Just as the Obama presidency has been a stimulus package for gun dealers, it has stepped up requests for concealed-carry permits in Kansas — to an average 45 per working day in 2009, compared with 23.6 per day in 2008 and 26.4 per day in 2007. “They are concerned about a lot of things and want to get a license before someone changes the law again,” Topeka concealed-carry instructor George Petersen told the Topeka Capital-Journal. So far, more than 4,000 of the 21,000 concealed-carry applicants to the Kansas Attorney General’s Office have been men ages 50 to 60, but six women older than 80 have sought permits. As of last week, the office had issued 19,100 licenses. That means the state is on track to have 20,000 concealed-carry permit holders by 2010.
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
- HLP on Open thread 11/8
- Hud on Open thread 11/8
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/8
- Regular on Everything really should be on the budget table
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/8
- Regular on Death penalty review promised
- Boxlock20 on Open thread 11/7
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/8
- Cynical on Death penalty review promised
- Monkeyhawk on Open thread 11/8
114 Comments
As Phil Journey predicted. Just took a year or two longer than he predicted.
I love this line from the Topeka online urinal story. It’s a classic old scare tactic.
“Someone can be certified to carry, but if they aren’t comfortable, the bad guy could take it away from them,” Feyh said.
Yes that is possible but lets look at someone who’s actually STUDIED that issue.
Clayton Cramer has a website connected to his blog where he’s cataloging self defense stories from around the nation. Recently when his catalog hit 4000 stories he decided to do a little digging. He found IIRC 5 stories in which the defender had his/her weapon taken away and used against them by the attacker. Guess how many he found in which the attacker had his/her weapon taken away and used against them by the defender? drum roll please…. 185.
185 to 5 in the wrong direction from the old scare saw.
Concealed Carry has been a damned near perfect marketing campaign for gun manufacturers.
If crime goes down, they can claim it’s thanks to all those rednecks packing heat scaring away the bad guys.
If crime goes up, all the more reason for more rednecks to carry more guns.
Win-Win.
Brilliant marketing.
I don’t know where you guys go — or why — where you’re to scared to go there unless you’ve got a gun handy. I know some of those places, I think, so I don’t go there? I don’t need to score crystal meth at 3 in the morning and I’m not in the market for Hillbilly Heroin.
I don’t have any “Dirty Harry” fantasies about munching a hotdog and wiping out a gang of dark-skinned thugs with my .44 Magnum.
“So do ya feel lucky, punk?”
Nah.
I just live my life prudently.
And near as I can figure out, any confrontation that adds another gun to the situation escalates the potential problem exponentially.
I just live my life prudently.
Then don’t carry. Quit bit ching
Anybody who thinks they need a gun at all times is probably someone that something bad SHOULD happen to.
“SolDevVB” –
Who’s “bit ching?”
I just think you people are absurd.
Just as absurd as those who buy inflatable sex dolls.
(Albeit, both are probably purchased by the same people, for the same purpose.)
Ever the humanist junior.
This topic is proof of Amercian madness to the rest of the civilized world, just adding another marker to a failed society.
As usual if you disagree with ape boy he resorts to personal attacks and innuendo about your personal life
(Albeit, both are probably purchased by the same people, for the same purpose.)
OK, so you relate sex and guns. And you oppose guns. Says a lot more about you than you tried to project on others.
Walk down the street downtown at lunch today. Count how many people are carrying fire arms.
What is absurd is your obsession over a person legally exercising their rights. What panty wetter arm flailing.
Nothing personal at all, “Cynical” –
Unless you personally happen to purchase guns and inflatable sex dolls.
In which case, I apologize.
Whatever turns you on.
Only 20,000? It should be 50,000!
Please encourage your neighbors to apply.
Explain to them that they don’t HAVE to carry,
but that having the permit to carry will allow
them to when the time comes.
Tell them to take advantage of a great program while it is available. You never know when a new form of government will try to take that right away.
There is enough suspicion of our new government, that I think you will easily be persuasive.
We need numbers to keep America secure.
Two point four.
The average number of posts by Monkeyhawk before he starts with his sexual enuendos in any thread.
And the people that disagree with him are the perverts!
LOL
Just as I suspected, “HLP” –
The virgin prophet “Nathaniel” is the product of immaculate conception.
American_Way
Posted May 28, 2009 at 7:52 am | Permalink
Only 20,000? It should be 50,000!
