KS preemption bill, newspaper story comments
For a little background:
Cities in Kansas found loopholes that would allow them to prohibit carry in parks and other places.
House bill 2528 passed by a significant majority in the house and senate, it will prohibit cities from restricting concealed carry (they still have control of open carry). The opposition to this bill claims that it infringes on "cities' rights" (just like banning Army recruiters from is about the don't ask don't tell policy).
Here's the story from a newspaper in Kansas's most liberal city: http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2007/ap...ks/?city_local
I posted there (as StephenCCH) mostly in response to previous comments. Here are some of my favorite highlights:
In response to "The founders might have had an entirely different viewpoint if they could have foreseen a time with weapons that could mow down 50 people or more in a heartbeat."
Responding to claims that CC couldn't possibly reduce crime
There were plenty of high casualty producing weapons prior to the revolution. Chemical weapons were used by the early Romans.
Tyrants almost always forbid weapons to their subjects, whether it be firearms, bows, swords or spears. The founders understood that an armed population is able to resist tyranny (as did the tyrants).
A heart will normally beat 70 times per minute. So an average heartbeat is less than 1 second. Less still because in situations where one might shoot others heart rates tend to rise.
A typical fully automatic firearm (highly restricted, not the semi-autos commonly available) will fire at a rate of 800 rounds per minute. My calculations show that to approximately 15.555 rounds per heartbeat. Fully automatic fire also tends to be less accurate so that doesn't equal 15 hits. My semi-automatic weapons have considerably lower practical rates of fire. The only way I can see hitting 50 people or more in a heartbeat is if they are standing in a straight line and fired upon with a high velocity rifle and a non-deforming munition (not a likely scenario IMO).
The Columbine high school shooting resulted in 12 deaths in a period of about an hour (roughly .0028 deaths per heartbeat)
The machine gun invented in 1718; da Vinci predicted the tank and helicopter; and Ben Franklin couldn't foresee more potent individual arms?
They asked for an example why I would need a gun at a kids ball game, I gave them 2. One a robbery, and 2 an angry baseball team picking a fight. Theses were compared to needing a bazooka in case of Iranian tank attacks or UFO sightings and called "laughable", and of course, police recommend we comply with robbers.
SB 418 is the "personal and family protection act". It's not the "general public protection act", it's not the "crime reduction act". Persons licensed to carry concealed do so for the purpose of protecting themselves and their family, not to be vigilante crime fighters.
Kansas has a population of about 2 million adults (2005 census), 5,122 (about .0025%) of those have CCH permits (as of 28 Feb). Violent crimes are not frequent; Many licensed persons will never use a gun in self defense. I think it's unlikely that concealed carry can be related to any crime trends.
Having a gun is not about making the community safer, it's about making me safer. It's not a substitute for or augment to law enforcement. In order for it to make a difference, we would need 1-2 million more Kansans licensed.
Even though it's doesn't really effect the community at large, the right to carry has a profound effect on those who have needed it.
I don't see how assaults, and robberies are "laughable".
"Comply with any robbery", this assumes mister bad guy will comply with the "etiquette" of not killing me if he gets my money. Somehow I don't trust a man who has threatened to kill me to not do so after I've given him money. A witness makes conviction a lot easier so why would a career criminal take that risk?
If instead of my money he wants to kill me? rape my sister? kidnap my child? Am I still to comply then?
Yes I can make up scenarios, but these 2 (or similar events) actually happen on a daily basis. I've never heard of Iranian tanks or UFOs in Kansas from credible sources, nor would they be clearly defined threats justifying deadly force. Since mine is a concealed carry handgun license, bazookas aren't allowed.
And my favorite, people who carry at ball games are unmanly wimps who are just compensating for something
I am compensating for something. I'm compensating for my lack of ability to stop bullets and knives with my superman steel flesh and jedi mind powers. I'm compensating for my malfunctioning crystal ball that does not accurately predict when and where I might be assaulted. The best way I know to stop a deadly assault is with deadly force.
I guess I'm a wimp. I don't go around picking fights, I avoid fights when I can, and I don't have enough confidence in my ninja training to kill a man at 10 paces with my bare hands. Some licensed women may not be offended by your claim that they lack manhood.