For those not paying attention to this, the NC law says people getting restraining orders are to be given information on how to apply for emergency concealed weapons permits - good while they do the background check for the regular permit.
Representatives of both groups say the bill sends the wrong messages: that victims are responsible for protecting themselves -- and that carrying a handgun is a wise idea.OK people will argue about concealed carry - of course those opposed never seem to want to talk about statistics. (How often does a CCW permit get revoked? What percentage of CCW permit-holders ever commit a crime? etc.)
But the real reason that these victimization groups are upset is that bit about responsibility. They believe that we should all turn responsibility for our security over to the state. There is just one problem. The state cannot guarantee our safety. They can't even come close.
A recent study showed that restraining orders are only effective 80% of the time. Eighty percent may sound like a lot, but would you drive your car if your breaks only worked 80% of the time?
Women who are depending on restraining orders and calls to 911 to keep them safe, die with disturbing regularity. But asking people to take responsibility for their own safety is against everything these groups stand for. I believe that if enough women armed and defended themselves, these organizations very existence would be in danger. Why do I need a victims' rights organization if I refuse to be victim? That's why I call them victimization organizations.
And the people on the other side of this issue?
"We felt there was more needed to be done to protect these women and empower them to be able to protect themselves," [Rep. Mark] Hilton said.Empowerment does not lead to victimization.
Update 11/18/2005: Original link has gone missing, see WAVY.COM - North Carolina law encourages gun access for domestic violence victims
[More on the NC law]