Petition to Tennessee State House, Tennessee Governor, Mae Beavers, Tennessee State Senate, Tennessee Emergency Medical Service, Terri Weaver
Legalized concealed carry for E.M.S., Firefighters and all Emergency personnel.
Due to changing times it is no longer safe for our first responders. We deserve the right to be able to protect ourselves and go home to our family. I feel that not only should it be legalized but should be recommended. I also feel there should be state approved training available as with law enforcement.
Petition to Texas State Senate, Texas State House, Joan Huffman, Don Huffines, Lois Kolkhorst, Mike Schofield, Dwayne Bohac, Joe Straus, Larry Phillips, Texas Governor, Ted Cruz, Barack Obama, John Cornyn, Michael McCaul
ALLOW TEXAS 1ST RESPONDERS, WHO MEET MINIMUM CRITERIA, TO CARRY A CONCEALED WEAPON ON DUTY
Fire and EMS first responders routinely respond to the same violent incidents that police officers do. While they typically endeavor to await the arrival of law enforcement prior to entering a known dangerous scene, they operate in an extremely dynamic field and even the most innocuous sounding "sick call" can rapidly turn into a violent incident. Evidence of this can be found in two studies (McGuire et al, 2009)* which showed that pre-hospital emergency medical services providers are 7 times more likely to be murdered on duty than all other healthcare providers. It also showed that Fire and EMS first responders are 22 times more likely, than the working public at large, to sustain injuries in a violent assault that leave them unable to return to work for their next shift. There are many other studies that support these findings, as well. I do not see this as only a problem for EMS providers around the nation, it is also a very real problem for me personally. While responding to a night club shooting where law enforcement was inaccurately reported to be on scene, my crew walked into an incident that turned violent in seconds. We were lead to believe that the scene was secure, yet suddenly I found myself face to face with an armed man who stood behind the kneeling members of my crew and individually held a pistol to the back of each of their heads. Had he decided to kill us, we would have had no recourse except to await our turn to be shot. These scenes have played out hundreds of times around the both Texas and the country. Every day that our first responders lives are placed in the hands of agencies who yield to political correctness and financial liability over their right to defend themselves, quite literally brings us one day closer to the next severely injured first responder. Or even worse, the next flag draped coffin. Currently The great State of Texas allows first responders to carry on duty but it also allows for an employer to restrict or prohibit their employees from exercising their right to carry. Most employing agencies prohibit their employees from carrying on the job for fear of liability. This concern is addressed in the language of the proposed bill. A simplified explanation is included below** as well as a link to an informational YouTube video***. *McGuire et al. "Occupational Fatalities in EMS: A Hidden Crisis." & "The Epidemiology of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses Among EMS Personnel" **On Duty Concealed Handgun License (ODCHL) Proposal I. I would like to propose that on duty first responders (FRs) be permitted to exercise their right to carry a concealed weapon for self defense. A. Currently Texas law grants FRs the right to carry but their employers can restrict or prohibit them from exercising that right. II. I propose increased training requirements, at the candidate’s expense. This curriculum would include the prerequisite of obtaining a standard Texas license to carry and then additional training in the following subjects (est. 40 hrs), to be permitted to carry on duty: A. De-escalation techniques B. Cover and concealment of both person and weapon (tactical thinking) C. Consequences of improper use D. Small arms training: i. Instinctive shooting ii. Tactical shooting iii. Shooting & moving iv. Low light shooting v. Shoot/don't shoot drills "Hogan's Alley" III. Current Texas laws prohibit the carrying of a concealed weapon in several specific locations. A. These exceptions to CHL rights should not be affected by the ODCHL endorsement if the card carrier is off duty. B. While on duty, and functioning under exigent circumstances, the ODCHL endorsement should supersede location restrictions. i. The Supreme Court ruling in 'US vs. Lopez' showed that the states have the right to set where, and by whom, those restrictions can be set or abandoned ii. The exceptions to that rule would be federal installations where 'US vs. Lopez' is not applicable iii. For these rare possibilities, as well as for fire incidents, a secure location should be provided for storage of a firearm. (Approx. $40 per unit retail) iv. The on duty exception for First Responders with an ODCHL would be similar in Tex30.06 to the FR exemption provided in Tex30.05 IV. Agency indemnification/Municipal limitations of liability A. Language should grant first responder employing agencies immunity from civil liability B. Exceptions to this rule include: Negligently failing to reasonably provide for first responder protection. Examples include: i. Failure to send law enforcement on a known dangerous situation ii. Failure to send law enforcement assistance in a timely manner when on scene units request help iii. Failure to provide accurate available information to responding units (ie. Dispatching a fire/EMS unit to a known shooting but sending it as a "Medical Problem". ***Informational YouTube Video: https://youtu.be/hLQqZly3gsc
Petition to Congress
Tell Congress to pass H.R. 38 enact concealed carry reciprocity
Common sense firearms laws such as H.R. 38 would enable those citizens who are legally able to possess and carry a concealed firearm in their home state to likewise possess and carry said firearm while traveling across state lines as long as that state permits concealed carry. Driver licenses are required to be honored by all states, marriage licenses are honored by all states; why not concealed carry licenses? This bill does not negate background checks as one still must have a background check to purchase the firearm as well undergo a deeper background check in most all states to receive the concealed carry license. Make your voice heard and tell congress it's time to act! Stop abridging our 2nd amendment rights!
