Posted on 07/20/2015 5:11:08 AM PDT by HomerBohn
Concealed carry killers are a threat to public safety. The evidence is clear that all too often, private citizens use their concealed handguns to take lives, not to save them. – The Violence Policy Center
It’s a myth that has been propagated for so long that even some conservatives believe it. The more guns you have on the streets, the more crime you get. It’s one of those cause-and-effect statements so obvious that most Americans don’t bother to question it. Even those who support the Second Amendment do so with reservations, believing that it’s more important to uphold personal liberty than to save lives.
But what if it wasn’t a choice? What if there was very little – if any – correlation between legal gun ownership and higher crime rates? Wouldn’t that make strict gun control policies a very silly reaction to violent crime statistics? Wouldn’t that mean that groups like The Violence Policy Center and Moms Demand Action are essentially lying to their followers?
A new study shows that this might be closer to the truth than most Americans realize. Conducted by the Crime Prevention Research Center, the study found that while murder rates have fallen since the election of President Barack Obama in 2008, the number of concealed carry permits has actually gone up. This correlation isn’t insignificant, either. Since 2007, the number of concealed carry permits in the United States has risen from 4.6 million to 12.8 million. During the same time frame, the murder rate has fallen from 5.6 murders per 100,000 Americans to 4.2 as of this year. The country is more armed than ever before, yet violent crime continues to fall.
“This paper simply shows that the states with the biggest increases in the percentage of the population with permits have seen the biggest drop in murder rates and crime,” said CPRC President John R. Lott in an interview with RealClearPolitics.
The study also found that concealed carry permits are becoming increasingly popular among women and minorities, breaking through the stereotypes. For years, pro-gun enthusiasts have been seen as largely white, male, rural, and conservative. But according to the study, there has been a 270% increase in the number of American women with concealed carry permits. Furthermore, concealed carry rates are rising among blacks and minorities at roughly twice the rate they are rising among whites.
“Over the last couple of years, there has been a massive sea change among blacks’ views towards guns,” Lott said. “My own belief is that, if you look at the evidence, women and blacks, particularly poor blacks who live in high-crime urban areas, are the people who benefit the most from owning guns.”
Lott is well known in gun rights circles for his book, More Guns = Less Crime, a must-read for anyone who wants to know the truth about the American gun debate. And while it’s tough to prove that the increase in concealed carry permits is directly responsible for the decrease in violent crime, his study does prove that the opposite argument is much less credible.
So why is it, with all of this information available, that liberal Democrats remain so fiercely anti-gun? Easy question. The thousands of handgun murders we have each year in America are not taking place in rural Kentucky. Red state Americans are not killing each other in mass numbers. The country’s most crime-riddled areas are urban communities with Democratic leadership. These politicians know that their awful economic policies are to blame for the dangerous conditions on the street. So they have to look for something else to blame. Racism in the justice system. Biased cops. The 1%. And of course, guns.
Since Democrats are still in power, we can assume that voters have not yet gotten the message. The next major gun study should attempt to prove a correlation between Democratic leadership and violent crime. If that can be proven (and it almost certainly can), maybe the left will be forced to acknowledge that there’s something wrong with their philosophy on politics, society, and the individual. And then maybe we can stop blaming boogeymen for America’s problems. -
“Even those who support the Second Amendment do so with reservations, believing that it’s more important to uphold personal liberty than to save lives”.
I’m really not sure what this statement is supposed to mean.
Upholding personal liberty means to me, open carry, Vermont style concealed carry, and the option to carry anywhere anytime, anyway I want to, thus saving lives in the process, especially yours and your loved ones should someone attempt to harm you or yours.
I was going to ask is this satire.
My CCW piece has never been drawn except to practice. And I’ve been a CCW carrier for about 20 yrs. When my great grands visit, or the youngest grands, it is locked in the gun safe and the key is put where they can’t get to it the day before they come.
Killings have actually dropped in states that have decent CCW laws.
> A new study shows that this might be closer to the truth than most Americans realize. Conducted by the Crime Prevention Research Center, the study found that while murder rates have fallen since the election of President Barack Obama in 2008, the number of concealed carry permits has actually gone up
Well the way the Obama Crime Sydnicate tells it white men are running around all over the place looking for innocent black people to kill and we need our guns taken away. The irony is rich.
>>> ..... private citizens use their concealed handguns to take lives, not to save them. – The Violence Policy Center
I THINK the VPC called drug dealers, gangbangers as ‘private citizens with concealed handguns’.
Anything to support their pet horse theory.
This “study” is the typical bilge that comes from Freedom-hating LIB degenerates in their attempt to justify their ignorance and fascist tendencies. What a bunch of hog wash.
