NFOA MEMBERS FORUM
General Categories => Laws and Legislation => Topic started by: Aldo on January 27, 2009, 10:27:20 PM
-
Folks, here is a direct request from Senator Christensen to voice support for LB430 to all members of the Judiciary Committee to get it out of Committee and onto the Senate Floor for debate/vote...otherwise it is dead in the water without getting out of Committee:
My e-mail:
- Dear Senator Christensen,
I want to thank you for your introduction of LB430. My prayers are that the bill will make it out of the Judiciary Committee to have a full consideration from the other Senators.
If there is anything that I or my peers and friends can do to help support LB 430 so that it can proceed from the Judiciary Committee, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Thank you again.
Regards,
XXXXXXXXXX
His response:
- Dear XXXXXXXX,
Thank you for your support and I would encourage you to voice your support to the remaining committee members to hear the bill and vote it out of committee and onto the floor for debate.
Sincerely,
Senator Mark R. Christensen
I know that some of us have written to the Senators on the Judiciary Committee, and some of us have written to Senators not on the Judiciary Committee. At this point, Senator Christensen is asking for the Senators on the Judiciary Committee to HEAR from pro-LB430 folks!!!!
Senators on the Judiciary Committee are the following:
Ashford (chair)...............................[bashford@leg.ne.gov]
Lathrop (vice-chair)........................[slathrop@leg.ne.gov]
Christensen (author of LB430)...........[mchristensen@leg.ne.gov]
Coash...........................................[ccoash@leg.ne.gov]
Council..........................................[bcouncil@leg.ne.gov]
Lautenbaugh..................................[slautenbaugh@leg.ne.gov]
McGill............................................[amcgill@leg.ne.gov]
Rogert..........................................[krogert@leg.ne.gov]
Edited by Randy LB430 not scheduled for 4.22.09
-
Hammer Time
-
Contacted. Took a whole 10 minutes. :o
This is the first step folks. It MUST make it out of committee before it even has a chance to pass.
I've done my part, how about you?
-
Done.
I did my part. Thanks Aldo for posting this.
-
Mine are done! They've been sent.
-
Be prepared to send mail more than once, and again right before the hearing takes place.
Back up your words with a written letter for the file if you have the time
-
I'm waiting upon a return response from Senator Christensen re the date/time of the Judiciary Committee's hearing of LB430....and will keep ya'll posted.
In the meantime, the NE legislature website posts each committee's agendas and upcoming LB hearings. So far, through January 30, the Judiciary Committee does not have LB430 listed yet.
Soooooo, there's still time for contacting that committee's senators. I concur with the others who have advocated both e-mail and written snail mail.
Important to contact all committee members; jury still out on Rogert, Coash, McGill, and Lathrop. Getting LB430 out of committee and onto the floor of the whole senate could very well hinge on how those four vote in committee...since Ashford and Council will go anti- and Cristensen and Lautenburgh will go pro-. Probably wouldn't hurt to contact any other non-committee senators who are definitely pro-gun so that maybe they can nudge the Judiciary Committee senators to get the debate out onto the floor so that ALL of the state's senators can speak for the people.
-
I called all of the judiciary Senators offices this morning. Positive feedback from Senator Lautenbaughs office. His assistant said the Senator fully supported LB430. All the rest said they would pass my request along.
-
I have finally heard back from my district's senator (McGill) who sits on the Judiciary Committee.
My e-mail to her:
- Senator McGill,
Thanks for taking the time to respond to my earlier e-mail.
Now that Senator Christiansen has introduced LB430, and you are on the Judiciary Committee, what is your opinion about the proposed legislation? Have you been hearing from others in District 26 about this issue?
Also, would you keep me abreast of when the public hearing is scheduled?
Regards,
XXXXXXXXXXXX
Her response today to me:
- I will have my staff make a note of your request and inform you when the hearing has been set. You can always check out the upcoming agenda?s on the Nebraskalegislature.gov as the hearings are set one week in advance.
I will be honest with you that I am not generally in favor of conceal-carry, but I am not adamantly opposed either. I certainly think that anyone with a legal permit should be allowed to drive through the cities that do not allow conceal-carry without having to jump through extra hoops like locking their guns in their trunk. I look forward to the public hearing and listening to both sides of this issue.
Amanda McGill
District 26
402-471-2610
So, I am still not sure how to completely interpret her position. But it seems that at least she will listen and perhaps even consider allowing LB430 to get out of committee to the larger audience of the senate floor. ???
-
In addition to emailing the members of the Judiciary Committee, we should also email the members of the rules committee. Every session in Illinois, a Concealed Carry bill is introduced. It makes it to it's 3rd reading before the legislature then gets shuffled to the rules comittee where it dies. I would hate to see that happen here.
-
In addition to emailing the members of the Judiciary Committee, we should also email the members of the rules committee. Every session in Illinois, a Concealed Carry bill is introduced. It makes it to it's 3rd reading before the legislature then gets shuffled to the rules comittee where it dies. I would hate to see that happen here.
It's my understanding that here in NE, once the reading is approved by the Judiciary Committee, then it gets out to the overall senate floor. My only experience was years ago with a health bill, and that was to be the scenario. Also, my communication from Senator Christensen on the Judiciary Committee was that approval would get the bill out there. But, hey, what do I know? I'm certainly not an attorney or expert on this unicameral stuff.
-
Well, Senator Tom White sent a response:
- Dear YYYYYYYY,
Thank you for contacting me regarding preemption legislation . I own three guns and am a supporter of the 2nd Amendment. In general, I support eliminating provisions that create confusing patchworks of laws.
This appears to be the case with current laws regarding concealed carry of firearms.
I do not serve on the Judiciary Committee, which has jurisdiction over LB 430, the bill concerning this issue. However, I will monitor this bill closely and look forward to reading the version that advances from committee.
Thank you again for your message, and please don't hesitate to contact me again if I can be of assistance.
Best,
Tom
I'd like to believe that he is sincere in making public his position on LB430.
-
#1). There is a magazine put out by the legislature called Unicameral Update. It is free for the asking. Clerk of Legislature's office. Terribly brief and mailed 2nd class so it usually arrives a day or two AFTER the hearings have been held. Watching the newspapers is slightly more effective. And if you are on good terms with a senator, contributed to the campaign and that can be time more than money, they will keep you posted, especially if you represent a "group..." (or claim to). Now if the group has "hammerred someone" on something in the past, even better. Where's the NRA? Good question?
#2). "...hammer? time..." Tack hammer maybe... We need to build a sledge hammer.
#3). This is when letters to the editor need to flow. In a small state like ours a letter found by a staffer and mentioned to a senator is counted as representing maybe 100 votes, maybe 150.
-
Have a connection with one of Ashford's annual fundraiser sponsor's a money man in Omaha.
His brothers is a good friend of mine and PRO Firearms.
This Omaha person also enjoys Hunting and Shooting, hopefully no Elmer Fudd.
Was told that he carries.
Believe that I will make a phone call and see if he will talk to his brother about LB 430.
Sure can not hurt.
-
Believe that I will make a phone call and see if he will talk to his brother about LB 430.
Sure can not hurt.
Thanks, Hatchet1961. Keep us posted on what you find out.
-
Just checked the upcoming agenda of the legislature's Judiciary Committee, and so far LB430 is not slated through Friday, February 27.
We still have March, April, and May...and 1st week of June before this legislative session ends. If you haven't written yet to the Senators on the Judiciary Committee, there's still time to do so. It will help keep the issue on the stove, so to speak.
However, slated for Friday, February 20th are the following legislative bills (first two appear related to "firearms", don't know about the third):
- Judiciary
Room 1113 - 1:30 p.m.
LB35 Ashford: Adopt the Violence Prevention Act, prohibit certain gang activity, and change certain
firearm provisions
LB63 Friend: Change provisions relating to assault, firearms, graffiti, gang affiliation, juveniles, and
jailhouse informers
LB508: Pirsch Prohibit certain gang-related initiations
-
Thanks aldo... we have updated the front page legislative updates as well as the forum legislative updates pages with this info already.
-
Thanks aldo... we have updated the front page legislative updates as well as the forum legislative updates pages with this info already.
Woops! Sorry, Jesse T. My bad. I always go straight to the forums. Probably doesn't hurt to double-inform folks. Again, I apologize for the duplication.
-
No problem aldo thats what its here for. Just wanted to let you know we are on top of things too :)
-
;D :D ;D IT'S GONNA HAPPEN ;D :D ;D
A poster on my LB430 thread on ccwne forum received notice back from Sen Ashford that LB430 is slated for hearing at the Judiciary Committee on March 26.
NFOA BOARD: Do y'all have a plan of who all is going and who will say what, etc?
MEMBERS: If ya haven't written those committee folks yet, soon would be a good time to do so.
This is cool! It will finally make the table for discussion. 8)
-
I will take off work to be there but probably not speak. I am pretty sure some other NFOA members and board members may do the same...
-
I note as of this date, there is nothing scheduled: http://www.nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=6960
Senator Ashford is holding a public meeting, at 6:30 pm on February 19, 2009, at the Westside Community Schools Adminstration Building, 909 S 76th St Omaha, NE 68114 on "issues that concern you and your family" I plan to speak in person regarding LB430.
Edited to correct link to LB430...
-
I will plan to attend this hearing on the 26th of March. I will take another member of my gun club that is a CCW holder also. Maybe we can all do lunch or have a meeting befoore the hearing?
-
My intention is to also go and attend.
Hey, if there's a get together lunch somewhere, keep me posted!! Love food. :P
-
I will take off work to be there but probably not speak. I am pretty sure some other NFOA members and board members may do the same...
Ditto here. I'm a horrible public speaker, but I'll be there too.
Oh, and lunch sounds good too.
-
I plan to be there.
Hopefully Chris will be in town for this as he is our designated official voice of NFOA on all matters, plus he's just plain good. We will no doubt have something prepared I am sure regardless.
If any of you plan to speak, please feel free to ask for assistance in critiquing of your presentation. We all benefit from having others help us with our speeches.
It would even be a good idea to get together ahead of time with others in your area to personally give your presentations to each other. It will help you practice reading it, and give others a chance to make suggestions. Additionally, coordinating presentations ahead of time is a great benefit.
Maybe can can get a lunch organized for after the meeting. That would be great.
-
Question: Since Carry is banned in the Capitol Building, who "holds the horses" while the rest of us fight?
-
Won't know for sure my schedule that day for a week or so, but if I'm free, I'll support if you need a newbie. Let me know, I can help out some organization for something like lunch or drinks maybe too.
-
Today I received the following response from Sen McCoy re an LB430 e-mail that I sent to NE Senators back in January. I am not familiar with McCoy, and so I don't know where he stands on gun-rights issues.
- Mr. YYYYYYYYY,
Thank you for contacting me regarding LB 430. I appreciate hearing from Nebraskans how proposed legislation will affect them and I am grateful you took the time to write me and address the issues surrounding the bill.
I look forward to continuing to work with you.
Sincerely,
Senator Beau McCoy
39th Legislative District
Nebraska State Legislature
402-471-2885
-
I emailed Brenda Council a week ago, haven't heard a word back...
-
Wow! According to the notice on the NFOA home page, the hearing is set for March 11th!!!!
Whoo-hoooo!!! Showtime!! :o
NFOA Board of Directors: most likely you guys are chatting about it right now, if not already done so. any plans that y'all can share?
-
From the NE legislative hearing schedule, it appears that LB430 is fifth on the list for Wednesday, March 11. I wonder if they will actually get that far on the list that day, or if it will spill over into the next day:
- LB97 Lautenbaugh: Change provisions relating to foreign corporations and provisions and penalties relating to certain sex offenders
- LB15 White: Require driver's license and Internet address information as part of sex offender
registration - LB496 Fulton: Authorize enforcement of traffic control signal violations by automated traffic
enforcement systems - LB671 Pirsch: Provide powers and duties and change membership of the Nebraska County Attorney
Standards Advisory Council relating to death investigations - LB430 Christensen: Amend the Concealed Handgun Permit Act and state the power of cities and villages with respect to firearms
-
Greetings everyone. I have written to the members of the Juniciary Committee, my Senator (not a Judiciary member), the Speaker of the Unicameral, and the Governor. Below is the response of the Speaker followed by Governor Heineman.
"Dear Mr. XXXXXX
Thank you for your February 26, 2009, e-mail regarding the concealed carry law in Nebraska. I agree with you. The Nebraska Legislature in 2006 passed a law allowing citizens to carry concealed weapons. The Attorney General?s Opinion clearly states that this state law preempts local ordinances.
Senator Christensen of Imperial has introduced LB 430 to clarify the law, specifically prohibiting cities from enacting concealed weapons ordinances. After I read the Attorney General?s Opinion, I don?t believe it is necessary. However, if it makes it to the floor, I will vote for it because I meant when I voted in 2006 to preempt state law and make this the law of Nebraska. I do not think a patchwork system of laws in Nebraska treat citizens fairly and believe that there should be one law across the state.
Thank you for taking the time to write me an e-mail. I appreciate your position and share your thoughts."
Mike Flood
"Dear Mr. XXXXXXX
Thank you for your recent correspondance requesting support for LB 430, introduced by Senator Mark Christensen. As you know, LB 430 amends the Concealed Handgun Permit Act as it relates to cities. I appreciate knowing your views on the Legislation, and please know that I continue to support an individual's right to bear arms as protected by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. LB 430 has not yet been scheduled for a hearing before the Judiciary Committee.
Should LB 430 reach my desk, I will keep your support in mind. Thank you, again, for writing and sharing your views with me."
Dave Heineman
-
I plan on attending this hearing. I would like to see as many members there as possible. This is only a hurdle to get this bill passed, we need a good showing to demonstrate to these guys that we mean business and want our rights back and now. I wrote out my testimony, to use for he hearing. I would suggest that all do the same just to be prepared. I will bring a gun facts printout just in case we need it. Hope to see a bunch of people there, maybe we can all go for lunch or a beverage afterwards.
-
I can't make it on Wednesday, but if it carry's over to Thursday, I'll be there...
-
Could somone please report on todays session. Did they get to discussion on LB 430?
-
Yes LB430 was discussed today in which two of our board members did speak at.
I was not able to make the hearing but did watch on the pod cast.
People who were present may post more information.
I thank those who attended today, finger tapping and all.
-
link to podcast????
-
I thank those who attended today, finger tapping and all.
????
-
Thanks for the info.
Will the hearing carry over into Thursday afternoon....or was a committee vote taken?
-
In actuality it is not a pod cast but a Live Flash Stream from NE Educational Television.
Here is the web site http://www.netnebraska.org/publicmedia/capitol.html
Finger tapping was a nervous proponent who did a great job speaking.
-
Thanks to everybody who came, was great to see a room full of proponents and 3 opponents.
-
The lack of information on this subject is disturbing. As an important issue as this is to all of this on the forum, someone that went should be posting their impressions of the senators, questions asked, etc.. An organization such as this one only grows and becomes powerful if it provides the information to its members in a timely manner, sorry rant mode off...
-
The way I saw it:
How do I think we did?
Council- She did not even stay in the room to hear testimony by the Pro- side.
Ashford- Like last time, he tried to turn "patchwork" concerns into a transportation issue. He does not like guns, feigns ignorance on the issues at hand and is unwilling to enlighten himself. Willful ignorance = stupidity. RINO.
Latthrop- Lathrop asked decidedly slanted questions of witnesses..... wanting to know how often instructors and CHP holders had to "qualify" ..... seemed to subscribe to the "Only Ones" mindset that Cops were the only ones proffessional enough to use a gun to defend themselves or others.... seemed horrified that "an untrained permit holder" might have anything other than a hymnal to defend himself and his family "in a church with 1,500 people in it". I don't go to such a church. I'm just supposed to think happy thoughts and hope the deranged gunman runs out of bullets before he gets to me and mine? My church usually has 50 souls on an average Sunday....... and why is it that I can defend myself in Church in Colby, but not in Kearny? If this bill passes, I can leave my gun in its holster at Mass in Castle Rock, but must leave it out in the parking lot in Columbus? Why is that?
