Matt Ollila
Professor Katie Greulich
English 132.10
3/23/12
Literature Review:
Does Concealed Carry of a Weapon
Affect Crime?
“Dispatch,
this is Officer Obrien”. “This is Dispatch, go ahead Obrien”. “We have shots fired on Jackson Community
College campus, please send backup”. Conversations like these are being heard
all too frequently these days. Since the ratification of the Second Amendment
in 1791, the firearm debate has been at the forefront of politics ever since.
The two sides of the debate are people who are in favor of more restrictive
laws and people that want more freedom when it comes to guns. Both sides offer
valid arguments for and against gun control. Through the Second Amendment some states have
allowed citizens the right to carry a concealed weapon. Does the allowance of
Concealed Carry of Weapon have any effect on crime?
In 2010
alone there were roughly thirty thousand deaths from firearms. Of those thirty
thousand, approximately eleven thousand were homicides (Firearms Tutorial).
Anti-gun advocates find this number to be way too high. They suggest that
better control will lessen the effects of gun violence. Gun control advocates,
typically democrats, have passed several laws in recent years in favor of stricter
laws concerning gun control. They believe that by passing more legislation, it won’t
only cut down on the rate of crime, but also cut down on the mass amount of
guns on the street.
As the
popular saying goes, “guns don’t kill people, people kill people”. This quote
is taken to heart by the numerous gun advocates. One of
the primary arguments in favor of gun rights is that people themselves are
actually the issue. Gun rights advocates argue that it is the people behind the
trigger, not the gun itself. Most gun rights supporters believe that basic
legislative laws are needed to prevent guns from getting into the wrong hands.
However, they also are firm believers in the Second Amendment and the notion
that the government cannot take their fundamental rights away. Both sides of
the debate agree on certain issues, such as who should be able to own a firearm,
such as a convicted murderer or rapist or someone who is deemed mentally
incapable. So in the end, the debate is
not whether or not who should be able to own a firearm. What is under scrutiny
is what is to blame for all of the death and crime that involves firearms. Does it rest solely in the fact that people
have access to firearms, or is there a bigger issue at hand that should be addressed?
The question is a difficult one that both sides argue endlessly.
The anti-gun
groups across the board preach less availability of guns, less crime. According
to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) “Virtually every crime
gun in the United States starts off as a legal firearm” (Inside Straw
Purchasing 3). Because of this discovery, anti-gun advocates push for extreme
gun control laws. In 1994 the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act was enacted
making it much harder to go out and just buy a handgun. This was a huge feat
for anti-gun groups. An earlier version of the law suggested a five day waiting
period to try and cut down on “crimes of passion” (Kwon 42). However, the final draft of the bill was
written without the five day waiting period because of National Rifle
Association’s tremendous fight to prevent it. An instant over-the-phone background
check is required instead. The Brady
bill was a very controversial case, one that was highly opposed by gun rights
advocates, which is why the passage of the bill was such a huge feat for
gun-control advocates.
While it may
be true that nearly all guns involved in crime were initially purchased
legally, gun rights advocates argue that when criminals intend to obtain a gun,
it is not likely that they will do so legally. A common tactic that criminals
use to get guns is a straw purchase. “A ‘straw purchase’ occurs when the actual
buyer of a firearm uses another person, the ‘straw purchaser,’ to execute the
paperwork necessary to purchase a firearm from an FFL” (Inside Straw Purchasing
5). Criminals who have used the straw purchase technique in the past either
can’t buy from an FFL themselves or do not want their name registered to the
gun. It is also very common for the guns to be sold on the streets once the
straw purchase has been made. Because these firearms are sold and bought on the
streets, there is no regulation of who can buy them because no background check
or permit is needed to purchase. Anti-gun leaders are consistently pushing for
more gun control in hopes that it will cut down the number of guns that make it
to the streets, and ultimately cut down on crime. The fact of the matter is,
even though the guns were originally purchased legally when the criminal wanted
the firearm they bought it illegally.
