It would hardly be surprising if Gov. Kathleen Sebelius vetoed the bill keeping secret the names of people who get permits to carry concealed guns in Kansas, given that she vetoed the conceal-carry bill itself. If she’s looking for other reasons, too, the fact that legislators rushed it through without any public hearing is a good one. With 90 days at their disposal, lawmakers should have had plenty to time to publicly weigh such an important open-government issue and no need to flout their own rules to pass this bill. A better way to handle this, as it happens, was promoted by the architect of the conceal-carry bill, state Sen. Phil Journey, R-Haysville. Lawmakers could have followed his counsel to allow public release of the names and county of residence for permit holders, but not addresses or Social Security numbers. A Sebelius veto would allow lawmakers to rethink the secret-records bill next year.
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- okobserver on Open thread 11/23
- Chas on Open thread 11/23
- Chas on Open thread 11/23
- Chas on Open thread 11/23
- okobserver on Open thread 11/23
- Chas on Open thread 11/23
- Chas on Open thread 11/23
- Chas on Open thread 11/23
- outlander on Open thread 11/23
- Chas on Open thread 11/23
27 Comments
Well, we won’t publish their names, but….HERE’S ALL THEIR PHONE RECORDS !!!!
Exactly Tracy, because we know anyone getting a permit must be link to Al Queda (since we know they would follow the law).
This is just too lame to even seriously address. I hope she does veto it. It will expose her for what she is.
And why does the public need to know who has a license? Only law enforcement needs to know. In my state, thats all who does know.Concealed means “hidden”, “secret”What the hell is wrong with you “flatstaters”??
Ben, are you from Kennesaw?
“IN KENNESAW IT’S THE LAW”
For those of you who don’t know, in order to live in Kennesaw Georgia you MUST own a firearm.It’s the law.
Just another petty attack on legitimate gun owners.
Do it, Kate. Watch me not vote for you.
“…allow public release of the names and county of residence for permit holders, but not addresses or Social Security numbers.”
What? I should memorize the list of names and then ask everybody who they are, just in case?
This is ridiculous. The only people who should have personal information is law enforcement. I really, really don’t want to know.
I bought my first rifle when I was 13, just walked into the drug store and plunked down $15 plus another dollar for two boxes of bullets. The lying politicians always promised No registration, No confiscation, No other infringement of our rights. Soon it was decided there would be no hunting allowed without Gun Safety Training courses. Soon thereafter no minor could buy a gun or ammunition. Then Brady caught a bullet in the head. With such brain damage he, and his lovely wife, lobbied to do their “check” for anyone buying a gun. BUT the records will not be kept! HA. Somewhere along the line Kansas enacted a NO-GUNs-can be-carried-by-anybody law. What BS. Finally we have a concealed carry law but some idiots want to make it public? It is bad enough that they want to register ME but now they want to tell the criminals I have a gun and might even be carrying it. Burglars and muggers rejoice.
There is an obvious compromise, just require everyone with a concealed carry permit to wear a large, red, “G” attached to the lapel of their clothing to signify that they are a gun carrier! That way anyone that is opposed can throw rocks and garbage at them….. That might be a smart idea Huh?
LoL we could also have every woman that commits adultery wear a large, red “A” on their lapel. But only after they are issued a permit to carry a concealed weapon.
And this thread is not Phil Brownlee’s? That is shocking.
We’ve been through this, and it seemed that writers here could find no good reason to publicly release who has a CC permit. That hasn’t changed.
Likewise, there is no good reason to veto this bill. Of course, there was no good reason to veto CCW itself, but she did, so I expect the silly result by the governor here. It’ll keep here bona fides intact for her supposed national ambitions.
If she veto’s the bill then she will be putting people at risk. There are a lot of women looking forward to being able to legally carry a concealed weapon. Why should they worry about their information being made available to criminals? Why would the governor want to put women in harms way? Would it be that she wants to protect the criminals and ignore the victim? Stand up for women governor and sign the bill!!
