We are faced with numerous problems as we go about our daily lives. Worrying that anyone on the street might be legally carrying a concealed weapon should not be one of them.
The Wisconsin state Legislature is currently considering a bill that would allow anyone who is over 21, has a clean criminal record and takes a course in firearm safety to legally carry a concealed weapon. Wisconsin is currently one of only six states in the nation not to give its citizens such a \liberty"". The Legislature is expected to pass the bill soon, but the governor is anticipated to veto it. This means that the a successful attempt to override the veto would decide the legislative fate of this proposal.
The Second Amendment to the Constitution is universally understood by those on the right as giving Americans the right to own any weapon in any circumstance, regardless of how unnecessary its clip size or rate of fire may be. Unless deer running around the woods in Kevlar vests are becoming a nuisance, then this view of the amendment is highly suspect for the danger it poses to law enforcement and society as a whole.
Contrary to this right-wing interpretation of the Second Amendment, many legal scholars understand the amendment as pertaining to civil militias-that citizens would bear arms in case King George decided he was not ready to give up his old colonial holdings. Now that we have a professional army to defend us from foreign or domestic threats, the need to have a well-armed citizenry for the purpose of national defense is no longer valid. Thus, the relevant protections granted by the constitution are equally outdated.
The argument then progresses to the claim that even if we no longer need private firearms to protect us from Redcoats or Russians, we still need them to protect us from the average criminal on the street. However, is deadly force really necessary to repel street crime? Would a can of mace not stop a potential rapist in his tracks just as fast as a gunshot wound to the chest? Perhaps then it is not so much the retaliatory force of firearms we desire as it is our need to dole out our own justice to those who seek to transgress against us. Why force the legal system to take its unnervingly slow time when we can be judge, jury and executioner in one easy squeeze of the trigger?
Furthermore, instead of reducing crime, the prevalence of concealed weapons on our streets would probably increase the number of gun-related crimes. When enraged, even a traditionally level-headed person is liable to act in ways they would normally not. With guns within easy reach it is more likely that a heated situation will turn deadly. When in a fit of rage, instead of punching your antagonist in the face, as per traditional bar fight decorum, someone with a concealed weapon may unthinkingly opt to shoot their foe instead. If we remove the gun from this situation we greatly increase the chances it will not turn fatal.
Advocates of the proposed legislation cite the fact that only six states in the entire nation have a complete ban on concealed weapons as a sign that we are behind the times and need to modernize. Instead, Wisconsin should be proud that it is part of a small minority of forward-thinking states that have the common sense to prevent turning their citizenry into a powder keg waiting for the right spark to incite mayhem.
