The Wichitan

Comments (7)

All The Wichitan Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • E

    ExNukeMar 17, 2016 at 9:35 PM

    The Columbine tragedy has absolutely nothing to do with the legal carrying of a gun with or without a beauracrat issuing a permission slip. Just like Sandy Hook, defending youself and children in your care with harsh words and moral indignation only gives a lunatic another thrill.

    “On campus, Matthew Watson, instructor of biology, said, “I feel troubled about campus carry,”
    Having been raised around guns as a kid, he said “I question the psychology of a person carrying an assault rifle into McDonald’s. I will leave and take my kids with me. I don’t know if its loaded but why carry if it’s not? The holstered handguns designed for open carry, display a safer and more responsible way to carry.”

    Matthew fails to mention that open carry of a holstered handgun was totally forbidden before the current law that allows it with a permit and printing or accidential exposure of a legal concealed handgun could get you charged with a felony, it was only legal to carry a rifle or shotgun openly (as if you could reasonably carry one concealed). That was the point in the Open Carry demonstrations.

    Reply
  • F

    Frank in SpokaneMar 16, 2016 at 4:44 PM

    “Despite [Columbine] and [other school shootings], Texas last year made it even easier to carry a weapon.”

    1. Texas’s new open carry law didn’t “make it even easier to carry a weapon.” If you choose to open carry, you still need the same permit that Texas requires for concealed carry.

    2. Texas laws re. carrying of firearms in public has no more to do with Dylan and Kleybold in 1999 than they do with Charles Whitman in 1966. Which is to say, “nothing.”

    3. What the new Texas law DOES do is to keep concealed carriers from being cited for exposing their weapons should a gust of wind blow their jackets open or their shirts ride up past their holsters.

    I am no fan of open carry myself, because of the loss of “tactile” (sic) advantage. But there’s no need to fear seeing what has always been there before.

    Reply
  • J

    jack burtonMar 16, 2016 at 1:00 PM

    Opening a story about legally carrying handguns according to state law with a story from the Columbine School shooting is like starting a story about the upcoming spring season of the Royals with an anecdote from the scandal of the 1919 World Series and trying to connect the two. Or starting a story about the new banking regulations that make things easier for the customer with an overview of the career of Jesse James and his bank-robbing crew.

    Thanks, Ms. York. No wonder the average citizen now views the trust and worth of the news media somewhat lower than even a used car salesman.

    Reply
  • B

    Barry HirshMar 16, 2016 at 11:43 AM

    “Despite this incident and others, Texas last year made it even easier to carry a weapon. ”

    What a ridiculous statement. Here’s how easy it is to carry a weapon: You get a weapon, and you carry it.

    What Texas has done (following the lead of several other states) is to remove an impermissible restriction on a fundamental right, that makes law-abiding people into violators simply by its exercise.

    It’s not the carrying of a weapon that matters, it’s what one does with that weapon that matters. No law can prevent someone from carrying a weapon. It can only penalize the behavior after the fact, and the mere behavior of bearing arms cannot be a crime for someone who is not a prohibited person.

    Reply
  • R

    RichMar 16, 2016 at 10:47 AM

    A recent indictment of a Chicago felon and known gang member demonstrates the exact problem those of us who read the Second Amendment for what it’s worth have a problem with background checks and gun control laws of any kind. Three months after buying two guns from an undercover agent, Lazaro Salas, 32, was indicted. He had acquired between 40 and 60 guns while being a felon.
    http://freedomoutpost.com/why-gun-control-laws-dont-work-felon-acquires-40-60-guns-for-resell/

    Reply
  • F

    fsilberMar 16, 2016 at 7:31 AM

    The only excuse I see for open carry is in a state where its courts have ruled that carrying a gun is Constitutional right but that concealed carry is forbidden without a permit. That is, if one wants to carry a gun not as a privilege but as a right.

    If a permit is required either way, or if no permit is required either way — then to me carrying openly is like a gay person dressing flamboyantly to say, “We’re here; we’re queer. Get used to it!”

    Reply
    • D

      DanHMar 16, 2016 at 11:07 AM

      It’s about choice. This way you have made your choice and others can make it for themselves. It also eliminates the ability of an anti-rights DA to charge someone who is taking a coat off by their car and putting on another top layer and the firearm incidentally shows. If you had thought about it, you may have realized that’s a valid reason for open carry laws as well.

      Reply
Activate Search
The Student News Site of Midwestern State University
Few changes noticed since open carry laws changed Jan. 1