Advertisement

Archive for Wednesday, June 5, 2013

Letter: Gun fears unfounded

June 5, 2013

Advertisement

To the editor:

The recent actions by the city and county commissions (and the Lawrence Journal-World editorial “More guns”) are clearly not grounded in the facts. The legislation passed by the Kansas Legislature allows only for residents who are approved for a concealed carry license. In 2007, concealed carry was approved by the Legislature, and there were fears that this would increase crime and lead to a “Wild West” environment. These fears have proven unfounded, as statistics have shown a decrease in violent crime in Kansas.

In addition, those with a concealed carry license are much less likely to commit a crime than those who do not have a license. Concealed carry applicants must submit a detailed application, undergo a background check by the Kansas Bureau of Investigation and wait at least 45 days (in most cases 90 days) before the license is issued. In addition, applicants must complete a safety course with a certified trainer.

The city and county commissioners are not only suggesting that it might be necessary to spend hundreds of thousands in taxpayer money; they are suggesting this is necessary to protect themselves from a specific population that is actually less dangerous. While concealed carry may not result in a safer environment, it certainly does not increase the risk of violence. I ask our commissioners to use reason before they spend more of our money.

Comments

Biscayne 1 year, 2 months ago

Thanks Patrick, good article and common sense.

6

Charles L Bloss Jr 1 year, 2 months ago

I think it does make the environment safer, as pertains to violent crime. I agree with you, and think the new gun and knife laws will be good for the state. Though I am perfectly happy with my assist open knife, I am not concerned about the switchblade and other weapons once illegal, now made legal. These give law abiding citizens more tools with which to protect themselves against violent criminals. As for "no gun signs" I do not enjoy going into a building with one, unless there are measures in place to protect me. In the majority of cases there are not, and I am stripped of the means to protect myself. I am pleased that this problem is partially addressed in the new law as it pertains to public buildings. I cannot help but wonder why this law frightens our elected representatives, and KU officials so much. Usually I avoid buildings with "no gun" signs, but when I must see a doctor I have no choice. I hope next year the legislature addresses this problem.

4

Kate Rogge 1 year, 2 months ago

I get around some, and I cannot remember the last time I was attacked nor when I was within sight or sound of someone who was being attacked. Is Lawrence and the rest of Kansas violently dangerous just when I'm not around? When was the last time any of those advocating for concealed carry were attacked? When did they last foil an attack upon someone else? How realistic is their fear of attack and their evident fears of not carrying weapons in public places?

5

ChuckFInster 1 year, 2 months ago

Those would have been a great questions to ask the folks in the Aurora theater, Columbine, Sandy Hook.....

7

elliottaw 1 year, 2 months ago

and a gun would not have helped in either of those instances, mental health though would have

3

Phoghorn 1 year, 2 months ago

If a gun in the hands of a CC holder had stopped the shooting rampage in the first minute or so, it definitely would have helped.

I wholeheartedly agree that our mental health system needs revamped, but by the time the bad guy starts shooting it is too late to pull out the Rorschach cards.

3

colicole81 1 year, 2 months ago

I beg to differ. Are you telling me that the principal of Sandy Hook, that ran towards the gun man, would not have been able to stop him had she been armed and educated on gun defense? I would also imagine that if a movie patron had been armed they could have taken James Holmes down as he went from aisle to aisle gunning people down in Aurora. I won't pretend that armed citizens can stop gunmen in all circumstances but they can at least protect themselves and possibly others. Those who are not armed can not protect anyone EVER!

3

elliottaw 1 year, 2 months ago

really so you can only stop a gun with a gun, so that means guns make you unstoppable???

0

JJE007 1 year, 2 months ago

There is no such thing as "unstoppable". Do you have an "unstoppable" suggestion for dealing with and discouraging the ills of our disgraceful society?

2

KevinBacon 1 year, 2 months ago

If they did, would you count that as a reason to disarm people? If the criminals are unstoppable, that's even more reason to own a gun.

3

StephenCCH 1 year, 2 months ago

Yes, guns are worthless. Let's disarm the police too.

2

colicole81 1 year, 2 months ago

Yes, generally, you can only stop a gun with a gun. I'm sure there are unique circumstances in which a shooter has been stopped in other ways but the odds of that happening are not as likely. So no, as long as there are armed "good guys" guns are not unstoppable. One thing that can not be disputed is that mental health can not stop a gun.

