1. CIMG3091.JPG
    Women's Asics running ...
    by Mike B.

    1453407_801922749860429_7366775675574649129_n.jpg
    Double Wide Skyline
    by Racefan

    article-4037.gif
    WANTED: Used Paddle Bo...
    by Tee

    21KWPHic1kL.jpg
    HP Pavilion p7 1512 de...
    by Avenger69

Welcome to Dodge City DodgeBoard.com!
Dodge City Kansas online community with information about local attractions, Dodge City history, local schools, tourism, hotels, and Boothill Casino.

You are currently viewing our community forums as a guest user. Sign up or
Having an account grants you additional privileges, such as creating and participating in discussions.

Dodge City Seeks Exemption For Concealed Carry Laws

Discussion in 'In The News' started by Tee, Jun 19, 2013.

  1. Detector
    Online

    Detector Gold Member

    And my point has been, So what? You think if someone has it in their mind to go shooting they are going to care about any no guns sign? All those signs do is keep the people who could stop such a shooting from doing so. There is nothing illegal about carrying a gun, It's shooting people with it that is illegal. Keep people from legally carrying isn't going to change that.
     
    Bubba likes this.
  2. Highwayman
    Offline

    Highwayman Gold Member

  3. Bubba
    Offline

    Bubba Platinum Member

    My point is, when is the last time that you have seen anyone open carry in Dodge City? Has it happened? I'm sure it has, but I have NEVER personally seen anybody open carry in Dodge City, other than LEO's. Many people have the right to open carry, but for the most part, it just isn't done. Open carry makes a person a target, because everybody has their eyes on them because it is an uncommon practice.
     
  4. Flying Dutchman
    Offline

    Flying Dutchman Senior Member

    I read the article and it was very good. I am not in any way against the new law. I agree whole heartedly with it. I knew that it was written specifically for CCH and why it was written. The article also says that the new law has a six month extension that municipalities can apply for, so the city is doing just that. It also explained that unified school districts can limit those who carry to include only employees and not the general public, which is what I said in the beginning. I never argued the validity of the law, never said I was against it. My only point was the logistics of implementing it here in Dodge due to our local gun laws. Why the city wants an extension is pure speculation on all our parts, but they are following the law as it is written in asking for one.
    As to not seeing anyone openly carry, that was not my point. Whether they do or not is irrelevant. That the law exists is. If someone wants to, and is legally allowed to, then they can and be allowed the same access as those who CC. That is what makes implementing the law logistically more difficult here than other areas of the state. I was not saying nor implying that the city shouldn't follow the law, just posing my opinion on why they would need an extension to see how to implement it. The "no guns allowed" here in Dodge was not targeted specifically at CC like it had been in other areas, which is why this new law was written.
    It does open up, though, if the city has the intention of limiting gun rights they may possibly move to make it illegal to openly carry at all. By doing that they eliminate the possibility of those who would want to openly carry thereby making the implementation of the new law easier. Am I wrong?
     
  5. Bubba
    Offline

    Bubba Platinum Member

    The way I read the article was that a city may file for an extension so that they can have time to install metal detectors or get armed security in place. To file for an extension just to see how it plays out in other cities is not a proper reason to file an extension.
     
    Tee and Highwayman like this.
  6. Flying Dutchman
    Offline

    Flying Dutchman Senior Member

    Yeah, that would not be a legitimate reason. Just threw it out there. From what I read a limited six month extension is granted for "security plans to be developed". They have to come up with what buildings they wish to exempt and why. Developing a security plan can be anything and is pretty broad in political and legal terms. Rest assured the city will get the extension like it or not.
     
  7. Tee
    Offline

    Tee Gold Member

    Here is what I think is the problem with NON-LEO open carry;

    • It makes people nervous, fearful, intimidated and just generally uptight. That service desk cashier is not likely to demand three ID's and a receipt if you are wearing a gun.
    • It invites problems with crazies who may be tempted to relieve you of your weapon. If you are caught up in the middle of a fight-or-flight incident, some nutcase may see your gun and conjure up a desperate move.
    • People may get the wrong impression. If you happen into a bank and demand they honor a check or argue that they didn't give you the right change, someone might misinterpret what you said if you are wearing a gun. I can give you hundreds of misunderstanding scenarios for a person who is wearing a gun.
    • Authorities may get trigger-happy. If you are stopped on the street, don't you think cops are going to handle you a bit different if they see a gun at your waist?
    I'm not saying I am against open carry. I'm just saying it presents more problems than concealed carry, IMO. I'm not even going to mention the fact that CCH licensees have been thoroughly vetted by authorities.
     
