It seems to me that opponents of concealed carry have failed to consider all aspects of the question.

They assume that concealed carry would increase the dangers to police. The police have no reason to fear law-abiding citizens even if they are carrying weapons, either in plain sight or concealed. They do have reason to fear the criminals, because most likely they are carrying concealed weapons.

Some argue that some concealed-carry permit holders would not maintain proper security with their weapons. People paying for and taking the required training are much more likely to properly secure their weapons than people who do not hold permits.

It is obvious that both in rural areas and in cities, police are not able to get to crime scenes to protect victims before crimes occur. What are citizens to do? Just sit there and submit to being robbed, raped or murdered without putting up a defense?

Opponents of concealed carry argue that "surprise is the element of any crime -- rendering a gun useless." That may come as a considerable surprise to the people who more that 2 million times a year use firearms to protect themselves and their families, in many cases without having to even fire them. Also, a U.S. Justice Department survey found that 40 percent of felons chose not to commit at least some crimes for fear that their victims were armed, and 34 percent admitted being scared off or shot at by armed victims.

One more question for concealed-carry opponents: Would they rather encounter a potential rapist who thinks that the victim does not have the ability to put up a defense, or one who stops and wonders whether the victim might have a pistol hidden in a purse or briefcase or in a holster concealed under their clothing?

George E. Black is a retired farmer who lives in Adrian, Mo.