I have not heard anything lately, Is Ernie still trying to delay a vote or something?

The appropriations bill (LB554A) got first round approval.

Did anyone read the Leader story about CCW?

I think I'm going to have to have a talk with a couple of them.  

Quoted: Did anyone read the Leader story about CCW? I think I'm going to have to have a talk with a couple of them.

Details my good man, give us the details

Bellevue and other area police may soon have a new reason to be cautious on the streets. Weapons in the public are always a concern to officers, but pending legislation may allow any person to carry a concealed handgun with a permit. Legislative Bill 454, the Concealed Handgun Permit Act, proposes that approved applicants should be authorized to carry weapons hidden from plain sight. Chief John Stacey is cautious about what could come out of the bill. He said he might support a more stringent and structured law, but he's not satisfied with what he's seen yet. "The amendments are ridiculous," Stacey said. "I have some issues. There's too many unanswered questions. Take a look at the basic bill and then look at the amendments." Some officers in area departments are wary of the security issues that may develop from the new legislation. BPD Officer John Stuck said the law would have to be written very specific and the training criteria should be set at a high bar. "There'd have to be very strict guidelines," Stuck said, adding the rules would have to be set on how the permit holder would carry the weapon and, if approached by a police officer, how they would present their hands. "That would my biggest thing." This seems to be the overall sentiment of most officers from a variety of agencies in Sarpy County. "It appears it will pass in some form," said Sarpy County Sheriff Jeff Davis. "The general feeling in law enforcement would be to oppose passing of the bill." A main concern of local officers is a rise in the number of handguns on the street as a result of LB 454. "The less guns out there, the better," said Sarpy County Lt. Mike Erhart. "We're trying to anticipate the worst." If the bill is passed, an applicant for a permit would be required to submit their request in person to their local sheriff's department, present valid identification, pay a $100 application fee and provide fingerprints for a background check. Permits would be issued within five days of an approved application, if general requirements are met, and are valid for five years. A handgun safety training course will be required for all those receiving permits, but officers worry about the ongoing stringency of such programs. "The department makes sure we are proficient in accuracy shooting - we qualify four times a year within the department," said Sarpy County Deputy Greg Monico. "Citizens don't have that." Bob Lausten, chief of the La Vista Police Department, is concerned about citizens purchasing guns as a result of LB 454 and not taking proper precautions to secure their weapons at home. "Law enforcement officers deal with a lot of situations on a daily basis," Lausten said. "A citizen may not have the background and expertise to think their actions through." The processing of new permits means additional administrative work for police departments - a change they are reluctant to embrace. Chief Len Houloose of the Papillion Police Department is disturbed by the administrative issue and funding requirements, and worries about the impact on both street and desk officers. "This will give officers one additional thing to worry about," Houloose said. Area police departments have not begun to implement policy changes regarding LB 454 because of the ongoing amendments to the bill. Since LB 454 was introduced to the Legislature by Sen. Jeanne Combs of Milligan, more than 30 amendments have been made to the bill and more are expected. "We're in a wait-and-see mode," Lausten said. Local law enforcement officers are not the only ones critical of LB 454. The bill has met opposition among senators as Sen. DiAnna Schimek of Lincoln and Sen. Nancy Thompson of La Vista have opposed the bill because of concerns over the added burden on local cities and law enforcement. Sen. Ernie Chambers called the bill an "atrocious travesty" when the Legislature voted to advance the bill. Sgt. Steve Young of the Papillion Police Department acknowledges the valid premise of the bill, but is wary of its impact on the department. "The concept is a good concept, but it's missing things," Young said. "We'll be constantly in a higher state of alert." Others are more positive. Bellevue Lt. Bill McClintick expects the bill to be reasonable and trusts in the Legislature's law-making abilities. "It's more fair than our current gun law," McClintick said. "They put some thought into it." Fellow Bellevue police Sgt. Matt Jarvis agreed. "I'm for it, absolutely," Jarvis said. "It's not going to affect the bad guys. We already have laws in place to stop them." Area law enforcement encourages citizens to use gun locks, which they provide free of charge at every department, and hopes the public exercises care and common sense if LB 454 is approved. "I believe that more guns on more people will cause more problems," Houloose said. "We won't get sufficient answers about this bill until a tragedy occurs." --Jason Buzzell contributed to this story.

