One common argument that the gun control crowd often puts forth is that if banning guns saves just one life then the gain would be worth the sacrifice. This, of course, is a deeply flawed argument designed only to trigger an emotional reaction. It’s also an argument that gun control proponents aren’t willing to stick to when it doesn’t work in their favor.
After an Illinois citizen with a concealed carry permit saved the life of a suburban Chicago police officer by exiting his vehicle and shooting a suspect who was shooting at the officer, the Chicago Sun-Times felt that it was necessary to lecture their readers about the supposed drawbacks of concealed carry in Illinois. Essentially, their argument was that one incident where lives were saved by a concealed carry permit holder does not justify right-to-carry laws.
We have to agree – major policies should not be determined by isolated incidents. The story of a concealed carry permit holder using his firearm to save the life of a police officer, though, is not an isolated incident. Even the Chicago Sun-Times goes on to admit in the same article that there are numerous other examples in Illinois alone where an armed citizen saved either their own life or the lives of others.
The bigger issue with the Chicago Sun-Times article, however, is the fact that they are attempting to play the reverse role a common gun control argument and failing in the process. If saving lives does not justify allowing concealed carry – something that many would argue is a Constitutional right – how does saving one life justify overturning a Constitutional amendment?
The Chicago Sun-Times attempts to point out instances in Illinois where concealed carry permit holders acted outside the law, but the best examples that they could come up with were a man waving his gun around while driving and a man discharging his weapon in a restaurant without cause.
While instances such as these are no doubt crimes that should be punished, they pale in comparison to the many instances where concealed carry permit holders saved lives. If the Chicago Sun-Times really wants to draw a comparison between a man waving a gun around in his vehicle and a police officer that might not be alive today were it not for right-to-carry laws then their journalists need to learn more about the pitfalls of false equivalencies.
The Chicago Sun-Times says that no one really knows how well concealed carry is working out in Illinois, yet that admission alone tells you everything you need to know about how well it has worked thus far. There are 265,000 people in Illinois that have been granted concealed carry permits. If these 265,000 citizens were causing problems and committing crimes, the Chicago Sun-Times would know all about it and would have much more to report on in their hit piece against concealed carry.
The reality is, though, that the vast majority of these 265,000 people are responsible, law-abiding citizens who would only use their firearms in the most extreme circumstances to save their own life and the lives of others. In other words, if the Chicago Sun-Times isn’t able to point out any significant changes that have come about from having over a quarter of a million people carry firearms with them save for a few stories where lives were saved then it’s safe to say that the policy is working out pretty well in Illinois. In fact, it’s working out exactly as intended.
Stories of concealed carry permit holders saving lives with their firearm are understandably rare since the vast majority of people will never find themselves in a situation that necessitates the use of lethal force. However, stories of concealed carry permit holders committing crimes with their firearms are rare to the point of being almost nonexistent. This is exactly what those who support concealed carry argue – that it saves lives on rare occasions without increasing crime at all.
According to the Chicago Sun-Times, though, saving lives isn’t worth having the right-to-carry in Illinois. In spite of the fact that they are unable to point out a single drawback, they still maintain that concealed carry is not good for Illinois no matter how many lives it saves. Fortunately, there is a Cierco police officer alive today thanks to right-to-carry laws who would no-doubt disagree.
~ American Gun News
Being from the other end of the state where common sense exists I can’t believe the idiot who wrote this actually believe it.
Typical liberal
Claptrap logic. That idiot should find himself a victim and see how he changes his tune.
None so blind as those who do not see
The right to carry a gun, shall not be infringed! This right, was etched in stone before we were born, therefore you can’t not have the right! People intelligent enough to work for a news entity should be able to understand what “Shall Not Be Infringed” means!
Chicago, is the Mecca of traitors! It’s also the rotten apple in the barrel. The Constitution is the Law Of The Land! The most hypocritical, self-described, leaders in the United States, are dug in there! They need to clean house, the rats have taken over the city! Every elected politician, swears an oath to abide by, and uphold, the Constitution!
Bill Ayers, manufactured Obama, he even gave him a fake resume that was a bit more ambitious than Obama was, a Constitutional professor at Harvard? Come on man!
It worked, half this Country voted for that fraudulent Kenyan! When it comes back to bite Obama, it’s going to have to lead to Ayers! After all it was his coup!
