Crime Rate & Concealed Carry - Page 2

Tru Trak · May 28, 2009, 07:17 AM

I have read both sides of this argument and have come to the conclusion that it is a useless one. The folks against CCW will always be against it (until attacked themselves) and the folks for it will always be for it. This has not changed in our whole history as far as I can see it. I can't imagine someone telling our Fore Fathers that they needed a permit to carry thier weapon. In my opinion I believe there is a slab of our society that is just evil and without weapons to keep them in check they will over run the rest of us in a short time. I for one don't intend to let someone from that slab do the harm that is their lifestyle to me or my family if I am at all capable. Capable meaning being able to take them out with a weapon as a last resort. This isn't something I take lightly and I hope never happens, but I can't and won't take that chance with my Beloved Bride or my Children. I like most others on this site see awful things happen on the news every day and any one of them could be me or my family, but if I have any say-so it will not be me you will be reading about I pray. The slab I speak of will never stop doing the harm they do and pass it on to the next generation, and I am sure they wonder (and I am glad) if the next person they try to do harm to is armed or not. Although that slab will always be who they are, the one thing I think that could make them happy is the thought that we could easily become an unarmed society.

Wagonman · May 28, 2009, 08:39 AM

Quote:

Of course you can dismiss all his critics if it makes your life easier.

Michelle Malkin? Geez, now we're talking real loon squad members.

I am not dismissing anyone, I googled the subject and read a little and made a judgement. His explanations look reasonable.

What's wrong with MM, I enjoy her pieces and her debating style.

FF/EMT · May 28, 2009, 09:49 AM

Quote:

to anyone who cares if CCW reduces crime:

CCW isn't about reducing crime. Its about defending myself. so, if you are in the mindset that in fact it does nothing for crime, then all more the reason I should carry my firearm.
I bet you would want one if you went into one of those cities. Would you rather not carry one because "it doesn't reduce crime"??? how horribly backwards that logic is. You go on ahead, leave your gun at home because it does nothing to stop crime. Ill be happy with mine everywhere I go. Cause bad guys don't tell me when they want to act in a criminal way. I can't tell the future that far.

Amen brother. I was gonna say something but I couldn't have said it better.

txstang84 · May 28, 2009, 11:14 AM

Quote:

to anyone who cares if CCW reduces crime:

CCW isn't about reducing crime. Its about defending myself. so, if you are in the mindset that in fact it does nothing for crime, then all more the reason I should carry my firearm.
I bet you would want one if you went into one of those cities. Would you rather not carry one because "it doesn't reduce crime"??? how horribly backwards that logic is. You go on ahead, leave your gun at home because it does nothing to stop crime. Ill be happy with mine everywhere I go. Cause bad guys don't tell me when they want to act in a criminal way. I can't tell the future that far.

+1

I don't think it's gonna get much if any more succint than this...

ECHOONE · May 28, 2009, 12:58 PM

What's up with this Double Naught guy is he running for public office or something? Yo.... Naught Obama already got the Presidency buddy!! Jobs filled!

Sixer · May 28, 2009, 01:06 PM

Same topic, different week...

http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/...d.php?t=358300

Mr. James · May 28, 2009, 04:30 PM

If one could adduce proof positive that concealed carry actually increased the crime/homicide/suicide rates, it would matter not a whit. Such debates may be mildly interesting in a parlour-game kind of way. But in point of fact, they are utterly irrelevant.

I have never thought much of utilitarian arguments about what a public benefit the Second Amendment, or concealed carry, or gun ownership in general provides. It ain't about crime stats or reducing violent crimes or about anything more or less fundamental than this: the individual's right to protect himself and his family from violent predators (or, in the extreme, predatory government) with the best tools available.

Carry on . . .

Kaiser sose · May 29, 2009, 01:56 PM

Where I live a CCW makes all the difference. The town I live in only has about 3,000 people, and about 70% of us are armed. There are several larger cities not far from us,one just a stones throw across the columbia river; and they do have their fair share of crime. But it is known far and wide that our town don't tolorate scum,and because of that fact we don't even have police on duty after 10pm. We citizens deal with any problems ourselves,and if more folks started taking a more active role in policein' their streets and cities maybe crime whould really drop; and things would get better....I don't know why I even bother,its unlikely that anyone who reads this knows what "A Citizen's Duty" is, thats truely sad...

