Statistics show over and over again states that allow concealed carry of weapons have decreased violent crime rates. The great state of Texas provides a clear example.
In 1996, Texas passed a concealed carry law. According to the Heartland Institute (heartland.org), within the first eight months the law was passed, Houston murder rates fell 18 percent, and Dallas murder rates fell 25 percent.
The same pattern is witnessed nationally. According to the same source, the University of Chicago conducted a study involving data from all 3,000 counties in the United States. The findings were remarkable:concealed carry laws were responsible for reducing murder by 8.5 percent, rape by 5 percent and severe assault by 7 percent.
So why is it that anti-gun Liberals are opposed to allowing law-abiding citizens to carry concealed weapons? The answer is simple ignorance of the statistics and irrational fear.
Liberals justify the trampling of your second-amendment rights in the name of “personal safety.” (Oddly, these are the same people who support unfettered first-amendment rights, even if “national safety” is threatened.) Somehow, Liberals actually believe tightening gun control laws will prevent crime.
However, it seems fairly obvious that criminals will be criminals, and they will continue to find, possess and use weapons regardless of what gun control laws are passed. Gun control laws do nothing except make it harder for law-abiding citizens to acquire guns. Sorry for the clich, but this statement is very true:if concealed weapons are outlawed, only outlaws will have concealed weapons.
This issue marks a crowning example of how Liberals govern based on “feelings” and Conservatives govern based on hard facts and practicality. Liberals say concealed guns make them feel unsafe. However, the evidence indicates otherwise:we are safer. Why is that? Because the average criminal is going to think twice before knocking off the local 7-11 because he does not know if the 90-year-old grandmother shopping for Twinkies is a pistol-packin’ mama.
The only legitimate argument that comes from Liberals against concealed carry is a normally levelheaded person may, if angered, use a gun when he just needed time to cool down or use a gun in a situation that only served to escalate the problem. These are two serious considerations but are both practically solved if those who wish to carry concealed weapons are required to take safety and training classes.
Concealed carry of weapons would undeniably make many environments safer. If pilots were allowed to carry guns, perhaps 9/11 would never have happened. If teachers were allowed to carry guns, perhaps Columbine would never have happened.
Now, do not misunderstand me. Guns are not appropriate in all settings. Any environment where tempers are prone to flare should not allow guns, for example, at sporting events. Also, it is probably not a good idea to mix guns and alcohol, so bars should not allow people to have concealed weapons.
The same restrictions need to be placed on the type of concealed weapons allowed. No one needs a fully automatic weapon, and surely nobody needs a concealed AK47 or a grenade launcher. Simple, semi-automatic handguns should be enough.
I think the case of concealed weapons is very straightforward:criminals will always have weapons (regardless of the law), and statistics show concealed carry laws directly lead to reduced violent crime rates. This points us to one irrefutable conclusion:law-abiding citizens should be allowed to carry concealed weapons (if they receive the proper training) for their safety and for the safety of the community.
A plethora of evidence already exists showing that concealed carry laws work. The trouble is getting Liberals to believe it.
Political hot zone appears every Thursday. Alex is a senior in microbiology. His views do not necessarily reflect those of the Daily Egyptian.