“We know who these people are. They’re the good guys. Why would we take the good guys’ right to defend themselves away?” – Rep. Jim Howell, R-Derby, talking on Kansas City public radio station KCUR about the new law allowing concealed-carry in more public buildings
“This is definitely an unfunded mandate. I just don’t like someone telling me what I can do in my house.” – Pratt County Sheriff Vernon Chinn, about the concealed-carry expansion
“We have become a pawn in a game of high-stakes poker.” – Shawn Naccarato, director of community and governmental relations at Pittsburg State University, on how higher-education funding figures into the Statehouse’s sales-tax debate
“Why in the world would we abolish one of the rarest things in American political history, a government program that’s working?” – Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, in the Washington Times, on federal legislation that would repeal the E-Verify immigration-status check system
Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kan., issued no formal statement about his April 17 vote against bipartisan legislation meant to strengthen background checks for gun buyers. But he told the Baldwin City Rotary Club this week that he didn’t think the measure would have prevented criminals from getting guns and he feared it would have burdened law-abiding citizens. “I have no problem with anyone who is in the business of selling firearms having to do a background check on whomever they sell to. The question is, how do you get to the dad handing the gun off to the son, which is not what we’re after,” said Moran, as quoted by the Baldwin City Signal. (The proposed legislation would not have affected a gun transfer from father to son.) Moran also spoke of the need for more emphasis on mental health at the state and federal levels, calling community-based programs “woefully underfunded.”
That didn’t take long. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder (in photo) informed Gov. Sam Brownback that part of a new state gun law is unconstitutional — the provisions saying guns made in Kansas are immune from federal regulation and prohibiting federal officials from enforcing those regulations. “In purporting to override federal law and to criminalize the official acts of federal officers, (the law) directly conflicts with federal law and is therefore unconstitutional,” Holder wrote. State lawmakers were told by the Kansas Attorney General’s Office that the law was unenforceable, yet they passed it anyway, and Brownback signed it into law. Now taxpayers will get stuck paying the legal bills in a losing attempt to defend the law.
It’s amazing how flippant some state lawmakers are about the state’s legal bills, considering them just a cost of doing business. No, they are a cost of making bad laws. The Kansas Attorney General’s Office estimated last week that it will need an additional $1.2 million to defend likely challenges to the state’s new gun, abortion and drug-testing laws. It’s already spent more than $750,000 defending previous abortion laws (and cases are still in the courts). The Attorney General’s Office even told lawmakers earlier in the session that parts of the new gun law couldn’t be enforced and would spur costly lawsuits, but lawmakers passed the bill anyway. It’s as if they are spending other people’s money. No, wait – they are.
The National Rifle Association won the legislative fight against new gun-control measures but lost one of its prominent members. Adolphus Busch IV, who has been an NRA member since 1975, asked that his name be removed from the NRA membership roles. “The NRA I see today has undermined the values upon which it was established,” he wrote in a letter to NRA president David Keene. “Your current strategic focus places a priority on the needs of gun and ammunition manufacturers while disregarding the opinions of your 4 million individual members” (74 percent of whom, he noted, support universal background checks).
Proponents of the Second Amendment Protection Act, which Gov. Sam Brownback signed last week, see no legal problem with its wording exempting Kansas-made guns from federal laws. But Robert Cottrol, a law professor at George Washington University, told the Huffington Post that the Constitution’s commerce clause generally covers trade within a single state that affects trade in a given industry nationwide. He suggested another way to exempt Kansas gun owners from federal gun laws: “Declare a large number of citizens deputies. That would be in the power of state government.”
Is there a bigger disconnect between Congress and the public than on expanding background checks for gun purchases? National polls show 90 percent or more of the public support expanded checks. Locally, 84 percent support requiring every gun buyer to go through a criminal background check, according to a SurveyUSA poll conducted for KWCH, Channel 12. Yet a carefully crafted measure failed in the U.S. Senate Wednesday, with Kansas Sens. Pat Roberts and Jerry Moran among those voting against it.
New gun laws in some states “appear to be the result of high emotion, not logic and clear thinking,” columnist Cal Thomas argued. “We all ache for the parents and loved ones of the Sandy Hook victims, but the Newtown tragedy shouldn’t be used as a prop for anti-gun proponents, the most extreme of whom want to register or ban all weapons except those for police and certain security people. What will more gun laws really accomplish? Will they keep one criminal bent on carnage from a single school door?”