_____________________________________________
I totally agree! (unless maybe 100,000)
Unlike most of the liberal bed wetters on this BLOG I have no problem with good law abiding people carring a gun if they want.
Why are they so afraid of their fellow citizens?
I’m not afraid of you, “HLP” –
You’re the one who thinks you need to be armed.
You’re the one who cowered away from two scheduled lunch meet-ups with me.
Just who is afraid of whom again?
What are you afraid of, Monkeyhawk?
Why is yor position on CCH so intellectually bankrupt that you must resort to sexual enuendo and personal attacks?
Admit it, ya got nothing intelligent to add to the subject.
I want one of those wrist derringers that you see on TV carried by professional gamblers. :)
Iola, KS?
Do you really expect me to go to Iola, KS to have lunch with you?
Really?
I wouldn’t walk accross the street to pi$$ on you if your hair was on fire.
If you really aren’t afraid of me, meet me today somewhere in Wichita.
I’ll leave my gun at home.
Stop trying to put your — ahem — words into my mouth.
I have no problem with competent, qualified, responsible people carrying weapons. I’ve written that countless times in this forum.
I simply think it’s foolish, bordering on fetishist.
Nothing personal about that, “HLP,” unless you are a fetishist or a fool.
In which case, my due apologies.
“Why are they so afraid of their fellow citizens?”
Fear. Fear is a great motivator. Fear of the unknown is human nature.
If they have not been raised or learned to use and appreciate guns – all they know is what they see on TV.
I’d guess 80% of evening television shows involve guns – in a negative light. All cop shows, CSI, Law and Order shows, etc.etc…
Then there is the newspaper – which everyone KNOWS publishes positive news (not). All people read is about the crimes and murders committed with guns.
It’s an education thing in my opinion for the people.
But, for the power hungry – it’s about control. They FEED on FEAR. So, they promote “evil” guns as a national platform to get re-elected.
“In which case, my due apologies.”
_____________________________________
Apology accepted.
Still lots of whining and bed-wetting about CCW. I recall the dire predictions of gun fights and blood running in the streets; it never happened.
If you want something to worry about, how about some of the people who have licenses to drive a car?
You agreed to the terms: you picked the day, I’d pick the place.
If there were a second meet-up, we’d switch those duties.
You committed to the original proposition then weaseled out. You offered you’d take the opportunity to fly over here, then weaseled out.
You won’t live up to your twice-promised commitments now, but get up on your hind legs and expect me to drive to Wichita? Sorry. That wasn’t the deal.
(Alas, as a bleeding heart liberal, I’ll have to admit I probably would walk across the street to pi$$ on you. Even if your hair weren’t on fire.)
If you want something to worry about, how about some of the people who have licenses to drive a car?
________________________________________
Good morning, XXX.
Exactly. First DUI, lose your licence for a year. Second DUI jail time and lose your licence permanently.
“Do you really expect me to go to Iola, KS to have lunch with you?”
You DID say you would.
But then, your word is worth nothing.
So. . .
When did you move to Iola?
Judge Sotomayor
- ruled on a Second Circuit Appeals Court panel that the Second Amendment is not a fundamental right and does not apply to the states in the case of Maloney v. Cuomo.
This ruling is in direct conflict with a Ninth Circuit Court ruling in the Nor. v. King case in California that the Second Amendment is incorporated through the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Good morning, BlueJay.
How many times have you and your boy eaten on my dime?
How many meetups have you organiized?
I have several liberal friends on this BLOG, how many conservatives do you have?
You are a pathological liar and you say my word is worth nothing?
nitwit
“but six women older than 80 have sought permits. ”
WHERE are the families of these women? People that age should have the aid and care of their families and certainly should not be in situations where they would need a gun.
#
BlueJay
Posted May 28, 2009 at 8:25 am | Permalink
“but six women older than 80 have sought permits. ”
WHERE are the families of these women? People that age should have the aid and care of their families and certainly should not be in situations where they would need a gun.
=======================
Age and sex bigot
“How many times have you and your boy eaten on my dime?”
None.
We made a point to eat food brought by other people.
” certainly should not be in situations where they would need a gun.”
Or drive a car maybe?
“Or drive a car maybe?”
At least Concealed Carry permits require a training certificate and can be denied based upon physical infirmity (eyesight).
Drivers license can be renewed by mail…….
“American_Way” proposes –
” certainly should not be in situations where they would need a gun.”
Or drive a car maybe?
Good idea!
Licensing allows just that!