Coash- Did not say much while I was there....... supposed to be on our side.
Rogert- ? I don't know..... he asked a couple of questions of the "pro" witnesses.
McGill- Looked bored and played with her hair most of the time....... she does not like boomsticks. I have the distinct feeling she would think call them "Icky".
I used the time taken up by the first two bills to drop a note in support of lb430 at Pankonin's office and talk w/ Sen. Ken Schilz about it. He's definitely on our side: One of our "No Guns = No $" cards was on his bulletin board, under a great big GFZ- Criminals Welcome sign ........
I had to leave at 5, so I did not hear the "Against" Witnesses- Marty Conboy (surprise, surprise, surprise.) Chief Cassidy (duh), and some woman from the League of Municipalities.
How's that?
-
The lack of information on this subject is disturbing. As an important issue as this is to all of this on the forum, someone that went should be posting their impressions of the senators, questions asked, etc.. An organization such as this one only grows and becomes powerful if it provides the information to its members in a timely manner, sorry rant mode off...
Sorry, I took the day off work yesterday so that I could drive to Lincoln and sit through the whole afternoon of testimonies, and testify myself. The hearing did not get over until 5:30 pm. By the time I drove back home, met my wife for dinner, and got back to the house it was late and I did not feel like typing. I had to get up and be at work early in the morning this morning and now I am faced with the work I missed yesterday and don't even really have time to be typing this.
I apologize for having a job, but I will post my views tonight after work. I'm sorry that the next night after the event is the earliest that I can post something.
-
Thank you to everyone from NFOA and the public in general who made the effort to travel to Lincoln and express their opinions on LB430.
I listened and watched the hearing as best I could from work. Great job! The only one I thought that was a bit confused was the guy who didn't know that Elkhorn had been annexed by Omaha. He was obviously not one of NFOA's guys.
The gentlemen from the military stationed at Offutt put a reasoned and responsible face on CHP holders and I thank them for their testimony. Hopefully someone got some NFOA information in their hands. :)
The frightening thing was that, by appearances and questions, many of the members of the Judiciary Committee had little knowledge of the very subject that they are responsible for legislating.
-
Philk, I had the same impression with the members of the judicary. Overall, I thought it went very well. It was great to see such a good turn out . I believe that I counted like 47 proponets and 3 against. I beleive that the bill will progress to the floor. It even seemed like Ashford was interested in some of the mucked up rules. Council spent most of the time in the powder room, I think guns gets her irregular. Again it was good to see such a good turn out and meet some fellow members of the NFOA. The little get togather with Christensen out in the hall after the hearing kind of boosted my hopefulness on this bill. Next step is to put as many gun owners on the steps of the capitol as possible when this goes to the floor.
-
Thanks for the reports. I am in "Greater Ne." and appreciate all that you guys do who are closer to Lincoln. If I can ever be of help, please let me know how.
-
The lack of information on this subject is disturbing. As an important issue as this is to all of this on the forum, someone that went should be posting their impressions of the senators, questions asked, etc.. An organization such as this one only grows and becomes powerful if it provides the information to its members in a timely manner, sorry rant mode off...
Sorry, I took the day off work yesterday so that I could drive to Lincoln and sit through the whole afternoon of testimonies, and testify myself. The hearing did not get over until 5:30 pm. By the time I drove back home, met my wife for dinner, and got back to the house it was late and I did not feel like typing. I had to get up and be at work early in the morning this morning and now I am faced with the work I missed yesterday and don't even really have time to be typing this.
I apologize for having a job, but I will post my views tonight after work. I'm sorry that the next night after the event is the earliest that I can post something.
Same here.
The members that were in attendance yesterday did so because we were able to take all or part of the day off from our jobs, drive to Lincoln, and sit through the hearings for 4 other bills in order to participate in the hearing for LB430 which did not start until 4pm. You may want to remember, we are volunteering our time for NFOA and are not paid in any way. The only reason I was even able to make it yesterday is because my Mother, who is on medical leave from work with a breathing condition, was able to sit at my house all day with my daughter who had a 102* fever. She knew that attending the hearing was important to me, so she drove the 20 miles to my house at 7am yesterday morning so that I could attend. After getting home from Lincoln around 6:30 pm, helping my other 2 kids with their homework, eating some dinner, getting my kids in the shower, folding 2 loads of laundry, and putting them in bed...I was ready to sit down and relax for about 20 minutes before I got ready for bed. I'm very sorry that taking care of my family was my priority when I got home, and my lack of "providing the information to its members in a timely manner" has "disturbed" you.
I guess that I just need to try harder.
EDIT: Thanks to Jim(who had his very well behaved daughter with him at the hearing ;) ) for posting his summary of the hearing. Well done, and I concur with all of it.
-
Am I seeing this correctly, did Sen. Fulton just make LB 430 his priority bill????????
Sen Christensen seemed to elude to something like this after the hearing last night...
I don't have time to investigate further right now (can't afford to get fired!) but this looks like great news!
-
confirmed: http://www.unicam.state.ne.us/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=6960
Fulton makes LB430 his priority bill.
-
ZOMG!!!!! Somebody buy that man a beer! I always knew fulton was good on guns but did not expect that at all.
-
Was was the impression from Sen. Amanda McGill.
Was she present and did she ask any question?
-
It is not perfect, but it is way better than we have......
I had a thought while driving this AM: Have anyone noticed that the CHP Law prohibits carry pretty much anywhere ideas are shared (except for the intarwebz!)? No Church Carry, no CCW in bars, no pocket pistols at political rallies, courthouses, libraries ....... it occurs to me that folk that take it upon themselves to provide for their own security are kinda socially marginalized by the very law we struggled to get passed!
-
Sen. McGill was present, she did not say much at all. In my personal opinion, her body language was poor, she spent the entire hearing twirling her hair and slouching in her chair, and I got the feeling she may as well have been rolling her eyes. I know this is not indicative of how she will vote or anything. It is just my personal feeling/observation.
At least she is a step above Sen. Council, who left the room for probably 90% of the proponent cases.
I also notice that LB35 and LB63 were picked up as priority bills by The judiciary committee and Ashford, respectively...
-
"EDIT: Thanks to Jim(who had his very well behaved daughter with him at the hearing ;) ) for posting his summary of the hearing. Well done, and I concur with all of it. "
She was an Angel, compared to her behavior at her sister's Spring Concert..... we nearly had a major problem, when we got to the top of the Capitol Building (burning off some lunch energy!) she announced she had to "go potty real bad" ..... ever try to find a bathroom when you really need on in an unfamiliar building?
-
I sent Sen Fulton a quick email to thank him for selecting this as his priority bill. Also asked if he would explain to me the basics of what priority bill guarantees. Here is his reply:
"Jesse,
Thanks for the email. The Speaker has the ability to schedule or not
schedule bills for debate. Any bill with a priority designation is
guaranteed Floor debate assuming it makes it out of committee. When I
prioritized LB430 it was to allow it see the light of public debate.
Hopefully it means it will become law.
Have a good week and weekend!
tony
Senator Tony Fulton
Nebraska Legislature, District 29 (Lincoln)
Office 2107
402-471-2734"
I am so Glad he's my senator!
-
Ok, Let's get along. LOL. This group is just getting started so I think we can give those that went to the hearing a little bit of a break.
-
First of all....many, many THANKS to all of you who attended the LB430 hearing and for those who were able to testify!! That is great news that y'all were able to sacrifice your time away from family and work to do what you did. I was not able to do so and wasn't able to follow on the live podcast, but my heart and prayers were with y'all. Greatly appreciated from the depths of my heart. :) :) :) :)
Second, I was able to locate a definition of "priority bill" on the NE Legislature website in their section called "Glossary of Terms"....http://www.nebraskalegislature.gov/about/glossary.php (http://www.nebraskalegislature.gov/about/glossary.php)
- Priority Bill - a bill that has priority status and generally is considered ahead of other bills in debate. Each senator may select one priority bill, each committee may select two priority bills, and the speaker may select up to 25 priority bills.
Sen Fulton certainly did a huge favor of support by using up his one "chip", so to speak, in making LB430 a "priority bill". I'm sure he wouldn't mind a thankful e-mail as JesseT did!!
And Sen Fulton is not even on the Judiciary Committee!! I don't know if that committee has any other priority bills, but if it does have more than two, I hope that the committee selects LB430 as one of their "two chips". And then, it seems that it is up to the Speaker to pick up to 25 of those.
Hey, every little bit helps........it all started with Sen Christensen introducing the bill, then a whole bunch of communications to the Senators from supporters, then what appears to me to have been a great showing and testifying by supporters yesterday, and now with the priority bill status by Sen Fulton.
Woo-hoooo!! :) :) :) :) :)
-
I thought it was interesting when Chris was speaking, he said something similar to "Everyone was concerned that blood would run in the streets. But that hasn't happened yet." As soon as I heard the word yet, I went "Ooh!" and happened to be looking right at Chief Cassady. Sure enough, he mouthed the word too. There ya go Chief, instead of concentrating on the "it hasn't happened" part, you focus on the "yet" part. Let's see, it's been 3 years. How much longer before the "yet" part doesn't matter?
I almost jumped up when Senator Ashford said "I think what they're saying is that they're law-abiding citizens, and they don't want to break the law." BINGO! I'm not sure it really matters to him, but it was nice to see that he "gets" it.
I had to leave almost immediately after the hearing. I was able to introduce myself to Chris. It was a little awkward in that a lot was happening right after the hearing. It was nice to finally put a face to a name though.
Chris, was that Senator Lathrop who asked about attending one of your classes?
-
This is excellent news. I work evenings so I couldn't attand but when this hits the floor for debate I will be there.
-
I am at home now and on my own time, but there is not much more that I can add to the discussion at this point. Again, a huge thank you to all that were able to take time out of your busy schedules to attend, and to speak.
I was not planning on speaking at all, mainly because I am the worst public speaker on the face of the earth and should be barred from doing so at all cost, but I wanted to take advantage of the last couple of minutes granted to us before the opponents spoke to address a couple of concerns that came up during the testimonies. Senator Lathrop's ignorance on the issues before him, combined with his hang up on the perceived lack of training (translated - competence) by anyone not possessing a badge really annoyed me. He got so hung up on how terrible it would be to have a non-leo permit holder firing a handgun in a crowded room that he completely lost track of the fact that the situation that would cause that to happen would be a deranged psychopath opening fire on masses of unarmed people in the same crowded room with nothing stopping him from shooting people at will except a cramp in his trigger finger. I don't think anything could be more terrible than that.
I would also like to bring attention to the happy little moment when Sen. Lautenbaugh slammed Chief Cassidy. When asked, the Chief conceded that possessing a firearm was more of a fundamental right than an individual's right to burn leaves. Then, the senator asked if that is the case, then shouldn't the laws concerning firearm possession be expected to be more uniform throughout the state than the local ordinances pertaining to leaf burning? That made me smile.
All in all, I think it went well, with the expected reactions of the pro and anti senators. No big surprises.
As has already been said, this bill is not perfect, and I doubt that it could even be passed without more imperfect changes being made to it. It is, however, a step in the right direction, and if the only way we can begin to reclaim our rights in this state is step by step, then I'll put my best running shoes on and get at it.
-
I'm sorry that I could not stay to hear all the testimony. I do not understand why preemption isn't an absolute no brainer.
Local jurisdictions should have the right to govern local issues but a State licsense/permit must be a state wide document or the State is diminished. As for reciprocity that shouyld also be a no brainer. The Attorney General ought to have the authority to declare reciprocity with States whose permit requirements meet or exceed our own.
I am hopeful that it will become law if we can just get it out of Committee.
-
Looks great. Can't believe Omaha did not have some type of representation there. Looks like they may loose the 10 dollar per handgun registration fee.
-
Looks great. Can't believe Omaha did not have some type of representation there. Looks like they may loose the 10 dollar per handgun registration fee.
They did. Omaha City Prosecutor Marty Conboy was there and did testify in opposition. I think the first section of the bill may be one of the parts that will get amended by the time it gets out of committee.
-
Can't believe Omaha did not have some type of representation there.
Well, Sen Brenda Council, who is on the committee, is from Omaha. But, it sounds from what those who attended are saying is that she may have been there in nameplate only during the testifying. Was she really gone from the room for that long? If so, you would think that the committee chair would have a word with her about her duty to sit through the meeting respectfully. Ok, I can understand that irritable bowel syndrome can have a priority, but it sounded from an earlier post that she left the room for an extended period of time.
-
Senators come and go from the hearings all the time. Some have meetings or other sessions to attend... its just the way the thing is run.
-
This morning while driving to work, the local Lincoln radio station (KLIN 1400AM) talk show dude was ranting about how he just couldn't understand how this bill could allow churches to have armed guards with guns strapped to their sides since it would just seem odd to be in church and look around and see an armed guard standing there.
I was trying to call in to the station while driving, but fortunately (before I could get into an accident dialing and driving at the same time) another listener called in and said that the idea is NOT to have someone standing there with a gun strapped to their side, but that the gun would be CONCEALED!!! The radio dude goes: "Oh, okay, good point. Thanks for the call." Uneducated dude, and, unfortunately, there are many folks like that out there in our community who just don't understand....and it sounds from those who attended the committee meeting that there are even committee members who are uneducated about the ccw deal...and they are on this important committee!!
I pray that it doesn't happen, but church shootings, and probably even school shootings, are gonna happen, and probably here in Lincoln. Why wait until something happens, and then have to wait until the next legislative session to change the law? This is an opportunity for the churches to OPT to have their internal ccw security in place....it doesn't mandate them, but at least it allows for the option to do so.
-
Senators come and go from the hearings all the time. Some have meetings or other sessions to attend... its just the way the thing is run.
Ah, thanks for the clarification. I was making the assumption that she was gone for that long because of her publicly known strong stance against this bill, against ccw, and against citizens even having guns! Good to give the benefit of the doubt. But, JesseT, in this case??? Hhhhmmm.
But, I wasn't there, so my bad on being judgmental based only on what I was reading from y'all who were there relative to folks' interpretations of the committee members.
-
I am not trying to defend her. She was not the only senator to come and go throughout the different hearings in the afternoon. It just seems wierd to me that she would be there the entire afternoon through everything but then as proponents for 430 start she leaves... and as opponents to 430 start, she is suddenly back. Coincidence or not... you decide.
-
I see Senator Fulton has made this his priority bill. Does that give the bill a 'get out of committee' free card and automatically advance it to the full legislature?
-
I see Senator Fulton has made this his priority bill. Does that give the bill a 'get out of committee' free card and automatically advance it to the full legislature?
No. I'm sure it doesn't hurt at all though..... ;)
I'm confident that it will advance out of committee, but it will most likely not be as it is written right now. I'm sure it will be amended.
-
I also emailed Sen. Fulton on this bill thanking him for the using his 'one chip" to make this his priority bill.
He respond: Thank you for your email. My priority designation ensures the bill will
come out of committee for full debate by the legislature. I have high
hopes we will pass this bill. I'm certain there will be attempts to
weaken it, though. I will work to keep the bill intact; pre-emption is
what the bill is about and reciprocity is vital also. I will make a
logical, articulate case as to why we should pass the bill.
Being from Lincoln, I catch a lot of heat for taking the positions I
take. Thanks for your support; it's meaningful to me. .
Tony Fulton
Senator Tony Fulton
ed with this:
-
I also emailed Sen. Fulton on this bill thanking him for the using his 'one chip" to make this his priority bill.
He respond: Thank you for your email. My priority designation ensures the bill will
come out of committee for full debate by the legislature. I have high
hopes we will pass this bill. I'm certain there will be attempts to
weaken it, though. I will work to keep the bill intact; pre-emption is
what the bill is about and reciprocity is vital also. I will make a
logical, articulate case as to why we should pass the bill.
Being from Lincoln, I catch a lot of heat for taking the positions I
take. Thanks for your support; it's meaningful to me. .
Tony Fulton
Senator Tony Fulton
ed with this:
Hmmm....I stand corrected.
-
JimP.
