Skip to comments.Should gun permits be easier?(NE)
Posted on 05/08/2010 5:40:49 PM PDT by marktwain
LINCOLN - A citizen's fatal shooting of a would-be robber in Omaha has sparked a debate over whether Nebraska should join three other states and do away with training and permit requirements to carry concealed handguns.
Harry J. McCullough III, a 32-year-old drugstore customer, shot one robber who was holding a sawed-off shotgun and apprehended another.
McCullough did not possess a state permit to carry a concealed handgun. He probably would be ineligible for such a permit because of his 1997 misdemeanor conviction for carrying a concealed weapon.
Many credit the actions of the former security guard with preventing the robbery and injury to others Monday night in a Walgreens store in the Benson neighborhood. McCullough drew his .40-caliber pistol and fired eight shots. Four struck the robber. Advertising
This is a perfect example of why the good guys should have guns and the bad guys shouldn't, said attorney James Martin Davis, who is representing McCullough.
State Sen. Mark Christensen of Imperial said Wednesday that he would favor Nebraska's joining Arizona, Vermont and Alaska in waiving all requirements except the criminal background check to carry concealed weapons.
That way, more people would carry concealed guns, the rural lawmaker said.
(Excerpt) Read more at omaha.com ...
"He probably would be ineligible for such a permit because of his 1997 misdemeanor conviction for carrying a concealed weapon."
There has been no mention of it since the early report.
Here is a comment from a story on April 28th:
"This man harry Mcculough is a personal friend of mine and has been for many years. James, as his friends know him has been a VERY skilled gunman from the day I met him, and has taken all necessary training courses to carry a gun. I am very disappointed with the Omaha Police Department that they would ticket him when he is so skilled, and like the county attorney said he was justified in using deadly force to protect himself and others. Dont worry guys, the charge of carrying a concealed weapon is a Class I misdemeanor in Omaha, besides hes got he best damn attorney in Nebraska on his side! EVERYONE in Omaha thinks he is a HERO!"
And NE probably made it almost impossible to obtain a permit, yet they want him to shoulder all the blame when he runs afoul the law.
This guy, facing similar "danger and stress" that the cops like to talk about facing. landing 4 out of 8 shots. With little to no training.
NE is "shall issue", but it's recent. His misdemeanor conviction was from before they had a permit system at all.
Of course almost every gun law, save those prohibiting felons from being armed, in the state, especially those of the City of Omaha, are blatantly in violation of the State Constitution, whose very paragraph of it's very first article says:
All persons are by nature free and independent, and have certain inherent and inalienable rights; among these are life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and the right to keep and bear arms for security or defense of self, family, home, and others, and for lawful common defense, hunting, recreational use, and all other lawful purposes, and such rights shall not be denied or infringed by the state or any subdivision thereof. To secure these rights, and the protection of property, governments are instituted among people, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.
The part in italics was added by a vote of the people in the late 1980s. The legislature wouldn't even put the measure on the ballot, so The People did it themselves via the initiative and referendum process.
But no gun law has yet been overturned on the basis of that provision. I guess the courts thought The People didn't really mean it?
There should not be any permitting or registration needed for any weapon.
“This program is available to anyone* age 21 and older interested in handgun safety. It is REQUIRED for all persons possessing and transporting exposed concealable loaded firearms in the City of Omaha. After successful completion of the course, a City of Omaha Handgun Permit may be issued.”
“But no gun law has yet been overturned on the basis of that provision. I guess the courts thought The People didn’t really mean it? “
Nearly the same Constitutional Amendment passed in Wisconsin in 1998, I think. But, there is the same effect, no court has been willing to strike down a single law yet.
All the judges who refuse to uphold the Constitution should be impeached.
Very likely he was relying on the State Constitution for his CCW, and the State Courts utterly failed him:
“All persons are by nature free and independent, and have certain inherent and inalienable rights; among these are life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and the right to keep and bear arms for security or defense of self, family, home, and others, and for lawful common defense, hunting, recreational use, and all other lawful purposes, and such rights shall not be denied or infringed by the state or any subdivision thereof. To secure these rights, and the protection of property, governments are instituted among people, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”
If the MSM can do a study and come up with a scenario to require licenses to print, broadcast, or stand on a corner soapbox and proselytize, then I will think about gun regulations. They are on their face un-Constitutional.
“If the courts ever interpreted the Second Amendment the way they interpret the First Amendment, we’d have a right to bear nuclear arms by now.” - Ann Coulter
A Felony is a Felony for a reason.
You want to see my gun permit? Here’s my “gun permit”:
Amendment 2 - Right to Bear Arms. Ratified 12/15/1791.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
You took the words off of my keyboard.
>Since a traffic violation is technically a Misdemeanor, does that mean the powers that be can refuse you a Concealed Carry Permit for running a Stop Sign?
>A Felony is a Felony for a reason.
I disagree that even a felon should be denied the right to keep and bear arms after serving his sentence; we call it “paying their debt to society,” but in this case it’s like repeatedly charging him after he’s payed.
As for misdemeanors [or allegations thereof] being used to deny rights, I think HUGE portions of Law Enforcement AND the Judicial should be charged under USC Title 18, Chapter 13:
§ 241. Conspiracy against rights [ http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00000241——000-.html ]
§ 242. Deprivation of rights under color of law [ http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/usc_sec_18_00000242——000-.html ]
LOL! Not everyone. There are a lot of people in the Omaha city gov who are pretty mad right now. They don’t want concealed carry at all.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.