A Federal District Court Judge has ruled that
Washington , D.C. 's ban on carrying open and concealed
firearms. The case is Palmer v. District of Columbia , D.C. and Cathy Lanier. Predictably,
gun rights advocates are happy, and gun control supporters unhappy. If
appealed, the case may eventually go to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Criminal justice
empirical evidence on whether law abiding citizens (i.e., potential victims)
carrying weapons increases, decreases, or has no effect on violent street crime
like robbery is mixed. Some (e.g., McDowall, Loftin & Wiersema,
1995; La Valle & Glover, 2012) find that RTC -- right to carry --
increases violent crime including homicide, while others (e.g., Kleck
& Gertz, 1995) find that citizens carrying guns deters would-be attackers.
The evidence that laws allowing citizens to carry guns will create huge
reductions in street crime is weak. (For an excellent review of U.S. gun
policies & evidence on effectiveness, read Cook & Ludwig's [2003]
book chapter, "Pragmatic gun policy.")
The worry to gun
control supporters is, of course, the domino effect: if the precedent is set in
D.C., will other municipalities and states follow? In truth, day-to-day life in
D.C. probably won't feel much different. Some research shows that in states
that allow concealed carry, only small percentages of adults actually apply for
permits. Plus some are already carrying, despite not having applied for a
permit.
Gun control and gun
rights is a game of inches. Sometimes Team Control is ahead, and other times
Team Rights is ahead. Nothing much really changes.
Sources:
Cook, P.J. & Ludwig, J. (2003). Pragmatic gun policy. In J.
Ludwig & P.J. Cook (Eds.), Evaluating
gun policy: Effects on crime & violence (pp.1-37).
Washington , D.C. : Brookings Institution Press
No comments:
Post a Comment