I have no problem with 80-year-old ladies who are qualified, competent, and responsible packing heat. 80 is the new 60, and all that.
I do have a problem with an unqualified, incompetent, irresponsible 30-year-old strutting into a mall or a playground with a gun and a grudge.
You don’t?
“Good morning, XXX.
Exactly. First DUI, lose your licence for a year. Second DUI jail time and lose your licence permanently.”
____________________
Good morning, Hank.
Good point about DUI. While we’re at it, let’s nail the idiots who can’t drive and use a cell phone at the same time. Then let’s go after the people who don’t know what their turn signals are for. These people represent a far greater danger than law abiding CCW holders.
#
Monkeyhawk
Posted May 28, 2009 at 8:35 am | Permalink
“American_Way” proposes –
” certainly should not be in situations where they would need a gun.”
Or drive a car maybe?
Good idea!
Licensing allows just that!
I have no problem with 80-year-old ladies who are qualified, competent, and responsible packing heat. 80 is the new 60, and all that.
I do have a problem with an unqualified, incompetent, irresponsible 30-year-old strutting into a mall or a playground with a gun and a grudge.
You don’t?
==================================
I’m not an attorney, but a crime committed by a C&C holder, would most likely be prosecuted more harshly than a spontaneous violent incident with an illegal carry of said firearm.
just saying…
“I have no problem with 80-year-old ladies who are qualified, competent, and responsible packing heat. 80 is the new 60, and all that.”
I agree! The qualifications are more strigent to carry and conceal than gaining a drivers license and killing people with a car.
“Exactly. First DUI, lose your licence for a year. Second DUI jail time and lose your licence permanently.”
If that law were applied retroactively, wouldn’t you be walking, Hank?
GrassEater, as always, show up to say- baaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.
Not all folks over 80 lie down and wait to die. Some are quite active and productive.
But you wouldnt know about productive now would you.
If that law were applied retroactively, wouldn’t you be walking, Hank?
____________________________________
No
We made a point to eat food brought by other people.
_____________________________________
Hmmm,
I seem to remember you and your boy eating some of my groceries at Nathan’s going away party.
So, how many meetups have you organized?
Good Morning, Steven!!
“HLP” asks –
“So, how many meetups have you organized?”
Two, so far.
You crapped out on both of ‘em.
“So, how many meetups have you organized?”
Before or after we stopped inviting cons?
One before. And it was better attended than…
“Nathan’s going away party.”
Also Rage’s going away party. That’s why I was there.
So, my little friend, did you eat at Nathan’s going away party? I know your boy had some of my groceries.
I would say, that all of the meetups, the ones by the editors, the ones that everyone could attend and even the ’secret’ ones by the bed wetters were a direct or indirect result of the very first one that Mary and I hosted at Lake Afton.
Face it, I’m a wonderful person.
20,000 carrying by 2010?
Perhaps.
And shockingly, blood has not run in the streets; in fact, aside from the occasional silliness (and it is silliness) of the “gunbuster,” not much has changed at all. As in this – funny, but spoofs the silliness dead-on:
http://www.firearmscoalition.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=52&Itemid=63
It’ s simple preparedness, folks; no different than keeping a first aid kit in the glovebox, or a fire extinguisher in the kitchen. Common sense preparedness. If you don’t believe in preparedness, don’t carry.
So you don’t go to “unsafe” places? Great. Neither, overwhelmingly, do those who carry. If you can predict in advance just which places the defecation is about the strike the oscillator, well, then good for you. Mere mortals cannot; we must prepare for the unexpected as well.
Great a bunch of old senile people packing. When the forget where they parked the car, they’ll shoot someone for stealing it.
“GMC70″ –
Do you always carry a snake bite kit?
“Great a bunch of old senile people packing.”
They take a test and have to qualify.
Neither are verified to get a drivers license in the mail. If we required a driving test for seniors, it might be revealed that they forgot where their car is parked.
Propose a new driving law. Gun laws work just fine.
Do you always carry a snake bite kit?
Were I going in snake country, yes. Unfortunately, human beings being what they are, neither you nor I can know with any sort of certainty just when we may be in “snake country,” when the snakes are of a human sort. And one prepares accordingly
Guys guys, the reason BlowJ, the Monkey and Maggot, as well as a few others, are against CCW is because they CAN’T qualify for one, and/or they are too much of a pu/ssy coward to take the responsibility.
