What makes a "common-sense gun rule?" It is a term that seems to get thrown around a lot lately by politicians. In order for a gun law to be "common-sense" it would need to be an effective deterrent of crime. Calling any law which is focused on limiting licensed holders of concealed weapons from carrying them in public "common-sense" would imply that there must be licensed concealed weapons carriers committing crimes. Is that really the case? Are licensed concealed weapons carriers indeed committing crimes?

Allowing law-abiding citizens to carry concealed weapons in public does not increase crime rates. Florida adopted a right-to-carry law in 1987. At the time the law was passed, critics predicted increases in violence. When the law went into effect, the Dade County Police began a program to record all arrest and non-arrest incidents involving concealed carry licensees. Between September of 1987 and August of 1992, Dade County recorded only 4 crimes committed by licensees with firearms. None of these crimes resulted in an injury. The record-keeping program was abandoned in 1992 because there were not enough incidents to justify tracking them.

Giving citizens the right to carry concealed weapons actually can decrease crime rates. Firearms are a proven and effective deterrent of violent crime. Americans use firearms to defend themselves from criminals at least 764,000 times a year. This figure is the lowest among a group of 9 nationwide surveys done by organizations including Gallup and the Los Angeles Times. In 1982, a survey of imprisoned criminals found that 34 percent of them had been "scared off, shot at, wounded or captured by an armed victim." Washington D.C. enacted a virtual ban on handguns in 1976. Between 1976 and 1991, Washington D.C.'s homicide rate rose 200 percent, while the U.S. rate rose 12 percent.

So why call a law "common-sense" if it has proven to be ineffective in accomplishing the stated objective? I believe gun laws are reactionary measures meant to soothe the minds of the common citizen, ignoring issues at the root of violent crime and doing nothing but placing citizens in more danger. If Seattle and Mayor Greg Nickels wish to decrease the amount of gun crime in the city, they should try to identify the root of the problem and solve it. Why are some citizens so broke, hungry, or mentally ill that they are willing and even eager to take someone's life in the commission of a crime? Why are so many criminals walking our streets? Criminals, whether motivated by poverty, greed, or mental illness will not be deterred by a law which prohibits them from concealing a weapon.

Ban guns altogether and violent criminals will either ignore those laws or find a new weapon of choice such as knives and even swords! The gun ban in the UK has been followed by more and more bans and regulations as criminals switch to new weapons to intimidate, harass, and harm the disarmed citizenry. Does anyone really believe that someone who has decided to murder in order to get what they want will be deterred by a gun law? If so, they might be in severe need of a healthy dose of "common-sense."

Sean Cooke
Seattle