I thought about that the other day, the bastions of freedom, the courthouse, schools, town hall meetings and the like where freedom is "to be protected and exhibited" ban the freedom of self protection... Also where rights are expected to be utilized re: 1st Amendment, voting etc. squash the right to self defense....
It is not perfect, but it is way better than we have......
I had a thought while driving this AM: Have anyone noticed that the CHP Law prohibits carry pretty much anywhere ideas are shared (except for the intarwebz!)? No Church Carry, no CCW in bars, no pocket pistols at political rallies, courthouses, libraries ....... it occurs to me that folk that take it upon themselves to provide for their own security are kinda socially marginalized by the very law we struggled to get passed!
-
Ranger-
Lotsa stuff to work for, haven't we?
-
Anyone able to say what the representitive from the league of municipalities had to say. This is the third hearing on this issue in about 2 years, at the first of those they testified that they would be offering a solution that has not seen the light of day to this point. Did they make the same suggestion again?
-
Since the bill will make it to the floor, it's obviously crucial that all Senators be contacted. Do we know when the bill is going to have its first reading? As much as I disagree with the State dictating to all "places of worship" that they be no carry zones if it will help secure progress on preemption and reciprocity...
-
I can't believe what I heard this a.m. I just returned from a town hall type meeting hosted by Sen. Wightman. The meeting was in Cozad. The Sheriff of Dawson Co. ask Sen. Wightman to vote against LB430 because he (the Sheriff) wanted to see a bill that would provide uniformity across the state. Am I missing something? Is that not what this bill would do? I don't think he was very happy with me when I suggested that he re-read the bill and study it a little deeper.
-
Good for you minnowmaker.
Some of these Sheriffs just refuse to get it. They believe and spew the same thing the Brady Campaign does. They don't read the legislation but follow the anti's like little sheep.
-
Good information and reply to Dawson Sheriff.
District 36: Gothenburg, Lexington, Ravenna, Amherst, Overton, Cozad, Eddyville, Miller, Elm Creek, Pleasanton, Sumner
Riverdale, Shelton and Gibbon are just a few in this district.
Links Below.
Dawson County Sheriff Gary Reiber
sheriff@dawsoncountyne.net
NE Unicameral Senator John Wightman District 36 jwightman@leg.ne.gov
-
What should we be saying to our representatives?
-
anyone got a sketch letter for this? Kathy Campbell needs some work!
-
Dear Senator,
It has come to my attention that LB 430 was made a priority bill by Senator Fulton. As a law-abiding citizen and concealed handgun permit holder, I strongly urge you to vote in favor of this bill. It will eliminate the patchwork of laws that exist throughout the state, allowing law-abiding citizens to go about their business without fear of prosecution because they happen to be in the wrong town. The bill also helps support our local troops by allowing those who are residents of other states that are stationed in Nebraska exercise their right to defend themselves.
Please vote YES on LB 430. Thank you for your time.
Respectfully,
Joe Q. Voter
-
Is anyone aware of any pending action? On another site another site I read these 2 posts:
Dated Feb 11. 2009 "Be patient my friends.....and stay tuned......Lexington et al. is in for a "surprise" real soon."
Dated Mar 21, 2009 ""Soon" will occur after we know the outcome of LB430. Should the bill pass...then all our worries are gone which thankfully appears to be the case with Sen Fulton's sponsorship. Should it fail to advance into law...then the "plan" begins. Sorry I cannot be more specific at this time.
Stand fast my dispirited brethren....change is coming soon (and it ain't the B.H.O. kinda change)."
-
thanks for the letter draft... I'll use something similar to that...
-
Thomas, Welcome to the forums.
As to the pending action you have heard about, well....let's say that there are more Aces to be played in this game,
But, ya gotta know when to hold 'em and know when to fold 'em...
-
TIME TO RECONTACT THE NE SENATORS: As noted in a new thread yesterday here on NFOA by CZ as well as the article on page B2 of the Local section in today's Lincoln Journal Star, LB 430 is going to the floor for general debate.
Unfortunately, at least for me, "allowing church security to carry concealed handguns won't be an option".
But, let's take what we can relative to traveling about our state without having to be aware of different city/local laws.
-
Just e-mailed Sen. Lautenbaugh. He is seemingly pro-2A, right?
-
Do we know when the bill is going to have its first reading?
According to the NE legislature website, the floor debate will begin on Tuesday, March 31:
http://www.unicam.state.ne.us/FloorDocs/Current/PDF/Agenda/nextagenda.pdf (http://www.unicam.state.ne.us/FloorDocs/Current/PDF/Agenda/nextagenda.pdf)
The entire session that day starts at 10:00am, but there are other "General File" debates scheduled prior to the "Christensen Division" (check out the website).
GENERAL FILE: 2009 SENATOR PRIORITY BILLS ? ?CHRISTENSEN DIVISION?
LB 463 (Dierks) Provide for licensure of animal therapists and consultation between veterinarians and other health care professionals
LB 551 (White) Extend the limiting age on sickness and accident insurance policies
LB 517 (Hansen) Change provisions relating to family reunification and termination of parental rights
LB 430 (Christensen) Amend the Concealed Handgun Permit Act and state the power of cities and villages with respect to firearms
As Sen Lautenburgh's legal aid wrote to FarmerRick in his other thread re clarification of the amendment for LB 430 and the upcoming debate on the floor on March 31: "...and please remind your members to pay attention to the debate and contact their individual senators regarding any concerns they may have."
LET'S STAY ON TOP OF SUPPORT WITH E-MAILS/PHONE CALLS TO THE SENATORS!!!
Also, it appears from the NE Legislature site (link above) that the debate/proceedings can be watched live streaming on your computer (I don't know about television) at:
http://www.netnebraska.org/publicmedia/capitol.html (http://www.netnebraska.org/publicmedia/capitol.html)
-
They have coverage on PBS. Not sure of the channel on Cox cable, somewhere in the teens. 17 or 18 I think?
-
Would it be wise to have as large a group as possible sitting (very respectfully) in the balcony to show support for Sen. Fulton and Christensen?
-
Would it be wise to have as large a group as possible sitting (very respectfully) in the balcony to show support for Sen. Fulton and Christensen?
Hhhhmmmmm.....how would they know that the group is supportive unless a message was sent to the two senators to inform them ahead of time? Now, if it was the British parliament, folks could do all of that "hear, hear", "nay, nay", "hhrruummpphh, hhrruummpphh" stuff! :)
-
If you watch on TV, every day the Senators will introduce different groups that are present in the balcony. I think it would show great support to have Sen. Christensen introduce a large group from the NFOA. Just my .02.
-
We could all show up wearing Charleton Heston masks ???
Actually, I didn't know that either, so minnowmaker's idea is better. ;D
I think it would be great to have a large NFOA showing there. I'm in.
-
If you watch on TV, every day the Senators will introduce different groups that are present in the balcony. I think it would show great support to have Sen. Christensen introduce a large group from the NFOA. Just my .02.
Ahhhhh....good point, minnowmaker. I haven't watched before....didn't know that. Not a bad idea!
-
We could all show up wearing Charleton Heston masks ???
Actually, I think it would be great to have a large NFOA showing there. I'm in.
If we're going to wear Heston masks, can I bring in a set of tablets along with a rod or staff? :)
-
We all need to quit posting at the same time!
-
We all need to quit posting at the same time!
Reminiscent of the Marx brothers?: "Thank you." "No, thank you." "Uh, no, thank you." :)
"Good night, Jay"
"Good night, Aldo"
-
I am stuck at work all day Tuesday...but I will have my laptop in my office tuned to the livestream so that I can duck in there every now and then and try to catch glimpses of what is going on.
Anyone planning on attending?
Someone one the NECCW site mentioned that the session on Tuesday might not even get to LB 430 since the session typically adjourns at noon. Anyone else familiar with the operations of the legislature? Do they re-open the session in the afternoon?
-
That was me, but I was then informed that they will be going to an all-day session starting this week as there will be no more afternoon hearings.
-
Hey, thanks, FarmerRick....your information has been greatly appreciated! This proposed bill has come so far and we're so close to seeing this city to city travel stuff straightened out.
I know that the amendment rubs some folks, including me, the wrong way. I'm also burning that the church component got struck out. And who knows what else is in store as this gets under way on Tuesday.
But if Omaha and the other remaining cities finally get their cheeks straightened out by this bill, then maybe that's the best we can do for the time being....one step at a time. An article the other day stated that Sen Christenson was gonna come back about the church part, perhaps in the next bill next time around.
If Council and the other anti-gunnies would just see that the lawful abiding citizens of this state are not the ones causing trouble, maybe they would spend more of their tax-dollar salaries on enforcing the existing laws against the real bad guys who commit the burglaries, hold-ups, etc.
Anyways, Tuesday is comin' up soon enough.....
-
How do we keep abreast of the debate without being there........
-
How do we keep abreast of the debate without being there........
Online: http://www.netnebraska.org/publicmedia/capitol.html (http://www.netnebraska.org/publicmedia/capitol.html)
Or, check you local PBS tv station, they usually carry it live.
-
Thanks for the info..........
-
As I read the amendment to LB430, Omaha would be allowed to keep their registration scheme, which effectively outlaws concealed carry unless you register whatever gun you have at the time with the Omaha police, hopefully before you are contacted by an officer. Is this interpretation correct?
-
The other day I wrote to the NE Senators via e-mail:
- Dear Sen XYXYXYXY,
LB 430 is very, very important for it to be approved as it provides much needed clarification of the existing Concealed Handgun Permit Act in Nebraska. I am concerned, though, about the pending amendment (AM 835) relative to how the amendment will dilute the clarification and intent of the originally worded LB 430.
Please do all that you can to ensure that LB 430 stays intact.
Thank you.
Respectfully,
XYXYYXYY
The response from Sen Fulton yesterday was:
- XYXYXX,
Thanks for being attentive to this bill.
Making this my priority bill ensures it will be debated. Hopefully we have the votes to make it into the consistent law of Nebraska. The Judiciary Committee has slapped an amendment on the bill which might negate it...I'm not sure though. I'll discuss with Senator Christensen and other members whether there still remains a loophole in the committee amendment.
Thanks again.
Tony
Senator Tony Fulton
Nebraska Legislature, District 29
Office 2107
402-471-2734
Response from Sen Janssen yesterday was:
- I will. And I was the lone co sponsor of LB 430.
Charlie
Response from my representative Sen McGill yesterday was:
- XYXYXY,
I do not believe LB 430 will pass without the amendments. In its original form, it went way beyond making conceal and carry uniform across the state. I do not support the original language that would not allow local cities to have their own laws dealing with firearms in general. Lincoln has some laws that I think are beneficial to the community. While I can see an argument on making conceal and carry uniform, I think local control much be maintained when it comes to firearm laws in general.
Amanda McGill
District 26
471-2610
I see that today (April 1), the legislature did not get to LB 430 in the morning session. Not sure if there is an afternoon session today, or if we'll have to wait until Thursday.
-
LB 430 DEBATE STARTING RIGHT NOW.....2:58PM
-
Holy smokes!!! Senator Ashford admits his skepticism was misplaced!!!
-
holy cow i hope somebody got it on tape!
-
Newsflash, Senator Council is opposed!!!
McGill doesn't get it either.
-
Sen. Ashford to Sen. Nelson on why 45 days instead of 30 days for a permit to be issued, "Unfortunatley we are dealing with state government here."
LOL
-
Adjourned for the day. AM929 passes.
-
Maybe Council needs to spend some more quality time on the streets of North Omaha. She refrenced the Burger King robbery in Miami, where the CCW shot the robber, she made him out to be the criminal in my opinion. She made no refrence to the thug poining the gun at the clerk or CCW... Did you want fries with that armed robbery??? It seemed like all of the law abiding citizens who get a permit will snap and run amuck...I believe that the church issue will be resolved to our satisfaction at a later date. All in all I was pretty happy with the outcome (so far) Ashford surprised me, still don't know what happened there... Stay tuned tomorrow in the AM To be continued.....
-
My quick notes from the watching/listening to the debate...my wrist hurts from all of the writing real fast; hope it doesn't hurt me for this Saturday's Rock Your Glock ;)
Sen Christensen opened regarding clarification of Amendment 929 on LB 430: it makes any city/town ordinances null and void; basically the state law supersedes any local ordinances; also, this bill and amendment are limited to just CHP holders and does not include broadly to other guns, thus being in accord to what Lincoln police chief Tom Cassidy has expressed reservations about.
Sen Ashford was initially against cc as a skeptic, but admits that some of the significant fears have not been borne out over time; supports the amendment and the bill in trying to address the confusion of the existing CHP law relative to transportation of cc handguns throughout the state by CHP holders.
Sen Janssen co-sponsored LB 430; prefers the "green copy" (the one without any amendment), but can understand need for clarification that amendment provides, and he requests support; also emphasized that guns are not bad things, and that it is the non-responsible people who don't go for CHP training that lend to the fears, and it is not those who are CHP trained folks; even those here at this hearing are open targets, and he feels safer with CHP holders around in meetings and wherever else he goes; also, people in churches are sitting ducks since there are psychologically disturbed people who attend churches as much as they attend anything else; LB 430 will prevent legal citizens from becoming law breakers.
Sen Stutman was not supporter of CHP when it was initially passed, but since we now have it as law, we now should have a level playing field by allowing CHP holders the ability to travel throughout the state without any confusion of local laws.
Sen McGill doesn't know how will vote on LB 430 but does support the amendment; has talked with folks in the city who have concerns regarding rules of who can own firearms as well as where they can be carried; not the biggest fan of CC, and bringing in CC will not make a place safer and prevent tragedies since psychologically disturbed people will all end up killing themselves anyway and do not fear being shot by someone with a CHP.
Sen Price support the bill; discussed issues regarding military personnel and their family (spouse) relative to: residency of NE and thus qualification for a NE CHP while stationed in another state, the waiting period for military folks especially since they are already familiar with arms, and what is the status of their NE permit should they be relocated to another state. Sen Ashford said if military person is a resident of NE, then they are qualified for a CHP, and if the individual moves to another state, the individual is still a CHP holder in NE, but it is up to the other state regarding reciprocity.
Sen Hadley asked Sen Christensen to elaborate on the letter from NE State Attorney General; Kearney as a result of that letter changed its 70-year-old law banning cc in Kearney; understands the confusion between different jurisdictions, therefore rises and supports the bill and amendment.
Sen Ashford clarify amendment by Sen Christensen; it is enlarging the ability and opportunity for CHP holders to carry where they previously could not, therefore passage of this bill/amendment will supersede any city ordinances such as Lincoln's about not carrying in city parks and Omaha's registration with the city police department; again, just want to clarify and support LB 430 and the amendment; appreciates Sen McGill's concerns and there will be time between now and Select File to entertain concerns since the Judiciary Committee is always open for business; also, want to clarify that this bill and amendment only pertains to CHP holders.
Sen Lautenbaugh rises and supports the underlying bill; the provisions are important and urges support.
Sen Council am absolutely opposed to LB 430 and any amendements to it; they do not bring safety to society, and am amazed how this body can support bringing in the FBI and other LE agencies and their restrictions, but yet allow CHP holders through this bill to carry anywhere they want to even though cities like Lincoln and Omaha have expressed reservations about places for carrying guns; most of the individuals here who have talked about needing to be strapped in church, well I did some research and found that of those shootings in churches, most of them were law abiding citizens and members or former members of those churches; the evidence does not bear it out about CC making places safer; in short, it is crap; these people who do the shooting are just pissed off people; how about the example of the Miamia Burger King where in Miami one can carry wherever they want, and there was a robber who went into a Burger King during after school hours with tens of children there, and someone in the Burger King with a CHP decides to get into a shootout with the robber, well some here will say it was okay because the robber is dead, but the CHP holder is hanging onto life by a thread because of critical injuries, and if the CHP holder had chosen not to get into a shootout, all that would have happened was a $200 robbery and no one hurt. (NOTE: the timekeeper stopped her because her time ran out).
Sen Lautenburgh one clarification: was for the original bill for churches to decide for themselves; we agreed to the amendment that took out that right so that LB 430 can move on, but I would support in the future that right of the church to choose for themselves.
