for consideration.

The measure, by Rep. Forrest Knox, R-Altoona, states that people who are licensed to carry a concealed gun would be allowed to bring a weapon into a state or city facility unless the building had adequate security measures, such as electronic screening equipment and guards, to ensure that no weapons could be brought in.

Representatives of colleges, cities and counties and other groups have lobbied against the legislation, saying it would be cost prohibitive to have security systems at all entrances.That means concealed carry would have to be allowed in their facilities, they said.

Two years ago, a similar bill by Knox was approved by the House but it got bogged down in the Senate.

Comments

rattler 2 years, 8 months ago

So do I understand it correctly that Knox wants to allow concealed weapons to be carried in public buildings because there isn't proper security to keep concealed weapons out? Makes sense to me.

0

timetospeakup 2 years, 8 months ago

Exactly what's being proposed here!

0

Eride 2 years, 8 months ago

So do I understand it correctly that almost all shootings are accidental and not the result of criminals intentionally committing crimes?

Why would we want to encourage more people to carry around weapons?

You lack "sense"

0

KansasKansan 2 years, 8 months ago

Because crime rates drop when there is a possible ccw holder in the vicinity, and rates increase in "gun-free zones" because law-abiding citizens will be unprotected.

Here's an example:

Florida enacted a right to carry law in 1987, these are the statistics of crimes rates in Florida to the rest of United States from 1987 to 1997 Homicide rate dropped 36% in Florida and went down .4% as United states as a whole. Firearm Homicide rate dropped 37% and went up 15% as a nation. Handgun Homicide rate dropped 41% & and went up 24% as a nation.

And another fun fact: http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/1/25/153427.shtml

0

Eride 2 years, 8 months ago

If you actually cite a reputable source for your data I will read it.

0

lwctown 2 years, 8 months ago

So if I understand correctly the only people who can carry on campus are criminals who are not going to follow any gun laws anyway. Well at least we all know criminal gunmen never go on rampages on a college campus and women are never sexually assaulted on a college campus.....

0

question4u 2 years, 8 months ago

You clearly don't understand correctly. Campus police carry weapons and are responsible for enforcing the law. They are professionals, not vigilantes.

We all know that people never accidentally shoot themselves or others around them and college kids never get into drunken altercations....

0

KansasKansan 2 years, 8 months ago

Nobody is suggesting that concealed handgun license holders be charged with the duty of protecting campuses. What is being suggested is that adults with concealed handgun licenses be allowed to protect themselves on college campuses, the same way they’re currently allowed to protect themselves in most other unsecured locations. According to a U.S. Secret Service study* into thirty-seven school shootings, ‘Over half of the attacks were resolved/ended before law enforcement responded to the scene. In these cases the attacker was stopped by faculty or fellow students, decided to stop shooting on his own, or killed himself.’ The study found that only three of the thirty-seven school shootings researched involved shots being fired by law enforcement officers.

*“Safe School Initiative: An Interim Report on the Prevention of Targeted Violence in Schools,” U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center in collaboration with the U.S. Department of Education with support from the National Institute of Justice, Co-Directors Bryan Vossekuil, Marissa Reddy PhD, Robert Fein PhD, October 2000

Accidental discharges are very rare—particularly because modern firearms feature multiple safety features and because a handgun’s trigger is typically not exposed when it is concealed—and only a small fraction of accidental discharges result in injury. SCCC feels that it is wrong to deny citizens a right simply because that right is accompanied by a negligible risk.

NOTE: Only about 2% of all firearm-related deaths in the U.S. are accidental, and most of those are hunting accidents and accidents involving firearms being openly handled in an unsafe manner. A person is five times more likely to accidentally drown, five times more likely to accidentally die in a fire, 29 times more likely to die in an accidental fall, and 32 times more likely to die from accidental poisoning than to die from an accidental gunshot wound.

This is NOT a debate about keeping guns out of the hands of college students. Allowing concealed carry on college campuses would not change the rules about who can buy a gun or who can obtain a concealed handgun license. Every state that provides for legalized concealed carry has statutes prohibiting license holders from carrying while under the influence of drugs or alcohol. Legalizing concealed carry on college campuses would neither make it easier for college students to obtain firearms nor make it legal for a person to carry a firearm while under the influence of drugs or alcohol. Allowing concealed carry on college campuses would have no impact on the laws regulating concealed carry at bars and off-campus parties, the places where students (particularly students of legal age to obtain a concealed handgun license) are most likely to consume alcohol.

0

Peaty Romano 2 years, 8 months ago

KansasKansan - Nicely put and well thought out thanks.

0

Jonathan Fox 2 years, 8 months ago

It's nice to know at least a few people understand the situation.

Just to add, I don't have any real statistics, but you'd think we'd of heard of an occurance of concealed carrying college students off campus having some kind of "drunken altercation" that everyone keeps freaking out about.

0

oldvet 2 years, 8 months ago

A shoot-out is better than a massacre!
Ask the families of :

Ross Alameddine
Christopher James "Jamie" Bishop
Brian Roy Bluhm
Ryan Christopher Clark
Austin Michelle Cloyd
Jocelyne Couture-Nowak
Daniel Alejandro Perez Cueva
Kevin Granata
Matthew Gregory Gwaltney
Caitlin Millar Hammaren
Jeremy Michael Herbstritt
Rachael Elizabeth Hill
Emily Jane Hilscher
Jarrett Lee Lane
Matthew Joseph La Porte
Henry J. Lee
Liviu Librescu
GV Loganathan
Partahi Lumbantoruan
Lauren McCain
Daniel ONeil
Juan Ortiz
Minal Panchal
Erin Peterson
Michael Pohle Jr
Julie Pryde
Mary Read
Reema Samaha
Waleed Shaalan
Leslie Sherman
Maxine Turner
Nicole White

All victims of a criminal with a gun at Virginia Tech, a university that prohibited people from legally carrying a concealed weapon on campus. Since holders of concealed carry permits understand and follow the laws, there were no guns on campus. The university prohibited guns, so everyone felt safe!

0

Phillbert 2 years, 8 months ago

Whether you're killed by a verified psycho or a wannabe Rambo, you're still dead. Fulfill your vigilante fantasies with Grand Theft Auto.

