Court of Appeals ruling on concealed carry

[JAK]

The issue is bigger then transportation of firearms.  What about when your wife or you decides to buy a new kitchen knife which is larger then 3.5 inches?   How are you going to get it home.

John K

[unfy]

The issue is bigger then transportation of firearms.  What about when your wife or you decides to buy a new kitchen knife which is larger then 3.5 inches?   How are you going to get it home.

John K

^ This.

So much this.

Can't "this" hard enough.

[Mntnman]

The issue is bigger then transportation of firearms.  What about when your wife or you decides to buy a new kitchen knife which is larger then 3.5 inches?   How are you going to get it home.

John K

Hammer, ax, pipe wrench, bottle of wine, tee ball bat, on and on and on.....

[unfy]

The issue is bigger then transportation of firearms.  What about when your wife or you decides to buy a new kitchen knife which is larger then 3.5 inches?   How are you going to get it home.

John K

My Uncle, in Maryland adds:

You'll not believe that I tried to buy my wife a standard 13" Sabatier chef's knife and was told I couldn't take it home with me from the shop selling it. They sent it to me via UPS or FedEx or some such, without charge because of the silly laws. Never let a lawyer or a politician tell you how to throw out your bathwater, you'll lose your youngest children!

[Dan W]

   I'd think even Ernie Chambers would be on board with making this more clear (since a few of his constituents get convicted of this now and again).

EC himself was charged with CCW but I am unsure if he  was convicted

[Mntnman]

I have only been assaulted with one deadly weapon, a beer bottle.  I nearly lost an eye. I had never seen the assailant before (or since) and he never said a word to me. Simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. I know a guy that the same thing happened to and he did lose an eye.

Point is, don't haul beer bottles home, 

[unfy]

Think this was mentioned earlier, but if not:

I have kids in the car. I don't want the gun out in the open while I'm focusing on traffic.

[GreyGeek]

The word "surreal" really applies in this case.   I believe those Justices knew what they were doing and they knew why they were doing it ...   throwing another hurdle in front of the 2A.

[Kendahl]

EC himself was charged with CCW but I am unsure if he  was convicted

If it happened while the legislature was in session, he was immune due to his status as a state senator. He once beat a speeding ticket on those grounds. It's my understanding that immunity was granted to prevent harassment of state senators by political opponents.

[Dan W]

If it happened while the legislature was in session, he was immune due to his status as a state senator. He once beat a speeding ticket on those grounds. It's my understanding that immunity was granted to prevent harassment of state senators by political opponents.

Happened in June 1969  (note the image at the link)

http://journalstar.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/chambers-to-begin-final-year-of-legislative-career/article_2b7e2cd3-7ee1-52d3-aba7-6b1cd501f9b0.html

[m morton]

Happened in June 1969  (note the image at the link)

http://journalstar.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/chambers-to-begin-final-year-of-legislative-career/article_2b7e2cd3-7ee1-52d3-aba7-6b1cd501f9b0.html

i love this line "He’s known as the single most powerful senator in the Legislature, a power some say he abuses from time to time." and he is still doing the same ****

[depserv]

I think it should be pointed out that according to FBI data more people are killed with so-called personal weapons, which means hands, feet, teeth, etc. than by all rifles combined.  And just one type of rifle is supposedly so dangerous that gun control crusaders have been trying to outlaw it for decades.  So hands and feet must be pretty dangerous.

That means that if it's illegal to have a rifle within reach (unless you have purchased a permission slip to exercise your constitutional right to bear arms), it must also be illegal for your hands and feet to be in reach of your hands.  This might create a problem with compliance.  And if you are wearing gloves, are your hands concealed weapons (even though they might be printing)?

Regarding Ernie Chambers, I'd like to point out again that he is only a powerful senator because the RINO majority gives him power.  If I read the information on Ballotpedia right, our legislature contains 12 Democrats, 35 Republicans, 1 Independent, and 1 Libertarian (who I assume would be pro-freedom).  With that makeup, or anything close to that makeup, there is no reason for Nebraska to have gun laws as restrictive as we have, and no reason Ernie Chambers should be anything but a minor annoyance.  Unless we are electing RINOs instead of real Republicans.

[Mali]

Regarding Ernie Chambers, I'd like to point out again that he is only a powerful senator because the RINO majority gives him power.  If I read the information on Ballotpedia right, our legislature contains 12 Democrats, 35 Republicans, 1 Independent, and 1 Libertarian (who I assume would be pro-freedom).  With that makeup, or anything close to that makeup, there is no reason for Nebraska to have gun laws as restrictive as we have, and no reason Ernie Chambers should be anything but a minor annoyance.  Unless we are electing RINOs instead of real Republicans.

I agree with what you are saying, but keep in mind that Chambers is a bully and a big reason he gets away with his antics is that others are afraid to stand up to him and be subjected to the ridicule and obstructionism he is focusing on others. If they were to all realize what you are saying and stand up to him as a group he would become far more ineffectual. But that has, unfortunately, a slim chance of happening because he has created a Pavlovian type response in the experienced Senators who want to maintain the dignity of the Unicameral instead of represent their constituents.

[depserv]

I agree with what you are saying, but keep in mind that Chambers is a bully and a big reason he gets away with his antics is that others are afraid to stand up to him and be subjected to the ridicule and obstructionism he is focusing on others. If they were to all realize what you are saying and stand up to him as a group he would become far more ineffectual. But that has, unfortunately, a slim chance of happening because he has created a Pavlovian type response in the experienced Senators who want to maintain the dignity of the Unicameral instead of represent their constituents.

I agree with what you are saying my friend, but would say it more succinctly with these words: the Nebraska Republican Party has no cajones.  They should be reminded of this, and reminded that if they do not have what it takes to do their duty, they should step down and let someone willing to stand up to Chambers take their place.  With the numbers so much in their favor, the situation we have is simply not acceptable, and is a black mark on the state Republican Party.