Sorry,I disagree with the whole concept that the police or anybody else "allows" citizens to carry guns. The police in this country are supposed to work as our agents,not our masters.
As far as the restriction for those convicted of violent misdemeanors, I'd love to hear from you why it's a good idea to give people who have committed violent crimes a license to carry a concealed weapon.
You can be convicted of a "violent misdemeanor" for fighting back with fists after being attacked. It's more common than not for the cops to charge both parties with assault in these cases. The question also needs to be asked "WHO gets to decide WHAT is violent?" Did you know you can be arrested for being violent by raising your voice to someone who claims this intimidated them?
HERE is going to be the REAL shocker for you. I also think violent former FELONS DO have the same rights to own and carry firearms that YOU do. If they are considered too violent or mentally unstable to be allowed to carry a gun,why were they ever released from prison or the mental institution to begin with? We used to have the concept in this country that once you had served your time,you had paid your debt to society,and you had the right to start over with all the same rights and privlidges as any other citizen.
BTW,would YOU care to explain to me WHY the lives of these people and their family members are of less value than YOUR life of the lives of YOUR family members? Would you really desire to deny these people the tools they need to protect their families?
Another consideration is the legal and political climate we operate in today. These days it's easy for the family member of a victim who was killed by a fellon with a legally licensed gun to sue the city, county, state or whomever they can blame for letting someone with a criminal history have access to a gun. I'm not offering this in support of keeping it illegal, just in explanation of why it probably is this way.