As President Obama steps up his call for an up-or-down vote on gun restrictions in the wake of the Sandy Hook Elementary School carnage, Kansas Sens. Jerry Moran and Pat Roberts and 11 other Senate Republicans are threatening to filibuster any such vote. The senators, led by Sens. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and Rand Paul, R-Ky., said in a letter Monday to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., that they “intend to oppose any legislation that would infringe on the American people’s constitutional right to bear arms, or on their ability to exercise this right without being subjected to government surveillance.” But Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said on CBS’ “Face the Nation” that he didn’t understand the filibuster threat: “The purpose of the United States Senate is to debate and to vote and to let the people know where we stand.” McCain asked: “What are we afraid of?”
Several bills this legislative session reflect a mistrust of public schoolteachers. One bill prevents teachers from having voluntary donations to political action committees deducted from their paychecks. Another bill would weaken teachers’ collective-bargaining rights. Another bill would require them to teach doubts about global warming. Yet when it comes to guns, lawmakers seem to have complete trust in teachers. Under a bill the House approved last week, school boards could allow any employee licensed to carry a concealed handgun to bring a firearm to school.
This week the Kansas Senate approved Senate Bill 45, which would prohibit the use of public funds to advocate for gun restrictions at the local, state or federal levels. The bill is being pushed by the National Rifle Association, the Kansas State Rifle Association and other gun-rights advocates. The groups are particularly annoyed that the Kansas Board of Regents has opposed efforts to allow guns on university campuses. Meanwhile, the House approved a bill that would require the state, cities, counties and townships to allow concealed-carry permit holders to carry guns in their buildings unless they have electronic equipment and officers to check for weapons at public entrances. The bill also would circumvent the Board of Regents and allow university presidents to designate employees who could carry concealed guns inside their facilities.
One of the few somewhat positive things to say about the Kansas House debate Wednesday on guns – which included references to the Branch Davidian compound and Ruby Ridge to justify state gun rights – was that House lawmakers voted to end the hypocrisy of mandating that local governments allow guns in their buildings while banning guns in the Statehouse. Rep. John Wilson, D-Lawrence, offered the amendment that opened the Statehouse to concealed weapons. Legislators “appear to think the more law-abiding gun owners in a place, the safer that place becomes,” he said. Though he doesn’t necessarily agree with that view, Wilson said: “If guns are safe around first-graders, I really believe guns should be safe around us here in the Capitol.”
Limited-government state lawmakers sure like to tell doctors what they can or can’t do and say, especially related to abortion. But the “Made in Kansas” pro-gun bill this session may take the cake. It would prevent physicians (other than psychiatrists) from asking patients if they have firearms in their homes. How is this the Legislature’s concern?
It seems unlikely that President Obama’s proposed ban on assault weapons will clear Congress. But there is broad support among the public for his call for expanded background checks on gun purchases, according to a CBS/New York Times poll. Overall, 92 percent of Americans support universal background checks. That includes 89 percent of Republicans and 85 percent of those living in households with a National Rifle Association member.
The much-needed push for gun safety in America is on. President Obama set the wheels in motion by announcing 23 executive orders aimed at reducing gun violence. He asked Congress to pass substantial laws, including bans on assault weapons and magazines of more than 10 rounds. He also called for background checks on all firearms purchases, including private sales and those made at gun shows. Those steps alone would decrease the likelihood of casualties in shootings and make the United States a safer and saner nation. Better tracking of who is buying and selling firearms would give police valuable tools to prevent the shootings that ravage Kansas City and other urban areas. Only irrational obeisance to the gun lobby would prevent Congress from passing such a sensible law. – Kansas City Star
I am disheartened by the White House gun violence task force’s recommendations, which primarily focus on gun control and missed the opportunity to provide bold proposals that would address the root of these tragedies: mental illness. I will fight proposals in the Senate that threaten our Second Amendment rights and fail to take real action to curb a culture of gun violence in America. I fully support enforcing the gun laws currently on the books instead of creating new ones that erode basic rights of self-protection. It has been statistically proved that passing gun legislation has no effect on removing guns from the hands of criminals. In the end, it is law-abiding citizens who are punished by gun control. With the emphasis mostly on gun control, the president avoided serious measures to tackle the increasingly violent culture in America. – Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan.
In one segment of Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show” Wednesday, former 4th Congressional District Rep. Todd Tiahrt was shown saying in 2007 that mayors shouldn’t be tracing guns used in crimes or cracking down on illegal gun sales because the ATF was on the case – a point noted with relief by host Jon Stewart. But a clip later in the show showed Tiahrt defending his amendment restricting gun-trace data and otherwise limiting the law enforcement powers of the ATF. “You have broken my t-heart,” Stewart said.
If there is anything that people of all political persuasions can agree on regarding guns, it may be that existing gun laws should be better enforced and felons with firearms should be prosecuted. So it’s impressive that only Puerto Rico and the Western District of Texas had more federal gun prosecutions in the fiscal year ending September 2012 than Kansas, where the office of U.S. Attorney Barry Grissom (in photo) filed gun-related charges against 447 people. Kansas also led the nation in such prosecutions in fiscal 2011. Grissom said he has told local agencies: “If they are felons and you can pull them over and they are armed, give them to us and we will cut them out of your community. You can have a huge impact on the crime rate.”
