Home Quote of the Day Cornhuskers Rejoice: Nebraska Constitutional Carry Begins Today

Cornhuskers Rejoice: Nebraska Constitutional Carry Begins Today

By
Dan Zimmerman
-
72
Concealed Carry
Courtesy Galco

“It doesn’t matter whether we have a permit process or not, those folks who are going to violate the law are going to violate the law and that’s really the way it is,” said Lancaster County Sheriff Terry Wagner.

Lancaster County is the second most populated county in the state, but based on conversations Wagner has had with agencies in states where constitutional carry is already legal, he said he doesn’t believe it will be a problem for the county or the state.

“It really goes back to the old adage of those people who obey the law are not the ones we need to worry about, it’s the folks who don’t obey the law and other things, are not going to obey the laws with regards to carrying weapons,” Wagner said.

While he doesn’t believe the new law will have major negative impacts, he would still like to see required training courses.

“You can go buy a gun today if you’re legally able to do so and own it and not be legally required to have training on that weapon, I think you should,” Wagner said. “That’s probably one of the parts of the bill I don’t care for, I wish it required people to have a training session but the fact of the matter is it really is not required now if you don’t have a carry conceal permit, if you open carry or just go out hunting, you don’t need a training session to do that.”

— Marlo Lundak in Seasoned Nebraska sheriffs share mixed feelings about new gun laws

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

72 COMMENTS

    • wont be any ‘shoot outs this weekend’ by law abiding citizens unless forced into a defense situation by the criminal who would have been carrying permit-less anyway even if permits were required by the law.

  2. Whats that …27 states now with ‘permit-less’ carry by ordinary law abiding citizens.

    Congratulations Nebraska!

    😁

  3. “While he doesn’t believe the new law will have major negative impacts, he would still like to see required training courses.”

    I can’t seem to find that restriction on an enumerated right in my pocket Constitution. Maybe it’s in the full-sized version, right next to the literacy test required before one can exercise their First Amendment right.

    • “Maybe it’s in the full-sized version, right next to the literacy test required before one can exercise their First Amendment right.”

      Its in the Bill of Rights Amendment that says you have to buy your constitutional rights exercise from the government by paying ‘subscription’ fees to exercise a constitutional right.

      • Say, .40 cal, did you ever find that information on the BOR amendments?

        I found a passing comment on one source that mentioned the first 10 amendments can’t be repealed or modified, but it didn’t go into any detail.

        I’m not giving you homework; I just can’t find that info. I’ve signed up for the Hillsdale course on the Constitution and I’m hoping it will be covered there.

        • Just ask any anti-gun organization or government, they will assure you its there, somewhere, in a Bill of Rights Amendment that says you have to buy your constitutional rights exercise from the government by paying ‘subscription’ fees to exercise a constitutional right.

        • It’s right next to the part where it says “You have the right to terminate your baby up until three days after birth.”

        • Any amendment of the Constitution can be Amended. It requires the same process as adding an Amendment.
          The amendment process is very difficult and time consuming: A proposed amendment must be passed by two-thirds of both houses of Congress, then ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the states. The ERA Amendment did not pass the necessary majority of state legislatures in the 1980s.
          An Amendment can be proposed by either congress/senate or by the states thru a constitutional convention.

        • One may argue that the Due Process clause of the 14th modified the BOR.

    • I’ll agree to a “right to bear arms” training requirement just as soon as “the right to vote” has a literacy and history exam requirement.

        • neiowa NO FRICKIN’ WAY! These illegal aliens came here crossing our borders illegally. They have no RESPECT for America, American people or American Law. Send their raggedy posteriors back where they came from.
          That type of “benevolence” was tried during the Reagan Administration. See where it has gotten us? These illegals think that it will happen again. NO FRICKIN’ WAY!

    • Only if failing the class did not resort in a lifetime ban on firearms ownership. You know folks like miner49er would try to sneak that in. Dropping out or failing does not negate your rights.

      • I could see a few blue states throwing that little wrench into our RKBA. Fail the class then and lose your right to keep or bear arms forever.

