Author Topic: Omaha City Council ALERT! (CCW Related) (Read 4833 times)

FarmerRick · « **on:** November 02, 2009, 08:28:40 AM »

This is on the agenda for tomorrows Omaha City Council meeting.
http://www.cityofomaha.org/cityclerk/images/stories/agenda/a09-11-03.pdf

50.
Res. that at the request of the Administration, the legislative package of the City of Omaha for the Second Session of the One-Hundred and First Legislature of the State of Nebraska shall include a proposal to make a first offense violation of the concealed carry law a felony ? see attached. ((PUBLIC HEARING TODAY ? CAN BE ADOPTED TODAY))

Text of proposal of law change: http://www.cityofomaha.org/cityclerk/images/stories/agenda/ID%2009_11_03/City%20Council/1262.pdf

And so it begins.... :angry9:

Mike M. · « **Reply #1 on:** November 02, 2009, 06:17:04 PM »

Maybe I missed something here. But isnt this just a proposal that could or will be sent to Lincoln for debate there? If so its time once again to contact our reps down there and also the ones in Omaha.

FarmerRick · « **Reply #2 on:** November 02, 2009, 06:22:48 PM »

Quote from: mtncrash1 on November 02, 2009, 06:17:04 PM

Maybe I missed something here. But isnt this just a proposal that could or will be sent to Lincoln for debate there? If so its time once again to contact our reps down there and also the ones in Omaha.

Yes.
I talked to Huskergun a bit ago, he and I both think that the Mayors Against Illegal Guns could be behind the idea as it is recommended by the "administration"(Mayor's office).

RLMoeller · « **Reply #3 on:** November 02, 2009, 06:35:49 PM »

But remember Mayor Suttle says he supports your 2nd Amendment rights. Right? uh . . . right.

I did read this as coming from the Mayor's office, and I too believe that MAIG is behind it. Too bad we have a puppet as Mayor.

-Rod

WarHorse1961 · « **Reply #4 on:** November 02, 2009, 07:29:15 PM »

Well, it's not the most eloquent, but I've already contact my city councilman.

Quote

Mr. Gernandt,

I think this resolution is horrible and request you vote against it.

There are some crimes that should be considered a felony for a 1st offense. This is not one of them. Doing nothing other than carrying a concealed weapon should not even be a crime, never mind a felony.

I'm sure you're aware that a knife with a blade longer that 3.5 inches is considered a weapon. And, that every person in a vehicle could be charged with a crime if a weapon is found in the vehicle.

Now, wouldn't you hate to lose all your rights because you went hunting with a buddy and he had a 3.6 inch skinning knife in his glovebox?

I've heard it before, and I'm sure I'll hear it again, that this resolution isn't for that situation. It's for all the gun violence that's occurring. If that's the case, then submit a resolution that targets (no pun intended) the gun violence. I'm sure you've heard the phrase "Unintended Consequences".

I'm sure this resolution is being submitted to combat the ever increasing violence that's occurring in Omaha. But, honestly, that's an Omaha problem, not a Nebraska problem. I don't think the State should really concern itself with this.

I have no faith in Mayor Fahey and his ability to fix this issue. You, on the other hand, are a retired law enforcement officer. I'm sure you can come up with better ideas than the administration without infringing on the rights of law abiding citizens.

Just as an aside, does it seem to you like it's becoming more and more difficult to be a "law abiding" citizen when there are laws being put on the books every single day?

Anyway, I just wanted to give you my 2 cents and recommend that you vote against this resolution.

Thanks,

xxxxxx

JebM · « **Reply #5 on:** November 02, 2009, 07:54:03 PM »

Good letter Warhorse! Only problem I have with it is the Suttle is the mayor not Fahey.

WarHorse1961 · « **Reply #6 on:** November 02, 2009, 08:34:04 PM »

Doh! I'm an idiot.

Hopefully he'll "overlook" that.

fathertime · « **Reply #7 on:** November 03, 2009, 04:08:37 PM »

So what was the outcome of the council meeting? I did not see anything on the news or the councils website.
Is there a local reporter who is pro-gun who should know about this?

fathertime · « **Reply #8 on:** November 03, 2009, 04:26:00 PM »

Just looking at the laws and its not just a knife over 3.5 inches.