0

phred 2 years, 8 months ago

vertigo, I know of one "wannabe Rambo" case that made things worse.. http://www.masscops.com/threads/shootout-in-idaho-town-2-officers-2-civilians-down.30645/

it isn't in this news report, but the civilian that was shot was a wannbe rambo that brought out his gun to shoot back at the shooter. He didn't shoot anyone, but managed to get himself shot and cause confusion for the police which delayed their ability to deal with the situation and rescue their fallen colleagues.

If the police, who have been trained for years to handle these situations, are often unable to stop them without fatalities, no yokel with a couple hour class is going to do any better. When police enter a situation with multiple shooters, it can be difficult for them to tell who is "the good guy" and as such they have to assume that everyone with a gun is a hazard making their job even more difficult and putting us all at greater risk.

0

KSWingman 2 years, 8 months ago

The facts of the 2007 Moscow, ID incident:

  1. No one involved in the incident (shooter or victims) has been identified as licensed to carry concealed.
  2. The shooting incident did not occur on a university campus. The first victim (the sniper's wife) was killed at home, and the other victims were shot outside a courthouse. The sniper concealed himself inside a Presbyterian church.
  3. No one involved in the incident carried a pistol into a government building (except, presumably, law enforcement officers at the courthouse).
  4. The 20 year old man was not old enough to be licensed to carry concealed. He had not been trained nor tested on the use of deadly force and the laws governing same. Since he had just watched 2 1/2 "Die Hard" movies, you may draw an inference as to his state of mind.
  5. He rode his bicycle into the kill zone, inserting himself into a situation which was not an immediate threat to him.
  6. He brought a pistol to a gunfight, which is never a good idea. Concealed carry is for the purpose of protecting yourself and your loved ones when trouble comes to you. The police don't go into a gunfight armed with only a handgun; a citizen shouldn't, either (also, see #5 above).
  7. There was no report of the injured, foolish young man on the street confusing the police about the presence of the sniper inside the church. However, the Moscow police chief said that citizens "trying to help" can become victims themselves, which happened in this case.

So, how does this relate to the issue of concealed carry license-holders carrying into college/university buildings, where criminals already carry their weapons illegally?

Is this really the best example you could find to make your point?

0

phred 2 years, 8 months ago

If you are going to only allow cases that occurred on a university campus (rather than a few blocks from one), and where concealed carry permits were documented (even those these haven't been around long in most places), and when there was a blue moon... yeah sure, you won't find any cases that fit. I would also say you are not going to find any cases of someone with a concealed carry license saving the day in a university shooting scene. It is a ridiculous defense of the argument that conceal carry weapons on campuses will stop such events. There have fortunately not been many campus shooting events from which to draw any of these sorts of examples.

This case, however, is a good example of why wannabe rambos are not anything like a solution to dealing with these rare events. As you state yourself, watching a couple Die Hard movies doesn't make one a trained SWAT team member capable of dealing with such situations.

0

rockchalker52 2 years, 8 months ago

Hey, ya gotta protect yourself in this conference. There's Okie State Cowboys with their six-shooters & now we're adding the Davy Crockett Mountaineers with those longa$$ rifles. They'll kill the Baylor Bears before the age of three.

0

lawslady 2 years, 8 months ago

Can we agree that the individuals serving in the military really know how to handle guns?
If you agree with that premise, did you know that in the military barracks and other locations on a military base have rules prohibiting carrying your weapon?

I enjoy using a gun and for years have enjoyed firing many types. And I think that anyone who wants to own a weapon should be allowed to do so (unless they have been previously adjudicated as unfit for some reason). So I am not anti-gun in any way. There are simply some places and situations where having weapons around (openly or concealed) is not a good idea.

The way this bill is written, the visitors at a prison, mental ward, day care, etc. would be allowed to bring in concealed weapons (of course they'd have to check them before going thru the security). Does anyone really think civilians walking around with concealed guns in such places is going to make it a safer envirnoment? If so, may I suggest you visit a country like Iran, where everyone who can walk is armed. See how safe you feel there.

0

timetospeakup 2 years, 8 months ago

Stop the BS. This does not allow people to bring guns into mental wards or prisons or anywhere else that already has adequate security screening.

0

billbodiggens 2 years, 8 months ago

Did I miss something? Are there armed guards and metal detectors at the doors of our hospital’s mental facilities and Area Mental Health facilities. Do the local day care facilities have armed guards and metal detectors? So, just where is that BS that you speak of? And, what, pray tell, is adequate security screening? And, what are you willing to pay for such "adequate security" at public buildings? If you reply is simply BS, why do you bother to even attempt to get involved in this important public issue? So many questions, so little results.

0

Rae Hudspeth 2 years, 8 months ago

Direct quote from a military wife whose husband was shot in the Fort Hood incident, upon being asked how she felt about him being deployed to Afghanistan: “At least he’s safe there and he can fire back, right?”

0

KansasKansan 2 years, 8 months ago

http://reason.com/archives/2009/11/11/the-folly-of-unilateral-disarm

The answer to bullets flying is almost always more bullets flying. That’s why the police bring so many guns with them when they respond to a report of ‘shots fired'

Think about inoculation.

Citizens with concealed handgun licenses are not vigilantes. They carry their concealed handguns as a means of getting themselves out of harm's way, not as an excuse to go chasing after bad guys. Whereas police shooting statistics involve scenarios such as pursuits down dark alleys and armed standoffs with assailants barricaded inside buildings, most civilian shootings happen at pointblank range. In the Luby's Cafeteria massacre, the Columbine High School massacre, and the Virginia Tech massacre, the assailants moved slowly and methodically, shooting their victims from very close range. A person doesn't have to be a deadeye shot to defend himself or herself against an assailant standing only a few feet away.

0

aryastark1984 2 years, 8 months ago

Wow! A modicum of common sense in the KS legislature! Will wonders never cease?

