As a Virginia concealed carry permit holder, I feel compelled to reply to the editorial "Privatizing concealed carry database threatens public safety" (CT, Apr. 2).
First of all, in the Commonwealth of Virginia, any person who owns a handgun can carry it openly, Wild-West style, anywhere they want (with a few exceptions). Someone I know once openly carried a very tiny pocket pistol into a Kroger and was asked by his trembling cashier whether he was going to kill her.
It is not surprising that in this environment, those of us who wish to carry firearms on our person choose to conceal them in order to avoid the fearful reactions like those of the Kroger cashier. So, instead we go through the thorough and lengthy process of concealed carry permit application. Many of us do; in fact, you have probably encountered people like us at the supermarket or at the theater, or anywhere other than on campus or in a bar.
That should not give you pause because concealed carry holders are the most law-abiding citizens there are. In the absence of data about Virginia, I will mention that a study of Texas concealed carry permit holders indicated that they are 5.7 times less likely than the average citizen to commit a violent crime. In Florida and Arkansas, respectively, those with concealed carry permits are 300 and 1,000 times less likely to commit a violent crime. If average people were as law-abiding as average permit holders, the United States would have the lowest crime rate in the entire world.
Imagine the consternation we feel when those of us who have so diligently applied ourselves to obtaining the permit to carry a handgun hidden in public suddenly have our names published in a major newspaper for all to see.
Those of us who wish to carry a handgun in public do not wish to deal with the hysteria of some people if we openly carry - like with the aforementioned cashier - and also do not wish to be made a spectacle of by the horrific misuse of the Virginia concealed carry database by the Roanoke Times. It should be completely obvious why we want our names to be hidden from the public.
Second of all, I would like to say that the process for obtaining a Virginia concealed carry permit entails a criminal and mental health background check as well as passing a class, which demonstrates that you are adequately capable of using and accurately firing a handgun. I would like to know where anyone, usually those who loathe and know nothing about firearms, get off second guessing the Virginia State Police when it comes to firearms safety and qualification. The whole point of the Virginia concealed carry criterion is to establish a clearly defined set of conditions for the issuing of a concealed carry permit. Part of the reason this exists is to safeguard the right of responsible gun owners to self-defense from the irrational bias of those who fear guns.
As my final point, when the authors of the earlier editorial write "the average citizen can no longer check to see whether the babysitter to whom they entrust their children is packing heat," not only do they show themselves to be hopelessly biased by their use of the sophomoric term "packing heat," but they also show their ignorance of the law. It states that any person may refuse the right of a concealed carry owner to carry a firearm on their property. Any person can, for any reason, demand that their private property should remain gun free.
That should be the end of their problem with the privatization of the Virginia concealed carry database.
James Dorman
senior, aerospace engineering
Leave a comment 15 Comments Write a letter to the editor
All letters to the editor must include a name, e-mail, daytime phone number and affiliation to Virginia Tech. Affiliation includes: year and major for students; position and department for faculty and staff; current city for alumni and parents.
It seems that the problem lies in the public perception of gun owners / CCW. The author, and several others, make great points about gun owners and CCW holders are safe and responsible people. Their efforts should then be focused on spreading knowledge of the benefits of gun ownership, not trying to restrict the freedom of information and the freedom of the press. I couldn't care less if you own a gun or have a CCW permit. I do care if you are trying to limit public access to information and restricting what a newspaper can print.
Reply to this Top
If you want a list of 38,000+ gun owners (many CCW permit holders) or potential gun owners go to the SCCC websites. Hell, they'll happily tell exactly what they carry with pictures. I'd worry more about a tax on ammunition.
Reply to this Top
Why should CCW permit holders be in a database in the first place? What is the compelling public interest? Should newspaper publish the names of minors accused of crimes? What about the names of the victims of sexual assault? Should rape victims be publicized? What about classified information?
Reply to this Top
Eric Wood has genital herpes. Sorry, freedom of information and all that.
Reply to this Top
why would you take a gun into a Kroger then mock the cashier for worrying about her safety? that's pathetic. its pretty obvious that anyone would be suspicious of the intent of someone with a gun hanging out walking around a grocery store. don't act like permit holders are some sort of gift to the world either, its stupid
Reply to this Top
He wasn't mocking her, retard. He was pointing out how emotional some people are about guns. Hint: a robber / murderer isn't likely to wear a gun openly. He also isn't acting like permit holders are some sort of gift to the world. He's pointing out that statistically they're more responsible than the average citizen. Sorry you had trouble keeping up.
