Bit of a media turnaround
In The Atlantic: "The Case for More Guns (and More Gun Control)".
"Even the leading advocacy group for stricter gun laws, the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, has given up the struggle to convince the courts, and the public, that the Constitution grants only members of a militia the right to bear arms."
"I would much rather have been armed than unarmed. I was not, and am not, under the illusion that a handgun would have necessarily provided a definitive solution to the problem posed by Colin Ferguson. But my instinct was that if someone is shooting at you, it is generally better to shoot back than to cower and pray."
"I called [DC Mayor] Gray to ask him about his assertion that more guns mean more violence, noting that he himself travels the city with armed police bodyguards, a service not afforded the typical Washington resident. “
"In 2004, the Ohio legislature passed a law allowing private citizens to apply for permits to carry firearms outside the home.... When I called [Ohio Chiefs of Police spokesman] Gilchrist recently, he told me that events since the state’s concealed-carry law took effect have proved his point. “Talking to the chiefs, I know that there is more gun violence and accidents involving guns,” he said. “I think there’s more gun violence now because there are more guns." Gilchrist said he did not know the exact statistics on gun-related incidents (or on incidents concerning concealed-carry permit holders specifically, because the state keeps the names of permit holders confidential). He says, however, that he tracks gun usage anecdotally. “You can look in the newspaper. I consciously look for stories that deal with guns. There are more and more articles in The Columbus Dispatch about people using guns inappropriately.”
Gilchrist’s argument would be convincing but for one thing: the firearm crime rate in Ohio remained steady after the concealed-carry law passed in 2004."
"There is no proof to support the idea that concealed-carry permit holders create more violence in society than would otherwise occur; they may, in fact, reduce it. According to Adam Winkler, a law professor at UCLA and the author of Gunfight: The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms in America, permit holders in the U.S. commit crimes at a rate lower than that of the general population. “We don’t see much bloodshed from concealed-carry permit holders, because they are law-abiding people,” Winkler said. “That’s not to say that permit holders don’t commit crimes, but they do so at a lower rate than the general population. People who seek to obtain permits are likely to be people who respect the law.” According to John Lott, an economist and a gun-rights advocate who maintains that gun ownership by law-abiding citizens helps curtail crime, the crime rate among concealed-carry permit holders is lower than the crime rate among police officers."
His tip of the hat to gun control is essentially, stricter background checks and and more training for CCW permitees.
Also suggests normal capacity (hicap) magazines might be excessive and lets pass unchallenged an assertion that shooting back in the Aurora theater would have been a bad idea because the shooter was armored - early reports said the shooter was wearing body armor but the shooter had neither soft armor nor plates though his gear may have included plate carriers no plates involved.
Posted by: Clark E Myers at November 29, 2012 01:18 PM
As a resident of Ohio, I must comment. The Columbus Dispatch (or if you will: Disgust, Dogpatch) is most definitely anti-gun. So, if you read more stories in the Disgust about "gun crime" or mis-handling of firearms it is because of editorial selection bias.
Posted by: Marturion at November 30, 2012 07:02 AM
"His tip of the hat to gun control is ... and more training for CCW permitees."
Moving in the right direction, but still--nuts to that last suggestion! Why? Because the states that don't have a training requirement (PA, WA...) don't have any worse record than those who do. So before we allow the state to hold up your ability to exercise a human right, should the need be really, truly, obviously compelling?
Posted by: Kirk Parker at November 30, 2012 11:14 PM