“...The country’s most crime-riddled areas are urban communities
with Democratic leadership. These politicians know that their
awful economic policies are to blame for the dangerous conditions
on the street. So they have to look for something else to blame...”
Chicago’s murder rate dropped 54% in the first year residents could get carry permits.
In the gang ridden inner city neighborhood where Otis McDonald of the SCOTUS case lived, concealed permits issued ranks as the 23rd top zip code of permit holders in Illinois 1,300+ zip codes.
This, according to the top Chicago newspaper story 07/05/15.
Pure, and fresh, bovine excrement.
I will post these stats to contribute to the pool of reference materials:
An Analysis of the Arrest Rate of Texas Concealed Handgun License Holders as Compared to the Arrest Rate of the Entire Texas Population,” William E. Sturdevant, September 1, 2000; Florida Department of Justice statistics,
1998; Florida Department of State,
http://concealedguns.procon.org/sourcefiles/sturdevant.pdf
From page 23 of the report:
6.3.3.1 Males
The average male Texan who is 21 years or older is 7.9 times more likely to be arrested for the violent crimes of murder, rape, robbery, and assault than the average male CHL holder. The average male Texan who is 21 years or older is 20 times more likely to be arrested for committing a non-violent crime than the average male CHL holder.
Looking at violent crimes individually, the average male Texan who is 21 years or older is 1.9 times (rate of 9.0 v. 4.8) more likely to be arrested for murder; 68 times (rate of 25 v. 0.4) more likely to be arrested for rape; 49 times (rate of 45 v. 0.9) more likely to be arrested for robbery;
3.2 times (rate of 207 v. 64) more likely to be arrested for aggravated assault; and 11 times (rate of 914 v. 82) more likely to be arrested for other assaults than the average male CHL holder.
No male Texas CHL holder was arrested for negligent manslaughter during the 1996 through 1999 period.
6.3.3.2 Females
The average female Texan who is 21 years or older is 7.5 times more likely to be arrested for the violent crimes of murder and assault than the average female CHL holder. The average female Texan who is 21 years or older is 16 times more likely to be arrested for committing a nonviolent
crime than the average female CHL holder.
Looking at violent crimes individually, the average female Texan who is 21 years or older is 1.7 times (rate of 1.3 v. 0.7) more likely to be arrested for murder; 2.2 times (rate of 48 v. 22) more likely to be arrested for aggravated assault; and 20 times (rate of 180 v. 9) more likely to be
arrested for other assaults than the average female CHL holder.
No female Texas CHL holder has arrested for negligent manslaughter, rape, or robbery during the 1996 through 1999 period.
...
7 CONCLUSIONS:
7.1.1 Arrest data for Texas CHL holders indicate that violent crime is not a consequence of handgun ownership or possession.
7.1.2 The total population of Texas has an arrest rate for violent crime that is 5.3 times higher than Texas CHL holders, based upon data from 1996 - 1999.
...
7.2.1 Arrest data for Texas CHL holders indicate that murder and non-negligent manslaughter is not a consequence of handgun ownership or possession....
...
7.5.2 The total population of Texas has an arrest rate for robbery that is 48 times higher than Texas CHL holders, based upon data from 1996 - 1999.
...
7.9.1 Less than two percent (1.9%) of the arrests of CHL holders for violent crimes that possibly involve weapons (murder, manslaughter, rape, robbery, aggravated assault) were classified as “family violence” crimes.
...
7.10.2 The total population of Texas has an arrest rate for non-violent crime that is 14 times higher than Texas CHL holders, based upon data from 1996 - 1999.
from:
Concealed Weapons/Firearms License Statistical Report,” 1998; Texas Department of Public Safety and the U.S. Census Bureau, reported in San Antonio Express-News, September 2000; Texas Department of Corrections data,
1996-2000, compiled by the Texas State Rifle Association
Murder Rates by Minnesota Gun Permit Holders Expose Remarkable Safety of Firearms Owners
When the Minnesota law was passed, an annual report of crimes committed by permit holders was required. The Minnesota permit is simply a permit to carry, the law does not discriminate between carrying concealed and carrying openly.
Reports for the law are available for 2003, and 2005-2012 in pdf files.
The number of people with Minnesota permits that commit murder or manslaughter is remarkably low. Only three instances are recorded in the Minnesota Carry Permit annual reports for the nine years reported.
From the reports, the numbers of valid permits for each year are as follows:
2003 – 15,677
2005 – 32,885
2006 – 42,189
2007 – 51,347
2008 – 56,919
2009 – 69,313
2010 – 79,180
2011 – 91,221
2012 – 114,793
Total for the years listed – 553,524
Rate of carry permit holders committing murder and manslaughter/100,000 per year, .542.
