I would disagree strongly with the opinion piece in the online Traveler today about concealed carry. The author of the article took an obvious side against concealed carry and the new "Dirty Harry law" as he/she called it.
He/she stated "Law enforcement officials who worry about an increase in hand gun violence oppose the concealed carry law." To the best of my knowledge on the topic, this is simply not the case. As a former police officer myself, I can tell you that I am in favor of concealed carry, and believe, as I know many officers do, that the bad guys may be less likely to attempt a crime if there is a chance that their intended victim might be armed.
He/she also stated "Furthermore, there is no clear evidence that letting people carry hidden guns benefits society by lowering the crime rate." The truth is, there have been studies done on both sides of the issue, which will tell you exactly what that side wants you to hear. What I find enlightening is what the author of this particular article, who is obviously on the side of the Brady gun banners, did not say. He/she did not say that there is clear evidence that letting people carry hidden guns raises the crime rate, or that there has been a rise in gun accidents or murder rates in states that have concealed carry laws (which is all but 4 states).
They went on to say "We do know that allowing concealed weapons will put more guns in people's hands - guns that will get stolen or lost and perhaps used for criminal purposes." To me, that sounds like grasping at straws. How many gun related crimes have we had to date in Ark City, and how does that compare to the number of gun owners? To me, the fact that more people are able to protect themselves makes me feel more secure, not less secure.
I am interested to see how the people of Ark City weigh in on this issue. I have a feeling it will be on the side of concealled carry and the writers of the Constitution, who gave us the right to bear arms.
Folks who like to quote the Second Amendment in the gun argument usually omit the phrase "well-regulated militia". I doubt that Madison and Jefferson envisioned every incompetent fool packing heat with no restrictions. Are there requirements for instruction and testing? Sure. But there are requirements for testing for a driver's license too, and every day we see people on the road who shouldn't be allowed to drive.
That said, this measure is probably like most hotly contested issues: neither the unmitigated disaster that opponents imagine, nor the blissful improvement in civilization that the proponents fantasize.
...And people who like to quote "Well regulated militia" always forget to mention that there is a COMMA in between Well regulated militia and the right of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms! Look it up! And for those gun banners who would say that the comma is just a pause... it is not used as such ANYWHERE ELSE in the Constitution. Our fore fathers believed that the people of the United States should have the ability to rise up against it's government if the government gets too out of hand. GUNS, not waving flags and preaching about peace, allowed us to escape British rule if I'm not mistaking.
Folks who like to quote the Second Amendment, love using the First Amendment. The Second Amendment was placed in the Bill of Rights to ensure that we would always have the First and many other Amendments. I could go on forever on this topic but I won't Personal protection is a proirity that can not be denied. Many people will tell me that the police are there to protect us. No offence to my Law enforcement brothers and sisters, but seldom do police actually stop a violent crime in progress. They work very hard in solving crimes that have happened, but a majority of the time they are there to take reports and find the criminal after he or she has violated someonne's human rights. I am not endorsing vigilante justice, but protection of ones self and family is what I endorse. If you still think that concealed carry is not needed, that is your right. Don't take the class, don't apply for the permit. But the day that you or someone you loves life is saved by a permit carrier, be sure to thank them.
Boy have I been asleep! I didn't see this until now. To Ski: You sir need to read the constitution and it's ammendments. If it weren't for private citizens, there would have been no continental army, hence no war,hence no constitutuion, and you would be bowing to a monarch. Start reading some of the studies done by the FBI, Assn of Chiefs of Police to name a couple, and all information in those studies will give light to just how concealed carry does in fact inhibit griminal activity. If you don't have the means to protect yourself, who do you think is going to protect you? The police try as they might can not protect you and are under no obligation to do so.
/www.fbi.gov/ucr/prelim2007/table3.htm Here is one, note that all crime rates as reported are down from previous years. I'll do some more research, and post more later. You can do a google search by state, and find out when their concealed carry past, and how the crime rate increased or declined since it's inseption.
