[OmahaNE]

http://www.omaha.com/

Thank you!

[runswithscissors]

I could go to my campus and vote, a couple hundred times :evil: Every computer has a different IP address so no one would know ;) Or would I just be exploiting a "loophole" in the system :neener:

[chaim]

I've voted from work. When I get off I'll vote from my parents' computer and later from mine.

Current results-
Do you agree with a Nebraska state senator's efforts to authorize the carrying of concealed weapons in the state? Read more about the issue.


· Yes.
576


· No.
744


· I am undecided.
47


· I don't have an opinion.
15




Still, I'm not sure about flooding these polls. When all of a sudden you have 10000 votes pro-gun and 500 against and undecided it is pretty obvious a pro-gun board flooded the poll so I don't know what we accomplish. I would be curious sometime to see the results of some of these polls after the fact. It may help us know where we need to concentrate our efforts to reach people.

[dolanp]

These polls go ignored if 'pro-gun' people win usually. In fact I recall one paper writing a follow-up article invalidating and not publishing the results because they were so heavily slanted for gun rights. He basically wrote how the gun people were so organized and how they cheated and flooded his poll. Surely if it was posted on MMM or Brady Bunch forums somewhere they wouldn't discount that surge of votes that went the other way.

They can't come to terms with the reality of the situation.

[Silver Bullet]

The media was plenty willing to post the results of Bush-Kerry post-debate polls when DU and other blueneck groups packed the vote.

[Greg L]

· Yes. 1029

· No. 805

· I am undecided. 48

· I don't have an opinion. 16

The poll doesn't need to be bombed by everyone here, however you can be fairly certain that what we would consider a defeat in the final poll results would be the lead story in the paper. If we win though it won't get a mention anywhere :banghead: .

[Michigander]

· Yes.
1088


· No.
826


· I am undecided.
50


· I don't have an opinion.
16

[Hawkmoon]

If the pro-gun side wins, the results "may" be ignored, but if the anti-gun side wins the results will certainly be used to "justify" anti-gun regulations, or at least as justification not to relax existing regulations.

Better to win and have the poll be ignored than to lose and have the poll be used against us.

[Risasi]

Hey!!

Hold on. I live in Nebraska, and work in Omaha. Native born and raised. And I am against the CCW.

OmahaNE,

It is already legal to carry concealed, by affirmative defense. We would be better served getting some of the Omaha Municipal codes stricen from the record books. By the way these Municipal codes all have their foundation in the handgun registration system setup for control of organized crime in the 1920's and 1930's!! They are old, outdated, and in the face of Nebraska State Constitution.

What is you argument for putting a CCW in place? The only one I can see is reciprocal carry to other states.

[dolanp]

An affirmative defense is an expensive "not guilty".

[Risasi]

dolanp,

That is true. But then again most "not guilty" judgments are generally expensive no matter how you cut it. Especially if it's civil.

[EDIT] Oh by the way here is the worst that can happen to you:

Class I misdemeanor...... Maximum -- not more than one year
imprisonment, or one thousand dollars
fine, or both
Minimum -- none

Second time you are busted it turns into a Class IV Felony.
Also so we know exactly what law we are talking about:

-------------------------------------------------
28-1202
Carrying concealed weapon; penalty; affirmative defense.


(1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of
this section, any person who carries a weapon or weapons
concealed on or about his or her person such as a revolver,
pistol, bowie knife, dirk or knife with a dirk blade attachment,
brass or iron knuckles, or any other deadly weapon commits the
offense of carrying a concealed weapon.
***THE IMPORTANT PART***
(2) It shall be an affirmative defense that the
defendant was engaged in any lawful business, calling, or
employment at the time he or she was carrying any weapon or
weapons and the circumstances in which such person was placed at
the time were such as to justify a prudent person in carrying the
weapon or weapons for the defense of his or her person, property,
or family.
***
(3) Carrying a concealed weapon is a Class I
misdemeanor.
(4) In the case of a second or subsequent conviction
under this section, carrying a concealed weapon is a Class IV
felony.



Source:
Laws 1977, LB 38, § 234; Laws 1984, LB 1095, § 1.

[TechBrute]

Yes.
1966


· No.
1164


· I am undecided.
69


· I don't have an opinion.
20

[OmahaNE]

Risasi,
I agree with the other poster about the "Affirmative defense" being not the best option. It is a "get out of jail" option, not a "stay out of jail" system.

That said, the concealed handgun permit act, Lb454, is worded such that it preserves the existing 12-2802 wording, so in effect it takes nothing away from the current law while providing a permit system as well. It is a win-win for us.

[Risasi]

OmahaNE,

Thanks for the response. I also found your website and am looking at it. I know what you are trying to do. And while I surely don't have anything against a law that is pro gun, I have always had a funny suspicion that this would somehow be turned around, and bite us in the buttocks.

First it starts with registration. Saying it's allowed by everybody. But then the social creep starts, and it's no longer socially responsible to carry or even own for that matter. Suddenly have to prove you are worthy to even be allowed to carry concealed. Which would step on both state and federal constitution.

Eventually it turns into a caste system that makes it very difficult for the "commoner" to carry. And we find only LEO and special cases are allowed (For instance a certain dark complexioned senator, with a reputation for getting pulled over for speeding on a certain interstate system, who then got a certain law passed to allow for reduced fines. And was found to be carrying a concealed weapon beneath his car seat :rolleyes: ). Really law is not there to help, but convict.

And a renegotiation of words and their meanings is what I am afraid of.

Anyway. I'll be looking at your site further and may try to touch base with you there. In the meantime I'll sit the fence until I get a full grasp of this bill.

Thanks again.

[OmahaNE]

Yes, I agree that it can be tricky to determine what is good & bad when it comes to something like this. We need to be very careful when looking at these laws to make sure that they preserve our current rights

The flip side is when you look at a state like Alaska which is completely non-restricted when it comes to concealed carry, but it has a permit system for reciprocity with other states. In my opinion, that is the best case scenerio.

If this bill passes NE would retain it's affirmative defense (for everyone), but with your NE permit you'd have reciprocity with 13 (?) other states to carry concealed in those states.

[RoyG]

Yes. 2699



No. 1493



I am undecided. 94



I don't have an opinion. 25

[larry starling]

I voted Yes, hope this helps out! :neener:

[beerslurpy]

Copied link to another window and voted yes. Up to nearly 3k on our side.