Most Popular
Recent Blog Posts
National Features >
But What About Knives?Proposition B quirk shows that it's for guns, not safetyBy Ray HartmannPublished on March 31, 1999If Proposition B passes next Tuesday, you could still get arrested as a felon for attempting to protect yourself by carrying a concealed "knife, blackjack or any other weapon readily capable of lethal use." Other than a gun, of course. If someone -- say one of the frightened young women depicted in Proposition B ads -- had a knife or club hidden in her purse, she would be guilty of a felony (punishable by a prison term) if she got caught with it. But the same woman could carry a loaded .357 Magnum into Busch Stadium -- even if there were signs expressly prohibiting guns there -- and at worst she would be cited for an "infraction of trespass" that wouldn't result in even the loss of her concealed-gun permit, much less a criminal charge. This is a bit puzzling. "It's just too risky." Why would we do anything to inhibit the good guy's right to self-defense? Why would we have any law limiting a citizen's self-protection? Say someone can't afford a gun, or even the whopping $80 permit fee that Proposition B supporters contend will help assure that only good folk are packing concealed heat. Don't we want the bad guys to know that even these penniless "potential victims" might be holding a switchblade or a club or some other means of "raising the stakes for criminals"? Why didn't the Proposition B authors simply eliminate the section of RsMo. 571.030 that makes concealing a weapon a crime? Why did they merely carve out an exception for guns? I asked pro-gun "Missourians Against Crime" spokesman Brett Feinstein Monday about why, if safety was such a pressing concern, concerned citizens shouldn't be able to defend themselves with, say, a knife. After noting that the question hadn't been raised before, he checked with someone and confirmed that it was indeed intentional that other weapons were excluded from the new protections of Proposition B. "I'm told there are two specific reasons," he said. "One is the issue of registration, because with so many different kinds of knives, there would be no way to keep track of them all. And there's the safety issue. A firearm is a much more effective means of self-protection if someone's coming toward you, because you can use it when there's space between you." The first half of that answer is pretty funny, given the National Rifle Association's constant opposition to gun-registration laws of any kind. As to the second part, I suspect someone well trained in the use of a knife or a nightstick can do a pretty fair job of self-defense without spraying bullets around at innocent bystanders. Still, I was relieved to hear that the NRA and its legislative associates had thought this thing through. It was good news that this wasn't an oversight, because my real fear in asking the question was that the response would be, "Hey, commie-pinko, you've finally got a great idea. Why, we'll do Proposition K for knives next, and then maybe get to legalizing concealed hand grenades in 2001." Personally, as a resident of Missouri, where FBI numbers show the violent crime rate has dropped faster than the national average without the benefit of "concealed carry" (and more than twice as fast as states that have it), I say we don't need people running around stadiums and bars and banks and daycare centers and everywhere else with hidden switchblades and clubs -- not any more than we need them running around with concealed firearms. But Proposition B backers don't see it that way, so it was especially enlightening to see them assert that Missourians can't be trusted to choose their weapon of self-defense. That, more than anything else, offers proof positive as to what Proposition B is really all about. Proposition B is all about guns.
write your comment
|