Double Naught Spy · May 29, 2009, 06:42 PM

Quote:

Double Naught, you seem to be quite the number cruncher. Here is a good one for ya...

Why dont you add up all of the instances where a CHL has used deadly force in a justified way, then compare it to all of the times a CHL has used deadly force in an unjustified way.

After you have secured this data, please report back and tell me if you still think CHL has not lowered the crime rate in instances where a CHL served any relavance to the said crime.

I will tell you what, you show me how the ratio of valid to invalid CHL use is causative to the overall crime rate and I will get the data for you. You can't because it isn't.

Quote:

Furthermore, the punks and thugs are performing "crook on crook" crimes. Dope dealers shoot crackheads for being late on their meth bill. This has nothing to do with CHL. A CHL cannot prevent that crime.

Thanks for helping make my point! CHLs don't do squat for crimes that don't occur against or in the presence of CHL holders who act in a positive manner on said crimes. You see, those data are part of what constitutes crime rates. There are so few people who have CHLs/CCWs (or whatever you call them where you are) that overall crime isn't affected in spite of claims by CHL/CCW proponents that it is.

Hkmp5sd · May 29, 2009, 07:07 PM

Quote:

You want to throw out data you don't like. Got it. Thanks for helping make my point!

Yet you are basing your argument on FBI data that even the FBI says not to use because of inaccuracies in reporting.

Given the number of LEOs in the country (several hundred thousand) vs. LEOs involved in gun fights vs. LEOs killed in gun fights vs. LEOs killed with their own gun (approximately 10%), we could prove that either cops do not need to be armed or it would make cops safer if we disarm them.

"Statistics" can be bent to support any argument.

I guess that is why people that swim in the ocean are statistically more likely to be bitten by sharks than those that only swim in pools.

**Shane Tuttle** · May 29, 2009, 10:31 PM

In my simple little mind, complicated stats that may or may not support a theory gets trumped by common sense just about every time.

The current small percentage of active concealed carriers may not be enough to see a dent made to show an actual reduction in crime. But how many cases have been not reported that a plausible crime was deterred?

If concealed permits were issued to 50% of the population that's law abiding and they actively carried, do you think your assertion will hold water then? I don't. Didn't think so in the beginning, either.

An armed society is a polite society. It's as simple as that.

ZeSpectre · May 29, 2009, 10:35 PM

Quote:

The current small percentage of active concealed carriers may not be enough to see a dent made to show an actual reduction in crime. But how many cases have been not reported that a plausible crime was deterred?

This thought often occurs to me as well. I don't think we'll ever get accurate stats because (for better or worse) we'll NEVER get accurate reporting on crimes that "almost" happened.

I'd love a world where folks did feel comfortable calling the police and saying "hey, just wanted to get this short-circuited crime attempt on report" and the cops would say, "thanks, we'll add that to the statistics" without any further hassles or weird looks.

Double Naught Spy · June 2, 2009, 03:20 PM

Quote:

I take the Dallas Morning News with a tiny grain of salt. They're getting about as liberal as the Houston Chronicle and Atlanta Constitution.

Okay, that is well and good. I guess you are saying they fudged the data? Well then, go look at it for yourself and crunch the data and see if things have indeed changed or not.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/2008prelim/

Quote:

The current small percentage of active concealed carriers may not be enough to see a dent made to show an actual reduction in crime. But how many cases have been not reported that a plausible crime was deterred?

Well gee, how about all the crime that isn't reported at all? There is a lot of it. If you want to argue about John Lott fantasy numbers, that is fine, but you just have to know that they are fantasy numbers.

Quote:

In my simple little mind, complicated stats that may or may not support a theory gets trumped by common sense just about every time.

Got it. If the data don't fit the theory, then so much the worse for the data.

