Devil’s Advocate: Concealed carry laws will change gun culture and help prevent mass shootings

In Devil's Advocate, Opinion
With the rampant spread of gun violence across America, the question of how to deal with the issue becomes more and more nuanced. Some believe that more states need to employ open carry laws so citizens can be armed in the case of an emergency. Others hold that law enforcers need to be more actively involved in communities to effectively fight crime. (Natalie Goldstein / Daily Titan)
With the rampant spread of gun violence across America, the question of how to deal with the issue becomes more and more nuanced. Some believe that more states need to employ open carry laws so citizens can be armed in the case of an emergency. Others hold that law enforcers need to be more actively involved in communities to effectively fight crime.
(Natalie Goldstein / Daily Titan)

America is obsessed with guns, and that fixation isn’t going away any time soon. The only reasonable and morally responsible thing to do is to address the issue as it presently exists.

All too often, TV viewers tune in to their favorite news anchor and learn of yet another shooting at a school, at a shopping mall or at a movie theater, and then go about their day. Political pundits and activists on both sides regurgitate facts and figures, but nothing ever gets done.

A favorite among gun control activists is citing the United Kingdom’s rigid gun laws and its relatively low gun violence reputation. For example, in 2011, there were 146 deaths by firearm in the United Kingdom and 32,351 in the United States.

No thinking person would deny this statistic or what it implies. The fewer guns we have, the less gun violence we will have. It’s simple math. But what this fact and its implied political plan fails to do is recognize the lengthy process of overturning America’s culture of guns.

Until we can largely eradicate America’s love of guns, we need laws in place that allow responsible, law abiding gun owners a means to protect themselves without having to break the law.

A criminal will carry a firearm, whether legally or illegally obtained, regardless of his or her state’s gun possession laws. A law-abiding citizen, on the other hand, will most likely not carry an illegal firearm.

In the event of an active shooter in any setting, unarmed innocents are left to run, hide and beg with little hope of survival.

We can reach for the Second Amendment right to bear arms to strengthen this argument, but is it not just a basic human right to act autonomously, especially in defense?

In the space of time between now and the hopeful future with a distaste for firearms, we need laws in place that allow people the means to defend themselves while simultaneously making it harder for criminals to obtain firearms.

In an article published in the database Opposing Viewpoints, author Alex Seitz-Wald cites a study which states, “Guns are used to threaten and intimidate far more often than they are used in self-defense.”

While that statement was made to defend gun control, it inadvertently bolsters the anti-gun control movement.

The very fact that guns are used more to “threaten and intimidate” than to defend oneself is because those who are being threatened often aren’t armed unless they are in their home or in a state that allows open-carry.

If civilians of all states were allowed to carry their legally purchased firearm, this statement couldn’t ring true.

The American government needs to put into place a system which allows responsible adults to be autonomous agents in a country with a gun fetish to rightfully defend themselves and others.

The process of changing the gun culture of America will be a lengthy and difficult process. Until we reach that goal, we need a good guy with a gun.

If you liked this story, sign up for our weekly newsletter with our top stories of the week.

You may also read!

CSUF baseball loses to University of Nevada, Reno to add to worst start in franchise history

After opening up its season with three straight losses, CSUF baseball faced University of Nevada, Reno in its home


Motorcyclist sustains moderate injuries after colliding with car on Nutwood Avenue near Cal State Fullerton

A male motorcyclist was injured after colliding with a car on Nutwood Avenue Tuesday night said Lt. Andrew Goodrich


Vince McMahon’s XFL wrestles with violence and player safety

Football reimagined. This is the idea CEO of World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc., Vince McMahon, pitched when he announced the

  • jsmith5893

    Re: “The fewer guns we have, the less gun violence we will have”

    The problem you have is that in 2010 (for example) there were 725000 violent criminals in state prisons and 15000 in federal prisons. This works out to a total of 740000 or about 0.238% of the US population which means that about 1 out of every 420 people in the US that have been caught have no qualms about ignoring whatever laws you pass and killing or injuring someone and the gun is often their tool of choice. So the bottom line is (1) The human race produces a few bad individuals prone to violence who just refuse to play by whatever rules you promulgate and until you find some way to identify these individuals and the courage to permanently eliminate them from society, innocent people are going to be killed (2) Because of these bad individuals, bad things happen every day to people who through no fault of their own were in the wrong place at the wrong time. Criminals will always have guns if they want them. If worst comes to worst they will be smuggled into the US from Mexico inside a bale of marijuana and sold on the black market.