Look at BlowJ, dependent on society to take care of him and his son, he won’t take that responsibility and wouldn’t for his families protection either.
But earlier, “GMC70,” you wrote –
“So you don’t go to “unsafe” places? Great. Neither, overwhelmingly, do those who carry.”
And still you carry a gun everywhere; not just “snake country.”
Thanks to a hugely successful marketing campaign by gun manufacturers, everywhere is “snake country” for gun fetishist CONs.
Fine.
I just think you’re fear is wussy and absurd.
Why don’t you haul around a Howitzer behind your pick-up, “GMC70?”
Ya never know when a world war might break out.
Silly rabbits.
“successful marketing campaign by gun manufacturers”
Why are you against private enterprise? You should be thankful that Obama is responsible for ONE industry making a profit.
“Boxlock20″ tries –
“…Guys guys, the reason BlowJ, the Monkey and Maggot, as well as a few others, are against CCW is because they CAN’T qualify for one, and/or they are too much of a pu/ssy coward….”
So it is a macho thing for you, huh, “Boxlock20?”
I’m supposedly “too much of a pu/ssy coward”?
I’m not the one who’s so afraid of… something… I need to pack heat. You are.
(Sorry to get “personal.” I know you CONs hate that.)
What amazes me his how you CONs attack me for advocating gun-owners be qualified, competent, and responsible.
And the only thing you can come back with is “pu/ssy coward” name-calling.
What astounds me is you think such attacks actually advance your case.
Monkey”boy” says “Thanks to a hugely successful marketing campaign by gun manufacturers”
Seems to be a reoccuring meme with you.One of those taliking point myths that you’ve convinced yourself of? Got any examples of this?
Monkey,
I call the exactly as I see them….and you!!!
Why don’t you haul around a Howitzer behind your pick-up
===================================
That is a little hard to conceal and un-holster.
#
ANTI
Posted May 28, 2009 at 10:03 am | Permalink
Why don’t you haul around a Howitzer behind your pick-up
===================================
That is a little hard to conceal and un-holster.
——————————
That’s not a Howitzer I’m carrying friend. :)
Thanks to a hugely successful marketing campaign by gun manufacturers
====================================
Obama has done more for gun sales than any right wing gun-nut or manufacturer could ever do.
“American_Way” –
You’re so filled with hate against me your thinking is skewed.
I’m an old ad man.
I made my fortune as a professional propagandist for health insurance companies, fast food systems, corporate jets, mutual funds, aggressive banking take-overs, venture capitalists whose only business strategies were sending American jobs overseas…
I’ve been to the Dark Side.
“Damnit, Rommel! I read your book!” — George C. Scott in “Patton.”
Hell, I wrote the book for a lot of your precious “principled” causes. Or, at least, the ads and commercials.
Your comment, “American_Way,” about my imagined hate of private enterprise merely exposes you as another WE Blog CON who posts without know a whit what you’re talking about.
It’s okay.
I’m used to it.
Oh and Monkey,
I see CCW as a most natural, responsible thing to do.
Ignore the statistical facts if you like, and obviously do, that crime is most definitively accruing on a frequent basis, and one can not predict with any certainty it will not happen to you or a loved one. Self defense is a God given right, and with arms a Constitutionally given right as well.
If you choose not to obtain a CCW…fine, that is most certainly your choice, but to ridicule others for taking that responsibility simply shows you are in fact a pu/ssy coward.
MonkeyHawk brags:
I made my fortune as a professional propagandist for health insurance companies, fast food systems, corporate jets, mutual funds, aggressive banking take-overs, venture capitalists whose only business strategies were sending American jobs overseas
There you go BlueJay, one of the evil men right in front of you. Ranks right up there with your appointed villains of Cheney and Bush.
Yeah, well thanks to Phil Journey, all of the resident gun nuts (Nathan pops to mind) can strut around packin’ heat, praying that they get a chance to get into a shoot ‘em up with some perp, preferably in a crowded restaurant so they can show how tough and macho they are.
Total madness. And yes, I own guns. But 22,000 Nathans? Scary.
Dennis
Gee, “Regular” –
And I thought you Twice-Born believed in repentance.
I’ve been to the Dark Side.
I returned to sanity.
Jealous?
You ignore the point, MH, and not by accident, by ideology. When it comes to human beings, everywhere IS “snake country.” That’s not marketing, that’s human nature. Neither you nor I can predict with any certainty where or when the s*** will hit the fan. So one does what one can – prepare accordingly.
