Constitutional Carry Bill Heads to Desk of Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback


An NRA-backed permitless carry bill is on its way to the desk of Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback after both the state House and Senate approved the legislation on Wednesday.

Senate Bill 45, as it’s known, would remove the state’s concealed carry permitting process for Kansas residents, which includes a background check, an eight-hour training requirement and a $132.50 fee. Residents could still obtain a state-issued CCW permit for reciprocity purposes, i.e. one that would allow them to travel into other states with a concealed firearm.

Brownback, a Republican, is expected to sign the bill into law making Kansas one of only a handful of states — Alaska, Arizona, Vermont, Wyoming and Montana (in rural areas) — that have Constitutional carry laws on the books.

“Kansans already have two documents granting them the right to concealed carry — the Constitution of the United States and the Kansas Constitution,” Rep. Travis Couture-Lovelady (R-Palco) told KCTV 5. “That should be all they need.”

Under current Kansas law, any law-abiding citizen can already carry a firearm openly without having to pass a background check or satisfy a training requirement, which supporters used to make their case to scrap the old issuing standard.

Yet opponents of the bill raised concerns about what will happen if more individuals are carrying concealed firearms without having to be taught basic gun safety.

“I have concerns with the type of culture that we’re creating, when guns are in more places, particularly among children,” said Rep. John Wilson (D-Lawrence).

“If I walk into a restaurant with my family with my 2 1/2-year-old son, I won’t know who has been properly trained and who has not,” he continued. “At least if I see their gun I can leave, but now I have no idea.”

Meanwhile, the NRA is urging members and gun-rights supporters to contact Brownback and “politely urge him to sign SB45 into law.”

{ 13 comments… add one }
  • Paul September 16, 2016, 9:45 am

    The federal government has no business setting up another bureaucratic agency. If they should do so the statue would be ten thousand pages and hundreds if not thousands of bureaucrats added to the trough. Hell No to federal agencies period!!

  • Wyantry July 18, 2016, 6:23 pm

    Maybe it is time to consider a national carrying license?

    1. Learning/hunting. (Long guns only). Akin to Hunter Safety Class. No pistols.

    2. Basic. Long guns and pistols. Open-carry. Class and 200 rounds qualification. Full reciprocity–all jurisdictions.

    3. Advanced. Concealed carry all jurisdictions. Class + 500 Ed qualification requirement. NO grandfathering nor exemption for military ORA law enforcement.
    Time for a NATIONAL CCL!

    What do you think?

  • Russ April 1, 2015, 8:18 pm

    Maybe I’m missing something, or just too used to California laws.
    Don’t you have to take a test to get a handgun permit in the first place?
    I’m just wondering why some here think a handgun owner would too incompetent to CC, without having extensive training.
    Pretty sure they could pull it off.
    I don’t know gun owners that are careless, do you?
    If you do, go straighten them out.

  • john delesky March 30, 2015, 3:32 pm

    I would like to see reciprocity across the USA within every state. I would also like to see mandatory gun safety and legal implications of using deadly force training in every state. In NY you have to take an 8 hour hunter safety course to get a hunting license for the first time. I have no problem with that what so ever. If you are going to carry a handgun I would like to see a 1 or perhaps 2 day training course. Gun safety training is something gun owners we should be happy to do. I enjoyed my hunter safety class 45 years ago. By offering this up to the gun control people we can show we are serious about who gets to have a gun. Plus it’s a good idea.

  • christen e bowers March 30, 2015, 1:52 pm

    Vermont’s gun laws have been like this forever basically and it is hardly a shoot-em-up crazy killer state–one of the most so-called liberal states in the union–they just know how to stay out of people’s private business–its called human rights in a free country-someplace Kansas could use a few lessons…..

  • Aaron March 30, 2015, 1:34 pm

    Some of us have Jewish names and we don’t like being on lists that get made public. But we still want self defense.

    In New York and Missouri the permit holders were released. It was illegal to do so in Missouri and legal in New York.

    Jew haters think they can shoot and kill Jews in Kansas, well we’re going to start shooting back and now you won’t know who is.carrying.

