Posted on 12/28/2004 3:23:29 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
Car jackings have dropped to near-zero levels in states with concealed carry laws.
Does this press release jibe with ANYTHING you've heard about concealed carry?
Sounds good to me.
So did rape in a Florida town that worked with women to familiarize them with firearms.
I wish. Carjackings are a real, and growing problem in Texas.
My response to the article would be a simple, who cares? My handgun increases my odds of surviving an assault. Whether or not it lowers the overall crime rate is irrelevant.
In a rare moment of candor, the MMM admits the truth.
Precisely
This may or may not be true; I don't know and don't particularly care. The interesting thing is, look who's on the defensive now! Used to be, we had to defend conceal carry saying that it won't increase crime (shootouts at stoplights and all that). Now, we are on the offense. The million mommies are on the defensive! I love it.
Bottom line: policy arguments come and go. The fact is that a law abiding citizen has an inalienable right to self defense, including the right to carry. That should be enough for most people.
I agree with that. How are criminals supposed to know you have a gun when it's concealed? Start carrying your gun on your belt right out in front, that will decrease crime.
The thrust of the story is wrong. It should at least state that blood in the streets didn't come about (as decried) when citizens were allowed to excersize their constitutional right.
To me, the most interesting part of these revelations that concealed carry laws don't cut down on the crime rate is that these same fellows were recently claiming that blood would be running in the streets if they allow citizens to carry concealed firearms.
So it seems they now believe that concealed carry does no harm.
This is a sea change in tactics, and it basically means we've got them on the ropes. Time to close in for the knockout.
By the way, John Lott's study IS credible evidence.
Scientifically, I'm sure there's no credible evidence. "Correlation does not imply causality," but in this case, you can make a pretty dang good assumption.
Well said!
Yes, I read quite a bit of John Lott's works a few years ago.
If I recall, he did scientific studies that showed that concealed weapons jurisdictions did indeed have lower crime rates.
"Sciences said researchers need accurate data on the number of guns manufactured and distributed, access to crime gun trace data, and more information on patterns of gun ownership and types of weapons owned in order to adequately assess policies to reduce and prevent gun violence."
They need to talk to Professor Lott-he has this information. According to the FBI, violent crime is down. Tying cause and effect is where the politics tend to take over.
I strongly believe that the presence of guns reduces crime but if the rate drops with the increase in guns being carried, who can say for sure if some other reason caused it.
There are quite a few studies which show a very large number of crimes are averted by citizens with guns and almost none make the police reports, Thus they will not factor in a lot of studies.
Concealed Guns don't deter crime, (unless your in Switzerland and you know that everyone has a gun)
Carry your gun out front and see who tries to mug you.
A law abiding gun owner will fire a gun in self defense.
Self Defense as in Defending oneself from a crime. The crime is still taking place, so of course guns don't prevent crime. What kind of a scientific study is this anyway?
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.