Confronting Crime

"Just like any other city in Arizona and in the nation we have our issues but it is not crime-ridden. I would never say you have to carry a gun or you have to be afraid for your life."
Tucson, Arizona, Vice-Mayor Regina Romero

"People don't want to confront an armed person at home. But, separately, there is solid evidence that in communities with higher rates of gun ownership, burglary rates are up, not down, and that's because guns are hot loot."
Garen J. Wintemute, director, University of California, Davis Violence Prevention Research Program

Everyone has an opinion. Gun ownership in America is a bitterly contentious issue. The founder of The Armed Citizen Project, a University of Houston graduate student, claims to know otherwise. Kyle Coplen insists: "It is our hypothesis that criminals have no desire to die in your hallway. We want to use that fear."

And so, the campaign promises free shotguns for people to enable them to have the confidence to protect themselves. Residents of Tucson are divided on the issue, understandably. It was here in 2011 that six people died in a shooting rampage that almost also killed Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, and the congresswoman along with her husband, astronaut Mark Kelly, are now leading an effort to make gun ownership more responsible.

James Palka/Associated Press

Emergency personnel used a stretcher to carry Representative Gabrielle Giffords outside a shopping center in Tucson, Ariz.    Published: January 8, 2011

"If you are not willing to protect the citizens of Tucson, someone is going to do it, why not me? Why not have armed citizens protecting themselves", insists a local real estate agent planning the distribution of shotguns in his community to be initiated by May. The state's gun supporters have donated an initial $12,500 to fund the gun giveaways.

Those who sign on to the program will be scheduled to receive training on the proper use, handling and storage of their free giveaway weapons. They will be given trigger locks. The cost works out to roughly $400 for each participant, representing the cost of the weapon and the associated training.

Ms. Gifford and her husband are gun owners. They don't advocate not being able to access guns at all, but they do advocate for responsible gun ownership. Although still recovering from her wounds, Ms. Gifford champions universal background gun checks and additional gun restrictions. The absurd thing is that a majority of National Rifle Association members support those basic restrictions as well.

But the National Rifle Association is out there, front and centre, a minority special-interest group with great political clout, representing the views and the values of a relatively small number of its members, albeit those in leading positions, that Congress should keep its hands off the right of the nation to own guns, and that no legislation is required or should be considered to update Second Amendment rights.

Tucson City Council moved to approve a measure that would require universal background checks at gun shows on city property. The gun giveaway program as far as they're concerned, appears legal, and as a result they have no reason to outlaw it. Their own police statistics indicate that violent crime appeared at a 13-year low in 2010. Violent crimes; homicides, sexual assaults, robberies are down.

But Tucson experiences roughly fifty  homicides yearly. Whether defensive gun use impacts on lower commissions of crime is not definitively supported by research. Some research results suggest guns are responsible for more suicides and accidental deaths. There are studies that lead to the impression criminals are loathe to confront gun owners.

Some residents of the area are concerned and upset by the campaign to offer free guns to those who wish to take part in the program. "We could take that $400 per shotgun and give it to these people so they could go buy groceries, pay rent, pay their utility bills, something useful. Vigilantism is not the answer", counters neighbourhood association president Cindy Ayala.

Priorities misplaced.