Posted on 12/04/2003 9:13:26 AM PST by myself6
Could anyone help me gather some research material for my sons english project. It seems that the teacher wants him to do a research project on CCW in wisconsin but has limited his information sources to .EDU .GOV and .MIL for internet, one movie (why a movie? that question is answered later), and one book.
The book is going to be "More guns less crime..."
Any good movies that are PRO CCW?
Are there ANY damn .edu or .gov sites that are PRO CCW and give stats??? I havnt found any.
I generally dont help the boy out with his school projects but the school is being unreasonable ( we all know why ).
Oh... The reason they allowed a movie is because they want the kids to watch bowling for columbine. When I heard that I about flipped.
hope someone can help with this request for resources.
www.packing.org
Wisconsin State Representative John La Fave 23rd Assembly District
Dear John,
I enjoyed our meeting as well as our discussion regarding AB-675. Thank you for your reply letter. Below are excerpts of your letter (in italic) dated January 15th, 2002, with my responses.
The bill, sponsored by state Rep. Scott Gunderson (R-Town of Norway), would allow people age 21 or over to obtain a concealed carry permit if they agreed to state and federal background checks, took a training course and met other requirements. It is estimated that a five-year permit would cost $75.
The price of liberty is now, apparently, eternal vigilance, plus an invasion of my privacy (assumption of innocence being a lost concept), plus training, plus $75.
It was recently and successfully argued before a Hamilton County Ohio judge (Case No.: A0004340) that Ohio’s statutes regulating concealed carry were unconstitutional, as they violated Article 1, section 4 of the Ohio state constitution, which states, "The people have the right to bear arms for their defense and security..." – verbiage not unlike Wisconsin’s "The people have the right to keep and bear arms for security, defense..."
Last week’s hearing drew more than 100 people, most of them backers of the bill. The opponents, including groups that represent the state’s police chiefs and prosecutors, said that there is no compelling need for a concealed carry law and that more hidden weapons would make work more dangerous for peace officers.
As deep as my respect is for police officers, they are under no legal obligation to protect me, or even respond to my calls for help (South v. Maryland, 59 U.S. 396 (1856), and Bowers v. DeVito, 686 F.2d 616 (1982)). We are all, therefore, solely responsible for our own self defense (United States v. Panter, 688 F.2d 268, 271 (5th Cir. 1982), and United States v. Gomez, 81 F.3d 846, 850 (9th Cir. 1996)).
Professor John Lott, who analyzed FBI crime statistics for all 3,054 American counties from 1977 to 1994, reported, "No [CCW] permit holders have ever shot at, let alone killed, a police officer; instead, permit holders have on occasion saved the lives of police officers who were being attacked by criminals."
A check of the Million Mom March’s collection of articles on crimes committed by CCW holders listed only three police officers being injured by gunshot wounds delivered by a single CCW holder ("Suspect No Stranger to Guns, Explosives"; Hartford Courant, September 4, 1998). All three officers survived. Of note is that the CCW holder was a former police officer.
And a survey released by the National Association of Chiefs of Police (NACOP) asked 23,113 chiefs and sheriffs around the country, "Do you agree that a national concealed handgun permit would reduce rates of violent crime as recent studies in some states already reflected?" According to the NACOP, 62 percent of those surveyed said "yes." (“Top Cops Favor Concealed Carry Laws”, CNSNews, November 30, 2001)
"This is just common sense that if everyone is walking around with a gun in their pocket, there is going to be more shootings," state Attorney General Jim Doyle said in an interview.
A quick check of other states’ CCW statistics reveals the percentage of Wisconsin’s population that can be expected to be issued a CCW permit should AB-675 ultimately pass into law; Washington: 4.98%, Connecticut: 3.54%, Indiana: 3.99%, Pennsylvania: 3.02%, and Florida: 1.6%. Single digits is a far cry from "everyone", as Mr. Doyle mistakenly believes.
Mr. Doyle may also want to re-consider his concept of common sense, given that England outlawed handguns in 1997, yet during this last year London’s crime statistics show muggings involving a firearm have risen by 53 percent, murders with a gun jumped by 90 percent, and robberies have increased more than 100% over the previous year ("Shooting For Mobile Phone Shocks Britain As Gun Crime Spirals", Associated Press, January 9th, 2002). England has only managed to disarm potential victims.
Doyle was incredulous at an attempt to repeal a ban on concealed weapons that has been in place since about 1870. "It’s amazing that in the year 2000, we’re fixing to move the clock back not a few years but 130 years," he said.
