# Council rejects gun ban



## Shipwreck (Jan 26, 2006)

*Council rejects gun ban*

The Lincoln City Council shot down Mayor Coleen Seng's proposal to ban concealed weapons in the city once a new state law takes effect next year.

BY MATT OLBERDING | Lincoln Journal Star

Lincoln Police Chief Tom Casady spent much of the weekend preparing written testimony for what he thought was going to be a long, contentious hearing July 31 on Mayor Coleen Seng's proposal to ban concealed weapons in the city once a new state law takes effect next year.

But Casady's testimony was reduced to a media handout Monday when the City Council, in a surprise move, voted to kill the proposal.

"I've never seen anything like this happen before," said a frustrated Casady during a hastily arranged press conference Monday afternoon.

Though the proposal was not on the council's Monday agenda, it was on the list of pending items with a notation that it was to have a public hearing July 31.

At the end of the meeting Monday, Councilman Jon Camp made a motion to take the proposal off the pending list and not take it any further.

His motion passed 5-2, with only Democrats Dan Marvin and Jonathan Cook opposing it.

Neither Seng nor Casady knew about the vote before it happened.

Seng found out by watching the council meeting on television; Casady was informed by a reporter.

Camp said he had talked to other council members and "sensed enough support today to do it."

But Seng and Casady both said the council's vote cheated the public out of an opportunity to have their say on the issue.

Seng said that in her 20 years on the council and as mayor, she's never seen a situation where "we've denied the public an opportunity to speak on an issue.

"I'm shocked that the council would do this," she said.

Casady, who supports the mayor's proposal, said he himself felt cheated out of the opportunity to be heard.

"I can't understand for the life of me why at the 11th hour they pulled the rug out from under that opportunity," he said.

Casady said he's seen the council spend hours on minutiae in public hearings and can't understand why they would not at least give people the chance to debate the issue.

"I've never seen the City Council do this before," he said.

Neither Seng nor Casady would speculate as to whether Omaha's recent decision to rescind its ban on concealed weapons to be in line with state law had an effect on the council's vote.

Camp denied that it did, but Marvin said he thought it had an impact.

Even though he voted against it, Marvin defended the council's decision.

But he did agree that it was out of the norm for how the body operates.

"I would agree with (Seng and Casady) that it was very unusual," he said.

The mayor's proposal could be reintroduced or reconsidered if someone from the winning side asked that it be, but that seems unlikely.

Seng cannot veto the decision, according to City Attorney Dana Roper.

The state Legislature voted in March to allow Nebraskans to carry concealed weapons starting Jan.1.

Applicants must pass background checks and meet other criteria to obtain the $100 permits, which will have to be renewed every five years.

The bill was opposed by the Police Officers Association of Nebraska and 85 percent of Lincoln's police officers, according to Casady.

Casady said he was also concerned by what he sees as loopholes in the law, such as the fact that it would not disqualify someone convicted of stalking from getting a concealed carry permit.

The law also does not prohibit people from carrying concealed weapons into government buildings other than courtrooms, jails and the Legislature.

Camp said he will support local legislation to reconcile that but otherwise thinks the city should follow the state's lead.

"Since Day 1 I've advocated waiting a year and seeing how it unfolds," he said.

"If I'm proven wrong, I'll be the first to initiate legislation to change."


----------



## Thor (May 11, 2006)

Minnesota's state law specifically states that a permit holder CAN carry into government offices and no government body can deny that privilege.



> Subd. 23. * Exclusivity.* This section sets forth the
> complete and exclusive criteria and procedures for the issuance
> of permits to carry and establishes their nature and scope.* No
> sheriff, police chief, governmental unit, government official,
> ...


However, Courts & schools are restricted areas. I know Minnesota is different than Nebraska, but our laws seem to be pretty good. In the 3 years we have had "shall issue", there have only been two negative incidents involving permit holders. Believe me, the Metro area is rabidly anti-gun and EVERY gun incident gets reported!! Oh yeah, and we CAN carry into bars and even have an alcoholic beverage, maybe two. (unless the bar is posted)


----------



## Maximo (May 26, 2006)

Shipwreck said:


> *
> 
> "Since Day 1 I've advocated waiting a year and seeing how it unfolds," he said.
> 
> *


*

Why? All you have to do is look at how successful other states with similar laws have been. And they need to look at the stats for other cities that have enacted anti ccw within their city, going against state law, and you can see street crime rise like a thermometer.*


----------



## Buckeye (Jul 13, 2006)

> The bill was opposed by the Police Officers Association of Nebraska and 85 percent of Lincoln's police officers, according to Casady.


I don't understand why State Police agencies are so vehemently ant-gun. I work with a police force and the majority of officers on the street could care less about legal CCW holders, or are actually happy to have additional certifiable good guys carrying. Our State Highway Patrol however, is one of the largest anti-gun forces in the state, largely responsible for "poison-pill" requirements in our CCW laws...I don't get why they think that it is an officer safety issue, when a criminal isn't going to ever follow the laws, and CCW holders are of the most scrutinized, registered, and law abiding citizens around???

I'm wondering if it's just the brainwashed Democratic pandering to their left-leaning unions that drives this....or if officers truly think legal CCW holders are a menace to their safety....more so than joe criminal they encounter every day?

I'd be interested in hearing thoughts from any LEO on here.


----------



## Maximo (May 26, 2006)

Buckeye said:


> I'm wondering if it's just the brainwashed Democratic pandering to their left-leaning unions that drives this....or if officers truly think legal CCW holders are a menace to their safety....more so than joe criminal they encounter every day?
> 
> I'd be interested in hearing thoughts from any LEO on here.


I am not a LEO but I do know several, and all are very pro ccw. My guess is the LEO's that are against ccw are the union leaders and the officers high enough up the ranks they have become bureacrats. Here in Texas the few anti-gun LEOs are people like the heads of police associations and a few DAs, there are a few scattered patrolmen here and there but it isn't many.
I left to take my puppy to the vet back in May while I was gone the security system went off and I had to return to the house to meet the police. Before we went in I told them I was a CHL holder and I was armed, they didn't even ask to see my ID which I thought was strange.


----------



## js (Jun 29, 2006)

Maximo said:


> I am not a LEO but I do know several, and all are very pro ccw.


+1

I've got a few buddies who are LEO and they are very pro ccw.


----------

