Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
Introduction
The question of legalization of weapon has always been a stumbling block in American society. Since the birth of the American nation open carry has been considered as a natural state of things. Now, the legislation of various states of the USA implies different approaches to the problem of the weapon legalization. Currently, open carry is permitted in 44 states and in 30 states there is no need in the license for bearing weapon in holster. Despite the constant changes in legislation aiming for either prohibition or permission of open carry, the ability to lawfully bear arms has been always a privilege in society. Historically, weapon has been always a symbol of a special status of its owner.
At the same time, frequent cases of shooting in schools and frequent homicides have made many American citizens to reshape their opinion concerning this question. Olson and Maltz state that «more than one-half of all homicides committed in the United States have involved a firearm… many have argued that it is the increased availability of firearms that has led to increased gun homicides” (748). Moreover, among the opponents of the weapon legalization there is a widely spread opinion that such sadly remembered event as the school shooting in Newtown might be avoided if the laws regulating the right of a person to possess weapon were more strict.
Other countries may serve as an example. For instance in Australia, where the same problem was especially acute in the 90th, the increasing legislative pressure helped to relieve this problem. In spite of the fact that criminal cases are rather frequent, the amount of murders has decreased, and what is more important there are no cases of mass shootings.
Historical background
However, in the USA it is rather difficult to implement the similar measures even after the frequent cases of mass shootings. It goes without saying that the level of violence is different countries varies. For instance, in the USA the crime level is higher than in Western Europe and is much lower in comparison with Latin America.
The roots of the America devotion to firearms go back to history. The American pioneer settlers have been struggling against native inhabitants and other nations. As the result of the European invasion, many indigenous nationalities were practically destroyed. At the same time, this fact did not guarantee a peaceful life for the first American settlers. Permanent colonial skirmishes with the Indians, the need to control slaves, and the Civil War between the states molded the territory of the contemporary USA into the area of the continuous fighting. In such a way, a person could not imagine his life without weapon.
Moreover, in the USA, and especially in such state as Texas, there is a widespread prejudice that the weapon possession protects an individual from the tyranny of the government. It is no wonder, considering the fact that the USA has appeared as a result of the rebellion against the British Empire. The right of citizens to form militia troops in order to struggle against the despotism of the government was one of the cornerstones of the newly formed state. Moreover, this right has been enshrined in the Second Amendment of the US Constitution, in which it is said that “a well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” (Lund 6).
Nowadays, when a regulated militia is no more than an anachronism the Second Amendment is used by the owners of weapon exclusively for the protection of their right to possess firearms, as if there might be a need to counter the threat of tyranny. At the same time, the Supreme Court of the USA has to accept it. As the result, the weapon possession is considered as the mandatory attribute of a free person.
Gun laws in Texas
All these tendencies may be observed in Texas – the state that is known to be the symbol of the American Wild West and the motherland of cowboys. At the present moment, in Texas there has been implemented a range of legislative initiatives allowing open carry in public places and concealed carry on the territory of educational establishments. These legislations have been signed by the governor of the state Gregg Abbott, who has pointed out that the given measure provides the realization of the right for bearing arms, which is guaranteed by the Second Amendment of the Constitution. It should be noted that the approval of these legislations took place soon after the attack of an armored man on the police department on Dallas. In this incident, the police shot him.
The new legislation will permit to bear arms openly for those people who have the license. The Texas House of Representatives also approved this regulatory change, which would come into effect in 2016. It must be admitted that far from everyone in Texas is satisfied with this innovation. The authorities of many Universities have argued against the permission on the concealed carry of weapon on the territory of their campuses. Moreover, the representatives of the police consider that this regulatory change will push the criminal situation in Texas into complication and will aggravate their job. The representatives of the Texan police department have appealed Abbot with the demand to put a veto on this legislation.
Arguments for open carry and concealed carry
These legislations have sparked a public outcry in Texas. The opponents of this decision think that the more firearms are distributed in society the higher the amount of crimes. Their arguments is that the weapon possession increases the risk of fatal outcomes. As Lott puts it “If guns are introduced into a violent encounter, the probability that someone will die increases” (355). Moreover, there are frequent cases when a murderer repents sincerely stating that the crime has been committed unintentionally. The argument of the opponents of weapon legalization is that “many murders arise from unintentional fits of rage that are quickly regretted, and simply keeping guns out of people’s reach will prevent deaths” (Lott 355). Sometimes the death is occurred accidentally as a result of a careless handling of weapon.
The advocates of this legislative innovation state that firearms in hands of low abiding citizens diminish the possibility of committing crime. Moreover, there are also gun control opponents who emphasize the advantages of open carry.
It is possible to distinguish several reasons why people prefer to bear firearms openly. Some of them want to underline their status holding themselves out as people who are able to defend themselves, their families, and their property. Some of them of them, by carrying weapon openly, want to show to the potential aggressor that they are armored and in such a way to prevent an assault. On the basis of his research Lott states that “surveys of convicted felons in America reveal that they are much more worried about armed victims than they are about running into the police” (356).
The main argument of these people is that open carry guarantees a certain tactical advantage in case of possible encounter. At the same time, those people who want to protect themselves but prefer to carry weapon concealed, point out several disadvantages of open carry. It is believed that a person, whose firearm is not hidden, becomes the first target of criminals in case of robbery. Moreover, the fact of the open carrying irritates surrounding people and makes them nervous. At the same time, Lott states that “by the very nature of these guns being concealed, criminals are unable to tell whether the victim is armed before they strike, thus raising criminals’ expected costs for committing many types of crimes” (357).
Conclusion
Apart from the arguments of the gun control advocates and frequent cases of gun violence, the legalization of weapon serves as a constraining factor for many criminals. In their research Lott and Mustard came to conclusion that
“if those states which did not have right-to-carry concealed gun provisions had adopted them in 1992, approximately 1,570 murders; 4,177 rapes; and over 60,000 aggravate assaults would have been avoided yearly” (1). The implementation of law that allows to carry openly handguns may be considered as a reasonable attempt of the state to guarantee the right of the citizens for self-defense. In spite of the fact, that this implementation has possible negative outcomes, numerous studies in this sphere evidence that the fear of a potential armed resistance is the factor that may prevent a crime.
Works Cited
Lott, John. “Does Allowing Law-Abiding Citizens to Carry Concealed Handguns Save Lives?” Valparaiso University Law Review. 31.2 (1997): 355-364. ValpoScholar. Web.
Lott, John and David Mustard. “Crime, Deterrence, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns.” The Law Scholl. 41.2 (1996): 1-38. The University of Chicago. Web.
Lund, Nelson. “The Second Amendment, Heller, and Originalist Jurisprudence.” George Mason University School of Law. 9.1 (2009):1-48. Research Paper Series. Web.
Olson, David and Michael Maltz. “Right-to-carry concealed weapon laws and homicide in large U.S. counties: the effect on weapon types, victim characteristics, and victim-offender relationships.” Journal of Law and Economics. 54.1 (2001): 747-770. The University of Chicago. Web.
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.