Kansas City Star, Aug. 19
So when is a Kansas-owned building that doubles as a private residence governed by the laws of the state?
When do different rules apply? And most importantly, can you bring a concealed weapon to the Kansas governor’s mansion or the KU chancellor’s residence?
Depends on who’s home. And if that person is the governor or the head of one of the state’s six public universities. Confused yet?
You’re not alone. This riddle has prompted a number of officials to check the fine print this week when reporters came calling for specifics.
The confusion was unleashed by the most recent loosening of gun laws in Kansas. On July 1, a new concealed carry statute went into effect, after being staved off for four years while officials contemplated how it would be implemented, presumably in an effort to head off confusion such as this.
The 2013 law allows concealed carry in all state buildings, with few exceptions. Public spaces including libraries, college classrooms and state office buildings all must comply.
But what hasn’t been spelled out was whether state-owned buildings that also serve as private residences would be considered public or private property when it comes to enforcing gun laws. Turns out, it depends on the desires of the current tenant - and perhaps who is home at the time.
Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback, through a spokeswoman, has said that he is fine with allowing guns to be concealed and carted into the governor’s mansion even when he is home with his family. But he didn’t have to give that answer.
The governor could have decided that when he is home and the space isn’t being used for a public reception or a tour, concealed guns should be banned.
After rereading all the applicable laws, the Kansas Highway Patrol, which is responsible for public safety at the governor’s residence, determined that Cedar Crest is a bit of an oddity under the terms of the new statute.
Apparently, the governor’s mansion can somehow morph from public to private space, subject to the concealed carry law when open to the public and exempt from the statute when in use as a residence.
The chancellor of the University of Kansas and other university presidents also have that option for their state-owned homes, according to a spokesman for the Board of Regents. Those spaces are also often used to host alumni gatherings and fundraisers.
For now, signage declaring Brownback’s residence a gun-free zone have been taken down on the grounds of Cedar Crest in Topeka.
But the public may need to ask ahead of time which rule will apply at Cedar Crest and at the homes of university leaders. Visitors might have to leave their weaponry in the car. Or not.
The scenarios are an example of legislators eagerly supporting a change in the law but failing to foresee real-world implications. It’s a good bet no one thought to raise these questions during debates.
And in 2018, it will be worth watching whether the gubernatorial candidates who supported the new gun law will still embrace the idea of allowing concealed weapons at the mansion they hope to call home.
___
Topeka Capital-Journal, Aug. 19
On Wednesday (Aug. 16), Senate Minority Leader Anthony Hensley released a statement demanding that top Republican officials in the state condemn the white supremacist rally in Charlottesville last weekend. He invoked Gov. Sam Brownback’s new role as ambassador-at-large for international religious freedom: “The people of this country deserve to know that you do not tolerate this hatred.” And he told Lt. Gov. Jeff Colyer that, as the next governor of Kansas, he should issue a forceful condemnation of bigotry on behalf of the state.
Hensley reserved his most incendiary remarks for Secretary of State Kris Kobach: “As a featured speaker for a white nationalist group, with connections to other hate groups, as a key architect of voter suppression laws, and a candidate for governor, the people of Kansas deserve to know whether your silence is indicative of your tolerance of such hate.”
Brownback responded with a denunciation of racism and violence. Colyer said, “Kansas has been and will continue to be a beacon of light and hope for those who fight for equality and justice for all.”
And Kobach explained that it “goes without saying that white supremacist views and racism are reprehensible.” However, he says he didn’t comment on Charlottesville “because I am running for governor of Kansas, not governor of Virginia.” Kobach also argued that the “vast majority of governors” haven’t commented on Charlottesville and asked if that made them all racists. In response, Hensley said “39 of 50 governors have released public statements” on Charlottesville and accused Kobach of harboring racist attitudes: “If he truly believes racism is reprehensible, Kobach would’ve spoken out before I called him out on his silence.”
The disgusting images from Charlottesville demonstrate that Kobach is wrong when he says it “goes without saying” that white supremacy is a noxious blight on our society. When there are neo-Nazis and members of the KKK marching through our streets, silence is unacceptable. Americans have a responsibility to resist such ugly and corrosive ideas when confronted with them - especially when they hold positions of power. Rep. Kevin Yoder put it well last weekend: “Any time that we don’t speak strongly in opposition to bigotry, racism and hatred, I think we’re giving oxygen and breathing room to let these groups flourish.” Kobach, Brownback and Colyer should have issued statements before they were pressured to do so.
