In this article, we would like to answer the question: Can Easing Concealed Carry Deter Crime?

Can Easing Concealed Carry Deter Crime?

In the recent past, there has been a myriad of debates emanating from the concept of concealed carry firearms laws. In regards to several studies and assessments conducted, it is authentic to attest to the fact that the enacted concealed carry laws have had both a positive and negative implication in the U.S. Nonetheless, a precise analysis conducted in the recent past further attests that adversities emanating from concealed firearm laws outweigh the positive outcomes witnessed.

This paper will articulate on the notion of concealed firearms and its implication upon crime rates in regards to David Fortunato’s article, ‘Can Easing Concealed Carry Deter Crime?’ Besides, the paper will further explicate on how the adversities emanating from concealed firearms could be solved effectively while featuring some of the policies and ideologies that have been kept in place either by the government or non-governmental policies check this link right here now.

David Fortunato’s article on concealed weapons argues that enacted laws that limit citizens from carrying concealed firearms have had a significant implication on reducing crime rates among the society.

Notably, laws allowing individuals to possess weapons legally has not only disrupted peace among the community but has also posed a greater risk to the entire state. Research conducted in the recent past seemingly attests to the fact that legal laws allowing citizens to possess weapons have affably contributed to the increased terror attacks in the U.S.

Furthermore, these laws have further led to increased crime rates in our societies, especially in learning institutions. Fortunato’s article denotes that concealed firearms policies have directly and indirectly led to an increased crime rate in our communities.

The article ‘Can Easing Concealed Carry Deter Crime?’ explains that public health institutions have been one of the most significant areas impacted by the enacted laws allowing concealed weapons.

Apparently, the increased level of violence in the community has led to a higher rate of patients being admitted to the hospitals with gunshot wounds. This notion has not only disrupted the public peace but also negated public health institutes which are forced to utilize their funds in treating patients with gunshots that could have been avoided. Furthermore, Fortunato’s article attests to the fact that concealed firearms among the society have led to increased death rates among the community which has affably resulted in increased mortality rates. In details, the article connotes that most of the gunshot patients admitted in hospitals are more likely to end up disabled or most probably dead. Notably, health practitioners further conclude that firearms violence entails a significant number of death rates annually in the U.S. compared to the annual mortality rates of male patients suffering colon and prostate cancer combined.

Besides health facilities, learning institutes have further been identified as one of the most significant institutes negated by the allowance of carrying concealed firearms. Notably, several research institutes attest that a large number of violence rates occurring in learning institutes especially colleges and universities majorly correlates with the concept of carrying concealed firearms. A brief analysis conducted in schools alludes that most of the cases related to assassination and homicide in our universities and colleges majorly emanate from concealed firearms possessed by students at schools.

Apparently, report articulated by the U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Department of Justice Office and Justice Programs alludes that the years 2012 and 2014 represent the highest number of gunshot violence-related cases in our learning institutions. Furthermore, the same departments further conclude that most of the cases reported are mostly perpetrated by students who are legally protected by concealed firearms laws. Nonetheless, both governmental and non-governmental authorities have initiated important programs to help regulate the impacts emanating from the increased public and institutional crime rates. Some of the ideologies delineated by this authorities are further explicated as follows.

  1. Having Armed Personnel at School

Apparently, this notion was in the recent past advocated by the Executive Director of the Rocky Mountain Gun Owners Group, David Brown. Besides, training teachers and other staff members on how to handle guns and other related weapons, Brown who is also a gun right lawyer argues that several armed personnel should be placed at each learning institution with the aim of providing security for the entire facility. Remarkably, this notion will not only regulate the increased crime rates encountered in learning facilities but it will also deter learners and teachers from carrying concealed firearms at schools. The notion has positively been adopted by several states including Ohio, New Jersey, and Colorado.

  1. Conducting Safety Programs at Schools

Seemingly, the ideology of starting safety programs at schools was initially suggested by Stephanie Ly. Stephanie Ly is the president of the American Federation of Teachers in New Mexico. Stephanie argued that the managerial department at various schools should initiate significant programs which should aim at educating students on the dangers emanating carrying and using concealed firearms at schools. The programs were to further point in ensuring that it prevents bullying cases at schools and creates a conducive environment for all learners.

In regards to David Fortunato’s article and the above-articulated notions, regulating the carrying of concealed firearms will affably reduce the increased crime rates in our societies. Furthermore, the idea of reducing concealed firearms will reduce the growing number of crime-related cases in education facilities and the reported number of gunshot patients in public health facilities.

Posted in Law