Comments like those make me wonder about the people we have in law enforcement in Nebraska.  Have they even looked at what most of the other states in the union have done?  Obviously not or they would see that it hasn't been a problem.  

What's even more troubling is how little the law enforcement people quoted in the article understand or even seem to care about the second ammendment to the United States Constitution and the Constitution of the State of Nebraska.  For your information and for you to pass on I'm including Article one of the Nebraska document.

Article I Constitution of the State of Nebraska:

Statement of rights.
               CI-1  All  persons  are by nature free and independent,
          and have certain inherent and inalienable rights; among these are
          life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness, and the  right  to  keep
          and  bear arms for security or defense of self, family, home, and
          others, and for lawful common defense, hunting, recreational use,
          and all other lawful purposes, and  such  rights  shall  not  be
          denied  or  infringed by the state or any subdivision thereof. To
          secure these rights, and the protection of property,  governments
          are  instituted among people, deriving their just powers from the
          consent of the governed.

i've had "experiences" with erhart before (and have spoken to a few nameless sarpy officers) and the consensus seems to be he's the one power-tripper that makes the whole department look like you-know-whats.

the leader never has impressed me--seems they're more representative of Lincoln and a few areas of Omaha than of Nebraskans in general.  ah well.

What amazes me is that these officers ignore the fact that those willing to commit dangerous crimes with firearms are not going to give a shit about whether they're carrying legally or not. Most violent gun crimes in Omaha are commited with illegal guns, by criminals who aren't supposed to have guns in the first place.

Criminals with guns have always carried. LB 454 just lets the law abiding and responsible citizens protect their families and themselves from those that have been, and are still willing to break the law in a violent manner.

LB 454 benefits every one but the criminals. Based on Ernie Chambers past thoughts and opinions, I believe this is why he's so afraid of it. Crime causes poverty, and with out that, Ernie loses quite a bit of job security. (Hopefully he loses his position anyways.)

"The department makes sure we are proficient in accuracy shooting - we qualify four times a year within the department," said Sarpy County Deputy Greg Monico. "Citizens don't have that."

He didn't mention how poorly so many of our Deputies perform at those shoots. ESPECIALLY considering how simple and pathetic those shoots are in the first place. Before I even joined this website, I knew there had to be many more capable shootists in the general public than there were sworn officers. It's more and more evident everytime I visit this site and everytime I go to a qualification shoot.

Overall - it's sad, just sad. I agree with the last two cited in the article - not the eight narrow-minded ones against it. You can see where they're coming from, but you also have to wonder why they don't see their fears are completely unfounded. Bad guys already have guns and we're trained to approach and treat everyone as if they were armed anyway; what difference does it make if they actually are? None of the times in recent memory in which Bellevue officers employed lethal force involve the suspect having a firearm. There's the guy who was on the receiving end of a search warrant with a baseball bat and three subjects driving motor vehicles (one was driving away from the officer, but that's another story all together).

My problems with what the bill lacks don't have to do with restricting citizens' access to firearms; quite the opposite, in fact. I'd like to see reciprocity opened up with other states and the list of prohibited places halved. I welcome more guns in the hands of the good guys. The bad guys are always going to get guns one way or another. This law isn't going to help them out, it may even clean up the streets when idiots with warrants or known or convicted criminals show up in line to apply. If anything, it will help the good guys be better. The mandatory training should help clear up questions for those eager to learn and serve as a refresher for those who already know: fundamentals of safety, when and when not to act, marksmanship, safe storage, laws, and general good practices. Continuing to train and learn never hurt anyone. More life-saving tools in the hands of trained and capable persons on the street is what's going to save the world someday.

Ernie Chambers is a asshat on the best of days & that happens only once or twide a

When I lived in Bellevue (83-89, got to love being stationed at Offutt) Omaha PD was extremly anti gun & the majority of Bellevue PD and Sarpy Co SO was as well. However, I did run it to some really good LEO's on all the aboved departments that were extremly pro gun and felt NE should have a CCW law.

I'd love to see Ne have a CCW so when we travel to NE I'd be legal

Hey, as a side note, does Bellevue still have the gun shop on the south side of the main drag, seems like they had a big display BAR in the window?? (Not the one on the North side of the street down towards the park/bridge) That's where I purchased my 1st AR15

Hey fella's,

To stay up to date on Nebraska CCW go to www.ccwne.com

That Leader story was crap.  Why didn't the reporter make a few simple phone calls to departments in states that already have ccw and ask them how they deal with it.  That article should have been printed in the editorials not the front page.