        How could one fail the class in NJ or NY? -why showing up, of course!

      • Well yes, certain states will never fully comply with the 2nd Amendment (or any other part of the Constitution), but that shouldn’t be a problem in Nebraska.

      • “Dropping out or failing does not negate your rights.” To the contrary, being a failure, loser, criminal, et al is an advantage in our current society. The elites are rewarding failure and not suprisingly getting a lot more of it.

    • Gun community: “Maybe firearms safety classes should be part of the school curriculum.”

      Anti-gun Biden & Democrats, with all anti-gun cheering them on: defund’s school programs that teach gun safety.

  5. Which other god-given rights enumerated in the constitution require mandatory training before they can be exercised?

    • To our readers:

      Was racial bigotry a factor which “inspired” unconstitutional restrictions on public carry of firearms in our nation roughly between 1860 and 1890? Sure. After that, it was the good old Ruling Class doing what the Ruling Class has always done throughout the world and always will do: consolidate their power and control and humiliate the masses.

      Note that civilian disarmament is alive and well today and enjoys both widespread and enthusiastic support in pretty much every nation on Earth–and it is almost entirely based on class, not racial heritage. Given that simple fact, I encourage everyone to focus their efforts on defending their rights in today’s political reality which is that the Ruling Class and even many people in the Working Class do NOT want anyone in the Working Class–regardless of race–to be legally armed in public. Make THAT the center of your debate rather than arguments about our nation’s politics of 130 to 170 years ago.

      To be absolutely clear: I am not replying to Debbie W. who has clearly demonstrated several times that she will not engage in meaningful and respectful debate.

      • nocommonsense…The origin or idea for Gun Control began centuries ago and it is clearly unargubly Rooted in Racism. In other words genius everything you see related to Gun Control today in one form or another was taken from yesterday’s Gun Control rot. I mean today’s Gun Control zealots just did not dream their Gun Control sht up, they got it from somewhere in time and polished it up in an effort to make Gun Control palatable. Like the bigots on this forum got their bigotry from bigots before them and on down the line.

        Every bit of what you cite as being separate all goes hand in hand with Gun Control beginnings in America and is tied to today’s Gun Control and tomorrow’s Gun Control. At least this time you did not go “tribal” but you did go karen.

        • Debbie W.,

          “The origin or idea for Gun Control began centuries ago and it is clearly unargubly Rooted in Racism.”

          How in the Hell does race factor into feudal Japan where their Ruling Class outlawed all weapons for their Working Class–all of whom were of the same race? How was feudal Japan’s “weapon control” rooted in Racism? Answer: it wasn’t.

          How in the Hell is China’s gun control rooted in racism today or even the recent past since it applied to all Chinese and all races? Answer: it wasn’t/isn’t.

          You keep bringing up race and that is a classic debate red herring.

          The core human psychological characteristic which drives disarmament laws is the desire of the Ruling Class to control, exploit, and humiliate the Working Class. And to a lesser extent many members of the Working Class support disarmament laws hoping to gain the favor (or avoid the ire) of the Ruling Class.

          While disarmament sometimes aligns with race, that is coincidence, not cause and effect. Rather, disarmament ALWAYS aligns with class, specifically the Ruling Class trying to disarm the Working Class.

          Our fight is against Ruling Class elitism, NOT racial bigotry. That is why no Hawaiians (regardless of race), virtually no New York City residents (regardless of race), and virtually no Los Angelenos (regardless of race) could get concealed carry licenses before the U.S. Supreme Court Bruen Ruling. That is the reality of the past 10 years and TODAY’S reality. That is our fight.

        • neiowa,

          Your suggestion (that I must support Communism because I despise Ruling Class elitism) is so dumb it almost doesn’t even deserve a response.

          I oppose all people of all stripes and all political affiliations who claim to be superior to the masses and who rail against our inherent human dignity and inalienable rights. Period.

