The debate that exists around gun control and gun policy is one that is very controversial. Both sides of this argument feel validated in their beliefs, and rightfully so. The rise of mass shootings that have occurred recently is startling to any sane American. These tragic occurrences make way for much debate between both ideas of thought. The advocates for gun control believe that more guns only mean more danger, and those in favor of guns feel that someone concealing a weapon in this situation could prevent more lives lost. Both parties feel that they are justified and only want to live in a country where they can feel safe. I've been doing a lot of research on this topic, however, and have made note of the overwhelming amount of evidence that points to concealed carried handguns as being the answer to this long time debate. More people should obtain their concealed carry permit, due to the affect that this has on crime, deterrence, and overall safety.

Advocates for concealed carry are among the majority of Americans (Newport). A poll lead by Gallup.com asks the participants of their poll, "Suppose more Americans were allowed to carry concealed weapons if they passed a criminal background check and training course. If more Americans carried concealed weapons, would the United States be safer or less safe?" 56% of the participants who responded stated that they believed the United States would be safer (Newport). Public opinion favors the allowing of citizens to carry concealed weapons because it works. An article on ProCon.org reads, "States that implemented "shall-issue" concealed carry laws reduced murders by 8.5%, rapes by 5%, aggravated assaults by 7%, and robbery by 3%" (ProCon.org). To clarify, shall-issue gun laws require concealed handgun owners to receive a permit to carry it. The carrier must meet a criteria determined by the law writers. As many people are probably aware, the amount of concealed carry permits in the United States has greatly grown since President Obama was first elected (Howell). This is likely due to the fact that President Obama has frequently promised stricter gun laws that make obtaining a handgun harder. In 2014, there were over 1.7 million new permits issued (Howell). This is a 15.4% increase from the amount of permits in 2013, an exponential increase worth noting (Howell). Howell states, " ... murder rates have fallen from 5.6 killings per 100,000 people to just 4.2, about a 25 percent drop, according to the report from the Crime Prevention Research Center." (Howell). These statistics illustrate that concealed carry permits can be an effective deterrent. By means of an increase in concealed carry permits, crime rates have effectively been lessened throughout the decades.

 John R. Lott and David B. Mustard look at crime trends in counties across the U.S. from 1977 to 1992 and are able to conclude that giving citizens the right to carry a concealed weapon is beneficial (Lott 1). The trend showed that violent crime is decreased without also increasing the amount of accidental deaths. (Lott 1). They state, "If those states which did not have right-to-carry concealed gun provisions had adopted them in 1992, approximately 1,570 murders; 4,177 rapes; and over 60,000 aggravate assaults would have been avoided yearly" (Lott 1). These numbers are convincing enough. There is simply less crime where the people of a community/state are known to be carrying a concealed weapon. Lott also states that when a criminal is unable to tell who may be armed, he will be deterred from committing a violent crime, as the expected risk is exponentially increased (Lott 4). This rise in risk for criminals is the goal of carrying a concealed weapon. It is only natural to assume that the more people there are armed, the fewer there are defenseless. 

Furthermore, the beauty of concealed carry is that only law abiding, responsible citizens will obtain their license. In Florida 221,443 licenses were issued between October 1, 1987 and April 30, 1994. Despite the large number of carriers, only 18 crimes involving firearms were committed by those with licenses (Lott 3). The percentage here is staggering, and goes to show that men and women who obtain their concealed carry license are among the most responsible Americans. Accidental gun deaths are nearly nonexistent as well. The vast majority of counties in the US have an accidental handgun death rate of zero (Lott 30). This extremely low rate of accidents is likely due to the fact that most gun owners are extremely careful when it comes to their firearms, and are less likely to have an accident with one. All this information points to a clear conclusion that allowing citizens to carry concealed weapons does more good than bad. This fact is clear in the minds of criminals everywhere, and we're able to see trends in criminal's movements when concealed carry laws are passed in a particular county. 

