|
HB 2052
Mar 14, 2013 21:34:21 GMT -5
Post by tkarter on Mar 14, 2013 21:34:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
HB 2052
Mar 27, 2013 21:52:27 GMT -5
Post by eagle on Mar 27, 2013 21:52:27 GMT -5
NOT GOOD .. in my mind... see next post ... here's the info : KSRA release : This bill passed the full Senate on Final Action today with a vote of 35 to 5. However, some amendments were made to the bill during the Senate actions so this bill must go back to the House for them to concur or appoint a conference committee to come to agreement on the differences before it can go to the Governor for signature. See how the Senate voted below. MEGA GUN BILL SENATE SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL 2052 The following bills, which have already been passed by the House, have been blended together in one mega gun bill. The House bills are HB 2052, HB 2055, HB 2098 previously reported in our alerts. Additionally the following Senate bills have also been blended into this mega gun bill, SB 157, SB 158, SB 184 & SB 186. Amendments have been done to clean up technicalities and differences in the bills. It resulted in the best of all of them rolled in to one. This mega gun bill is now SENATE SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL 2052 and was passed by the Senate Committee on Federal and State Affairs this morning. Link to bill : www.kslegislature.org/li/b2013_14/measures/documents/hb2052_03_0000.pdfNotes (link) : www.kslegislature.org/li/b2013_14/measures/documents/supp_note_hb2052_03_0000.pdf
|
|
|
HB 2052
Mar 27, 2013 21:54:10 GMT -5
Post by tkarter on Mar 27, 2013 21:54:10 GMT -5
That means they go back to the house right?
|
|
|
HB 2052
Mar 27, 2013 21:59:05 GMT -5
Post by eagle on Mar 27, 2013 21:59:05 GMT -5
My email to my House Representative & CC'd Patricia Stoneking :
What is deleted in the below section is the words "in the building of" What is added are the words "as premises" and "of premises" .
Dear Mr Seiwert,
The Senate combined all of these bills into one, which will be returning to the House for concurrence.
I , and many others, have a BIG problem with one aspect of this bill and I hope you will support our stance on this,and argue if at all possible for that particular modification not be approved… and returned to the original language.
This is in the following section : (red highlight being deleted and ‘blue” being added in the statute).
Sec. 8. K.S.A. 2012 Supp. 75-7c10 is hereby amended to read as follows: 75-7c10. Subject to the provisions of section 2, and amendments thereto: (a) Provided that the premises are conspicuously posted in accordance with rules and regulations adopted by the attorney general as premises where carrying a concealed handgun is prohibited, no license issued pursuant to or recognized by this act shall authorize the licensee to carry a concealed handgun into the building of: (1) Any place where an activity declared
The reason for this is simple… all definitions of “premises” , include lands, parking lots, etc. of a property, NOT just the buildings. This opens posting parking lots, walkways, and all sorts of things that would make impractical let alone nearly impossible to know if there are signs, where the signs would be, and nearly impossible to follow.
What may seem like a small change, is likely to cause many problems and muddy waters on what is legal and isn’t legal in terms of posting, as well as where and where not CC is legal.
I would strongly urge that the wording stick to “buildings” being the only location that can be “posted” with the AG approved signage as it is today in the statutes.
Mr Siewert, to reiterate, “any” references to “premises” in this section of the bill., vs “in the building of” …… should be returned to the orginal language of the present statute in my , and several other’s opinions. The word “premises” …. is far reaching and greatly expands areas that can be posted , and that presents all types of muddy waters legally for CC holders.
|
|
|
HB 2052
Mar 27, 2013 22:01:44 GMT -5
Post by eagle on Mar 27, 2013 22:01:44 GMT -5
That means they go back to the house right? Yep ... and my concern is .... someone is "sneaking" this in on "premises" and they will vote it in without even realizing the impact of that. I really hope that I am wrong, but every definition and legal definition of "premises" , includes "everything" ....including the land the building is sitting on and anything else on it (parking lots,parking garages, walkways, parks, outdoor stadiums, etc).
|
|
|
HB 2052
Mar 27, 2013 22:05:41 GMT -5
Post by tkarter on Mar 27, 2013 22:05:41 GMT -5
It all looks so good except what you and I seemed concerned with. I am sure it will pass the house too. We need to find the right argument against the language you and I agree is not good for cch in Kansas.
