Whenever stories about law-abiding citizens carrying firearms within the bounds of their state laws comes up, you can count on some leftist bobblehead, clearly unfamiliar with the feeling of testosterone in “his” veins, vowing to take any gun “he” sees away from the rightful owner and bring down the wrath of almighty Goddess upon the citizen.
Y’know – the stuff the left accuses carry permittees of wanting to do, but that never happens.
Lamentably, it happened in Kansas this week – and it was no laughing matter. A “man” noticed another Kansan carrying his firearm. It just gets worse from there:
Police said Smith was allegedly upset about another man carrying a concealed weapon. He took the gun away from the man, pointed it at him and another man, and shot the victim in the leg, according to the allegations.
The victim was taken to a hospital with with injuries that were not life-threatening.
Bond for Smith was set at $10,000.
Smith is an idiot, and the county attorney should be charging the weasel with attempted murder as well as use of a stolen firearm in a crime.
Now – just watch Moms Want Action try to blame the gun for this.
I guess the owner of a gun has an issue with the concept of “concealed”.
While I see no reason Mr. Smith should not be charged with a litany of crimes and locked up in a mental institution, victim should also be held accountable for “failure to conceal”.
Well, jpa, that’s really just semantics. If victim has a permit, he doesn’t necessarily have to conceal. We also don’t know everything. He may have bent over to tie his shoe and his jacket pulled up, exposing it.
Mine isn’t always concealed, depending on my surroundings. Granted, exposing it usually elicits a chat with any law enforcement officers that happen to see it.
Losing control of your pistol is not good. I hope the guy gets himself some training when he gets out of the hospital.
I’d bet that if I really concentrated on what to look for, I’d be able to spot a lot of carry permit holders. The simple fact of the matter is that even the “flattest” guns tend to project about an inch from the wearer’s body, so someone with a good eye can probably spot it, given the right angle. Plus, there are tell-tale clothing hints like vests and coats that will tend to indicate who might be carrying.
That said, the perp here is very lucky to be alive.
Good observation, bb.
Of course, there is always someone that will conceal their weapon, but want everyone to know that they are packing.
For instance, about six years ago, I was up at Mille Lacs on a fishing trip. We were having lunch at the Blue Goose, when a group of seven bikers in their late 60s or early 70s pulled into the lot. All of them wore denim jackets with a large eagle sewn to the backs. Above the eagle were the words “I’m a Republican” and below the eagle, the words,”And I’m Armed!”.
Depending on the state, if you have a visible imprint, you are in trouble – license or not. It is either out, or in – nothing in-between or semanticy about it.
If I’m not mistaken Kansas is a “Constitutional Carry” State (came into KS law April 2015). No permit required (although you can obtain one if desired). You’re allowed to carry either openly or concealed if you meet age and other minimal requirements.
If you ask me the bond amount mentioned should have a couple more zeros to the left of the decimal point.