0

somedude20 2 years, 8 months ago

Finally, a Republican with a little common sense....kind of like finding a Bigfoot or God

0

lawslady 2 years, 8 months ago

Read it for yourselves and decide; http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2011_12/measures/hb2353/

If the jail does not put security up at every entrance to the building, the guns can get in. Only when there is a security check point does the person have to give up their weapon. See sections (a), (e) and (f). And as for mental wards, see section (g)

(a) The carrying of a concealed handgun as authorized by the personal and family protection act shall not be prohibited in state or municipality facilities or premises municipal buildings unless such facilities or premises have building has adequate security measures to ensure that no weapons are permitted to be carried into or on such premises or facilities such building. (e) Subject to provisions of subsection (f), nothing in this act shall limit the ability of a corrections facility, a jail facility or a law enforcement agency to prohibit the carrying of a concealed weapon by any person on such premises. (f) Any state or municipal building which contains both public access entrances and restricted access entrances shall provide adequate security at the public access entrances in order to prohibit the carrying of a concealed handgun in such public areas. (g) A state or municipal-owned medical care facility as defined in K.S.A. 65-425, and amendments thereto, may prohibit patients seeking treatment from carrying a concealed handgun. (i) For purposes of this section: (1) "Adequate security measures" means the use of electronic equipment and personnel at public entrances to detect and restrict the carrying of any weapons into the facility or on such premises state or municipal building, including, but not limited to, metal detectors, metal detector wands or any other equipment used for similar purposes to ensure that weapons are not permitted to be carried into such premises or facilities building by members of the public. (2) “Municipality” means as the term The terms "municipality" and "municipal" are interchangeable and have the same meaning as the term "municipality" is defined in K.S.A.75-6102, and amendments thereto, but does not include school districts. (3) "Restricted access entrance" means an entrance that is restricted to the public and requires a key, keycard, code, or similar device to allow entry to authorized personnel. (4) “State” means as the term is defined in K.S.A. 75-6102, and amendments thereto. (5) "State or municipal building" means a building owned or leased by such public entity. It does not include a building owned by the state or a municipality which is leased by a private entity whether for profit or not-for-profit or a building held in title by the state or a municipality solely for reasons of revenue bond financing.

0

DillonBarnes 2 years, 8 months ago

Public entrances require security measures, which I think you'll find all prisons have.

0

Flap Doodle 2 years, 8 months ago

CCW in Kansas didn't become law the first time around either. Come back in a year.

0

DillonBarnes 2 years, 8 months ago

Of course this is the second time this bill has been around.

0

JayhawkFan1985 2 years, 8 months ago

Next step is to return the legal drinking age to 18. Bad idea.

0

Kevin Haislip 2 years, 8 months ago

guns on campus! why waste our legislators time? kids with guns! how dumb! hell most of them can't use a condom without supervision.

0

50YearResident 2 years, 8 months ago

I think most 21 year olds would not like to be still called a kid. At what age did you become an adult? 40? 50? or 65 ?

0

KansasKansan 2 years, 8 months ago

These aren't "kids with guns". The requirement for obtaining a permit are easy enough to find. Why not take a look? http://www.usacarry.com/kansas_concealed_carry_permit_information.html

Since the fall semester of 2006, state law has allowed licensed individuals to carry concealed handguns on the campuses of the nine degree-offering public colleges (20 campuses) and one public technical college (10 campuses) in Utah. Concealed carry has been allowed at Colorado State University (Fort Collins, CO) since 2003 and at Blue Ridge Community College (Weyers Cave, VA) since 1995. After allowing concealed carry on campus for a combined total of one hundred semesters, none of these twelve schools has seen a single resulting incident of gun violence (including threats and suicides), a single gun accident, or a single gun theft. Likewise, none of the forty ‘right-to-carry’ states has seen a resulting increase in gun violence since legalizing concealed carry, despite the fact that licensed citizens in those states regularly carry concealed handguns in places like office buildings, movie theaters, grocery stores, shopping malls, restaurants, churches, banks, etc. Numerous studies*, including studies by University of Maryland senior research scientist John Lott, University of Georgia professor David Mustard, engineering statistician William Sturdevant, and various state agencies, show that concealed handgun license holders are five times less likely than non-license holders to commit violent crimes.

"Crime, Deterrence, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns,” John Lott and David Mustard, Journal of Legal Studies (v.26, no.1, pages 1-68, January 1997);

“An Analysis of the Arrest Rate of Texas Concealed Handgun License Holders as Compared to the Arrest Rate of the Entire Texas Population,” William E. Sturdevant, September 1, 2000; Florida Department of Justice statistics, 1998; Florida Department of State,

“Concealed Weapons/Firearms License Statistical Report,” 1998; Texas Department of Public Safety and the U.S. Census Bureau, reported in San Antonio Express-News, September 2000; Texas Department of Corrections data, 1996-2000, compiled by the Texas State Rifle Association

0

oldvet 2 years, 8 months ago

There you go again... trying to provide facts to a liberal...

The cry of the liberal when confronted with data: "Facts? We don't need no stinking facts!"

0

begin60 2 years, 8 months ago

Thank you! Yes--let sanity prevail at least once a generation in Kansas. Please reject this bill.

0

Lawrence Morgan 2 years, 8 months ago

Morris is right on. Thanks for not acting on this legislation. It is very definitely the wrong thing. The only thing I would have liked the Journal-World to do, which it didn't, would be to get a wide variety of professors, students and the Chancellor to speak up and say what they think. Unless I have missed something, the most important thing here is the University, as well as other universities and community colleges throughout the state, but they are not represented here - in the kind of article the New York Times would do - and they need to be.

0

KansasKansan 2 years, 8 months ago

The important thing here is not what professors, students, etc. "think". This is an issue about allowing licensed ccw permit holders to continue to protect themselves, as they do in otherwise unrestricted areas. Declaring a gun-free zone is is not a valid way to offer an individual his/her safety.

Statement on Virginia Tech Lockdown August 4th, 2011 Police at Virginia Tech are searching for a reported armed gunman at the site of the worst college shooting in history. The latest word is that no shots or injuries have been reported, but armed police officers have placed the campus on lock-down and continue to search.

Clearly, not even Virginia Tech officials have much confidence in their alleged “gun-free zone.”

Virginia Tech, like most colleges, demands the right to ban guns on campus, but they continue to show an appalling lack of interest in enforcing those bans or creating any practical mechanism to protect students.

“Colleges have entered into an informal alliance with criminals,” said David Burnett, spokesman with Students for Concealed Carry. “By banishing lawfully-armed citizens, the college is denying the right to self-defense and creating a defense-free environment which leaves colleges extremely vulnerable – and attractive – to criminals.”

Last month, in denying the college a blanket right to disarm law-abiding citizens, Virginia Tech’s Attorney-General Ken Cuccinelli stated that gun-ban polices “are ineffectual because persons who wish to perpetrate violence will ignore them, and that the net effect of such policies is to leave defenseless the law-abiding citizens who follow these policies.”

