Kansas schools uninsurable due to gun law?

[Nessie]

Thanks for the link. However, it's not as you describe completely. While it is Kansas and I would wager a guess that there are problems with the CCW process, here is the requirements section.



Highlighting mine. It's not as willy nilly as simply not being a convicted felon.

Now if that was needed for all gun owners, the instances of non criminal shootings would clearly drop as far more effort has been made to ensure suitable people and not idiots are allowed to have guns.

 

[Babbylonian]

Highlighting mine. It's not as willy nilly as simply not being a convicted felon.

1. An 8-hour course is nothing, a joke.
2. I did mention mental illness and other restrictions.
3. Yeah, I read it.

I don't know what you're trying to catch me on, unless you want to argue that the listed restrictions are sufficient to identify anybody who shouldn't be allowed to carry a gun. Given that would logically be impossible (assuming one doesn't believe that everyone should be allowed to do so), it's not something particularly worth discussion.

Bottom line: It ain't the Old West anymore, even in Kansas which was the Old West. People need to keep their *********** guns at home until - maybe in 20-50 years - we're ready to come and confiscate them.

 

[DJW]

1. An 8-hour course is nothing, a joke.
2. I did mention mental illness and other restrictions.
3. Yeah, I read it.

I don't know what you're trying to catch me on, unless you want to argue that the listed restrictions are sufficient to identify anybody who shouldn't be allowed to carry a gun. Given that would logically be impossible (assuming one doesn't believe that everyone should be allowed to do so), it's not something particularly worth discussion.

Bottom line: It ain't the Old West anymore, even in Kansas which was the Old West. People need to keep their *********** guns at home until - maybe in 20-50 years - we're ready to come and confiscate them.

This is why the Anti control side distrusts your side.

 

[WildCat]

It will happen pretty quickly if there really is no increase in risk.

If it doesn't happen quickly the implication is that those who make their money from analyzing risk see an increased risk.

Utah has allowed concealed carry in schools for a long time, I've heard nothing about their schools having trouble getting insurance. So obviously there's already insurance companies who don't have a problem with it.

 

[tsig]

I believe the reasoning is that the risk of accidents will not exceed the reduction of violence through deterrence and active shooters being taken down sooner.

Again, I don't agree with this, but it's not nonsense logic, simply wrong. In my view.

It might have something to do with the severity of the occurrence. The liability for 20 deaths is significantly greater than a broken arm on the swing.

 

[WildCat]

It might have something to do with the severity of the occurrence. The liability for 20 deaths is significantly greater than a broken arm on the swing.

Kind of hard to see how an accident incident can result in 20 deaths. It wasn't a Sandy Hook employee who killed all those kids, and I'm unaware of any school massacre being carried out by an employee or by a guest who was permitted to carry concealed in the school.

 

[BStrong]

This is a very short-sighted law, granting gun owners the right to carry concealed weapons in public buildings. It's the same thing that happened with Stand Your Ground and enhanced Castle Doctrine laws. They're crafted to protect the Ward and June Cleavers in our world. The advocates always forget it will apply to every gun owner, even the ones with hair-trigger tempers, all kinds of personal issues and, nowadays, even felony convictions.

A felony conviction puts one in the prohibited class for firearms possession, let alone issuance of a carry license.

 

[newyorkguy]

A felony conviction puts one in the prohibited class for firearms possession, let alone issuance of a carry license.

Not anymore.

Under federal law, those convicted of a felony are forbidden from purchasing or possessing firearms and explosives. Yet as the result of a 1965 amendment to the Federal Firearms Act of 1938, convicted felons were allowed to apply to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) for "relief" from the "disability" of not being able to buy and possess guns. The "relief from disability" program was established as a favor to firearms manufacturer Winchester, then a division of Olin Mathieson Corporation. In 1962 Olin Mathieson pleaded guilty to felony counts stemming from a kickback scheme involving Vietnamese and Cambodian pharmaceutical importers. Under the law as it existed at the time, Winchester could no longer be licensed as a firearm manufacturer. The "relief from disability" program allowed Winchester to stay in business.


"Relief" Program Becomes Felons' Second-Chance Club

Although created to benefit one corporation, the program quickly became a mechanism by which thousands of individuals with felony convictions had their gun privileges restored. In the 10-year period from1982 until 1992, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms processed more than 22,000 applications. Between 1985 and 1990 ATF granted "relief" in approximately one third of those cases. (ATF estimated that approximately one third of those not granted "relief" chose to drop out of the process, while the remaining one third were denied "relief.")

The crimes committed by those individuals granted "relief" were not limited to non-violent, "white collar" crimes like those committed by Olin. Through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) the Violence Policy Center obtained 100 randomly selected files of felons granted "relief." Among those 100 cases were: five convictions for felony sexual assault; 11 burglary convictions; 13 convictions for distribution of narcotics; and, four homicide convictions. In fact, of the 100 sample cases, one third involved either violent crimes (16 percent) or drug-related crimes (17 percent).

Link

 

[triforcharity]

This is a very short-sighted law, granting gun owners the right to carry concealed weapons in public buildings. It's the same thing that happened with Stand Your Ground and enhanced Castle Doctrine laws. They're crafted to protect the Ward and June Cleavers in our world. The advocates always forget it will apply to every gun owner, even the ones with hair-trigger tempers, all kinds of personal issues and, nowadays, even felony convictions.

