Last Monday, October 14, New Philadelphia City Council passed Ordinance No. 31-2009 which repealed Section 549.12 of the city's Codified Ordinances. That Section basically prohibited the carrying of guns in City owned buildings.
The repeal of that ordinance makes sense. The Ohio Revised Code lists places where weapons are not permitted. If you are interested you can look those up in Ohio Revised Code 2923.126. Secondly, the carrying of concealed weapons significantly lowers crime rates.
While repeal of 31-2009 was being considered, there were a number of comments made to the media about the terrible carnage which was surely to follow. A number of folks said they were not going to go to New Philadelphia's parks anymore as they fear for the safety of their families. It is difficult to understand their concern in light of the facts. The evidence is overwhelming that legally carrying a concealed weapon decreases crime.
The facts speak for themselves. Those cities with the most numerous, and strictest, gun controls are the ones with the highest crime rates, including murder. Two years ago, Chicago had a crime rate of 1,179 per hundred thousand population, which included 443 murders. At the same time, New York City had a crime rate of 614 cases per hundred thousand, about half that of Chicago, but still experienced 496 murders. Both these cities have extremely stringent and restrictive gun laws. Gun laws just don't work. Criminals don't obey the law, so where is the surprise that criminals carry, and use, weapons against unarmed citizens?
Economist John R. Lott, author of More Guns, Less Crime (Chicago University Press), said, “Letting law-abiding citizens carry guns reduces the rate at which criminals are carrying guns.” He went on to say that armed citizens increase the risk to armed criminals, who typically prefer to avoid life-threatening risk and so are less likely to use guns in the commission of a crime. Lott explained that where there is an increase in CCPs (Concealed Carry Permits), there is also a drop in violent crime relative to property crime -- fewer armed robberies and more larcenies. Also, criminals tend to move from areas in which more citizens are armed, resulting in an increase in crime in counties and states that restrict gun ownership and CCPs.
New Philadelphia Police Chief Jeff Urban, who originally requested the ordinance repeal, feels strongly about the issue of citizens and weapon possession. He is a strong advocate of the Second Amendment of the Constitution which guarantees the right for a citizen to possess, carry, and use a weapon for his protection. He points out that the Ohio Constitution guarantees that right as well. It is legal in Ohio to carry a firearm in the open, or concealed with the proper Concealed Carry Permit, anywhere in the state except where restricted by law, such as in court houses, police stations, prisons, and the like.
On this, Chief Urban and I agree. The right to carry a weapon, the ability to carry it concealed with a proper Concealed Carry Permit, and the right to defend one's self by its use, is a right which should be honored and protected.
The repeal of that ordinance makes sense. The Ohio Revised Code lists places where weapons are not permitted. If you are interested you can look those up in Ohio Revised Code 2923.126. Secondly, the carrying of concealed weapons significantly lowers crime rates.
While repeal of 31-2009 was being considered, there were a number of comments made to the media about the terrible carnage which was surely to follow. A number of folks said they were not going to go to New Philadelphia's parks anymore as they fear for the safety of their families. It is difficult to understand their concern in light of the facts. The evidence is overwhelming that legally carrying a concealed weapon decreases crime.
The facts speak for themselves. Those cities with the most numerous, and strictest, gun controls are the ones with the highest crime rates, including murder. Two years ago, Chicago had a crime rate of 1,179 per hundred thousand population, which included 443 murders. At the same time, New York City had a crime rate of 614 cases per hundred thousand, about half that of Chicago, but still experienced 496 murders. Both these cities have extremely stringent and restrictive gun laws. Gun laws just don't work. Criminals don't obey the law, so where is the surprise that criminals carry, and use, weapons against unarmed citizens?
Economist John R. Lott, author of More Guns, Less Crime (Chicago University Press), said, “Letting law-abiding citizens carry guns reduces the rate at which criminals are carrying guns.” He went on to say that armed citizens increase the risk to armed criminals, who typically prefer to avoid life-threatening risk and so are less likely to use guns in the commission of a crime. Lott explained that where there is an increase in CCPs (Concealed Carry Permits), there is also a drop in violent crime relative to property crime -- fewer armed robberies and more larcenies. Also, criminals tend to move from areas in which more citizens are armed, resulting in an increase in crime in counties and states that restrict gun ownership and CCPs.
New Philadelphia Police Chief Jeff Urban, who originally requested the ordinance repeal, feels strongly about the issue of citizens and weapon possession. He is a strong advocate of the Second Amendment of the Constitution which guarantees the right for a citizen to possess, carry, and use a weapon for his protection. He points out that the Ohio Constitution guarantees that right as well. It is legal in Ohio to carry a firearm in the open, or concealed with the proper Concealed Carry Permit, anywhere in the state except where restricted by law, such as in court houses, police stations, prisons, and the like.
On this, Chief Urban and I agree. The right to carry a weapon, the ability to carry it concealed with a proper Concealed Carry Permit, and the right to defend one's self by its use, is a right which should be honored and protected.
I have to agree with you on this one, Bob.
ReplyDelete