Sen Nelson intend to vote in support but with the understanding that AM 929 will be revised or reworded to clarify what the cities feel should be protected; also question to Sen Ashford regarding why a 45-day wait instead of a 30-day wait since modern technology and software should allow for a shorter waiting period; Sen Ashford said State Patrol asked for the 45 days.
Sen Korpisek if had been here initially when first CHP bill was considered, would not have supported it, but now it is law and there are now big enough issues that it should be ok to approve the bill and amendment, but am now back on the fence because getting nervous when hearing Sen Christensen talking about coming back next year with an amendment to allow churches to have CC security; am not against guns and open carry, would rather prefer to see the person carrying, but am concerned about CC; so, just go for the vote now and see how it turns out.
Sen Ashford private businesses already have the right to post no carry, so there shouldn't have to be local control by cities; regarding Sen McGill's comments, if CHP holder is in a Lincoln city park and an officer goes to that person and asks about their gun, then the CHP holder just has to present their permit, and obviously that person has been through the CHP training; there are other circumstances such as CC without a permit or other guns like long guns concealed or not that are not permitted as it currently stands.
Sen Christensen closed by asking for vote of support.
VOTE: 27 Yes, 2 No.....(NOTE: I think 15 or 25 no vote....it was tough to see the voting board on my laptop).
Sounded like there might be further consideration tomorrow about another one or two amendments??????....the end of the debate happened so fast, and then the live stream ended.
NE legislature website says there is a "McCoy AM936" filed, a "Judiciary AM835" filed, and a "Price FA24" filed....all pending. Check out the website to hit those links and read about them......
http://www.nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=6960 (http://www.nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=6960)
NOTE: McCOY AM835 adds back into the bill the right for a place of worship to authorize its security personnel to CC etc. PRICE FA24 is a timeline change of some sort but doesn't appear to be a biggie, and JUDICIARY AM835 revises state statute so that CHP holders will NOT be punished for CC as long as they are in compliance with the CHP Act.
I gotta give my wrist a break...and my head....it is swimming!!!!!
-
Good report Aldo, but was anyone else beside me appalled at the language used by Senator Council! I'm not a prude, but when these events are televised, or internet streamed, it's plain embarassaing that a senator cannot speak without using profanity...
-
Good report Aldo, but was anyone else beside me appalled at the language used by Senator Council! I'm not a prude, but when these events are televised, or internet streamed, it's plain embarassaing that a senator cannot speak without using profanity...
I was not surprised to hear it. Like someone over at ccwne said ... "You aren't fooling anyone with the wig Ernie, we can still see your moustache"
-
Great job Aldo. And thanks for keeping us that could not watch informed.
-
Hell of a write-up, thank you very much!
-
OK, today (April 2) was it; the whole kit and kaboodle passed, including the re-inclusion of allowing churches the right to choose for themselves.
For what it is worth, here's the notes I took if you're interested:
AMENDMENT 936
Sen McCoy introduced Amendment 936 to allow places of worship to have security personal with CCW.
Sen Wightman asked Sen Christensen couple of questions about ccw history and background check process; Sen Christensen explained the background check process; Sen Wightman said that he will support LB 430 and Sen Christensen's amendment from yesterday but nothing further; stated that NRA camel has been getting under the tent too much; he doesn't feel any safer with people who have CHP; he believes that cities should have the right to have local control, yet he will support Sen Christensen's amendment to allow state to supersede the cities for CCW transportation.
Sen White rose in support of Sen McCoy's amendment; church is a place of refuge from violence and it is a place of peace and forgiveness, but his own church has suffered from victimization and vandalism; and church history reflects long history of violence and hatred against the church; if church deems it necessary to have a security officer be it hired or a CHP holder, then he supports the church's right to decide for themselves.
Sen Schilz supports McCoy's amendment; one has to be able to defend oneself; the country's forefathers meant for citizens to have the right to defend themselves.
Sen McCoy yes, churches have had a long history of victimization; his amendment gives the church the right to choose; this amendment is stricter than other states who have similar amendments.
Sen Council rises in opposition to the amendment and the underlying bill; in the same historical context, when this legislative body passed the original CC bill, the church was identified as one of the specific places to prohibit CCW; what is really being sought by this legislation? we are being told that law abiding citizens with CHP will become law breakers with the current wording of the CHP law; refer others to existing statute that already provides provisions to protect the CHP holder who is at the intersection between jurisdictions with different city laws...(NOTE: timekeep stopped her because time was up).
Sen Stuthman as said yesterday, he did not support the original bill in the past for CCW, but he now does support Sen Christensen's amendment regarding travel in state by CHP holder, but not sure yet regarding the McCoy amendment; question to Sen McCoy regarding how many churches have 24/7 security at the present time; Sen McCoy was not sure but said that NE has megachurches with large family sizes, such as his own church, and there is security at his church and others; Sen Stuthman made point that churches already now have security; question to Sen Council regarding clarification that as long as CHP holder stays in the vehicle with the CCW, then that individual is exempt from being against the law; Sen Council said yes as long as the gun is not removed from the vehicle; Sen Stuthman said that answers the concerns of his constituents.
Sen Harms question to Sen McCoy: he (Harms) is still struggling with the amendment relative to what is happening to the House of God and to the country; so it offends him in a sense, especially relative to the term security personnel since there currently is no training or certification process for security personnel, and we need to first define it; in the urban areas this may be fine, but he has concern regarding rural areas; Sen McCoy said that the US Dept Homeland Security held a conference recently regarding security at churches, and that security teams are usually retired or off-duty LEO and military; Sen Harms said that is an issue with small churches.
Sen McGill supports uniformity regarding travel in the state for CHP holders, but is against this McCoy amendment; each year there will be further erosion with more and more requests and exemptions, for example political rallies; if someone wants a gun in the church, then just don't conceal it, and that is the answer.
Sen Hansen question to Sen McCoy to describe security at his church and how it would change if this amendment passes; Sen McCoy says his church has off-duty Douglas County LEO armed and located at each entrance; Sen McCoy clarified that his amendment is not intended to supplant security personnel but rather to enhance it; Sen Hansen said he supports the amendment, and that even though his own church is small and would not elect to have armed security, he does support it for other churches who choose to do so.
Sen McCoy 38 other states already allow or will be allowing CC in places of worship; his amendment would be the most restrictive of all of those states; it is important to allow the churches the ability to protect itself; there has not been one incident of accidental discharge anywhere in this country in churches; in 2007 in a Colorado church, there was an individual who came into the 7,000 member church armed with 1,000 rounds, and the person was stopped by one armed security person.
Vote was started on McCoy Amendment 936, and when it reached 15 yes, 12 no, and 19 no vote, a Senator made a "call to house" that required all unauthorized personnel to leave the legislative floor. Sen McCoy requested a roll call (NOTE: it went too fast to jot down votes by names...I wasn't prepared with a list beforhand....sorry); a roll call vote tally was 29 yes, 15 no, and 3 no vote to approve AM936.
FLOOR AMENDMENT 24
Sen Flood introduced the amendment regarding a timeline for military personnel applications.
Sen Christensen said committee did not deal with that issue in the original bill and was amenable to allowing it to be removed.
Sen Price closed asking for support.
Vote: 33 yes, 3 no, and 11 no vote to approve FA24.
AMENDMENT 940
Sen Price introduced the amendment relative to military members and spouses who are NE residents but stationed outside of NE not being able to apply for a CHP, and that amendment would allow for application to be done without being present in the state.
Sen Whitequestion to Sen Price: key to the CHP permit is proper training and background check; how would this be done in these situations? Sen Price said he will look into the background check, and perhaps the out-of-state training would suffice, but this amendment pertains strictly to residency issue. Sen White said he was still concerned with the background check and training processes; he emphasized need to have person physically present for both, and that this amendment destroys the essence of the CHP process.
Sen Price also supports these assertions regarding training and background check; he does not want to erode the CHP process, and was willing to withdraw his amendment and bring it back on Select File.
AM940 was put into pending status.
SEN ASHFORD TO CLOSE ON AM835 AND LB 430
Sen Ashford urges members to support the amendments and bill; he appreciates the concerns expressed by Sen Council and Sen McGill regarding their respective cities, and it would be appropriate between now and Select File to list those concerns relative to State Statute, for example stalkers would not be permitted to have CHP.
Vote on adoption of committee amendments: 39 yes, 2 no, and 6 no vote.
Sen Christensen if there are concerns, please bring them before the next two votes.
Vote for LB 430 to advance to Enrollment and Review Initial: 40 yes, 4 no, 4 no vote.
NE Legislature definitions from their glossary:
Enrollment and Review Initial (E&R for Review): the enrollment and review process that a bill undergoes after it is advanced from General File.
Enrollment and Review Final (E&R for Engrossing): the enrollment and review process that a bill undergoes after it is advanced from Select File. During this stage, the bill is engrossed and reprinted for Final Reading.
Select File: the second stage at which a bill is considered by the entire Legislature. Bills on Select File may be amended, returned to committee, indefinitely postponed or advanced to Final Reading.
Final Reading: the third and last stage at which a bill is considered by the entire Legislature. The clerk reads the entire bill aloud, unless final reading is waived, and senators vote without debate on whether to submit the bill to the governor.
SO, FOLKS, WE CAN'T LET UP YET ON OUR CONTACTING STATE SENATORS. THIS IS GREAT THAT LB 430 AND AMENDMENTS MADE IT TO THIS POINT, BUT THERE IS POTENTIAL AND PROBABILITY FOR CHANGES OR WORSE TO STILL BE DONE. STILL CONTACT THE SENATORS AND KEEP UP THE SUPPORT!!!
-
Here's the votes on Amendment 936 roll call (29 yes, 15 no, 5 nv=no vote):
Adams-yes, Ashford-yes, Avery-nv, Campbell-no, Carlson-yes, Christensen-yes, Coash-yes, Cook-no, Corrett-yes, Council-no, Dierks-yes, Dubes-no, Fischer-yes, Flood-yes, Friend-yes, Fulton-yes, Gay-yes, Giese-no, Gloor-no, Haar-no, Hadley-yes, Hansen-yes, Harms-no, Heidemann-yes, Howard-nv, Janssen-yes, Karpisek-no, Langemeier-yes, Lathings-no, Lautenbaugh-yes, Louden-yes, McCoy-yes, McGill-no, Mello-yes, Nantkes-nv, Nelson-yes, Nordquist-yes, Pahls-yes, Pankonin-nv, Pirsch-yes, Price-yes, Rogent-no, Schilz-yes, Stuthman-nv, Sullivan-no, Utter-yes, Wallman-no, White-yes, Wightman-no.
See prior page for notes on today's meeting.
-
Aldo you have given us all a terrific report.
Good Job and Thank You
-
Aldo you have given us all a terrific report.
Good Job and Thank You
Actually, Randy, all thanks to you and everyone else in NFOA. This group and this site are a tremendous inspiration and hope for all patriots. The enthusiasm of everyone is contagious.
-
Don't forget to thank the Senators that stood up for us in this effort. Once the voting record is posted, I will try to post a list of those that voted in our favor
-
Aldo you have given us all a terrific report.
Good Job and Thank You
I second this motion!
Your reports have been great, Aldo.
-
I just recieved an E-Mail from Ken Haar (who voted no on AM936) indicating that he would support LB430.
-
I just recieved an E-Mail from Ken Haar (who voted no on AM936) indicating that he would support LB430.
In my email, He also stated that Lincoln had "opted out" of concealed carry... not very informed are we Kenny
-
The E&R document has been published
http://uniweb.legislature.ne.gov/FloorDocs/Current/PDF/AM/ER8052.pdf
-
A big thank you to all who have testified and kept us updated durring this.
-
So, a little help here. What and when is the next action? More to the point when will this be final, and made law?
-
Next round is Select File.
Select File is the second debating and voting stage. This step allows another opportunity for amendment, compromise and reflection. Bills on Select File may be indefinitely postponed or advanced to the next stage. After Select File, bills are sent to E&R again to be rechecked. Bills then are reprinted for Final Reading.
Final Reading
Before final passage, all bills are constitutionally required to be read aloud in their entirety by the Clerk of the Legislature, unless three-fifths (30 members) of the Legislature votes to waive the requirement. A bill may not be amended or debated on Final Reading, but may be returned to Select File for a specific amendment. Bills may not be voted on for final passage until at least five legislative days after the bill is introduced, and one legislative day after it is placed on Final Reading.
-
Can't thank you guys enough - especially FarmerRick and Aldo. I have been passing along your reports to other friends who are not members here. At least 3 of them, besides myself, have sent emails and/or snail mails to our state Senators. You are reaching more than just the members here.
-chris
-
Avery's AM993 is not good at all! I don't like the fact that the vote on this was 29 ayes, 0 nayes, 17not voting, 3 absent. Are the pro people just agreeing with every amendment so we can just get the bill passed?!!
This amendment is a problem because anyone who drives to a school, college, or university etc. is not allowed to have a loaded gun in their own vehicle and the gun needs to be encased. Which means this would include CCW people. Furthermore, if you are a student you cannot possess a gun in your vehicle at all even if you have a CCW permit!
I have a permit. I am a university student. So for instance I go do my errands for the day and have my loaded gun on my person. My first stop is the university to make a short stop at the bookstore to buy or sell a book. Oops, I cant go now because I have a gun. This means I have to leave the gun at home, and then go back to campus and do my business. Then I after go back home, get my gun and then continue on with errands! This is not fair.
Christensen should amend this to allow adult students or nonstudents with a Concealed Handgun Permit to be exempt from this rule as long as they don't remove the handgun from the vehicle. If they want to ban guns on university and college property fine! But they shouldn't be dictating what I can or cannot possess in my vehicle. I think this is a clear violation of the 2nd Amendment and the Nebraska constitution.
-
have to agree... 993 is a mess, it violates the original intent which was clarity and consistency no matter where you are in the state...
-
Also contacted my senator and got reply from her as will trying to keep free from too many amements go gang....
-
This is what I received from Senator Bill Avery...
I plan to vote for this bill when it comes up again for second round debate. I managed to get it amended on first round to more clearly define "schools" so that college and universities were included. With that amendment, I voted to advance the bill and will continue to support it through Final Reading.
Thanks for contacting me. I appreciate your interest in the legislative process.
Sen. Bill Avery
Is he a little confused or am I? I didn't think LB430 addressed school carry. Is he thinking of the original CC legislation?
Fly
-
Avery's amendment AM993 to LB 430 addresses possession of firearms on school property and at at school functions and changes the definition of a school to include all colleges and universities
http://uniweb.legislature.ne.gov/FloorDocs/Current/PDF/AM/AM993.pdf
-
Avery's amendment AM993 to LB 430 addresses possession of firearms on school property and at at school functions and changes the definition of a school to include all colleges and universities
Ahhhh...I will try to keep up.
Thanks,
Fly
-
Avery's amendment AM993 to LB 430 addresses possession of firearms on school property and at at school functions and changes the definition of a school to include all colleges and universities
http://uniweb.legislature.ne.gov/FloorDocs/Current/PDF/AM/AM993.pdf
Hhhmmmm....I don't like this amendment at all!! As a CHP holder, why should I not be able to appropriately store my handgun in my vehicle while I am parked on "school" property (even university)....and me not in the vehicle?
-
Aldo, I don't like it either (for Avery's amendment and the "designated Only Ones" for Carry in Church), but is an improvement over what we have.
-
I hope this thing doesn't get amended to death.
-
LB 430 should be re-scheduled for the end of next week according to Senator Fulton's response to my e-mail query (see below):
- Dear Senator Fulton,
Would you provide me with an update regarding the status of LB 430 since its last debate on April 7 when Sen Avery introduced AM 835 which was adopted?
Is it scheduled to come to the floor again this session?
Also, since AM 835 now has a re-definition for "school" that includes universities, how am I as a concealed carry permit holder expected to drive onto university properties to pick up my son from the university?
According
to the amendment, I am not even allowed to park the car and leave my handgun locked in a gunbox or glovebox in the vehicle?
Thanks for taking the time to stay in touch with me about the progress of LB 430, and I look forward to hearing from you.