You were on top of it way before I was. It all looked so good that I almost failed to see the bad part. Thanks to you I see it plain and simple.
|
|
|
HB 2052
Mar 28, 2013 23:42:55 GMT -5
Post by eagle on Mar 28, 2013 23:42:55 GMT -5
One thing I missed (big UGH) ..... that makes a difference .....are words at the very bottom after all of the deletions.... "any building". Sorry for any confusion I may have created by not finding these nearly hidden words. They eliminated "the building of" ....... without showing the next added words, show a bunch of deletions and then at the very end... put " any building" . Easy to not see it there. So, once the deletions are out of the way , it will read as follows in this section : ( ‘blue” being added in the statute). Quote: Sec. 8. K.S.A. 2012 Supp. 75-7c10 is hereby amended to read as follows: 75-7c10. Subject to the provisions of section 2, and amendments thereto: (a) Provided that the premises are conspicuously posted in accordance with rules and regulations adopted by the attorney general as premises where carrying a concealed handgun is prohibited, no license issued pursuant to or recognized by this act shall authorize the licensee to carry a concealed handgun into (a whole bunch of deleted parts and then) any building. One good thing in this bill is : Quote: (e){(d)} (1) It shall be a violation of this section to carry a concealed handgun in violation of any restriction or prohibition allowed by subsection (a) or (b) if the premises are posted in accordance with rules and regulations adopted by the attorney general pursuant to subsection (h). Any person who violates this section shall not be subject to a criminal penalty but may be subject to denial to such premises or removal from such premises.
|
|
|
Post by tkarter on Mar 29, 2013 9:36:27 GMT -5
The word premises should be a deal breaker.
Sent from my ZTE-Z990G using proboards
|
|
|
HB 2052
Mar 29, 2013 16:41:39 GMT -5
Post by eagle on Mar 29, 2013 16:41:39 GMT -5
You saw my post on the other thread, I assume. I still think it could end up a major issue, and someone has convinced them it won't be... or they just really don't understand. I have ran into that before.
I used to do some things with the Ks Supreme Crt, and a few things we tried to explain to Legislatures on wording and they just couldn't get it, I called one of the guys there to please call them and explain it to them. They did , and then the Leglislators told me that they got a call and the Supreme Crt was telling them what I had... gee, you think ... duh. The sarcasism comes from past dealings and that a lot of Legislators have no background in law, courts, judgments, rulings, etc... and then attempt to write laws.
|
|
|
Post by tkarter on Mar 29, 2013 17:33:03 GMT -5
I think it was intentional and worded that way so college campuses could deny cch.
Sent from my ZTE-Z990G using proboards
|
|
|
HB 2052
Apr 2, 2013 16:15:16 GMT -5
Post by eagle on Apr 2, 2013 16:15:16 GMT -5
Date Chamber Status AR JPN Mon 01 Apr 2013 Senate Motion to accede adopted; Senator Ostmeyer, Senator Emler and Senator Faust-Goudeau appointed as conferees Mon 01 Apr 2013 House Nonconcurred with amendments; Conference Committee requested; appointed Representative Siegfreid , Representative Brunk and Representative Ruiz as conferees 600 Wed 27 Mar 2013 Senate Final Action - Substitute passed as amended; Yea: 35 Nay: 5 480
|
|
|
HB 2052
Apr 2, 2013 16:15:19 GMT -5
Post by eagle on Apr 2, 2013 16:15:19 GMT -5
Date Chamber Status AR JPN Mon 01 Apr 2013 Senate Motion to accede adopted; Senator Ostmeyer, Senator Emler and Senator Faust-Goudeau appointed as conferees
Mon 01 Apr 2013 House Nonconcurred with amendments; Conference Committee requested; appointed Representative Siegfreid , Representative Brunk and Representative Ruiz as conferees 600
Wed 27 Mar 2013 Senate Final Action - Substitute passed as amended; Yea: 35 Nay: 5
|
|
|
HB 2052
Apr 2, 2013 19:40:50 GMT -5
Post by tkarter on Apr 2, 2013 19:40:50 GMT -5
So where is this in the chain of getting done?
|
|
|
Post by eagle on Apr 6, 2013 0:21:27 GMT -5
KSRA email tonight :
Senate Substitute for HB 2052, the bill now known as the Mega Gun Bill passed the House 104-16 and passed the Senate 35-5! It's also on the way to the Governor for signature!
|
|
|
HB 2052
Jun 18, 2013 23:48:44 GMT -5
Post by eagle on Jun 18, 2013 23:48:44 GMT -5
www.ksccw.net/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=286On KSCCW.net ..... we're trying to get more 'clarification', and copies of the law .. since it's effective date is coming up very soon here. And, trying to figure out the ramifications of "exemptions" , etc. Apmech did get some good info from Rep... Knox. Just thought I would point it out.
|
|