Machine guns on the fast track
By Patrick Kelley
Originally published 12:53 p.m., April 1, 2008
Updated 12:53 p.m., April 1, 2008
In Topeka, House and Senate negotiators are still wrangling over which Kansas children most deserve state help on health insurance. Whatever the outcome of the negotiations, some Kansas children who need health insurance will not get it.
The argument is not about health care, but about money. How much can the state afford to spend to keep its children healthy? How much it is willing to spend?
Those are the sort of questions that — if allowed to get out of hand — can drag out consideration of a bill from session to session.
Meanwhile, the children have to wait.
Not having to wait are the gun dealers of Kansas. Last week, the House passed a bill to allow private ownership of machine guns and other fully automatic weapons, silencers and sawed-off shotguns.
The bill started out with the intent of correcting a state law that, according to the Kansas attorney general, made it illegal for Kansas arms dealers to stock those items for sale to law-enforcement agencies. Somewhere along the line, the lawmakers decided what the heck, let’s let everybody in on the fun.
It proved to be a very popular bill, passing the House 105-18. And yes, both of Emporia’s representatives voted in favor of the bill.
If the Senate agrees and the governor approves, soon any Kansans who can pass the background checks and afford the cost of the guns and $200 federal registration fee for each gun, will be able to arm themselves like Rambo.
Supporters of the bill argued that wealthy gun collectors were the only people likely to take advantage of the change in the law. Some machine guns, the supporters said, sell for $20,000 to $80,000. Such a price would certainly limit sales of machine guns. The only people with that kind of money are rich collectors (and, perhaps, successful drug dealers who have managed to avoid a criminal record).
But by including other automatic weapons, sawed-off shotguns and silencers in the bill, the House prevented the legislation from being labeled the Wealthy Gun Nut Protection Act of 2008. The inclusion of the lesser arms would put legal automatic firepower, concealable shotguns and silenced guns within the reach of most Kansans.
Even of those Kansans whose children are not covered by health insurance.
Comments
We allow registered users to post comments on this Web site. To learn more about our posting policies please read our User Poster Agreement Policy.
Posted by Absolute (anonymous) on April 1, 2008 at 1:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
And what if these wealthy gun collectors have a break in and their machine guns are stolen? Do you think the criminal is going to register the gun with the government.
I am very upset this passed. I feel less safe today because of it.
Posted by USNretired (anonymous) on April 1, 2008 at 1:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)
This column is the Emporia left-nut opinion.
Posted by Blackshirt (anonymous) on April 1, 2008 at 2:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What is with the comment about childrens health insurance? Does that have anything to do with the main issue of this piece? Most likely it is added to inflame the reader by offering a real hot topic when there isn't enough in the article to get people excited.
Posted by tosie (anonymous) on April 1, 2008 at 3:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What a bunch of idiots passing this gun law....makes me feel really safe...this world is already out of control, let's just make it easier for criminals to kill people!
Posted by Weltha (anonymous) on April 1, 2008 at 3:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)
The new law isn't going to make it easier for criminals to kill people. The criminals don't give a flying rats butt about the laws or they wouldn't be called criminals. They already have these whether or not they are legal. These new gun laws are evening the playing field a little. You may find yourself glad we have some of these new gun laws one day. When you are in a store being robbed by a criminal someone legal may be in there with a gun and may just save your life and the lives of others. Think about that way before going all postal about it being easier on criminals.
Posted by blulitespecial (anonymous) on April 1, 2008 at 3:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
If you actually read the proposed changes,it's not a big deal.The criminals don't have class lll Federal licenses.Kansas is only one of maybe 6 states without this law.Do you feel safer in Kansas than in the big cities?Also the idea of a left wingnut in the State government decreeing that all firearms are to be confiscated will not happen,like actually DID happen in LA after hurricane Katrina.
Posted by Bjnemp (anonymous) on April 1, 2008 at 4:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I guess I am one of the dreaded "wealthy gun collectors". I, and sixty-four million other law abiding U.S. gun owners, have never killed, robbed, or threatened anyone with a gun. I also possess a concealed carry permit. I am as good a citizen as you; probably much better. I don't jaywalk, exceed speed limits, or even remove tags from pillows. As an honest, solid citizen It is my second amendment right to own my firearms. In the event of civil unrest, invasion, or a criminal assault upon you or your family, I would instantly become the most important and welcomed person in your defenseless misinformed life. Guns no more cause crime than matchces cause arson. Don't judge me because I enjoy the craftsmanship of exquisite firearms and I won't judge you for collecting Hummels.
Posted by tosie (anonymous) on April 1, 2008 at 5:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I guess I just don't see the point of owning a machine gun, sawed off shot gun, or silencer in order to protect my home and family. It's just my opinion...you don't have to like it. I don't appreciate being called defenseless or misinformed BJnemp because you have no idea how I protect my home or what information I am aware of. Thank you.
Posted by blulitespecial (anonymous) on April 1, 2008 at 5:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)
There's a reason we can all voice our opinion,and not worry about it-the kindness of the government isn't the reason.
Bjnemp- I'm with you! Firearms ownership is not only my right,but I consider it a moral obligation and civic duty.But I do look over my shoulder when I cut the tags off pillows...