    • Russ April 1, 2015, 8:00 pm

      Relax Aaron, nobody is going to be killing Jews.
      That was a real weird comment by you.
      My anti-gunner liberal forum troll flag just popped up.

  • Adam March 30, 2015, 11:07 am

    I agree with the previous two guys. I am all for concealed carry for anyone who can complete some training. I was law enforcement in the military. People don’t always understand all the factors that must be looked at when using lethal force. I believe people need to fully understand their respective states use of force laws when it comes to conceal carry.

    • Dittohd March 30, 2015, 8:29 pm

      To both Arnold and John.
      I don’t think our government, especially when run by liberal morons, should be able to dictate any restrictions on the Second Amendment! They are not capable of LOGIC. Even some Republicans think they know best and I don’t want them to be able to change or restrict our freedoms. I don’t have a problem with gun people encouraging education about carry. I don’t think the government needs to spend money to advertise to get training. Firearm instructors (private sector) should get the word out to get training but it should not be required. Give people the incentive to get instruction rather than taking our money and insisting we have government approval to exercise our 2A rights.

  • John March 30, 2015, 10:12 am

    I usually monitor anti-gun sites and argue for the right to bear arms with the anti-gun nuts.

    They call me a baby killer and all kinds of crap just for owning a gun!

    But yesterday I was in discussions with Constitutional Carry people – I was treated almost as bad as the anti-gunners criticize me.

    They want no training requirements what-so-ever to carry in public.

    I think if you are going to carry in public then you should be trained in how to shoot in public. And it takes more than most think it does to do it right and can be very dangerous to non-threats ie how to stop a threat without hitting innocent by-standers. Makes too much sense I guess. And I don’t really understand why the NRA resists needing more training to CC.

    Especially since they have the best training “courses” for this if you go the PDN section. Although I think IDPA competitive shooting is the best training “method” for this. I am a Certified Instructor and teach on a volunteer basis ie I don’t make money at it, and I shoot competitions. In most classes I see “maybe” 1 out of 20 I would even begin to trust to be able to shoot in a public place without out hitting more innocents than threats.

    Constitutional Carry people want NO restrictions or rules on CC. I think that is dangerous and will eventually catch up with us and we will end up loosing many of our gun rights in the long run.
    We have a Basic Right to Free Speech also, but you cannot Yell Fire in a crowded theater since it is dangerous.
    I say – untrained people shooting in public are also dangerous.
    As with speech – There need to be “some” rules, restrictions for the public good with shooting in public.
    They say that is an “Infringement” which is not allowed by the Constitution.
    I say that is illogical Madness.

    • arnold March 30, 2015, 12:59 pm

      I agree completely. When this goes bad, and it will, then will come the blow back that may diminish the rights we hold now. I am a gun nut, own more guns than I want published, shoot, hunt and carry. However, our rights under the 2nd Amendment were only recently established by the Supreme Court by a one vote majority and that decision said our rights were subject to “reasonable regulation”. Our “rights” are not as strongly grounded as some think. Pushing senseless changes like this solely for the sake of flexing our muscles is going to come back and cost us dearly one day. CC carry, with a little training and background checks is not a undue burden for gun owners. Rather, it is reasonable and I want it. If we want to keep our rights, gun owners need to show the non-gun owners (which is a growing toward a majority) that we want to offer solutions to gun violence, not make it worse. Unregulated CC has not been a part of gun ownership in America and this is a foolish step. Remember even in Tombstone, you could not carry openly. CC is a recently won right in most states. This only places it in danger.

  • Robert HAVENER March 30, 2015, 9:48 am

    Any person should have a back ground check and get their concel permit. Any person that has been in the military service should be given a concel permit.

    • James Joplin March 30, 2015, 11:41 pm

      Don’t be idiots! Criminals and scumbags don’t undergo training or get CHLs, Such requirements only inconvenience those who least need them. Besides, we have a right to keep and bear arms which is unconstitutional and therefore illegal to infringe upon, and such rules as you would have over us constitute infringement. Neither you nor the government have the right or authority to say which law abiding citizen can or should be able to carry a firearm. To assume that constitutional carry will “go bad” is assinine and self-serving. Stinking socialists.

Leave a Comment

Send this to a friend