**Bud Helms** · June 2, 2009, 07:17 PM

Man! I turn around and this topic is in it's second page. Obviously a topic for L&CR.

Moving. You guys behave over there. They don't take prisoners.

Hkmp5sd · June 2, 2009, 07:20 PM

Hmmm.....

Quote:

Got it. If the data don't fit the theory, then so much the worse for the data.

Quote:

If you want to argue about John Lott fantasy numbers, that is fine, but you just have to know that they are fantasy numbers.

Sounds like the pot calling the kettle black.

**Shane Tuttle** · June 2, 2009, 08:19 PM

Oh, yes. The dreaded universal crime rates. Well, to throw the curve ball, Detroit has one of, if not, the highest crime rate in America. Yet Michigan is a shall issue state. Supports your case, right? Not so fast. Doesn't exactly show in the stats that many law abiding citizens made a mass exodus to the suburbs. So the overall crime rate may be higher, but it doesn't make sense. Just because the crime rate is sky high in Detroit due to all the hooligans are left behind there doesn't mean CCW permits don't reduce crime. A higher concentration of CCW and law abiding gunowners in most well ran highly populated towns in the metro area provides significant evidence that CCW can "cause" safer places to live. Also, UCR, as another member argued, doesn't take into account for potential crime that's thwarted necessarily. It only uses stats that are REPORTED. UCR is a complete joke.

The whole point missed here is there's not nearly enough active concealed carry users out there to provide proof it can "cause" a reduction in crime. One day, if we have significantly sized cities that has permits issued to 30-40%, this argument will not only be conjecture, it will prove that it provides a safer environment.

Quote:

Got it. If the data don't fit the theory, then so much the worse for the data.

Let's put it this way: I would take a platoon sergeant's word before some general at ICOR on how the actual battle is going in his own trenches. You cling to the UCR as hard, conclusive data. I'll keep my common sense.

nitetrane98 · June 2, 2009, 08:57 PM

Double Naught,
You're constructing a strawman argument by saying that CCWer's believe CCW laws are passed to prevent crime. I've lived in Texas for 35 years. I was here when the law was passed. I don't recall any of the proponents of CCW saying anything about reducing crime. So your premise is false from the beginning.

I do remember in 1995 the Luby's massacre in Killeen TX. where a man killed 20+ folks in cold blood. I also remember the anti gun crowd screaming like stuck pigs that there would be blood running in the streets of Texas. "It'll be like the Wild West days, OMG the humanity. Well, guess, didn't happen.

Your statistics are of no use trying to connect CCW with the rise in the crime rate because there was never a connection in the first place.

Cerick · June 2, 2009, 10:35 PM

CCW sure doesn't increase crime. Look at D.C. One of the higher crime rates and no CCW at all. Your sample list of cities with populations over 1,000,000 was weak too because other than the 3 cities you listed, there are only 8 more cities in the country with a population that big. Also San Antonio has a relatively low rate compared to alot of major cities.

skydiver3346 · June 3, 2009, 08:16 AM

I really don't know all the facts to your original question/post? Folks make some good points so far regarding this question.

However, the only fact I'm concerned about, is that my conceal carry should hopefully help (in the event that a crime is committed against me and/or my family).

Bartholomew Roberts · June 3, 2009, 08:23 AM

Texas has a high crime rate; but what about violent crime? Most of Dallas's crime problem is theft from motor vehicles, which is pretty common around here; but it isn't the type of crime you would expect CCW to deter.

In fact, without getting into the merits of the Lott study, if I remember Lott correctly, I believe he suggests that their is a substitution factor and that criminals may choose less confrontational crimes as a substitute in his study.