  7. Let’s be honest about one aspect of responsible carry of firearms for self-defense:

    We can teach someone 98% of what they need to know to carry carry firearms responsibly for self-defense in about 10 minutes.

    — First few minutes cover the traditional firearm safety “Four Rules”.
    — Second few minutes cover the law regarding legally justified use of deadly force.
    — Third few minutes review safe carry methods (e.g. holsters) and recommend simple practice regimens.

    For reference simple practice regimens could include mentioning unloaded dry-fire practice and practicing drawing with your unloaded handgun.

    Keep that training session simple (as I listed above), fast (about 10 minutes or less), free, and readily available pretty much everywhere at all imaginable times–and I can entertain a serious discussion whether or not we mandate said training for public carry of firearms.

    And note that all of that training could be a simple one-sheet of paper with all the necessary information which requires not much more than a person reading it and affirming that he/she read it.

    • Hey guess what u_s? In the neighboring state of Indiana there’s NEVER been training required. And for over a year no license required. I would get one if you go to other states(except ILLannoy). Lower crime than Chiraq even with the hole known as Gary. Because criminals know there’s a helluva lot of legal carry in Gary🙄

      • former water walker,

        I fully understand and appreciate states like Indiana which have no training requirements.

        I am drawing on my experience taking Hunter Safety training many years ago. It was free although it did take several hours on a Saturday. It was fantastic. And part of the reason that it took many hours is because the training covers a lot more (as it should) than just the “four rules”.

        I bring this up because my family will soon be hosting an exchange student from Europe and I was thinking about how to help our student feel at ease, expecting that he/she will almost certainly hear gunshots within one mile of my home (from hunters sighting-in their firearms as well as gunshots from hunting). I am optimistic that telling our student about our mandatory Hunter Safety training–and the fact that our state’s 500,000 hunters have not had a single gunfire injury to humans in the last several years–is incredibly compelling. And that got me thinking about detractors to our right to carry firearms in public for righteous self-defense.

        I know that we all want to be able to do whatever we want as though we live in a vacuum. The reality is that we do not live in individual vacuums and I am brainstorming how we can exercise our rights with an absolute minimum of qualifications–and how we can push back HARD on naysayers. It seems to me that some tiny amount of free training and near-perfect injury rate goes a really long way to putting us on solid footing when we DEMAND our rights and tell naysayers to pound sand.

        • If nocommonsense was the firearm safety advisor genius he thinks he is he would have said something about the pants pic showing mr. Glock pointed towards a mr. happy. Should the pic inspire a Glock newbe to try shoving a Glock with a chambered round down their pants they may be in store for a rude awakening. Loaded or not…Always point a firearm in a safe direction. Towards one’s weenie, legs and feet is not a safe direction.

  9. Studies prove that unnecessary shootings occur when people do not know the law as to when you can legally shoot someone. Firearms accidents also go up when people are not trained in safe gun handling.

    • dacian, the DUNDERHEAD, You bet there have been “unnecessary (sic)” shootings. Take a good look at your criminal buddies in Chicago, LA, San Francisco, etc.
      You should be taking a couple of course in firearms safety. You are a menace to society with your control freak nonsense.

    • @dacian

      “Studies prove that unnecessary shootings occur when people do not know the law as to when you can legally shoot someone. Firearms accidents also go up when people are not trained in safe gun handling.”

      100% False.

      There is no such study that ‘proves’ “unnecessary shootings occur when people do not know the law as to when you can legally shoot someone.”

      Firearms accidents DO NOT GO UP when people are not trained in safe gun handling. Do accidents happen? Yes, accidents happen even among ‘trained’ people like, for example, the more than 4,700 ‘accidental’ ‘shootings’ (even if no one was hit) by law enforcement nation wide annually. But ‘accidents’ do not “go up when people are not trained in safe gun handling” even though accidents may happen.

      Law enforcement has an advantage – if they accidentally shoot towards or at someone (innocent person or bystander missed) or property the city in most areas is pretty quick to hush it up by paying a sum and having non-disclosure agreements signed and it never makes the news and the public never knows but there is a report and that’s where they are hidden.

