Alright Grammar Nazis, I need some review
Thread Starter
|
Suspended
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
From: New Mexico
Alright Grammar *****, I need some review
“Guns in Certain Restaurants”
I write this in support of Senate Bill 40. In the January session of 2009, the New Mexico State Legislature considered a bill (HB 105, and SB 608) that would allow citizens whom have been issued a Concealed Handgun License (CHL) to carry a concealed firearm into an establishment that served alcohol for on premises consumption, so long as the business derived at least a majority of their revenues from the sale of food for on premises consumption. That bill passed the House 49 to 13, and was recommended to pass the Senate. This bill never became law.
Senator George K. Munoz (D-Cibola & McKinley) has introduced virtually the same bill, with the main difference being that restaurants would have to derive 60% or more of their annual gross receipts from the sale of food. This means that it will still be illegal to carry a firearm into a bar/bar atmosphere. Approximately 37 other states permit possession of a firearm in an establishment that sells liquor for on premises consumption.
Why is it reasonable to allow possession of a firearm in a restaurant? Oft cited professor Gary Kleck (criminology professor at Florida State University), wrote in his 1998 article entitled "Carrying guns for protection: results from the National Defense Survey," that defensive gun use is “... effective, in the sense that gun-wielding victims are less likely to be injured, lose property, or otherwise have crimes completed against them than victims who either do nothing to resist or who resist without weapons.” Further support for defensive gun use is found in Kleck’s 1991 book “Point Blank,” where he cites a number of surveys and other studies, illustrating that existing evidence supports “... the hypothesis that active physical resistance without a gun often provokes offender attack, whereas resistance with a gun deters attack.” Basically, if you have a gun and use it to defend yourself, you are less likely to become the victim of a crime.
Further, a 2000 study by H. Sterling Burnett for the National Center for Policy Analysis looked at the crime rate of concealed licensees versus the crime rate of the general public, and showed that persons with a license to carry a concealed firearm were less likely to be arrested for a crime. The study found that a licensee was 5.7 times less likely to be arrested for a violent crime and 14 times less likely to be arrested for a nonviolent crime. During the five years period between the publication of this study, and Texas granting its citizens concealed carry permits (signed into law May 26, 1995), not one licensee had been arrested for negligent manslaughter. The obvious conclusion we can draw from this information is that those citizens with concealed carry licenses are more law abiding than the average citizen. Also to be noted, this bill does not change current New Mexico law that prohibits the possession of a firearm while under the influence of intoxicants or narcotics §30-7-4(A)(2) NMSA 1978. This proposed bill would allow for restaurants to post signs at the entrance of their establishments that prohibit persons entering from carrying a firearm, and the proposed statute is §30-7-3(A)(4)(b). Since concealed licensees are more law-abiding, they will be less likely to illegally carry a firearm than the "Average Joe" sitting at the next table over.
Burnett also mentions findings from John Lott's 1998 article "More Guns, Less Crime." "Using data from all 3,054 U.S. counties between 1977 and 1992, he found that after controlling for other factors: Concealed handgun laws reduce murder by 8.5 percent, rape by 5 percent and severe assault by 7 percent." This suggests to me that not only are concealed licensees statistically less dangerous, but that having more people with concealed licenses probably helps reduce crime rates (I know, I know...causation is not correlation, but there is still a strong tie in this case).
Considering that firearms are very useful in deterring attacks, and concealed license holders are above-average when it comes to obeying the law, I cannot think of a rational argument, based on relevant statistics and facts, that an opponent to this bill can make. Please support self defense, and encourage your Senator and Representative to vote in favor of this bill.
I write this in support of Senate Bill 40. In the January session of 2009, the New Mexico State Legislature considered a bill (HB 105, and SB 608) that would allow citizens whom have been issued a Concealed Handgun License (CHL) to carry a concealed firearm into an establishment that served alcohol for on premises consumption, so long as the business derived at least a majority of their revenues from the sale of food for on premises consumption. That bill passed the House 49 to 13, and was recommended to pass the Senate. This bill never became law.
Senator George K. Munoz (D-Cibola & McKinley) has introduced virtually the same bill, with the main difference being that restaurants would have to derive 60% or more of their annual gross receipts from the sale of food. This means that it will still be illegal to carry a firearm into a bar/bar atmosphere. Approximately 37 other states permit possession of a firearm in an establishment that sells liquor for on premises consumption.
Why is it reasonable to allow possession of a firearm in a restaurant? Oft cited professor Gary Kleck (criminology professor at Florida State University), wrote in his 1998 article entitled "Carrying guns for protection: results from the National Defense Survey," that defensive gun use is “... effective, in the sense that gun-wielding victims are less likely to be injured, lose property, or otherwise have crimes completed against them than victims who either do nothing to resist or who resist without weapons.” Further support for defensive gun use is found in Kleck’s 1991 book “Point Blank,” where he cites a number of surveys and other studies, illustrating that existing evidence supports “... the hypothesis that active physical resistance without a gun often provokes offender attack, whereas resistance with a gun deters attack.” Basically, if you have a gun and use it to defend yourself, you are less likely to become the victim of a crime.