0

StephenCCH 1 year, 2 months ago

In Aurora, men with guns arrested the suspect. Columbine is what prompted law enforcement to bring guns in to those situations quicker. Sandy Hook ended when men with guns arrived prompting the shooter to self-terminate.

That's 2 for guns helping, and 1 where lack of guns didn't help.

2

elliottaw 1 year, 2 months ago

Neither of those were stopped by guns, they were stopped when the police arrived, guns were never even drawn by the officers

0

JJE007 1 year, 2 months ago

The mystical, magical presence of the police, who were too late to save MANY people from horror, stopped the violence with guns...that were never drawn.

That's about the silliest thing I've ever heard.

3

BlackVelvet 1 year, 2 months ago

"I get around some, and I cannot remember the last time I was attacked nor when I was within sight or sound of someone who was being attacked."

There are a lot of places (a movie theater in Colorado perhaps) that used to say what you said...but you never know when or where it may happen. Some of us would prefer to be prepared, rather than be a victim.

6

JJE007 1 year, 2 months ago

sunflower-voter? Do you fear the concealed carry license holders? What's your point, exactly?

4

Kate Rogge 1 year, 2 months ago

I'm thrilled that fearful people can carry concealed weapons. What a great idea! I'm going to Checkers after work for milk, butter, and eggs. Why doesn't one of the local CCW folks meet me there in case I need some suppressing fire in the dairy aisle?

1

Jason Johnson 1 year, 2 months ago

I shop there regularly, I'll gladly escort you.

4

JJE007 1 year, 2 months ago

I'm not fearful. I do not carry concealed. I do not feel the need (at this point in time). I DO support their right to carry. I am not afraid of my neighbors who have been trained and certified. Are you?

5

JJE007 1 year, 2 months ago

BTW, sunflower-voter, you never answered the question regarding your fear of, or lack fear of, those schooled and certified to "carry concealed". Got fear?

2

Jason Johnson 1 year, 2 months ago

sunflower-voter, Do you have health insurance? Liability insurance (or even full coverage) on your car? Do you have a fire extinguisher in your house? My gun is another form of insurance. I pray I never have to use it, but I also pray that if I do, my aim is true. :)

7

elliottaw 1 year, 2 months ago

I most also look like a real bad### because I have never felt the need to pull out a gun, and I grew up in the inner city were a stronger argument could be made. But then again maybe its just because I have a backbone and can stand up for myself that I don't feel the need to have my safety blanket with me at all time. Time to man up people and quite living likes scared little girls.

5

Phoghorn 1 year, 2 months ago

Have you tried running a business in the inner city? I am not trying to troll your comments, but having to carry cash in the urban jungle might change your opinion.

I have a backbone too, and I can stand up for myself. That being said, in an active shooter situation, no backbone is going to help you survive. Having a CC permit, and the ability to stop the shooter might save your life, and those of others.

I hope to God that I NEVER have to use a gun in self defense, but I want the freedom to have the ability should the need arise.

4

elliottaw 1 year, 2 months ago

lol yeah because that really happens a lot, and as a vet I know what it is like to be shoot at, I can almost guarantee people that have not been in that type of situation with either wet themselves, freeze in fear or pass out the chances of them actually being able to draw and fire back are slim, and even then the chances of them hitting their intended target are even slimmer.

2

JJE007 1 year, 2 months ago

You sound a bit intoxicated with your own viewpoint. Why are you worrying about people who are legally carrying guns who "(will) either wet themselves, freeze in fear or pass out" when being fired upon?

4

JJE007 1 year, 2 months ago

You're acting a bit ridiculously, now. You can bad mouth CC holders and supporters all you want but all it does is make you seem mean.

3

50YearResident 1 year, 2 months ago

Are you one of the city's homeless, elliottaw?

0

Thinking_Out_Loud 1 year, 2 months ago

Speaking of seeming mean...50Year's comment does the trick.

3

StephenCCH 1 year, 2 months ago

Must be nice to be superman. What say you to the women who choose to arm themselves?

1

BigAl 1 year, 2 months ago

I am not looking for an argument from either side with this question but has there ever been an instance where a cc person stopped or even altered a criminal offense in progress?

