Kansas law change may allow even blind to carry concealed

[proud2BlibKansan]

In the state of Kansas, to carry a concealed firearm you need a gun — preferably something that fits nice under your jacket, in your pocket or perhaps in your purse.

You also need a license, the state’s seal of approval that you can hide a firearm on your person.

What’s less clear is whether you need eyesight. It certainly is suggested, unquestionably helpful. But following a change in state law, it is no longer clear whether it is required.

Kansas legislators during the last session approved a number of changes to the state’s concealed carry law. One of them was that people who are renewing their license no longer have to take any sort of test to prove they’re still proficient with a firearm.

The changes also removed language from the law that gave the attorney general the right to deny applicants a license if they “suffer from a physical infirmity which prevents the safe handling of a weapon.”

A spokesman for Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt — whose office oversees the concealed carry program — conceded this week that the office is uncertain whether it has the authority to deny a concealed carry license renewal for any physical reason, even if the applicant is blind.

more . . . http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2011/feb/12/kansas-law-change-may-allow-even-blind-carry-conce/

[babylonsister]

1. Joke, right. Right???? Ugh. What happened to brain cells? I mourn

their loss on a host of issues.

[proud2BlibKansan]

2. No joke

The KS House is full of nutcases.

[Clovis Sangrail]

3. wow

One of them was that people who are renewing their license no longer have to take any sort of test to prove they’re still proficient with a firearm.

I'm just imagining the 89 year old that's driving an Oldsmobile onto the freeway at 19mph ... and then substituting the Oldsmobile for a concealed weapon.
SCARY

[cleanhippie]

4. Unrec for misleading title

The change in the law ONLY affects EXISTING permit holders (those who have ALREADY passed the proficiency test) not NEW applicants (who still have to pass a proficiency test.


They seem to be working to determine if there will be an issue with any EXISTING permit holders that may NOW have physical disabilities.

[proud2BlibKansan]

5. Took it straight from the article

I see you failed to click on the link. :)

[cleanhippie]

6. It was not a reflection on you, but on the title. Don't take it personally.

I see you failed to read my comments. If you had, you would notice that I explained what you did not include in your OP about who this change actually affects. :)

[proud2BlibKansan]

8. You edited your post and added your comments AFTER I posted my reply

and unless I am clairvoyant, it would have been hard to know what you were posting.

[cleanhippie]

14. Not to split hairs, but my edit was one minute before your reply.

But its all good. No worries.

[proud2BlibKansan]

17. Not to split hairs, but I didn't see your edit until AFTER I posted my reply

Which is what I was trying to tell you in my previous post.

[cleanhippie]

18. I think we were both typing furiously at the same time.

:toast:

[pnwmom]

22. And what if their vision declined after they passed the test?

Why aren't gun users required to pass periodic vision tests just as drivers do?

[cleanhippie]

23. Perhaps because having a driving license is a privilege

and the Right to Keep and Bear Arms is a Constitutionally enumerated and protected right?

:shrug:

[pnwmom]

26. The Second Amendment refers to "the right of the people" not being infringed.

And it does so in the context of a militia. It doesn't refer to the "right of every single person."

It makes no sense to allow blind people to shoot guns except under careful supervision. It is impossible for me to believe that our Founders meant blind people to wield weapons that can kill other human beings dozens of feet away. (And with today's guns, kill dozens of people dozens of feet away -- in seconds.)

[cleanhippie]

27. I agree, it makes no sense.

But this change in the law only affect existing permit holders, and they realize that there is a potential problem here and are looking at trying to fix it without infringing on people rights.

Do you really think that of the 17,000 existing permit holders, some, many or all are going to lose their eyesight and just continue to shoot without assistance? Really? Come on, get real here. This is not a problem, its not an issue.

[pnwmom]

29. Many people gradually lose their eyesight and continue to drive

even though it's dangerous to do so. It's hard to admit when your faculties are declining.

My mother's car was hit by a 95 year old driver whose vision had severely declined, but that state at that time didn't require vision re-checks of the elderly. And I've stood in line behind an elderly driver who failed the vision test -- and had brought no one with him to drive him home.

If people go on driving despite vision losses, which are usually gradual, why wouldn't they also think they could go on using their guns? Unless there is some mechanism for testing them.

[cleanhippie]

34. Look, I am not saying that the possibility isn't there, just that the probability of that happening

is nearly infinitesimal. If the odds of even one of the 17,000 current permit holders will lose eyesight and irresponsibly fire his/her weapon with impaired eyesight is improbable, so this just is not an issue in this change of the law.