See, thats what ya git with a female running things :-)
There is a poster on the message board asked honestly why it was a big deal one way or another? I explained it this way,
Imagine that there was a list made available of all women who had or were going to have an abortion. Don’t you think that operation Rescue would like to get their hands on it? Imagine if they did and what kind of things they would do with it? Now there are groups that mirror Operation Rescue in the Anti-gun groups. They would hunt down and harass, investigate and protest anyone and everyone on the list of concealed carry. Looking for anything they could use to farther their case and get they name in the news.
Haaretz explains why the US is paying three dollars a gallon for gasoline and the reasons behind making nuclear threats to Iran.
Any consideration about how 3 dollar gas impacts American families? No, as long as they don’t have any reductions from their 30 billion a years from the US Treasury and all the military hardware they’re given for free and can resell.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/717210.html
Israel protests China’s invitation to Hamas’ foreign minister
The Harvard Paper is correct. Israel runs American foreign policy.Hamas is not a “terrorist” organization, but Zionist Israel most certainly is that and worse.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/717547.html
Is Ed trying to say that the Jews are taking away our guns? Because I fail to see what this yet another innane anti semitic rant had to with this thread. Isn’t Fredemann a Jewish surname, are you bipolar?
Dingus:
Ed is truly just a SSDD writer. It’s best to just ignore his writings; you’ll have seen it before in his previous tin-hat rantings.
Usually I just see the word “zionist” or a variation in the first line or so, and I know I can just skip the post as irrelevent and lunatic.
BTW – same applies to Ian, slightly different subject.
GMC70,
You make a good point!
Guys, granted, Ed can seem like a nutcase sometimes….ok, most of the time, but sometimes, that old boy comes up with some pretty good stuff.
Are you sure he’s full of shit?
I think I’ll hold judgement on that. A lot of what Ed posts is enough to make you say, “Hmmmmm”….
I don’t class him with Ian at all.
I too weigh in for Ed.
Gster you’re new. GMC you’ve been around a few months.
Ed has been about since the beginning of this blog. Though he rarely engages us anymore, the archives show he has a keen debate.
He obviously beleives very strongly in the things that he posts.
(Meaning no disrespect) Ed
Sometime I must make the time to better know why this is so important to him.
JR:
I wasn’t implying that Ed had nothing important to say, to the contrary. I don’t agree with a lot of his ideas, and some I can’t understand, but he does come up with some good stuff that makes me stop and think. I have also wondered what drives his obviously strong feelings about his ideas..
Ed was and IS right!
CT
Ed is unique. I have serious doubts about everything he posts but I have that problem with most of you liberals as well. I don’t like Jews or most other minorities either. Too clannish. I would really like to know WHY Ed is so Anti. I picture him as a Palestinian with a computer hiding in a bombed out building somewhere in the Mideast with nothing to do but Blog. Am I close Ed?
Frankly, I don’t think Ed has anything important to say. This subject says it all – the subject is the open records on CCW, and the push to get it through at the last minute. But does Ed post on that? Tell me how Ed’s post is REMOTELY on, near, in the general area of, that topic. Instead, he posts more anti-semetic spewing.
I clicked on a couple of his posts, once. Mistake. Nutcase city. Once I read him, on this very blog, rationalizing strapping on a bomb and targeting women and children, I was done. NO CAUSE, no matter how right, justifies deliberately targeting innocents in such a way.
That was enough for me to write him off entirely.
No credibility, no nothing.
Slightly off subject, but not much.
You say there is no bias in major network news?
How about Jake Tapper reporting on NRA news for ABC news.
What’s wrong with that you ask?
Jake Tapper used to work for Handgun Control Inc.
Jake Tapper wrote numerous anti-gun screads while writing for Salon magazine.
Funny stuff.
So I guess we can only have people with no personal opinions on a subject report on it…don’t think it would work…I doubt that most judges come to cases with a completely blank slate…that doesn’t mean that they cannot be aware of their prejudices and put them aside or recuse themselves when they can’t.
Brian
There’s a difference between having an opinion about something and having been a paid advocate for or against something.
It’s like having a former lobbyist for a major oil company doing reporting on Global Warming don’t you think?