•Why do the leaders of our state insist on making it more difficult to vote while making it easier to carry a weapon? Why do you have to show a photo ID to vote when, under one of the concealed-carry proposals, you can apply for a license by mail without proof of identification? ...
If democracy is at the forefront of the argument for concealed carry, how does that square with making it more difficult for people to vote in a state that has virtually no voter fraud, according to the nonpartisan Government Accountability Board? Those two concepts just don’t add up to a more democratic Wisconsin.
There were 488 gun-related deaths in Wisconsin in 2007 according to the Legal Community Against Violence (citing National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, WISQARS Injury Mortality Reports, 1999-2007. This compares with a mere 20 instances of voter fraud in 2008 (and keep in mind that our Republican Attorney General, J.B. van Hollen, has been diligently working for years to prove the Republican myth of widespread voter fraud).
So clearly, making it tougher to vote than to carry a gun into a polling place makes a lot of sense.
The Tribune's other arguments against the concealed carry bills working their unstoppable way through the legislature have been heard before (although not by our gun-happy Republicans, who will hear none of it):
In other words, if concealed weapons aren’t a good idea for the place where legislators work, why is it a good idea for our workplaces or churches or Lambeau Field? ...
Under at least one of the proposals, someone convicted of a violent misdemeanor — stalking and battery, for instance — could carry a concealed weapon. Do we really think that will have a safe, healthy ending?