[pnwmom]

35. I don't think the odds are "nearly infinitesimal."

I think they're the same odds that a person will drive with impaired vision. And states should be checking the vision of those allowed to use guns just as they check the vision of those who are allowed to drive.

The Second Amendment says that "the people's" right to have guns shall not be infringed, and refers to a militia. It doesn't say that every single person should have access to a gun, no matter how impaired.

[cleanhippie]

36. Partially right.

The Constitution states that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. The SCOTUS has ruled several times confirming that this right is an INDIVIDUAL right, as in every single person has that right.

I guess we will both agree and disagree. I just think that the odds of a CCW holder, who statistically is 27times MORE responsible than a non-ccw holder when it comes to guns, are so small, that it will just not happen. You are comparing the MILLIONS of drivers license holders to the 17,000 current CCW holders, and the chance that one of those 17,000 will bot lose eyesight AND fire a weapon without supervision is virtually nil.

[pnwmom]

38. Actually, I wasn't talking about just CCW holders, I was

talking about all gun owners.

[cleanhippie]

40. Ahh, right., Well you do understand thsi THIS law in the OP is for current CCW holders

exclusively in that state, right?

[pnwmom]

41. Yes, I see that now. But I support gun registration laws

and I support at least minimal standards in determining who is allowed to register and/or use a gun -- e.g., the person should be sighted.

[marmar]

7. This country is becoming one big nuthouse.

nt

[cleanhippie]

15. Becoming a nuthouse? I knew we had crossed into cukoo land whan Shrub took office.

Had it confirmed in 2004, and we were certified insane last year.

[babylonsister]

19. +1 and hi. Can it get any more ridiculous? nt

[hifiguy]

33. An open air laughing academy

And I never expected to see the day when I would be living in one.

[Rage for Order]

9. Why not? They put braille on drive-up ATM's; this is the next step

:silly:

[proud2BlibKansan]

11. That makes sense though

A passenger in the back seat on the drivers side.

Also people walk up to ATMs all the time.

[pnwmom]

21. yeah, right. Just as long as a bullet can find a braille path to follow. n/t

[MattBaggins]

28. They do not put braille on drive up ATMs

They put braille on ATMs UIs and many of those happen to end up in drive-up locations

[Rage for Order]

39. Dude, I know. It was an attempt at humor

But, as the saying goes, a joke ceases to be funny when it has to be explained

[Paladin]

10. The DU Guns Forum Has Had Several Threads......

....advocating guns for the sight-impaired. Guess that puts the old "Always be sure of your target" rule into the shitter.......

[cleanhippie]

16. Really? Which ones? I must have missed all of them. Link?

[pipoman]

43. That's a complete lie

and you know it. Why do you lie? Are you really that desperate to participate? How sad...

[ohheckyeah]

12. New Rule:

If your state legislature is batshit crazy you MUST secede from the Union.

[blondeatlast]

24. Can this Arizonan find a job out of state first, please? nt

[DefenseLawyer]

13. Obviously the sawed off shotgun must also be legalized

The weapon of choice for the visually impaired.

[Edweird]

20. It's no secret that I'm 'pro 2nd amnendment'

and I have reservations about a blind person with
a firearm. There is an exception though - in my
stae (Florida) a concealed permit allows you to
carry any legal weapon. I could see (no pun intended)
a blind person carrying a razor sharp full tang
fixed blade knife for defense. Without a concealed
license that's a felony here.

[joeybee12]

25. Woo-hoo! this just makes us all freer and safer!!!!! knr

[Patiod]

30. Three recs? Really? Don't the Gungeon Dwellers

have anything better to do today?

Well-regulated militia. Well-regulated militia. Well-regulated militia.

[hifiguy]

31. I really thought this was from The Onion

But seeing it's Kansas, how can anyone be surprised by anything other than the fact that it isn't Texas?

[pipoman]

44. Didn't Minnesota elect a pro wrestler for a governor?

Talk about truth being stranger than fiction..

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

32. I don't see any reason to be upset here.

[fascisthunter]

37. lol... not a bad idea

[MadHound]

42. Kansas. Making Missouri look intelligent for the past thirty years.

Seriously, some of the shit happening in Kansas is just utterly insane.

But on a positive note, the Jayhawks got their ass handed to them last weekend at the NCAA tourney:evilgrin:

[Manifestor_of_Light]

45. I will tell my friend the blind lawyer.

I will let him know.


And previously he was always the "designated drinker", since he cannot drive... :rofl: