Right to Carry & Middle America


PDA






badgerrr
May 18, 2003, 02:19 AM
Was just thumbing thru the new American Rifleman today. They had a blurb and graphic on "Right to Carry Laws 2003".

The very worst places in the country for Right to Carry was in the very Middle of the Country! Yunno.....hopefully where sanity would reighn.....

Looks like the states in question are Nebraska, Kansas, Mo., Wisconsin, Ill, & Ohio.

Anybody out there, from this area, know what's going on here? Could this be some kind of throw-back to the daze of Tammany Hall or something? I'm confused.... :confused:

If you enjoyed reading about "Right to Carry & Middle America" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
valnar
May 18, 2003, 08:31 AM
I'm from Ohio and its hard to believe. All the states surrounding us (Indiana, Kentucky, Penn, and somewhat Michigan) have CCW and Ohio does not.

At least we are allowed to buy whatever guns we want and go shooting. 'tis better than **********.

Robert

Gray Peterson
May 18, 2003, 08:44 AM
Reasons for this...

Well, a very long time ago, a LOT of states outright banned concealed carry. The wave of liberalization occured between 1992 and 1996, easily 15 states removed their bans or their restrictive licensing policies.

The whys of each state:

Wisconsin: This state is very liberal and very "progressive". Though a lot of rural Democrats are pro-gun, and almost all GOP is pro-gun, the leadership of the state Senate was not. Someone on packing.org (goes by the name of MaxMadison?) claimed that CCW was dead in WI for the next four years due to Governor Doyle. He claimed a veto threat by the Governor killed it.

Two problems: 1. Doyle never made an issue of CCW in the Governor's race, nor has he said one way or another and 2. There's enough votes to override a veto in both houses of the Legislature, anyway. Problem is, the budget dominated the entire state debate, so that put off CCW until at least June, perhaps even September.

Missouri: There's a bill sitting on the Governor's desk now, and he's threatened to veto it. He hasn't yet. But there should be enough votes to override.

Ohio: Too many damned spineless liberals in the leadership of the GOP. Governor Bob Taft. Though the new state Senate President has pretty given the finger to Taft on the CCW issue. We'll see what happens, but the House passed HB12 by a veto proof margin.

Kansas: Dear lord, same as it is in Ohio, but worse in certain ways. The problem is that there are too many liberal GOP voters in KS for some reason. They sat out, and let Karen Sebulous win the governorship. She's anti-gun.

Nebraska: You can thank Ernie Chamber's BS on this one. He made so many motions against this bill that it's probably dead for the session, someone want to point out to me if this is wrong or not.

Illinois: Chicago, 'nuff said.

Iowa: Same problem as Minnesota before it went shall-issue: Too many damned liberals, absolutely HORRID, and as far as I know, only one group is pushing for CCW, and that's CCW4Iowa.

Don Gwinn
May 18, 2003, 10:15 AM
The Heartland has many great attributes, but a tendency to embrace sweeping change is not one of them. Right-to-carry in its modern form is not even 20 years old.

Honestly, this can be a wonderful place to live, but only if you can ignore Chicago. I don't know what excuse they use in Kansas or Iowa, but here Chicago literally dominates the state and it's only getting worse because of the way the Republicans screwed up here. It used to be that the Republicans dominated all the Constitutional offices in Illinois, mostly as a counterbalance to Democrat power in Chicago. There hadn't been a Democrat Governor in Illinois for 25 years before Blagojevich, and the last guy had gone to prison. But the Republicans thought the formula in Illinois was to copy the Democrats, and they did. Now everyone who matters in the IL Republican party is a RINO and most of them are crooks.

People finally became so fed up with the scandals and blatant corruption under George Ryan that they would vote for Blagojevich in the hope that something would change (even though it was obvious to anyone with half a brain that Blago was no reformer and could not be trusted.) People who suggested Libertarians were derided as fools who would get Blago elected. He won by a landslide, of course. It didn't help that the idiotic crook running for the Republicans has the same last name as the idiotic crook who was Governor for the last four years (no relation.)

