The City Wants to Pass its own Gun Laws

[K C Muffin]

That's better....

[pootsy]

There's alot of places doing this, not just DC. I work at a place in Newton and we have a no gun sticker on our window as well. Kinda reminds you of the old days. Like Virgil Earp said in the movie Tombstone "Were not saying you can't carry a gun, You just can't carry a gun in town"........ Kinda funny, they say history repeats itself.

[Bubba]

Here are instances where concealed carry permit holders saved the day!

Concealed carry permit holder shoots suspect - 49abcnews.com

It's the 2nd story on this page, scroll down to read...Cato Daily Dispatch for August 24, 1999

Here is an AMAZING page that shows why it may just be a very bad thing to not allow law abiding citizens the right to carry a gun, maybe the no gun sign should be re-thought....Ohioans For Concealed Carry - IS CRIME ON THE INCREASE IN POSTED BUSINESSES?


Or, maybe the no gun sign should read something like this.

[lurker]

When does 'common sense' become waffling?

When the HutchNews editorializes....

Council waffles

Members should rethink decision on ordinance

Two of the Hutchinson City Council's more thoughtful members announced last week they were too hasty in voting for an ordinance that bans the carry of concealed guns in city-owned buildings, facilities and parks. And to that end, councilmen Brad Dillon and Ron Sellers said they favor allowing the ordinance to lapse when city officials review and adopt criminal codes later this month.

Sellers and Dillon made the right decision - the first time. They should stick to their guns and leave the ordinance, which drew little fire from gun proponents, in place.

In fact, one council member said he didn't receive any calls from constituents after a Jan. 2 meeting, when the council adopted an ordinance that mirrors the state's concealed carry law but added locations - "city-owned buildings and facilities, which include parks" - where concealed carry is banned.

One council member said he received three e-mails questioning adoption of the ordinance, which beefs up the state's concealed carry law. If Dillon and Sellers had been hit with a barrage of phone calls, e-mails and faxes, it would be understandable for either or both to seek further discussion about the ordnance. But a couple of e-mails and a handful of comments made while the two attended other public events hardly represent a majority opinion.

And a simple fact remains: There is no need to bring a concealed weapon to any city-owned park.

State law bans guns - concealed or carried in plain sight - from schools, bars or sporting events. The latter takes care of Fun Valley Softball Complex and the Sports Arena in Hutchinson. But it does not protect city-owned parks that also are home to softball and baseball fields.

For example, Rice Park on the city's west side and Carey Park, on the southern end, both sport ballfields that adults and youth use heavily in the summer. Because the council now has decided to abandon its concealed carry ordinance, those who attend ball games played at Stremel Field in Carey Park and the Rice Park ball diamonds can expect fans who like to carry concealed weapons.

The problem with those parks, Hutchinson City Manager John Deardoff correctly points out, is that they have too many access points, making enforcement of a concealed ban seemingly impossible.

Others note it is legal to carry guns that are in plain sight into city-owned parks, so why ban concealed carry?

For this council to consider banning guns altogether from city-owned parks probably is too far-reaching - those that are concealed or carried in plain sight. But that is an option.

The city should offer such protection to families and children who want to enjoy ball games at the parks without fear of some disgruntled fan, angry at an umpire or coach, suddenly producing a weapon that he or she legally concealed.

A gun ban won't prevent those premeditated incidents of violence, those intent on harming someone. But a ban can prevent those needless accidents that stem from gun owners bringing their guns to public venues simply because they can.

At the least, Dillon and Sellers should reconsider their decisions to allow the concealed carry ordinance to lapse, especially given the little ire the measure generated. At the most, the entire council should consider an ordinance that bans guns - both concealed and carried in plain sight - at all city parks.

02/04/2007; 02:39:12 AM

The Editor simply doesn't understand that common sense doesn't require a barrage of emails (or phone calls) to take hold....

[TexKan]

There are "no gun" signs on all local govt buildings down here - infact there ae so many "no gun" signs that after awhile ya just don't see em anymore. - No guns has always been no federal, local or state building........ ya'll doin this all wrong - you can holler all ya want but in the end they are gonna win -everyone uses the buildings and not everyone wants to be round gun tottin folks. You are dealin with folks that thinka sign protects them........... you need to take the same view............... signs don't mean I can't - they mena don't get caught!! yall keep missin the word "concealed".............

[Highwayman]

A gun ban won't prevent those premeditated incidents of violence, those intent on harming someone. But a ban can prevent those needless accidents that stem from gun owners bringing their guns to public venues simply because they can.

Perhaps the editor could attempt to give some examples to back up this statement instead of just expecting us to accept his claim at face value. If this was a real problem I doubt if other states would have kept their carry laws.

[lurker]

Originally Posted by Highwayman

Perhaps the editor could attempt to give some examples to back up this statement instead of just expecting us to accept his claim at face value. If this was a real problem I doubt if other states would have kept their carry laws.

Methinks the Editor is trying to protect the T-ball umpires from folks like hiz'self.

[Value Pack]

:..Animals..:

The people coming up with this is:

The League of Kansas Municipalities • 300 SW 8th Ave
Topeka, KS 66603-3912
Phone (785) 354-9565 • Fax (785) 354-4186

The link above lets you see what they are putting out. The problem is that the people looking at this (our city commissioners) don't study anything for more than 3 minutes. So we get 3 minutes decisions that take months, if not years to undo.

This is a trap for anyone with a cc. How do you keep track of all the properties that a city owns and what if you are in a non hometown city like Elkhart, Garden City or Wichita standing on property owned by a city that normally should not be?

What are going to say if you are standing on a site that is owned by a city that is not marked/owned by the city? Our city now owns some of the lots along Wyatt Earp Blvd but only the Register of Deeds and the City know which ones.

This law is a hidden trap waiting to be tripped when ever it suits the city to spring it.

Our elected commissioners need to table this and study the issue in more detail rather then just make the same mistakes that other cities have made and than regreted.

(I have no idea why the link comes up "animals". Somebody's idea of a joke maybe.)

http://www.lkm.org/lkmservices/sampl...-ordinance.pdf

This is another link on this and what the league is suggesting.


From the Hutch news on what the Attorney General's office has to say.
"Morrison spokeswoman Ashley Anstaett said the office's staff has determined that cities and counties can't pass ordinances that would outlaw concealed carry within their jurisdictions.

However, they do have the same rights as other property owners to post signs restricting concealed weapons, she said.

Without a formal attorney general's opinion on the subject, though, details about exactly how far a city or county can go remain murky, Anstaett said.

Anstaett said her office hopes that local governments who want to prohibit hidden guns in their workplaces or on their property put up signs announcing that fact.

"We don't want concealed carry licensees unfairly charged with crimes they didn't know they were committing," Anstaett said.

Whether the Legislature will get involved in the issue remains to be seen, the vice chairman of the Senate's Judiciary Committee said.

"I don't know if it will come up this session," Sen. Terry Bruce, R-Hutchinson, said."

[Bronco-Fan]

Folks it sounds like everybody should go the the Commision Meeting Monday, might be the thing to do. I know of one that is against it. show him some support, time to say whoa to these 4 power playing fools,

[Bronco-Fan]

I think I will drive by Radio Shack and see if the Dude got one of those sticker up, I know the Mayor is protect my the School Adminstration building.