UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES

Wherein the people of Kansas discover that passing a law allowing people to pack heat in schools has adverse effects on the cost of insuring school districts. It turns out that when all of the bullshit and rhetoric are stripped away and the matter is reduced to one of dollars, cents, and actuarial tables, having a bunch of armed yahoos doesn't really make anything safer.

On a side note, Kansas legislators and judges still haven't gotten around to making it legal to carry guns into courthouses or the State Legislature. An innocent oversight, I'm sure.

24 thoughts on “UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES”

  • On related note even in Texarse the state troopers have a bit sanity. They refused entry to large groups of open carry pervs to state legislature with magazines locked in place.

    Though how that changes things I'm not quite certain, but I'm sure the fact that a loaded magazine is someone's pocket or hand or in a concealed weapon rather than in the weapon itself means something to someone somewhere.

  • middle seaman says:

    Guns will protect us when the Chinese invade, says the guy. We need the guns to protect us against the government controlling us, says the other.

    Hey guys, invaders have tanks and bombers. The NSA invaded your guts and we didn't see you protest much.

    Garbage.

  • Though how that changes things I'm not quite certain, but I'm sure the fact that a loaded magazine is someone's pocket or hand or in a concealed weapon rather than in the weapon itself means something to someone somewhere.

    Well obviously it means the second amendment has been violated. It clearly says anything limiting the all-annihilating destructive force of any citizen is fascism.

  • And how are we supposed to convince kids to not bring concealed blades to school, when the teachers are carrying?

  • LK is right. Plus, remember the story, less than 2 weeks after the Newtown shooting, about the toy cop in a Michigan school who left his loaded gun in the bathroom? Kid found it. Profoundly, amazingly lucky nobody wound up hurt.

  • Cognitive Dissonance says:

    Not sure what happened with the last post there. Does WordPress have a problem with paragraphs and quotation marks?

    ”It’s one thing to have a trained peace officer with a gun in school; it’s a completely different situation when you have a custodian or a teacher with a gun. …"

    I don't know about you fine folks, but something about the phrase "peace officer with a gun," and something moreso about the phrase "peace officer with a gun in school" just makes me nervous.

  • c u n d gulag says:

    Who needs insurance?

    They'll simply write a law in which parents of children wounded or killed in a school, can't sue the school district, or the state.

  • LK,

    No worries about kids bringing weapons to school. They can just take the guns off the teachers.

  • What c u n d gulag said. The same people who push for guns in schools are also in favor of sweeping tort reform, so I'm sure their next order of business would be to deprive people injured or killed by guns of any civil legal remedy.

  • Why would the legislators care about this? They don't pay for the insurance. "The people" didn't pass that stupid law, the legislators did. "The people" will be told that this is why government doesn't work and will then be even more determined to vote in Teabagging lunatics who will pass more insanely stupid laws because the voices in their heads (God? Is that you?!) tell them to. "The people" are just really dumb that way.

  • Hmm, so what you're saying is that according to the invisible hand of the market, more guns does not, in fact, make one safer. I'm sure our nation's conservatives will be revising their opinion on this issue in short order.

  • THE FOUNDING FATHERS WROTE THAT ALL MEN ARE TO CARRY A BRACE OF PISTOLS AND SEMI-AUTOMATIC RIFLE AND HAVE ROVING GUNFIGHTS AT ALL TIMES ESPECIALLY SCHOOLS AND HOSPITALS FEED THE BLOODSTAINED GOD IA IA LIBERTY FHTAGN

  • Even better, most of Kansas is poor and rural. This law does not allow exceptions for any public building either unless they have security measures and procedures that must meet State guidelines. Many counties and municipalities will not be able to afford the security upgrades that are required.

    Even some of the wealthier population areas are scrambling to keep guns out of their buildings. I wonder if there isn't a security company or two who might be offering their services to these government agencies for a low, low price now that they are needed?

  • I'm curious as to why there was no mention an Insurance companies raising insurance premiums for the University of Colorado when they began allowing folks to carry guns. Maybe UC is willing to pay higher premiums?

  • J Dryden: Can't Google-Fu a source, but I had read somehwere that insurance is indeed considered "evil" bu some dominionists.

  • @ Brian M: That doesn't surprise me, though really, I mostly associate that attitude with Ned Flanders: "Ned doesn't believe in insurance. He considers it a form of gambling."

  • Freeportguy says:

    Is this the type of knee jerk reaction conservatives ALWAYS warn liberals about after a shooting…?

  • Now we know "What's the matter with Kansas?" was a rhetorical question. One must admire the persuaveness of politicians that can convince a majority of voters that hair of the dog that bit them is the solution.

Comments are closed.