I would be interested to see if one or the other included or excluded certain types of violent crime.
What I find very strange is that the only result that seems to hold up in all the studies is that CCW is associated with higher non-violent property crime. This makes no sense. Lott theorizes that would-be violent criminals move away from violent crime to non-violent crime because they are deterred by CCW. I don't buy it. Is a rapist is going start stealing cars instead of raping? The only type of crime where I would buy this argument is robbery, but even in Lott's results, CCW has barely any affect on this category of crime.
And then, of course, the negative relationship between CCW and violent crime all but disappears when you add the 1993-1999 data, so that argument holds no water in any case.
Anyone trained in econometrics can immediately see that there are major specification problems in all the studies, and they all need to be taken with a grain of salt.