What happens if we compare two neighboring counties, one with shall-issue concealed carry laws and the other without said laws? Bronars and Lott explore this idea, and they find that the neighboring county immediately suffers the effects of not passing their own shall-issue concealed carry laws. They state, "Spillover effects on neighboring counties are almost always deleterious. Criminals tend to move across communities more readily in response to changes in concealed handgun laws..." (Bronars 479). These findings show that the concealed handgun laws are a major deterrent in the county that they are passed in, so much so that criminals will move to different communities so they may continue to commit their crimes. These results were not expected and appear to be lasting. Bronars and Lott state, "The spillover effects are surprisingly large, especially for property crimes." (479). Despite the rise of crime, Bronars and Lott were confident that if the affected state enacted shall-issue concealed carry laws, it also will begin to lower the violent crime rates in that county. They stated, " ... concealed handguns deter criminals and th(e) largest reductions in violent crime will be obtained when all the states adopt these laws." (Bronars 479). In recent years, most all U.S. states have enacted shall-issue laws due to the overwhelming evidence that confirms the positive effects concealed weapons have on a community. 

When a person obtains their concealed carry permit, they are making a conscious decision to be responsible for all the innocent people that may be around them. If an incident should occur, the concealed carrier will be the first line of defense until first responders arrive on scene. This is highlighted when Arizona Sheriff Richard Mack said, "Police do very little to prevent violent crime. We investigate crime after the fact." (ProCon.org).The average time it takes for an officer to arrive to a call is 10 minutes (Ervine). A massive amount of damage could be done to a large group of defenseless people during this time. On average, nine people are killed every minute during a homicide (Ervine). Looking at recent deadly mass shootings, we see a large police response time with heavy casualties. The police took 20 minutes to arrive on scene at the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting (Moore). This amount of time is unacceptable. There shouldn't be blame placed on the police, but something needs to be done so that victims may be able to protect themselves in one way or another. The only way to reduce the amount of casualties is to ensure that people are able to protect themselves as soon as a potential homicide begins (Moore). The amount of lives that could be saved by a single concealed carrier is immense. Every person should be able to protect themselves, their loved ones, and the innocent citizens that surround them. The method of protection is determined by the carrier's preference. 

Gun owners are faced with the decision between open carrying and concealed carrying a handgun. Either way, concealed carry has been proven to be the safer alternative. Open carrying a weapon could lead to confrontation, harmless or not (Halverson). A passerby who is unaware that openly carrying a weapon is legal may call the police to inform them that you have a weapon (Halverson). Not only this, but everyone around you will be immediately tense and on edge, while with a concealed weapon, no one would know that you were carrying unless they explicitly asked (Halverson). Another benefit that goes along with concealed carry is that the carrier is required to have a permit (Halverson). A training class must be completed in order to obtain the permit, and better training means more safety (Halverson). In states where a permit is not required to open carry a firearm, people with no formal training would not be breaking the law by openly carrying their weapon (Halverson). So, concealed carry is the better option because it means that the owner of the concealed weapon will be better trained, and no one will be able to single out the carrier. Recently, open carry laws have been passed in Texas, which means that you do not need a permit to openly carry a firearm. The passing of this law has proven to be more troublesome than helpful to gun advocates. Places like offices are becoming stricter with having any guns in the workplace at all. The passing of this law has only seemed to bring attention to guns in sensitive areas (Mascia). One Texan says:

"We were free to carry concealed at far more places before than now. You have the exact same ability to be safe carrying concealed as openly. Except that now you can't do either in many places. So you're not safer at all. Open carry is not a right. It's a dress code and comfort issue. You were already freely bearing arms before 1 Jan. You've given up safety for comfort and lost and freedom [sic] for all of us" (Mascia).

This firsthand account goes to show that some people are less comfortable with openly carried guns. This worry affects concealed carriers by limiting where they are able to be armed. Because of this, open-carry is harmful to concealed carry advocates and open carry advocates alike. The goal of both groups should be to ensure that there are more licensed carriers in any given area. 

