The current Kansas state constitution's second-amendment analogue states "The people have the right to bear arms for their defense and security".
From http://www.davekopel.com/2A/LawRev/W...each.htm#_edn3 : "The Kansas approach to interpreting the Second Amendment was created in dicta from a 1905 Kansas Supreme Court decision, City of Salina v. Blaksley, interpreting the state constitution.  The case arose out of enforcement of an ordinance against carrying concealed weapons. The government, on appeal, simply urged that the ordinance was a reasonable regulation of the right to arms, but the Kansas Supreme Court went much further, and declared that the right to arms protected the state government, not the individual citizen, thereby adopting a "collective rights" theory, meaning the state was not bound to respect it."
Kansas Senate Resolution 1611 has passed and will place a question on the 2010 state ballot for a popular vote. Kansans will vote on whether to replace the current language with "a person has the right to keep and bear arms for the defense of self, family, home and state, for lawful hunting and recreational use, and for any other lawful purpose".
Several states (including CO) have similar text, but with weaseling clauses that state, basically, "except for concealed carry". If KSR 1611 passes, Kansas could become like Vermont regarding the right to carry. Wow!