    candidate and Highwayman like this.
  8. candidate
    Offline

    candidate Senior Member

    I see what your arguement is FD, for lack of a better term. If those with concealed carry permits are allowed in a public building under the new law then would a person legally openly carrying a pistol be allowed? This will no doubt be argued for many more moons. If you want to get down to the nitty gritty the 2nd Amendment of the United States Constitution allows American citizens to keep and bear arms for their individual protection. The concealed carry law to some is unconstitutional in itself. Paying for, asking permission, and requiring a special permit to excercise an American citizens constitutional right? Most people do it anyway because they realize it is the law and they are inherently law abiding. They will take the steps, jump through the hoops, and pay the money to better protect the ones they love. I do not want to start the fight over the other methods of gun control imposed on us already and the gun control imposed in various states.

    Open carry is a touchy subject. I'm all for it but I don't like it myself. By that I mean that I choose not to do it because: A. I don't want to be a target for active shooters, rabid anti-gun zealots, uninformed LEO newbs, The knock-out game, overprotective mommies, etc. B. I don't want to be followed and targeted by thieves who wish to investigate my property while I'm not there to protect it. Most people who open carry do so by using a quality holster and mostly dress decent. Most thugs just shove their Saturday night special in their pants. Still no good way to tell if someone is legit just by looks. This law doesn't provide for open carrying of guns so those that want open carry in these buildings need to work to ammend the law.
    Let's be real here for a moment. No constitution, state law, county law, city ordinance, sign on a door is stopping anyone from carrying a concealed weapon anywhere. A person who would not pass a background check is not stopped from getting possesion of a gun, however they do not obtain them legally. A person who does not wish to pay the Sheriff and the AG, pay an instructor and take the class, submit to a background check, and provide fingerprints is not stopped from carrying a gun concealed. They just stuff it in their waistband or pocket and break more laws. We know by now that the laws against murder are also fairly ineffective.

    Scary isn't it.

    The law aims to allow those who legally carry a concealed pistol to continue to do so where it is unsecured. Meaning any number of people could have walked in with weapons and bad intentions with no one there to stop them. It lets those approved by the AG to provide their own protection in a place that provides none.

    I'm going to go out on a limb and say that concealed carry permit holders can be trusted to behave while dropping of their water bill payment. The attorney general trusts them, why can't the local politicians?
     
    Tee and Highwayman like this.
  9. Tee
    Offline

    Tee Gold Member

    Good point Bubba. Because what if the request for an extension is denied? In the meantime, will the city be busy implementing a security plan or will they be twiddling their thumbs, then file another extension upon denial, citing "needing time to implement security plan" ??

    I think if they are filing an extension then they need to make their decision which way they are going to go; security or allow CCH? That needs to be decided.
     
    Highwayman likes this.
  10. Highwayman
    Offline

    Highwayman Gold Member

    I can't let this pass unnoticed. If the city wanted a 6 month exemption to develop a security plan, that would be legit. But, according to the article in the opening post, that ain't what they want. Instead, they ask for 1 year to see what happens elsewhere. And I'll keep my previous opinion about where the city wants to go with this.

    The Dodge City Commission Monday night voted unanimously to send a letter to Kansas Attorney general Derrick Schmidt asking for a one year exemption from the new Concealed Carry law set to go into effect July 1st. The new law, HB2052 authorizes the carrying of concealed weapons in public and municipal buildings.

    According to Dodge City Clerk Nanette Pogue, the exemption will give the city of Dodge City time to see how the new law affects other municipalities throughout the state.

    Yesterday the Garden City Commission also voted unanimously to ask for a 6 month extension.
     
    Bubba likes this.
  11. JohnWayne
    Offline

    JohnWayne Well-Known Member

    Good question. ;)
     