I was talking with a Papillion cop tonight about that Leader piece and he was surprised at the lean the article had. He said most of the cops he's talked to around here are all for it. We ragged on the anti's for a while and when I said we're supposed to treat people as if they're armed anyway, he said, "Exactly." (if you could put bold on the spoken word, he would've.)

So don't worry, there are those of us with badges out there that are all for CCW.

Personally, if I lived in Ernie's district I'd be all for concealed carry..........yes indeed I would.

Quoted: Ernie Chambers is a asshat on the best of days & that happens only once or twide a When I lived in Bellevue (83-89, got to love being stationed at Offutt) Omaha PD was extremly anti gun & the majority of Bellevue PD and Sarpy Co SO was as well. However, I did run it to some really good LEO's on all the aboved departments that were extremly pro gun and felt NE should have a CCW law. I'd love to see Ne have a CCW so when we travel to NE I'd be legal Hey, as a side note, does Bellevue still have the gun shop on the south side of the main drag, seems like they had a big display BAR in the window?? (Not the one on the North side of the street down towards the park/bridge) That's where I purchased my 1st AR15

Old Town Guns closed a few years back, the owner retired.  True Value (where I bought my first AR) is also closed.  Sadly B-Town is out of real gun shops.

Quoted: Old Town Guns closed a few years back, the owner retired.  True Value (where I bought my first AR) is also closed.  Sadly B-Town is out of real gun shops.

I purchased my 1st M1 Garand at the True Value & forgot all about them selling guns. Sad to see Old Town closed, it was a fun place to hang out even if it was expensive to purchases stuff there.

Have been thinking about stopping in for the night when we make a run back to Iowa just to see how Offutt/Bellevue has changed. I did like living in Bellevue, but I'm sure things have really changed since I left in 89.

Is Hams Bar still there

Quoted: Old Town Guns closed a few years back, the owner retired.  True Value (where I bought my first AR) is also closed.  Sadly B-Town is out of real gun shops.

True Value got shut down because they were making straw sales and not keeping proper records on their legal sales.  They were a very shady business, and I for one am not sad to see them go.

Bellevue Gun and Supply's out-of-business sale, on the other hand, was probably one of the saddest weeks of my life.  Sure I got a fantastic deal on a .300 win mag Savage accutrigger ($200 new otd), but it was a much bigger price.

With the exception of a personal order by the Offutt Rod & Gun Club, Scheel's is about the only place I'd go to consider purchasing a firearm over the counter anymore.

Quoted: With the exception of a personal order by the Offutt Rod & Gun Club, Scheel's is about the only place I'd go to consider purchasing a firearm over the counter anymore.

Back in the day Offutt never had a rod & gun club even though we tried to get one going

Did not have a Scheels (whatever that is) either

Shrike, if you haven't seen Bellevue since '89, you're not going to recognize the place. Hell, so much changed while I was gone from 95-01.

Quoted: Shrike, if you haven't seen Bellevue since '89, you're not going to recognize the place. Hell, so much changed while I was gone from 95-01.

Other than a 2 day stop in 94 or 95 when we camped at Lake Manawa State Park to take the wife & kiddo to the Henry Doorly Zoo we have never stopped. Seems like we take 80 from WY to IA once or twice a year, but never detoured off of 80.

Could not believe the changes ya can see from 80, heck we got lost trying to find Bronco Burgers (name?????) the only other time we detoured off of 80 as that place had the best the greasy burger/onion rings in the area. Seems like there was also a really good greek food resturant, but heck if I remember where

Quoted: Quoted: Shrike, if you haven't seen Bellevue since '89, you're not going to recognize the place. Hell, so much changed while I was gone from 95-01. Other than a 2 day stop in 94 or 95 when we camped at Lake Manawa State Park to take the wife & kiddo to the Henry Doorly Zoo we have never stopped. Seems like we take 80 from WY to IA once or twice a year, but never detoured off of 80. Could not believe the changes ya can see from 80, heck we got lost trying to find Bronco Burgers (name?????) the only other time we detoured off of 80 as that place had the best the greasy burger/onion rings in the area. Seems like there was also a really good greek food resturant, but heck if I remember where

Broncos off of 72nd closed this year.  I'll save you getting lost looking for that.