Regards,
XYXYXXY
Lincoln
- XYXYXYX,
The bill will likely be scheduled late next week by the Speaker. It is a matter left to the Speaker when and when not to schedule bills. I have spoken with him, and our bill is fine. It is going to be scheduled, and it will pass.
Regarding school, that actually was something that existed in the original CCW law...I don't know why it needed amending again. I did not support it, but I also don't want to pick a fight that could hamper the bill's chances of passing. I figure we have a bill that is 95% good...I plan to leave well enough alone.
You raise a good point. There is also the reality that in the last tragic school shooting, there was already a gun ban (Virginia Tech).
Senator Tony Fulton
Nebraska Legislature, District 29 (Lincoln) Office 2107
402-471-2734
- Dear Senator Fulton,
Thank you for your prompt response! Greatly appreciated for all that you are doing to move LB 430 along.
Thanks also for the explanation. Sometimes it is best to remember the ultimate end goal which is the preemption of state law (LB 430) over any city or local ordinances regarding the transportation of a handgun by a concealed handgun permit holder. It will be good to finally have that aspect clearly stated. And there will also be the other provisions relative to the processing of permits, residency of military personnel stationed in NE, and reciprocity with other states (which should ultimately be of benefit for NE concealed handgun permit holders).
There is always the future for other bills as citizens and lawmakers continue to realize that concealed handgun permit holders are not the problem-makers with guns.
Again, thank you for the updated information. If you don't mind, please keep me posted regarding the date of when the bill come back to the floor. I will also do my best to watch the NE legislature website, too.
Regards,
XYXYXYXX
Lincoln
I also received this response from Senator Christensen:
- XYXYXYXX
I expect LB430 back next week and no additional changes.
I will read a page long legislative history and expect the bill to move second round to final. There will be no way at this time to carry with my interpretation.
I have visited with University and trying to get a hour or 24 hour exemption in the vehicle. Thanks for your email. I am working on this.
SO, ALTHOUGH NOT THE BEST RELATIVE TO WHAT I PERSONALLY WOULD LIKE TO SEE REGARDING PLACES OF WORSHIP AND UNIVERSITY, AT THIS POINT I WOULD RATHER HAVE IT PASSED SO THAT WE CAN TRAVEL THROUGHOUT THE STATE WITHOUT THAT YOCO-LOCAL STUFF OF OMAHA, ETC. ALSO, THE RECIPROCITY WITH OTHER STATES WILL BE ICING ON THE CAKE.
EVEN THOUGH SEN FULTON FEELS THAT IT WILL PASS, IT WON'T HURT TO STAY IN TOUCH WITH THE SENATORS RIGHT TO THE VERY END!
Cool 8) 8) 8) 8)
-
Did it couple of weeks ago, thanks gang....
-
Thanks for the update Aldo.
As much as I hate to admit it, the fix appears to be "in" ever since the NRA and Brad Ashford conspired with the Legislators to pass LB97( http://www.unicam.state.ne.us/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=542 ) in 2007, putting colleges and universities on the banned places list for CCW.
I concede that we probably can't win the battle at this time. Avery's bill (LB145) which is the basis for the amendment banning firearms on all school grounds, was likely to pass on it's own, even if it had not been tacked on to LB430.
I will take the win on LB430, and live to fight another day on the campus carry issues.
Remember that the Unicameral cycles every 2 years, so it will be a while before that fight can be renewed
-
This is what I received from Sen Langemeier's office yesterday:
...Thank you for your inquiry to our office regarding LB 430. My name is Craig Breunig and I am the Legislative Aide for Senator Chris Langemeier. He asked that I respond to you. At this time LB 430 is still in the second stage of debate by the full Legislature otherwise known as Select File. The bill is not dead and debate on this measure will be resumed this year at some point. Craig Breunig
-
Whoa!!!! Check it out. Sen Christensen today (Monday, April 20) filed a pending amendment (AM1105) to Sen Avery's Amendment AM835 of LB 430. Apparently it will allow for a concealed handgun permit holder to bring his/her handgun onto a parking lot of a school and be allowed to keep it locked in the vehicle without being in violation except where prohibited by federal law. May we assume that this is the case even when the CHP holder leaves the vehicle (e.g., if the CHP happens to be a school "university" employee)? ;)
NE Legislature LB 430 status page:
http://www.nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=6960 (http://www.nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=6960)
Sen Christensen's AM 1105 document page (pdf document):
http://www.nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/Current/PDF/AM/AM1105.pdf (http://www.nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/Current/PDF/AM/AM1105.pdf)
AM1105 AM1105
LB430 LB430
NPN-04/20/2009 NPN-04/20/2009
AMENDMENTS TO LB 430
Introduced by Christensen, 44.
1 1. In the Standing Committee amendments, AM835, on page
2 22, strike beginning with "A" in line 1 through the period in line
3 4, show as stricken, and insert
4 "(3) A permitholder carrying a concealed handgun in a
5 vehicle or on his or her person while riding in or on a vehicle
6 into or onto any parking area, which is open to the public, used by
7 any location listed in subdivision (1)(a) of this section, does not
8 violate this section if the handgun is not removed from the vehicle
9 and is locked inside the vehicle while the vehicle is in or on such
10 parking area. This subsection does not apply to any parking area
11 used by such location when the carrying of a concealed handgun into
12 or onto such parking area is prohibited by federal law.
13 (4)"; and in line 7 strike "(3)", show as stricken, and
14 insert "(5)".
15 2. In the Avery amendment, AM993, on page 4, line 4,
16 strike "or" and show as stricken; and in line 7 after "vehicle"
17 insert ", or (f) a handgun carried as a concealed handgun by a
18 person who is a valid holder of a permit issued under the Concealed
19 Handgun Permit Act in a vehicle or on his or her person while
20 riding in or on a vehicle into or onto any parking area, which is
21 open to the public, used by a school if the handgun is not removed
22 from the vehicle and is locked inside the vehicle glove box or
23 trunk while the vehicle is in or on such parking area, except as
prohibited by federal law".
AM1105 AM1105
LB430 LB430
NPN-04/20/2009 NPN-04/20/2009
-
I've heard some rumors of this for a while... good to see it showing up finally!
-
I'm extremely happy with this, hope it flys....
-
Great! Now everybody write your Senators again to support this new amendment! It does pay to bug them. If enough people complain the majority will listen.
-
E-mails sent to my senator and fellow like-minded citizens.
-
Dear Senators,
Senator Mark Christensen has introduced AM1105 to LB430. This amendment would make an exception for Concealed Handgun Permit holders to keep their concealed handgun locked in their vehicle when parked on school/college/university property.
As a Concealed Handgun Permit holder and university student, I travel not only to the university but to other places as well throughout the day. To require me to not have my concealed handgun in my vehicle while it is parked on university property is unfair and unreasonable since I have already gone through an extensive background check and have received training in the law and firearms use. It would be ridiculous to require me to have to go home to drop off my concealed handgun everytime I planned on going to the University for classes or errands.
Therefore, I would ask for your support of Senator Christensen's AM1105 to LB430. Please vote for AM1105 and for passage of LB430 into law. Thank you for considering this bill.
-
AM1105 is just what we needed. I hope it goes through. I've written my senator, Bill Avery, in the recent past regarding LB430, and I plan to write him regarding AM1105. Just one question...do you folks just right to your senator, or do you do all senators and/or committees?
Thanks,
Fly
-
AM1105 is just what we needed. I hope it goes through. I've written my senator, Bill Avery, in the recent past regarding LB430, and I plan to write him regarding AM1105. Just one question...do you folks just right to your senator, or do you do all senators and/or committees?
Thanks,
Fly
Fly, each has their own flavor as to whom they will write. Just my opinion, but I write to each individual Senator rather than a "group" e-mail...take a little longer, but it makes it personal when one opens the e-mail with their personal salutation identified at the beginning. I even send to those who I know are ding-bats (Council, McGill as examples...especially the latter one since she is my area's representative) just so they know that there are quite a few folks out there who support the bill....otherwise the ding-bats will only hear from their fellow ding-bats. If we don't take the time to do action and speak up, then ding-bats come out on top....check out our Fed govt!!! The ding-bats came out of the walls to vote more so than folks with full brain functions. But that's just my opinion and modus operandum. Cut and paste works wonders....beats the old days of typing things out and snail mailing.
-
I wrote to both Sen Christensen and Sen Fulton regarding this AM 1105. So far I have only heard back from Sen Fulton:
- Dear Senator Fulton,
On the NE Legislature website today I noticed that Senator Christensen filed a pending amendment (AM 1105) to LB 430. Am I reading/interpreting it correctly that a NE CHP holder will be allowed to bring their handgun onto a school parking lot as long as it is locked in a compartment? And, as a university employee, will I as a NE CHP holder be able to keep my CCW locked in the car's lockbox while I go into my place of employment on campus for the day?
This is great news if I am interpreting it correctly! Do you feel that this amendment will have the support of the other Senators? Should I and my colleagues continue to write to NE Senators to request their support of this amendment?
Thank you in advance for taking the time to read my e-mail and address my questions. I look forward to your response!
Regards,
XYXYXYXYX
Lincoln
- XYXXYXXY,
That's the intent. I haven't read his amendment yet, but he (Sen Christensen) is trying to clarify a little more within the law...as we have the votes to do so we think. I'll review the amendment, but I spoke with Sen Christensen, and this is his intention.
tony
Senator Tony Fulton
Nebraska Legislature, District 29
Office 2107
402-471-2734
-
Oh heck...there's only 49 senators. Maybe I will just send each of them an individual note.
Thanks,
Fly
-
Here is my first email to Sen. Avery...
Dear Senator Avery,
Since our correspondence, AM1105 has been introduced by Sen. Christensen. This amendment is just what is needed for the conceal carry permit holders to live their day-to-day lives, but still exercise their right of self protection.
In my case, I have children in the LPS system. When I pick up my children, I can't even drive through the parking area. I have to park across the street or remove/secure the firearm in the back of the vehicle. The option of disarming is a bad idea for a couple of reasons. First, the more a gun is unnecessarily handled, the higher the chance for a negligent discharge. Secondly, this would be an awkward task and one that is difficult to do without possibly alarming my fellow citizens.
I would ask that you support Sen. Christensen's common sense amendment to LB430.
Thank you,
-
Hey. Things are really cookin' up. Sen Christensen has now (Tuesday, April 21) made ANOTHER amendment AM 1132 that further clarifies his recent AM 1105. AM 1132 seems to be adding a couple of user-friendly additions re 1) lock boxes (since AM 1105 was only identifying glove compartments), 2) motorcycles with lockable compartments, and 3) if the CHP holder leaves the vehicle, it's okay to have the handgun locked in the vehicle. He's staying right on top of this to make this bill as clear as daylight!! Kudos to Sen Christensen. 8) 8) 8) 8)
NE Legislature website re LB 430 and latest AM 1132 (April 21, 2009):
http://www.nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=6960 (http://www.nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=6960)
Sen Christensen's AM 1132 from today (April 21, 2009),,,pdf document:
http://www.nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/Current/PDF/AM/AM1132.pdf (http://www.nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/Current/PDF/AM/AM1132.pdf)
Here is the document for today's (April 21) amendment:
AM1132 AM1132
LB430 LB430
NPN-04/21/2009 NPN-04/21/2009
AMENDMENTS TO LB 430
Introduced by Christensen, 44.
1 1. In the E & R amendments, ER8052, on page 22, strike
2 beginning with "A" in line 13 through the period in line 16, show
3 as stricken, and insert
4 "(3) A permitholder carrying a concealed handgun in a
5 vehicle or on his or her person while riding in or on a vehicle
6 into or onto any parking area, which is open to the public, used
7 by any location listed in subdivision (1)(a) of this section, does
8 not violate this section if, upon exiting the vehicle, the handgun
9 is locked inside the glove box, trunk, or other compartment of the
10 vehicle, a storage box securely attached to the vehicle, or, if
11 the vehicle is a motorcycle, a saddle bag or compartment securely
12 attached to the motorcycle. This subsection does not apply to any
13 parking area used by such location when the carrying of a concealed
14 handgun into or onto such parking area is prohibited by federal
15 law.
16 (4)"; and in line 19 strike "(3)", show as stricken, and
17 insert "(5)".
18 2. In the Avery amendment, AM993, on page 4, line 4,
19 strike "or" and show as stricken; and in line 7 after "vehicle"
20 insert ", or (f) a handgun carried as a concealed handgun by a
21 person who is a valid holder of a permit issued under the Concealed
22 Handgun Permit Act in a vehicle or on his or her person while
23 riding in or on a vehicle into or onto any parking area, which
is open to the public, used by a school if, upon exiting the
2 vehicle, the handgun is locked inside the glove box, trunk, or
3 other compartment of the vehicle, a storage box securely attached
4 to the vehicle, or, if the vehicle is a motorcycle, a saddle bag or
5 compartment securely attached to the motorcycle while the vehicle
6 is in or on such parking area, except as prohibited by federal
7 law".
-
Whewwweee! Roller coaster time!!!! Senator Christensen wrote (see below) that LB 430 will be heard tomorrow (Wed, April 22) as long as today's bills are finished up.
He also stated that both the university and the cities "are on board" with his latest amendments to LB 430!!!!!! 8) ;D :o :)
"XYXYXXY,
The bill will be heard tomorrow if LB545 is finished today. I should have votes to take care of this. The university and cities are on board!
Senator
Mark Christensen"
-
The other bills on today's agenda did not get finished.
Here's the pdf document for tomorrow's agenda (Wednesday, April 22), and LB 430 is NOT scheduled. Remember, Sen Christensen in his e-mail said that it would get scheduled for tomorrow if the other bills (particularly LB 545) get finished. So, perhaps for Thursday, April 23.
http://www.nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/Current/PDF/Agenda/nextagenda.pdf (http://www.nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/Current/PDF/Agenda/nextagenda.pdf)
Hey, it's gonna get on there.....real soon....and hopefully approved as quickly as well. Let's get this bill behind us and move on. It will be a GREAT accomplishment when that happens, and many thank yous need to go to the Senators who vote in its favor...and certainly to Sen Christensen!
Let's stay vigilant....it won't hurt to keep in contact with the Senators on LB 430 and Sen Christensen's amendments!
-
From Senator Avery...
Greg,
I have been working with Sen. Christensen on amending LB 430 to satisfy colleges and universities. They have a legitimate concern about loaded weapons in school parking lots. The amendment will allow guns in school parking lots, but they must be in a locked compartment (glove box, trunk, toolbox, etc.) when permit holder is not in the vehicle. So you would be able to enter a school parking with a concealed weapon, so long as you do not leave your vehicle.
Sen. Bill Avery
Sounds like Avery won't try to block it.
Fly
-
From Senator Avery...
Greg,
I have been working with Sen. Christensen on amending LB 430 to satisfy colleges and universities. They have a legitimate concern about loaded weapons in school parking lots. The amendment will allow guns in school parking lots, but they must be in a locked compartment (glove box, trunk, toolbox, etc.) when permit holder is not in the vehicle. So you would be able to enter a school parking with a concealed weapon, so long as you do not leave your vehicle.
Sen. Bill Avery
Sounds like Avery won't try to block it.
Fly
Excellent! Thanks for sharing that info from Sen Avery, Fly!! That must be why Sen Christensen is sounding fairly confident that he has the votes. I can only assume that he must be working with other key Senators as well.
Again, thanks for sharing, Fly.
-
Here is what I sent to the Senators (excluding Christensen and Avery)...
Dear Senator XXXXX,
I am in the process of writing every Nebraska Senator expressing my support for the common sense legislation introduced in LB430 along with the recent amendments AM1105 and AM1132. Even though I am not a constituent in your district, I would like to emphasize how important this proposed legislation is to the law abiding citizens of Nebraska.
The naysayers who opposed conceal carry legislation when it was introduced made wild claims of increased crime and violence should it be passed. Since the inception of concealed carry law in Nebraska, and across the nation for that matter, there has been NO significant increase in crime or violence that can be directly attributed to these laws. This is not to say that permit holders have not broken the law, rather the laws broken are not a direct result of their permit. On the other hand, if you look beyond the liberal bias of the media, you can read on a daily basis about how law abiding citizens have used firearms to protect themselves or their loved ones.
