General Categories > Laws and Legislation

LB 430 Amend the Concealed Handgun Permit Act and state the power of cities a

<< < (2/5) > >>

Coyote Dan:
Glad to offer a little bit of help at the grassroots level.  You guys are always so insightful and I appreciate your forums...

ranger04:
I called Chritensen's office at around 5:30PM expecting to get a machine to voice my support for this bill. Instead, I spoke with an Aide, that went above and beyond the call of duty. We went through the bill and I shared with him my concern over the easy way to lose a our rights by violating a city ordinace. Columbus is not posted and the various other cities that you may pass through  on a trip is utterly confusing. We talked about his bill till past 6:00PM.

 [b]I would like to see 5 or 6 hundred gun owners on the capitol steps in support of this bill and to protest the other bills that are detrimental to our rights! What do you say? [/b]

JimP:
....Don't like:

 "(c) A place of worship may authorize its security
22 personnel to carry concealed handguns on its property so long
23 as each member of the security personnel, as authorized, is in
24 compliance with the Concealed Handgun Permit Act and possesses a
25 permit to carry a concealed handgun issued pursuant to the act and,
-6-
LB 430 LB 430
if the property is leased, the carrying of 1 concealed handguns on
2 the property does not violate the terms of any real property lease
3 agreement between the place of worship and the lessor."

..... but the rest of it it is GREAT!

..... just why is it the Powers That Be in Kansas and South Dakota (and soon Colorado!) trust ME, a Nebraskan, to come to the church of my choice in their states with a pistol in my pants, but in Nebraska, I have to be part of the Old Boy Network...... sort of an official/unofficial Only Ones Club?

JimP:
I sent this:Kudos on the bill, sir!

I do have one problem with it:  Why must I be a designated security person to Carry in church?  A quick Google search for "church shooting" showed me that of the first 4 incidents listed, the nut doing the shooting was a disgruntled member of the congregation: he's going to know who those "designated security personnel" are, and just shoot them first.  I don't know about you, but sitting in the pew with a bulls eye on the back of my head is not real appealing to me.  Not to mention the fact that I am quite sure several members of my church would be appalled if they knew I even had a permit, let alone wanted to Carry in Church.  The biggest advantage of Concealed Carry is that NOBODY KNOWS  WHO IS CARRYING.

Why is it that Kansas, South Dakota, and Colorado (once the reciprocity portion of this passes) have no problem with me going to any church I want to with concealed handgun, but Nebraska does?  The permit holders are not the problem: A nut who would shoot up a church is not going to bother getting a permit, and if he did have a permit, not being one of the  "designated security personnel" will not deter him in the least: they are already intent on MURDER.  They are not going to be paying attention to ANY laws, other than the laws of physics.

Keep up the good work!

tonopah:
I contacted my State Senator Tom Hansens office today and asked him to support this. I will talk to as many as I can today and have them call his office also.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page