illusrtation by Ben Ciccati

Article Tools

Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
iPod friendly
Comments

Bookmark This

del.icio.us.
Digg!
furl
google
newsvine
reddit
technorati
Facebook
Yahoo!

The recent tragic events at Virginia Tech, and our overwhelming sense of loss and grief caused by one person using firearms, most assuredly should focus our thoughts on the problems and the potential dangers of firearms in America.

The matter of whether concealed weapons permits should be issued more freely is highly relevant. Larry Rankin (“Slow on the Draw,” April 12) thinks they should and cites “evidence” that doing so makes for safer communities. He also faults Sheriff Bill Brown for failing to make these permits more readily available in Santa Barbara County.

In Santa Barbara County — by law — a permit to carry a concealed weapon must be periodically reviewed. In the past, these permits were automatically renewed. We are grateful that Sheriff Brown is doing his job in renewing concealed weapons permits only in those cases where necessary requirements are met. In California, an applicant for a carrying-concealed-weapon (CCW) permit must demonstrate a specific need for the weapon, and even then law enforcement may exercise discretion regarding the issuance of concealed weapons permits. In most other states, law enforcement offices are required to issue a CCW unless the applicant is a felon. These “shall-issue CCW permits” require a licensee merely to claim a lawful purpose of self-defense in order to obtain one.

Restricting the issuance of concealed weapons permits makes sense, despite Mr. Rankin’s assertions to the contrary. Lax issuance policies end up putting CCW permits in the hands of criminals, potential criminals, or disturbed individuals. Under pressure from the NRA, many states have relaxed CCW laws, and the results have not been good. According to the Florida Department of State, Division of Licensing, from April 30, 1997 through January 30, 2000, 1,041 Florida CCW license-holders had their licenses revoked for committing crimes after receiving their licenses. Data from the Texas Department of Public Safety found that Texas CCW license-holders were arrested for a total of 3,370 crimes between January 1, 1996 and April 30, 2000, including some very serious violent offenses. Texas CCW permit holders were arrested for weapon-related offenses at a rate that was 66% higher than that of the general population of Texas. A Salt Lake Tribune article in April 2001 stated that “scores of Utahans are having their CCW licenses revoked for criminal violations — including felonies and firearms offenses,” since the state began running daily background checks on its CCW permit holders. In the first year of the daily checks, the state experienced a 241% increase in the number of revocations, with the single biggest reason for license revocations being the fact that the permit holder was wanted on an outstanding warrant.

Large statistical studies have confirmed that CCWs most likely cause more — rather than less — crime. A recent exhaustive study by Professor John Donohue of Stanford University examined crime data across the country. The study refuted the research that the oft-quoted gun rights advocate John Lott claimed showed concealed handgun laws reduced crime. Lott’s findings — based on his 1997 survey — covered only a short period of time, during which urban crime was already rising, whereas Professor Donohue studied the longer impact of CCW laws.

Lott had erroneously concluded from his survey that concealed handguns deterred crime without being fired an astoundingly high 98% of the time. That claim allowed Lott to explain away the fact that extremely few people ever report using their handgun as a means of self-defense. Professor David Mustard, who co-authored Lott’s work, conceded that there were critical flaws in their study — flaws that seriously undermined their conclusions. Mustard was deposed under oath in the Ohio concealed-handgun case Klein v. Leis. Mustard admitted that the study “omitted variables.” This could explain that changes in crime rate are due to reasons other than changes in CCW laws. Mustard also admitted that the study did not account for many of the major factors he believes affect crime, including crack cocaine, wealth, drugs, alcohol use, and police practices such as community policing.

The 22 million guns in America — in addition to new guns constantly being spewed into circulation and easily accessed — whether due to lax CCW issuance policies, or any other means, legal or illegal, constitute a major societal problem. In 2002, 30,242 people were killed by guns in America — 83 people a day — including 17,108 suicides, 11,829 homicides, and 762 unintentional or accidental shootings (Injury Mortality Reports, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control).

Yet the illusion persists that a gun kept in the home confers automatic protection. In fact, it is 22 times more likely to be used in an unintentional shooting, a criminal assault, or an attempted or actual suicide than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense (Kellerman, “Injuries and Deaths Due to Firearms in the Home,” Journal of Trauma, Infection, and Critical Care, August 1998). And when someone is home, a gun is used for protection in less than two percent of home invasion crimes (Kellerman, “Weapon Involvement in Home Invasion Crimes,” Journal of the American Medical Association, June 1995).

Keeping a firearm in one’s home is a legitimate personal choice, but the promiscuous granting of concealed weapons permits creates unreasonable threats to public safety. Concealed weapons permits should continue to be issued only in very special circumstances. And, as the Virginia Tech massacre demonstrates to us, we must also employ other ways to keep firearms out of the hands of disturbed and/or criminally inclined individuals.

Comments

Discussion Guidelines

Currently:
Haze
Temperature:
55.9°
Wind:
6 NNE