With over 600 acres of ground to cover, declaring the area “safe” may take a while, but with today’s quick notification, it appears Virginia Tech has at least taken to heart the lesson it learned in blood back in 2007 where they failed to notify students of the danger for nearly two hours.

“We hope Virginia Tech will continue to learn from their mistakes and stop disarming the very people who could make a difference in a life-or-death situation,” said Burnett.

0

DillonBarnes 2 years, 8 months ago

What amazes me is the sheer fear people have over firearms, and honestly, I cannot understand many of the arguments against this bill. The amount of land in question in minuscule to the amount of land where concealed carry is already legal, but apparently this land is so vile, it corrupts otherwise normal minds into reckless killers.

How can you argue about increased violence with this passage? Remember, its only the addition of this 1% of land area that is changing, the variable of WHO is carrying is not changing. How can you argue about accidental discharges and handling stress when we just haven't seen those fears manifest on the 99% of land concealed carriers already carry in?

On one hand, you argue that campus is too stressful to allowed carry, and it pushes students to become violent, apparently to mass acts of violence; but on the other hand, you stress how safe KU campus is.

0

wdl 2 years, 8 months ago

Its not about land acreage, its about population density and the age group and maturity level of the people packing heat. I don't really think if the carry or not will make much difference about anything. The one that won't change is that the bad guys always are carrying and they really don't care what the laws are at any level. So you have a choice of either protecting yourself on a sanctioned level or not. This is as debatable topic as abortion. Actually, in some cases it could be regarded as retroactive abortion.

0

kujeeper 2 years, 8 months ago

I would rather be judge by 12 than carried by 6..... And do not ever refer to Campus Police (at least at KU) as professionals, they are department rejects from the true professional departments in eastern Kansas

0

KansasKansan 2 years, 8 months ago

This hasn't been an issue with concealed handgun license holders in other walks of life for several reasons. First and foremost, real-world shootouts are typically localized and over very quickly. It's not realistic to expect police to encounter an ongoing shootout between assailants and armed civilians. Second, police are trained to expect both armed bad guys AND armed good guys—from off-duty/undercover police officers to armed civilians—in tactical scenarios. Third, concealed handgun license holders are trained to use their firearms for self-defense. They are not trained to run through buildings looking for bad guys. Therefore, the biggest distinction between the armed assailants and the armed civilians is that the armed civilians would be hiding with the crowd, and the armed assailants would be shooting at the crowd.

0

Hedge 2 years, 8 months ago

Most people here don't even know the current laws.

For starters, since 2010, if you have a valid Kansas concealed carry permit you already can and do carry on a college campus. And if the buildings are not posted properly you can already carry in them as well. The only thing this bill would do is require some additional security if the college is going to require you to disarm while going into the building.

Interesting that since 2010 there hasn't been blood in the streets from this.

The other thing is this bill does NOT prevent a college from still having a no-gun policy for students. Granted it won't be a "criminal" act that you can get arrested for but the school can still expel a student if caught carrying.

And the real truth of it is there have been people concealed carrying long before there were any laws on the books permitting it. You just didn't know it because they carry concealed. And they are, for the most part, responsible law abiding people.

0

50YearResident 2 years, 8 months ago

How can the Senate Leader, one man, keep a bill from being considered by the entire group of Senaters after it was approved by the House?

0

KansasKansan 2 years, 8 months ago

This article appears to be an op ed, for the most part. I don't think i Morris stopped anything. Correct me if I'm wrong.

0

DillonBarnes 2 years, 8 months ago

That was the impression I got. The title is very poorly written leading to a confusing article.

0

vegieman 2 years, 8 months ago

Thank God, a politician with common sense. There are enough criminals and thugs running loose on college campuses across America. No sense promoting more wreckless temptation. Increase stiffer penalties on ones who do carry illegaly.

0

KansasKansan 2 years, 8 months ago

??? Not sure what you mean to say here.

Since the fall semester of 2006, state law has allowed licensed individuals to carry concealed handguns on the campuses of the nine degree-offering public colleges (20 campuses) and one public technical college (10 campuses) in Utah. Concealed carry has been allowed at Colorado State University (Fort Collins, CO) since 2003 and at Blue Ridge Community College (Weyers Cave, VA) since 1995. After allowing concealed carry on campus for a combined total of one hundred semesters, none of these twelve schools has seen a single resulting incident of gun violence (including threats and suicides), a single gun accident, or a single gun theft. Likewise, none of the forty ‘right-to-carry’ states has seen a resulting increase in gun violence since legalizing concealed carry, despite the fact that licensed citizens in those states regularly carry concealed handguns in places like office buildings, movie theaters, grocery stores, shopping malls, restaurants, churches, banks, etc. Numerous studies*, including studies by University of Maryland senior research scientist John Lott, University of Georgia professor David Mustard, engineering statistician William Sturdevant, and various state agencies, show that concealed handgun license holders are five times less likely than non-license holders to commit violent crimes.

"Crime, Deterrence, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns,” John Lott and David Mustard, Journal of Legal Studies (v.26, no.1, pages 1-68, January 1997);

“An Analysis of the Arrest Rate of Texas Concealed Handgun License Holders as Compared to the Arrest Rate of the Entire Texas Population,” William E. Sturdevant, September 1, 2000; Florida Department of Justice statistics, 1998; Florida Department of State,

“Concealed Weapons/Firearms License Statistical Report,” 1998; Texas Department of Public Safety and the U.S. Census Bureau, reported in San Antonio Express-News, September 2000; Texas Department of Corrections data, 1996-2000, compiled by the Texas State Rifle Association

0

tomatogrower 2 years, 8 months ago

"House Democratic Leader Paul Davis of Lawrence, whose district includes Kansas University, said, “I think that we need to let the Regents institutions police those issues themselves. They know what the security concerns are, better than the 165 legislators.”"

So here is a truly conservative idea that I can get behind. On everything else the neoconservatives say "Get the government out", except gun control and women's bodies. Oh and anyone's sex life.