Regarding LB430, AM1105, and AM1132. This bill and the proposed amendments are needed for the conceal carry permit holders to live their day-to-day lives, but still exercise their right of self protection. In my case, I have children in the LPS system. When I pick up my children, I can't even drive through the parking area. I have to park across the street or remove/secure the firearm in the back of the vehicle. The option of disarming is a bad idea for a couple of reasons. First, the more a gun is unnecessarily handled, the higher the chance for a negligent discharge. Secondly, this would be an awkward task and one that is difficult to do without possibly alarming my fellow citizens. I understand the intent of the current law; however, the citizens who have gone to the trouble of acquiring a conceal carry permit are not the threat.
I would ask that you support LB430 and Senator Christensen's common sense amendments.
Sincerely,
Hopefully it will do some good.
Fly
-
I called Christensen's and Sturthmans offices expressing my support for the amemdment. I also told Christensen's aide that he needs to share the water or Koolaide that he is drinking because that has to be the reason for these "common sense" bills coming out of his office. She got a laugh out of that. Sounded like she was fielding quite a few calls & that people were not too happy. Not sure if they were related to this latest amedment , she did not elaborate. But it IS a good amendment and we need to support it. This bill went from being great to pretty good to great again.
-
I just emailed and also wrote hardcopy letters to mail to the Judiciary Committee.
-
Good job everyone! Keep it up! And special thanks to Aldo for all the vigilance and activism on your part. I guess I will send out another letter to the Senators to support AM1132 as well.
-
OK, folks.....here we go! LB 430 is now on the agenda for Thursday, April 23!!!
If you have internet access, you can watch it live at:
http://www.netnebraska.org/publicmedia/capitol.html (http://www.netnebraska.org/publicmedia/capitol.html)
....or you can watch it live on NET tv...whatever channel that is for your area.
Here is the NE Legislature website for the agenda; LB 430 is not up right away, but at least it is out of the gate and out on the tarmac:
http://www.nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/Current/PDF/Agenda/nextagenda.pdf (http://www.nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/Current/PDF/Agenda/nextagenda.pdf)
Here is what the agenda looks like in case you don't want to go to the website:
NEBRASKA UNICAMERAL LEGISLATIVE AGENDA
Sixty-seventh Day
Thursday, April 23, 2009 One Hundred First Legislature
9:00 a.m. First Session
Prayer by the Chaplain
Call to Order ? Roll Call
Corrections for the Journal
Messages, Reports, Announcements
SELECT FILE: 2009 SENATOR PRIORITY BILLS ? ?SULLIVAN DIVISION?
LB 98 (Carlson) Change noxious weed grant programs and the Riparian Vegetation Management Task
Force
LB 98A (Carlson) Appropriations Bill
LB 420 (Hadley) Change a sales tax exemption relating to nonprofit organizations
LB 159 (Gay) Provide an income tax credit for long-term care insurance policy premiums
LB 159A (Gay) Appropriations Bill
LB 489 (Sullivan) Adopt the Area Health Education Centers Act
LB 489A (Sullivan) Appropriations Bill
SELECT FILE: 2009 COMMITTEE PRIORITY BILLS ? ?ADAMS DIVISION?
LB 679 (Legislative Performance Audit Committee) Require certain disclosures from potential members of
the State Foster Care Review Board
LB 198 (Stuthman) Adopt the Reduced Cigarette Ignition Propensity Act
LB 322 (Avery) Prohibit nepotism and supervision of family members by executive branch officials and
employees
LB 549 (Adams) Change provisions relating to schools
SELECT FILE: 2009 SPEAKER PRIORITY BILLS
LB 246 (Dubas) Provide for a statewide strategic plan for biotechnology and repeal the Biopower Steering
Committee
LB 440 (Council) Change diversity criteria under the Student Diversity Scholarship Program Act
SELECT FILE: 2009 SENATOR PRIORITY BILLS ? ?WHITE DIVISION?
LB 430 (Christensen) Change provisions relating to the Concealed Handgun Permit Act 8) 8) 8) 8) 8)
LB 551 (White) Extend the limiting age on sickness and accident insurance policies
SELECT FILE: 2009 SPEAKER PRIORITY BILLS
LB 56 (Fischer) Change the Livestock Waste Management Act
LB 162 (Cornett) Change provisions relating to contractor registration and income tax withholding
SELECT FILE: 2009 COMMITTEE PRIORITY BILLS ? ?FULTON DIVISION?
LB 436 (Haar) Provide for net metering of electricity
LB 497 (Fulton) Change ignition interlock device provisions and penalties
LB 497A (Fulton) Appropriations Bill
12:30 P.M. -- ANY SELECT FILE BILL LISTED ABOVE, WITHOUT AN AMENDMENT OTHER THAN AN E & R
AMENDMENT, WILL BE VOTED UPON FOR ADVANCEMENT.
RETURN TO AGENDA AT LOCATION LEFT PRIOR TO 12:30 P.M.
GENERAL FILE: 2009 SENATOR PRIORITY BILL
LB 160 (Gay) Authorize issuance of flood protection and water quality enhancement bonds by natural
resources districts
GENERAL FILE: 2009 COMMITTEE PRIORITY BILLS ? ?LATHROP DIVISION?
LB 630 (Business and Labor Committee) Change workers' compensation medical fee and procedural
provisions
GENERAL FILE: 2009 SENATOR PRIORITY BILL
LB 307 (Council) Change sentencing requirements with respect to certain minors
GENERAL FILE: 2009 SPEAKER PRIORITY BILLS
LB 9 (Wightman) Exempt biofuels used for irrigation and farming purposes from sales tax
LB 494 (McCoy) Change provisions relating to dangerous dogs
GENERAL FILE: 2009 COMMITTEE PRIORITY BILLS ? ?PAHLS DIVISION?
LB 288 (Health and Human Services Committee) Change provisions relating to health and human services
LB 16 (White) Adopt the Taxpayer Transparency Act
LB 16A (White) Appropriations Bill
LB 241 (Pahls) Change the Commercial Dog and Cat Operator Inspection Act
GENERAL FILE: 2009 SENATOR PRIORITY BILL ? ?PIRSCH DIVISION?
LB 671 (Pirsch) Provide powers and duties and change membership of the Nebraska County Attorney
Standards Advisory Council relating to death investigations
LB 476 (Stuthman) Adopt the Center for Student Leadership and Extended Learning Act
LB 476A (Stuthman) Appropriations Bill
LB 285 (Pirsch) Change Sex Offender Registration Act provisions
GENERAL FILE: 2009 SENATOR PRIORITY BILLS ? ?PANKONIN DIVISION?
LB 633 (Mello) Create the Neighborhood Development Act
LB 342 (Gay) Provide duties for the Department of Health and Human Services relating to payment for
pediatric feeding disorder treatment
LB 568 (Dubas) Provide requirements for wind leases and easements
LB 134 (Pankonin) Change natural resources districts eminent domain powers
LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION(S) ELIGIBLE FOR ADOPTION PURSUANT TO RULE 4, SECTION 5(B)
LR 92 (Pirsch) Declare May 1, 2009, as "Keep Kids Alive-Drive 25 Day"
LR 93 (Dubas) Extend sympathy to the family of Merle Hansen
LR 94 (Price) Congratulate Xavier Metzger for earning the rank of Eagle Scout
Messages on the President?s Desk
Adjourn until Monday, April 27, 2009 at 10:00 a.m.
-
After writing 47 senators individually (ok...I cut and pasted, but it still took a while), these are the responses I have received. So far, fairly positive.
Greg,
Will do. This is my priority bill, and I am working closely with Sen. Christensen to ensure its passage.
Thanks for your support.
Thanks for the email Mr. Lamb.
Sen. Pirsch
Thanks Greg. I am the co sponsor of this legislation. Charlie
Oops...my bad. :-[
Mr. Lamb: I voted for this and continue to support it.
Dear Mr. Lamb:
I do not share your opinion on the importance of this legislation. Indeed, I don't even share your opinion on the necessity of this legislation. So, it should come as no surprise that I have not and will not vote to enact any portion of LB 430.
Big surprise there.
Mr. Lamb-
I am and have always been supportive of LB 430.
-
We're up!!
http://www.netnebraska.org/publicmedia/capitol.html (http://www.netnebraska.org/publicmedia/capitol.html)
-
please feel free to give those of us who can't watch some updates :D
Thanks all you who have time and are available to watch! I wish I was!
-
Sen. Nantkes and Sen. Friend are bickering back and forth about judicial review and other crap that has nothing to do with LB430.
Going ok so far.
-
AM1192 and FA31 have been introduced by Sen. Christensen. They change some wording including changing that you have to stow the gun before entering a university parking lot. Also, saddlebags must be "hardened".
http://www.nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/Current/PDF/AM/AM1192.pdf (http://www.nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/Current/PDF/AM/AM1192.pdf)
http://www.nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/Current/PDF/AM/FA31.pdf (http://www.nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/Current/PDF/AM/FA31.pdf)
-
AM1192 passes 37-0-9
FA31 is up for debate now
-
Sen. Council speaking. Says current law is good enough for passage, same as she spoke about before.
Sen. Friend talking about cloture, filibuster, blah, blah, blah. Not adding to the debate at all.
-
They change some wording including changing that you have to stow the gun before entering a university parking lot.
Does this include ALL schools or just universities?
Fly
-
They change some wording including changing that you have to stow the gun before entering a university parking lot.
Does this include ALL schools or just universities?
Fly
Or were you speaking of the requirement of securing the firearm BEFORE exiting the vehicle?
Fly
-
FA31 passes, 36-0-9
Back to AM1132 as amended,
Christensen closing on AM1132
-
AM1132 passes 36-0-10
Debate on LB430 begins
-
http://nebraskalegislature.gov/FloorDocs/Current/PDF/AM/AM1132.pdf
or (f) a handgun carried as a concealed handgun by a
21 person who is a valid holder of a permit issued under the Concealed
22 Handgun Permit Act in a vehicle or on his or her person while
23 riding in or on a vehicle into or onto any parking area, which
is open to the public, used by a school
1 if, upon exiting the
2 vehicle, the handgun is locked inside the glove box, trunk, or
3 other compartment of the vehicle, a storage box securely attached
4 to the vehicle, or, if the vehicle is a motorcycle, a saddle bag or
5 compartment securely attached to the motorcycle while the vehicle
6 is in or on such parking area, except as prohibited by federal
7 law".
-
Just says school.
Defined in LB993 as:
(7) School means a public, private, denominational, or
6 parochial elementary, vocational, or secondary school, a private
7 postsecondary career school as defined in section 85-1603, a
8 community college, a public or private college, a junior college,
9 or a university;
So, sounds to me like you can drive through any school parking lot you want, anywhere in the state, if you don't leave the vehicle. If you DO leave the vehicle, you must lock the gun as perscribed. I am a little confused though, I drive an SUV, have no trunk, glovebox lock, or other. Is my gun considered locked in the glovebox if placed in an unlocked glovebox or closed center console, with the vehicle being locked?
-
They change some wording including changing that you have to stow the gun before entering a university parking lot.
Does this include ALL schools or just universities?
Fly
Or were you speaking of the requirement of securing the firearm BEFORE exiting the vehicle?
Fly
Universities only, elementary and high schools are prohibited by federal law, per what was said in the debate. Yes, on the above concerning securing before.
LB430 advances to E&R for engrossing!
-
thanks rick!!!!
-
Farmer Rick
Ya I have been lurking in the shadows and peeking thru the grass.
So for the Uninformed what does E & R for engrosing mean ??
FLUFF
-
Enrollment and Review (E&R) - the process of incorporating adopted amendments into a bill, reviewing the bill for technical and grammatical accuracy, and making recommendations relative to arrangement, phraseology and correlation.
This is a page I use frequently.
http://www.nebraskalegislature.gov/about/glossary.php (http://www.nebraskalegislature.gov/about/glossary.php)
-
I hear they still make paper 'Thank you' cards. I generally stick to just email. BUT today, over lunch I'm heading to Target to find a genuine 'Thank you' cards. Senator Christensen deserves more than just my email thanks (sent earlier) for the beating he took in the debate of this bill.
-
Since that was select file, this is the final E&R, we now go onto Final Reading!!! I daresay things are looking really good!
Rick, do you know what the vote count was for advancing 430 to next stage?
-
Ok
So after E & R is done, It's one more read and a Final vote ??
-
Yes, after debate (rambling) about 2A and many other Bill of Rights discussion stuff (????), LB 430 and Amendment were approved to move on to Enrollment and Review Final (E&R for Engrossing).
According to the NE Legislature glossary of terms:
Enrollment and Review Final (E&R for Engrossing) - the Enrollment and Review process that a bill undergoes after it is advanced from Select File. During this stage, the bill is engrossed and reprinted for Final Reading.
So, now we wait until it comes back onto the docket for the final reading and vote.
-
Say, Aldo do you happen to have the audio for today's debate (THU 4/23/09)? I really appreciated the last two. I would especially like today's debate in audio because of the school talk. The whole federal thing regarding guns at elementary and high schools. I really would like the audio on that.
-
Since that was select file, this is the final E&R, we now go onto Final Reading!!! I daresay things are looking really good!
Rick, do you know what the vote count was for advancing 430 to next stage?
It was a voice vote. The weird part, if I heard it correctly, was Sen. McGill was the one that offered the motion to move LB430 to E&R.
Voice Vote - a vote in which senators cast their votes orally and no totals are recorded.
-
If possible, I would really appreciate the audio of todays debate too.
Thanks...Jerry.
-
Does this include ALL schools or just universities?
Fly
[/quote]
Universities only, elementary and high schools are prohibited by federal law, per what was said in the debate. Yes, on the above concerning securing before.
Do you know what Federal Law is being referenced? I searched and came up with "Gun Free Schools Act of 1994" and it deals with a student bringing a gun to school. I think other states allow a ccp to be in a school parking lot as long as their weapon remains in the vehicle.
-
Since that was select file, this is the final E&R, we now go onto Final Reading!!! I daresay things are looking really good!
Rick, do you know what the vote count was for advancing 430 to next stage?
It was a voice vote. The weird part, if I heard it correctly, was Sen. McGill was the one that offered the motion to move LB430 to E&R.
Voice Vote - a vote in which senators cast their votes orally and no totals are recorded.
Maybe it was some parliamentary protocol thing for the entire morning session's agenda today, but from the very first agenda item to the end of at least LB 430, Sen McGill was the one who was consistently called upon by the Speaker to offer the motion at the end of each of those many, many bills. Believe me, from what she spoke of today when it was her turn to talk re LB 430, she was no friend to be making the motion (willingly) for LB 430 and its amendment to move forward to E&R Final....like I said, for whatever parliamentary reason, she wore the hat this morning of the Speaker calling upon her to make whatever motion per each bill.
I have copious notes from the beginning of LB 430...until they all went on this rabbit trail about the entire federal bill of rights thing....and then the final voice vote....there was no roll call vote. I'll post the notes up here shortly as I did for the previous sessions.
-
Thanks for the help Aldo.
Sen. Friend likes to get fired up, it seems. It was pretty entertaining debate today.
-
Allright, folks, here is the best I could do regarding my notes on what transpired today....it got pretty bizarre at one point.... :o
Sen Christensen withdraws Amendment 1105.
Sen Christensen opens with Amendment 1132; says AM 1132 further positions the rights of the CHP holder and it clarifies the transportation issue of guns by a CHP holder onto public places; the CHP holder can go, leave the handgun in the vehicle, and not be in violation as long as the handgun is locked in the vehicle; it harmonizes the policy of Sen Avery with AM 1332 by clarifying the ability of a CHP holder to transport a CCW onto public places except where Federal Law prohibits it; I met with the university officials as well as Sen Avery, and both are okay with the wording of AM 1132.
