Posted on 11/23/2005 1:30:56 PM PST by jdege
By ADAM A. MEYERS Racine, Wis.
I am a police officer with the Racine Police Department and a part-time police officer for another community in Racine County. This is strictly my opinion and I am not speaking on behalf of the communities or law enforcement agencies that employ me.
The Wisconsin law against carrying a concealed firearm has worked effectively for over 130 years. Deciding to pass a concealed carry law in Wisconsin that will allow almost every adult to carry a concealed firearm is a potentially dangerous decision.
Carrying a concealed firearm and deciding to shoot another human being is different from what is perceived on television, in the movies or while playing a video game. Allowing Wisconsin residents to carry concealed firearms may not reduce crime. If anything, crime may increase and there will be, without a doubt, more firearms in our homes and on our streets.
I strongly support the ability for people to defend themselves, but I don’t believe that carrying a concealed firearm is the only way to accomplish this. There are a lot of responsibilities that come with carrying a concealed firearm and being able to effectively use it against someone in their self-defense or in the defense of another human being.
I agree that retired law enforcement professionals should be permitted to carry a concealed firearm as long as they follow state and federal laws and those policies presented to them by their former law enforcement agencies.
I believe that there is no credible evidence that carrying a concealed firearm reduces crime and that passing a concealed carry law in Wisconsin will do more harm than good.
Why only retired Police Officers? Why not Veterans and Military Retirees too? Why not properly trained citizens, Security Guards, Military Reservists and such?
I'm too skeptical when someone advocates only allowing one segment of society to be armed.
I lived in Kennesaw, GA myself. It seemed like everyone was armed and I never felt safer.
The point of this story is that obviously, only cops are qualified to carry firearms. Us peasants just can't handle that kind of responsibility.
Here is a great example of someone we are supposed to wait for to come rescue us ignorant, unarmed civilians when facing a deadly bad guy. I think I'll keep exercising my CCW instead.
Didn't they just make Alaska a free carry state? Basically, you require no license, etc?
In fact, I KNOW it has. It doesn't jibe with your account, though that may have been the case back before the law changed.
Nevermind, I see that you responded to that fact.
Has there yet to be a locale where concealed carry was introduced that had an increase in crime?Murders in north Minneapolis went up dramatically, the year after shall-issue was adopted in Minnesota. That's the neighborhood just north of downtown, where all the '60's "urban renewal" projects were built.
Now admittedly, city-wide the total number of murders was unchanged. But the murders that did happen almost all seemed to happen in that one neighborhood.
I can see that the change from crimminals carrying concealed to everyone carrying concealed worries some people. But the only people that would worry would be crimminals.
I like my crimminals worried.
Why?? It might be reasonable to expect an increase in accidental shootings or in careless gun handling by untrained and inexperienced people carrying guns, but why would you expect crime to increase? No real criminal was ever deterred from carrying a gun just because of a law against it, breaking laws is his normal way of life.
I guess I should have said I wouldn't be surprised. But neither am I surprised that there hasn't been an incerease in gun related crime that I'm aware of. I heard it speculated that impuslive young people who think its all of a sudden cool to be packing might use a gun where otherwise they might use fists. As I said, speculation.
"It can be made satisfactory for use by a SWAT sniper."
Sir, you're fooling yourself. The only LEOs I know of that use the Ruger Mini series of weapons for anything are people employed as prison guards by the various DOCs. Why? Because their use for them is at extremely short range where inaccuracy does not matter (10 MOA accuracy is OK when your target is only 50 yards away), and they have a less-sinister appearance than, say, the AR series of weapons. Well, that, and they're cheap. Anybody, and I mean ANYBODY, who relies on the Ruger Mini series of weapon for any "serious social purpose" is a fool. You'll get more accuracy from the most crudely made and primitive AK clone out there.
As noted in a prior post, I prefer the Savage 12FV in .223 with a good B&W Elite 10X scope on top. 10 rounds through a single hole at 100 yards is effortless. The 12VLP in Ruger 204 is even better.
that's after accuracy work has been done on a mini 14. And usually so much is replaced that there is very little "mini 14" actually left.
And after their accuracy work has been done, you're spending more on a min-15 than you would for a good ar15.
I think everyone ought to carry guns -- but they should be displayed prominently, saying: "I'm packing, so I'll be a good citizen -- AND SO DO YOU". Only criminals would be bothered about not displaying it prominently.
Hopefully your doctor will be back in on monday and he can adjust your meds.
You'd be surprised how many otherwise conservative cops think this.
It's all selfish of course as they don't want to confront people with guns on car stops etc..if they can avoid it.
But their significant others likely carry "illegally" along with a business card with contact info of their cop significant other. It's a "cop to cop courtesy for their relatives" thing they don't get busted. Know it for a fact from my own days 10-8 so any cops out there don't bother disputing this.
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.