0

KansasKansan 2 years, 8 months ago

Since the fall semester of 2006, state law has allowed licensed individuals to carry concealed handguns on the campuses of the nine degree-offering public colleges (20 campuses) and one public technical college (10 campuses) in Utah. Concealed carry has been allowed at Colorado State University (Fort Collins, CO) since 2003 and at Blue Ridge Community College (Weyers Cave, VA) since 1995. After allowing concealed carry on campus for a combined total of one hundred semesters, none of these twelve schools has seen a single resulting incident of gun violence (including threats and suicides), a single gun accident, or a single gun theft. Likewise, none of the forty ‘right-to-carry’ states has seen a resulting increase in gun violence since legalizing concealed carry, despite the fact that licensed citizens in those states regularly carry concealed handguns in places like office buildings, movie theaters, grocery stores, shopping malls, restaurants, churches, banks, etc. Numerous studies*, including studies by University of Maryland senior research scientist John Lott, University of Georgia professor David Mustard, engineering statistician William Sturdevant, and various state agencies, show that concealed handgun license holders are five times less likely than non-license holders to commit violent crimes.

"Crime, Deterrence, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns,” John Lott and David Mustard, Journal of Legal Studies (v.26, no.1, pages 1-68, January 1997);

“An Analysis of the Arrest Rate of Texas Concealed Handgun License Holders as Compared to the Arrest Rate of the Entire Texas Population,” William E. Sturdevant, September 1, 2000; Florida Department of Justice statistics, 1998; Florida Department of State,

“Concealed Weapons/Firearms License Statistical Report,” 1998; Texas Department of Public Safety and the U.S. Census Bureau, reported in San Antonio Express-News, September 2000; Texas Department of Corrections data, 1996-2000, compiled by the Texas State Rifle Association

0

Hedge 2 years, 8 months ago

KansasKansan well said. But it is obvious that those who are against this are basing there standing on their own fears and are never going to be convinced. You can present all of the solid evidence you want. You will never convince them or convert them. But it is nice to see which side is the more rational on the issue. I find that most people who do carry are the most level headed. That's why it isn't a problem.

0

DillonBarnes 2 years, 8 months ago

No, I think you will find most people carry out of a sense of preparedness, not fear.

0

DillonBarnes 2 years, 8 months ago

When logic fails, resort to personal attacks.

0

DillonBarnes 2 years, 8 months ago

I wear my seat-belt. I carry a first aid kit.

Is that out of fear?

0

Hedge 2 years, 8 months ago

It's called situational awareness. Something everyone should study regardless of whether they carry or not.

And nobody says, "Get the drop on" anymore.

0

Hedge 2 years, 8 months ago

I took my girl to a wonderful dinner theater this evening. We had good food, and saw an excellent performance. I carried. Didn't give it a second thought all evening. No one got mugged. No one went ballistic and shot the place up. No incidents what so ever. The couple we went with did not carry. I don't care that they didn't. They didn't care that I did. The three or four hundred others at the theater didn't care either because they seemed to have a good time as well. That is about as exciting as it gets when it comes to this issue. I'd say your fear of people carrying far exceeds my fear of going out. I don't dwell on it at all. I wish you didn't either. You should have more faith in people. I do.

0

50YearResident 2 years, 8 months ago

So, why are you so desperatly afraid of meeting another person that may have a concealed weapon? You seem paranoid about the subject. Do you break out into a cold sweat when you are out in the public? Do you have the urge to pat down everyone you meet to see if they have a weapon? It seems you may have a problem that needs some counseling

This responce if for the statement you said: So please spare me the "it is obvious that those who are against this are basing there standing on their own fears and are never going to be convinced."Bs. I am not the one scared to go out of the house at night without a weapon.

0

brewmaster 2 years, 8 months ago

This is good news. Now a TTA will not be able to legally possess concealed guns on KU campus; not TTA - Temporary Teaching Assistant, but rather TTA - Tattooed Thug Athlete.

0

KansasKansan 2 years, 8 months ago

Since when could a "Tattooed Thug Athlete" "legally possess concealed guns on KU campus"?

This bill will not stop anyone, criminal intent or otherwise, from illegally carrying on campus. What is may do is allow individual license holders to lawfully protect themselves when threatened with serious bodily harm or death.

0

missmagoo 2 years, 8 months ago

Legislators need to find something better to do.. seriously.

0

Fred Whitehead Jr. 2 years, 8 months ago

Good! This was the most stupid and ignorant proposal I have ever seen. People can cause enough mayhem in disputes with others without being armed with deadly weapons. It doesn't matter is you have a permit, people with their emotions out of control are very dangerous, even unarmed.

0

KansasKansan 2 years, 8 months ago

"people with their emotions out of control are very dangerous, even unarmed." This would be an argument in favor of the bill, however,

Contrary to popular myth, most psychiatric professionals agree that the notion of a previously sane, well-adjusted person simply ‘snapping’ and becoming violent is not supported by case evidence. A Secret Service study* into school shootings concluded that school shooters do not simply snap and that a person’s downward spiral toward violence is typically accompanied by numerous warning signs.

*“Safe School Initiative: An Interim Report on the Prevention of Targeted Violence in Schools,” U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center in collaboration with the U.S. Department of Education with support from the National Institute of Justice, Co-Directors Bryan Vossekuil, Marissa Reddy PhD, Robert Fein PhD, October 2000

0

FlintHawk 2 years, 8 months ago

Props to Sen. Morris!! Best news from Topeka in several months.

0

Mark Jakubauskas 2 years, 8 months ago

We used to kid about that back in grad school.....the fastest way to pass your graduate oral exams: Walk in the room, sit down, lay the pistol on the table, and ask, "Any questions ?"

0

Uhlrick_Hetfield_III 2 years, 8 months ago

Just like Congress, a Republican house and a Democratic Senate.

0

KansasKansan 2 years, 8 months ago

October 16, 1991, Luby’s Cafeteria, Killeen, TX, “Gun-Free”: 1 gunman, 23 murdered, 20 injured. April 20, 1999, Columbine, “Gun-Free”: 2 gunmen, 13 murdered, 24 injured. Many were murdered AFTER the police were “on scene”. April 16, 2007, Virginia Tech, “Gun-Free”: 1 gunman, 32 murdered, 25 injured. Most were murdered AFTER the police were “on scene”. Feb 14,2008 Northern Illinois University, 1 gunman, 5 dead, 18 injured, gunman kills self long before police arrive to engage. Nov 5 ,2009 Ft Hood Texas, 1 gunman, 13 dead, 30 wounded. Military personnel on base are BANNED from having a weapon, but the shooter did, and it was almost 9 minutes before police responded.