Sen Nantkes I rise up in support of the underlying legislation, but this is a serious topic and thus needs discussion. Question to Sen Christensen: my understanding that the main point of the amendment is to protect citizens regarding the right to a concealed carry permit, so where does this emanate from? Sen Christensen says it comes from the Second Amendment. Question to Sen Christensen: where does the Second Amendment talk about concealed carry weapons? Sen Christensen says 2A is the right to bear arms. Sen Nantkes says that 2A doesn't cover all rights, so then it is up to the judiciary to decide what is covered and not covered [NOTE: Sen Nantkes then reads the entire 2A], and so the Second Amendment talks about a well regulated militia and doesn't really give broad rights to carry a concealed weapon, doesn't it? Sen Christensen says that's why we're all here today is to clarify LB 430, and he tells her that he is not sure where she is trying to go with this. [NOTE: he's not the only one :-\] Sen Nantkes says she is doing this for consistency and public policy sake, that we're going to support ALL parts of the constitution...[NOTE: Speaker stopped her since her time expired...thank GOD :-X].
Sen Christensen introduces AM 1192 to AM 1132; says AM 1192 clarifies the language of AM 1132 to read more clearly and is just a clerical cleanup of the bill with a change of "the" and "and".
Sen White question to Sen Christensen: let's assume I'm carrying a big .45 and I go to pick up my child at school and I take out the gun in public to put it in the trunk of my car; now I am in support of LB 430, but I am concerned about frightening people in public.
Sen Christensen again explained the intent of the amendment, and also how CHP with a motorcycle can be covered leagally.
Sen White I understand the intent, but I am concerned about public exposure of a gun. Sen Christensen asked if Sen White would be okay if the word "quickly" were to be added to the amendment regarding placing a gun in the trunk after the CHP holder exits the vehicle. Sen White said that "promptly upon exiting the vehicle to put away the weapon" would be better since the current wording is too loose. Sen Christensen said that he and his team will do a language change here to accommodate the concern.
Sen Avery said I helped Sen Christensen put AM 1132 together; I can also clarify what Sen White means and what Sen Christensen is doing: AM 1132 already takes care of the concern as it is written and does not need any changes.
Sen Gloor question to Sen Christensen: let's look at a real world scenario---a person is brought to the emergency room and a concealed weapon is discovered on the person and the weapon is given to the family members to put away, so is that breaking the law? Sen Christensen said no since it was not willfully being done in the emergency room, and then asks Sen Gloor is he has any concern with AM 1132. Sen Gloor says no, I understand that Sen Avery and you have worked together, so I am in support of LB 430 and the amendement.
Sen Harr question to Sen Christensen: is the purpose of this amendment so that we don't trap the CHP holder? Sen Christensen says that we are just wanting consistency of transportation throughout the state and also if the CHP holder is picking up a child or someone at the university. Sen Harr says that years ago he would not have approved of the bill and amendment, but he has a friend who went through CCW training in Texas and now sees that it was a positive experience.
Sen Harr expresses his concern, as a former motorcyclist, that a saddlebag on a motorcycle can be cut free and stolen pretty easily, and asked Sen Christensen if that is a concern? Sen Christensen says that the amendment identifies either a saddlebag or a compartment, but if Sen Harr wants the amendment reworded about the saddlebag, then that can be changed. Sen Harr says that he is okay with the bill and the amendment.
Sen Nantkes [NOTE: here is where you as the reader need to put on your tin foil hat] expresses thanks to Sen Christensen for cooperating with all parties regarding the amendment; question to Sen Christensen: are there rights in the Constitution for all citizens? Sen Christensen says yes. Sen Nantkes asks: then are there rights that are more important than others? Sen Christensen says it's up to each person's interests as to what may be more important to one person from another. Sen Nantkes asks: is the right to privacy as important as the Second Amendment? Sen Christensen starts to answer, but Sen Nantkes interrupts abruptly with: yes or no?!? Sen Christensen says yes. Sen Nantkes says that for the sake of argument, the courts have not found broad rights on the Federal level and that NE is actually more broad, so local control is an issue that the NE bill under Sen Christensen would supersede the local control, so I just want the Senators to be committed to ALL rights to ALL citizens. [NOTE: Speaker stops Sen Nantkes because her time expired]
Sen McGill [NOTE: this is where you the reader need to put another tin foil hat on top of the first one] I do not support LB 430; I understand why concealed carry supporters want this, but there is a warped perception of violence by what we see on television; I was at a neighborhood meeting the other night with Chief Cassidy, and we noted that crimes are going down and that killers kill themselves after they kill who they targeted and so anyone with a concealed weapon is not going to make it any safer, and gang crimes are targeted crimes and don't involve anyone else, and...[NOTE: Speaker stops Sen McGill because her time expired....seemed like a short clock, but that was okay by me].
Sen ???? I rise in support of the bill and the amendment.
Sen Friend emphatically states that Sen Nantkes is wrong in what she is saying about constitutional rights and court decisions and fundamentals of the Bill of Rights; never in my time here have I witnessed one Senator challenging another Senator for a "yes or no" answer!; that was offensive to my sensibilities to say something like that; if you want me to speak for 2 hours, or 4 hours, or 40 hours on this, I will; yes, I am furious!
Sen Nantkes I am supportive of the bill and the amendment, but I just want to say that.....[NOTE: sorry, folks, but this is where I lost it and couldn't take any more notes because of her rambling again about all of the Bill of Rights, and right to privacy, and yada yada yada]. [NOTE: Speaker stops Sen Nantkes because her time expired].
Sen Schilz I am from western NE where gun support is strong; I support both the bill and the amendment.
Sen Fulton expressed support for both the bill and the amendment.
[NOTE: there were some other Senators who came up, but I had to leave the office area and couldn't pick up on the rest until when I came back, which was the call for a voice vote].
Voice vote: Speaker called for Sen McGill to make motion to move the bill and amendment forward. Sen McGill did so, and the voice vote approved.
So, folks, that's it. Sorry that I missed some towards the end, but it seemed to be droning on about this right and that right....and it was one heck of a rabbit trail....I really wondered if it was going to end with a vote. Thankfully, it did.
So now we wait for the Final reading as all of the language is put together in one final document.
--Aldo
-
Awesome writeup, Aldo.
-
Thanks Aldo. I have some important things happening at work right now and haven't been able to keep up with the debates. This is great news!
-
I nominate ALDO as the NFOA's legislative reporter of the month ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
AND i own page 14
-
Does this include ALL schools or just universities?
Fly
Federal Law prohibits possesing a firearm in a school zone UNLESS AUTHORIZED BY THE STATE.
18 USC 922 (q)
So basically now NE is authorizing permit holders to carry on school grounds as long as it is in the vehicle. In Utah for example, they allow permit holders to carry in schools.
Universities only, elementary and high schools are prohibited by federal law, per what was said in the debate. Yes, on the above concerning securing before.
Do you know what Federal Law is being referenced? I searched and came up with "Gun Free Schools Act of 1994" and it deals with a student bringing a gun to school. I think other states allow a ccp to be in a school parking lot as long as their weapon remains in the vehicle.
[/quote]
-
Aldo-
Awesome summary and updates today! Thank you!
I have been buried at work all day today, and just finally got home a little bit ago.
PS DAN- I now own 2/3 of page 14 ;D
-
awww Federal Law, it has to be read carefully, because it does not always mean what it says or what can be gleamed from reading it. The drug free zones signs at schools "Penalty doubled under Federal Law" so say I have a pound of pot at school get caught no problemo, state staute sets the penalties, now if I have 220 lbs of pot then the Federalies double the penalty. In my research the 1994 gun law regarding schools is the last one I have seen.
-
OK
Please clarify?????
Say I stop to pick up the kids after school (Elementry), Will I be violating the law (LB430 when passed :)) if the firearm remains in the vehicle in a secure locked box ??
It will be a few years before the kids get to the university level.
FLUFF
-
As I read the law, as long as you don't leave the vehicle with the firearm on school grounds you are FINE. If you leave the vehicle it must be locked up in a container, or glove box
-
Now, to muddy the confusion even more......there are no laws prohibiting OC in Nebraska. I swing buy the campus bookstore and leave my gun on the front seat (I would not really do that, but just playing devil's advocate). Is LB430 intended to apply only to CHP holders?
See what happens when you can't look to other states who are getting right for guidance?
-
Yes, FLUFF, as CZ noted, one must have the the handgun already locked up prior to exiting the vehicle. Because this issue came up during the debate on the Senate floor about the public getting frightened if someone should leave their vehicle and then take out their handgun and then place it in the trunk, Sen Christensen made a Floor Amendment (FA31) that was adopted Thursday (April 23) to take care of this issue along with the one about the saddlebag on a motorcycle.
Here is Sen Christensen's Floor Amendment:
Floor Amendment To LB430
Introduced by Christensen, 44.
Amend AM1132 On page 1, line 8 after the word "if" strike "upon" and insert "prior to" On page
1, line 11 strike "saddle bag or" and insert "hardened" On page 2, line 1 strike the word "upon" and
insert "prior to"
So, 2 things that come out of the Floor Amendment:
1) as CZ noted, the individual must lock up the gun inside the vehicle "prior to" exiting the vehicle; and 2) no more considering a locked saddlebag for a motorcycle...there must now be a "hardened" compartment on the motorcycle since there was a concern that the saddlebag could easily be cut off from the motorcycle and stolen (with the handgun in it).
Actually, a third thing that comes out of that FA31.....Sen Christensen's continued willingness to cooperatively work with his peers and the constituents. I personally find it incredible that he found the university folks and Chief Cassidy amenable to wordsmithing with him; being a university employee, I NEVER would have imagined that the NU folks would have given an inch about this issue. So, I am one happy dude. Way cool! 8)
P.S. Sorry that my notes from the debate didn't include FA31.....Sen Christensen had his office aides working feverishly on the side doing some wordsmithing based on the real-time concerns going on....and I must have blinked....or more likely nodded off from the doldrum of Sen Nantke's and Sen McGill's nonsensical ramblings...and Sen Christensen must have slipped that FA31 in there; pretty smart move on his part to hold the coalition of supporters together!!
-
If a school sponsors an activity at a public location, such as a car wash in the local Wal-mart parking lot, would a CCW permit holder be guilty of illegal possesion of a firearm if the CCW permit holder entered the parking lot during the time of the school sponsored car wash? Reference Final Reading copy of LB430, Paragraph 28-1204.04(1), Page 22 Lines 20-23 and Page 23 Lines 16-21. It appears to me the school carry prohibition in LB430 applies to school sponsored activies on and off school property. Am I reading this correctly?
-
Foggy language, no question. I think mainly meant to address school football games and such..
-
I was hoping that was the intent. I obtained my CCW permit a few months ago and have been trying to learn the crazy maze of laws. I obey the law, pay my taxes, and could get arrested and labled a criminal because someone put a "No CCW" sticker in their window!
-
According to Senator Christensen, the final reading of LB 430 should be either this Thursday/Friday (April 30/May 1) or next Thursday/Friday (May 7/8).
Here is an e-mail that I sent to him, and then his response:
- Dear Senator Christensen,
I am not that familiar with the time line process now that the bill is moving to the E&R Final engrossing stage. Do you know about how long a time that will take before LB 430 will be back on the legislative agenda?
Regards,
XYXYXYXYXY
Lincoln
- XYXXYXXYX,
Generally the next week on Thursday or Friday, which ever is the last day of the week? He skips some weeks on doing final readings. I expect this week but we could pass over this week.
Mark Christensen
-
I sent an email to Speaker Flood today asking if he thought an emergency clause would be appropriate for LB430. It would make the changes take effect as soon as the bill is signed by the Governor. I'll update if I get a response.
-
Here is another Senator's reply I have received...
Thank you for your email. I support LB 430 and it's intent.
And another one today...
Dear Greg,
Thank you for your e-mail regarding LB 430 and the proposed amendments.
LB 430 has advanced to Final Reading with AM 1132 and AM 1192. I support the bill in its current form.
I appreciate you taking the time to contact me with your views on this important issue.
Fly
-
Senator Wallman is on board as well.
-
Here is an e-mail that I sent to Sen. Pirsch, and his response:
-------------------------------------------
Senator Pirsch:
I urge you to support the adoption of AM 1132 to LB 430. I urge you to support the 2nd Ammendment.
-------------------------------------------
Mr. XXXX:
Thank you for your email and your input on AM 1132 to LB 430. It is greatly appreciated. I am a very strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment. Please keep in touch as the session advances. My office number is XXX-XXX-XXXX. Which neighborhood do you live in by the way? Thanks again.
Warm Regards,
Sen. Pete Pirsch
-------------------------------------------
Senator Pirsch:
I know you're very busy, so thank you for personally responding to my emial! Thank you for supporting LB430 and the 2nd Ammendment! I live in the XXXX neighborhood. I'll continue following the session advances of LB430 daily along with my peers in the Nebraska Firearms Owners Association. I recenlty obtained my CCW permit and have been researching all the CCW laws to make sure I obey them all. The maze of Nebraska state and city laws regarding CCW is very frustrating because I obey the law, pay my taxes, and yet could be arrested and labled a criminal becuase someone put a "No CCW," sicker in their window that I accidentally did not see! As a practical exercise, I'd like for legislators to obtain a CCW permit and carry their firearm during their daily routine, then they will see how impractical all the CCW restrictions are, especially since only law abiding citizens can obtain a CCW permit. I realize LB430 will help eliminate a lot of these restriction and harmonize laws across the state and I greatly thank you for your efforts in this! I'll plan on voting for you in the next election! Thank you for your time and public service!
-------------------------------------------
Mr. XXXX:
Thanks for the follow up and please keep in touch. We're working on getting that shooting range bill passed as well this session.
Regards,
Sen. Pirsch
-
Here are some emails that I sent to Sen. Brenda Council, and her response:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Sen. Council:
Thank you for supporting LB430 and I encourage you to voice your support to the remaining Judiciary Committee members to hear the bill and vote it out of committee and onto the floor for debate.
Sincerely,
XXXXXXXX
Nebraska Firearms Owners Association Member
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Mr. XXXXXXXX:
I don't think you intended to send this e-mail to me since I am adamantly opposed to CCW and, therefore, I have voted against and will continue to vote against LB 430.
Senator Brenda J. Council
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Senator Council:
I know you're very busy and I appreciate you making the time to personally respond to my email. I intended to send you the email encouraging you to support CCW and LB430. I hope you've had a good day and thank you again for your time.
Sincerley,
XXXXXXXX
Nebraska Firearms Owners Association Member
-
Nothing posted yet on the NE Legislature website. Per Sen Christensen's e-mail, it could be this Thursday/Friday. We'll just have to keep checkin' and then let everyone know. I travelled to Omaha this past Sunday, and I did NOT like having to go without my handgun! :P
-
I see the LPD chief, Tom Casady, was present to protest LB430.
How special. :'(
Fly
-
Maybe Tom will run for the Legislature now to get his powers back ;)
-
Yikes!! Don't give him any ideas!!
-
I, too, emailed Sen. Brenda Council, along with the rest of the members, for passing LB430 out of the Judiciary Committee. Here's her response:
"Dear Mr. XXXXX:
I did not vote to move this bill out of Committee and I have, and I will continue to vote against LB 430 at every stage of the debate.
Senator Brenda J. Council"
-
Has anyone asked her a simple question? "Why?"
Though I can imagine what she would say, it would be interesting to hear. Maybe we can knock down some of her prejudice against the 2A.
I know...I'm dreaming.
Fly
-
Has anyone asked her a simple question? "Why?"
Though I can imagine what she would say, it would be interesting to hear. Maybe we can knock down some of her prejudice against the 2A.
I know...I'm dreaming.
Fly
Now that felons can vote again, she is protecting her constituancy!
-
LB 430 is on the agenda for final reading, Wednesday, May 13th.
-
Thanks Lefty... LB503 is also on the agenda for Select File debate
-
Thanks for picking that up, Lefty.
Here is the agenda for tomorrow, Wednesday, April 12. Hopefully, the legislature will get to it. And it will be interesting to see if the legislature goes for the full reading of the bill or votes to skip the full reading and let the action begin. Just guessing, but my wager is that the legislature votes to skip the full reading and goes for it!!
