Christensen encouraged by response to school gun bill

Thursday, February 17, 2011

McCOOK, Nebraska -- State Sen. Mark Christensen told McCook Chamber of Commerce members, Thursday morning during a weekly conference call at the Keystone that he was encouraged by the number of law enforcement entities that testified neutral or positive on behalf of LB516, his bill to allow teachers, security personnel and administrators to carry permitted concealed weapons on school grounds. Christensen said the majority that testified were neutral and that typically the Omaha Police Department has fought all of his gun bills. "It's encouraging to see law enforcement was not opposed to the bill and for them to take the effort to come out and testify," said Christensen, adding that there was "a lot of benefit to pacifying senators and letting them know where the police departments stand on the bill."

Christensen said the Lincoln Public School system testified in opposition of the bill, but said that wasn't unexpected, as they already have metal detectors and off-duty police officers in their schools. He said his bill would allow rural schools, that have a much longer police response time, the option of a preventative measure without adding an expense for something they hopefully would never use. "This is nothing more than locals being able to decide to have a different, increased preparedness, if they need it," said Christensen.

He also explained that the notification process in his bill did not require identifying who specifically was carrying, which could hamper the overall effectiveness of it, but simply required that parents be informed if the option has been approved locally.

The group again discussed the topic of road funding, with Christensen saying vehicle fees received zero dollars from out of state travelers, sales tax provided very little and he believed fuel tax provided the most. He said he felt that was the best option and said he would vote for that. "The problem with Senator Fischer's bill [LR3CA that authorizes the use of state sales and use taxes for highway bonds] is that it isn't a solution," said Christensen, adding that it simply pushed the problem out for two years, "She won't be here in two years, I still will."

Concern over the fuel tax increase hurting border stations, because Nebraska was already on the high end when compared to surrounding states, led Christensen saying border bleed was a concern. Linda Taylor said the concern should be focused on bleed over of sales tax dollars over the Internet, prompting City Manager Kurt Fristch to raise questions, "What has the state done to earn that tax?" Fritsch added that is was a complicated issue with no business residing in the state, no expense to the state from the transaction, "What are you paying for?"

Taylor argued that the person making the purchase was in that state and Larry Eisenmenger said the scenario was "killing main street."

Fritsch responded that a lot of people were buying over the internet, "simply because it's not available here." Taylor said she had experience with customers coming into her retail shop and saying if the sales tax was removed from the sale, they would then buy.

Christensen reiterated that it was a complicated issue and the argument would turn to whether the state that item was sold from should receive the tax, or the state the individual purchasing resided in. He said he supported a transaction tax, that it encourages people to save and believed it to be as equal as it can be and fair to everyone.

Among other topics, Fritsch asked Christensen to support LB323, a bill that allows cities to opt out of the provisions of the Nebraska Advantage Act, that refunds applicants local option sales taxes. Explaining that it put municipalities in a difficult financial position by taking funds after they were already figured into the budget. Rex Nelson, Executive Director of the McCook Economic Development Corporation, said that many in his field would testify against the bill, but that it had "caused enough grief to cities to probably warrant something being done."

Comments
View 3 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • We are too often blinded by visions of heroic vigilante actions. We fail to think about the consequences of arming people more (specifically in our school systems) in an attempt to "decrease" violence. Too often those carrying the gun will have it taken away, shoot the wrong person or shoot when it isn't necessary because of a lack of training, not feel able to actually respond, or suffer from severe mental anguish and guilt for having pulled the trigger.

    Our schools should not be armed. I will not work in, nor will I enroll a child in, a school that falls for the myth of vigilante justice or protection.

    -- Posted by mefriesen on Mon, Feb 21, 2011, at 1:21 PM
  • Rally can you give me an example of that actually happening? I can not come up with one CCW permit holder in nebraska that has had any of those things happen to them.

    It is about choice adn each school board can decide for themselves if they want this or not. i thouight liberals were all for choice???

    -- Posted by Chaco1 on Tue, Feb 22, 2011, at 10:33 AM
  • Where is your proof or examples of this happening mefriesen? I doubt that you have either one because to my knowledge it hasn't happened.

    -- Posted by Oh what a wonderful day on Wed, Feb 23, 2011, at 10:19 AM
Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration: