Kansas is about to join the twenty other states that have passed “Katrina Bills” which prohibit mass confiscations of firearms during states of emergency. Not everyone is happy about this:
I understand the unfairness of disarming citizens and not criminals, but Greensburg isn’t New Orleans.
It just seems silly to craft a bill to guard against something that never happened in Kansas and probably never will.
I don’t see how whether or not this ever happened in Kansas is really at issue, and pardon me if I don’t take a reporter’s word that it’ll never happen there. What harm is there in passing this law? I don’t know about you, but it sounds like a case of sour grapes to me.
Hasn’t the reporter ever heard of tornadoes? I understand they aren’t uncommon in Kansas and if there was a mass outbreak with several towns or cities devastated, rescue services stretched beyond breaking, I could see “never” actually happening.
As I was taught as a child, “never say never”.
Let him go weep in a cornfield somewhere.
Hasn’t this guy ever seen the classic, “The Wizard of Oz?”
I don’t recall Dorothy calling the cops when attacked by flying monkeys.
Granted, I also don’t recall her whipping out a full-auto AK spitting out belted 50 cal heat-seeking ammo either, but hey, it was a Disney flick.
Well, I read the article and this is what I came away with.
Grabbing a gun out of your hands is confiscation.
Grabbing a gun out of your house when you ain’t around is “just finding it.”
My assumption was that the “recovered” weapons were not actually removed from houses, but were found in the piles of debris that used to be houses that may not have come to rest on the property they came from. Having helped clean up after tornadoes in the past, I’ve seen the contents of one home spread over an area larger than the average city block. Finding a firearm on one property would not mean it came from the associated house.
I do think the law is a good idea, at least if it isn’t as easy for the governor to ignore as the article seems to imply.
I also wonder if the guns that haven’t been returned yet were properly taken care of to avoid water damage. I seem to recall that a couple more thunderstorms moved through the area during the first couple days after the tornado.
I think the police in Kansas acted entirely appropriately in the matter, but the law is still a good idea, even if it had nothing to do with what happened in Greenburg.
mmccormick@wichitaeagle.com
Dear Mark:
Natural disasters and other emergencies can happen any place, and at any time. Of course KS is not New Orleans…but so what? Kansas is in no way immune to civil emergencies.
And…do you think it wise to call “meaningless” and “silly” what 100% of the Kansas House things is important? I don’t.
Sure…the governor can still do what is “necessary to promote and secure the safety and protection of the civilian population.” However, that can not include gun confiscation, should this meaningful and important bill pass. This bill is about people, from whom governments are formed and empowered. It’s about people remaining in control, during good times AND bad times.
The KBI and the Association of Chiefs of Police opposed the bill….yes. They oppose it in as much as they forget whom they serve. The people.
I would venture to guess you opposed concealed carry law before it passed in Kansas? Has the predicted havoc ensued? Remember that millions of people make billions of correct decisions, every day. Learn to trust them.
Carl
Chicago, IL
(formerly of another city, Kansas)