The Corner

Politics & Policy

Charlie Sykes Is Wrong to Call ‘Constitutional Carry’ ‘Nuts’

In the New York Times, Charlie Sykes suggests that the National Rifle Association is irredeemably opposed to “rational gun regulation,” and tells a story to illustrate his claim:

I was a longtime supporter of Second Amendment rights and had backed state legislation that would allow law-abiding citizens who passed training courses and background checks to carry concealed weapons (as every state now allows in some form). More than 16 million Americans have the permits.

In 2011, concealed-carry legislation was poised to pass both houses of the Wisconsin Legislature until the N.R.A. decided that it did not go far enough. It insisted that the Second Amendment should preclude even minimal safety requirements for concealed carry. The N.R.A., claiming that it was supporting what it calls “constitutional carry,” demanded that anyone be allowed to carry a concealed handgun without training, background checks or permits of any kind.

I thought this was nuts and said so. The N.R.A. position made no sense from the standpoint of either public safety or politics. How would an unlimited right to carry weapons enhance public safety or confidence if you could walk into Milwaukee’s Miller Park with a handgun without any training or a permit? That would be a nightmare for law enforcement and frankly unsettling even for many ardent Second Amendment supporters.

But the national gun rights lobby pushed back hard, targeting me and a radio colleague who thought the idea defied common sense. The headline on one pro-gun website declared, “N.R.A. Calls Out Milwaukee Talk Show Hosts for Ignorant Stance on Right to Carry.”

Darren LaSorte, a former lobbyist for the N.R.A. Institute for Legislative Action, appeared on an internet broadcast, insisting that “it’s embarrassing to see them do that.” By suggesting that people learn to use a gun before carrying it out in public, he said, my colleague and I “probably did more harm to constitutional carry and the fight there than any other people out there, the anti-gunners or anyone else.”

Per Sykes’s account, his audience agreed with him. “My listeners,” he writes, “overwhelmingly supported gun rights but thought that requirements for background checks, safety training and permits just made sense.”

I don’t doubt that Sykes’s concern is sincere, nor that he is correct to recall that his listeners agreed with him six years ago. Indeed, if you asked people on the street at random what they think about this issue, I daresay that they’d side with Sykes. But that’s not actually a good argument against “constitutional carry,” and nor does it make any sort of case that the idea is ”nuts.” It’s not, whatever one might intuitively assume.

By the time that Wisconsin passed “shall-issue” concealed carry, almost every other state in America had similar laws on the books. Here, courtesy of Jeff Dege, is a chart showing the change:

In his piece, Sykes presents himself as a moderate for supporting Wisconsin’s addition to the list. And, by 2011, he undoubtedly was. And yet he was only able to do that because others before him had been called “nuts.” Thirty years ago, when Florida moved to a “shall-issue” system, the state was lambasted as an outlier. Florida, snarked the New York Times, would become the “gunshine state.” Worst still, we were told that we’d see shootouts in the street; usher in a return to the “wild west”; create a country in which the supermarket became the OK Corral. And what happened? Nothing. Crime dropped dramatically, as did gun crime. The naysayers slowly admitted they were wrong. And, as we have learned from the data provided by both Texas and Florida, concealed carriers proved themselves to be considerably more law-abiding than the police.

Nowadays, the position that provokes eye-rolls is that one held by the NRA: That, in Skyes’s words, “anyone be allowed to carry a concealed handgun without training, background checks or permits of any kind.” But should it? And does the NRA’s championing of it indicate a certain irresponsibility?

No.

As Sykes concedes, it is already the case that “12 states allow concealed carry without a permit.” And what has been the result there? Well . . . again, nothing. Nothing at all. Vermont has had “constitutional carry” since 1777. Alaska has had it since 2003. Arizona has had it since 2010. Recently, they have been joined by nine others. And nothing has changed. As my colleague Robert VerBruggen put it in a recent review of the evidence, “a bunch of states started letting almost any random person walk around with a gun, and if anything good or bad resulted, it doesn’t reliably show up in the data. That’s something in itself.”

I’ll say. 

 

Most Popular

Trump vs. Biden: A Rundown

One week out, the contrasts are worth assessing. Foreign policy Biden so far has issued no substantive critique of Trump’s foreign policy other than banalities that Trump’s comportment and unpredictability have offended allies and tarnished America’s reputation. But who exactly, according to Biden, is ... Read More

Trump vs. Biden: A Rundown

One week out, the contrasts are worth assessing. Foreign policy Biden so far has issued no substantive critique of Trump’s foreign policy other than banalities that Trump’s comportment and unpredictability have offended allies and tarnished America’s reputation. But who exactly, according to Biden, is ... Read More
Law & the Courts

The Kavanaugh Court

If Justice Barrett votes as her mentor Justice Scalia did, she will be part of an ascendant conservative majority on the Supreme Court. What kinds of decisions can we expect from this majority? Short answer: Ask Brett Kavanaugh. Contrary to how journalists frame each seat change on the Court, comparing the new ... Read More
Law & the Courts

The Kavanaugh Court

If Justice Barrett votes as her mentor Justice Scalia did, she will be part of an ascendant conservative majority on the Supreme Court. What kinds of decisions can we expect from this majority? Short answer: Ask Brett Kavanaugh. Contrary to how journalists frame each seat change on the Court, comparing the new ... Read More
Elections

The Only Middle Finger Available

If Donald Trump wins a second term, it will be an unmistakable countercultural statement in a year when progressives have otherwise worked their will across the culture. After months and months of statues toppling and riots in American cities and a crime wave and woke virtue-signaling from professional sports ... Read More
Elections

The Only Middle Finger Available

If Donald Trump wins a second term, it will be an unmistakable countercultural statement in a year when progressives have otherwise worked their will across the culture. After months and months of statues toppling and riots in American cities and a crime wave and woke virtue-signaling from professional sports ... Read More

The Pollster Who Thinks Trump Is Ahead

The polling aggregator on the website RealClearPolitics shows the margin in polls led by Joe Biden in a blue font and the ones led by Donald Trump in red. For a while, the battleground states have tended to be uniformly blue, except for polls conducted by the Trafalgar Group. If you are a firm believer only in ... Read More

The Pollster Who Thinks Trump Is Ahead

The polling aggregator on the website RealClearPolitics shows the margin in polls led by Joe Biden in a blue font and the ones led by Donald Trump in red. For a while, the battleground states have tended to be uniformly blue, except for polls conducted by the Trafalgar Group. If you are a firm believer only in ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Some Counterfactual Thinking

Election Day is one week away. Can you believe it? On the menu today: contemplating what would be different, and what would be the same, if Ruth Bader Ginsburg had retired in 2013 instead of staying on the Court until her death earlier this year; a couple of flubbed words on the campaign trail; yes, people really ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Some Counterfactual Thinking

Election Day is one week away. Can you believe it? On the menu today: contemplating what would be different, and what would be the same, if Ruth Bader Ginsburg had retired in 2013 instead of staying on the Court until her death earlier this year; a couple of flubbed words on the campaign trail; yes, people really ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Whose Seat?

Amy Coney Barrett is confirmed. And I think there are two little things to say about it. The first is that we very likely have in Barrett the true successor to Antonin Scalia on the Court. Barrett clerked for Scalia and her articulation of his philosophy is probably the most faithful on the court. Justices ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Whose Seat?

Amy Coney Barrett is confirmed. And I think there are two little things to say about it. The first is that we very likely have in Barrett the true successor to Antonin Scalia on the Court. Barrett clerked for Scalia and her articulation of his philosophy is probably the most faithful on the court. Justices ... Read More