The preparation is relatively cheap, and with regular practice, within reach of nearly anyone. The benefits, should the unthinkable happen (and the unthinkable does happen, and entirely unpredictably) are potentially huge. The potential costs of not preparing are catastrophic. Criminee – we regularly buy insurance, at great cost, for just the same sorts of reasons.
Hmmmmm; small or no downside, potentially huge upside. Duh. It’s a simple decision. Except for the willfully blind, or the ideologically driven.
You think my (what you misunderstand as)”fear” is wussy and absurd? Fine. I don’t give a rat’s a** what you think. I “think” (actually I know, though you’d never accept same), however, your lack of preparation is shortsighted and naive.
And for the record, while my advocacy of the law and the purpose behind it as well as the central importance of the 2nd amendment and its purposes is no secret, I will not disclose whether or not I am carrying. Any assumption you make is just that: an assumption, with no basis in knowledge or fact.
Keep ‘em guessing.
“YellowdogLiberal” imagines –
“…22,000 Nathans? Scary.”
Obviously you’re not in the inflatable sex doll industry.
I don’t ‘carry’, although I have thought about getting the licence. It’s a personal choice, as it should be. I definitely do not want someone packing if they are nervous about their weapon and don’t know how to properly use it.
My main reason for not carrying is a matter of my present collection of weapons. A single action revolver with a long barrel kinda sticks out like a sore thumb and is drawn in a manner similar to swinging a water logged log.
The one I thing I really wonder about is all the nut-cases who think Obama’s going to ban their guns.
It’s a great marketing campaign I guess, but one cannot underestimate the degree of delusion necessary to fall for that pitch.
The streets may not run with blood, but seeing that many paranoid deluded gun owners is an unsettling concept nonetheless, as paranoia can translate into an itchy trigger finger. But it’s certain that these hyper-NRA types were already packing heat anyway, and hence if they were going to shoot their foot or their neighbor’s dog, it was going to happen anyway.
The one I thing I really wonder about is all the nut-cases who think Obama’s going to ban their guns.
No delusion necessary, Rage. Just an understanding of Obama’s record; not what he says, what he’s done. His actual votes. He’s never met a gun control law he didn’t like, or vote for.
Do I think he can actually ban guns? No- he hasn’t the votes, for now, nor would this society stand for it.
Would he like to? Absolutely.
Is that the ultimately goal of much of the leadership of his party? Absolutely.
Thinking anything else is in fact delusion.
“GMC70″ –
What part of “qualified, competent, and responsible” do you not understand?
I’ve written it so many times on this issue, in this forum, and this morning… and you CONs keep ignoring it and attacking me.
As I’ve pointed out many times, there’s no difference between my position and the NRA’s. I just happen to remind people of the absurdity you think you can’t go to a swimming pool without a gun strapped to your hip. You want to “keep ‘em guessing” because deep in your soul you realize strutting into a bar with your chaps chafing, yer spurs jinglin’, and y’r pearl-handle Colt revolvers hangin’ off your hips in a hand-tooled holster might lead some others to think you’re a certifiable nut.
Concealed carry is simply a matter of degree on that little macho fantasy.
Fine.
I just think it’s silly.
“So, my little friend, ”
You’re littler than me there, stubby.
“Face it, I’m a wonderful person.”
Having met you, involuntarily and several times, that was not my assessment.
“Your comment, “American_Way,” about my imagined hate of private enterprise merely exposes you as another WE Blog CON who posts without know a whit what you’re talking about.”
Monkeyhawk, I think you are still mad that I thought it was a little weird for you to spend twenty minutes starring at a man getting dressed.
Monkeyhawk
Posted May 25, 2009 at 10:24 pm | Permalink
In the locker room at the gym one time I saw a jarhead spend about twenty minutes primping as he donned his full dress uniform.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2009/05/open-thread-525-2/#comment-580768
So Monkeyhawk, I guess your below statement was a positive for private industry:
Thanks to a hugely successful marketing campaign by gun manufacturers, everywhere is “snake country” for gun fetishist CONs.
Monkey”boy”
Any examples of that CCW marketing campaign you repeatedly talk about?
I mentioned the other day how the Chief of State in Canada got into a problem for evicererating a seal carcass and eating part of the heart, a ceremony which is considered an honor by the Innuit peoples. Peta, Greenpeace and tree huggers galore come out in droves to condemmn the lady whose actions were applauded by the local Government and public opinion. To-day she took the controversy to a new height, she went hunting with the Innuit, carrying a gun even. The EU is outraged that the Head of State, the woman who representt Queen Elizabeth 11 would do such a thing. Love it.