As an already highly controversial topic, many get up in arms at the mention of concealed handguns on college campuses. Most states do not allow concealed carry permits to be utilized on college campuses. Unfortunately, the college campus has become a somewhat unsafe environment, especially for women on campus. It is estimated that one in five women on a college campus will be sexually assaulted in one way or another. This number is unacceptable, and there doesn't seem to be much being done to help try and reverse this awful statistic. The most a school seems to do is offer self-defense classes, but these notoriously fall short when a real life situation begins to unfold. It is frustrating and heartbreaking that students are left so defenseless. A potential solution to this issue is to legalize the carrying of concealed handguns on college campuses. If a potential sex offender knows that most students are armed, he will surely think twice about committing such a crime. An activist group called Concealed Campus advocates for the lifting of the ban of concealed weapons on college campuses. The group has answered many questions that doubters may have. They respond to the criticism: "In an active shooter situation, a student or faculty member with a gun would only make things worse" (Campus). They answer, "What is worse than allowing an execution-style massacre to continue uncontested?  How could any action with the potential to stop or slow a deranged killer intent on slaughtering victim after victim be considered 'worse' than allowing the killer to continue undeterred?" (Campus). They go on to state that contrary to Hollywood movies, the average gun exchange lasts only 3 to 5 seconds (Campus). Therefore, the argument that students or faculty would make things worse is nullified. This group of activists makes an interesting point. In response to a criticism saying that the addition of more guns in order to solve violence was illogical, they state, "One might have just as easily told Edward Jenner, (the man who discovered that the cowpox virus could be used to inoculate people against smallpox) 'It is inconceivable that any logical person would believe that the answer to disease is more viruses'" (Campus). Instead of continuing to limit the rights of college students, a widespread acceptance of concealed weapons is in order. This acceptance of concealed weapons on campus will surely affect the rates of crime on campuses just as it does at the state level. Of course, if the ban on these permits were lifted, there would be no guarantee that at least one student in any given classroom would be armed. Jeffrey Bouffard, Matt Nobles, Wells Williams, and Michael Cavanaugh answer the question: "Should the ban be lifted, what is the likelihood that a given classroom would contain at least one handgun?" (Bouffard 317-318). Ultimately, they find that the probability of any given student obtaining their concealed carry permit varied based on the classroom and the major that the students were in. However, when asking students who were leaving their classes, more than three quarters of classes contain at least one person who reported a very high likelihood of obtaining a concealed carry license if the ban were lifted (Bouffard 330). 

  While I am convicted in my beliefs, I believe that every side to an argument is validated in their feelings. We all just want the United States of America to be a safe place. However, the method of achieving that goal is different. Someone may feel that the increase of access to handguns will not be a positive thing for the people of the United States. They may feel that the only way to reduce violent crime is to reduce accessibility to handguns. While these people are rightfully worried about potential criminals obtaining a handgun, they should take solace in the fact that out of all violent offenses committed since 1998 approximately only 9% of them involved a handgun (Olson 748). Another concern that critics point out is that deterrence is not possible unless the public of a community/state is made aware of an increase in concealed carry permits in their area (Fortunato 1072). If potential criminals are not made aware of such an increase in permits, they will be unaware of the increased risk that threatens their life. This lack of awareness will increase the amount of deadly confrontations between a carrier and a criminal (Fortunato 1074-1075). According to his logic, implementing concealed carry will not deter crime, but will actually increase the number of violent deaths in a community (Fortunato 1075). However, this increase in violent deaths in any community has yet to be observed. Fortunato's argument is based solely on the idea that the people of a community are unaware of the amount of concealed weapon holders around them. He finds that there is an unidentifiable link between concealed carrier policy and people's beliefs concerning the number of firearm carriers in their community (Fortunato 1082). So, the data neither proves nor disproves that any given criminal is aware of the amount of concealed weapons in their community. 

To conclude, concealed handguns are the answer to a safer community and a safer United States. The statistics that show the success of concealed carry permits in deterring crime implemented in shall-issue states is noteworthy and extraordinary. It is important that we try and stray away from open-carry, as it causes unwanted attention and problems for gun activists everywhere. Allowing college students to obtain a concealed carry license is a way of allowing them to protect themselves from the threat of violent crimes so common on college campuses. This, and the continuation of allowing those who lawfully obtain a permit to conceal a weapon is the next, much needed step towards a safer America.

