Ohio Gun debate ends with volleys fired, without a winner

Josey1

Gun debate ends with volleys fired, without a winner 02/02/02Janet H. Cho Plain Dealer ReporterAbout the only thing John R. Lott Jr. and State Sen. Eric Fingerhut could agree on during yesterday's testy gun control debate was that police play the largest role in fighting crime. Lott, a senior research scholar at Yale University Law School and author of "More Guns, Less Crime," argued that because police can't protect every citizen all the time, people should be able to carry guns to protect themselves. From Our Advertiser Ohio law bans carrying concealed weapons or having loaded weapons in a vehicle. A state appeals court will hear arguments next month on whether the ban violates the state Constitution. Letting ordinary people carry concealed weapons leads to fewer murders, violent crimes, robberies and rapes, because criminals are less likely to prey on those who might be armed, Lott said. "Guns can make it easier for bad things to happen, but guns can also make it easier for people to defend themselves and prevent bad things from happening," he said to a lecture hall of about 65 law students at Case Western Reserve University School of Law. Fingerhut, a Shaker Heights Democrat and vocal gun control advocate, said he usually turns down invitations to speak at such debates because they rarely change anybody's mind. But he made an exception yesterday, saying: "I really feel very strongly that the materials just presented to you are almost wholly unreliable, and when presented as fact and as the basis for public policy, are a true disservice to this fine law school." Fingerhut criticized Lott for disguising his advocacy as scholarly work and disputed many of the figures Lott cited as inaccurate. He said it was illogical and misleading to use crime statistics to support his arguments, because it's impossible to factor in all the reasons some places have more crime than others. "It is ludicrous to suggest that increasing the number of people carrying loaded weapons around the house is actually going to reduce crime," he said. Fingerhut pointed out that after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the federal government responded by beefing up the number of police and other trained people carrying weapons and "simultaneously doing everything we can to make sure that the people who are untrained are unarmed and shouldn't have them." Lott disagreed. "Sept. 11 is a reason why more people should get guns and arm themselves, because there's so many targets," he said. He thinks commercial airline pilots should also carry guns to defend themselves against hijackers, because there aren't enough federal marshals to patrol every flight. Lott contends that those most vulnerable to crime - women, senior citizens and poor people who live in high-crime areas - would benefit the most from a conceal-carry law. Fingerhut acknowledged that many of the people who want to carry guns already own them and use them responsibly. He said he would support a conceal-carry law if permit holders were properly screened and trained and if police could have a say in who got permits. But Lott favors a less restrictive law that requires fewer hours of firearms training and makes the permits affordable to anyone who wants one. http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/xml/story.ssf/html_standard.xsl?/base/cuyahoga/10126458183213839.xml