Further, a 2000 study by H. Sterling Burnett for the National Center for Policy Analysis looked at the crime rate of concealed licensees versus the crime rate of the general public, and showed that persons with a license to carry a concealed firearm were less likely to be arrested for a crime. The study found that a licensee was 5.7 times less likely to be arrested for a violent crime and 14 times less likely to be arrested for a nonviolent crime. During the five years period between the publication of this study, and Texas granting its citizens concealed carry permits (signed into law May 26, 1995), not one licensee had been arrested for negligent manslaughter. The obvious conclusion we can draw from this information is that those citizens with concealed carry licenses are more law abiding than the average citizen. Also to be noted, this bill does not change current New Mexico law that prohibits the possession of a firearm while under the influence of intoxicants or narcotics §30-7-4(A)(2) NMSA 1978. This proposed bill would allow for restaurants to post signs at the entrance of their establishments that prohibit persons entering from carrying a firearm, and the proposed statute is §30-7-3(A)(4)(b). Since concealed licensees are more law-abiding, they will be less likely to illegally carry a firearm than the "Average Joe" sitting at the next table over.
Burnett also mentions findings from John Lott's 1998 article "More Guns, Less Crime." "Using data from all 3,054 U.S. counties between 1977 and 1992, he found that after controlling for other factors: Concealed handgun laws reduce murder by 8.5 percent, rape by 5 percent and severe assault by 7 percent." This suggests to me that not only are concealed licensees statistically less dangerous, but that having more people with concealed licenses probably helps reduce crime rates (I know, I know...causation is not correlation, but there is still a strong tie in this case).
Considering that firearms are very useful in deterring attacks, and concealed license holders are above-average when it comes to obeying the law, I cannot think of a rational argument, based on relevant statistics and facts, that an opponent to this bill can make. Please support self defense, and encourage your Senator and Representative to vote in favor of this bill.
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 526
Likes: 0
From: SoCal
I write this in support of Senate Bill 40. In the January session of 2009, the New Mexico State Legislature considered a bill (HB 105, and SB 608) that would allow citizens who have been issued a Concealed Handgun License (CHL) to carry a concealed firearm into an establishment that served alcohol for on-premises consumption so long as the business derived at least a majority of their revenues from the sale of food for on-premises consumption. That bill passed the House by a count of 49 to 13 and was recommended to pass the Senate. This bill never became law.
Senator George K. Munoz (D-Cibola & McKinley) has introduced virtually the same bill with the main difference being that restaurants would have to derive 60% or more of their annual gross receipts from the sale of food. This means that it will still be illegal to carry a firearm into a bar or bar atmosphere. Approximately 37 other states permit possession of a firearm in an establishment that sells liquor for on-premises consumption.
Why is it reasonable to allow possession of a firearm in a restaurant? Often cited professor Gary Kleck (criminology professor at Florida State University), wrote in his 1998 article entitled, "Carrying guns for protection: results from the National Defense Survey," that defensive gun use is “effective, in the sense that gun-wielding victims are less likely to be injured, lose property, or otherwise have crimes completed against them than victims who either do nothing to resist or who resist without weapons.” Further support for defensive gun use is found in Kleck’s 1991 book, Point Blank, in which he cites a number of surveys and other studies illustrating existing evidence that supports “the hypothesis that active physical resistance without a gun often provokes offender attack, whereas resistance with a gun deters attack.” In summary, if you have a gun and use it to defend yourself, you are less likely to become the victim of a crime.
Further, a 2000 study by H. Sterling Burnett for the National Center for Policy Analysis looked at the crime rate of concealed licensees versus the crime rate of the general public and showed that persons with a license to carry a concealed firearm were less likely to be arrested for a crime. The study found that a licensee was 5.7 times less likely to be arrested for a violent crime and 14 times less likely to be arrested for a nonviolent crime. During the five years period between the publication of this study and Texas granting its citizens concealed carry permits (signed into law May 26, 1995), not one licensee had been arrested for negligent manslaughter. The obvious conclusion we can draw from this information is that those citizens with concealed carry licenses are more law abiding than the average citizen. Also to be noted, this bill does not change current New Mexico law that prohibits the possession of a firearm while under the influence of intoxicants or narcotics. §30-7-4(A)(2) NMSA 1978. This proposed bill (§30-7-3(A)(4)(b)) would allow for restaurants to post signs at the entrance of their establishments that prohibit entering persons from carrying a firearm. Since concealed licensees are more law-abiding, they will be less likely to illegally carry a firearm than the "Average Joe" sitting at the next table.
Burnett also mentions findings from John Lott's 1998 article, "More Guns, Less Crime." "Using data from all 3,054 U.S. counties between 1977 and 1992, he found that after controlling for other factors: Concealed handgun laws reduce murder by 8.5 percent, rape by 5 percent and severe assault by 7 percent." This suggests to me that not only are concealed licensees statistically less dangerous, but that having more people with concealed licenses helps reduce crime rates. [I deleted “probably” because your argument won’t be persuasive if you, the author, aren’t completely convinced. You have to be convinced to convince your audience]
Considering that firearms are very useful in deterring attacks and concealed license holders are above-average when it comes to obeying the law, I cannot think of a rational argument, based on relevant statistics and facts, that an opponent to this bill can make. [I’d consider rephrasing this. There is always a counterargument, and a stronger and more convincing argument can be made if you introduce this counterargument and show why it is erroneous] Please support self-defense and encourage your Senator and Representative to vote in favor of this bill.
-- I corrected some grammar and what not, made some comments at the end. Hope that helps.
