CONCEALED CARRY, the best affirmative action

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

Excerpted from Rutgers Law Review (1995) LIBERALIZING THE CONCEALED CARRY OF HANDGUNS BY QUALIFIED CIVILIANS: THE CASE FOR "CARRY REFORM" by John C. Lenzen

Other data indicate that more prevalent concealed carry may be a powerful weapon in the fight against violent crime in two ways: (1) empowering individuals to defend against violent crime; and (2) deterring the commission of violent crimes in general.

• First, the carrying of firearms by qualified civilians enables individuals to stop some crimes from being committed.
  
• Certainly there are instances in which it does not matter whether one is armed, for example, when a victim cannot draw his or her handgun safely. In these cases, the mere possession of a handgun does not force the victim to do anything unwise or unsafe. An armed victim is as free as an unarmed victim to succumb to the perpetrator. There are times, however, when victims may resist safely. Concealed carry reform empowers people to decide, rationally, when and where to resist.

Consequently, opponents to carry reform advance a number of arguments: that everyone will be armed and we will be surrounded by people "packing heat" (generally accompanied by a disparaging remark about the "wild west"); that ordinary arguments will escalate into shootouts, that those who are armed will "look for trouble" or be more aggressive than usual; that innocent bystanders will be shot by irresponsible armed civilians; and that it is statistically safer not to resist crimes than to do so with a handgun. Not one of these claims is empirically sound in light of recent statistical evidence and the experiences of the carry reform states. (emphasis added)

The empirical evidence from those states with liberal concealed carry laws strongly suggests that carry reform in New Jersey would not threaten public safety. Other data indicate that more prevalent concealed carry may be a powerful weapon in the fight against violent crime in two ways:

1. empowering individuals to defend against violent crime; and
   
2. deterring the commission of violent crimes in general.

First, the carrying of firearms by qualified civilians enables individuals to stop some crimes from being committed. Certainly there are instances in which it does not matter whether one is armed, for example, when a victim cannot draw his or her handgun safely. In these cases, the mere possession of a handgun does not force the victim to do anything unwise or unsafe. An armed victim is as free as an unarmed victim to succumb to the perpetrator. There are times, however, when victims may resist safely. Concealed carry reform empowers people to decide, rationally, when and where to resist.

Second, there is a sizable body of empirical evidence indicating that widespread concealed carry may have a deterrent effect on violent crime by causing criminals to fear that their intended victims might resist with swift and deadly force. (emphasis added) Statistical data indicate that private citizens already use firearms to justifiably kill significant numbers of felons. Quasi-experimental evidence illustrates that well publicized campaigns to increase the perception that the general population is armed correlate strongly with reductions in certain violent crimes. Finally, survey data gathered from incarcerated felons show that criminals are well aware of the danger posed by armed victims and adjust their behavior accordingly.

Taken as a whole, this evidence suggests that more widespread and well-publicized concealed carry may reduce the rates of violent crime by deterring criminal behavior. (emphasis added)

Do you live in a city or state where concealed carry is the privilege of the connected, rich, famous, favored, politician or cop and/or friends or relatives thereof?

Start a movement. Write to a representative, mayor, governor and/or legislator.