The Right-to-Carry Laws in 2012
By Jerry Walch, 16th Jun 2012 | Follow this author
| RSS Feed | Short URL http://nut.bz/rkha9dii/
Posted in WikinutNewsCrime
The one comment that I have received so far on my latest article, Do American's Really Want Stronger Gun Control Laws? read, “A shame that any honest person feels they need a gun.” The real shame is that so many relatively intelligent people think that disarming the honest citizen will reduce violent crime when, in reality, just the opposite is true. In the 41 states with a right-to-Carry law in effect, violent crimes have reached a 37-year low. Where is the shame in that achievement?
- Self-defense is a Fundamental Right.
- More Right-to-Carry Laws has proven to lead to less crime.
- The police are not required to protect you.
- The right to self-defense has been recognized for centuries.
Self-defense is a Fundamental Right.
Self-defense is a fundamental right of every law-abiding American. The Right to self-defense is guaranteed every American by the United States constitution and by the constitutions of 44 of the 50 states. The common law, and the laws of all 50 states recognize the right to use arms in self-defense. RTC laws respect the citizen's right to self-defense by allowing private individuals to carry concealed firearms for protection.
More Right-to-Carry Laws has proven to lead to less crime.
Violent crimes in the United States peaked in 1991. As a result, 24 states adopted “Shall Issue” Laws which replaced their laws prohibiting the carrying of concealed weapons or their laws that allowed the issuing of concealed carry permits on a very restrictive basis. Since then, according to a report by the BATFE (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives) many other federal, state, and local gun control laws have been eliminated or made less restrictive; and the number of privately-owned guns has risen by about 100 million to an all-time high. According to the FBI, Bureau of Justice Statistics, through 2010, the latest year for which statistics are available, the nation’s murder rate has decreased 52 percent to a 47-year low, and the total violent crime rate has decreased 48 percent to a 37-year low. Where is the shame in that?
The police are not required to protect you.
I am willing to bet that all you members of the Brady Bunch reading this did not know that. It is true none-the-less. In Warren v. District of Columbia (1981), the D.C. Court of Appeals ruled, “police personnel and the government employing them are not generally liable to victims of criminal acts for failure to provide adequate police protection . . . . government and its agents are under no general duty to provide public services, such as police protection, to public services, such as police protection, to any particular citizen.” In Bowers v. DeVito (1982), the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled “here is no constitutional right to be protected by the state against being murdered by criminals or madmen.” Think about that for a moment...how can they be expected to protect you since they cannot be within you 24-hours a day, 365 days a year.
The right to self-defense has been recognized for centuries.
Cicero said 2,000 years ago, “If our lives are endangered by plots or violence or armed robbers or enemies, any and every method of protecting ourselves is morally right.”
English jurist Sir William Blackstone observed that the English Bill of Rights recognized “the right of having and using arms for self-preservation and defense” as intended “to protect and maintain inviolate the three great and primary rights,” the first of which is “personal security.”
Sir Michael Foster, judge of the Court of King’s Bench, wrote in the 18th century, “The right of self-defense . . . is founded in the law of nature, and is not, nor can be, superseded by any law of society.”
Related articles:
Do Americans Really Want Stronger Gun Control Laws?
Comments
16th Jun 2012 (#)
I was not trying to imply we should disarm innocent people, only wishing we did not live in a world where people felt they had to have a gun to feel safe.
Reply to this comment
16th Jun 2012 (#)
Well stated Jerry, just well done, proof is in the pudding. Mark, we all wish we did not live in a place where we need guns but sadly, we do. Nice one, just plan facts, gotta love it. As always, thank you for sharing.:)
Reply to this comment
16th Jun 2012 (#)
Thank you Mark. Thank you Denise for reading and commenting.
Reply to this comment
18th Jun 2012 (#)
I can tell you any weapon is unsafe. I would stick with having a Super Soaker and squirting water on all my friends as that is what I do best. I make it through without getting a drop on me too.
I am on Facebook - write out there for the time being....
Reply to this comment
19th Jun 2012 (#)
Weapons aren't unsafe, Lady A, in the hands of someone who knows how to use them. People who apply for a conceal carry permit are required to take a course in the safe handling of their weapon.
Thanks for reading and commenting. As for your "Super soaker", will that stop a rapist with a knife? I really doubt it.
Reply to this comment
19th Jun 2012 (#)
Great article!
Reply to this comment
19th Jun 2012 (#)
Thank you, ICANANSWER
Reply to this comment
22nd Jun 2012 (#)
Very informative article. xx
Reply to this comment
22nd Jun 2012 (#)
Thank you Blossom.
Reply to this comment
24th Jun 2012 (#)
Excellent well-written article. Thanks for sharing!
Reply to this comment
24th Jun 2012 (#)
Thanks for reading and for commenting, John.
Reply to this comment
26th Jun 2012 (#)
Right to private defense is rightly justified.Thanks for sharing an interesting article.
Reply to this comment
26th Jun 2012 (#)
Thank you for reading and commenting, Ramalingam.
Reply to this comment
27th Jun 2012 (#)
Excellent informative article. Thanks for sharing.
Reply to this comment