Petition to firstname.lastname@example.org , email@example.com , firstname.lastname@example.org , email@example.com , firstname.lastname@example.org , email@example.com , firstname.lastname@example.org , Kpoe@capital.edu
Stop Capital University Concealed Carry
The #CapFam is greater than just Capital University students, staff, and administration. It includes the community of Bexley, Capital University alumni, family members, our network of community leaders & partners across Columbus. We, a coalition of organizations, students, staff and the greater Bexley community, believes that SB 1, erroneously titled “No More Victims,” misrepresents the University’s purpose and directly contradicts the values of the organizations and students herein represented. This coalition supports genuine efforts to improve the safety and representation of survivors of campus violence. We call on our peers and community members to join us in opposition to the spirit and intent of this legislation. We, as members of the #CapFam, adamantly oppose the legislation known as SB 1 regarding concealed carry on campus and publicly address the following concerns with the said legislation. The blatant disregard for student interest in the creation of this legislation is evident by the lack of student input and open forums regarding the content of SB 1 prior to its proposal to Student Government. Not only are student interests being disregarded, but the proposal is a misrepresentation of university values. As an institution with purpose, Capital University challenges members of its community to ask, think, and lead. Without the input of students and by only a small number of students speaking on behalf of all students, we feel these values are being misrepresented. This legislation is inappropriately produced and proposed to the Student Government Senate Legislation drafted an hour prior to the Senate meeting without ample time for research by voting senators and without the knowledge of absent senators has no place in our representative body. By being a part of the Capital University community, students and faculty also belong to the Bexley community at large. Decisions of this magnitude and controversial nature affect the Bexley community, as well as our own. Calling for a vote regarding concealed carry without research and consultation from the Bexley community is damaging to the relationship the University holds with community members. This proposal and the language used in it are damaging to survivors of all forms of violence. The proposal calls for the safety of students while using damaging terminology and without appropriate agency for survivors. Survivors should not be silenced and spoken for but should be given a platform to advocate for their needs and cared for by our community. Speaking for one survivor should not be twisted into the views of all survivors. The legislation proposed cites affirmative research without citing research in refutation of the presented argument. Thoughtful, intentional legislation includes research and debate from all sides. With the disregard for proper procedure and lack of ample time prior to the vote, sufficient research could not be presented or discussed. Rigorous, educated, and research-based discussion should follow controversial, sensitive legislation such as that proposed. We, the signers of this petition, believe that an integral part of Capital University's purpose is to remain a safe, open, and involved member of the Bexley community. Stand by us and oppose this legislation. Sincerely, The #CapFam
Petition to Council of the European Union
EU Schengen area wide firearms concealed carry for self protection and property protection
English / ENG / EN: European Firearms Pass should become sufficient condition for concealed carry across the entire Schengen Area of European Union once concealed firearms carry is allowed for the European Firearms Pass owner in his/her home country. This will allow to: self protect families with children traveling for seasonal vacation across EU self protection of truck/lorry drivers and property protection of ware and products they transport across the entire Schengen protect any business representatives and employees while transiting themselves or any ware or products across Schengen No further actions or requests in terms of announcements to authorities to transit or destination countries should be needed. Concealed firearms carry of any EU citizen in Schengen area should become as natural and easy as traveling across Schengen country borders. Slovak / SVK / SK: Európsky zbrojný pas by sa mal stať postačujúcou podmienkou pre skryté nosenie zbrane na celom území Európskej Únie patriacej do Schengen zóny pre každého držiteľa zbrojného preukazu, ktorým mu je umožnené zbraň nosiť v jeho/jej domácej krajine. Toto umožní: ochranu osôb a majetku pre rodiny s deťmi, ktoré cestujú na letnú alebo zimnú dovolenku do inej krajiny EÚ ochranu osôb pre vodičov kamiónov a tiež efektívnejšiu ochranu tovaru a produktov, ktoré prevážajú po krajinách Schengen zóny ochranu osôb a majetku konateľov a zamestnancov spoločností pri nutnosti presunu seba a tovaru alebo produktov po krajinách Schengen zóny Na takéto nosenie zbrane v krajinách Schengen zóny nebude potrebná žiadna ohlasovacia ani oznamovacia povinnosť žiadnych autorít z tranzitných krajín a ani cieľovej krajiny. Možnosť skrytého nosenia zbrane pre ktoréhokoľvek obyvateľa EÚ v Schengen zóne by sa mala stať rovnakou samozrejmosťou akou je voľný priechod štátnych hraníc týchto krajín. https://www.facebook.com/schengen.concealed.carry/
Petition to Donald Trump, National Rifle Association, Republican National Committee
Nation wide Constitutional carry. If you can legally own a gun you should be able to carry
Now more than ever the American people should have the right to defend themselves. We face threats on a daily basis from terrorism or mentally unstable individuals. This is about our God given right to freedom and our right to defend ourselves and loved ones from those who seek to harm us. If legal gun owners are allowed to always have a firearm and gun free zones are gone we will all be safer. If you look at statistics on national as well as international level you will see that gun free zones are a target rich environment for terrorism. The American people did not seek out this war with terrorism, but it is here. Our government can not always protect us. It your duty as an American citizen regardless of race or religion to protect yourself and family. Currently politicians (who all happen to have armed guards) are not allowing you to do so. Apparently their lives are more important than the working class American. It is time for Americans to unite again and let our government know that we will not be victims. Terroists, mentally insane and criminals do not care about a concealed carry permit or gun free zones. All these things do is make victims out of law abiding citizens and often times innocent children. Children who were left unprotected because we have laws in America that bind the hands of those who wish to protect them and give the power of life and death to killers. A concealed carry permit is a form of registration and gun control. The 2nd amendment should be the permit for law abiding citizens to carry not an unconstitutional state issued permit. Regardless of your religion or race if you love America, the Constitution and want us safe and secure you need to sign this. During WWII Admiral Yamamoto of Japan advised against invading our mainland because "behind every blade of grass would be a rifle." That is what should always be said of America by our enemies!