Wyoming 2020 Bill Would Eliminate most “Gun Free Zones”

AmmoLand ^ | 11 February, 2020 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

In Wyoming, Second Amendment supporters have been working to repeal “gun free zones” for years. Bill SF0088 in Wyoming would eliminate most “gun free zones” in the state in 2020. Here are the relevant portions of the bill:

(b)  Persons lawfully carrying concealed weapons in Wyoming under W.S. 6‑8‑104(a)(ii) through (iv) may carry a concealed weapon in the following places:

(i)  Any meeting of a governmental entity;

(ii)  Any meeting of the legislature or a committee thereof.

 (c)  Persons lawfully carrying concealed weapons in Wyoming under W.S. 6‑8‑104(a)(ii) or (iii) may carry a concealed weapon in the following places:

 (i)  Any public school, public college or university or professional athletic event, except as provided in W.S. 21‑3‑132;

 (ii)  Any public elementary or secondary school facility, except as provided in W.S. 21‑3‑132;

 (iii)  Any public college or university facility.

W.S. 21-3-132  generally prohibits the carry of firearms in K-12 schools, unless the school board allows the practice.

The bill is sponsored by Senator(s) Bouchard, Biteman, James and Steinmetz and Representative(s) Blackburn, Clem, Edwards, Gray, Jennings, Laursen, Piiparinen, Salazar, Styvar and Tass.

In 2019, the legislation was popular. From the Gillettenewsrecord.com:

[marktwain]

In 2019, the bill was stopped in committee by three votes to two. The three votes were two Republicans and one Democrat.

[from occupied ga]

The three votes were two Republicans...

Why shows yet again that Republicans can't be trusted with our rights any more than Democrats. It was Reagan who signed the despicable full auto ban in '86.

[marktwain]

In specific cases, you are correct.

Statistically, you are incorrect.

Republicans are, on average, more susceptible to pressure to do the right thing.

Democrats, on average, are philosopically opposed to the idea of limits on government.

[Who is John Galt?]

Republicans are, on average, more susceptible to pressure to do the right thing.
Democrats, on average, are philosopically opposed to the idea of limits on government.

Which is one reason I never, ever vote for a Dem candidate...

[from occupied ga]

Statistically, you are incorrect.

Maybe, maybe not. Depends on how you define it. Let's look at the '86 grossly misnamed gun owner's protection act (i.e. full auto ban.) It passed the Senate 79:15. At the time the Senate was R:D 53:46 which means that if NO Democrats voted against it then 79-46 = 33 Republicans voted for it. 33/53 = 62.2% of Republicans voted for the semi-auto ban so statistically speaking Republicans are to be trusted with our gun rights less than half the time.

Republicans are, on average, more susceptible to pressure to do the right thing.

perhaps although I'd have to have pre and post calling/letter writing campaign pro/antigun stance of legislators to quantify this. The analysis would be a straight forward chi Square

Bottom line: you can't trust Republicans just because they have an R after their name.

[from occupied ga]

semiauto ban = FULL AUTO BAN

[Scrambler Bob]

Appreciate the short excerpt.

Can get right to posting quickly, Freeper Style.

[marktwain]

Maybe, maybe not. Depends on how you define it. Let's look at the '86 grossly misnamed gun owner's protection act (i.e. full auto ban.) It passed the Senate 79:15.

The '86 full auto ban was only a small part of the Gun Owners' Protection Act.

The critical vote was a voice vote fraudulently done by the Democrats.

It was not even clear at the time, that the '86 law actually banned production of more full autos. It allows for production under the authority of the government.

Gun owners had been fighting for years for the reforms which were enacted. The activists were not willing to throw them all away because of the poison pill of the '86 full auto ban.

It is horribly bad law, I would say, blatantly unconstitutional.

But it is wrong to claim it was the major focus of the bill at the time.

[from occupied ga]

The critical vote was a voice vote fraudulently done by the Democrats.

Yes and that's why I can't give a more accurate analysis.

The activists were not willing to throw them all away because of the poison pill of the '86 full auto ban.

That was a major problem right there. The poison pill should have killed the bill. there was an R majority in the Senate. The President was R. The House was D, but I'm not sure at the time that all Democrats had frothing at the mouth fanatic hatred of armed citizens that they do today.

Any gun restriction tends to be permanent. Any relief to gun owners is only good until the next legislative session. You're no doubt familiar with the way this works. A bad bill passes with so-called "compromises" to get it through. The ink isn't even dry before the anti-gunners are screeching about closing "loopholes" in the bill. We need to find some legislators with the guts to sponsor a pro-gun- bill - ie strike down the full auto ban for example. Not this death by a thousand cuts. No one wins anything by constantly being on the defense.

[marktwain]

We need to find some legislators with the guts to sponsor a pro-gun- bill - ie strike down the full auto ban for example. Not this death by a thousand cuts. No one wins anything by constantly being on the defense.

There are plenty of pro-Second Amendment bills filed. You never hear of them in the legacy Media, except if they have a chance of passage, and then the purpose is to defeat them.

Legislators have mostly been pawns of the Mediacracy for the last 50 years.

President Trump is the first President to take on the Mediacracy and win.

[jimmygrace]

Gun-free zones have always been a terrible idea for schools. If you are not willing to put a sticker on your house proudly proclaiming that your home is a gun-free zone, then why are you doing it to your school? You should only be able to declare a gun-free zone if you can back it up the way court houses and airports can.