What a Good Day for Gun Rights

It is indeed a happy birthday.  Kansas House and Senate have passed a right to keep and bear arms constitutional amendment:

A person has the right to keep and bear arms for the defense of self, family, home and state, for lawful hunting and recreational use, and for any other lawful purpose.

Better part is that it passed 39-1 in the Senate, and 116-9 in the House.  Now it goes to the voters for approval, which it will likely win.  If the anti-gun groups choose to fight this battle, ballot initiative fights are expensive as hell.  This must not be a good day at Brady headquarters.  Definitely not a good day for the Kansas Chapter. Ooops, looks like they don’t have one.  What a pity.  NRA has a state association in Kansas.

8 thoughts on “What a Good Day for Gun Rights”

  1. Good news.

    I was born in Dodge City, might explain why I’m a gunnut.

  2. But there is the one hitch, Kathleen Sibelius. But if things hold the legislature will over-ride the veto. They did on the concealed carry. At least when she is HHS Secretary she will be out of our hair on a day to day basis.
    Useless C***

  3. This IS good news! Kansas just installed the 2A the way it SHOULD have been written, so there’s no mistake that it’s an individual right.

  4. I’ve read elsewhere that Kansas invented the “collective right” interpretation in a 1905 decision (anyone want to bet that it was racially motivated?), and that this is a “this time we mean it!” attempt to make their Constitution more clear on the point.

  5. The Kansas Supreme Court didn’t invent the collective rights idea, but they did provide a new and fascinating version of it–they took an idea that was floating around elite circles about the Second Amendment (that it was a protection of the right of the states to organize a militia to protect themselves from the federal government), and applied it to the Kansas Constitution’s RKBA guarantee: thus guaranteeing the legislature the right to organize a militia to overthrow the legislature. This theory for the Second Amendment, while historically wrong, is at least logical. When done as the Kansas Supreme Court did in City of Salina v. Blaksley (Kan. 1905), is illogical.

  6. Kitty-cat Sebelius will veto this as she has done for every pro-gun bill that comes to her. The legislature had to override her veto to pass CCW some years ago. There are enough RINOs in the legislature to make every override effort difficult.

    Sure hope it passes. Those of us in neighboring Missouri will have to suffer under liberal tyranny for another four years at least.

  7. If only the proposed amendment had added “liberty” or “freedom” as well as property to the list of items defendable by lethal use of private arms, then I should be satisfied with its wording. The 2nd Amendment emphasizes the security of liberty (“free State”) from Washington tyranny as the prime motive for our individual right to arms. To have this same purpose codified against State and local tyranny would be priceless!. – Arnie

Comments are closed.