A while back I wrote about how those who believe in Gun Control also believe in discrimination. Now I want to take that one step further and discuss an even more flagrant discriminatory practice, May Issue.
I am referring to the issuance of concealed carry permits, also known as CCW, CCL, CPL, CHL or other TLA’s. They are government permission to carry a concealed firearm in public and are issued by either a state, county or local entity. This is the opposite of Constitutional Carry, which refers to the view that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution permits no restrictions or other regulations on gun ownership or possession. It is also referred to as permitless carry or “Vermont carry”
Having grown up and lived a considerable portion of my life in a constitutional carry state, I’ve always viewed the need to obtain a permit to carry a firearm with a certain level of disdain. The Second Amendment has always seemed pretty clear.
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
However governments always have and always will insert themselves into places where they don’t exactly belong, and licensing the carrying of firearms is a good example. After all, it’s my life and my family’s life – and if you’re not going to be there to effectively protect it 24/7, why shouldn’t I be able to?
Shall Issue vs. May Issue
Shall Issue jurisdictions require a permit or license to carry, however the applicant generally only has to meet certain objective criteria, such as submitting fingerprints for a background check, to be free of disqualifying criminal or mental health issues and passing a firearms training class or qualification. Note that there are fees for all of these steps.
May Issue jurisdictions on the other hand impose additional, non-objective criteria, which include justifying the ‘need’ to carry a firearm beyond that of simple self-defense. Applicants must show this ‘good cause’ is above and beyond the level of protection currently offered by law enforcement in the area. In addition to training classes and qualifications, May Issue jurisdictions also typically impose additional psychological testing requirements. These add to the cost and time commitment required to obtain the permit and serves as yet another barrier to those who cannot afford it.
May Issue criteria tends to be more arbitrary than not. Since the determining authority has the full, ultimate and non-appealable discretion of who gets a permit and who does not, the deciding factors are purposefully nebulous. What is ruled a valid reason for one person, may not be considered for another. Many May Issue jurisdictions liberally issue to some but not to others. Even the most restrictive jurisdictions, the ones where the normal citizen is flat out told no before they even apply – or who won’t even accept an application – do in fact issue to a select few. Typical among these are the wealthy, famous and close family and friends of the issuing authority.
So what is the difference between a simple self-defense need and a ‘good cause’ self-defense need? That is usually the million-dollar question. The ONLY reason why anyone, including law enforcement and everyone other than criminals, carries a firearm is for self-defense. The average citizen can be a victim of violent crime at any time, in any place and their expected response under May Issue is to call local law enforcement that may be minutes away, at the absolute best, and only if someone else is able to call them.
Then there is the argument that having more people carrying firearms will make all citizens less safe and put law enforcement in more danger. Having been a citizen and law enforcement officer in a Constitutional Carry state I can tell you flat out that this is not true. The only impact is the criminals don’t know who is and who isn’t able to defend themselves. In other words, it’s a deterrent to crime.
It boils down to who is entitled or is privileged enough to be able to defend their lives. The wealthy, famous or connected justify it by saying they are more of a target for crime than others. While they may attract more attention to themselves, they are also in a position to have more personal protection barriers than the average citizen and are actually less of a potential target.
The most likely target of crime is always going to be the most disadvantaged in the community. Without the financial or political clout to obtain a permit, they are denied the most effective means to defend their lives and their family’s lives.
Denying that a basic right to self-defense exists in the name of ‘keeping everyone safer’ separates the haves and have-nots. You don’t have a higher level of ‘need’ simply because of who you are, what you do or whom you know. Personal safety and security is everyone’s right and May Issue is simply another discriminatory system to keep the privilege in the hands of a select few.
Bob
#oddstuffing, #self-defense, #2ndamendment, #constitution, #Vermont-carry, #discrimination, #mayissue, #mewe, #oddstuffing.com