Any news on topic?  I tried to read up on the Unicameral site, but didn't get much from the legislative gibberish.

Funny you should ask.  From today's OWH:

LINCOLN - State Sen. Jeanne Combs of Milligan, sponsor of a bill to allow Nebraskans to carry concealed handguns, has asked the state Republican Party to tone down its pressure on lawmakers when her bill next hits the legislative agenda. The Nebraska GOP ruffled some lawmakers' feathers when it put out a letter last month urging lawmakers to advance Combs' bill, which is part of the party's platform. The letter identified, by name, six lawmakers as being "swing" votes on the concealed handgun issue. State Sen. Don Pederson of North Platte, one of those named, publicly criticized the effort and abstained from voting on the measure because of it. "I feel very strongly about this being a nonpartisan body," Pederson said Monday. "I resent any political party interfering with that. And I didn't buy . . . that concealed carry is a 'core' Republican belief." Combs and Republican Party Chairman Mark Quandahl said they talked it over and decided that no further action was needed from the party. "I asked them to cool it," Combs said. "People have made up their minds." Quandahl said the bill "passed by a pretty healthy margin on the first round of debate. I think everybody knows where they stand and where the Republican Party stands." Legislative Bill 454 received initial approval 33-11, after a vote to cut off a filibuster by its opponents, including State Sen. Ernie Chambers of Omaha. It is not yet known when the Legislature will take up second round debate on the measure, which is expected to spark another filibuster as days run short in the 2006 session, which ends April 12. Legislative Speaker Kermit Brashear of Omaha said he does not know when he'll bring up the bill again. Combs' measure would allow people to obtain five-year permits to carry a concealed handgun, at a cost of $100. Firearms training and criminal background checks would be required. Republican officials admitted that their push on the concealed handgun measure was unprecedented. "This may be the most comprehensive action we've been involved in, partly due to the leadership of Chairman Quandahl," said Jessica Moenning, the party's executive director. Past legislative efforts by the party have focused on bills dealing with the mechanics of elections and repealing the nonpartisan status of Nebraska's Legislature. In its Jan. 6 letter to Republican lawmakers, Quandahl said the party had begun a reorganization of its members at the grass-roots level and had recruited hundreds to become active in the political and electoral process. The Second Amendment Coalition is "our largest and most enthusiastic," he wrote. "I think it is important for you to consider that LB 454 strikes at the very core of what we stand for, reflects the common-sense values rooted in Nebraskans everywhere, and is in accordance with both our state and national party platform," the letter said. State Sen. Mick Mines of Blair, a Republican, wrote back that the party's e-mail alerts offended him and only strengthened his opposition to the concealed weapons bill. "I am concerned that my party would resort to this kind of cheap-shot politics against longtime and loyal Republicans," he wrote. "Especially over a second-tier issue like concealed carry weapons."

was up for debate today and should be debated tomorrow

looking like they may have to allowing  Lincoln Omaha to ban it  to pass
fuckers glad i don't live there anymore


p094.ezboard.com/fccwnebraskafrm8

Quoted: was up for debate today and should be debated tomorrow looking like they may have to allowing  Lincoln Omaha to ban it  to pass fuckers glad i don't live there anymore p094.ezboard.com/fccwnebraskafrm8

All the more reason to be happy seeing Sarpy County growing. Fewer reasons to go into Omaha. Not like that city-specific ban would affect my carrying, but still...

Quoted: State Sen. Mick Mines of Blair, a Republican, wrote back that the party's e-mail alerts offended him and only strengthened his opposition to the concealed weapons bill. "I am concerned that my party would resort to this kind of cheap-shot politics against longtime and loyal Republicans," he wrote. "Especially over a second-tier issue like concealed carry weapons."

I will refrain from typing what I think abot Sen. Mines, but when I worked in the unicameral during his freshman year I was suprised to learn that he was one of our biggest obstacles to this bill.  I have had a good laugh over his argument that the letter from Chairman Quandahl was a cheap-shot, because it named him personally for being a long-standing obstruction to this bill.  Last time I knew, it's not a cheap-shot if it's the truth.

