TexasCHLforum.com

Home > Opinion
8/5/08
In defense of concealed carry


By Roland Blumberg, Guest Columnist
PrintEmail Article Tools Page 1 of 1 There has been substantial debate on the subject of conceal carry in The Daily Texan lately, but regrettably, much of the information that has been presented seriously misrepresents and even falsifies the critical legal and moral aspects of concealed carry. Although publicly disclosing having a concealed-handgun license defeats its ultimate purpose (by doing so I help dismantle the anonymity of conceal carry that is so inherently important in discouraging criminals from committing crime with impunity), I will volunteer such in order to help reinforce points and add some much needed clarification regarding conceal carry laws, and more importantly, what actual limitations concealed-handgun licensees really have.

First, the eligibility requirements for a concealed handgun license deserve clarification. Texas state law allows eligibility to anyone who has not committed a class A or B misdemeanor in the preceding five years or a felony in the preceding 10. Aside from these state requirements, federal requirements concerning handgun ownership must also be met. Among other stipulations, a legal handgun owner must be 21 years of age, not be under a domestic violence restraining order, not be adjudicated as mentally defective, not be a felon and not be a known addict to any substances. Though the state recognizes the eligibility of a convicted felon to apply for a license after 10 years, federal law inherently excludes all felons from having guns.

Further, the all too common groundless, emotional language that suggests licensees are not adequately trained and potentially irresponsible enough to consume alcohol while carrying is not reflective of reality. Not only is it illegal for a licensee to be consuming alcohol while carrying, but it is improbable that a licensee would elect to behave in such a reckless manner. According to the National Center for Policy Analysis, a licensee is six times less likely to commit a violent crime and half as likely to commit murder as a member of the general public. This conclusion was derived from crime data collected from 1995 to 2000 in Texas. During this period, approximately 200,000 people received a license, and only six licensees were arrested for murder or negligent manslaughter. That's an average of one per year. The truth is that people who qualify for and receive a license are emotionally stable individuals who do not intend to break the law.

Although potential licensees do not endure harsh conditions and tactical weapons training like SWAT team members would during the 10 hours of required class for a concealed carry permit, concealed- handgun license candidates are educated on when and how lethal force should be applied. The required class strongly reinforces that having a license does not entitle an individual to enact vigilante justice on wrong-doers or police their own neighborhood and threaten hoodlums. Instead, candidates learn that a license only enables a person to be better prepared for a situation in which they must defend their life or the lives of innocent persons from criminals.

Also through the class, candidates discover that the presence of a firearm more often de-escalates the intensity of a situation rather than making it worse. In most instances, a criminal will surrender or retreat in the presence of an armed civilian in order to avoid being shot. And in the unlikely event that a licensee must use deadly force, he or she must be prepared to be arrested, possibly charged with a crime and maybe even face civil suit. No licensee wants to use his or her handgun to shoot someone unless he or she absolutely must, and the only reason one would ever have to shoot is to prevent the death and injury of the innocent.

After being the victim of a violent crime involving a firearm, I decided that I should apply for a concealed carry permit. My permit doesn't give me a false sense of security, but if a violent crime does occur, I know I will not have to idly stand by and hope for the best. Instead, I will have the option to react to the crime and end it without anyone, including the criminal, being harmed.

Blumberg is a classical archaeology senior.

... a felony in the preceding 10

seamusTX wrote:

... a felony in the preceding 10

- Jim

Not only is it illegal for a licensee to be consuming alcohol while carrying, but it is improbable that a licensee would elect to behave in such a reckless manner.

dukesean wrote:So Chas, just to clarify, there is no Texas state law that allows felons (violent or not) after 10 years to obtain a CHL, even if such a law would be rendered meaningless by federal law that prohibits felons from owning guns?

razoraggie wrote:

Not only is it illegal for a licensee to be consuming alcohol while carrying, but it is improbable that a licensee would elect to behave in such a reckless manner.

Really? .
And where might that law be found, captain amazing?

I know that this topic has been bled dry here, but being intoxicated (as the LAW states) and consuming are on two different wavelengths.

razoraggie wrote:

Not only is it illegal for a licensee to be consuming alcohol while carrying, but it is improbable that a licensee would elect to behave in such a reckless manner.

Really? .
And where might that law be found, captain amazing?

I know that this topic has been bled dry here, but being intoxicated (as the LAW states) and consuming are on two different wavelengths.

TDDude wrote: .....
Plus, if that was printed in the Daily Texan, the devil's imps are being issued show shoes right now.

razoraggie wrote:

Not only is it illegal for a licensee to be consuming alcohol while carrying, but it is improbable that a licensee would elect to behave in such a reckless manner.

Really? .
And where might that law be found, captain amazing?

I know that this topic has been bled dry here, but being intoxicated (as the LAW states) and consuming are on two different wavelengths.