By allowing ads to appear on this site, you support the local businesses who, in turn, support great journalism.
Legalize concealed weapons not pot
Placeholder Image

Editor, Manteca Bulletin,
On TV today, the news and talk shows are touting the legalization of marijuana as the next best tax thing to help California.  Like the Lotto and Indian gambling, they say their taxes on this drug will pay for the schools, etc.

This sounds suspiciously like other deficit paying snake oil promises we have been sold in the past.  Actually, I have often wondered where all the money has gone that the Lotto was SUPPOSED to create for the schools. Indian gambling revenues were SUPPOSED to be in the millions, yet Arnold is now asking that state workers take more of a bigger pay cut  (Hey Arnold, here’s a tip, take away all of the money that goes to paying for all those clowns and their lackeys in the Sacramento legislature and you would have more money for California’s bills... put them all on a dollar a year like you are).

There is another legal way that would generate tons of money for California and it doesn’t promote narcotics and more junkies.

That is to make California a Shall-Issue State on the issuance of concealed carry weapons permits, like the other 37 states in the Union that have adopted that position.  The Sheriff in Sacramento was in the news recently for offering CCWs  to the folks in his county as he was losing over 300 deputies.  He understands that the good citizens are rightfully afraid as the “State” can no longer keep up the pretence of being able to protect the citizens.

For those who do not know, Concealed carry (CCW) is the legal authorization for private citizens to carry a handgun or other weapons in public in a concealed manner, either on the person or in close proximity to the person.

California is a “May Issue” state vs. a Shall Issue.  The difference is that May-Issue states arbitrarily tend to deny permits to regular folks. In many cases you have to be wealthy, famous, or otherwise influential to obtain a permit.

Ordinary people have to “prove” a need that is greater than the ordinary citizen to receive the permit.  The actual result, in way too many cases, is that ordinary citizens applications always seems to end up being rejected by the police agency for not being a legitimate need.

For example, a woman who is stalked and threatened by her ex-boyfriend or husband does not demonstrate a need.   The State feels that the woman should apply for a restraining order, which, as most of us know, means very little to her stalker.

A family living in a violent gang-infested neighborhood should move.

A real estate agent, traveling salesperson, or truck driver should look for other work.

Under no circumstances should a person be allowed to defend herself with a firearm unless they are at home (if even there!).  Lawful self-defense with a firearm in the home is not lawful when outside of the home in the shall not issue cities and counties of this State.

Arizona, and Oregon, and most other Western States, are Shall-Issue states and since adoption, have seen decreases in the number of crimes against the person, especially violent crimes.  This has been the case in all states with similar concealed carry laws.

Most crimes are committed far from any law enforcement agency or police officer. The police just can’t be everywhere at all times. It’s up to the good citizens of the United States to protect themselves.

Criminals are not all that smart but they do realize that if one out of every ten people walking around is carrying a gun, the crooks have to ask themselves: If I mug someone, I might get $20 or $30 or maybe jack their car but is this $20 or $30 or car worth dying for?

Thousands would apply for their CCW permits in California and the State would benefit financially, crime goes down, and the police may even find some stolen firearms due to the background investigations, and the responsible people are protecting themselves and their families, thus freeing the police up to handle other problems.

Will the “streets run red with blood” like the nay-sayers love to predict? This is the same old untrue fable that has been reiterated since the late 80’s. As all fables, this is told to teach, and in this case teach a falsehood. The other states that have switched to Shall Issue have reported just the opposite.  Crime against the person goes down rather than the other way around.

Warren A. Barth
July 10, 2009