Posted on 12/04/2003 9:13:26 AM PST by myself6
Could anyone help me gather some research material for my sons english project. It seems that the teacher wants him to do a research project on CCW in wisconsin but has limited his information sources to .EDU .GOV and .MIL for internet, one movie (why a movie? that question is answered later), and one book.
The book is going to be "More guns less crime..."
Any good movies that are PRO CCW?
Are there ANY damn .edu or .gov sites that are PRO CCW and give stats??? I havnt found any.
I generally dont help the boy out with his school projects but the school is being unreasonable ( we all know why ).
Oh... The reason they allowed a movie is because they want the kids to watch bowling for columbine. When I heard that I about flipped.
hope someone can help with this request for resources.
www.packing.org
Wisconsin State Representative John La Fave 23rd Assembly District
Dear John,
I enjoyed our meeting as well as our discussion regarding AB-675. Thank you for your reply letter. Below are excerpts of your letter (in italic) dated January 15th, 2002, with my responses.
The bill, sponsored by state Rep. Scott Gunderson (R-Town of Norway), would allow people age 21 or over to obtain a concealed carry permit if they agreed to state and federal background checks, took a training course and met other requirements. It is estimated that a five-year permit would cost $75.
The price of liberty is now, apparently, eternal vigilance, plus an invasion of my privacy (assumption of innocence being a lost concept), plus training, plus $75.
It was recently and successfully argued before a Hamilton County Ohio judge (Case No.: A0004340) that Ohios statutes regulating concealed carry were unconstitutional, as they violated Article 1, section 4 of the Ohio state constitution, which states, "The people have the right to bear arms for their defense and security..." verbiage not unlike Wisconsins "The people have the right to keep and bear arms for security, defense..."
Last weeks hearing drew more than 100 people, most of them backers of the bill. The opponents, including groups that represent the states police chiefs and prosecutors, said that there is no compelling need for a concealed carry law and that more hidden weapons would make work more dangerous for peace officers.
As deep as my respect is for police officers, they are under no legal obligation to protect me, or even respond to my calls for help (South v. Maryland, 59 U.S. 396 (1856), and Bowers v. DeVito, 686 F.2d 616 (1982)). We are all, therefore, solely responsible for our own self defense (United States v. Panter, 688 F.2d 268, 271 (5th Cir. 1982), and United States v. Gomez, 81 F.3d 846, 850 (9th Cir. 1996)).
Professor John Lott, who analyzed FBI crime statistics for all 3,054 American counties from 1977 to 1994, reported, "No [CCW] permit holders have ever shot at, let alone killed, a police officer; instead, permit holders have on occasion saved the lives of police officers who were being attacked by criminals."
A check of the Million Mom Marchs collection of articles on crimes committed by CCW holders listed only three police officers being injured by gunshot wounds delivered by a single CCW holder ("Suspect No Stranger to Guns, Explosives"; Hartford Courant, September 4, 1998). All three officers survived. Of note is that the CCW holder was a former police officer.
And a survey released by the National Association of Chiefs of Police (NACOP) asked 23,113 chiefs and sheriffs around the country, "Do you agree that a national concealed handgun permit would reduce rates of violent crime as recent studies in some states already reflected?" According to the NACOP, 62 percent of those surveyed said "yes." (Top Cops Favor Concealed Carry Laws, CNSNews, November 30, 2001)
"This is just common sense that if everyone is walking around with a gun in their pocket, there is going to be more shootings," state Attorney General Jim Doyle said in an interview.
A quick check of other states CCW statistics reveals the percentage of Wisconsins population that can be expected to be issued a CCW permit should AB-675 ultimately pass into law; Washington: 4.98%, Connecticut: 3.54%, Indiana: 3.99%, Pennsylvania: 3.02%, and Florida: 1.6%. Single digits is a far cry from "everyone", as Mr. Doyle mistakenly believes.
Mr. Doyle may also want to re-consider his concept of common sense, given that England outlawed handguns in 1997, yet during this last year Londons crime statistics show muggings involving a firearm have risen by 53 percent, murders with a gun jumped by 90 percent, and robberies have increased more than 100% over the previous year ("Shooting For Mobile Phone Shocks Britain As Gun Crime Spirals", Associated Press, January 9th, 2002). England has only managed to disarm potential victims.
Doyle was incredulous at an attempt to repeal a ban on concealed weapons that has been in place since about 1870. "Its amazing that in the year 2000, were fixing to move the clock back not a few years but 130 years," he said.
Thirty-two states are now shall issue, and eleven are "may issue". Vermont requires no permit whatsoever, and coincidentally has the fourth lowest violent crime rate in the country (FBI Uniform Crime Report - 1999), behind three other states, all of which are shall-issue. Wisconsin is one of only six holdouts, which does not afford its law-abiding citizens the right to carry concealed. Mr. Doyle should consider that of the many states which have passed CCW legislation, none of them have re-considered. The trend is towards more states with concealed carry freedoms, not less.
But he [Doyle] called the concealed carry bill "extreme" and said he finds it "very difficult to believe that this would pass."
If Mr. Doyle considers the language of Wisconsins Constitution, which guarantees the right to keep and bear arms, and the legislation necessary to allow Wisconsins law-abiding residents to practice this right, "extreme," then it is unfortunate - for him.
Not to stray off the subject, but speaking of extreme, Ive unfortunately been made aware of some of the finer points of Mr. Doyles anti-terrorist legislation (SB363), which would turn millions of otherwise law abiding Wisconsin residents into instant felons merely for possessing ammunition. That, in my view, is extreme.
The most recent Wisconsin poll on the subject...
Excuse me, but my civil rights are not subject to the results of a poll. Thank heavens no one took a poll when Rosa Parks was thinking of sitting in the front of a Montgomery bus. And like Rosa Parks, I am not asking for any rights not already set forth in our state and federal Constitution rights that are being abrogated through the misuse and misapplication of Disorderly Conduct ordinances and statutes (Regulation of firearms in Wisconsin, Wisconsin Legislative Reference Bureau, September 2000, Brief 00-01).
However, in 1998 a referendum was placed on the November ballot, which asked: Shall the state Constitution be amended to declare that the people have the right to keep and bear arms for security, defense, hunting, recreation or any other lawful purpose?
The result: Yes - 1,205,873 (74%), No - 425,052 (26%) (Wisconsin Blue Book 2001-2002).
In light of the "overwhelming" results of that referendum, it is unconscionable that law-abiding Wisconsin residents are still being prevented from exercising this constitutionally guaranteed right, either through open carry or concealed. This bill, AB-675, begs to be approved.
I look forward to your reply.
Sincerely,
Not that I disagree with Lott, or his book, but liberals have convinced themselves that Lott's work has been "debunked."
Look into using one of Gary Kleck's books instead.
http://www.legis.state.wi.us/senate/sen23/news/ppa1.htm
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/guns.htm
FBI uniform crime reports, if he wishes to compare before/after violent crime stats in, say, Michigan, or another state which recently adopted CCW:
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/cjusew96h.pdf
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/10/311.html
Good idea! JPFO will gladly provide a copy!
2nd amendment, gun control and firearm legislation
I also recommend trying to find 2nd amendment related legislation, bills etc., then try to find arguments the legislators use both for and against.
You might consider searching the anti-second amendment websites because they will alert you to great legislation they are against. :) (million moms, the brady bunch etc)
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.