Thirty-two states are now “shall issue”, and eleven are "may issue". Vermont requires no permit whatsoever, and coincidentally has the fourth lowest violent crime rate in the country (FBI Uniform Crime Report - 1999), behind three other states, all of which are shall-issue. Wisconsin is one of only six holdouts, which does not afford its law-abiding citizens the right to carry concealed. Mr. Doyle should consider that of the many states which have passed CCW legislation, none of them have re-considered. The trend is towards more states with concealed carry freedoms, not less.
But he [Doyle] called the concealed carry bill "extreme" and said he finds it "very difficult to believe that this would pass."
If Mr. Doyle considers the language of Wisconsin’s Constitution, which guarantees the right to keep and bear arms, and the legislation necessary to allow Wisconsin’s law-abiding residents to practice this right, "extreme," then it is unfortunate - for him.
Not to stray off the subject, but speaking of “extreme”, I’ve unfortunately been made aware of some of the finer points of Mr. Doyle’s anti-terrorist legislation (SB363), which would turn millions of otherwise law abiding Wisconsin residents into instant felons merely for possessing ammunition. That, in my view, is “extreme.”
The most recent Wisconsin poll on the subject...
Excuse me, but my civil rights are not subject to the results of a poll. Thank heavens no one took a poll when Rosa Parks was thinking of sitting in the front of a Montgomery bus. And like Rosa Parks, I am not asking for any rights not already set forth in our state and federal Constitution – rights that are being abrogated through the misuse and misapplication of ‘Disorderly Conduct’ ordinances and statutes (“Regulation of firearms in Wisconsin,” Wisconsin Legislative Reference Bureau, September 2000, Brief 00-01).
However, in 1998 a referendum was placed on the November ballot, which asked: “Shall the state Constitution be amended to declare that the people have the right to keep and bear arms for security, defense, hunting, recreation or any other lawful purpose?”
The result: Yes - 1,205,873 (74%), No - 425,052 (26%) (Wisconsin Blue Book 2001-2002).
In light of the "overwhelming" results of that referendum, it is unconscionable that law-abiding Wisconsin residents are still being prevented from exercising this constitutionally guaranteed right, either through open carry or concealed. This bill, AB-675, begs to be approved.
I look forward to your reply.
Sincerely,
Not that I disagree with Lott, or his book, but liberals have convinced themselves that Lott's work has been "debunked."
Look into using one of Gary Kleck's books instead.
http://www.legis.state.wi.us/senate/sen23/news/ppa1.htm
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/guns.htm
FBI uniform crime reports, if he wishes to compare before/after violent crime stats in, say, Michigan, or another state which recently adopted CCW:
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/cjusew96h.pdf
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/10/311.html
Good idea! JPFO will gladly provide a copy!
2nd amendment, gun control and firearm legislation
I also recommend trying to find 2nd amendment related legislation, bills etc., then try to find arguments the legislators use both for and against.
You might consider searching the anti-second amendment websites because they will alert you to great legislation they are against. :) (million moms, the brady bunch etc)
http://www.fraserinstitute.ca/shared/readmore.asp?sNav=nr&id=570
Break out the camcorder and make your own movie, in which you cite the relevant passages from the sources you know will support the thesis. Bases covered.
Thanks!
I've heard the same thing and there is at least one individual who is trying to discredit Lott personally and professionally. I haven't read any of Kleck's work but have heard him referenced many times in the CCW debate. A book I found extremely helpful is a collection of personal accounts by individuals who successfully defended themselves with CCW:
The best defense : true stories of intended victims who defended themselves with a firearm. Waters, Robert A.
212 p. ISBN : 1888952970 (pbk.)$14.95 Nashville, Tenn. : Cumberland House, c1998.
Subject Heading(s) : Firearms--United States--Use in crime prevention--Case studies. Self-defense--Case studies.
I will make one caveat about the book--it contains some very graphic material. It is not presented sensationally, its intent is to impress on readers' minds the extreme danger the victims faced. This book is an excellent source of case studies because Waters collected accounts from the broadest cross-section of individuals possible. One of the men interviewed, a Vet from Houston, was an integral part of getting CCW legislation passed in Texas. If you do want to use the book and can't get access to it, let me know and I'll do what I can to electronically transfer the information to you.
I will keep looking for websites. Having only .edu, .gov and .mil sites to choose from is making this quite a challenge. One I'm sure that wasn't lost on your son's teacher.
Good luck with this project and remember FReepers are only a post away.
www.keepandbeararms.com
www.saf.com
www.2asisters.org
And here is some good stuff.
Send me your email in a private note and I have some word files on other states, like MI OH, TN FL, TX etc.
Ohio draws bead on bill similar to Michigan concealed-gun law
Toledo Blade 01 December 2003 | JAMES DREW
Posted on 12/01/2003 8:14 AM CST by Deadeye Division Ohio draws bead on bill similar to Michigan concealed-gun law
By JAMES DREW BLADE COLUMBUS BUREAU CHIEF COLUMBUS - Since the Michigan law that made it easier for citizens to carry concealed handguns took effect in July, 2001, the number of permit holders has nearly doubled and crime has dropped.
Backers of a bill that would give Ohio a similar law say the result - more armed law-abiding citizens and lower crime - could happen in Ohio if the legislature and Gov. Bob Taft break their impasse.
In 2000, Michigan had an estimated 4,109 crimes per 100,000 residents, the FBI says. The rate in Ohio was 4,041 per 1,000 residents.
According to data for 2002, Michigan’s crime rate declined to 3,874 per 100,000 residents and Ohio’s increased to 4,107.
"For over 40 years, Michigan’s per capita crime rate has exceeded Ohio’s; the new [data] proves all that has changed," said Jim Irvine, chairman of the political action committee for Ohioans for Concealed Carry, Inc.
Ohio is one of five states that do not allow concealed handguns. The others are Illinois, Kansas, Nebraska, and Wisconsin.
In 1998, as legislators prepared to revise Michigan’s 71-year-old concealed-carry law so more citizens could get licenses, attorney James Neal wrote in the Lansing State Journal: "If concealed handguns are allowed to proliferate in Michigan, it will mean more violence, accidents, deaths, and injuries."
Leaders of the gun rights movement in Michigan assert that Mr. Neal and other critics were wrong, but they are reluctant to draw a correlation between more concealed-carry permits and less crime. There are too many variables, they say.
"There’s no way of making any direct connection, but there is no place where there has been any substantial increase in crime all attributable to you and I having more freedom to transport firearms," said Dale Shantz, a resident of Elberta, Mich., who is president of the Michigan Coalition for Responsible Gun Owners.
"It’s one more piece of liberty," added Daniel Bambery, a DeWitt, Mich., attorney who represents the pro-gun group.
Bruce Gelispie, an Akron native who has lived in Michigan for 19 years, said there are several incidents that show how concealed-carry has prevented crimes.
He said last year a friend had left the General Motors plant where he works in Flint about 2:30 a.m. when he reached a blocked train crossing. A man tried to get into his car through a rear passenger door.
Mr. Gelispie said his friend, who has a concealed-carry license, pulled his 45-caliber handgun and pointed it at the man, who ran away.
"My friend then called the police. You always do that, because the person might have gotten your license plate and could call the police and say you might have pulled a gun on them," said Mr. Gelispie, an auto worker who also is a National Rifle Association-trained instructor.
Michigan’s less restrictive concealed-carry law hasn’t created problems, but there is no evidence it has led to a drop in crime, said Jim Kessler, policy director for Americans for Gun Safety, in Washington.
"One of the reasons is so few people actually choose to carry a concealed weapon. In rural areas, very few people are afraid of crime. In urban areas, people are more concerned about crime, but they think carrying a gun will get them into more trouble, will put their lives at risk more, and they’re probably right," Mr. Kessler said.
For 2000, Michigan reported an estimated 52,242 violent crimes in urban areas. The figure in Ohio was 35,112.
Last year, Michigan reported 50,097 violent crimes in urban areas. The figure for Ohio increased to 37,428.
Urban law enforcement officials in Michigan cited closer cooperation among agencies and improved crime-fighting techniques for the decline.
In the rural county of Hillsdale, with a population of about 50,000, Sheriff Stan W. Burchardt said the new concealed-carry law hasn’t had an effect on the low crime rate.
"Where the help might be is in areas where there are car-jackings or people are strong-armed robbed, but that doesn’t happen here," the sheriff said.
Detroit City Councilman Kay Everett said the law has given more business owners a "comfort zone" in Wayne County. But she said the debate pales in importance to efforts to crack down on trafficking of illegal guns in Detroit.
"These gun dealers are allowed to sell weapons on the open market and they get away with selling AK-47s. The federal government is not doing its job," she said.
Michigan has had a law enabling citizens to carry concealed handguns since 1927.
The new law in Michigan which took effect on July 1, 2001, was to address varying standards that county gun boards used to judge applications for licenses.
Before the new law was in place, county gun boards - which consist of the prosecuting attorney, sheriff, and a representative of the state police - had too much power to determine who received a permit that could be used throughout the state, critics said.
Applicants had to be at least age 18 and were required to demonstrate a need to carry a concealed handgun. There was no requirement for training.
In some counties, those without a felony conviction could get a concealed-carry permit. In others, retired law enforcement officers or security guards generally were the only ones to get them, Mr. Bambery said.