I don't think your post here, contains one factual statement. Not one.

 

[triforcharity]

Not anymore.

Link

Do you even know the process of applying for relief? Something tells me you don't. Please, explain the process. (Quick! Go google it!)

 

[Newtons Bit]

Kind of hard to see how an accident incident can result in 20 deaths. It wasn't a Sandy Hook employee who killed all those kids, and I'm unaware of any school massacre being carried out by an employee or by a guest who was permitted to carry concealed in the school.

Well, you see, people that have guns on them are inundated with homicidal thoughts. Eventually they'll just snap and shoot the nearest people near them. All of the laws that prohibit CCL holders from carrying at public sites are really just designed to protect bystanders from these poor souls who are driven mad by the evil objects on them.

 

[Babbylonian]

Well, you see, people that have guns on them are inundated with homicidal thoughts. Eventually they'll just snap and shoot the nearest people near them. All of the laws that prohibit CCL holders from carrying at public sites are really just designed to protect bystanders from these poor souls who are driven mad by the evil objects on them.

Paranoid morons would seem to be at higher risk for homicidal thoughts...

 

[newyorkguy]

Do you even know the process of applying for relief? Something tells me you don't. Please, explain the process. (Quick! Go google it!)

Do I personally know the procedure a felon has to go through to regain the right to possess a gun? No. I'm not a felon.

Are you saying felons can't re-acquire the right to possess a firearm?

 

[triforcharity]

Then don't make the claim that felons can acquire guns legally. It's not true. (Once they've had their rights restored, they're no longer felons according to the law) It's not like getting a driver's license. And yes, I'm saying that felons cannot. If they petition to have their rights restored, they're no longer felons.

 

[tyr_13]

1. An 8-hour course is nothing, a joke.
2. I did mention mental illness and other restrictions.
3. Yeah, I read it.

I didn't question that you read it, but that it didn't actually support your position. While the eight hour course might be poorly administered or used, I disagree with your assumption that it therefore is. On what basis do you assert that it is?

I don't know what you're trying to catch me on, unless you want to argue that the listed restrictions are sufficient to identify anybody who shouldn't be allowed to carry a gun. Given that would logically be impossible (assuming one doesn't believe that everyone should be allowed to do so), it's not something particularly worth discussion.

I wasn't trying to 'catch' you on anything. I disagree with your characterization of the CCW requirements. This does give me insight into your mindset with guns and the subject would be important to anyone who wished to defend the carry by teachers of the OP.

Bottom line: It ain't the Old West anymore, even in Kansas which was the Old West. People need to keep their *********** guns at home until - maybe in 20-50 years - we're ready to come and confiscate them.

And this gives me even better insight into your mindset on guns. Such things do real harm to the advancement of gun safety in the US.

 

[KatieG]

It's nowhere near as extensive or as far reaching. However, the claim that he was responding to was that these people shouldn't have guns. Their having a CCW would indicate that they have shown they should have guns.

Of course this says nothing about if they should have guns in schools. My own take on the matter is that teachers shouldn't be carrying because they are surrounded by children of various backgrounds and responsibility levels all day while trying to teach. It increases the chance of an accident more than it defends against an active shooter, in my opinion.

EDIT: Sorry, shouldn't necessarily have guns. It's an important distinction.

CCL means they can have a gun, not necessarily mean that all of them should.

 

[newyorkguy]

The advocates always forget it will apply to every gun owner, even the ones with hair-trigger tempers, all kinds of personal issues and, nowadays, even felony convictions.

...And yes, I'm saying that felons cannot. If they petition to have their rights restored, they're no longer felons.

You're saying felons. I said a felony conviction no longer means you can't possess a gun. I think you've actually made my case.

A felony conviction no longer bars someone from reacquiring the right to have a firearm.

 

[thaiboxerken]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...thrusts-iowa-insurer-into-gun-debate/2495815/



The law of unintended consequences once again.

I feel that this will be one case where the conservatives shun the free market position.

 

[thaiboxerken]

Teachers are whiners who always want to get paid more than they are worth. "If you can't do, teach."

But let's arm them!

 

[Travis]

And how long before another insurance company looks at this, realizes there is next to no increase risk of liability and adds the school to their insurance?

This assumes the insurance company would not care that morons with a CCL are coming onto campus with their murder toys.

These are people with a CCL.

Which means what? I've seen the people that get CCL's. I wouldn't trust them with cheese graters let alone a firearm.

How does the CCL training compare to LEO training?

Their's training? Because I have seen people with CCL's accidentally discharge weapons on numerous occasions.

The real unintended consequence will be when EMC loses that market to an up and comer. I have a lot of faith in teachers and CCP holders. I hope we'll be rewarded with a little synergy.

And then watch them lose money the first time some troglodyte with a CCL accidentally shoots a student.

This is why the Anti control side distrusts your side.

And maybe they should. One day us anti gun people might have the political will to come for the guns. All the guns. And if that comes to pass we will do so with a smile on our faces.

If that is something they wish to fear then let them.