      A person (innocent or bystander) is ~1,200 times more likely to be accidentally shot or shot at by a ‘firearms trained’ law enforcement member once they begin to draw their firearm than they are to be shot or shot at by an ordinary law abiding armed citizen with or without training.

  11. For the same reason that people will just break the law anyway is the reason that training courses shouldn’t be mandatory. Any responsible person is going to get training for a dangerous peice of equipment.
    Just because someone gets an instructors permit(a piece of paper that allows them to charge someone mo money for his “state approved” instruction)does not mean that he is any better than the old guy at the range, a realitive who is profiecient with firearms, or even the fact you never got “formal training”, but have the reading, practice and practical experience to carry safely.

  12. Having seen sloppy gun handling firsthand I can see the sheriff’s point, I would suggest his offering gun safety training to the general population, free of charge.

  14. Good for Nebraska! I lived there for 45 years but had a permit for only the last four. The permit wasn’t hard to get and the training was reasonable and worthwhile. I wouldn’t want to be near someone who couldn’t qualify.

  15. Mandatory training, testing and licensing are required to lawfully drive and we get 40,000 deaths a year and an uncountable number of infractions by millions of people everyday.

    Seems to be doing a whole lot of good there.

  16. Wonderful!!! And yes I know this is not what the founders created. But as a former resident of California, it would be great to have this law in the state of my birth.

    Some day perhaps.

  18. It’s not all good news. Here in Omaha the mayor just made a lot of the city gun-free, the order states the following ares are included:

    “…all City managed buildings/facilities/parks/public spaces and surrounding areas such as sidewalks, driveways, and parking lots under the City’s control.”

    Before today with my NE CCW, I didn’t have to worry about that bullshit. So much for progress

    • Cato, that is because you have a Leftist control freak mayor. Sounds like his “order” is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Most states do not allow a city, town or country to regulate firearms in any way.

      • The mayor is a she and she’s a Republican. I’m only guessing, but I think she believes the CCW holders at least had some training. Now that any ‘lawful’ person can carry, she doesn’t trust her untrained constituents.

        • CATO, have you ever heard of the term RINO? Whether she “trusts” or not, what she is doing is unconstitutional and against her own state’s laws. You see, only the STATE can do what she is trying to do and even then as stated, UNCONSTITUTIONAL!
          I would love to see such a “rule” as I am an NRA instructor and it would fill my coffers, but it is still UNCONSTITUTDIONAL!
          neiowa, As CATO is one of those control freaks, he is in favor of his mayor’s order.

        • The lawsuits are coming as are actions from the state legislature. It’s going to be interesting to see what happens. I think the mayor will lose eventually.

          Walter

          Thanks for stating the obvious you fucking dunce. Of course the state will try and overturn her actions. Of course it’s unconstitutional. But thanks for clearing that up.

          Anyone that can read simple English and understand the meanings of common words can tell I’m against the mayor’s order.

        • CATO, people like you need to be told the obvious. That state will not try but will succeed as your mayor, the RINO is in violation of her own state law. There are a number of decision already been rendered in similar matters. But being a Lefty as you are…
          Your words? More of your pablum trying to placate us?

      • Coincidentally —

        “Firearms preemption takes effect a long with constitutional carry September 2nd 2023, allowing concealed carry without a permit but also invalidating local open carry restrictions as well.” — Wiki

        • Neat. Shame it is a needed companion law but if not for control freaks, karens, and commies we wouldn’t need castle doctrine or stand your ground laws either.

  20. Put on your waders, blood will be running hubcap deep in Nebraska streets……NOT!!!!

    Each time I take a road trip, leaving my guns home alone, when I return home turning into my lane, I expect to see bodies floating in fender deep blood. But, alas, never one drop of blood, nary a body, never one shot fired. Guess I just have under-achieving guns. Come on, Guns. There’s blood to be spilled, your reputation to keep up.

Comments are closed.

© COPYRIGHT 2021, THETRUTHABOUTGUNS.COM. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.