Every now
and again you will read a tragic headline of another child shot and or killed
due to accidents involving firearms. A study showed that “10% of families admitted to having unlocked and loaded
firearms within easy reach of children” (Firearms Tutorial). When children are involved
in shootings, it is always a tragic matter and is never taken lightly,
especially within the anti-gun community. Usually after tragic accidental
shootings gun-control groups push for stricter laws, and also question whether
or not people should be able to possess firearms. . Gun-control groups often liken this to a
popular parenting technique, when something is bad you take it away. The thing
that is “bad” in this case is the firearm, and they try to “ban” firearms. They
are always immediately stopped by the Second Amendment which states “The right
of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed (Second Amendment).
It is safe
to say that no one wants a child to get hurt in a gun accident. However, the
gun-control community’s extreme end all be all view can be a little
overwhelming. The pro-gun community’s response is to encourage gun safety. As was
quoted earlier, 10% of families admit to having loaded and unlocked firearm
within reach of a child. The NRA realized a need for education and safety. In
1988, The NRA began educating children and teens through the Eddie Safety Eagle
program. Through this program over 21 million children have been reached in all
fifty states. The program was not created to endorse the NRA but rather to
educate and hopefully teach children how to be safe if they ever come into
contact with a firearm. Eddie Eagle tells children that if they see a gun,
“STOP! Don’t touch. Leave the area. Tell an adult.” (Eddie Eagle Safety Program).
This method of educating rather than banning is very popular within the pro-gun
community. They believe that if children come into contact with firearms that
rather than playing with it, they will let an adult know.
Through the
Second Amendment some states have given us the right to conceal carry a weapon (CCW).
Concealed carry is means that you are able to conceal a firearm from obvious
view. There nearly six million people throughout the nation who are licensed to
carry a concealed weapon (Stuckey). Since concealed carry is not a right
specifically mentioned in the Constitution, it is a right that is given to the
states. Different states have a wide variety of criteria and restrictions. The
allowance of concealed carry is divided into four categories: shall issue, may
issue, no issue, and unrestricted. Shall
issue states have a set standard of criteria, and as long as the citizen meets
these requirements, they shall be issued a license to carry a concealed weapon.
May issue states require the citizen to identify a specific need for concealed
carry. No Issue districts or states will not allow citizens under any
circumstances to carry a concealed weapon. Unrestricted states have no licensing
system for concealed carry, and anyone that is legally allowed to own a firearm
can carry a concealed weapon. If your state allows you to have a license to
carry, you must first go through the proper training. Each state’s training
varies a little. In Michigan, you must first take a handgun safety course. It
is an eight hour class that has a NRA approved hand-written test and a shooting
portion. After passing the class, you must pass proper background checks and
FBI fingerprint check. After going through all of that, you must pay the
appropriate fees and wait for the county gun board to approve your application. After being approved, there are certain areas
where you are not allowed to carry concealed. These locations include schools, daycare
centers, stadiums, bars, places of worship, entertainment facilities with 2,500
or more seats, hospitals, colleges, and casinos (MSP-Firearms). Despite being “gun
free zones”, terrible gun related violence still happens at places like these.
As you can
see the gun debate creates a deep ravine throughout the nation. This is
America; because of this, we also have the Freedom of speech which often makes
this debate a very interesting and sometimes crude issue. However, we can say
for sure that the Second Amendment is here to stay. In many States we have the
right to carry a concealed weapon because of the Second Amendment. The right to
carry a concealed weapon is an issue that is at the forefront of the American
gun debate. It is our natural right to
be able to possess firearms and to defend ourselves from harm and tyranny, and
the government should not infringe on that right by limiting our right to carry
a concealed weapon. In the following
paragraphs I intend to defend the Second Amendment, explain how CCW laws are a
deterrent to criminals, explain how strict firearm laws enable criminals, and
prove that CPL holders are educated and trained.