What part of “qualified, competent, and responsible” do you not understand?
I’ve written it so many times on this issue, in this forum, and this morning… and you CONs keep ignoring it and attacking me.
—-
MH – there is that one little fact: I don’t believe you.
First, you’ve written no such thing this morning.
Moreover, you’ve demonstrated – repeatedly – that you’ve got not an honorable bone in your body. You resort to personal attacks on a regular basis, and despite your protestations otherwise, you usually go there first. This very thread demonstrates that. You did so on your first post, and do so on the latest. So excused me if I take your word to be something less than set in mud.
Your “qualified, competent, and responsible” translates into “registered, gov’t approved, and gov’t regulated.” And I know what gov’t always ultimately seeks when weapons are treated that way. No thanks.
American gun owners have overwhelmingly time and again demonstrated themselves to be exactly what you seek; that’s why the “blood will run in the streets” predictions are always wrong. And criminals will always be criminals, and will never be regulated in the way you seek. The regulation you advocate thus limits and restricts those who are not a threat in the first place, and places no limits on those who are, as they will ignore that law.
You’re not honorable, but you’re also not stupid. You understand that. Thus I must conclude you have other motives. Res Ipso Loquitor.
I still dont understand why I need take pay a fee take a class and and get a licence for something that the constituiton says I cand do?
GMC how is C&C permits not de facto gun regstration?
Kansas Population, 2008 estimate — 2,802,134
Persons under 18 years old, percent, 2007 — 25.1%
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/20000.html
I don’t know that eighteen is the minimum age for concealed-carry permits, it was the info I could find easily available. And these figures work to show that of the estimated Kansans over the age of eighteen, 20,000 is a small and insignificant number of people.
TomPaine
CC permits are not gun registration, they are people registration. People who most likely have guns. You don’t have to own a gun to get a permit but it can be assumed that 99% of those with a permit probably have at least one gun.
“I still dont understand why I need take pay a fee take a class and and get a licence for something that the constituiton says I cand do?”
$150.00 permit fee. Issued:
$110 x 19,100 permits = $2,101,000.00 (state)
$40 x 19,100 permits = $764,000.00 (county)
(150 applicants were denied in 2008. I don’t know if they get their application fee back)
Why? Money for state and county would be my guess.
Permits issued by age/gender:
http://www.ksag.org/files/shared/ConcealedCarryGraph.pdf
20,000 is a small and insignificant number of people.
Less than 0.8 persons per 100,000 people in Kansas would conceal and carry. :)
Make that less than 8 per 100,000 :)
Lets assume that most people who get CC permits own guns, more than likely handguns. Now the government has a list not only of handgun owners but of those that plan on carrying guns, sounds like gun registration too me
Absotively and posilutely, “American_Way” –
In fact, I’m kinda jealous of the “…hugely successful marketing campaign by gun manufacturers.”
Brilliant work!
A little too much self defense?
Thursday, May 28, 2009
(AP)
“An Oklahoma City pharmacist who shot and killed a 16-year-old would-be robber was charged Wednesday with first-degree murder.
Jerome Ersland, 57, was being held without bail in the Oklahoma County Jail.
Oklahoma County District Attorney David Prater said in an afternoon news conference that Ersland was justified in shooting Antwun Parker once in the head on May 19. But Prater said Ersland went too far when he shot Parker five more times in the abdomen while Parker lay unconscious on the floor.”
Ya think?
“GMC70″ posts on the taxpayers’ dime –
“MH – there is that one little fact: I don’t believe you.
First, you’ve written no such thing this morning.
Uhm –
Monkeyhawk
Posted May 28, 2009 at 8:35 am | Permalink
I have no problem with 80-year-old ladies who are qualified, competent, and responsible packing heat….
“Moreover, you’ve demonstrated – repeatedly – that you’ve got not an honorable bone in your body. You resort to personal attacks on a regular basis, and despite your protestations otherwise, you usually go there first. This very thread demonstrates that. You did so on your first post, and do so on the latest. So excused me if I take your word to be something less than set in mud.”
For those of you scoring at home, here’s when I posted my “very first” contribution to this thread: 7:18 am.
Any of you CONs can quote from that post and demonstrate how it was a personal attack.
(You can start with the person attacked.)