NEBRASKA UNICAMERAL LEGISLATIVE AGENDA
Seventy-eighth Day
Wednesday, May 13, 2009 One Hundred First Legislature
9:00 a.m. First Session
Prayer by the Chaplain
Call to Order ? Roll Call
Corrections for the Journal
Messages, Reports, Announcements
FINAL READING: BUDGET AND STATE CLAIMS BILLS (BILLS PRECEDED WITH AN * WILL REQUIRE A VOTE
TO SUSPEND AT LARGE READING, PURSUANT TO RULE 6, SECTION 8 )
*LB 311e (Speaker Flood, at the request of the Governor) Provide for deficit appropriations
LB 312e (Speaker Flood, at the request of the Governor) Appropriate funds for salaries of members of the
Legislature
LB 313e (Speaker Flood, at the request of the Governor) Appropriate funds for salaries of constitutional
officers
*LB 314e (Speaker Flood, at the request of the Governor) Appropriate funds for capital construction
*LB 315e (Speaker Flood, at the request of the Governor) Appropriate funds for state government expenses
*LB 316e (Speaker Flood, at the request of the Governor) Change provisions relating to certain funds and
provide for transfers of funds
LB 318e (Speaker Flood, at the request of the Governor) Change provisions governing depreciation charges
for capital improvement projects
LB 414e (Ashford) Change salary and retirement provisions for judges and a fee
LB 414Ae (Ashford) Appropriations Bill
LB 456e (Heidemann) Change provisions relating to the Cash Reserve Fund
LB 628e (Business and Labor Committee) Provide for payment of claims against the state
LB 629 (Business and Labor Committee) Disapprove claims against the state
FINAL READING: SPEAKER?S MAJOR PROPOSAL (BILLS PRECEDED WITH AN * WILL REQUIRE A VOTE TO
SUSPEND AT LARGE READING, PURSUANT TO RULE 6, SECTION 8 )
*LB 545e (Adams) Adopt, change, and eliminate provisions relating to school funding and state aid to schools
LB 545Ae (Adams) Appropriations Bill
FINAL READING (BILLS PRECEDED WITH AN * WILL REQUIRE A VOTE TO SUSPEND AT LARGE READING,
PURSUANT TO RULE 6, SECTION 8 )
*LB 198 (Stuthman) Adopt the Reduced Cigarette Ignition Propensity Act
LB 198A (Stuthman) Appropriations Bill
*LB 430 (Christensen) Change provisions relating to the Concealed Handgun Permit Act
FINAL READING: MOTION TO RETURN TO SELECT FILE FOR A SPECIFIC AMENDMENT
LB 671 (Pirsch) Provide powers and duties for and change membership of the Nebraska County Attorney
Standards Advisory Council relating to death investigations, require training for coroners and
deputy coroners, and provide duties for the Nebraska Commission on Law Enforcement and
Criminal Justice
SELECT FILE: 2009 SPEAKER PRIORITY BILLS ? ?ROGERT DIVISION?
LB 503 (Langemeier) Adopt the Nebraska Shooting Range Protection Act
LB 358 (Pahls) Change the Comprehensive Health Insurance Pool Act
LB 155 (Rogert) Adopt the Public Protection Act, change provisions relating to theft offenses and criminal
impersonation, and create the offenses of identity theft and identity fraud
SELECT FILE: 2009 COMMITTEE PRIORITY BILL
LB 630 (Business and Labor Committee) Change workers' compensation medical fee and procedural
provisions
SELECT FILE: 2009 SPEAKER PRIORITY BILL
LB 626 (Karpisek) Change prohibited activities for public officials and public employees use of public
resources
Messages on the President?s Desk
Adjourn until Thursday, May 14, 2009 at 9:00 a.m.
-
9:55am -- LB430 should be coming up shortly.
will update if I can after the vote.
-
LB430 passes with a vote of 45-3
against were: Campbell, Cook, McGill
-
Woohooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Thanks to those who kept us updated to this.
-
To bad they didn't add an emergency Clause.
-
First vote for skipping the "final reading" was 38-0-10 (with Council absent).
Final vote: 45-3 (with Council absent)
Many thanks to everyone for their support of LB 430! This is a great day!!! Council was not there today, otherwise it would have been 45-4. A rather resounding support by the NE Senators. Not even close!!!!
-
When you say "LB430 passes" does that mean it passes out of committee and goes to the floor for a vote, or does it mean that it now goes to the governor for his signature?
-
This is great news, especially for me I live in Lexington area and have friends in Holdrege area (two of the last hold outs).
Now to send senators thank yous!
-
When you say "LB430 passes" does that mean it passes out of committee and goes to the floor for a vote, or does it mean that it now goes to the governor for his signature?
Has passed all committes, amendments, and votes in legislature. Speaker has signed it and it will be sent to the governor for his signature.
-
When you say "LB430 passes" does that mean it passes out of committee and goes to the floor for a vote, or does it mean that it now goes to the governor for his signature?
Has passed all committes, amendments, and votes in legislature. Speaker has signed it and it will be sent to the governor for his signature.
Yes, according to the NE Legislature website, LB 430 was sent to the Governor today!
http://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=6960 (http://nebraskalegislature.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=6960)
-
Thank you! That is wonderful.
Yesterday was my birthday, and even though it's a day late, it's a great birthday present!
I've been plunking for this ever since CCW became possible. I guess all those letters were worth the time they took.
Congratulations to all of us.
-
Do you suppose that Council's absense was on purpose?
When the Gov. signs it, when does it go into effect?
-
Ok
I'm going to print out new law for a good long read late.
Lets Review
What all has changed ??
-
-State Pre-emption of all local ordinances regarding CHP holders
-Church carry for approved security personel
-No more 180 day wait period for military personel stationed in NE
-Allow carry at any of the prohibited or posted places so long as gun does not leave vehicle (including schools!)
-Dictates CHP issuance in 45 days or less (after 1 Jan 2010)
-Enables Reciprocity with states TBD by NE Attorney General
-
When does this go into effect?
-
according to the unicam website the law will go into effect 3 months after the session has come to an end. and contingent on the governors signature.
-
Awesome!! Great job to all of the members who lobbied and just as importantly took the time to keep the masses informed - this site's content has been extremely helpful!!
-
In between our celebrating, let's remember to send a "thank you" to the NE Senators!
The nod of gratitude now will be worth its weight later on when the next issue comes up.
-
Voting in the affirmative, 45:
Adams Fischer Hansen Louden Price Ashford Flood Harms McCoy Rogert Avery Friend Heidemann Mello Schilz Carlson Fulton Howard Nantkes Stuthman Christensen Gay Janssen Nelson Sullivan Coash Giese Karpisek Nordquist Utter Cornett Gloor Langemeier Pahls Wallman Dierks Haar Lathrop Pankonin White Dubas Hadley Lautenbaugh Pirsch Wightman
-
I feel safer already knowing that my fellow law abiding citizens will be free to CCW anywhere in the state in 3 months.
-
I'm sure this has already been asked, but is there a chance that Gov. Heineman won't sign LB430? Isn't that the last step required to make it a law?
Fly
-
I'm sure this has already been asked, but is there a chance that Gov. Heineman won't sign LB430? Isn't that the last step required to make it a law?
Good point!...Maybe it's too early for celebrating...Maybe we should all write Governor Heinman and urge him to sign the bill.
-
Don't Worry.
Dave is on board
-
Don't Worry...Dave is on board
Good!...I was starting to fret!
-
Don't Worry.
Dave is on board
That's what I was trying to figure out. I was not sure what Gov. Heineman's stance was on gun issues.
Fly
-
Signed today by the Governor!
-
Awesome! Now we just need to wait three months before common sense becomes law. (http://www.nebraskafirepower.com/forum/Smileys/default/rolleyes.gif)
Fly
-
Maybe this question has been asked already, but how will this law affect the Omaha requirement to have guns registered in Omaha regardless of where you reside if you want to carry in Omaha?
Greg58
-
Maybe someone else will have a differing opinion here, but my opinion is that Omaha's law will not stand. The purpose of the bill is for a CHP holder to travel anywhere in the state and abide by only those limits as set by the original concealed carry state law. Thus removing any city/town specific limitations...and Omaha's gun registration definitely would be over and above the state limits.
Fly
-
Thanks that is what I was hoping. I live in Western Douglas Co. and don't particularly want to let Omaha know what I own, or give them any of my money.
Greg58
-
LB430 Sec. 5. Cities and villages shall not have the power to regulate the ownership, possession, or transportation of a concealed handgun, as such ownership, possession, or transportation is authorized under the Concealed Handgun Permit Act, except as expressly provided by state law.
Any existing city or village ordinance, permit, or regulation regulating the ownership, possession, or transportation of a concealed handgun, as such ownership, possession, or transportation is authorized under the act, is declared to be null and void as against any permit holder possessing a valid permit under the act.
Reminder that this law makes changes to the Concealed Handgun Permit Act only and does not affect current NE firearm laws in any other way.
Only Concealed Handgun Permit holders when the Bill LB430 goes into affect
September 5th, 2009.
Omaha's requirement for any handgun purchased in Omaha must be registered with OPD will still stand as law.
I would really like to be wrong on this but Omaha and Lincoln just let this go through to easily after it was amended.
Individuals not living in Omaha or purchasing a handgun in Omaha are not required to register the handgun for concealed carry permit purposes formally required for Non-Omaha permit holders. Non resident handgun purchased in Omaha guess what must register with OPD.
LB430 Final Reading Copy Link
http://uniweb.legislature.ne.gov/bills/view_bill.php?DocumentID=6960
-
Here's a question.. The law mentions "loaded firearms" what is the legislative definition of loaded? A round in the chamber, a magazine with rounds in it placed into the grip of a pistol or rounds in the cylinder of a revolver?
-
Thanks that is what I was hoping. I live in Western Douglas Co. and don't particularly want to let Omaha know what I own, or give them any of my money.
AMEN BROTHA!
Omaha's requirement for any handgun purchased in Omaha must be registered with OPD will still stand as law.
Good point Randy. That is definitely a point I should have included.
Here's a question.. The law mentions "loaded firearms" what is the legislative definition of loaded? A round in the chamber, a magazine with rounds in it placed into the grip of a pistol or rounds in the cylinder of a revolver?
I can't site any documentation, but I think you will find the generally accepted interpretation of "loaded" to include rounds in a magazine even if it is not inserted in the pistol. I have no doubt that rounds in the cylinder of a revolver would be considered loaded.
Fly
-
"Victory is mine!"
A hearty thank you to all NFOA members who helped get this through!
-
What about the lincoln parks ban? Can CCW'ers carry in parks now thanks to LB430?
"12.08.200 Weapons Prohibited in Parks.
(a) It shall be unlawful for any person to possess or discharge, or cause to be discharged,
within any park, any firearm, including, but not limited to, any pistol, revolver, shotgun, or rifle."
-
What about the lincoln parks ban? Can CCW'ers carry in parks now thanks to LB430?
"12.08.200 Weapons Prohibited in Parks.
(a) It shall be unlawful for any person to possess or discharge, or cause to be discharged,
within any park, any firearm, including, but not limited to, any pistol, revolver, shotgun, or rifle."
Again, that is a city ordinance...not state. LB430 overrides it.
Fly
-
Yes, Jesse T, my understanding (which isn't saying much since I am not an attorney) from listening to the floor debates and from my reading of LB 430, Lincoln's park stuff is superseded by LB 430.
During one of the debates, the issue came up, and a pro-LB 430 Senator said that a CHP could carry in the Lincoln parks, and that if an officer came up suspecting of a person carrying (??seeing a "print"???), all the CHP holder has to do is to show his/her CHP, and all would be well.
-
OK I am confused here is it so that 90 days after governor signed vs 3 months after close of Unicameral Session if unsigned but not vetoed. If so we need to update the front page date.
Article below from Columbus Telegam:
"The City of Columbus has 90 days from the day the governor signed the bill to come into compliance with the new legislation, which would place the deadline Aug. 17."
Reply to my email question about date below.
"During composition of the article I confirmed with the governor's office that the legislation would go into effect 90 days after Gov. Heinemann signed the bill. Had he not signed nor vetoed the bill the legislation would have gone into effect three calendar months after the final day the Unicameral was in session.
If you have any other inquiries do not hesitate to contact me."
Adrian Sanchez
Telegram Staff Writer
(402) 563-7534
asanchez@columbustelegram.com
-
Just joined (thanks to a referral on another message board) and I'll toss out my first post in the form of a question: I saw that the Omaha city requirement to register was not eliminated from the final version submitted and signed by the governor. I have a Taurus Judge that I got from a store inside the city limits, so of course I had to go through the hoops of registering it. I also have a Walther PP, which I purchased in Germany over 20 years ago and is probably going to be my primary carry weapon ("His Honor" will be the home defense pistol). My question is whether or not I would be in violation of the city statute if I carried my Walther in Omaha and had to ID myself to a LEO? ??? I realize that this might sound like an obvious one to some folks, but sometimes things are decided around very fine points of a law.
Also, has anybody seen any indication or discussion of what the criteria are or will be for reciprocity? I believe the AG is supposed to make the list of states that Nebraska will recognize & reciprocate with, but I haven't seen anything on that subject with any potential or likely states named.
Any insight on this is appreciated. Thanks!!!
-
First off, welcome to the NFOA!
Seeing as how you listed that you're in Bellevue, I think the consensus is that before September, if you plan on carrying the Walther in Omaha, you need to register it. After September you don't need to. If you lived in Omaha, you'd have to register it regardless.
The criteria for reciprocity is the same as Nebraska's requirement. Class and qualification.
Sorry, I haven't done the research to find out what other States have those requirements, anybody?
-
The criteria for reciprocity is the same as Nebraska's requirement. Class and qualification.
Sorry, I haven't done the research to find out what other States have those requirements, anybody?
Does NE require qualification scoring? I though it was just certificate of training, vision, and printing/background check? Colorado requires a certificate of training class (or proof of military/LEO service) and printing/background check. So, if there isn't a qualification score required in NE, then NE will honor the CO permit and by CO laws (CO honors any state's CCW - you must be a resident of the same state as your permit - that honors CO CCW) (http://cbi.state.co.us/ccw/reciprocity.asp) NE permits would then also be valid in CO.
You can conveniently check each state's CCW requirements at CarryConcealed.net (http://carryconcealed.publishpath.com/legal)
Zombie
-
To get the training certificate issued by a state-licensed instructor you must shoot a qualifier. 30-ish rounds. Short ranges. You must show you can draw safely from concealment, handle your firearm without blowing a toe off, and not point it at your instructor.
-
Roger that. I misread it to be a quantitative qual (scoriing X pts from X distance) vs a qualitative qual of skills proficiency. Good to know; thanks!
-
First, a belated thanks to those who replied, I appreciate the advice. I haven't seen any announcements or postings regarding the states to which Nebraska would grant reciprocity, if anyone has a link or other source, it's appreciated. On a related topic, I don't know if there has been any movement on the Castle Doctrine research that had a funding request (by the same legislator who got LB 430 through, I believe). I'm trying to track this through my state senator (Abbie Cornett) and am awaiting her reply to an email. I'll pass along any useful info I can get back.
-
The Attorney Generals Office is working on the list of states. I checked with them this weekend and Mr Bruning says they are working hard to get that list established when the law takes effect
-
Senator Christensen (who introduced LB430) was the one who also introduced LR191, which would have initiated a study by the judiciary committee into the current laws in NE, and laws in other states, regarding the use of force to defned oneself. They would then provide their findings and recommendations to the rest of the legislature. Unfortunately, I don't believe the resolution made it to a vote this session, so no study will be made unless it is brought up again next session. Another alternative to having a study would be to simply introduce legislation that would create a "castle law" in Nebraska. We, NFOA, need to pursue this with great vigor. Personally, I'd rather skip the study, if we can find someone to introduce a well-written bill that will provide protection for citizens who choose to use force to defend themselves or their property. The home page of NFOA has a poll asking what we think is the biggest priority for us in the coming year, and so far, a castle law seems to be our choice.