Passage of 2015 Firearms Act cause for concern
More stories from Amy Napier
The West Virginia Senate Judiciary Committee recently passed a bill enabling the Firearms Act of 2015, allowing anyone over the age of 18 to carry a concealed weapon without a permit.
Sen. Robert Karnes, R-Upshur, said he advocated this bill because he believes citizens have a constitutional right to defend themselves.
“I believe that charging somebody for a permit in order to have this weapon that you may well need, is a violation of a basic and an inherent right and obviously a violation of the second amendment,” Karnes said.
Marshall University students and staff members have expressed concern since Senate Bill 347 was passed.
Pamela Mulder, psychology professor and faculty senate liaison for the Legislative Affairs Committee, said she wrote a letter to congress emphasizing the need for proper gun training before obtaining a weapon.
“There are many people out there who do not handle their emotions very well,” Mulder said. “You’ve seen them get mad. You’ve seen road rage. You’ve seen all these other responses. The only thing I could imagine would be worse would be an untrained person carrying a gun and shouting at strangers.”
Political science professor Marybeth Beller said she opposes the bill because having a weapon is not the same thing as protecting oneself.
“The idea that is largely promoted in society is that if everyone is armed, everyone can defend him or herself,” Beller said. “The logic is that isn’t true. People who successfully defend themselves with firearms are very trained in how to do so.”
Karnes countered this argument and said most people in West Virginia are already familiar with safe gun practices.
“It’s not really an issue here that much,” Karnes said. “I think almost anybody who actually gets a gun is going to want to know how to use it properly. I’m not against training. I just don’t think it should be a requirement.”
Karnes said SB 347 is currently in the House of Delegates Judiciary, and he said he thinks it will pass soon.
Amy Napier can be contacted at [email protected].
Your donation will help continue the work of independent student journalism at Marshall University. If you benefit from The Parthenon's free content, please consider making a donation.
MrApple • Mar 6, 2015 at 2:45 pm
““There are many people out there who do not handle their emotions very well,” Mulder said. “You’ve seen them get mad. You’ve seen road rage. You’ve seen all these other responses. The only thing I could imagine would be worse would be an untrained person carrying a gun and shouting at strangers.””
>So because a few people can’t “handle their emotions very well” we all should suffer for their actions. This isn’t Middle School if someone doesn’t play nice then stay away from them and call the Cops.
“Political science professor Marybeth Beller said she opposes the bill because having a weapon is not the same thing as protecting oneself.”
>True, just as owning a guitar doesn’t make you Eric Clapton. That being said it is the issue of “required” training that speaks to an intrusive and overbearing government.
““The idea that is largely promoted in society is that if everyone is armed, everyone can defend him or herself,” Beller said. “The logic is that isn’t true. People who successfully defend themselves with firearms are very trained in how to do so.””
>And yet there are stories after stories of untrained people successfully defending their lives with their firearms. I guess it was just dumb luck that they were able to figure out which end of the gun the bullets go in. 😉
teebonicus • Mar 6, 2015 at 2:21 pm
There is no defense for the imposition of a requirement to ask for and gain permission from the government in order to exercise a fundamental right.
Rights, unlike privileges, are not subject to prior approval.
And keeping and bearing arms is a right, not a privilege.
Lee Cruse • Mar 6, 2015 at 2:19 pm
“People who successfully defend themselves with firearms are very trained in how to do so” – not sure that I agree, however, there should be no disagreement that you should be so trained. You individual protection is your job and you have a responsibility to have the training and tools necessary.
Roberto Reyes • Mar 6, 2015 at 5:09 pm
Training by who? Do we need training for the 1st amendment too? After all someone could spew “hate” speech.