“Your “qualified, competent, and responsible” translates into “registered, gov’t approved, and gov’t regulated.”
Gee, is this the same “GMC70″ who routinely attacks me when I (correctly) decipher right wing-nut code words?
Y’see, I know a “Dred Scott” reference is code for Advocates of Illegal Abortion. Just as “States’ Rights” was code for racial segregation.
This ain’t my first rodeo, “GMC70.”
Your “honorable” high horse has already thrown two shoes.
“…the “blood will run in the streets” predictions are always wrong.”
And also it’s an argument I’ve never made, “GMC70.”
Find a lion and a tin man and a little Kansas girl and you’re set…
” And criminals will always be criminals, and will never be regulated in the way you seek.”
And there will always be murder so it shouldn’t be a crime….
“The regulation you advocate thus limits and restricts those who are not a threat in the first place, and places no limits on those who are, as they will ignore that law.”
Take that up with the NRA.
As “Heckler” contributed to this thread:
“CC permits are not gun registration, they are people registration.”
That’s the NRA’s preferred approach to Concealed Carry legislation in the several states.
And I agree!
Can you WE Blog CONs get it through your skulls I’ve merely advocating official NRA policy?!
“Competent, qualified, and reliable.”
Haul that Howitzer around town behind your pick-up for all I care, as long as you’re competent, qualified, and reliable.
“You’re not honorable, but you’re also not stupid. You understand that. Thus I must conclude you have other motives. Res Ipso Loquitor.”
I may not measure up to your strained standards of honorable, “GMC70,” but at least I know it’s spelled, res ipsa loquitur.”
And I’m not one who takes my municipal school law degree into the world expecting the taxpayers to finance my internet surfing as I throw out Latin terms I can’t quite get right.
“American_Way
Posted May 28, 2009 at 11:33 am | Permalink
…was charged Wednesday with first-degree murder.
…said in an afternoon news conference that Ersland was justified in shooting Antwun Parker once in the head on May 19. But Prater said Ersland went too far when he shot Parker five more times in the abdomen while Parker lay unconscious on the floor.””
Wait. If the kill shot was justified (I am presuming the shot to the head killed the robber) how can they charge the guy with first-degree murder for the five shots that came afterward.
That doesn’t pass the smell test.
Brian I should have provided a link.
I guess the kid was still wiggling.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,522461,00.html?test=latestnews
“TomPaine
Posted May 28, 2009 at 11:05 am | Permalink
Lets assume that most people who get CC permits own guns, more than likely handguns. Now the government has a list not only of handgun owners but of those that plan on carrying guns, sounds like gun registration too me”
Your statement is missing an important step: what percentage of people who own handguns are applying for CC permits.
Since there is no registry of handgun ownership there is no valid way to tell. I know many people who own handguns for are not applying for CC.
I wonder why the union doesn’t want to be the bad guy and release the information? Could it be because THEY agreed to it?
“DETROIT — A person briefed on General Motors Corp.’s plans says the company on Monday will identify the 14 factories it will close as it heads toward an a likely Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection filing.
The person says United Auto Workers officials in Detroit have told plant-level union leaders that the company will make the announcement, not the union.” Fox
More factories closing under Obama – worst president ever.
“American_Way
Posted May 28, 2009 at 11:59 am | Permalink
Brian I should have provided a link”
Yeah, there was some key information you left out:
“Ersland is seen chasing the second man outside before returning, walking past Parker to get a second gun then going back to Parker and opening fire.
The charge alleges Ersland shot Parker while he was incapacitated and lying on his back. Ersland’s account of the incident doesn’t match the video or the evidence collected at the scene, according to an affidavit written by Oklahoma City Police Detective David Jacobson.
Jacobson said the suspect who ran away from the pharmacy was armed, but no gun was found near Parker.
“Ersland shows no concern for his safety as he walks by Parker, and turns his back to Parker as he walks behind the pharmacy counter,” Jacobson said. “Ersland is then seen to put the pistol he is carrying on the counter, and retrieve a second pistol from a drawer.”
Ersland used this pistol to shoot Parker on the ground, the detective said.”
‘3-year-old girl accidentally shoots and kills brother‘
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/may/28/girl-shoots-kills-brother-california
I dunno, “brian_nuevo” –
I’m not advocating the guy go to the pokey.
But if you drop a bandit with a head shot then stand on top of him and pump five more rounds into the dead guy’s torso, you might have “issues.”