  12. Flying Dutchman
    Offline

    Flying Dutchman Senior Member

    I know the law was written because of CCH being specifically banned...but hear me out. In those areas where it was posted no CCH allowed it was already law that carrying a firearm was illegal. CCH was implemented state wide as an exclusion to that rule. In those areas ONLY CCH was allowed to carry, so the banning of guns was targeted directly to them...in other words negating their exemption. The new law does not state that municipalities have to lift the ban only for CCH, it states that they have to lift the "no guns" entirely. I do not know what cities in Kansas allow open carry but I can assume it is not very many.
    So, here in Dodge because we have open carry, the "no guns" rule was not aimed directly at CCH. It was in effect before CCH ever came along. Once CCH was allowed and made law, the city did not have to change the wording of to whom the "no guns" affected because it affected everybody. It was a blanket rule. So now they are in a pickle because lifting the "no guns" means exactly that. In those areas that already ban carrying openly, they do not have that issue because it is illegal to openly carry anyway.
    So as an example the city in no way will be able to meet the security requirements for Wright Park. Those with CCH will be able to carry their firearms, as they should. The problem here is those who can openly carry will also be able to. It may not be probable that a lot of people will suddenly begin carrying firearms, but it is possible and legal for them to do so. Now, if I was a city commissioner that would make me uneasy. I would want to see if I could exempt the park and keep it a gun free zone. Not because I am concerned with those who have a CCH, but because I am concerned with those who don't and since I cannot ban them under the new law specifically, I have to ban everybody. That is the rub we have here that Wichita and other cities do not. That's why I can see the commissioners passing a new law banning the carrying of guns in the open. I think it might have said in the article there is a loophole for this. I think it said something along the lines that you can ban guns but you cannot prosecute or charge those with a CCH if they violate the gun ban in certain areas. If that is the case...it is basically a "don't ask don't tell" situation. Unless you pull your gun nobody knows you have it. If that is so then the problem solves itself.
    To play Devil's Advocate JW...the AG has the luxury of being able to trust everyone because he doesn't have to deal with everyone.
     
  13. Tee
    Offline

    Tee Gold Member

    This is perhaps the simplest and best question on the matter.
     
  14. Flying Dutchman
    Offline

    Flying Dutchman Senior Member

    But you already know the answer Tee. Ideology and power drive the politicians. Is it the people who have a CCH that they don't trust, or is it the firearm they don't trust. The legislature did the right thing according to the law. We can all break it down to whatever reasons we want to justify it, but in the end it is rather basic...the state granted the right to it's citizens that those who pass the qualifications can carry and conceal. The municipalities cannot override those rights. If CCH was a county by county or city by city law then this would not even be discussed. CCH is based entirely upon a person's personal safety and nothing more. In order to ban their right to personal safety, you have to ensure their personal safety. If you can't, then you cannot ban them from doing it.
     
    candidate and Tee like this.
  15. Detector
    Online

    Detector Gold Member

    Wright Park is one of the few place where I personally would want to open carry. I have been involved in several incidents while metal detecting that I'm sure had I had a pistol visible on my person would not have happened.
     
  16. candidate
    Offline

    candidate Senior Member

    I have not watched you detect metal. I imagine you spend most of the time with headphones on and looking down at the ground. I fear your situational awareness may not be great while detecting. The right person sees a gun on your hip and you deep into your detecting they may figure your pistol easy to get. If you should decide to open carry I would suggest a quality holster with some level of retention and try to keep your awareness up. But yes I do agree that a pistol in a holster on your hip would likely serve to make most reconsider starting something with you.
     
    gadwall and Highwayman like this.
  17. candidate
    Offline

    candidate Senior Member

    Yes it is all about control, gun control and people control. I hope this poison hasn't infected our local politics but it's only a matter of time. And then there is the liability/lawsuit factor, which is a whole other plague on our society.
     
  18. Detector
    Online

    Detector Gold Member

    I keep a very watchful eye on my surroundings and usually keep one headphone off my right ear so I can hear what is going on around me. I stand up and acknowledge anyone coming within 20' of me. I've had several groups of punks try and get behind me. My feeling is they're trying to get behind me to jump me grab my detector and run. Having my Stallard JS-9(big looking gun) on my side would be visible from quite a way away.
     
  19. Flying Dutchman
    Offline

    Flying Dutchman Senior Member

    I also am not a big fan of open carry. With my job I have to openly carry but I'm also in uniform and continually conscience of my weapon. I don't walk in front of people, try not to expose my gun side and keep my strong hand free. I agree that with a weapon exposed, it definitely intimidates some...but unless they have consistently trained with that weapon...not only shooting it but drawing it and how to retain it if someone grabs it...it's just putting themselves and others at risk.
    Everybody thinks they can react to a situation quickly. The reality is we don't. Unless that is all you do...train daily, constantly, and train your brain to override all instincts and normal reactions at all times. Even then a person is limited to the laws of physics.
    It is truly amazing just how fast a person moves, especially if they know what they are doing, and how slow we normally react to a situation. It is scary.
     
  20. Detector
    Online

    Detector Gold Member

    Call me Barney Fife because I don't keep my bullets in my gun. The clip with the bullets is in my pocket.
     

Share This Page