Facts are clear, concealed carry laws necessary to allow citizens to protect themselves.
The courts have deliberated over the Second Amendment for some time and it has been confirmed that individual gun ownership rights are indeed provided for in the amendment. Americans' right to own firearms is no longer in question. Today, the bigger issue is what to make of concealed carry laws.
In the U.S., only Illinois, Wisconsin and Washington, D.C., don't allow any type of concealed carry. Every other state has joined the majority faction after seeing the benefits that can come from allowing citizens to lawfully carry firearms.
Concealed carry laws prove their worth all the time, such as when citizens defend themselves from criminals. Just January, in Houston, two citizens used their legally concealed weapons to defend their office against a would-be attacker. Similar situations occur all the time that serve to further justify concealed carry laws.
One flawed argument against concealed carry laws is that while they allow citizens to carry weapons, they allow criminals to do so as well. This theory falls flat on its face for several reasons.
First of all, an extensive background check is required to get a concealed carry permit. Secondly, criminals who intend to break the law with a firearm aren't going to bother with a permit. Law-abiding citizens are the ones who legally acquire a concealed carry permit.
A study by criminologists Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz estimated that firearms are used for self-defense 2.5 million times every year. In the 1980s, the U.S. Justice Department funded a study by the Social and Demographic Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts. In this study, 1,874 convicted felons from 10 states were interviewed.
The results were astonishing.
According to the study, 34 percent of the criminal respondents said they had been scared off, shot at, wounded or captured by an armed citizen, and 40 percent said they had been deterred from committing a particular crime because they believed the potential victim was armed. If anything, this study seems to admit that it's safe to say armed citizens scare criminals and deter crime.
Concealed carry laws shouldn't face any danger of repeal. Washington, D.C., famous for its stringent gun laws and lack of a concealed carry law, serves as a perfect case. According to the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, D.C. had the highest murder rate and violent crime in the country from 2006 to 2007, far exceeding any other area. It still has one of the highest crime rates in the nation, despite infringing on its citizens' gun rights.
Oddly enough, Vermont, which lies in the same region, is a complete opposite. It has the most liberal concealed carry policy in the country (along with Alaska), and one of the lowest violent crime and murder rates. It would seem that concealed carry laws save lives and protect law-abiding citizens in this case, as well.
If nothing else, people have a right to defend themselves. U.S. police agencies are effective and wonderful at their jobs, but stretched thin in many areas. Officers can't be everywhere they are needed at once, especially in large metropolitan areas.
From a strictly legal standpoint, concealed carry makes even more sense, as the government doesn't have a legal duty to protect its citizens. In 1982, a federal court of appeals ruled in Bowers v. DeVito that, "[T]here is no constitutional right to be protected by the state against being murdered by criminals or madmen." If citizens don't have the right to be protected, they at least deserve the right to protect themselves.
Thus closes the bulletproof case for concealed carry laws.
By: Travis Holland
Source: Link Removed
The courts have deliberated over the Second Amendment for some time and it has been confirmed that individual gun ownership rights are indeed provided for in the amendment. Americans' right to own firearms is no longer in question. Today, the bigger issue is what to make of concealed carry laws.
In the U.S., only Illinois, Wisconsin and Washington, D.C., don't allow any type of concealed carry. Every other state has joined the majority faction after seeing the benefits that can come from allowing citizens to lawfully carry firearms.
Concealed carry laws prove their worth all the time, such as when citizens defend themselves from criminals. Just January, in Houston, two citizens used their legally concealed weapons to defend their office against a would-be attacker. Similar situations occur all the time that serve to further justify concealed carry laws.
One flawed argument against concealed carry laws is that while they allow citizens to carry weapons, they allow criminals to do so as well. This theory falls flat on its face for several reasons.
First of all, an extensive background check is required to get a concealed carry permit. Secondly, criminals who intend to break the law with a firearm aren't going to bother with a permit. Law-abiding citizens are the ones who legally acquire a concealed carry permit.
A study by criminologists Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz estimated that firearms are used for self-defense 2.5 million times every year. In the 1980s, the U.S. Justice Department funded a study by the Social and Demographic Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts. In this study, 1,874 convicted felons from 10 states were interviewed.
The results were astonishing.
According to the study, 34 percent of the criminal respondents said they had been scared off, shot at, wounded or captured by an armed citizen, and 40 percent said they had been deterred from committing a particular crime because they believed the potential victim was armed. If anything, this study seems to admit that it's safe to say armed citizens scare criminals and deter crime.
Concealed carry laws shouldn't face any danger of repeal. Washington, D.C., famous for its stringent gun laws and lack of a concealed carry law, serves as a perfect case. According to the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, D.C. had the highest murder rate and violent crime in the country from 2006 to 2007, far exceeding any other area. It still has one of the highest crime rates in the nation, despite infringing on its citizens' gun rights.
Oddly enough, Vermont, which lies in the same region, is a complete opposite. It has the most liberal concealed carry policy in the country (along with Alaska), and one of the lowest violent crime and murder rates. It would seem that concealed carry laws save lives and protect law-abiding citizens in this case, as well.
If nothing else, people have a right to defend themselves. U.S. police agencies are effective and wonderful at their jobs, but stretched thin in many areas. Officers can't be everywhere they are needed at once, especially in large metropolitan areas.
From a strictly legal standpoint, concealed carry makes even more sense, as the government doesn't have a legal duty to protect its citizens. In 1982, a federal court of appeals ruled in Bowers v. DeVito that, "[T]here is no constitutional right to be protected by the state against being murdered by criminals or madmen." If citizens don't have the right to be protected, they at least deserve the right to protect themselves.
Thus closes the bulletproof case for concealed carry laws.
By: Travis Holland
Source: Link Removed
leasantry:
