Skip to comments.Concealed carry: Why the uproar?
Posted on 05/01/2012 3:39:33 PM PDT by neverdem
April 8, 2012, marked the anniversary of a law that affects the lives of more than 270,000 Buckeyes.
Ohios concealed-handgun license law turned 8 years old on that Sunday afternoon.
Notably absent from the festivities were blood in the streets, Wild West reenactments and an epidemic of accidental gun injuries. To understand the significance of this event and why today it seems completely unremarkable, simply Google Ohio concealed carry 2003 and prepare to be astonished.
The widespread carrying of concealed handguns, however, will result in far more cases of senseless killings that occur simply because a loaded gun was readily available. Ohio Prosecuting Attorneys Association, March 4, 2003.
Imagine your childs class is visiting the Statehouse on the same day a group known for violence is scheduled to attend in protest. State Highway Patrol, March 5, 2003.
If 200,000 to 300,000 citizens begin carrying a concealed weapon, common sense tells us that accidents will become a daily event. Ohio Association of Chiefs of Police, March 5, 2003.
Eight years later, we know definitively that these dire warnings were groundless. Ohio was the 46th state to adopt licensed concealed carry, allowing residents to obtain a predetermination of their legal ability to carry a handgun without facing potential arrest and prosecution. This number has since increased to 49 states, with Illinois as the lone holdout.
Of these 49 states, several, including New York and California, have a license that is technically available. However, courtesy of may issue laws in these states, it is nearly impossible for mere mortals to meet the arbitrary, subjective standards to obtain a license. In these states, bureaucrats have absolute discretion over whether to issue a license. A federal court in Maryland recently struck down that states may issue law on the grounds that these government officials are given power to freely discriminate against applicants for any reason. Indeed, almost all gun-control laws have their roots in racial or ethnic discrimination. In the next year or two, it is entirely likely that the U.S. Supreme Court is going to decide that all may issue systems are constitutionally impermissible.
Despite more citizens than ever carrying a gun for self-defense, the national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention statistics continue to show that accidental gun injuries are, if anything, decreasing. Further, unjustified shootings by licensees remain an extremely rare occurrence, and these occurrences are statistically insignificant, especially when compared to the instances of lawful self-defense use.
We now know that the burdensome restrictions contained in our original law had nothing to do with safety and everything to do with harassing those who would otherwise obtain the license. Originally, law enforcement insisted upon Ohio being the only state to micromanage how a licensee carried a handgun inside a vehicle. Ohio has since removed this micromanagement.
Ohio also originally forced licensees to disarm in order to use a bathroom in a park or highway rest stop, and this provision has similarly been removed. Similarly gone is the ability of Ohios newspapers to compile and publish lists of licensees.
Perhaps most important, it is now 100 percent clear that cities, villages and townships cannot interfere with the gun rights of Ohio residents. Gone forever is the impossible task of tracking and complying with a patchwork of 250-plus sets of gun laws across Ohio.
Ohios licensees are your neighbor, Little League coach, dentist, insurance agent and the person sitting next to you at dinner or church. Next time you see one, wish them happy birthday. Do not be surprised if they seem confused; like anyone else, they are probably wondering what all the fuss was about.
Ken Hanson is a Delaware attorney active in gun-rights legislation, litigation and lobbying.
I have a CCW and never once wanted to shoot anyone. My pistol is like seatbelts in a car or a helmet for a motorcycle: You hope you never need it but you will thank God if you do need it.
Thank you John Lott - where ever you are...
I have actually heard the “blood running in the streets” mantra from a liberal face to face. It’s one thing seeing it in print from the usual liberal talking heads, but quite another hearing it straight from somebody’s pie-hole with complete seriousness.
You never need a gun until you need one very badly.
We’ve heard those same dire warnings every time a state went ccw or any easing of gun control laws. The amazing thing is that the MSM repeats these dire warnings every time as if they are brand new.
Clouds Effect on Climate Change Is Last Bastion for Dissenters frontpage hit piece on Richard Lindzen of MIT
Some noteworthy articles about politics, foreign or military affairs, IMHO, FReepmail me if you want on or off my list.
I’d rather have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it.
I would say “excuse me, there are X number of states that have had shall-issue CCW for some years now, name me one instance where “blood in the streets” has ever come about!” and secondly, “You say nothing when criminals carry no matter what the law says, but let one law-abiding person seek to protect himself from those dirtbags and you think THAT is more wrong than the criminal? I think you’re the one who needs to examine their reasoning.”
When Kansas adopted concealed carry in 2006, what did Dodge City become?
You are so right!! Twice, at the moment I held a brand new gun in my hands, I turned and softly made a blessing upon the gun, “I pray GOD you are never NEEDED.”
If my prayers are answered, I will consider it the BEST money I ever “wasted.”
Nobody wants to. Having to shoot someone is only the beginning of the ordeal. Being temporarily arrested and disarmed. Not getting your gun back for years, and possibly in damaged condition. People who were not there armchair quaterbacking your decisions with the luxury of not facing possible death. Civil suits from the thug or their family. Tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees.
Thanks for the ping!
NBC did a special on Kennesaw, Georgia's, mandatory-carry laws about 25 years ago (in order to rage against them). They put up all kinds of videotape of "scary-looking" Southern redneck long-haired Swomp Thang guys wearing 1911's on both hips and piling into their "Smokey and the Bandit" Trans Ams (ooooh, scaaary!! -- LOL!), but then at some point they had to admit that street crime in Kennesaw had cratered the minute that ordinance passed! LOLAY, NBC Pukes!!
Not where states have passed ammended Castle Doctrine laws like Florida. I'm pretty certain the recent Trayvon tragedy isn't going to result in negative backlash on our so called Stand Your Ground defensive laws. Because of this law, the State Attorney is basically barred from bringing a malicious prosecution as would have been normal when Janet Reno was the State Attorney in Miami. Also, any civil suits by decedent's families are also barred in the event the shooting is ruled justified or excused. It's because other states often DON'T have this kind of ammended law on Castle Doctrine that I worry about retiring away from Florida to the place we really would like to live, someplace in the mountains of North Carolina. I live in hope that the Tarheel state will wise up and make their state more gun friendly.
I wish lentulusgracchus, but you're getting close. The bearing part of the RKBA argument would be much more advanced if Kennesaw, GA had passed a mandatory carry law.
From the current article that I posted:
Of these 49 states, several, including New York and California, have a license that is technically available. However, courtesy of may issue laws in these states, it is nearly impossible for mere mortals to meet the arbitrary, subjective standards to obtain a license.Besides the arbitrary nature of the Second Amendment in "may issue" states, there is an excessive or any fee argument. What other right is saddled with fees? Recall the poll tax. Make the states responsible for the costs of backround checks, and most will drop them like a hot potato, IMHO.
In the next year or two, it is entirely likely that the U.S. Supreme Court is going to decide that all may issue systems are constitutionally impermissible.
Some people dont think that far. The bullet travels farther than the person you had to shoot and you pointed it out well.
It aint like the movies.
It is only a problem depending on whose blood is running.
Also, I think your analogy to the poll tax is a good one.