Gun Free Zone: 5 incidents

Defenseless victims murdered: 86; Defenseless victims injured: 117

December 17, 1991 Shoney’s Family Restaurant, Anniston, AL: 3 gunmen, 20 hostages, one ARMED customer (Thomas Glenn Terry). Police finally arrived to find one dead robber, one wounded robber and the third had fled when the shooting started. NO INJURED INNOCENTS. October 1, 1997, Pearl High School: 1 gunman, 2 murdered, 7 injured: Stopped by ARMED vice principal. January 16, 2002, Virginia Appalachian School of Law: 1 gunman, 3 murdered, 3 injured. Killer was stopped when confronted by two ARMED students. Dec 9 2007, Colorado Springs, New Life Church, 1 gunman 2 murdered, 3 injured, gunman stopped when armed woman shoots gunman, who then turns gun on self and commits suicide, while 100 other church members are in church. May 4th, College Station Georgia 2 gunman, 10 victims, 1 dead gunman, 1 victim wounded. The 2 thugs robbing a party begin discussing if they have enough bullets to do the job. One man retrieves his firearm, kills one thug, chases the other off.

Where murderers encountered ARMED resistance: 5 incidents

murdered: 7; injured: 14

Where no resistance occurred, 9 plus times higher body count. Challenge: Find an example of a crime scene involving mass murder—or potential mass murder—where an armed intended victim “made things worse".

0

KansasKansan 2 years, 8 months ago

When you find a way to stop people with criminal intent from gun onto campuses, then we can talk about what reasons we have to want to carry lawfully. Hanging up a sign doesn't count.

0

voevoda 2 years, 8 months ago

Responsible gun owners would not be a problem. Nor members of a "well-regulated militia," as specified in the Second Amendment. But the rules for who would be entitled to concealed carry are much too lenient to filter out people who are too unstable, too excitable, or too careless. Until we have stricter regulations about who in general is entitled to carry a weapon, we need strict regulations about who can carry them on college campuses.

0

DillonBarnes 2 years, 8 months ago

Isn't it possible that those who are "too unstable, too excitable, or too careless" to a point that you feel it is a threat to other people, may not care about the "no gun" zones lawful citizens have to follow?

i.e. These people are already carrying guns.

0

DillonBarnes 2 years, 8 months ago

Isn't it possible that those who are "too unstable, too excitable, or too careless" to a point that you feel it is a threat to other people, may not care about the "no gun" zones lawful citizens have to follow?

i.e. These people are already carrying guns.

0

voevoda 2 years, 8 months ago

Having more unstable, excitable, and careless people with guns does not lessen the chances of someone getting hurt. The presence of people carrying firearms does not increase the chance that an unstable, excitable, or careless person will be stopped. Think of the case of the attack on Gabrielle Giffords. The attacker there was subdued by people who didn't have firearms, despite the fact that quite a few people at the site had weapons.
Some people feel safer carrying a weapon, but on a college campus, it's just a delusion. The danger is minimal, and having a weapon doesn't make anyone safer.

0

KansasKansan 2 years, 8 months ago

Nineteen of the thirty-two victims of the Virginia Tech massacre were over the age of twenty-one (the minimum age to obtain a concealed handgun license in Virginia and most other states).

Though statistically safer than other comparable locations, college campuses play host to every type of violence found in the rest of society, from murder to assault to rape. The statistics suggest that allowing concealed carry on campus won’t hurt and might help; therefore, there is no legitimate reason not to allow it. A free society does not deny the people a right unless there is empirical evidence that granting that right will do more harm than good.

What is worse than allowing an execution-style massacre to continue uncontested? How could any action with the potential to stop or slow a deranged killer intent on slaughtering victim after victim be considered ‘worse’ than allowing that killer to continue undeterred? Contrary to what the movies might have us believe, most real-world shootouts last less than ten seconds*. Even the real Gunfight at the O.K. Corral, a shootout involving nine armed participants and a number of bystanders, lasted only about thirty seconds and resulted in only three fatalities. It is unlikely that an exchange of gunfire between an armed assailant and an armed citizen would last more than a couple of seconds before one or both parties were disabled. How could a couple of seconds of exchanged gunfire possibly be worse than a ten-minute, execution-style massacre?

*In The Line of Fire: Violence Against Law Enforcement, U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, National Institute of Justice, 1997

According to a U.S. Secret Service study* into thirty-seven school shootings, ‘Over half of the attacks were resolved/ended before law enforcement responded to the scene. In these cases the attacker was stopped by faculty or fellow students, decided to stop shooting on his own, or killed himself.’ The study found that only three of the thirty-seven school shootings researched involved shots being fired by law enforcement officers.

*“Safe School Initiative: An Interim Report on the Prevention of Targeted Violence in Schools,” U.S. Secret Service National Threat Assessment Center in collaboration with the U.S. Department of Education with support from the National Institute of Justice, Co-Directors Bryan Vossekuil, Marissa Reddy PhD, Robert Fein PhD, October 2000

0

50YearResident 2 years, 8 months ago

So, according to you, only the police and military should have weapons?

0

Fred Whitehead Jr. 2 years, 8 months ago

Recent news reports from Kansas City detailed two girls playing with a gun and one was shot and seriously injured. Parents, anywhere? Guns out of reach?? hmmmmm

The real problem is that there is no way to fix "stupid".

0

graylanternlizard 2 years, 8 months ago

I'm sure the gun carrying criminal are very happy.

0

50YearResident 2 years, 8 months ago

You shouldn't of taken that last drag on whatever you are smoking. You are getting incoherent!

0

Hedge 2 years, 8 months ago

You are reinforcing my comment that people who carry are the most level headed. Thank you.

I''m not a cop or in special forces. Why do I need that type of training. I carry for my own personal self defense. A whole different skill set requirement. They go looking for trouble. I do not.

0

KansasKansan 2 years, 8 months ago

Police officers do not spend four to five months learning to carry concealed handguns for self-defense; they spend four to five months learning to be police officers. Concealed handgun license holders are not police officers; therefore, they have no need of most of the training received by police officers. Concealed handgun license holders don't need to know how to drive police cars at high speeds or how to kick down doors or how to conduct traffic stops or how to make arrests or how to use handcuffs. And concealed handgun license holders definitely don't need to spend weeks memorizing radio codes and traffic laws.