"We have 83 counties and we had 83 different standards to receive a permit," he said. In December, 2000, the Michigan legislature approved a bill that says county gun boards "shall issue" permits to applicants who don’t have a criminal record or a history of mental illness. Then-Gov. John Engler signed it into law.
Counting concealed-carry permits with restrictions, Michigan had 51,954 permit holders in 2000.
Nearly 30 months after the revised law took effect, Michigan has 90,369 permit holders, state officials say.
From July 1, 2001, to June 30 of this year, county gun boards have rejected slightly more than 1 percent of the applications for such permits. For example, the Hillsdale County gun board denied only 12 of 509 applications in that period.
The leading reasons for rejected applications in Michigan are county gun board decisions and residents with misdemeanor convictions. Although gun boards have less discretion than before July 1, 2001, they can reject applications by citing "clear and convincing evidence" of civil infractions, crimes, personal protection order or injunctions, police reports, other evidence, or "statements that bear directly on the applicant’s ability to carry a concealed weapon," according to the Monroe County Sheriff’s Department.
From July 1, 2001, to June of this year, about one-tenth of one percent of licenses were revoked, with the leading reason being applicants convicted of a felony or a misdemeanor. Crimes have included a rape, a felony assault, domestic assault, and alcohol-related offenses.
The low rate of applications denied and licenses revoked does not surprise Mr. Bambery, given the requirement that applicants pass background checks.
"The people who are exercising this right are really the people who have never been in trouble and foreseeably probably never will be," he said.
But the entire concealed-carry system relies on background check systems that have flaws, said Mr. Kessler, the policy director for Americans for Gun Safety.
In a 2002 report titled "Broken Records," Americans for Gun Safety said 401 people in Michigan who shouldn’t have been able to buy guns were able to do so despite background checks.
Utah is the only state that checks daily if a concealed-carry permit holder has committed a crime and if so, that person’s permit is revoked, Mr. Kessler said.
"It requires computerizing your records and cross-checking, which a lot of states have not done," he said.
Although county gun board meetings are open to the public, Michigan law exempts information about concealed-carry permits from the state public records law.
That prevents citizens and the press from finding out who applied for a permit and who has them, said Carolynne Jarvis, executive director of the Michigan Partnership to Prevent Gun Violence, a Lansing-based gun-control group.
"There’s no way to determine what the effect of this law is. We’d like to pretend there is, but there isn’t. The whole purpose of the way the law was put together is you couldn’t and it’s not accidental," Ms. Jarvis said.
In Ohio, Governor Taft - who has said for nearly five years he won’t sign a concealed-carry bill into law unless it has adequate background checks, training requirements, and support from law enforcement - surprised legislators recently when he said he would veto any bill that bars the public from knowing who has permits.
Backers of the bill say that cloaking who is carrying handguns is crucial to deterring crime. They also point out that the House version of the bill would require an annual report on the number of licenses issued, renewed, suspended, revoked, and denied - similar to information that the Michigan State Police provide. Mr. Bambery said the Michigan law has worked well, but he said some counties improperly have tried to add conditions.
The Michigan Coalition for Responsible Gun Owners recently sued Kent County, which has required applicants to provide a letter from their physician vouching they aren’t or haven’t been mentally ill.
The additional paperwork is unnecessary because applicants must sign a statement allowing county gun boards to access their medical records, the group charges.
Mr. Bambery, who described himself as a libertarian, said his criteria for evaluating the new law is a simple one.
"It’s how many citizens have decided they are going to exercise their rights to a concealed-carry permit. It has been a fairly significant number, but it has not been the rush that the critics were forecasting," he said.
Mr. Bambery is among those who don’t have a permit.
"I live in a small town. I have pistols and enjoy shooting them, and I took the concealed-carry training. But it’s not my thing," he said.
Last month, two men drove up to 22-year-old Johnny Donaldson, Jr., as he beat a 16-year-old girl with a metal pipe on the west side of Detroit, police said.
The man in the passenger seat shot and killed Mr. Donaldson and sped away. No arrests have been made and there is no evidence that the gunman had a concealed-carry permit.
But John Birch, president of a group in Oak Brook, Ill., that supports such laws and other gun issues, said he hopes the gunman does have a permit and will step forward.
"Stopping an in-progress felony is good citizenship. I think the fear level has been transferred from the victims to the criminals," Mr. Birch said.
They list the following website: www.gunlaws.com, or email: books@gunlaws.com
Wisconsin Concealed Carry Association
Address:
WCCA
3263 S. 45th St
Milwaukee, WI 53219
Telephone:
414.543.1916
Fax:
414.543.0855
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.