THE PUBLIC IS FRUSTRATED; BUT PUTTING MORE GUNS ON THE STREETS IS NO ANSWER

Each year guns are involved in approximately 10,000 murders, 15,000 suicides and 2,000 accidental deaths. A substantial number of these deaths involved handguns. It is hard to see how putting more guns on the street can reduce the number of violent deaths recorded each year.

Legislators are looking for any means to reduce violence in our society. A bill currently under discussion could have a significant impact on public safety in Missouri, but not in the manner hoped for. The law would allow private individuals to carry a concealed handgun.

This piece of legislation is a response to the frustration felt by the public about crime. As is often the case legislators are offering what seems to be a quick and inexpensive solution to a difficult problem. The theory is that if criminals believe that their potential victims are armed they will be deterred from attacking them. If this argument is valid then we should arm everyone so there are no potential victims. But can we still call ourselves a civilized nation? Where would we not take guns? To church, to a PTA meeting, to the grocery store or to a baseball game?

The intuitive attraction of this law lies in our need to feel safe in what seems to be an increasingly hostile world. Fear can cause people to lose confidence in traditional mechanisms of social control. The argument runs that if the community cannot protect us then surely we have the right to protect ourselves. Fear can blind us to the need to work for a community made up of people who want to live in peace.

Citizens of Missouri must question how much safer this law will make them. Legislators maintain that sheriffs will screen applicants before issuing a permit to carry a concealed weapon. It is doubtful that any screening procedure can prevent guns from falling into the hands of people who should not have them. The one hundred dollar fee will barely cover the cost of conducting a computerized background check, let alone provide for screening to determine if the applicant has the judgment and emotional stability to make split-second life or death decisions. Proponents of the bill argue that applicants will be trained before being allowed to carry a gun. It is a simple t~~ask~ to train individuals in the skills necessary to fire a handgun. But will the training provide shooters with an understanding of the legal and moral implications of taking a human life?

Another immediate problem resulting from the passage of this law would be to determine who should receive permits? During the first year after the Florida law, which is similar to the one proposed in Missouri, was passed officials received 36,000 applications for permits. How much time and energy should be devoted to background investigations of permit applicants?

There are no simple solutions to the problem of violent crime. Controlling violence rests with the ability of a community to set and enforce reasonable limits on the conduct of its members. The solution to violent crime does not lie in arming more people.

One part of the solution is in the hands of parents who must teach their children to respect the rights of others. Another part of the solution lies in providing the education needed to perform the jobs which will exist in the future and in creating the opportunity for all people to use their talents. We need to work toward lasting solutions to violence. We cannot delude ourselves into believing that shortsighted, quick-fix answers such as this one now being debated in Jefferson City will make us safer.

Dr. Michael Brown is Professor of Criminal Justice at Southeast Missouri State University.