Issue date: 10/6/05 Section: Editorial/Opinion

When my step-dad died last spring, my family began a long process of clearing out his personal possessions. Some we gave to charity, and others, including family heirlooms, were dispersed among his children, siblings and nieces and nephews.

As we culled through his closet, I was shocked to learn that my family owned a gun.

I deserve the right to at least know they have that power.

What floored me was when my mom nonchalantly asked me to take the gun out to my uncle's truck. I had never touched a gun before.

However, not wanting to make waves, I did it. And, despite being in its case, in poor repair and most importantly unloaded, I somehow worried that I'd shoot myself. I was scared throughout the minute-long walk outside to the driveway.

I never want to touch a gun again.

And I don't know if I'd want a gun in my house again, either.

Last Thursday, state Sen. Dave Zien, R-Eau Claire, and state Rep. Scott Gunderson, R-Waterford, introduced legislation that would allow people to carry concealed weapons. Zien also championed a similar bill two years ago that was vetoed by Democratic Governor Jim Doyle.

The current piece of legislation makes me nervous. I don't like the idea of not knowing if Joe Schmo walking down the street is packing or not.

What's worse is that in its current form, the legislation states this vital information about who is carrying a concealed weapon should be kept totally private - even from law enforcement.

This would mean that in situations like routine traffic stops, officers would not be able to check to see if the vehicle's owner had a permit to carry a concealed weapon.

Despite what the National Rifle Association says, it is in fact guns, not people alone, that kill other people. Those hired to keep us safe have a right to expect a certain degree of protection as well. We owe it to our officers to give them information about potentially dangerous situations, especially if we have it right at our fingertips.

If officers don't know who has a gun or not, they will likely have to treat everyone as if they are carrying a dangerous weapon. And really, would you blame them?

Further, the public has a right to know who is and is not carrying a concealed weapon.

Zien and Gunderson said in a recent Milwaukee Journal Sentinel article it wouldn't be fair to those choosing to conceal weapons, because it would make them targets in criminal investigations, even if they didn't have a reason to suspect them.

You know what? Tough. If people feel the need to conceal weapons, they should expect some consequences. And maybe being questioned now and then will be one of those consequences. If they don't commit crimes, they should have little to worry about.

When we're talking about something as serious as guns - which can take a life in an instant - a free flow of information is imperative.

I understand guns are a necessary part of life. People use them to hunt. Police officers and the men and women in the armed services use them for protection. I understand the Bill of Rights guarantees we all have the right to bear arms.

I don't understand letting anybody who jumps through small hoops walk through the streets with a gun in their back pocket.

I certainly don't understand not giving the public and the police fair warning. If someone holds the power to surprise me and take my life in a matter of seconds, I deserve the right to at least know they have that power.

If people are given the choice to conceal and carry weapons, the rest of us should be given the opportunity to have an informed choice on weather or not to associate with them.

MacLaughlin is a senior print journalism major and editorial editor of The Spectator. Mac Mouths Off is a weekly column that appears every Thursday.

Page 1 of 1

Article Tools