“American_Way
Posted May 28, 2009 at 12:03 pm | Permalink
I wonder why the union doesn’t want to be the bad guy and release the information? Could it be because THEY agreed to it?”
United Auto Workers – worst union ever?
“cosmos_originally” –
I once had a three-year-old sister.
No way I’m gonna believe it was “accidental.”
“Monkeyhawk
Posted May 28, 2009 at 12:04 pm | Permalink
I dunno, “brian_nuevo” –
I’m not advocating the guy go to the pokey.
But if you drop a bandit with a head shot then stand on top of him and pump five more rounds into the dead guy’s torso, you might have “issues.””
I think the issues in that situation would be adrenaline and emotion.
However, “the rest of the story” in the case in question reveals something completely different.
“cosmos_originally
Posted May 28, 2009 at 12:03 pm | Permalink
‘3-year-old girl accidentally shoots and kills brother‘”
“Boy died as father showed him how to stab someone”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1523302/Boy-died-as-father-showed-him-how-to-stab-someone.html
“Yeah, there was some key information you left out”
Actually Brian, I think had the major points in my initial post. I mention the five shots AFTER the guy was unconscious on the floor and ended
with
Ya think?
“But if you drop a bandit with a head shot then stand on top of him and pump five more rounds into the dead guy’s torso, you might have “issues.””
Monkeyhawk wouldn’t you be concerned about blood splattering on your own clothes, or maybe a ricochet?
No matter how you slice it, we’re talking less than 1% of adult Kansans. People with background checks, money for licensing, trained, and tested. Now out of a group of 100, how many OTHERS are carrying? Law Enforcement, those otherwise-legal people carrying illegally, and the most worisome, the criminals with bad histories and evil intent. So out of that group of 100, why all the uproar about the ONE? If you are not a felon, are here legally, this is your RIGHT! CCH’ers are not a problem, and never have been, in any of the 48 states that allow it.
An Oklahoma City pharmacist who shot and killed a 16-year-old would-be robber
=====================================
One less dirt bag to worry about.
“So far, more than 4,000 of the 21,000 concealed-carry applicants to the Kansas Attorney General’s Office have been men ages 50 to 60,”
“Get out of my yard you damned kids!”
Aim low BlueJay, aim low.
“So far, more than 4,000 of the 21,000 concealed-carry applicants to the Kansas Attorney General’s Office have been men ages 50 to 60,”
—————————————————-
That’s in line with the last census in terms of percentage of the population.
If the idea is it’s a bunch of scared or angry old men, you’re wrong.
#
Mr_Kia
Posted May 28, 2009 at 3:37 pm | Permalink
“So far, more than 4,000 of the 21,000 concealed-carry applicants to the Kansas Attorney General’s Office have been men ages 50 to 60,”
—————————————————-
That’s in line with the last census in terms of percentage of the population.
If the idea is it’s a bunch of scared or angry old men, you’re wrong.
============================================
Men between the ages of 50 and 60 makeup 20% of the population in Kansas?
Men between the ages of 50 and 60 makeup 20% of the population in Kansas?
==================================
Somebody’s going to be busy digging holes in a few years.
Somebody’s going to be busy digging holes in a few years.
I’ve been saying this for years. 77 million babybooomers. 1/5th
the US population aging.
Think of investing in what they will need:
Healthcare
Healthcare products
Drugs
Adult daycare
Adult diapers
Senior Centers
Senior retirement communities
Senior Travel agents/trip planning
Senior activities coordinators
Legal counsel (wills/POA/living wills/trusts)
Cemetary plots
Tombstones
Caskets
They will DEMAND representation and benefits like noclass of Americans ever in our history. They will wield the power and have time on their hands to use it.
American_Way,
Don’t you fall into the baby boom demographic?
Those born between 1944 and 1964 are generally considered a part of that group.
Ruger now has an AR:
http://www.ruger-firearms.com/Firearms/FAProdView?model=5902&return=Y
Monkeyhawk
Posted May 28, 2009 at 10:11 am | Permalink
Gee, “Regular” –
And I thought you Twice-Born believed in repentance.
I’ve been to the Dark Side.
I returned to sanity.
Jealous?
– - – – - – - — – - – - – - – - – - – — – - – - — – - – - –
Well jeez monkeyboy. Speaking for the twice born, all I can say is “praise the Lord and pass the ammunition”.
I can’t wait till my neighbor who was once convicted and served for attempted murder gets his. Afterall, he’s already got an arsenal over there.