Concealed carry not the answer [to retired Treasury Agent]

Concealed carry not the answer

Thursday, January 10, 2002

On Jan. 1, your Public Forum published a letter titled, "Illinois needs concealed-carry law." I would like to respond to that letter because the last thing Illinois or any other state needs is a concealed-carry law.

I realize that some misguided states have enacted conceal-carry laws to satisfy a minority of their citizens. Those states have ignored the right of the rest of their citizens, and visitors to their states, to go about their daily lives without being exposed to the potential danger of bullets fired by people carrying legally concealed firearms.

While I have seen no statistics showing that people are being accidentally shot daily by indiscriminate shooting from people carrying legally concealed firearms, I sincerely doubt that accidental shootings will not occur in the future. One has only to review news reports of the many people killed and injured each year by hunters legally carrying and discharging firearms during the hunting seasons to know that an intended target is not always a proper target, and it is not always the only thing shot. Those wanting concealed-carry laws should be assured that, no matter how well intentioned their actions, they can do more harm than good.

In addition, if they harm some innocent person they will no doubt be sued for every cent they have, or will ever have.

Legal carry proponents contend that crime statistics show a drop in crime in states authorizing legal carry. However, FBI statistics show that crime is down across the country. If concealed carry had even a small effect on crime prevention, I doubt that concealed carry is the answer to further drops in the crime rate. I am a retired U.S. Treasury agent, and I can tell you unequivocally that no law enforcement officer wants to rely on guns in the hands of the general public as a means of enforcing the laws of this country.

In addition, no law enforcement officer, uniformed or in plain clothes, while in the performance of his or her duty, would be happy to be confronted with a situation where a civilian either draws a gun, or is found to be carrying one for any reason. Despite the civilian's good intentions, such people would be in substantial peril.

Proponents of concealed carry say that there is no record of abuse of the right to carry concealed firearms, that an armed society is a polite society. To this I say, "Just wait. It is just a matter of time."

Just because a state has allowed citizens to carry concealed weapons, it has not automatically endowed them with good sense, or complacent tempers.

Lastly, if an armed society is a polite society, Afghanistan must be a country of very polite people. Just the type of society we need. Not!

Joseph A. De Leon
Orland 'Park

"Law enforcement is for the trained and motivated."

It is that point that I'm somewhat turning around on the author. I know that those who carry do it for protection. My point was: we're all members of society, so why should we rely solely on LEOs to provide law enforcement when we all know a crime when we see one usually. More toward your argument, let's all be allowed to register with the "Police Reserve" programs and become deputized. Isn't that the essence of a society anyway? Everyone is one the same page regarding how we behave in our society?

Hmmmmm, I'm not sure you understand, or I conveyed effectively, the context of that comment. I will say that I qualify myself as a gun nut. I also build things, and would qualify myself as a tool nut. I enjoy sailing, and would say that I am a boat nut. There was no disrespect intended by the use of the term; I wasn't being in the least sarcastic in my remarks in that or my following post. Perhaps I should clarify what may have been a confusing statement: I like the fact that citizens are serious about arming themselves and providing for the greater protection of innocent life; I like the fact that non-cops--often at the scene of a cluster first--may act to protect mine. I like the fact that my family enjoys the protection of folks who would have first the moral uprightness, then the means of self-protection necessary, to intervene on behalf of the innocent in defense against mean bad guys.

I said: "Wow we agree on something"

_Jim Said: One of those street-perps in Muskegon, Michigan robbed, then was preparing to rape one of my aged aunts IN HER OWN HOME -

- she laid him out with three shots from the .357 her late husband used to carry as a bailiff.

A firearm *is* the greatest equalizer ..."

I had a gang banger point a Glock at my head at about 15 feet away, he was about to kill me for sure. I lifted my weapon and unloaded my gun on him. Only hit him twice though it was dark using a .380 cult (small gun impossable to aim at night)(he lived). All for nodding, 'hi' to his friend as he walked past my home.
Was the scariest night of my life.

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.