KY Permitless Carry a possibility? HB 531!

From the NRA:

Today, House Bill 531 was introduced by state Representatives Hubert Collins (D-97) and Jody Richards (D-20).  HB 531 would allow a law-abiding individual, to lawfully carry a concealed handgun for self-defense without needing to first obtain a government-issued license.  This legislation has been referred to the House Judiciary Committee for consideration, and your NRA-ILA expects a Senate version of HB 531 to be introduced later this week.

This bipartisan legislation recognizes the right of Kentuckians to legally carry a concealed firearm without the requirement of acquiring a Kentucky concealed carry deadly weapons license (CCDW).  HB 531 is a much-needed update to concealed carry in Kentucky, allowing law-abiding gun owners the ability to better protect themselves and their loved ones.  This legislation would give Kentuckians the freedom to choose the best method of carrying for them, based on their attire, gender and/or physical attributes.  HB 531 would also keep in place the current permitting system so that people who obtain a permit could still enjoy the reciprocity agreements that Kentucky has with other states.

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20160301/kentucky-permitless-carry-legislation-introduced

Hot damn if this makes it through!

Edit: looks like this also prohibits employers from banning CCW and allows for campus carry too!

Advertisements

The tears are delicious – Rick Cohen’s “Gun Control Stalls: Assault Rifles and Us” pity party

From Nonprofit Quarterly’s Rick Cohen, comes this missive: “Gun Control Stalls: Assault Rifles and Us”

It is so strange that the American movement for gun control has flickered and come close to disappearing despite the ubiquity of gun violence in the U.S. and its resurgence in Western Europe. In liberal Vermont, for example, a bill to require universal background checks seems destined for defeat in the state legislature, admitted Ann Braden, co-founder of Gun Sense Vermont. Even legislation introduced by California Senator Dianne Feinstein at the federal level that would deny people on the federal terrorist watch list access to assault weapons faces difficulties and attracted only Democratic cosponsors in the Senate (although in the House, a similar bill was introduced by Republican Representative Peter King, who agrees with Feinstein that denying people on terrorist watch lists access to flights but allowing them to purchase assault weapons makes no sense).

https://nonprofitquarterly.org/policysocial-context/25690-gun-control-stalls-assault-rifles-and-us.html

Yes, so strange. It’s almost like the gun control movement is almost entirely astroturf and has taken quite a shellacking in the last year.  Why on earth would politicians show little interest in gun control after voters have expressed their displeasure with its supporters?  It is a mystery.

Still, I’m sure Cohen isn’t completely clueless…

The pro-gun lobby is feeling its oats, promoting “campus carry” bills around the country that would permit guns on college campuses, which gun advocates like the NRA say could be used to prevent sexual assault. Everytown for Gun Safety, a group founded by former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg, denounced state legislators in 10 states for promoting campus carry legislation. Supporters’ contentions that guns on campus would deter sexual assault do not differ much from arguments that making guns more widely available would help Americans stand up against jihadist threats. Do gun proponents really imagine shoppers in the Mall of America engaged in pitched gun battles with terrorists? These anti-regulation justifications trotted out by gun supporters are no more than rank opportunism, preying on the fears of women on campus and of most Americans about terrorists hidden among us.

Oh.  Not bad, a 2 for 1 strawman involving campus carry and the recently publicized jihadist threat against the Mall of America.  First, let’s deal with the obvious: CCW holders aren’t worried about jihadists.  They are worried about someone attacking them as they travel too and from their homes.  The recognize that criminals don’t care about “No Gun Zones” around campuses or malls.

As for the claims about rank opportunism, let me give Mr Cohen a hearty “FOAD” – the hypocrisy of some antigun schmuck screaming about opportunism after writing this post Newtown article and this post-Aurora one is more than enough to throw him off his moral high horse.

Imagine if the three young Muslims who were murdered in North Carolina, ostensibly due to a fight over a parking space, hadn’t had to deal with a Craig Hicks loaded to the gills with assault rifles. He’d be no less demented, but lacking the ability to pump bullets into their skulls, Hicks might have had to actually talk to them rather than executing them point blank.

Or he could have stabbed all three to death, like Elliot Rogers did.  Or burned their house to the ground.

