Posted on 12/12/2011 3:56:50 AM PST by marktwain
Absolutely, people should be allowed to defend themselves anywhere.
Providing the option to ban concealed-carry handguns from "recreational facilities" was a bad change to House Bill 650, which became law on Dec. 1. It should never have occurred. The inclusion of that provision was a lame attempt by ignorant state legislators to water down the bill. The personal choice of some state representatives to refrain from carrying a weapon for self-defense does not extend to allowing legislators to take that choice from other North Carolinians regardless of the location in question. So, yes, concealed carry should be allowed anywhere in a park.
I have never met this newspaper's editor, but by his editorial, he seems like a reasonable, thoughtful person. Therefore, I would like to point out a couple of items for his consideration.
The question in play involves concealed handgun carry in parks. The important word is concealed. The moms and dads mentioned in the editorial's fourth paragraph would never know if a handgun is present. Nor would anyone know if the mom or dad is carrying. No one should be nervous or distraught, as a handgun would not be displayed unless absolutely necessary. This is taken very seriously by the ones with the concealed-carry permits, as part of the advantage over a criminal attacker is surprise.
As for referees and parents or spectators with pistols, I can only think back to my sporting days. I played sports for years as a youth. I umpired youth baseball games in my last years of high school and during college. I recall some parents getting out of hand and yelling or making inappropriate comments toward umpires or toward me when I was in those shoes. However, knowing those parents as I did, I would hazard a guess they would have been better behaved if they were carrying concealed. Carrying concealed is not a decision taken lightly, and if a parent chooses to accept the responsibility, he or she isn't likely yelling at umps at ball games while carrying, as that is irresponsible. If we can assume adults tend to be consistent in their behavior, good and bad, then it's not likely umps or referees would encounter responsible people behaving poorly.
Lastly, as for the "crossfire" comment, any notion of a "Wild West" scenario has never proven to be a valid concern, although it has been raised for years by anti-gunners. Concealed carry has been valid in an increasing number of states for years, and there have been no instances of the Wild West or gun battles at sundown. This concern is not supported by experience.
If we want to save children and lives, do two things that seem unthinkable or counter-intuitive to many people at first: Allow concealed carry everywhere and take automobiles off the road. The presence of concealed guns make us safer, which is proven by credible studies, and cars with bad or reckless drivers are as dangerous as can be. Why is it self-defense naysayers always talk as if guns kill people instead of people kill people, but they don't get worked up about cars killing people? Cars are far more dangerous than guns. Makes you go "hmmmm." (No, I am not advocating the end of automobiles.)
I got in a debate with a gun once. The gun won.
Me - “My opponent is a drunkard! He’s been known to take six shots!”
Gun - “Bang!”
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.