There were surges of gun purchases and concealed-carry permit applications in Kansas after the shootings at Newtown, Conn. In the 10 business days between Dec. 14 and the end of the year, 1,012 Kansans applied for gun permits, the Lawrence Journal-World reported. That 100-per-day average was about 50 percent higher than the 64-per-day application average since July. The number of background checks in Kansas also reached an all-time high of more than 35,000 in December. Nationally, background checks in December totaled nearly 2.8 million, compared with 1.6 million in October. Some of the surge may be Christmas buying, but gun dealers said that many buyers were concerned about new gun regulations.
Former U.S. Rep. Todd Tiahrt of Goddard has been back in the news as part of the debate about gun control. The New York Times and other media have reported how members of Congress are skilled at placing restrictions on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. The so-called Tiahrt amendment, first championed by Tiahrt, limits how the ATF can share gun-tracing information. When he was in Congress, Tiahrt regularly had to defend the amendment against complaints from New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and others. The politically difficult process of Senate confirmation also has resulted in the ATF being without a permanent director for six years.
“Compare the rate of murder by gun in the United States to the rate in any other advanced industrial nation, and you’re forced to draw one of two conclusions: Either there are far more homicidal people in this country than just about anyplace else on Earth, or far more guns,” columnist Harold Meyerson wrote. “We must either be home to more people who succumb to murderous rage or who kill out of the coldest of calculations, or it’s easier to pick up a gun and start shooting here than in any comparable country.” Meyerson noted that there are 3.2 gun homicides per 100,000 residents in the United States, while only 0.1 per 100,000 in France, Britain and Australia. “Want to argue that we have 32 times the rate of dangerous mental illness that they have in Australia?”
In the wake of the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, 54 percent of Americans support stricter gun-control laws while 43 percent oppose them, according to a new ABC News/Washington Post poll. There is a gender gap on guns, as 59 percent of women support more gun control compared with 47 percent of men. Only 29 percent of Republicans support more gun control. Regarding specific proposals, 59 percent of those surveyed support a ban on high-capacity ammunition clips, and 52 percent support a ban on semi-automatic handguns. Only 27 percent support banning all handgun sales except to law enforcement.
Despite the impression given by the media, mass shootings are not more common now than they have been in past decades, John Fund wrote in National Review Online. “Incidents of mass murder in the U.S. declined from 42 in the 1990s to 26 in the first decade of this century,” Fund noted. “The chances of being killed in a mass shooting are about what they are for being struck by lightning.” Of course, the rarity of the killings is of no comfort to families in Newtown, Conn.
The National Rifle Association has argued that banning assault weapons is ineffective in curbing crime. However, Australia’s ban has significantly reduced murders and mass killings. Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times wrote: “In Australia in 1996, a mass killing of 35 people galvanized the nation’s conservative prime minister to ban certain rapid-fire long guns. The ‘national firearms agreement,’ as it was known, led to the buyback of 650,000 guns and to tighter rules for licensing and safe storage of those remaining in public hands.… In the 18 years before the law, Australia suffered 13 mass shootings – but not one in the 14 years after the law took full effect. The murder rate with firearms has dropped by more than 40 percent, according to data compiled by the Harvard Injury Control Research Center, and the suicide rate with firearms has dropped by more than half.”
The Overland Park City Council is rethinking its decision last month to allow the open carry of guns. The council approved open carry after an opinion by Attorney General Derek Schmidt’s office that cities “may not completely prohibit the open carry of a loaded firearm on one’s person.” Wichita also removed its restrictions on open carry. The change didn’t go over well in Overland Park. “The public has not been pleased,” council member Jim Hix told the Kansas City Star. The council is now considering restrictions on open carry that would mirror the state’s concealed-carry gun law.
“First they came for Wichita, then Overland Park and now, the Dot,” wrote Kansas City Star columnist Mary Sanchez, about the libertarians who want the unified city-county government in Wyandotte County to join Overland Park and Wichita in repealing local bans on the open carry of firearms that seem to conflict with state law. Sanchez observed: “Other state legislatures have handled open carry with a higher sense of fairness to all instead of rolling over for a belly rub by gun-rights activists.” For example, Oklahoma’s new open-carry law, which goes into effect Nov. 1, will require those who choose to carry guns openly to have gone through training and a background check. But, Sanchez wrote, “Kansas has ‘permissive open carry.’ No permits, with their extensive background checks, are required and no safety training – the very things that reasonable people would expect.”
