The Joplin Globe, Joplin, MO

Top Stories

February 8, 2013

PSU student group formally opposes concealed-gun bill

PITTSBURG, Kan. — The Student Government Association of Pittsburg State University has joined Kansas’ other public universities in opposing a bill that would allow concealed weapons on college and university campuses.

More than 900 PSU students were polled on the issue before Wednesday’s vote by student senators, who decided 22-16 to formally oppose the bill that is currently under consideration by legislators, student body President Lara Ismert said.

The bill would allow individuals with a concealed-carry permit to carry concealed weapons into public buildings, which includes college and university campuses, unless those buildings have “adequate security measures” such as security guards or metal detectors, said Shawn Naccarato, director of government and community relations at PSU.

The university currently bans weapons, concealed or otherwise, in accordance with a policy from the state Board of Regents, its governing board, said Mike McCracken, director of PSU police.

The PSU group was the last student government organization of the seven public universities in the state to announce its opposition to the bill in recent weeks.

“We aren’t trying to change any policies on campus,” Ismert said of the students’ vote. “We are trying to have a more formal statement from the campus to take to Topeka.”

University officials oppose the bill on the basis that the allowance of weapons on campus should be a board choice, not a choice of lawmakers, Naccarato said.

“Our position is to support the Board of Regents’ position, which is first and foremost to maintain the authority of the board to make the decision as to whether or not concealed weapons should be allowed (on campuses),” he said.

McCracken said the police chiefs of the state’s public universities oppose the bill for safety reasons. He said their concerns include a potential difficulty in police officers being able to identify the shooter in an active-shooter scenario where multiple weapons are present, and the possibility of a concealed weapon being stolen from someone.

“We don’t feel like it would help the overall safety of the campus because it would interfere with the educational process,” he said. “Instead of making it more safe on campus, we feel like it would overall make it less safe.”

The debate will likely be a hot topic at PSU for a while, Ismert said. Before their vote, student senators polled their peers in an online, 10-question survey. Ismert said a question asking about support for lawful concealed weapons on university campuses garnered a “yes” vote from 53 percent of the 918 students who took the survey and a “no” vote from 44 percent — suggesting just how divided the student population might be.

“I think the discussion isn’t over,” she said. “A lot of people are talking about it.”

Ismert said she supports being able to carry a concealed weapon “in most instances.” Several members of her family have a concealed-carry permit, and she said she plans to get her own permit sometime this year. But she said she thinks allowing weapons at PSU wouldn’t be a good idea.

“I don’t think higher education institutions are the right environment for that,” said Ismert, a senior majoring in math and English.

Edwin Stremel, a student senator and senior majoring in automotive technology, said he supports being able to carry concealed weapons on campus. He is involved in a separate student group that has lobbied for that option for three semesters.

Stremel said he thinks individuals who have the appropriate license should have the choice to carry a weapon with them — especially if there is a shooter on campus, where their options otherwise would be to run or hide.

“It’s not about arming all the students,” he said of the bill. “It’s about giving students who have a concealed-carry permit to, when all else fails, defend themselves.”

According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, Missouri and Oklahoma are among the states that ban carrying a concealed weapon on a college or university campus.

Ken Kennedy, chief of police at Missouri Southern State University in Joplin, said concealed weapons are not allowed on campus, except on police officers. Katie Dewey, spokeswoman for Northeastern Oklahoma A&M College in Miami, also confirmed that weapons are not allowed on that campus, not even in private vehicles.

Legislation filed this session in the Missouri House of Representatives would allow teachers or administrators to carry a concealed weapon on the campus of a higher education institution, elementary or secondary school. The bill, sponsored by Rep. Mike Kelley, R-Lamar, has not been assigned to a House committee and is not on any calendar.

Carryover bill

A similar bill that would have allowed concealed weapons on Kansas college and university campuses failed last year to make it through the Legislature, according to Shawn Naccarato, director of government and community relations at Pittsburg State University.

1
Text Only
Top Stories
  • 080114 Older worker1_72.jpg Co-workers, friends honor nurse with 50-year career

    Wilma Massey has worked a half century in health care and, even at the age of 74, she’s the first to arrive at work each morning.

    August 1, 2014 2 Photos

  • Scott Branden Smith 080114.jpg Comatose assault victim dies

    A Joplin man left in a coma from an apparent assault died this afternoon at Freeman Hospital West.

    August 1, 2014 1 Photo

  • Amendment 7 backers tout safety, new jobs; foes say special interests to benefit

