Nationwide concealed carry, Part II: More guns on the street, or more of our own authority?

January 29, 9:31 AMLA Gun Rights ExaminerJohn Longenecker

Previous Next

2 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the LA Gun Rights Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

Is it smart to stop a crime in progress when police will not arrive in time? It is if the target is you and you have no choice. As with aging, consider the alternative. Millions of Americans suffer at the hands of criminals purely because they do not resist. Home invasions are in the increase, and so are abductions. Understand that much of the violent crime we are talking about are not squabbles over who did what to whom, some of which is best left to civil courts, but purely criminal acts such as robberies, sexual assaults, kidnapings, beatings and other aggression.

But if anyone choosing could carry their ability to resist grave danger wherever they had a right to be in the entire United States, would it come to putting more guns on the streets and contribute to more violence?

No, it would not. Because it is not a matter of more iron on the street that makes for violence, it is right now a lack of resistance in authority, your authority to stop your own injury, rape or murder. Or another child’s abduction. The emphasis is on your own authority to act in self-defense, and backing that authority with lethal force.

Is it smart to stop a crime in progress? I wouldn’t suggest intervention in a bank takeover, but here is a very good case study of what can be done compared to what was not done.

Twenty-one persons died in a Texas eatery for a lack of a response with lethal force in a case in 1991. One of those witnesses to the murders was a lady named Suzanna Hupp, a gun owner. The law at the time was that you could travel with your handgun, but that your handgun could not be brought into a restaurant, and Ms. Hupp complied. As murderers entered the eatery and killed her parents along with nineteen others, her handgun and the law did her positively no good, no matter what the lawmakers’ and anti-gun activists’ intentions. Ms. Hupp became a strong Second Amendment advocate and won a seat in the Texas House Of Representatives.

This scenario is played out millions of times every year in crimes large and small for lack of armed resistance thanks to laws which tie the hands of the very people from whom our police are selected. Or our Representatives. Anti-gun laws will never touch the criminals who find it so easy to get their hands on any weapon they want because they know their targets cannot. It is absolutely decorticate to enact law which favors crime so blatantly, and make no mistake: laws which disarm constituents on the grounds that shooting might occur are so wrong-headed it is suspicious.

January 12^th, Dr. Laura Schlessinger read on the air from my book, Safe Streets In The Nationwide Concealed Carry Of Handguns, "Disarming citizens merely to show how violent violence can be is unconscionable." Anti-gun programs become such a self-feeding, self-perpetuating, evergreen crisis, that growing violence results literally inescapably, which then sees a call for more and more disarming of citizens. Generations ago, a cadre of German Philosophers all agreed on one thing; that allowing conditions to deteriorate made for good governance. But it does not make for good government in the United States. Today, we see these German Philosophers’ influence in amazing, drastic policies seemingly prompted by high crime, from imposing RFID Chips to a National ID Card and beyond.

Get a handle on crime without criminalizing the honest and you can unwind much of this which is so adverse to the interests of the United States. We are not to be governed by the texts of German Philosophers, but by the words of those who escaped such abuses and who declared that we are the sovereign, not governments or German Philosophers.  

New concealed carry laws in support of our declared citizen authority, our right-mindedness, courage, integrity and moral imperatives in the public interest are being introduced as we speak, and I urge you to please write your representatives in support of these. One of the most impressive and effective is the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2009 (H.R. 197) introduced by Representatives Cliff Stearns’ (R-Fla.) and Rick Boucher (D-Va.).

With so many more gun laws (more than 20,000 of them), truly the status of the armed citizen is an accurate indicator of the overall health of our nation. Reversing gun laws – even the repeal of all gun laws – will unwind many, many programs which were built on the theory of fighting violence. While discouraging constituents from the very idea.

Internet search term National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2009 (H.R. 197)

_________________________________________________________________