xenophon
Member
This won't help the blood pressure.....doesn't the Medical College of WI have better areas to focus on?.........
http://www.jsonline.com/news/editorials/oct05/364252.asp
Editorial: Just say 'no' to more guns
From the Journal Sentinel
Posted: Oct. 19, 2005
There is a must-read article for the state Legislature in a recent issue of the Wisconsin Medical Journal.
In a guest editorial, Stephen Hargarten, co-director of the Firearm Injury Center at the Medical College of Wisconsin, raises questions that should prompt all legislators to look skeptically at a proposal that would allow average Wisconsinites to carry concealed weapons. Wisconsin is one of four states that prohibit the practice.
The proposed bill is a resurrection of a failed effort from last year. The Legislature passed so-called concealed-carry legislation in 2004 but missed by one vote in overriding a very necessary veto by Gov. Jim Doyle. Rep. Scott Gunderson (R-Waterford) and Sen. Dave Zien (R-Eau Claire) have promised to bring back a version of the bill this year.
They shouldn't. But if they do, Hargarten's article is a good guide for why they should show more sense about it this time.
In the article, Hargarten, who has written extensively on the public health aspects of gun violence, explains that the National Academy of Sciences has concluded that one of the principal reasons stated for such legislation - deterring crime - has little basis in fact. One of the December report's findings: "There is no credible evidence that 'right-to-carry' laws, which allow qualified adults to carry concealed handguns, either decrease or increase violent crime."
Hargarten notes that Wisconsin's suicide rate among youth is already 36% higher than the national average, that nearly 60% of firearm suicides in the state among youth involve someone else's gun and that 83% of the time it belongs to a parent or guardian. It stands to reason that availability of guns could increase with concealed carry - and that there might be a corresponding increase in the number of people killed with their own guns that have been taken from them.
"Are we really certain that conceal and carry is a thoughtful, timely policy for Wisconsin?" Hargarten asks in understated fashion.
We can answer that. With a preponderance of Milwaukee's killings involving guns, making more guns available is simple lunacy.
But Hargarten, who likely has read the same tea leaves as have we about this Legislature, also asks the question of whether such legislation should at least address the types of guns that citizens should be allowed to conceal and carry. In short, guns with exposed hammers that rest on firing pins can be discharged when dropped.
"Legislators may wish to limit the availability of more dangerous firearms through safety standards such as California's 'drop safety' requirement for all new handguns sold in the state," he wrote.
Hargarten, noting that the National Academy of Sciences called for more research about guns to guide policy, wrote that concealed-carry legislation, if improperly drafted, could stymie such efforts. He said previous legislation impeded or prohibited "the use of license application information or the experience of license-holders either as perpetrators or as victims of crime and violent injury."
In other words, any new legislation should make available the tools to discern whether the bill has helped or worsened matters.
Hargarten also fears that the upcoming bill would immunize groups that dispense the permits from lawsuits if they give permits to the wrong people. It shouldn't.
In short, these are the questions Hargarten would ask before enacting any concealed-carry legislation: "Do we really need this policy implemented to address crime and homicide? Do we want loaded, defective or poorly designed guns in our environment? Do we have the funds and infrastructure to accurately evaluate this policy?"
Good questions. The answers are "no," "no" and "no." It stands to reason then that the Legislature's answer to any new concealed-carry law should be "no" as well.
(You can find Hargarten's article at www.wisconsinmedicalsociety.org/health_news/wmj.cfm?volume=104&issue=7)
(I dug up the link for you, to help your blood pressure even more)
Public health implications of carrying concealed weapons: Have we thought this policy through? view article
Stephen W. Hargarten, MD, MPH
http://www.wisconsinmedicalsociety.org/uploads/wmj/Hargarten.pdf
http://www.jsonline.com/news/editorials/oct05/364252.asp
Editorial: Just say 'no' to more guns
From the Journal Sentinel
Posted: Oct. 19, 2005
There is a must-read article for the state Legislature in a recent issue of the Wisconsin Medical Journal.
In a guest editorial, Stephen Hargarten, co-director of the Firearm Injury Center at the Medical College of Wisconsin, raises questions that should prompt all legislators to look skeptically at a proposal that would allow average Wisconsinites to carry concealed weapons. Wisconsin is one of four states that prohibit the practice.
The proposed bill is a resurrection of a failed effort from last year. The Legislature passed so-called concealed-carry legislation in 2004 but missed by one vote in overriding a very necessary veto by Gov. Jim Doyle. Rep. Scott Gunderson (R-Waterford) and Sen. Dave Zien (R-Eau Claire) have promised to bring back a version of the bill this year.
They shouldn't. But if they do, Hargarten's article is a good guide for why they should show more sense about it this time.
In the article, Hargarten, who has written extensively on the public health aspects of gun violence, explains that the National Academy of Sciences has concluded that one of the principal reasons stated for such legislation - deterring crime - has little basis in fact. One of the December report's findings: "There is no credible evidence that 'right-to-carry' laws, which allow qualified adults to carry concealed handguns, either decrease or increase violent crime."
Hargarten notes that Wisconsin's suicide rate among youth is already 36% higher than the national average, that nearly 60% of firearm suicides in the state among youth involve someone else's gun and that 83% of the time it belongs to a parent or guardian. It stands to reason that availability of guns could increase with concealed carry - and that there might be a corresponding increase in the number of people killed with their own guns that have been taken from them.
"Are we really certain that conceal and carry is a thoughtful, timely policy for Wisconsin?" Hargarten asks in understated fashion.
We can answer that. With a preponderance of Milwaukee's killings involving guns, making more guns available is simple lunacy.
But Hargarten, who likely has read the same tea leaves as have we about this Legislature, also asks the question of whether such legislation should at least address the types of guns that citizens should be allowed to conceal and carry. In short, guns with exposed hammers that rest on firing pins can be discharged when dropped.
"Legislators may wish to limit the availability of more dangerous firearms through safety standards such as California's 'drop safety' requirement for all new handguns sold in the state," he wrote.
Hargarten, noting that the National Academy of Sciences called for more research about guns to guide policy, wrote that concealed-carry legislation, if improperly drafted, could stymie such efforts. He said previous legislation impeded or prohibited "the use of license application information or the experience of license-holders either as perpetrators or as victims of crime and violent injury."
In other words, any new legislation should make available the tools to discern whether the bill has helped or worsened matters.
Hargarten also fears that the upcoming bill would immunize groups that dispense the permits from lawsuits if they give permits to the wrong people. It shouldn't.
In short, these are the questions Hargarten would ask before enacting any concealed-carry legislation: "Do we really need this policy implemented to address crime and homicide? Do we want loaded, defective or poorly designed guns in our environment? Do we have the funds and infrastructure to accurately evaluate this policy?"
Good questions. The answers are "no," "no" and "no." It stands to reason then that the Legislature's answer to any new concealed-carry law should be "no" as well.
(You can find Hargarten's article at www.wisconsinmedicalsociety.org/health_news/wmj.cfm?volume=104&issue=7)
(I dug up the link for you, to help your blood pressure even more)
Public health implications of carrying concealed weapons: Have we thought this policy through? view article
Stephen W. Hargarten, MD, MPH
http://www.wisconsinmedicalsociety.org/uploads/wmj/Hargarten.pdf
:banghead: 