Hank D. · June 3, 2009, 09:28 AM

I for one well know that you can take the statistacs and make them do whatever you want them to do, the noumbers game! I'm not saying that happened here!!! I try very heard to talk of things that I know to be true and not what I hear from any second or third parties, now with that said, one thing I know to be true Is that most criminals are very big cowards, not all but most, whach out for the nut job!!! They go after the weak and try very heard to stay away from the strong! Case In point, I grew up In New York City, "Washington Hights"
My father had a butcher shop there from about 1946 till I think 1978 or so and we had a lot of stores around us, on our street going South was next a hardwear store, a shoe maker , a Deli, a dry goods store and a book store and then a candy store and so on, My point In all the years that we had that store we were never held up, or even an attemped made to hold us up! The same with the shoe maker, all the other stores on that block and across the street were all held up at gun point from time to time. I worked in my Dad's store every weekend for well over 25 years.
Why were we and the shoemaker left out of the holdups? Think about who is always working with a knife and or clever In hand and the shoe maker always had a knife or hammer in hand!!! "Most criminals are cowards" they go for the weak and not the strong! There is another story that I heard of from I think GA. about 10 or 15 years ago??? Two towns close to each other,lets just say town "A" and town "B" town "A" had an anti gun Mayer, and town "B" had a pro gun Mayer, I think this story was in The American rifel Man or Guns and Ammo 10-15 years ago??? Town "A" tolds all the people that there would be a ban on guns In that town and as town "B" heard of this they went 180 and stated that all good standing people In that town should have a gun in the house hold by law? Well guess just what happened to the crime rate in each of them towns, now it was not over night, but the crime rate In town "A" went up by about 3-4 times and town "B" the crime rate went down by just about the same!!! for you people that like to go digging things like this up, go at it, I'm going from memory here about the times and the States and also which magazines I saw the stories In and when!!! If any of you find the stories I'm talking about, please post them back here.
Semper FI to all, Hank D. Please note, I'm not a very good speller/my weak point.

David Armstrong · June 3, 2009, 09:35 AM

Quote:

Well then, go look at it for yourself and crunch the data and see if things have indeed changed or not.

And thus the problem with so many people, particularly those in the gun world. Way too many folks who want to argue the facts based on what they think, or based on a bumper sticker cliche they found, or based on something they read about what someone posted talking about what someone said about what they read. Not many folks want to take the time and effort to actually read the research, to study the information, to look at the analysis, and so on. Nobody goes to look at the data, nobody crunches the data themselves, many can't find the data, more can't crunch it, and even more could care less what the data shows and what the facts are if it disagrees with what they think. Then they get mad because you tell them to go read some of the material. Sad.

David Armstrong · June 3, 2009, 09:40 AM

Quote:

CCW sure doesn't increase crime. Look at D.C. One of the higher crime rates and no CCW at all.

Apparently doesn't do much to reduce it, either. New Orleans and Baton Rouge both are CCW towns and have some of the highest violent crime rates in the U.S.

Hank D. · June 3, 2009, 09:48 AM

Also take a good look a Washington DC.Hank D.

Hank D. · June 3, 2009, 09:54 AM

I have two good books for anyone that wants to look into the stats, Book #1 more Guns less crime, #2-The bias ageinst guns, both by a once anti gunner John R. Lott Jr. Semper FI to all, Hank D.

May 28, 2009, 07:17 AM	#26
Tru Trak Member Join Date: December 11, 2008 Posts: 45	I have read both sides of this argument and have come to the conclusion that it is a useless one. The folks against CCW will always be against it (until attacked themselves) and the folks for it will always be for it. This has not changed in our whole history as far as I can see it. I can't imagine someone telling our Fore Fathers that they needed a permit to carry thier weapon. In my opinion I believe there is a slab of our society that is just evil and without weapons to keep them in check they will over run the rest of us in a short time. I for one don't intend to let someone from that slab do the harm that is their lifestyle to me or my family if I am at all capable. Capable meaning being able to take them out with a weapon as a last resort. This isn't something I take lightly and I hope never happens, but I can't and won't take that chance with my Beloved Bride or my Children. I like most others on this site see awful things happen on the news every day and any one of them could be me or my family, but if I have any say-so it will not be me you will be reading about I pray. The slab I speak of will never stop doing the harm they do and pass it on to the next generation, and I am sure they wonder (and I am glad) if the next person they try to do harm to is armed or not. Although that slab will always be who they are, the one thing I think that could make them happy is the thought that we could easily become an unarmed society. __________________ "Reserved behavior may take longer to make a first impression, but will always beat the rushed alternative" Larry

May 28, 2009, 01:06 PM	#31
Sixer Senior Member Join Date: April 16, 2008 Location: Missouri Posts: 1,891	Same topic, different week... http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/...d.php?t=358300 __________________ Hopp Custom Leather <------ click for HOLSTER awesomeness!! -There is no theory of evolution... Just a list of creatures Chuck Norris has allowed to live.