As u know I’m from TEXAS,first of all I applaude this ( HERO )
$28 Million dollars to seal the lies that are Obama! He didn’t have $28M, how could he have afforded such an extravagant endeavor? Tax-Payers, of coarse! We The People, paid for it, we didn’t get to vote on it, but then it’s the routine for politicians! How could it cost so much, and has anyone investigated it? Taxpayers deserve to know, and if we did in fact pay for it, we have the right to see them! Unseal the Obama Documents, it is proof that he was a complete fraud!
I expended a considerable amount of TIME and THOUGHT composing and writing a reasonable response to your REQUEST
It does if it is your life. What a stupid statement by a newspaper. Fire the reporter, they are too dumb to be effective!
PART ll after premature cut off. — As I concluded my post , IT WAS STOPPED for some reason, The sane, SENSEABLE Question I posed will NOT be asked nor ANSWERED
To be expected from COMMUNISTS BILLIONAIRES.
If there are any decent people still left in Chicago … get the hell out of there!
Stupid is incurable.
Moronic beliefs like those expressed in the article which run contrary to any common sense really anger me. Unfortunately there are way too many idiots like that in this country.
These are the same people who claim any restrictive gun law whatsoever is worth passing, if it has even a remote chance of saving just one life.
We need more people carrying guns, not less, if we are ever going to put an end to these crazy people shooting people we will have to have as many people carrying guns as possible. Only an idiot would think this is wrong.
Do they also claim the earth is flat?
The Chicago sun-times is a stupid paper anyways ,The paper has about 10 or 15 pages ,and they print a bunch BS anyway. They should close there doors already. Don’t believe any thing from that paper.
JohnK
How insulting and stupid can a newspaper be? The Sun Times has just showed exactly how! I suggest the life of the police officer is worth more than the writer of the article, the editorial staff and anyone who thinks similarly. Let’s change the officer to the Sun Times’ wife/husband, child, mother, father, neighbor. I submit that narrow, stupid, ignorant viewpoint would rapidly be revised. I am not a Sun Times subscriber. If I was, I would now be an EX-subscriber!
I just have two question for the writer. Do you think not allowing right to carry would take the GUN out of the hands of the man that was trying to KILL a police officer and all the other illegal guns in Chicago? How do you expect to get all the illegal guns from criminals, do you think they will turn in all their guns? Wait till a legal gun owner saves your life in that god forsaken city and that article will change real quick.
Remember that one anti gun politician actually stated their belief that its only natural criminals will disarm once their victims are disarmed as if all the statistics from gun free zones showing that armed criminals actively target unarmed victims meant nothing.
This is not the first time an officer or others have been saved by a bystander who was armed and able to save lives it just rarely if ever makes the news and this article shows what happens the few times such an incident does a biased anti constitution individual spouts on as if hundreds or more who could have been saved by being armed should be allowed to die at the hands of ARMED CRIMINALS just to promote their anti constitution agenda.
Criminals who disobey existing restrictions put in place on the FALSE promise that “criminals will obey them thus people do not need to protect themselves” or “they will obey this new one just ignore the fact they ignored all the other laws passed on the same promise” all just to support their anti constitution agenda of disarming people so they can take away other rights without fear of the people will defend those rights as a group of them LAWFULLY DID in 1946 when a corrupt individual abused his authority in an attempt to seize and control the counting of ballots to ensure he got reelected.
And I suppose this dumb SOB thinks it is worth it to give up a right for one human life?He and the rest of the left should read Ronald Dworkin and what he says about the possible social cost of maintaining a right. He says there can be a considerable cost and if you don’t think that is possible check the 4th through 8th amendments. People are often killed by murders released on a “technicality”.
Well it seems this news paper has reached the low level of the National Inquiror or any other grocery store gossip rag. wonder just what they would do if their editor was on the street being shot and he asked a person to intervene with a gun to save his life and the person said saving your life would not justify my having a gun sorry guess you die !
I remember seeing this particular lady on YouTube who flat out said there was no excuse to try to defend yourself. She said, “Self-defense is no excuse.” She stated that you should allow the crime to happen because to defend yourself placed the criminal at risk.
typical stupid democrat socialist opinion from Chiraq!
According to the CDC, Americans use firearms DEFENSIVELY more than 6,000 times EVERY DAY! That’s not anecdotal and it’s not just one life. Now, the folks who work for this newspaper, I don’t care about their lives, that’s their issue to worry about. Me, I carry daily.
Whatever IDIOT wrote THAT should not be allowed to own a PENCIL, let alone a COMPUTER!
Are these people real? What is wrong with these people, that they think
The liberal mindset is a mental illness. “ YOU CAN’T ARGUE WITH A SICK MIND”,Joe Walsh. Quit trying!