However, Kobach’s silence wasn’t unimpeachable evidence of racist sympathies. Hensley has long described Kobach as the “most racist politician in America,” and he appears to think his reticence about Charlottesville is a clear indicator that this assertion is true. This is unfair. Hensley may point out that Kobach has championed immigration and voting laws that disproportionately harm racial minorities. He may argue that Kobach’s connections to groups like the Federation for American Immigration Reform are troubling. But take another look at his words: “If he truly believes racism is reprehensible, Kobach would’ve spoken out before I called him out on his silence.” How does this track onto Brownback and Colyer? Does their delayed response prove that they don’t “truly believe racism is reprehensible”?
While there’s nothing wrong with challenging Kobach on the immigration proposals and voter ID laws he champions, the fight against these abysmal policies is undermined if we accuse him of being a racist at every available opportunity.
___
Lawrence Journal-World, Aug. 21
There is a fine line between teaching the history of the Civil War, accurately and honestly, and celebrating men who fought on the side of slavery.
The community of Lecompton is an example of the former.
In 1855, Lecompton was established as the pro-slavery capital of the Kansas Territory. The next year, the Legislature for the Territory met in Lecompton and drafted a pro-slavery constitution in hopes of getting Kansas admitted to the union as a slave state. Paul Bahnmaier, president of the Lecompton Historical Society, calls it the beginning of the end of slavery.
“So without the fight over the Lecompton Constitution in Washington, D.C., that was written on the second floor of Constitution Hall, Abraham Lincoln would not have been elected in 1860,” Bahnmaier says. “So that’s why we can very legitimately say, Lecompton is the first place in the Civil War where slavery began to die.”
There was a time when Lecompton was billed as “the slavery capital” on I-70 billboards. Those billboard have come down and Lecompton is now billed as the Birth Place of the Civil War.
Visitors to Lecompton can tour Constitution Hall, the building where the Kansas Territorial Government convened in the fall of 1857 and drafted the pro-slavery constitution. They can visit the original Democratic Headquarters and tour the Territorial Capital Museum. There are re-enactments.
Simply put, Lecompton is a must stop for anyone interested in understanding the Bleeding Kansas era.
What visitors to Lecompton won’t find are statues celebrating the work of the pro-slavery activists, the Border Ruffians who flooded into Kansas from Missouri to improperly influence the vote on whether Kansas would be a slave state and worse, the murderous bandits who raided Kansas communities in the name of the Confederacy.
That’s as it should be. Monuments and statues to confederate leaders like Robert E. Lee and Jefferson Davis, often erected during eras of segregation and Jim Crow, are painful reminders of slavery. It is right for communities to decide that the time has come to remove many such statues.
Fortunately, there is no decision to be made in Lecompton, where the Bleeding Kansas history can be explored without improperly celebrating slavery.
___
Wichita Eagle, Aug. 16
Kansans take pride in being kind beyond the norms set in other parts of the country. Holding open a door at a busy convenience store, or a quick wave to oncoming county-road traffic, are small examples of our thoughtfulness.
Some Kansas ranchers, victims of last spring’s wildfire in southwest Kansas, took it a major step further this month. They gave up valuable resources of their own to help new wildfire victims in Montana and drought victims in South Dakota.
“Even though we’re still picking up our own pieces, we should be the first to step up when somebody needs help,” said rancher Tyler Woolfolk, who lives near Protection.
The March fire that burned more than 700,000 acres in Clark and Comanche counties killed thousands of cattle and burned hundreds of miles of fences. Ranchers in those areas have had a rough summer trying to recover.
But Kansas ranchers jumped to the aid of ranchers elsewhere this summer, just as donors from around the country helped them with hay and supplies soon after the wildfire.
A group including Bernie Smith sent 32 tons of hay to a Montana rancher recovering from a 270,000-acre fire. Remember, Smith and friends could have used the hay for their own cattle since winter grasses are going to be thin.
Woolfolk’s ranch arranged to have hay sent to South Dakota, where ranchers are struggling to keep their herds fed during a drought.
Other ranchers contributed money for fuel, and some loaned pickups, trailers and semis.
The Kansas ranchers are delivering more than needed supplies. They were also able to give Montana ranchers encouragement, having gone through the ordeal themselves. Helping the next wildfire victims has also been therapeutic for Kansas ranchers after months of concern about their own burned-out properties.
Travis Brown, a Montana rancher who lost 6,000 acres to fire, said the Kansans “understand the challenges that are in front of us.”
Brown and the other ranchers who received Kansas kindness will now get an opportunity to pay it forward.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.