Rate of murder in the general population in Minnesota, per 100,000 averaged for the years 2003, 2005 – 2012, is 1.78.
https://dps.mn.gov/Pages/Results.aspx?k=permit%20to%20carry%20report
2011 Report:
https://dps.mn.gov/divisions/bca/Documents/2011%20Permit%20to%20Carry%20Year%20End%20Report%20Final.pdf
Revised Minnesota Murder/Manslaughter Rates, Wednesday, October 16, 2013
http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2013/10/minnesota-carry-permit-murder-rates_16.html
Quinnipiac Study: Concealed Carry Results in Fewer Murders
“These results suggest that restrictive concealed weapons laws may cause an
increase in gun-related murders at the state level.”
1.3.2014 by Bradford Thomas
In what will certainly be gun control advocates’ new least favorite study,
Quinnipiac University’s Mark Gius found not only that states with
restrictive concealed weapons laws had higher gun-related murder rates, but
that assault weapons bans had no significant impact on murder rates at the
state level.
The study by economist Mark Gius, published in Applied Economics Letters,
sought to “determine the effects of state-level assault weapons bans and
concealed weapons laws on state murder rates,” using extensive data from a
thirty-year period, 1980-2009. In the abstract for the study, Gius sums up
the findings:
Using data for the period 1980 to 2009 and controlling for state and year
fixed effects, the results of the present study suggest that states with
restrictions on the carrying of concealed weapons had higher gun-related
murder rates than other states. It was also found that assault weapons bans
did not significantly affect murder rates at the state level. These results
suggest that restrictive concealed weapons laws may cause an increase in
gun-related murders at the state level.
Gius notes that these results are consistent with previous research,
specifically citing the work by John R. Lott and David B. Mustard.
http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/quinnipiac-study-concealed-carry-results-fewer-murders
link to study
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13504851.2013.854294#.UsblyNK1y-2
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13504851.2013.854294
More like horse excrement theory.
There is a high correlation between drugs and gangs, and the incidence of violent and non-violent crime.. 78% of Maryland’s violent crime occcurrs in Baltimore. It seems pretty obvious what the problem is. It sure isn’t a laxk of gun control as Maryland has more of that than pretty much every other state.
I was at the range yesterday practicing. (admittedly, boy did it appear I needed it) The day before several friends and one of my kids wanted to see the new Terminator movie. Yes, I was CCing in the theater. No, I no longer care if a place is posted "gun free" or not. That's why it's called "concealed" carry. In my State such signs carry no legal force. I've decided that my safety and that of my friends and loved ones, even just my fellow citizens - all are more important to me than the risk of embarrassment at being asked to leave, even banned from any establishment.
So I carry, period. If someone doesn't like it that's just too {expletive} bad. My safety trumps their irrational, unfounded, ignorant fears. I'm an engineer, I understand probabilities. I'm aware of the many comparisons to bear attacks, lighting strikes etc. I realize I will almost certainly never need to draw my weapon other than on the practice range. Many anti-gun people would try to characterize my preparedness as irrational "fears" for my personal security. I look at the big picture. My carrying probably will never make a difference. However, our carrying (as a society, non-criminals) does make a difference. All those violent, even deadly criminal attacks are happening to someone. If we as a society increase the percentage of people prepared to defend themselves, then violent crimes (as the study shows) are decreased.
So will my carrying make a difference to me and my loved ones? Probably not. But I'm helping make society just a little bit safer by being part of that percentage. And you just never know, I could end up being one of the people that makes a very direct contribution to the safety of society.
In all fairness, those arguments against concealed carry are so utterly rejected by the public that even mentioning them comes across, oddly enough, as a straw man argument.
Even radical anti-gun liberty nuts don’t believe that concealed carry is a real threat; they are just entirely cynical in their efforts to ban guns that they would assert that night is day and up is down. With the possible exception of Michael Bloomberg, who has mental issues to the point of being psychotic. And he is the one who meets the payroll of the anti-gunners, so they will agree with anything he says.
Armed criminals are part of the public too!
They are a threat to all the young skiddle loving gentle giant polar bear hunters!
Its a logic and personal justification train.
1. You deserve help from others.
2. You are entitled to help from others.
3. Whatever you don't have is the result of others having too much.
4. You are entitled to take what others have.
5. If others won't give you what you want, you are entitled to take it with force.
My Grandson was shot in the Colorado Theater shooting. He was seriously injured and has yet too fully recover. Gun free zones are useless and open invitations. I’ts a good thing I can’t read.
Ummm, they're LIBERAL groups - of course they're lying...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.