SBG

Wombat:

Hypothetical question.
You are fueling up and in line to pay on duty , in front of you you see what you think may be a IWB clip on a clean cut guy paying for his gas. Would you be complelled to investgate?

Real question:
Have you ever encounterd someone open carrying? I know that the letter of the law alows this is Sarpy but have never seen anyone do it.

I'm going to be raging pissed if Omaha allows a CCW ban. If you ask me, we need it more than any other part of the state.  

LINCOLN, Neb. (AP) - Nebraska lawmakers are one step away from approving a measure to allow Nebraskans to carry concealed weapons. Sen. Jeanne Combs of Milligan, the sponsor of the bill (LB454) and a member of the National Rifle Association, moved to vote on ending second-round debate on the measure Friday, knowing she needed 33 votes to stop a filibuster of the measure. She squeaked by. The vote was 33-9. Lawmakers then voted 31-9 to advance the bill to the last of three rounds of consideration. Supporters have been trying to get such a measure passed since 1996. Sen. Ernie Chambers of Omaha led the filibuster and promised to do the same - even on other bills - to try to block the measure from passage this session. "The only thing we have to do this session is pass the budget," Chambers said. "We need to think deeply about what is being proposed here." Thirty-eight states have some form of concealed-weapons laws, according to the NRA. Former Sen. Gene Tyson of Norfolk introduced a similar measure in 2003. It was advanced to second-round debate but never returned to the agenda - later dying because of a rule that gives legislation a two-year shelf life to be passed. A concealed-weapons measure was first introduced in 1996, but the 2003 vote marked the first time the bill had advanced in the Legislature since 1998. The bill that year cleared one of three rounds of debate before time ran out. Supporters argue that being able to carry concealed weapons is a constitutional right. And they say the bill would merely put guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens who want to protect themselves against bad guys who already carry weapons. Opponents argue that allowing concealed weapons would only lead to the potential for more violence. Gov. Dave Heineman supports the concept of legalizing the carrying of concealed weapons. The bill would require applicants for a concealed-weapon permit to pass a background check and complete a handgun training and safety course. The permit would cost $100 and be valid for five years. Convicted felons would not be allowed to get a permit. Concealed weapons would not be allowed in a variety of places, including bars, police stations, public meetings, athletic events, schools, churches, hospitals and banks. Signs also could be posted prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons in other locations. It is estimated that licenses could be granted to more than 64,000 people in Nebraska.

Quoted: I'm going to be raging pissed if Omaha allows a CCW ban. If you ask me, we need it more than any other part of the state.

yeah no shit
oh well i only get to Omhah maybe omce a month and Lincoln once a week
hop the goobers in Femont GI Kearney ETC don't  follow as it would make the license moot point if all the larger cites just decide to ban it
*sigh* better than nothing I guess but not much

BTW they voted and moved it to final reading have to see what hapens

Concealed weapons would not be allowed in a variety of places, including bars, police stations, public meetings, athletic events, schools, churches, hospitals and banks. Signs also could be posted prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons in other locations.

Quoted: I'm going to be raging pissed if Omaha allows a CCW ban. If you ask me, we need it more than any other part of the state.

Omaha already has a statute banning CCW ,and will not have to enact anything to continue the ban unless a preemption clause is added to LB454 or it is amended later.

Lincoln does not have a current city ban on CCW, so they will have to pass a law to ban it if LB454 passes as it is currently written. We can fight it , but the Lincoln city council has a liberal/anti majority at this time.

so, the solution there would be to get a Nebraska CCW Permit, and then get the city of Omaha's open-carry permit.

problem solved.  


(yes, i realize the issues surrounding it, i just thought i'd post the humorously obvious current solution )

If we won't be able to carry in Omaha or Lincoln, screw it. I'll just carry illegally and accept a misdemeanor if I get cought.

This whole deal is pretty ridiculous.

well, don't necessarily do that. i'd wait and see if that misdemeanor would result in a permit revocation.

Well, Kansas got theirs. Home state of the free-fire zone of Dodge City that every anti-CCW idiot fears their state will become (but never has and never will). We better get ours and it better not be crap. As if we don't already feel backwoods enough on modern things, we're behind the times on a matter that some people see as a "backwoods gun-loving hick" thing to do anyway.