previous post next post  

Pro-Gun Advancements Being Made in Kansas!

By The Armorer on March 25, 2007 | | Comments (2)

From the NRA-ILA:

In Kansas this week, the House passed House Bill 2528, the clean-up bill for the Right-to-Carry legislation that passed last year. This bill addresses the problems that began to occur last year, before the law even took effect, when cities misinterpreted language in the original bill and believed that they could pass ordinances more stringent than state law to ban permit holders from certain areas. This bill passed the House by a vote of 107-17. The tremendous bipartisan support for this legislation will hopefully carry over to the Senate and speed this bill along before the session ends.

Please contact your State Representative at (800) 432-3924 and thank him or her for their support of this critical legislation. Also please contact your State Senator at (785) 296-2456 and respectfully urge him or her to vote for HB 2528.

Also passing was Senate Bill 189, which will allow for a mentored hunting program to be implemented by the Department of Natural Resources. Mentored hunting allows first time hunters to earn a 1-year deferment, through the hunter safety course, to purchase a license and participate in mentored hunts with an adult. After the end of that year’s hunting season, they may then take the hunter safety course and purchase a regular license. Research has shown this is one of the safest ways to expose new hunters to hunting and give them a real sense of the experience in a supervised environment.

Please contact your Senator at (785) 296-2456 and thank them for their support of this legislation.

Now if I could just get the legislature to amend their gun laws to allow the ownership of at least C&R full auto and DD's, like Missouri does, this state would be a paradise.

And before some anti-gunner cries "bloodbath! streets running red!" I would note that it ain't machineguns the gang-bangers are killing each other (and innocent bystanders) with in KCMO. And make no mistake - the bulk of our killings are gang-related. The law-abiding aren't running around shooting themselves and each other all that much.

And most of the guns being used (already illegally) aren't legally owned or legally obtained... so... passing another *law* about gun ownership or the stripping thereof isn't likely to have much of an impact, is it? It's kind of like ripping the roof off the house down the street to fight the fire that's in the... other house, you know, the one up the block with flames shooting through the window.

But that's so much easier than actually attacking the roots of the problem - which is why the gang-bangers exist and behave the way they do, huh?

Because that might force some politically incorrect thinking, speechifying, and policy, eh?

My local *Democrat* representative, Candy Ruff, has been a leader in this fight, and in bringing concealed carry to the state. Too bad my Democrat Federal Representative, Nancy Boyda, doesn't share this particular value... Hint to Ms. Boyda - if you did, your margin of victory over Jim Ryun would have been larger. Ryun deserved to lose his seat. It's just too bad he lost to you, on this set of issues, especially.

Share This Article:

Share |

Categories:

2 Comments

By Blue on March 26, 2007 2:42 PM
Boyda is pro-gun you doof. I challenge you to identify one anti-gun thing she's done.
 
By John of Argghhh! on March 26, 2007 4:49 PM
1. Please observe "The Rulez". Calling me a "doof" isn't incentive to respond. We prefer you zing the message and not zing the messenger. Keeps things more polite. 2. That said... she hasn't been in office yet long enough to "do anything". But the NRA gave her an "F" in it's rating on her. But she is a former Republican, and if she wants to keep her job, she'll continue to do nothing, in most major aspects. There's always room to wiggle. But around here, Dave Kopel speaks loudly, so let's check with him, 'kay? First up, the ratings explanation:
For federal races, there are two grades reported: first the NRA grade, then the grade from Gun Owners of America (GOA). The latter group grades much more severely than does the NRA. A “?” or “NR” means that the candidate refused to answer the group’s questionnaire. Many candidates answered the NRA questionnaire but not the GOA one, and many of these candidates have good records on the gun issue. A refusal to answer both questionnaires should almost always be considered equivalent to an “F”.
Okay? Now, on to the rest.
Kansas Governor. (R) Jim Barnett (A-) vs. (D) *Kathleen Sebelius (C). Sebelius signed a good bill pre-empting some local firearms laws, in order to help travelers. But she vetoed a “shall issue” concealed carry law, and fought hard, but unsuccessfully, against a veto over-ride in the legislature. Attorney General. (R) *Phil Kline (A+) vs. (D) Paul Morrison (C+). The latest poll shows Morrison with a big lead over the outspoken and very controversial incumbent. District 2, eastern plains. (R) *Jim Ryun (A) vs. (D) Nancy Boyda (F)
Coming in dead *last* among the Democrat candidates. With an "F". In 2004, Kopel characterized her thusly:
Nancy Boyda (F/NR), who is following the strategy of Americans for Gun Safety: claiming to be pro-gun, while supporting the usual litany of crackdowns on law-abiding gun owners.
Not a ringing endorsement. Representative Boyda has been relatively quiet on the issue, which is probably smart on her part. The proof will be in the pudding when she has to start voting. So, Blue, why *shouldn't* I be, if nothing else, pre-emptive in stating my views on the issue? I don't thus far perceive Representative Boyda as being representative of my views on this subject thus far. Like I said - if she wants to keep her job...