Concealed Carry To Take Effect - Restrictions are plentiful (NE)

wowt.com ^ | Dec 29, 2006 | NA

[neverdem]

Concealed Carry To Take Effect

Restrictions are plentiful

Nebraska is about to usher in a new law that will allow people to carry concealed weapons but that doesn't mean you'll be able to carry those weapons everywhere.

The first step toward getting legal is to fill out the paperwork and go through a training class but come January 3, it will be legal to carry a concealed weapon in Nebraska.

There are a number of places where you won't be able to go while toting that weapon.

City buildings, courthouses and bars are among them. And you won't find any shootin' irons at Grumpy's Grill. Grumpy says he'll put in metal detector if he has to.

Officials with the Nebraska State Patrol also want you to know that if you're pulled over by law enforcement or if you need emergency medical attention, the first thing you need to tell the officer or the EMT is that you have a gun.

The law was originally set to take effect on January 2 but state offices will be closed on Tuesday for a day of mourning for President Ford.

For more information about the change in the law, visit the Nebraska State Patrol Web site.

[Beagle8U]

So in your mind convicted violent felons should always have the RKBA?

We should arm them in prison then?

[Felis_irritable]

When the TX carry law was passed, we had some businesses with the "no weapons here" signs, and of course the media made a big deal about it, as if it was the start of a trend. A *lot* of those signs have come down in the intervening years.

I won't patronize businesses that fear my firearms unless they are the only one available, and I'm not alone.

[ASA Vet]

All this person has to do is post a sign saying firearms not allowed on premisis

His sign should read,

CRIMINAL SAFETY ZONE

[ASA Vet]

The Detroit case was a black felon

Then why wasn't he in prision?

[TheKidster]

I don't want felons voting or carrying guns so I can't agree with you there. I think that's a fair price for violating somebody else's liberty in a felonious fashion.

As far as bar restrictions, this seems to be the only wise prohibition, drunks and guns are not a good thing to mix.

[dhuffman@awod.com]

It doesn't matter what I think. I'm not as smart as were the Founding Fathers. Democracy is the rule of fools by fools.

I'll ignore your ironic question just as you did mine.

Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns.

[TheKidster]

Felons by definition are not "Good People"

[dhuffman@awod.com]

My, my. All these petty tyrants coming out. No wonder we are in the pickle that we are.

Either we are equal or we are not (cummon guys, which is it?) Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns.

[Beagle8U]

"Then why wasn't he in prision?"

I think he was on parole. The guy would have filed the same suit had he been caught selling drugs.

He wanted to get off because he was playing the race card.

...I wouldn't have been caught/charged if the cops weren't targeting blacks.

Thats what the case was about.

[dhuffman@awod.com]

Demos are not Good People by definition. Argument by assertion.

I'll speak for your petty tyrant, 'traffic violations are felonies.' Turn in your gun, d'mass. Or I'll speak for your SO, 'You committed domestic violence,' not even tried yet. Turn in your gun.

Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns.

[TheKidster]

Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns.

Listen, you're just trolling, I can tell because if you really had a good idea of what the founders wanted you'd realize that voting rights were not given to everyone, only land owners.
Also, you have to be mentally retarded to believe violent felons out of prison should be able to carry concealed fire arms legally. We put these people AWAY and lock them up in a PRISON to seperate them from society, because they are dangerous and have proven an inability to respect the right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness of thier VICTIMS (the people they shot, robbed, beat, raped, murdered, battered, sodomized, looted, kidnapped, etc.)
You seem to have a decent grasp of basic writing skills so I don't think you are retarded.
Also, don't you get voted out of Packing.org all the time?

[TheKidster]

Demos are not Good People by definition. Argument by assertion.

Are you smoking wikky sticks or something? Felons are people who have committed crimes against people that are so violent, or have thumbed thier noses at the law so outrageously that they have been deemed a danger to society and are locked up in jail or prison.

I sense some sort of personal resentment. Maybe after you smacked your wife she went to the cops and you lost your guns? Maybe you refused to pay your fines and refused to obey traffic laws to the point that they threw your sorry ass in the can and slapped you with a 3rd degree felony?
Maybe you went to prison for hurting someone or stealing thier stuff or sexually abusing someone and now you've "changed" and want your guns back?

[tpaine]

Owning and carrying arms is a self evident, inalienable right..
-- In fact, our constitution, -- insists that this is an uninfringeable right.

Amazingly enough, many people on FR think that "we the people" can delegate a power to governments - to 'regulate away' that right.

See the 10th. -- Such power cannot be delegated. It is inalienable. People cannot vote away their own rights.
--- Majority rule does not apply..

[ASA Vet]

If he's on parole (probation) then he's still a felon.
Reminds me of this.

In the linked case, a Felon on probation for welfare fraud is trying to sue the local public bus company. She's pretending to be an offended Møøslime.

[FreedomCalls]

I guess Grumpy forgets that the customers in the Luby's in Killen, TX on October 16, 1991 were also forced to leave their handguns in the parking lot. It would have made a difference when George Hennard arrived.

[tpaine]

"-- if you really had a good idea of what the founders wanted you'd realize that voting rights were not given to everyone, only land owners. --"


The Role of a Majority Vote in a Free Society
Address:http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1744214/posts?q=1&&page=1


The founders did not want our inalienable rights to be subject to 'regulations' by majority voters.

[SauronOfMordor]

So in your mind convicted violent felons should always have the RKBA?

My philosophy on the subject is: if they are too dangerous to be armed, then they are too dangerous to be loose on the streets. Because they WILL get access to guns, whether you want them to or not.

[Beagle8U]

Yes, I read about the Grand Rapids mooslime bus case also.

I don't think she will get far in demanding lots of cash in that area. GR is on the conservative side of the state.

[SauronOfMordor]

Also, you have to be mentally retarded to believe violent felons out of prison should be able to carry concealed fire arms legally. We put these people AWAY and lock them up in a PRISON to seperate them from society, because they are dangerous and have proven an inability to respect the right to life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness of thier VICTIMS (the people they shot, robbed, beat, raped, murdered, battered, sodomized, looted, kidnapped, etc.)

You present good arguments. So explain to me why we should have these guys loose on the street? If they are too dangerous to the rest of us, and this will never change, why not just keep them locked up forever? Or (alternate cheaper solution), when somebody is convicted for the third violent felony and thereafter, present to the jurors his ENTIRE criminal record, have them go back in the jury room, and have them decide if the world would be better off if this guy was simply executed

[tpaine]

Owning and carrying arms is a self evident, inalienable right..
-- In fact, our constitution, -- insists that this is an uninfringeable right.

Amazingly enough, many people on FR think that "we the people" can delegate a power to governments - to 'regulate away' that right.

See the 10th. -- Such power cannot be delegated. It is inalienable. People cannot vote away their own rights.
--- Majority rule does not apply..


The Role of a Majority Vote in a Free Society
Address:http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1744214/posts?q=1&&page=1
The founders did not want our inalienable rights to be subject to 'regulations' by majority voters.

Can you agree?