The Second Amendment grants people
in the United States the right to own personal firearms. Even though the
Amendment is fairly cut and dry, a few words are left open to interpretation
which is why only some states allow citizens to gain a license to carry a
concealed weapon. Michigan, among other states has adopted what is called the
Castle doctrine. Many of you may be familiar with the recent case involving
Trayvon Martin in Florida; the man who shot Trayvon is using Florida’s “Stand
your ground Law” as his defense. The
Castle doctrine allows you to stand your ground but only within your home for
Michigan. It was not until 2006 that Michigan allowed you to stand your grown
outside your home with the passing of the Self Defense Act. The Act reads that
an individual may protect themselves if
“(1) An
individual who has not or is not engaged in the commission of a crime at the
time he or she uses deadly force may use deadly force against another
individual anywhere he or she has the legal right to be with no duty to retreat
if either of the following applies: (a) The individual honestly and reasonably
believes that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent
death of or imminent great bodily harm to himself or herself or to another
individual. (b) The individual honestly and reasonably believes that the use of
deadly force is necessary to prevent the imminent sexual assault of himself or
herself or of another individual. (2) An individual who has not or is not
engaged in the commission of a crime at the time he or she uses force other
than deadly force may use force other than deadly force against another
individual anywhere he or she has the legal right to be with no duty to retreat
if he or she honestly and reasonably believes that the use of that force is
necessary to defend himself or herself or another individual from the imminent
unlawful use of force by another individual.”(State of Michigan)
The passage of
the Self defense Act was a momentous occasion, especially for those who had CCW
permits. The passage of the Act helped future cases of self defense when deadly
force was needed. The passage of this Act grants law-abiding citizens the right
to defend themselves in situations where deadly force is the only option.
Some of the most horrific crimes
have happened within Pistol Free Zones. Several tragic shootings have occurred
at schools and colleges in recent years. It seems as though criminals are aware
that the people they are going to attack will not be armed. Perhaps they do, no
one can tell for sure. As I mentioned earlier, there are different types of CCW
permit issuance across America. Please keep this in mind as you study the
following graph.
If you look
at the top of the graph you will see that the District of Columbia, our
nation’s capital, has the highest murder rate by firearms. Now if you direct
your attention to the bottom of the scale, you will see Vermont with the lowest
murder rate from a firearm (States with the most and fewest firearm murders). If
you recall, there are four types of concealed carry laws in the United States. The
District of Columbia does not allow CCW permits for citizens; in fact they do
not allow any type of firearms. Vermont on the other hand is an unrestricted
concealed carry state. Based on what I can see from this chart it proves that
criminals do take into account whether or not someone might have CCW permit. I
might also go as far to say that the gun-control laws are not working because
firearms within the limits of the District of Columbia are strictly forbidden.
The Anti-gun Community believes that
if there are more restrictive gun laws then there will be less crime. The graph
above shows that even in the District of Columbia where guns are banned murders
from firearms are still occurring at a very high rate taking place. This
example is a counter argument to the anti-gun community’s beliefs. John R.
Lott, Jr. in his recent book “More Guns,
Less Crime” proves through countless case studies and statistical analyses
that in fact more guns do result in less crime. So the belief that the CCW
holder will be even more of a danger to an already dangerous society may be not
true. John R. Lott, Jr. brings clear evidence that CCW holders might make
criminals think twice before they act (Lott).
There is a common misconception about
CCW permit holders that they are self appointed vigilantes. However, this is
not the case; the majority are upstanding citizens within the state. A citizen
who is interested in a CCW permit is only concerned about his or her well being
or family’s safety. There is a long list of requirements to be able to get your
CCW permit. Among those requirements are certain laws you must have never been
convicted of. Of these long lists of laws include never being convicted of
malicious use of a telephone, which is commonly referred to as prank calling.
Yes, it’s hard to believe that something as mundane as prank calling could
prevent you from getting your CCW permit. It just goes to show you that getting
your CCW is a big deal and is not taken lightly within the government.
The right to carry a concealed
weapon is an important issue in American politics. Just recently, Wisconsin passed
legislation that changed their concealed carry laws from no issue to shall
issue. This landmark legislation made
front page headlines across the nation, showing the importance of citizens
being allowed to have the right to carry a concealed weapon. Currently the only
state that has failed to grant its citizens this right is Illinois. American citizens realize the importance of
the right to carry a concealed weapon, and it is easy to see that the benefits clearly
out weight the costs.
No comments:
Post a Comment