"Contrary to what some opponents of concealed carry might claim, concealed handgun license holders don't need extensive tactical training because they are not charged with protecting the public—It’s not their job to act like amateur, one-man SWAT teams. All a concealed handgun license holder needs to know is how to use his or her concealed handgun to stop an immediate threat of death or serious bodily harm, and that type of training CAN be accomplished in a few hours."

KS·CPOST Annual Firearms Qualification Requirements: http://www.kscpost.org/rules.htm

0

Hedge 2 years, 8 months ago

We can bandy this about forever. I'll never convince you it's good just like you will never convince me its bad. But the basic fact is that at least for now it is legal for me to carry a firearm and I choose to do so. The fact that you do not does not bother me in the least. I carry for my own personal reasons. I won't blame the police for not being there when I may need them the most. They can't be everywhere all the time. I understand that. So I choose to take some of that responsibility on myself. You will probably never know who around you carries and who doesn't. Try not to let that get to you. It will be all right.

If everyone is so against it and thinks it is so bad why do all but two states have some form of legal concealed carry now? And come on now. the NRA isn't that strong. See you around!

0

lawslady 2 years, 8 months ago

They'd better slow up and think this one thru better.

A solution in search of a problem? Violent crimes on university campuses accounted for less than 1% of the violent crimes in Kansas during 2010. (Federal Bureau of Investigation). The rate of violent crimes per 100,000 in Kansas in 2010 was 369.1. The rate of violent crimes per 100,000 on Kansas college campuses in 2010 was 10.7.

Negative impact on Kansas economy? Kansas public universities hold memberships in three athletic conferences, the Mid-America Intercollegiate Athletics Conference (MIAA), the Big 12, and the Missouri Valley Conference. Athletic conference officials may require extensive security measures to ensure the safety of fans, athletes, officials, and staff. Due to the security risks and additional screenings required, Kansas venues would likely be disqualified for tournaments and other athletic events.

More than just adult students and classrooms involved? Most campuses are home to early Childhood Centers, There are Medical Centers with patients of all ages in several campus locations; The Kansas Academy of Math and Science (KAMS) - high school students residing and attending classes at Fort Hays State University; Stadiums, Performance Centers, Museums, Arenas, and Field Houses for athletic and cultural events all involved; Laboratories and work spaces with chemicals and equipment where a gun discharge, even if accidental, could cause serious harm or reactions.

0

Hedge 2 years, 8 months ago

I never said she was wrong. She's right on several points. It would be expensive. And thank you for pointing out that nothing happened when I went out. the other evening. You are making my point for me. The safety concerns you have against legally carrying citizens is not warranted, in my opinion.

Neither one of you have yet to answer my simple question. It's not an outlandish scenario. I'd just like to know how you would feel. Or better yet, what would your advice be if your wife or girlfriend came home and told you this happened to them? What if she were actually confronted by someone with the intent to rob or rape her? I really would like to know what you would tell them. If it makes sense, I promise to consider it.

0

KansasKansan 2 years, 8 months ago

From: http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2011-03-01-editorial01_ST1_N.htm

According to the FBI, crime on campus is rising; most of the violent attacks occurring on campus in the past 100 years happened in just the past 20. There were 3,287 rapes, 60 killings, 5,026 assaults and 4,562 robberies across college campuses just in 2008. Worse yet, experts tell us campus crime is underreported.

Colleges can't keep criminals from being armed because criminals never ask permission. But rather than considering that criminals fear armed victims more than signs, colleges peddle imaginary problems as an excuse not to implement real solutions.

Now with legislators in 12 states considering "campus carry" legislation, critics are baselessly insisting campus violence will escalate. The reality is that 71 campuses in three states already allow licensed concealed carry on campus, and have done so for years without a single resulting incident. The imagined gruesome consequences are just that — imaginary.

"Crime, Deterrence, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns,” John Lott and David Mustard, Journal of Legal Studies (v.26, no.1, pages 1-68, January 1997);

“An Analysis of the Arrest Rate of Texas Concealed Handgun License Holders as Compared to the Arrest Rate of the Entire Texas Population,” William E. Sturdevant, September 1, 2000; Florida Department of Justice statistics, 1998; Florida Department of State,

“Concealed Weapons/Firearms License Statistical Report,” 1998; Texas Department of Public Safety and the U.S. Census Bureau, reported in San Antonio Express-News, September 2000; Texas Department of Corrections data, 1996-2000, compiled by the Texas State Rifle Association

These stats are old, but please try and find me an instance of a ccw holder making

0

lawslady 2 years, 8 months ago

BTW, I like guns and have been a good shot since I was a child. But this bill is not a good idea, imho.

But before making up your minds, you should all go read the bill on this for yourselves - http://kslegislature.org/li/b2011_12/measures/documents/hb2353_01_0000.pdf NOTE it does not just cover campuses. It requires that all public buildings allow concealed weapons inside if they don't have enough security.

Any public building that does not have security at all doors will be required to let people inside who have a concealed carry permit. Think that one through for awhile. Think of all the public buildings around, and how much money (tax dollars) it will take to post an armed guard or security device at each entrance/exit. Hospital waiting rooms. And prison waiting rooms. And mental wards. And child care facilities, etc. Security guards/security screening devices - required. Or guns inside.

Either the people who SELL security systems (or own security companies) are behind this bill, or Kansas is a test site for some real extreme gun rights agenda (maybe introducing gun laws leading to mandated open carry by everyone?).

0

Hedge 2 years, 8 months ago

It's not so much being able to carry into those buildings as carrying to and from those buildings. Without stirring up another no-win debate here that will degrade into name calling, can I put forth a scenario and ask a question? Have you ever been in a large multilevel parking garage, alone, at night? You are half way between your car and the nearest door or exit and you hear a noise, or see someone move in the shadows. If so, how did that make you feel? Helpless? Scared? Paranoid? Maybe you wish you had a gun. Maybe not. Standing at the door is a uniformed police man. Feel better? I know I would. But this time there isn't anyone. Just you. Now lets say you normally carry and have a firearm but you had to leave it in your car. Doesn't do you much good there does it. Please don't go off accusing me of walking around paranoid all the time. I don't any more than you do. All I'm asking is how you would feel in this situation.