1

mom_of_three 1 year, 2 months ago

I read of very few, but my personal favorite is the Hutchinson grandma who cold cocked an intruder/attacker with a frying pan.

1

Phoghorn 1 year, 2 months ago

Statistics will be a bit thin for a few reasons.

  1. CC is a relatively new law, so we don't have decades upon decades of statistics.

  2. Most bad guys deliberately go on shooting sprees in locations where they know that nobody will be carrying concealed (ie, the only no CC theater in Aurora).

  3. In the cases of homeowners defending their homes, or employees/business owners defending a business, the "good gun" rarely needs to be fired - just pulling it out will often cause the bad guy to flee.

0

BigAl 1 year, 2 months ago

Good post Phoghorn, thanks. But I would disagree a little. Just the other day we had several shots fired at McDonald's in West Lawrence. Could have been a dozen concealed carry folks there. I just don't know what this effect will end up being.

1

Phoghorn 1 year, 2 months ago

Thanks for your thoughtful response. I was wondering if there were any CC holders present. We might find out as details become evident, but I have my doubts. I see more CC freedoms as being a good thing, as it will allow people to legally be able to defend themselves against criminals (the criminals that pose a threat to life, that is). I figure that the thugs will be carrying guns regardless of what the law says.

1

1 year, 2 months ago

CCW holders don't go through the process to protect others. They obtain the permit to protect themselves and their families.

1

jafs 1 year, 2 months ago

Well, that sentiment is clearly not shared by all pro cc folks, many of whom extol the virtues of having them at a shooting by saying they'd save a lot of lives.

In fact, that's one of the big justifications for having cc and armed citizens that's used a lot.

If they're really just in it for themselves, that argument falls down a bit.

0

50YearResident 1 year, 2 months ago

You won't see a CC holder trying to stop a drug deal. CC holders are not policemen and they normally don't get involved unless they are threatened and need to respond for their own protection or their loved ones protection. So far there has been very few of those kinds of incidents in Lawrence.

3

colicole81 1 year, 2 months ago

Yes, examples can be found if you google conceal and carry stops crime.

2

elliottaw 1 year, 2 months ago

you can google aliens invade LA and get some sites too, doesn't make them true

1

Jason Johnson 1 year, 2 months ago

Why do you fear lawful gun users so much, Elliot?

1

elliottaw 1 year, 2 months ago

Most are uneducated and terrible undertrained going thru a weekend course in no way prepares you to carry a gun

0

JJE007 1 year, 2 months ago

Source?

You're sounding a mite "terrible undertrained" and underknowledgeatedlike, in your disruptive parlance.

I'm beginning to wonder if elliottaw is one person or a multitude of disingenous trolls.

1

Jim Phillips 1 year, 2 months ago

Doesn't mean they aren't either.

0

1 year, 2 months ago

BigAl. Yes CC holders and gun owners have stopped many crimes. Problem is the press doesn't like to report on them.

1

KevinBacon 1 year, 2 months ago

Absolutely. This forum is devoted solely to documenting incidents: http://www.reddit.com/r/dgu

1

Topple 1 year, 2 months ago

I won't feel safe until everyone drives a tank.

1

Phoghorn 1 year, 2 months ago

The car I drove in High School would probably count.

0

FlintlockRifle 1 year, 2 months ago

Yes, please join the NRA and read the Armed Citizen column each month, usually not in Lawrence thank God ,but the crime cities in this great country

1

BlackVelvet 1 year, 2 months ago

Some on here who routinely preach tolerance, but what they really mean is ..."as long as you agree with MY point of view". That's the only time they seem to be tolerant. Making fun of and mocking those who agree with Concealed Carry is not productive. Disagree with it if you wish. But enough of the name calling and junior high school behavior. Please.

4

Joe Hyde 1 year, 2 months ago

You'd think that anyone who passes the background check required to obtain a concealed carry permit is also a polite person, the type who respects the rights and wishes of property owners who prefer their property kept free of guns and knives.

This is basically what counties and cities are telling the Kansas legislature and CC permit holders: "We don't want ANYONE's guns and knives brought onto our county and municipal owned properties unless it's done by law enforcement people. Our employees feel more secure when firearms and other dangerous weapons are not getting carried into the public workplace. Permit holders are always welcome to come in; just don't bring in your weapons, please."