May 28, 2009, 04:30 PM	#32
Mr. James Senior Member Join Date: April 10, 2001 Location: The Old Dominion Posts: 1,521	If one could adduce proof positive that concealed carry actually increased the crime/homicide/suicide rates, it would matter not a whit. Such debates may be mildly interesting in a parlour-game kind of way. But in point of fact, they are utterly irrelevant. I have never thought much of utilitarian arguments about what a public benefit the Second Amendment, or concealed carry, or gun ownership in general provides. It ain't about crime stats or reducing violent crimes or about anything more or less fundamental than this: the individual's right to protect himself and his family from violent predators (or, in the extreme, predatory government) with the best tools available. Carry on . . . __________________ "...A humble and contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise." Ps. li "When law and morality contradict each other, the citizen has the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense or losing his respect for the law." —Frederic Bastiat

May 29, 2009, 01:56 PM	#33
Kaiser sose Junior Member Join Date: May 29, 2009 Location: Oregon Posts: 8	Where I live a CCW makes all the difference. The town I live in only has about 3,000 people, and about 70% of us are armed. There are several larger cities not far from us,one just a stones throw across the columbia river; and they do have their fair share of crime. But it is known far and wide that our town don't tolorate scum,and because of that fact we don't even have police on duty after 10pm. We citizens deal with any problems ourselves,and if more folks started taking a more active role in policein' their streets and cities maybe crime whould really drop; and things would get better....I don't know why I even bother,its unlikely that anyone who reads this knows what "A Citizen's Duty" is, thats truely sad... Last edited by Shane Tuttle; May 29, 2009 at 10:13 PM. Reason: removal of term to skirt language filter

May 29, 2009, 10:31 PM	#36
Shane Tuttle Staff Join Date: November 28, 2005 Location: Montana Posts: 9,443	In my simple little mind, complicated stats that may or may not support a theory gets trumped by common sense just about every time. The current small percentage of active concealed carriers may not be enough to see a dent made to show an actual reduction in crime. But how many cases have been not reported that a plausible crime was deterred? If concealed permits were issued to 50% of the population that's law abiding and they actively carried, do you think your assertion will hold water then? I don't. Didn't think so in the beginning, either. An armed society is a polite society. It's as simple as that. __________________ If it were up to me, the word "got" would be deleted from the English language. Posting and YOU: http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/posting

May 28, 2009, 12:58 PM	#30
ECHOONE Junior member Join Date: February 10, 2008 Location: FL Posts: 204	What's up with this Double Naught guy is he running for public office or something? Yo.... Naught Obama already got the Presidency buddy!! Jobs filled!

June 2, 2009, 07:17 PM	#39
Bud Helms Senior Member Join Date: December 31, 1999 Location: Middle Georgia, USA Posts: 13,198	Man! I turn around and this topic is in it's second page. Obviously a topic for L&CR. Moving. You guys behave over there. They don't take prisoners.

June 2, 2009, 08:57 PM	#42
nitetrane98 Junior member Join Date: May 23, 2009 Posts: 143	Double Naught, You're constructing a strawman argument by saying that CCWer's believe CCW laws are passed to prevent crime. I've lived in Texas for 35 years. I was here when the law was passed. I don't recall any of the proponents of CCW saying anything about reducing crime. So your premise is false from the beginning. I do remember in 1995 the Luby's massacre in Killeen TX. where a man killed 20+ folks in cold blood. I also remember the anti gun crowd screaming like stuck pigs that there would be blood running in the streets of Texas. "It'll be like the Wild West days, OMG the humanity. Well, guess, didn't happen. Your statistics are of no use trying to connect CCW with the rise in the crime rate because there was never a connection in the first place.