28-1202. Carrying concealed weapon; penalty; affirmative defense.

(1)(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, any person who carries a weapon or weapons concealed on or about his or her person, such as a handgun, a knife, brass or iron knuckles, or any other deadly weapon, commits the offense of carrying a concealed weapon.

(b) It is an affirmative defense that the defendant was engaged in any lawful business, calling, or employment at the time he or she was carrying any weapon or weapons and the circumstances in which such person was placed at the time were such as to justify a prudent person in carrying the weapon or weapons for the defense of his or her person, property, or family.

(2) This section does not apply to a person who is the holder of a valid permit issued under the Concealed Handgun Permit Act if the concealed weapon the defendant is carrying is a handgun.

(3) Carrying a concealed weapon is a Class I misdemeanor.

(4) In the case of a second or subsequent conviction under this section, carrying a concealed weapon is a Class IV felony.

fathertime · « **Reply #9 on:** November 03, 2009, 04:37:23 PM »

I meant to add this definition -

28-1201. Terms, defined.

(5) Knife means any dagger, dirk, knife, or stiletto with a blade over three and one-half inches in length or any other dangerous instrument capable of inflicting cutting, stabbing, or tearing wounds

So most anything could be considered a knife. It a huge stretch but, if I didn't trim my nails for week and kept my hands in my coat pockets, I would be carrying a concealed weapon.

rluening · « **Reply #10 on:** November 06, 2009, 03:44:23 PM »

Apparently it was amended - the new motion makes little sense in light of LB430...

I'm at work and busy. Maybe it will make more sense when I get a change to read it later.

The amendment:
http://www.cityofomaha.org/cityclerk/images/stories/journal/ID%2009_11_03/City%20Council/1262a.pdf

/rl

AAllen · « **Reply #11 on:** November 06, 2009, 04:15:07 PM »

Well at least that way they are directing it toward the criminals carrying with out a permit, rather than law abiding folks.

rluening · « **Reply #12 on:** November 06, 2009, 04:31:14 PM »

Maybe, but the state CCW law only applies to permit holder who can no longer be charged under local CCW laws.

I think they just wanted to make themselves feel good....

/rl

Chris Z · « **Reply #13 on:** November 06, 2009, 05:19:01 PM »

Basically the city council wants the legislature to make the offense of carrying a concealed weapons FIRST OFFENSE a FELONY (currently a misdemeanor).

This issue has nothing to do with a law abiding concealed handgun permit holder.

However if legislation such as this does happen, which it will.... We will need to watch closely how it is worded.

Randy · « **Reply #14 on:** November 06, 2009, 06:19:43 PM »

So this proposed law would make it very easy to be charged with a Felony just because of a minor infraction of the Nebraska Handgun Permit Act?

What a bunch of Bureaucracy Bull.

Members we need to monitor this one closely and be prepared to act accordingly by contacting all representatives involved..

Chris Z · « **Reply #15 on:** November 06, 2009, 06:24:24 PM »

No a minor infraction of the concealed handgun permit, would get you charged with that offense.

If you were carrying without a permit illegally, this proposal would mean you would be charged with a felony rather than a misdemeanor

Randy · « **Reply #16 on:** November 06, 2009, 06:27:11 PM »

Thank you for the clarification.

fathertime · « **Reply #17 on:** November 09, 2009, 10:04:08 AM »

Reading the City Council minutes it looks like Mr. Gernandt was the sole vote against the proposal.

CCID # 1262 ? Motion by Jerram that the Resolution be placed on file
Seconded by Gray
ROLL CALL:
Yeas: Festersen, Gray, Jerram, Stothert, Thompson
Nay: Mr. President
Absent: Sigerson
Motion Carried 5-1

huskergun · « **Reply #18 on:** November 09, 2009, 07:57:01 PM »

We need to watch this and make sure the bill is worded the right way.

FarmerRick · « **Reply #19 on:** November 09, 2009, 07:59:17 PM »

Quote from: huskergun on November 09, 2009, 07:57:01 PM

We need to watch this and make sure the bill is worded the right way.

Or, make sure it does not get out of committee...or even introduced.