A Concealed Weapons Permit - is it really necessary?

What is a concealed weapons permit, what is it supposed to do, and is it really needed to help ensure our safety?

These are three good questions with really simple answers that I'll provide you with in this article.

Remember, you'll be getting answers from a Libertarian that believes in the natural right of self-defense, so be prepared for answers that resonate with freedom, rights and justice.

Let me answer these questions, and then offer discussion.

First, a permit to carry a concealed weapon is just another way your government attempts to control your behavior. It is a licensing of your right to bear arms, perhaps the only enumerated right that we openly license.

Second, the whole idea behind the concealed weapons permit process is to make certain that only the "good guys" are carrying guns and other concealed weapons out there among the rest of us. It is designed to keep guns out of the hands of the "bad guys" and thereby prevent violent crime.

Third, the whole idea of a concealed weapons permit is absolutely unnecessary because the process only applies to the law abiding. As you'll probably come to agree, the law abiding are the ones who we shouldn't have concern about in the first place, so why try to regulate their actions?

In the following discussion, I'll use the terms concealed weapons permit, concealed carry permit and concealed firearms permit interchangeably. They are the same thing. The variation in terminology stems from how some law enforcement agencies in various states prefer to call their concealed weapons permit.

A Little Background on the Subject

Gun control has been with us for many generations. A concealed weapons permit is just another form of it. Let's look at three examples of gun control to see that regardless of the intentions, it really only punishes the innocent and law-abiding among us, and does nothing but benefit the criminal-minded.

Some of the early forms of gun control took the form of laws that forbade former slaves from owning firearms. This effectively disarmed a specific group of citizens so they would be defenseless in the face of racists and others that wanted to retain power and control over blacks.

In 1934, congress passed the National Firearms Act that required an application for a license and a tax of $200 to be paid before a citizen could own a machine gun. This was supposed to cut down on criminal use of machine guns, but as you can imagine, the $200 fee back in 1934 (when an apartment rented for $15 a month and cheese was 24 cents a pound) only deterred average citizens from owning a gun that could operate in a fully automatic mode.

Some states prohibit ownership of machine guns, so even if you wanted to (legally) own one, you couldn't get a license if you were a resident of a state that prohibited them.

So, here we are 75 years later, and it isn't at all uncommon for criminals to have automatic weapons for their gang related enterprises (regardless of what state they live in.) So, history shows us once again that the law abiding are penalized with fees and prohibitions while the criminals get all the weapons they care to pay for.

That brings us to the concealed weapons permit, something that nearly every state has in one form or another. Nearly 40 states have a "shall issue" law that requires no "need" be shown for a citizen to apply for the concealed carry permit.

A handful of states have concealed weapons permit programs based on a show of "need". Michigan used to be that way. You had to demonstrate that you carried cash as a part of your business, or were a woman alone at night as part of your employment requirements before you could get a local permit to carry a concealed firearm.

States like Hawaii, California and New York have a concealed weapons permit process at either the state or local level based on "need", but they don't regularly issue permits. I understand that Hawaii hasn't issued a single permit.

Other states don't have a concealed weapons permit process because they don't allow concealed carry of deadly weapons. Wisconsin is such a state. This isn't a surprise when you consider that Wisconsin also has a law in place that says you can't discriminate against applicants for employment based on their arrest or conviction record.

I'm not liking the idea that a convicted bank robber, forger or counterfeiter has to be given equal consideration for a position in a bank right alongside of others who have no criminal record. But then, that's one of the reasons I don't live or work in Wisconsin.

Lastly, there's Vermont where they have no concealed weapons permit because there are no restrictions against concealed carry, unless you're doing it for unlawful purposes. Okay, so there is one state with a sane concealed carry law.

So, with the exception of Vermont, the law-abiding citizen must apply for permission to carry a weapon in self-defense. Usually this involves fees, training and issuance of an identification card. Oh, and I almost forgot to mention - it usually also requires that you wait until the state is ready to issue you the permit.

The Idea Behind the Concealed Weapons Permit Process

Okay, so the concealed carry process is a burden, an expense and an inconvenience. But it has an upside doesn't it? Well, supposedly, but I sure can't find it.

The idea behind the permit process is to keep guns out of the wrong hands. Only those that "qualify" should have guns on the street, so why is it that criminals everywhere have guns if they so choose? The answer is simple, they pay for them on the black market.

I find it so ironic that the criminal underworld operates very much on the basis of free enterprise, whereas the free market economy operated in the light of day has many restrictions that cause it to be, well, not so very free after all.

In other words, the law-abiding are faced with the restrictions such as applications, training, fingerprinting and waiting for approval, and the lawless are not. This can hardly be the intention of such laws, but it's what we have in place.

So who is it that gets a concealed weapons permit?

Who are We Licensing Anyway?

Simply put, the law-abiding are the ones that apply for a concealed weapons permit. This seems obvious to me, but then I'm familiar with the process. As a rule, criminals don't apply for the permit/license.

Even if criminals do apply, they won't be approved (if the process works correctly), so only the law-abiding will have a permit. Think about it. The law-abiding are the ones who we should not fear, and yet they are the ones who we are trying to regulate.

Criminals are indeed the ones we have something to fear from, and yet they aren't regulated at all. At least, not until they commit a crime. Until that time, they would appear as any other law-abiding citizen on the street.