Reply to this Top
Mike, thanks for that deep, intellectual reply. You're exact type of person the author is talking about, someone who hates guns because "they're scary". Concealed carry owners don't want people to know they have guns (hence the whole concealed part) because of ignorant people like you.
Reply to this Top
Just like a person carrying a gun, a newspaper publisher should use discretion. I don't know if the policy of being able to obtain the information is all that awful, but the decision to publish all the data without thinking about the the pros and cons shows pretty poor judgment. Making an apology and taking off the list within a short time just demonstrated how little they even thought about what they were doing. I'm not pissed if my info was up for the world to see, I am more disappointed that nobody thinks about the consequences of what they do. Maybe that is why people are so nervous that others walk around with concealed weapons-they might be just as thoughtless as the newspaper industry.
Reply to this Top
Doesn't the fact that those people followed the legal process to obtain a state issued permit to carry concealed demonstrate that they are not thoughtless, at least in regards to carrying their firearms? I would say yes.
Reply to this Top
You would know 'anonymous', you're probably the one who gave them to me. Anyways, Sean, The Roanoke Times was well within the law to publish the data. It may have been a bad move on their part, but they have to right to make mistakes. If anyone was really angered over the action of the paper, then cancel your subscription and encourage all your friends and family to follow suit. All newspapers would quickly learn that it is not in their financial interests to make mistakes; there was no need to change the law.
Reply to this Top
Eric, do gun owners "have the right to make mistakes?" You seem to forget that media is more than just private business, operating on free-market principles as you state. They are considered by many as reputable and viable sources of information. Equating gun owners to sex offenders, as they did, is not really a "mistake" but an intentional attack on gun ownership; any investigation of their history would show this to be consistent with their values.
Reply to this Top
Eric Wood, The 4th ammendment calls for a right to privacy. Why _should_ a legal activity such as buying a gun or obtaining a CCW cause the individual to become a public figure? The only logical reason for this is to cause gunowners grief. It is the ignorance and fear of people like you that drives such illegal behavior.
Reply to this Top
It's always difficult to tell whether an image has been manipulated. However, site <a href="http://www.pskiller.com/">Photoshopped Image Killer</a> makes things easy. By submit an image URL you can see if the image has been altered. Altered image will get a red flag while original image gets a white flag.
Reply to this Top
I have no problem with reaponsible law abiding people having and carrying guns even though I don't choose to exercise that righ myself. But a few warnings to those who choose to exercise the right:
-The right as I said, is for "responsible" people. If you choose to own a gun and especially if you choose to carry it, you forfeit the right to make a mistake.
-It is your gun, so it is your responsibility. You don't have to keep it under lock and key as some have proposed, but you do have to keep control of it. If someone else takes it and uses it, with or without your permission, it is still your responsibility.
-Property rights supersede gun rights. If a property owner says that you can't have a gun on his or her property, commercial or residential, then their word, right or wrong, is final!! If you don't like their rules, then stay off of their property. If you want to change their rules, then offer to pay their property taxes for them. Other wise, the property owner makes the rules for their property just as you make the rules for yours.
The responsibility of gun ownership comes with the right to own a gun. It comes with the territory. If you can't live with the responsibility that comes with Second Amendment rights, the don't exercise the right.
Reply to this Top
I have no problem with reaponsible law abiding people having and carrying guns even though I don't choose to exercise that righ myself. But a few warnings to those who choose to exercise the right:
-The right as I said, is for "responsible" people. If you choose to own a gun and especially if you choose to carry it, you forfeit the right to make a mistake.
-It is your gun, so it is your responsibility. You don't have to keep it under lock and key as some have proposed, but you do have to keep control of it. If someone else takes it and uses it, with or without your permission, it is still your responsibility.
-Property rights supersede gun rights. If a property owner says that you can't have a gun on his or her property, commercial or residential, then their word, right or wrong, is final!! If you don't like their rules, then stay off of their property. If you want to change their rules, then offer to pay their property taxes for them. Other wise, the property owner makes the rules for their property just as you make the rules for yours.
The responsibility of gun ownership comes with the right to own a gun. It comes with the territory. If you can't live with the responsibility that comes with Second Amendment rights, the don't exercise the right.
Reply to this Top