Posted by dml (anonymous) on April 1, 2008 at 9:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Kstrebuchet, I presume you have not heard a centerfire firearm go off when you did not have any ear plugs or ear muffs on. I did...ONCE! Man, did that hurt the eardrums! That is a VERY good reason for silencers. You can still hear the gun go off, but it would not kill your eardrums or the eardrums of anyone around the shooter who is not wearing hearing protection.
I would like to be able to own a full auto firearm...especially if we cut and run out of the Middle East and Al-Queda brings the fight over here! That is a right protected by the Second Amendment and I think it is also a duty as a citizen of this country. The one reason that the Japanese gave for bombing Pear Harbor and not invading the U S Mainland is because they knew there were too many people with guns to make the attack successful. Also, the government in Switzerland ISSUES a full auto weapon to every household to help defend its country. Why don't we ever hear of mass shootings over there? I find it interesting that the more laws there are in an area restricting gun ownership, the higher their crime rate is. Just look at Washington D. C. They have the most restrictive gun law in the USA and if not the highest crime rate, one of the highest!
I am sure our founding fathers are rolling in their graves over how we in this country have let the government whittle away at the Second Amendment. They put it in place in case the government decides to ignore the other amendments. Unfortunately, no one has challenged the unconstitutional laws that make it hard for most law abiding, blue collar citizens to own this type of guns. Once our government has done away with the Second Amendment, there will be no way of stopping them from doing away with the other amendments or the whole Constitution.
Posted by Bjnemp (anonymous) on April 1, 2008 at 10:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Amen, dml. You hit the proverbial nail on the head. The second amendent is in place in case the politicians ignore the others. What part of "Shall not be infringed" do these people not understand?
Posted by spurrit (anonymous) on April 1, 2008 at 10:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I can't believe this idiot still has a job. His complete lack of skill shown by starting out talking about children's healthcare, then switching to a tirade against guns was pedestrian, at best.
How he keeps from being run out of Emporia on a rail is beyond me.
As for making class III weapons legal here, it's about time. Most of the folks (if not all) that will be buying these guns will be putting them into some of the finest safes available, and I doubt that more than a couple will ever end up in the hands of theives.
I really have little interest in owning a machine gun,(or $20,000 to buy a decent one) but having a silencer would make shooting practice (I'm a competitive shooter, hunter, and hunter's ed. instructor) much safer and more fun. I have cumulative hearing loss from years of shooting, and would prefer to use a silencer, so my wife and kid will be able to shoot more safely.
As for those alarmists that worry about "the streets running red with blood", you said the same thing about concealed carry. It didn't happen. It won't happen. You don't realise how incredibly expensive it is just to buy one of these guns! The people that can afford to buy fully automatic rifles already have enough money that it's highly doubtful they'll ever use their guns to carjack or rob someone.
Posted by hottopics (anonymous) on April 1, 2008 at 11:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Sorry kids, you cant afford health care but by golly you will find a sawed off shot gun under the bed. This in the same story makes me ill.
You cant print the truth in this town about the city court slapping hands of people who own dogs that kill other dogs. You dont print the fact that the city courts revenue has been cut in HALF since the two hit the seats.
Sorry I get a bit carried away at the the BS thats in the Government and our own court systems when we cant even afford a friggin gallon of gas.
Posted by Bjnemp (anonymous) on April 2, 2008 at 2:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)
How ironic is that! Last week it was reported that Emporia is one of the best places in the nation for sportsmen (hunters) to live, and this week the Emporia Gazette publishes a ridiculous left-wing liberal rant against guns! Also ironic is that I own numerous firearms---including assault rifles and handguns---and don't hunt. Such is the beauty of living in America: the freedom to choose. Somebody needs to remind the Gazette staff of that principle.
Posted by open_eyes (anonymous) on April 2, 2008 at 3:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I remember growing up and attending a small-town school. The parking lot was lined with pickup trucks, all with fully-loaded gunracks in plain display. Probably enough firepower out there to take over a small country if we wanted to.
Nary a problem. Or even a hint of one. Some of the teachers were hunters, too, and were interested in what guns we all had.
Nowadays, thanks to..... well, I won't mention, I think it's pretty plain to see where our society is headed, due to the decline of family values and teachings, a scene like that would have army tanks surrounding the parking lot. And with good reason.
Kstr, your point is valid, that you see no need for silencers when it comes to protecting one's self, but as been stated here, silencers are used for other reasons. I wish I had used a silencer back in the days when I target shot and hunted more, maybe I wouldn't have this constant ringing in my ears now, and...... what was that you said? Sorry, can't hear like I used to.... :)
Posted by Weltha (anonymous) on April 4, 2008 at 11:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
In answer to a couple other posts on another article. This hasn't been moved. Its just a little farther down the page.
Posted by Bjnemp (anonymous) on April 4, 2008 at 12:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Thank you, Weltha. This article may not have been moved to avoid a barrage of criticism, but perception tends to become reality so thank you for moving it back.
Post a comment
We allow registered users to post comments on this Web site. Our goal with this feature is to encourage thoughtful discussions about the news stories. Using the comment feature to make random attacks on people is not acceptable. Emporiagazette.com neither endorses nor guarantees the accuracy of any user contribution. Responsibility for what is posted or contributed to this site is the sole responsibility of each user. To learn more about our posting policies please read our User Poster Agreement Policy.
(Requires free registration.)