    Billions of dollars are on the line when Missouri voters head to the polls on Tuesday to consider Amendment 7.
    The constitutional amendment, sent to the voters by the Legislature this year, would temporarily increase Missouri’s sales tax by three-quarters of 1 percent, raising an estimated $5.4 billion for the next decade to fund transportation projects. That includes more than $114.1 million in state funds for projects in Newton and Jasper counties, on top of additional revenue for localities that would be raised.
    After the Missouri Department of Transportation downsized in recent years, these projects are now mostly designed and built by private engineers, contractors and laborers — many of whom have contributed tens of thousands of dollars to a campaign effort to sway voters to support the measure.
    Last Monday — eight days ahead of the primary election day — supporters of the measure reported having raised more than $4.1 million for a campaign committee called Missourians For Safe Transportation and New Jobs, which was established last fall to support the measure.
    The International Union of Operating Engineers in St. Louis and Kansas City have contributed nearly $250,000 to the effort. That total was dwarfed by the $649,398 put in by the Industry Advancement Fund Heavy Constructors. Between its Missouri and Kansas companies, APAC — a construction contracting company that specializes in transportation projects — has contributed more than $150,000.
    “The whole idea that money is flowing into the campaign, of course it is,” said Sen. John Lamping, a St. Louis Republican who is opposed to the measure. “It would be a smart business decision to do that.”
    Lamping said the money pouring into the campaign supporting Amendment 7 is indicative of the financial gain the measure bodes for contractors and laborers.  
    Lamping proposed a measure in the Legislature that would redirect one-eighth of existing sales and use tax revenue directly to transportation projects, but he said that measure was rejected by legislative leaders. The coalition “didn’t hear about it,” the outgoing senator said, “because it was my idea instead of someone else’s idea.”
    Lamping, who filibustered a similar measure in 2013, said Republicans have an ideological consistency problem on the issue. He pointed to the Legislature passing a sales tax increase only a few weeks after overriding Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon’s veto of an income tax cut that will largely help businesses organized as limited liability corporations, like many of the companies that could benefit from the measure. Lamping said that the tax increase will mostly affect taxpayers who did not get a significant tax cut.
    “Who wants a tax cut in Missouri?” he said. “Businesses. (Republican leaders) wanted to make them happy and then they passed a tax cut. This is grand-scale special interest cronyism.”
    The ad campaign being funded mostly by the business interests features paramedics and construction workers claiming the measure would “fix our roads and keep Missouri families safe.”
    “We have a chance to give our highways and bridges the repairs they need,” says one ad, which is running in Joplin and statewide in the lead up to Tuesday’s vote. “We have a chance to fix what’s broken by voting yes on Amendment 7.”
    The commercial uses a lot of words to talk about the benefits of the measure, but two words in particular are noticeably absent from the commercial: “Tax increase.”  
    “The ads don’t mention any of the ballot language,” said Jewell Patek, a spokesman for Missourians For Safe Transportation and New Jobs. “We figure Missourians will see the language when they go to the polls.”
    Patek, a former state representative who now lobbies the Legislature, said he disagreed with Lamping’s notion that Amendment 7 is all about special interest gain.
    “There’s quite a bit to gain for Missourians,” he said. “We have serious road needs. We’ll win or lose by the benefits in Amendment 7. I’m not sure I agree with Senator Lamping’s assessment.”
    If approved, Amendment 7 would prevent an increase in the state’s fuel tax, a funding boost opponents of the amendment like Democratic Gov. Jay Nixon and some of the state’s social welfare groups have said would be more appropriate because it could pull in revenue from people who use the roads — like the state’s trucking industry.
    The Missouri Truckers Association’s political action committee has contributed more than $27,000 to the effort to pass the measure. Tom Crawford, president of the association, said his members support the amendment because they see the problems on the road and deal with them every day. And passage of the measure does not mean anyone will stop paying fuel tax.
    “We overpay our fair share on the fuel tax,” he said, pointing to statistics by the American Transportation Research Institute that show truckers have accounted for about 14 percent of road usage while paying for 39 percent of all taxes and fees owed by motorists. “We pay sales taxes just like everybody does on goods and products that people buy in the stores.”
    Crawford said truck companies do not pay state sales taxes on the purchase of trucks, but they do pay a federal tax. “So, we won’t be impacted on new equipment purchase, but other areas of our business will be impacted just like every other taxpayer in the state will,” he said.
    Thomas Shrout, who is helping lead the campaign against the tax hike, said that is not good enough and that Amendment 7 lets truck drivers off the hook. “Under Amendment 7, they wouldn’t have to pay any more,” he said.
    Shrout’s opposition campaign has raised just over $27,000 — less than 1 percent of the total money raised by its supporters. They are targeting their opposition at the state’s urban core by spending money on direct mail and targeted robocalls in the final week.
    “We think using the sales tax to fund road projects is poor policy for the state of Missouri,” he said. “It should be rejected.”
    Shrout said the Missouri Department of Transportation and its supporters should go back to the drawing board and consider some of the other options like campaigning for toll roads or a gas tax increase — both based on road usage.
    Representatives for APAC and the Heavy Constructors Association declined requests for comment.

    Tuesday’s election
    Amendment 7 is one of five measures voters will consider when they head to the polls on Tuesday. Statewide, local election officials reported to the Missouri secretary of state that it was their estimate that about 27 percent of the state’s 4.06 million registered voters will show up to vote, including 25 percent of registered voters in Jasper County and 30 percent in Newton County.

    August 1, 2014

  • Brownback names 3 Kansas Board of Regents members

    Gov. Sam Brownback on Friday named a former veteran Kansas House member and two attorneys to the board overseeing the state’s higher education system.

    August 1, 2014

  • Fair to feature goats, chickens and decorated bras

    Along with the usual fair sights, sounds and smells — livestock, poultry, produce and the like — there will be something a bit unusual at the Cherokee County American Legion Free Fair this year: Decorated brassieres. And pink. Lots of pink.

    August 1, 2014

  • Grant to fund solar energy system for PSU’s Plaster Center

    An $80,000 grant from Westar Energy will fund solar panels to provide both energy and education at the Robert W. Plaster Center, now under construction at Pittsburg State University.

    August 1, 2014

  • Detour in Parsons for bridge work begins

    A portion of south U.S. 59 Highway will close at the Parsons, Kansas, city limits on Aug. 4 for drainage work, asphalt resurfacing and a bridge deck repair project.

    August 1, 2014

  • Autism center to break ground on future home

    Ground will be broken Tuesday morning for the future home of the Bill & Virginia  Leffen Center for Autism at 2808 S. Picher Ave.

    August 1, 2014

  • Our View.jpg Our View: Home runs for area

    Baseball fans, there’s something exciting going on today that has nothing to do with the major leagues.

    August 1, 2014 1 Photo

  • LIVE BLOG: Little League Regional Tournament

    Athletes and parents from Joplin and Frontenac are headed to Indianapolis for the Little League Central Region Tournament. Follow their progress here.

    August 1, 2014