Now that's a pretty simple request; nothing hard to figure out.

For the state of Kansas to compel municipalities and county governments to allow firearms and knives on their property over the personal and official objections of staff and elected local representatives, such insistence by the state is both rude and arrogant. And I might add that CC permit holders who aggressively work to overwhelm this sensible objection by public servants are doing more harm than good in terms of furthering the acceptance of concealed carry.

Indeed, their insistence on bringing concealed weapons into buildings despite signs saying "No Weapons", and doing that simply because they hold a CC permit, is tantamount to hunters deliberately ignoring "No Hunting" signs posted by farmers and committing illegal trespass and poaching game animals simply because they're carrying a shotgun and have a valid Kansas hunting license.

5

50YearResident 1 year, 2 months ago

Joe, you are assuming things that are not going to happen. CC holders are not going to rush the courthouse or city hall carrying their concealed guns. It isn't going to happen, with or without the signs. Just relax and let the law go into effect. These people that you are now afraid of are your friends, neighbors, doctors, lawyers and business associates. Some CC holders are even former policemen and sheriff's deputies. Are you really afraid they are now going to hurt you because a sign has been removed?

3

1 year, 2 months ago

"Indeed, their insistence on bringing concealed weapons into buildings despite signs saying "No Weapons", and doing that simply because they hold a CC permit"

Wrong, this is not what they are doing. I as a CCW holder observe all posted locations and do not bring my gun into that establishment.

The law prohibits posting the sign if there is no security so there is no sign to ignore. Provide security and post the sign and I will observe it.

3

Joe Hyde 1 year, 2 months ago

Can't post a No Weapons sign unless security checkpoints are in place to enforce it? Listen to how ignorant that argument sounds, Mr. Mertz.

By that logic, the Kansas farmer who fails to outfit his land with an expensive combination of No Hunting signs, security cameras and 24/7 armed guards has no choice but to let all armed hunters enter onto his property anytime they wish.

If you respect the county and city public servants who work for you, a No Weapons sign posted at their buildings should be enough to motivate you to respect the owner's wishes. What on earth makes you think the general public should pay multi-thousands for security guards just because you can't take no for an answer?

1

50YearResident 1 year, 2 months ago

Joe, its been said many times on these forums that security systems are not necessary because of this change in laws. The security systems are only necessary if you don't want to take the sign down. The reason is because the building owners will now be responsible for any injuries to people within the building if there ever are any. Take the sign down and the liability changes. No security or metal detectors are required when the sign is removed. Nobody is going to poach deer in the lobby.

3

JJE007 1 year, 2 months ago

"By that logic, the Kansas farmer who fails to outfit his land with an expensive combination of No Hunting signs, security cameras and 24/7 armed guards has no choice but to let all armed hunters enter onto his property anytime they wish."

Actually, all a Kansas farmer has to do is paint their fence posts with a bit of purple. That means that nobody can legally hunt their property without written permission, and conservation officers are free to enter their property to check hunters for that permission. It's the law. Of course, there are a few people out there who are fine with breaking the law.

2

StephenCCH 1 year, 2 months ago

The 'Kansas farmer' isn't operating a public office where all citizens have legitimate business.

I absolutely respect the rights of property owners; those public facilities are owned by the people.

2

1 year, 2 months ago

So if I as part of the people own it then I have a right to carry a gun into my building.

2

1 year, 2 months ago

Joe it isn't my argument it is the law. Post a sign and I will respect it.

Your analogy makes no sense as you are mixing private and public property and making up a law that doesn't exist and never will.

Sour grapes is what I get from your post. The will of the people prevailed and you don't like it.

Show a little respect for the law.

2

1 year, 2 months ago

Past tense of Joe Hyde = Joe Hid? LOL

0

50YearResident 1 year, 2 months ago

Joe, just a reminder for you. CC holders have been carrying guns in Lawrence for five years now. If they were inclined to shoot at you they could have done it before you walked into a posted building or right after you walked out of a posted building. If this hasn't happened yet, then you must be safe to go inside the building after the sign is removed. Take some time and think about what I just said and see if you can grasp what if anything will change by this law going into effect.

3

Commenting has been disabled for this item.