The one and only actual idea Jim Ryan espoused in his campaign was that all the Democratic candidates lived within a 30-mile box in Chicago and a few suburbs, and if they were elected Chicago would run the state. He was, of course, mocked. The media literally laughed and joked about this stupid appeal to demagoguery. Since the election:


Daley has closed Meigs Field, probably with an eye toward putting a casino there, if the state legislature will grant Chicago a license.
The state legislature is debating a casino license for Chicago, without asking where it will go, of course.
Blago has broached the subject of either taking over existing casinos or establishing state-run casinos with the existing licenses. A short step to a casino run by Chicago, don't you think?
Daley's brother (the genius behind Al Gore's post-election campaign) just got a law passed for his phone company, SBC, that's going to make it billions.
Blagojevich says that his office was not notified of the midnight destruction of Meigs by Daley's office, but it's OK with him. No big deal.
Blagojevich refuses to move to Springfield, the capital of the state, and live in the Governor's mansion. Says his wife won't let him. Has to stay in Chicago, dontcha know? Of course, she's Dick Mell's daughter, so she should have known what it means to run for office.

another okie
May 18, 2003, 02:56 PM
There are several reasons for this. I'll list a few, and I'm sure many others who live in this part of the country can come up with some more. I don't know much about Illinois, and what I write below is mostly true of Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska.

Many heartland states passed a great deal of new legislation during the "progressive" era, 1890-1920 or so. This was the first period of time in America when lots of folks wanted to use the power of government to change society, in this case to "clean things up." At that time banning concealed carry was considered progressive. Most Midwestern states have a large German and Scandanavian population which tends to view government very positively and no doubt expects the police the protect them.

These states also have large rural hunting populations that carry shotguns and rifles in their vehicles routinely and don't see the need for concealed carry.

And in several of these states (though not Illinois) there is a long-standing tolerance by police of law abiding folks carrying guns, either in their car or on their person, if it seems reasonable. I used to know several folks who routinely carried and never had any hassles before we had a law, and I can remember a news story not too long ago of a woman who had a handgun in her car in Kansas and used it to defend herself. She was not charged with anything.

You put that together with a relatively low crime rate and you get slow action on concealed carry.

Jim March
May 18, 2003, 03:58 PM
Look at the bigger picture.

Gun control in America is of racist origins. See also Cramer and a pile of other research.

The states where there's no CCW (or there is, but it's totally screwed up such as California, New York, NJ/MA/etc) are states that haven't (yet) been forced to confront their racist histories. There's more racism in Chicago or Los Angeles today than in Atlanta Georgia or anywhere else in the old South.

Once you look at it that way, Missouri is the only "odd one out".

zahc
May 18, 2003, 09:00 PM
Valnar:"At least we are allowed to buy whatever guns we want and go shooting."

Yeah. That is, if you're over 21 years old.

answerguy
May 18, 2003, 10:27 PM
I'm from Ohio and its hard to believe. All the states surrounding us (Indiana, Kentucky, Penn, and somewhat Michigan) have CCW and Ohio does not.

Somewhat Michigan? What shu talking about?

S_O_Laban
May 19, 2003, 04:48 AM
The problem in most of these states is that the big cities control much of what goes on in their state. CCW in Mo , several years ago, lost narrowly on a state wide ballot because of the high concetration of liberal voters in the big cities.

valnar
May 19, 2003, 10:50 AM
RE: Michigan. Perhaps this web page is outdated?

http://www.ccrkba.org/pub/rkba/press-releases/ccwstudy.html

-Robert

El Tejon
May 19, 2003, 11:17 AM
As for Ohio, Missouri and Illinois, it is the cities that dominate the state, especially Chicago's control of Illinois. "Downstate" (i.e. everything outside of Cook County) is closer to Indiana. However, Chicago is a creature onto itself.:(

SkunkApe
May 19, 2003, 11:25 AM
Michigan became "shall issue" on July 1, 2001.

We do have a few CEZs, though.

http://www.packing.org/state/index.jsp/michigan

If you enjoyed reading about "Right to Carry & Middle America" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!