  • Dean Weingarten

    “Gun violence” is a propaganda term. It makes no difference if you reduce “gun violence” and the murder rate goes up and the suicide rate is unaffected.

    In England and Wales, the murder rate increased with increasing gun control. The suicide rate was unaffected. Colin Greenwood first discovered this in 1972, followed by book length studies by Professor Joyce Lee Malcom in the 90’s.

    Greenwood discovered, in his Cambridge study, that gun control was passed because the elites feared an armed population, not for fear of crime.

    There is no epidemic of gun violence in the United States. The murder rate has dropped in half in the last 25 years while the number of guns in the country has almost doubled.

  • MasterWildfire

    It’s time to enact reasonable gun control laws, because the old gun control laws simply don’t work!
    So what new gun control laws, would those who ignore the current and more serious laws against rape, robbery and murder, obey? And why wouldn’t they simply ignore the new gun control laws just as they ignore the current laws against rape, robbery and murder?

    Then there’s the focus on “GUN DEATH!” WHY?!
    Why is the TOOL used by the murderers so important?
    A friend from high school, many years after high school, was robbed and had his brains beat out with a hammer.
    Of the many, many, friends and relatives at his funeral, I didn’t hear one person say: “THANK GOD! He wasn’t SHOT!”

    We keep hearing about “GUN VIOLENCE!”
    So how much of this “GUN VIOLENCE!” is ILLEGAL ACTS committed in violation of numerous laws totally forbidding the acts?

    So the real question we need to be asking is: Where has the cowardly ideology of “The more helpless you are when attacked with deadly intent, the SAFER you are!” actually saved lives?
    “Gun Free” Red Lake High School? – 9 slaughtered, 5 wounded
    “Gun Free” San Ysidro McDonald’s? 21 slaughtered, 19 wounded
    “Gun Free” Columbine? – 13 slaughtered, 21 wounded
    “Gun Free” Sandy Hook? – 26 slaughtered, 2 wounded
    “Gun Free” Virginia Tech? – 32 slaughtered, 17 wounded
    “Gun Free” University of Arizona College of Nursing? – 3 slaughtered, 5 wounded
    “Gun Free” University of Alabama (Huntsville)? – 2 slaughtered, 3 wounded
    “Gun Free” Northern Illinois University? – 5 slaughtered, 17 wounded
    “Gun Free” Umpqua Community College? 9 slaughtered, 9 wounded
    “Gun Free” Fort Hood 2009? – 13 slaughtered, 32 wounded
    “Gun Free” Fort Hood 2014? – 3 slaughtered, 12 wounded
    The “Gun Free” Century movie theater in Aurora? – 12 slaughtered, 70 wounded
    The “Gun Free” Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church? – 9 slaughtered, 8 wounded
    The “Gun Free” Chattanooga Recruiting Center? -5 slaughtered, 2 wounded
    The “Gun Free” Gabby Giffords meet-n-greet? – 6 slaughtered, 13 wounded

    And yes, the Gabby Giffords meet-n-greet shooting was indeed “Gun Free”, because while most of the victims COULD have been legally armed, NO ONE actually at the shooting took personal responsibility for their own safety by BEING armed.
    And no, there was NO “concealed carry holder at the Gabby Giffords shooting
    That was simply a LIE, told to encourage the stupid and cowardly, future victims, to stay UNARMED for the violent predators’ convenience.

    By the time Joe Zamudio arrived at the shooting scene, the goblin had already been disarmed and was no longer a threat.

    “Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” – Albert Einstein

    What “same thing” do we see being repeated “over and over again and expecting
    different results”?

    The efforts to DISARMING the intended VICTIMS!

    “OH! But a civilized Society shouldn’t NEED guns!”

    “He who goes unarmed in paradise had better be sure that that is where he is.”—James Thurber.

    How many of the politicians that are telling you, that “guns make you LESS safe and endanger your family” and that you “need to disarm” . . . are surrounded by armed security details? Why?

Mobile Sliding Menu