MONROE - A couple of weeks ago, a colleague wrote a column about concealed carry laws. Shortly after the column was in the paper, I had people e-mailing me and calling me, asking when I would write my opinion about the issue.
I hesitated, because I don't really like to write replies to columns other reporters write. But I decided I had to say something about the issue, so here are my two cents.
First, before people write in or call to complain that I'm against guns, let me just say that I am not. I've hunted rabbits, pheasants and squirrels. I don't now own a gun, but in the past I have owned a 4-10 and enjoyed target practicing.
So, once again, for people who might have missed it: I'm not against guns.
However, I think there are a few myths about concealed carry laws, and I don't think people have thought the issue all the way through.
First, people can't use a gun to protect property. A gun can only be used to protect a person. A lot of people assume that if someone is stealing from them, they have a right to kill.
They don't.
If someone is stealing gas on a farm, the farmer can't walk outside and shoot the person.
If a person breaks into a home, the only reason a person in the home can defend himself is if he thinks the intruder is a threat. If the intruder is stealing a television set in the living room, the homeowner can't walk downstairs and shoot him. A concealed carry law isn't necessary for someone to protect themselves in their own home.
If a criminal is in the process of stealing your car, and you see him from the window of your home, you can't go outside and shoot him.
Second, the thought of more people carrying concealed weapons will create a more hostile environment between citizens and the police.
If a police officer stops someone for speeding, failing to stop at a stop sign or having a taillight burned out, the officer will have to assume the person in the vehicle has a weapon. They take precautions now but, with a concealed carry law, everyone will be suspect - regardless of age or gender.
The driver will be told to keep their hands on the wheel or exit the car, and the officer will have to search the car for a weapon. They'd do it for their own safety, but it would no doubt cause hard feelings between police officers and people who aren't carrying a concealed weapon. Police departments will receive calls from people who will complain they were treated like a criminal when they only were speeding.
Another myth is that if there is a concealed carry law, private citizens will be able to foil robbery attempts. You always hear someone say that if a fast food restaurant is being robbed they could get their gun out and shoot the robber.
Here's something I want to stress to these people.
I 'd rather take my chances than have Dirty Harry five feet behind me to the right, or Dirty Harriet five feet behind me to the left, pull out their pistols and try to take out the robber. I think it's more likely I would get shot by a citizen trying to be a hero than a robber.
And heaven help you if you see two guys with a gun stop a man on the street, pull out your weapon and demand they drop their guns, and then find out later, probably while you're in jail, that they were two detectives arresting someone.
And it's unlikely you would be able to defend yourself if someone walks up with a gun and demands your car. Hopefully, your gun will be in a case, in the glove box or under the seat. The only way a gun would be useful is if you were holding it while you were driving.
I realize criminals carry weapons and I understand people worry about their safety. Concealed carry laws often are a knee-jerk reaction to crime, as is the idea of putting everyone in jail and prison for every crime.
After the Virginia Tech shootings, there were plenty of people who suggested college students be allowed to carry weapons on campus. What would that have done? Immediately following the shootings, when police were trying to find the shooter, hundreds of students could have been running around campus with guns drawn, looking for the shooter or trying to protect themselves. Their natural reactions would have been to run toward the police as they arrived.
In the midst of all the chaos, how would a cop know if a student was the shooter or just someone who was trying to protect themselves? The officer would have seconds, just seconds, to determine if his life was in danger and react accordingly.
Knee-jerk reactions don't solve the underlying problems of crime or offer effective solutions as to how to curb crime.
Those are questions to focus on.
- Brian Gray is a reporter at The Monroe Times. He can be reached at
bgray@themonroetimes.com
I hesitated, because I don't really like to write replies to columns other reporters write. But I decided I had to say something about the issue, so here are my two cents.
First, before people write in or call to complain that I'm against guns, let me just say that I am not. I've hunted rabbits, pheasants and squirrels. I don't now own a gun, but in the past I have owned a 4-10 and enjoyed target practicing.
So, once again, for people who might have missed it: I'm not against guns.
However, I think there are a few myths about concealed carry laws, and I don't think people have thought the issue all the way through.
First, people can't use a gun to protect property. A gun can only be used to protect a person. A lot of people assume that if someone is stealing from them, they have a right to kill.
They don't.
If someone is stealing gas on a farm, the farmer can't walk outside and shoot the person.
If a person breaks into a home, the only reason a person in the home can defend himself is if he thinks the intruder is a threat. If the intruder is stealing a television set in the living room, the homeowner can't walk downstairs and shoot him. A concealed carry law isn't necessary for someone to protect themselves in their own home.
If a criminal is in the process of stealing your car, and you see him from the window of your home, you can't go outside and shoot him.
Second, the thought of more people carrying concealed weapons will create a more hostile environment between citizens and the police.
If a police officer stops someone for speeding, failing to stop at a stop sign or having a taillight burned out, the officer will have to assume the person in the vehicle has a weapon. They take precautions now but, with a concealed carry law, everyone will be suspect - regardless of age or gender.
The driver will be told to keep their hands on the wheel or exit the car, and the officer will have to search the car for a weapon. They'd do it for their own safety, but it would no doubt cause hard feelings between police officers and people who aren't carrying a concealed weapon. Police departments will receive calls from people who will complain they were treated like a criminal when they only were speeding.
Another myth is that if there is a concealed carry law, private citizens will be able to foil robbery attempts. You always hear someone say that if a fast food restaurant is being robbed they could get their gun out and shoot the robber.
Here's something I want to stress to these people.
I 'd rather take my chances than have Dirty Harry five feet behind me to the right, or Dirty Harriet five feet behind me to the left, pull out their pistols and try to take out the robber. I think it's more likely I would get shot by a citizen trying to be a hero than a robber.
And heaven help you if you see two guys with a gun stop a man on the street, pull out your weapon and demand they drop their guns, and then find out later, probably while you're in jail, that they were two detectives arresting someone.
And it's unlikely you would be able to defend yourself if someone walks up with a gun and demands your car. Hopefully, your gun will be in a case, in the glove box or under the seat. The only way a gun would be useful is if you were holding it while you were driving.
I realize criminals carry weapons and I understand people worry about their safety. Concealed carry laws often are a knee-jerk reaction to crime, as is the idea of putting everyone in jail and prison for every crime.
After the Virginia Tech shootings, there were plenty of people who suggested college students be allowed to carry weapons on campus. What would that have done? Immediately following the shootings, when police were trying to find the shooter, hundreds of students could have been running around campus with guns drawn, looking for the shooter or trying to protect themselves. Their natural reactions would have been to run toward the police as they arrived.
In the midst of all the chaos, how would a cop know if a student was the shooter or just someone who was trying to protect themselves? The officer would have seconds, just seconds, to determine if his life was in danger and react accordingly.
Knee-jerk reactions don't solve the underlying problems of crime or offer effective solutions as to how to curb crime.
Those are questions to focus on.
- Brian Gray is a reporter at The Monroe Times. He can be reached at
bgray@themonroetimes.com
