ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1995, Roanoke Times
DATE: Thursday, December 21, 1995 TAG: 9512210052
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-14 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: DAVID HOLT
ALTHOUGH I am very weary of the arguments on both sides of the gun-control issue, I cannot allow Susan Glick's Dec. 11 commentary, ``Fla. puts guns into the hands of criminals,'' to pass without comment.
She presents the results of a study conducted by the Violence Policy Center of Washington, D.C., on the effectiveness of the concealed-carry law the state of Florida passed in 1987. Her presentation was primarily concerned with the number of criminals who should have been denied the license to carry concealed weapons, but who somehow slipped through the screening process.
It also presented numerical evidence that criminal acts were perpetrated by license grantees who had been deemed qualified by the screening process. With all due respect, Glick's numbers are meaningless.
In a state that has for eight years granted concealed-carry permits to thousands, the aberrations to the intent of the lawmakers she cited are pitifully small. They would appeal only to those who subscribe to the mystical zero-risk society scheme.
Therein lies my utter disgust with the argument. Both sides present numbers as if those of us who are truly concerned with our self-defense will be swayed by them.
Let me state once and for all the true issue of gun control: It's simply an issue of the primacy of the individual or the primacy of the state.
The United States of America is the only nation on Earth that was created upon an ideal - the ideal of the primacy of the individual. The state is created only to guarantee the primacy of the individual. The guarantee of individual freedom is the only reason the United States exists as the greatest nation on the Earth.
It follows that if the individual is to be guaranteed the freedom of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, he or she must also be allowed the absolute right to self-defense.
And if the right of self-defense is sacred, then the right to meet force with equal or greater force is equally sacred.
There can be no restrictions on the personal ownership of weapons that diminish the right to self-defense. Therefore, all gun-control laws are at the root immoral.
The issue isn't whether a criminal obtains a concealed-carry permit, or whether a child dies in a horrible accident with its father's gun, or how many innocent people would have died if an armed citizen had intervened when Colin Ferguson or Patrick Purdy went on their rampages.
The issue is whether we as individuals should be capable of our own self-defense or whether we should cower behind locked doors, afraid to venture out after dark, anxiously awaiting the 100,000 extra policemen that are promised but who are never there when you need them.
David Holt, of Salem, is a retired radio technician.
LENGTH: Medium: 56 linesby CNB