June 2, 2009, 10:35 PM	#43
Cerick Senior Member Join Date: May 13, 2008 Location: 973, NJ Posts: 345	CCW sure doesn't increase crime. Look at D.C. One of the higher crime rates and no CCW at all. Your sample list of cities with populations over 1,000,000 was weak too because other than the 3 cities you listed, there are only 8 more cities in the country with a population that big. Also San Antonio has a relatively low rate compared to alot of major cities.

June 3, 2009, 08:16 AM	#44
skydiver3346 Senior Member Join Date: December 22, 2007 Location: Florida Posts: 1,222	Crime and conceal carry? I really don't know all the facts to your original question/post? Folks make some good points so far regarding this question. However, the only fact I'm concerned about, is that my conceal carry should hopefully help (in the event that a crime is committed against me and/or my family).

June 3, 2009, 08:23 AM	#45
Bartholomew Roberts member Join Date: June 12, 2000 Location: Texas and Oklahoma area Posts: 8,462	Texas has a high crime rate; but what about violent crime? Most of Dallas's crime problem is theft from motor vehicles, which is pretty common around here; but it isn't the type of crime you would expect CCW to deter. In fact, without getting into the merits of the Lott study, if I remember Lott correctly, I believe he suggests that their is a substitution factor and that criminals may choose less confrontational crimes as a substitute in his study.

June 3, 2009, 09:28 AM	#46
Hank D. Junior member Join Date: May 19, 2009 Location: Lincoln, Delaware Posts: 64	Crime rate & concealed carry I for one well know that you can take the statistacs and make them do whatever you want them to do, the noumbers game! I'm not saying that happened here!!! I try very heard to talk of things that I know to be true and not what I hear from any second or third parties, now with that said, one thing I know to be true Is that most criminals are very big cowards, not all but most, whach out for the nut job!!! They go after the weak and try very heard to stay away from the strong! Case In point, I grew up In New York City, "Washington Hights" My father had a butcher shop there from about 1946 till I think 1978 or so and we had a lot of stores around us, on our street going South was next a hardwear store, a shoe maker , a Deli, a dry goods store and a book store and then a candy store and so on, My point In all the years that we had that store we were never held up, or even an attemped made to hold us up! The same with the shoe maker, all the other stores on that block and across the street were all held up at gun point from time to time. I worked in my Dad's store every weekend for well over 25 years. Why were we and the shoemaker left out of the holdups? Think about who is always working with a knife and or clever In hand and the shoe maker always had a knife or hammer in hand!!! "Most criminals are cowards" they go for the weak and not the strong! There is another story that I heard of from I think GA. about 10 or 15 years ago??? Two towns close to each other,lets just say town "A" and town "B" town "A" had an anti gun Mayer, and town "B" had a pro gun Mayer, I think this story was in The American rifel Man or Guns and Ammo 10-15 years ago??? Town "A" tolds all the people that there would be a ban on guns In that town and as town "B" heard of this they went 180 and stated that all good standing people In that town should have a gun in the house hold by law? Well guess just what happened to the crime rate in each of them towns, now it was not over night, but the crime rate In town "A" went up by about 3-4 times and town "B" the crime rate went down by just about the same!!! for you people that like to go digging things like this up, go at it, I'm going from memory here about the times and the States and also which magazines I saw the stories In and when!!! If any of you find the stories I'm talking about, please post them back here. Semper FI to all, Hank D. Please note, I'm not a very good speller/my weak point.

June 3, 2009, 09:48 AM	#49
Hank D. Junior member Join Date: May 19, 2009 Location: Lincoln, Delaware Posts: 64	Also take a good look a Washington DC.Hank D.

June 3, 2009, 09:54 AM	#50
Hank D. Junior member Join Date: May 19, 2009 Location: Lincoln, Delaware Posts: 64	I have two good books for anyone that wants to look into the stats, Book #1 more Guns less crime, #2-The bias ageinst guns, both by a once anti gunner John R. Lott Jr. Semper FI to all, Hank D.