Concealed Carry – Response to NY Times Editorial

Last week, the NY Times ran an editorial in which it condemned what they called the “scourge of concealed carry”.  The editorial stated opinion as fact, and fact as fallacy, both bad practices in the art of journalism.

In its final paragraph, the editorial insisted that Washington must become “actively engaged in making sure that the states stop allowing guns to get into the wrong hands.”  This would be some feat, if it were possible, and this is the substance of the fallacy: a person intent on committing a crime will manage to get his hands on a gun, whether or not the law allows it.  If he cannot acquire a gun, he will use a knife, a machete, even a baseball bat, or other weapon. In any case, illegal guns are rife in the shady world of crime, and easy for criminals to obtain (without a background check or registration!).

The principle of punishing the victim rather than deterring the criminal flies in the face of common sense. Further hardening of gun laws will have the reverse effect from the intention of stopping gun violence. The deaths of Americans who do not have access to weapons with which they can defend themselves and their families will be the cost. Any gun control that takes away that right, assured by the Second Amendment, will raise the level of gun crimes, not lower it.

The President’s home town of Chicago is one of the most dramatic examples of this principle. The city, which has what is arguably one of the strictest set of gun laws in the country, also has the highest murder rate of any comparable city in the world. Based on the number of murders per 100,000 population, Chicago tops the list with 19.4 murders per 100,000, overshadowing Sao Paulo (at 15.6), Moscow (9.6), and Mexico City (at 8.0).

In 2012 so far, more than 470 children were the victims of gun violence, and there were a whopping 2,640 shooting victims throughout the city. This is an increase of 433 shooting victims from 2011, and the year is not quite over.

Earlier this month, 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals tossed out Illinois’ ban on carrying concealed weapons this week. Chicago officials vowed to fight that decision “up to the Supreme Court”.

Here is what they are missing: a criminal facing the prospect of an unarmed population is empowered to both carry and use a weapon in the commission of a crime. In communities where concealed carry is permitted, the crime rate tends to be lower, because a criminal never knows when he will be facing the barrel of a gun. And a gunman who also intends to kill himself when his  killing spree is over has very little to lose by breaking the law by using illegal weapons.

It is the unarmed citizen who needs to be able to protect himself – legally – in the event that he or she becomes the victim of someone who has obtained his weapon illegally. The incident may be a home invasion, a carjacking, or a street crime; an unarmed person will be at a severe disadvantage when facing a criminal with a gun. The cases of people who did not die because they were able to defend themselves in such situations are legion. (See here for just a few.)

The NY Times editorial referred to vague “shall issue” or “right-to-carry’ laws” which it called “permissive”, neglecting to understand that these are state laws and each state has its own set of regulations which it applies according to local standards. The use of broad generalities in place of hard research and critical thinking does nothing to encourage the discussion or resolve any of the issues.

The hysterical demand that we “ban all weapons” is silly on its face. Disarming an estimated 80 million American gun owners would be an impossible job, and generate more resistance than almost any other action the government could take against its citizens. There is also the Constitution to consider. Specifically, the Second Amendment which guarantees that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”, which the Supreme Court has upheld.

It is time we left the growing hysteria outside and began a serious conversation about the real issues. We may never be able to stop the use of guns and other weapons in the killing of innocents. There is evil in the world that we cannot contain, despite our best efforts to do so, and there is mental illness, and passion, and a host of other emotions that make people do crazy things.

What we can do, however, is to approach the issue intelligently and dispassionately in order to find solutions that will curb the flourishing markets of illegal guns on city streets, without abrogating their Constitutional rights. Americans will then be safer, wherever they are, and we will continue to be a free nation.

Read the original NY Times  editorial here.