I don't have a problem with restricting some places. But they should be places that I can choose not to go to. Places like city halls or the court houses don't give me that option all the time. Sometimes I have to go there. And since the courts have said I can carry a firearm right up to the front door all I'm asking is that if you say I have to leave my gun at the door; 1: you will keep it secure until I leave, 2: you will make sure that no one else in the building has a firearm either.

0

lawslady 2 years, 8 months ago

Then you are in luck Hedge. Because CURRENT LAW allows you to carry a weapon outside, anywhere, already. The provision of HB 2353 will expand the right to carry concealed into buildings owned by the government, unless there are security devices or guards at all doors. Many city halls and courts houses already have screening devices, out of necessity. But many other public buildings (like sporting arenas, waiting rooms at hospitals, etc.) do not. Almost every single law enforcement branch is against allowing weapons inside such places, and they are banned therein. If you are afraid the bad guys will ignore that ban and you want to be able to defend yourself, what about allowing OPEN CARRY inside such places? But meanwhile, what about the drunk 21 year old with a permit to carry who is at a game and gets mad at the other team's fans? All I can say is that a lot of people better get real polilte if this law passes.

0

Hedge 2 years, 8 months ago

Yes, current laws do allow for outside carry. But none of the government buildings in my town has any type of security devices so HB 2353 is good in that respect. As to the other locations you mention...I would disagree on hospitals in their entirety. ER's maybe. I recently had to go to Wichita to St. Francis hospital to see a relative. Earlier in the week there were two armed robberies/assaults in one of the hospital parking lots. It was late when I got there and even later by the time I left. I would have preferred to be armed while traversing the parking lot but it stayed in the car as the building was posted. But are you saying you would be ok with open carry in those places? If so, why open as opposed to concealed? Sports arenas. I won't argue there and probably for the same reason. Me personally, if I know I am going to be drinking I leave the gun at home. But I also make sure I won't be driving. That’s called being responsible. Yet society seems to be ok with that same drunk 21 year old hopping in his car and heading out on the streets after the game. As far as I am concerned, any event that requires driving to and from should not be serving alcohol. But we allow it. And the acceptable way to handle it is to have laws to punish them after the fact, if they screw up. (i.e. DUI) We don't just arbitrarily say that 21 year olds are prone to drinking therefore they should not be allowed to drive. The same with concealed carry. I don’t think laws and restrictions should be made based on what a very small percentage “might” do. By all means have very strong penalties if you do screw up. But most of the people that I know that do carry are very well versed on the laws, have a substantial investment in time and money to be able to exercise their right to carry, and will go out of their way not to put themselves in a situation that could result in the loss of that right. Are there some out there that are irresponsible? Sure. Punish them when they do mess up. Do we really want to legislate based on what a few “might” do? If so, we should start a list.

I would still like to know if you have given any thoughts to self defense and how you approach it. What do you recommend?

0

Hedge 2 years, 8 months ago

LOL now isn't that calling the kettle black! Scroll up a bit and see who the irrational one is.

So what would you do in my scenario overplayed? I'd still like to hear from lawslady too.

0

KansasKansan 2 years, 8 months ago

I think you're jumping the gun.

This bill extends the area in which a ccw permit holder may carry to such and such places. Your phrasing is somewhat loaded. Anyway, I wonder your opinion on the effectiveness of "gun-free zones" considering numerous shootings in recent years have occurred within them.

0

lawslady 2 years, 8 months ago

http://www.kslegislature.org/li/b2011_12/measures/documents/supp_note_hb2353_01_0000.pdf According to the fiscal note from the Division of the Budget, the League of Kansas Municipalities said passage of HB 2353 could cost local units of government between $1.5 million and $3.0 million statewide. This estimate is based on an average walk-through electronic scanner costing between $2,500 to $5,000, plus freight and installation, if 627 cities chose to purchase only one unit each. It is not known if all 627 cities would choose this option, choose to install more than one device, or choose a hand-held wand detector. Some cities might already have either or both of these devices, or would choose not to use detectors for controlling concealed carry in public buildings. In addition, there would be ongoing annual expenditures to staff the detectors and to maintain the equipment. There was nothing reported about the counties in the fiscal note.

0

KansasKansan 2 years, 8 months ago

Stepping on the 2nd may be expensive. I've asked before (I don't believe of you) for instances of ccw holders making things worse for the rest of the community when a situation becomes dangerous. You will find instances of the opposite when searching.

Since the fall semester of 2006, state law has allowed licensed individuals to carry concealed handguns on the campuses of the nine degree-offering public colleges (20 campuses) and one public technical college (10 campuses) in Utah. Concealed carry has been allowed at Colorado State University (Fort Collins, CO) since 2003 and at Blue Ridge Community College (Weyers Cave, VA) since 1995. After allowing concealed carry on campus for a combined total of one hundred semesters, none of these twelve schools has seen a single resulting incident of gun violence (including threats and suicides), a single gun accident, or a single gun theft. Likewise, none of the forty ‘right-to-carry’ states has seen a resulting increase in gun violence since legalizing concealed carry, despite the fact that licensed citizens in those states regularly carry concealed handguns in places like office buildings, movie theaters, grocery stores, shopping malls, restaurants, churches, banks, etc. Numerous studies*, including studies by University of Maryland senior research scientist John Lott, University of Georgia professor David Mustard, engineering statistician William Sturdevant, and various state agencies, show that concealed handgun license holders are five times less likely than non-license holders to commit violent crimes.

"Crime, Deterrence, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns,” John Lott and David Mustard, Journal of Legal Studies (v.26, no.1, pages 1-68, January 1997);

“An Analysis of the Arrest Rate of Texas Concealed Handgun License Holders as Compared to the Arrest Rate of the Entire Texas Population,” William E. Sturdevant, September 1, 2000; Florida Department of Justice statistics, 1998; Florida Department of State,

“Concealed Weapons/Firearms License Statistical Report,” 1998; Texas Department of Public Safety and the U.S. Census Bureau, reported in San Antonio Express-News, September 2000; Texas Department of Corrections data, 1996-2000, compiled by the Texas State Rifle Association

0

Hedge 2 years, 8 months ago

LJW reports there were only 590 "major" crimes in Lawrence in 2011. And the Lawrence police department said there were only 40 reported rapes last year. Yep. There is absolutely no reason to even think about silly matters like self defense.

There was sure a lot of DUI's though. Now there's a 2000 lb lethal weapon that you are far more likely to die from than any CCW permit holder.

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.