Congarts to Kansas! I hope more states will do it soon.
KS video report:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9gcJ_wibF4
KS video report:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9gcJ_wibF4
Kansas Carry bill signed!!!
- Thread starter Shanghai McCoy
- Start date
- Status
Panzerschwein
member
I moved here to Kansas about a year and a half ago.
Boy do I like it! Nice, pretty rolling plains, laid back lifestyle, and great gun laws that just got BETTER!! I've already had my Kansas CCW for some time, but nice to know it isn't needed by other law abiding citizens.
Boy do I like it! Nice, pretty rolling plains, laid back lifestyle, and great gun laws that just got BETTER!! I've already had my Kansas CCW for some time, but nice to know it isn't needed by other law abiding citizens.
CoalTrain49
Member
I think permit-less carry (CC) is inevitable in just about all but a few states. The hold outs will be the same states that fight shall issue. From an economic perspective states are better off with (CC). It lessens the expense and time of having to process the permits. Here our sheriffs dept. is so under staffed that they have volunteers do the up front registration and finger printing. I wouldn't be surprised if they did the BC's also. If you have to pay county staff to take care of permits those folks get medical benefits and pensions.
The largest part of most county budgets is the criminal justice system. Why would a state want to force local gov't to spend that money on permits when everyone knows it's an ineffective tool for law enforcement. Criminals don't carry CWP's. TX has already proven that and documented it.
I've had a CPL for 25 years and will probably continue to hold one for the insurance I carry but this is a breath of fresh air.
Someone is paying attention in Kansas. I hope they document the crime stats so we can all see that permits and BC's don't reduce crime.
Congratulations.
The largest part of most county budgets is the criminal justice system. Why would a state want to force local gov't to spend that money on permits when everyone knows it's an ineffective tool for law enforcement. Criminals don't carry CWP's. TX has already proven that and documented it.
I've had a CPL for 25 years and will probably continue to hold one for the insurance I carry but this is a breath of fresh air.
Someone is paying attention in Kansas. I hope they document the crime stats so we can all see that permits and BC's don't reduce crime.
Congratulations.
Last edited:
we are not amused
Member
Who the Heck cares? No one in Kansas anymore!
Maybe you need to get on the ball in Minnesota and get your State to follow suit! Then you won't have to defend yourself in court for carrying no matter what you call it.
As for the School Zones, don't commit a crime in them, and it doesn't matter. The Courts would almost certainly overturn that overreaching and unconstitutional law, like they did before. Carrying onto School property may be a different matter, but the thousand foot exclusion zone has been ruled unconstitutional before, and almost certainly will be again if it is ever enforced.
we are not amused
Member
Perhaps a source of income, but not a large or important source.
That myth, that they are a large source of income, has been advanced every time concealed carry permits laws have been discussed, usually by someone who didn't want them, and claimed that having the "huge" income they represent, no one could ever get Constitutional carry. Well that myth has just been busted.
CoalTrain49
Member
Correct, the permits themselves aren't an expense. Gov't tries to cover the cost by charging a fee for a permit. The problem comes from having to hire additional staff to satisfy the requirements of issuing permits. Short term it looks good, long term the liability is staggering.
MN for example has a woefully underfunded pension system as most states do. That tells me that in order to balance their budget they have to borrow money that is owed to their pension system. In other words they are running in the red.
If you have smaller gov't you have fewer under funded pensions to worry about.
Probably one of the reasons why Kansas made the move to limit the permit process as some have already done. I don't think Kansas will be the last one either.
Last edited:
GarySTL
Member
Do you have to be a Kansas resident, or are visitors also allowed "permitless" carry. I live in Missouri and have a permit recognized by Kansas, but just wondering.
Shanghai McCoy
Member
As I understand the law as written people from other states, with reciprocity, will need to have their permits with them. Same as for Kansans going across state lines. Permit less carry is for residents only and in state only.
Red Wind
Member
So, Kansas is like Wyoming and I believe ,Arkansas ,in that regard.
Only Alaska, Arizona and the ultimate pioneer, Vermont (1777) , have "pure" permit-less carry to all comers.
Still, a giant step forward for Kansas. My best to you Jayhawks and Wildcats and Shockers! Don't want to leave anybody out! 
Only Alaska, Arizona and the ultimate pioneer, Vermont (1777) , have "pure" permit-less carry to all comers.
Still, a giant step forward for Kansas. My best to you Jayhawks and Wildcats and Shockers!
Don't want to leave anybody out! Shanghai McCoy
Member
^^^^
Well you forgot the Washburn Ichabods but then, who doesn't...
Well you forgot the Washburn Ichabods but then, who doesn't...
Red Wind
Member
Sorry! The Cranes?
The Cranes?Shanghai McCoy
Member
Nope, it is the "Ichabods"...Sorry!
Red Wind
Member
Who could know! Thank you!
Thank you! 
- Status