He sums up with this:

The fault, as it were, isn’t the responsibility of the gun control advocates who are fighting mightily against the power of the NRA and other like-minded organizations. This one lies at the feet of the broad mass of nonprofits. After the tragedy at Sandy Hook, when the president assigned vice president Joe Biden to lead a national task force on gun violence, that was the moment for the nonprofit sector writ large to come to grips with the nonsensical system in the U.S. that allows assault rifles to be widely available, guns to be purchased with limited or no background checks in many cases, and sales of silencers and sawed-off shotguns. It was a moment for all nonprofits to see gun control as an issue of public health, of social welfare, and of community well-being. For any number of unpersuasive reasons, including but not limited to the White House’s own inability to marshal its resources and reject pressures from red-state Democrats not to pursue the issue, it didn’t happen. Hopefully, the nonprofit sector will take on gun control someday as a public health issue that affects all of us.—Rick Cohen

Close, Rick, but no cigar.  The fault is that you and yours are out of touch and suffering heavily from confirmation bias. Nothing will convince you that the folly of gun control won’t work.  You just surround yourself with the comforting blanket of junk science, and clutch desperately at your tiger repelling rock and ignore that the real world doesn’t agree with your interpretations.

BTW, your ignorance is showing.  Silencers & “sawed off” shotguns are heavily restricted under the National Firearms Act of 1934 – they are the opposite of easy to purchase as they require fingerprinting, background checks, and a BATFE issued tax stamp to purchase.   Either you let out a Freudian slip in your desire to have them even more restricted, or you are yet another in a legion of uninformed “journalists”.

Gun control didn’t stop Charlie Hebdo.  Gun control hasn’t helped Venezuela & Mexico & Brazil.   And your hatred of Campus Carry is entirely misplaced as concealed carriers are more law abiding than the general population.

In closing, pick another subject to wax poetic on, Ricky.

The pushback against Campus Carry is much ado about nothing.

Campus Carry is making the news, especially after the remarks of one Nevada Lawmaker who suggested that women shooting rapists would have a deterrence effect:

The sponsor of a bill in Nevada, Assemblywoman Michele Fiore, said in a telephone interview: “If these young, hot little girls on campus have a firearm, I wonder how many men will want to assault them. The sexual assaults that are occurring would go down once these sexual predators get a bullet in their head.” (source)

Naturally the first reaction to this is a bunch of handwringing nonsense, strawman arguments and panic.

Opponents contend that university campuses should remain havens from the gun-related risks that exist elsewhere, and that college students, with high rates of binge drinking and other recklessness, would be particularly prone to gun accidents.

First and foremost, campuses certainly aren’t havens from gun-related risks that exist elsewhere – Virginia Tech & other school shootings are ample proof of that.

Second, the ‘drinking’ argument is completely incorrect for one simple reason: most states require that a CCW applicant has to be over the age of 21.  This is going to eliminate 90%+ of the student population immediately.  Instead, this bill is going to allow people to effectively defend themselves against attackers when they commute in from their homes or off campus apartments.   There’s no shortage of crimes that occur on campuses, such as:

These are just the first few results from Google.  But even more than that, we already know that “no guns” policies have created victims, because we know about Amanda Collins.  You may remember her name if you followed the Colorado firearms testimony during the last election season – Democrat Senator Evie Hudak made this callous remark to her after her testimony:

I just want to say, statistics are not on your side, even if you had had a gun. You said that you were a martial arts student, I mean person, experience in taekwondo, and yet because this individual was so large and was able to overcome you even with your skills, and chances are that if you had had a gun, then he would have been able to get than from you na possibly use it against you …

It seems that when it comes to the issue of self defense, progressives are not pro-choice at all.

Naturally the media response to this issue has been almost uniformly negative.  The Houston Chronicle opines that

Allowing concealed handgun license holders to tote pistols on college campuses could cost tens of millions of dollars, a burden that could be ultimately passed on to students or siphoned away from education and research programs at Texas universities. (source)

Riiiiiiiiiiight.  Or it could cost nothing at all and just allow the same level of day to day activities that normal CCW use does.

The LA Times wrote:

What’s the dumbest idea of the season? Backed by the National Rifle Assn., state legislators across the country have been pushing laws to let students carry concealed weapons on college campuses.

What’s the lame excuse? Gun-toting young women would be armed to defend themselves in the event of sexual assaults.

We shouldn’t be surprised by this. These are the same crackpots who argued in favor of more guns on campuses after the Virginia Tech shootings in 2007. And who held out the 2012 massacre of 26 students and educators at Sandy Hook Elementary School as an argument in favor of arming teachers. Of course they’re cynically twisting the latest painful, high-profile issue into an argument for more guns. (source)

Wow.  I must have imagined the media outcry for more gun control after each and every possible opportunity.

As usual, this issue highlights the hypocrisy of the antigun movement.