It comes as no surprise to myself and many others that the place in this country with the highest number of violent crimes per capita is also the place with the strictest gun laws. If I was a criminal and looking for the easiest person to rob, I would look for someone who I knew would not have anyway of protecting themselves. It is obvious that the reason that Washington DC has the highest violent crime rate in this country is because they also have the strictest gun laws.
 
Taking away someone’s Constitutional right to bear arms and protect themselves is not only un-American but reckless endangerment. As a citizen of this great country I should be allowed to protect myself and my family from those who would do me harm. The US Constitution gives me this right; unfortunately closed minded individuals have taken away this right in much of this country.
 
Using Washington DC as an example, we can see that strict gun laws in no way decrease crime, just the opposite. It gives criminals more opportunity with less risk. This country currently has gun laws on the books that are meant to keep guns out of criminals' hands, unfortunately criminals do not care about laws, which is why there are criminals. Maybe if we did a better job protecting our citizens and enforcing our current gun laws crime would be lower. Taking away a law abiding citizen’s right to bear arms is just making him a potential target.
 
Eleanor Holmes Norton, the District of Columbia’s nonvoting delegate to the House, made a comment about the Senate-approved provision to remove the District’s restrictions on semiautomatic firearms and gun registration requirements. She said that the provision “is so reckless and radical that it puts at risk everybody from the president down to the kids that the amendment would allow to possess weapons.” Representative Norton needs to get her facts straight. The amendment does not allow kids to purchase firearms; you must be twenty-one years old to legally purchase a hand-gun and eighteen years old to legally purchase a shot-gun or rifle from a gun dealer holding a Federal Firearms License. The problem is that the guns used in most crimes are illegally obtained and in no way affect by this piece of legislation.
 
What I would consider reckless and radical is the fact that I can not carry a semi-automatic pistol concealed to protect myself in the most violent city in this country. The current firearm laws in Washington DC are putting everybody at risk, not the proposed legislation; which in my opinion does not go far enough in giving me rights to protect myself.
 
By giving citizens back their Second Amendment right to bear arms we will allow them to protect themselves from the criminal element that is preying on them. It is in my opinion that Washington DC, as well as other parts of this country, need to allow their citizens the right to bear arms and also allow them the opportunity to carry these weapons concealed. Only qualified individuals who pass an FBI background check and can show proficiency with a firearm will be granted a concealed carry permit. Currently, the only individuals who carry concealed weapons in Washington DC are law enforcement and criminals; it would be nice if the rest of us could.
 
The only people who need to fear qualified law abiding citizens carrying guns are criminals. And maybe it is time we put some fear in them; since law enforcement and our justice system hasn’t. It is time we stop worrying about adding more gun laws to books and start enforcing the ones we currently have. And we need to allow concealed carry for qualified permit holding citizens nationwide.
Senior Editor 00buck.org