So, there you have it. We are imposing a regulatory burden on the law-abiding. This regulatory burden is indeed a penalty of sorts for being a law-abiding citizen.

The criminal has no such regulatory burden, unless they are apprehended during their involvement in a crime in which they are in possession of a concealed deadly weapon. Oftentimes, minor charges such as carrying a concealed deadly weapon are plea-bargained away in favor of prosecuting major offenses, or a criminal pleads guilty to the misdemeanor of concealed carry as a lesser offense in order to escape prosecution of the more serious crimes.

My Experience with Wyoming's Concealed Weapons Permit Process

I want to tell you about my experience with Wyoming's concealed carry process. I found it quite interesting. Wyoming law requires that you obtain training, submit fingerprints, and wait 60 days before being issued a concealed firearms permit (if you are indeed qualified under the program.)

I complied with all the requirements of the law, and then inquired as to the status of my permit after the 60 days had elapsed. I was told that I could not obtain the permit until my fingerprint its had been returned from Washington.

I explained that the law required the state to issue me a concealed firearms permit at the end of 60 days, or write me a letter telling me why I didn't qualify. I was told that the state did not issue permits until the fingerprints came back from the FBI. I reminded the program clerk of the 60 day requirement, and she informed me that the state would not be "upstanding" if they issued permits before the fingerprint check had been completed.

Of course, the 60 day limitation is put in place because the delay in fingerprint processing could go on indefinitely. The state program clerk assured me "that has never happened." How reassuring, indefinitely has never happened.

So here we have a department within the Attorney General's office, the number one law enforcement officer in the State of Wyoming, and they are in direct violation of state law as a matter of course in program implementation. Moreover, their explanation for violating state law was that the Legislature had no idea how long it would take to get the fingerprint check completed.

(Oh, yes they did have an idea of the delays. That's why they placed a 60 day limit on issuing a concealed weapons permit.)

My overall impression was that the state felt somehow responsible for me and my actions, up to the point where they knew positively that it was okay to issue the permit. But, the state felt no obligation to protect me during the interim while they violated state law by not issuing my permit.

How odd, the state doesn't want to look bad by following the law, but had no problem with me being defenseless because of their decision to implement the program contrary to law.

Here we have classic examples of why laws should not be passed in the first place:

• they are misinterpreted
• they are deliberately misapplied
• they are enforced in imaginative and discretionary ways
• they only apply to the law-abiding
• we believe they will be followed by criminals

My solution to the problem with the Attorney General's office was rather simple. I informed the clerk that when I arrived back from my travels in another state, that I was going to open carry throughout the streets of Cheyenne and do all of my errands and business with a gun on my hip - including trips to the bank and the grocery store and strolling downtown.

I also informed her that if questioned by citizens, reporters or law enforcement, I would simply inform them that I have the gun in plain sight and easy reach so as to be able to defend myself because the Attorney General's office has left me in a defenseless position, through their deliberate violation of state law when it comes to the concealed weapons permit process.

I was then informed by the state clerk (concerned mother figure that she is) that should I desired to carry a firearm openly, that I should inform local law enforcement beforehand. Isn't that great? I have to inform law enforcement when I'm going to do something that is perfectly legal to do.

I suggested to her that perhaps I would inform local law enforcement each time I went out to do my laundry. Well, why not? Open carry in Wyoming is legal, and so is doing laundry.

All of this goes to show you that the law-abiding are burdened with the law, and the criminal is only burdened to the extent that they are caught in violation of the law.

Recommendations to My Readers

My recommendations to you are very simple.

First, get a concealed weapons permit so you understand what it's like to have your rights licensed much like a privilege.

Get your training, have your finger prints taken, pay the permit fees, and then wait for the licensed to be issued.

Next, conceal your weapon appropriately and go for a stroll down the street. Imagine that you're a criminal and not a law-abiding citizen. This will demonstrate to you know just how easy it is for an armed criminal to go about his or her day-to-day business among other law-abiding citizens.

Keep track of your activities to see if you do the following:

• run around with your gun
• put your gun on the street
• draw your weapon in anger
• shoot at people over trivial matters
• injure or kill innocent children on a playground
• charge into a school on a shooting rampage
• commit other crimes such as armed robbery or kidnapping

It is amazing to me how some people think that having a permit to carry a gun is synonymous with having a license for murder, mayhem and intimidation.

I think you'll find that even after many years of carrying a concealed firearm, you rarely have the need to brandish the weapon, let alone use it. You'll also find that having the weapon in your possession in no way influences you to do things of a foolish or criminal nature.

As Ted Nugent reminds us: "If guns cause crime, mine must be defective."

Also, remember to notify authorities of your changes of address, and periodically pay a fee to be reissued your permit to carry a concealed weapon.

Last but not least, be prepared to have other rights regulated, permitted, and otherwise turned into a privilege.

This Libertarian believes that there is only one sure way to stop this silly belief that we need a concealed weapons permit. That one sure way is simply to require training, licensing and permitting for:

• obtaining legal counsel
• going to church
• hanging out with your friends
• writing a letter to the newspaper
• lobbying your state or federal legislature
• having a trial by jury

I think that would finally ram home the point that many a Libertarian has been making for years: "What part of 'shall not be infringed' don't you understand?"

Done with Concealed Weapons Permit, take me back to Gun Control