The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old July 15, 2010, 12:16 AM   #1
Wagonman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 11, 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 987
Police Officers shot by CCWs

Is there information on how many Police Officers have been shot by CCW holders?
Wagonman is offline  
Old July 15, 2010, 03:31 AM   #2
BillCA
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 28, 2004
Location: Silicon Valley, Ca
Posts: 7,087
I have not seen any statistics released.

We know it has happened, unfortunately. But it is quite rare, statistically speaking.
__________________
BillCA in CA (Unfortunately)
BillCA is offline  
Old July 15, 2010, 05:44 AM   #3
csmsss
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Orange, TX
Posts: 2,986
Shouldn't you be asking about police officers UNLAWFULLY shot by CCW's?
csmsss is offline  
Old July 15, 2010, 06:48 AM   #4
Kreyzhorse
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 12, 2006
Location: NKY
Posts: 11,495
I was trolling over at the Brady Campaign site yesterday (got to keep up with what the crazies are doing) and they actually had a article on crimes committed by people with CCW licenses. I don't trust their data, but, it might be worth a read.
__________________
"He who laughs last, laughs dead." Homer Simpson
Kreyzhorse is offline  
Old July 15, 2010, 10:31 AM   #5
stargazer65
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 6, 2009
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 761
I have read the article. One of the things they neglect to mention as BillCA pointed is:

Quote:
We know it has happened, unfortunately. But it is quite rare, statistically speaking.
The point they are trying to convey in the article is that CCW requirements should be more stringent. Which they will continue to push incrementally until CCW is eliminated, or so restrictve as to be impractical for the common person. The fact is you can't ever weed out somebody who is law abiding but will someday in the future break the law. It's impossible and I believe it would be unconstitutional.
__________________
"I assert that nothing ever comes to pass without a cause." Jonathan Edwards
stargazer65 is offline  
Old July 15, 2010, 11:01 AM   #6
ScottRiqui
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 27, 2010
Location: Norfolk, VA
Posts: 2,905
Whenever I see the Brady-type lists of criminal acts by CHL holders, my reaction is the same - "meh, so what?"

No one ever promised that no CHL holder would ever commit a criminal act. These stories, while tragic, are no reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

The important thing is that CHL holders are wildly under-represented in the criminal class. And as long as we're behaving ourselves better than the general public, leave us the hell alone.
ScottRiqui is offline  
Old July 15, 2010, 01:24 PM   #7
Kreyzhorse
Senior Member
 
Join Date: April 12, 2006
Location: NKY
Posts: 11,495
Quote:
Whenever I see the Brady-type lists of criminal acts by CHL holders, my reaction is the same - "meh, so what?"
I agree. I actually get a kick out of reading them though.
__________________
"He who laughs last, laughs dead." Homer Simpson
Kreyzhorse is offline  
Old July 15, 2010, 04:09 PM   #8
TailGator
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 8, 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,012
Quote:
The important thing is that CHL holders are wildly under-represented in the criminal class.
I think I read somewhere that the rate of violent crime convictions for CHL holders was actually lower per capita than that for nuns.

When people start that line of argument, I interrupt with, "Yeah, isn't that great? Between 10 and 15 million CHL holders in the US, and we still have few enough crimes by them that we can list them individually!"
TailGator is offline  
Old July 15, 2010, 06:23 PM   #9
johnwilliamson062
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 6,817
Quote:
When people start that line of argument, I interrupt with, "Yeah, isn't that great? Between 10 and 15 million CHL holders in the US
I recently saw a statistic of about seven million. Do you have some sort of citation? I would love to be able to say the number is higher than I thought.
__________________
$0 of an NRA membership goes to legislative action or court battles. Not a dime. Only money contributed to the NRA-ILA or NRA-PVF. You could just donate to the Second Amendment Foundation
First Shotgun Thread First Rifle Thread First Pistol Thread

Last edited by johnwilliamson062; July 15, 2010 at 07:02 PM.
johnwilliamson062 is offline  
Old July 15, 2010, 11:20 PM   #10
44 AMP
Staff
 
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 11,525
Considering that for many years (and maybe even still today) the Brady group listed anyone shot and killed under the age of 25 (by anyone, including police, and by any firearm) as the "death of a child due to a handgun", I find all of their "data" highly suspect.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.
44 AMP is offline  
Old July 15, 2010, 11:28 PM   #11
Wagonman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 11, 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 987
Quote:
I think I read somewhere that the rate of violent crime convictions for CHL holders was actually lower per capita than that for nuns.

When people start that line of argument, I interrupt with, "Yeah, isn't that great? Between 10 and 15 million CHL holders in the US, and we still have few enough crimes by them that we can list them individually!"
That is the direction I would think it goes. I just hate hearing Daley blather on about how the recent decision affects Cops safety. More guns in citizens hands makes my job easier on the whole.

Quote:
Shouldn't you be asking about police officers UNLAWFULLY shot by CCW's
Distinction without a difference in this instance.
Wagonman is offline  
Old July 15, 2010, 11:39 PM   #12
Sefner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 24, 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 769
The number of police shot by people who have CCWs is 9 according to the BC. Now I haven't read the cases, but I would look at: did the person use the license to help them commit the shooting? If not, it doesn't matter if they had a CPL... in fact it doesn't matter at all, because anyone anywhere can illegally buy a gun and then go shoot a cop. Did the person even use their carry weapon in the crime? A lot of these criminals use rifles or other weapons. Were they carrying illegally? A lot of them are drunk, which is carrying illegal (imagine that, if you make something illegal people will still do it, well damn).

Anyway here is the link: http://www.bradycampaign.org/xshare/...s-misdeeds.pdf

The simple fact that years of murders can be summed up in 35 pages should tell you something. I made a post about this earlier in another thread... after some searching I found it. The following is data from Texas:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Myself in another thread
Just for fun I crunched the numbers for 2007 (most recent year for available data). Some of the findings were pulled right from statistical information, some I derived myself...

Total # of convictions: 61,260
Total # of convictions where the criminal had a CHL: 160
% of convictions in which the criminal had a CHL: .2612%

# of "Active CHL Holders": 288,909
% of Texans with an "Active CHL": 1.208%

And just to go off of what Mike Irwin said,

# of murders in Texas: 1,420
# of murder convictions: 371
# of murder convictions in which the criminal had a CHL: 2
% of murder convictions in which the criminal had a CHL: .5391%

And what alloy said:

# of ALL child drowning deaths in Texas: 63
# of murder convictions in which the criminal had a CHL: 2
# of MANSLAUGHTER convictions in which the criminal had a CHL: 1

And car accidents:

# of Motor Vehicle Accident deaths in Texas in 2006: 3,781


That means that the general populace of Texas in 2007 is 4.624 times MORE LIKELY to be convicted of a crime than an "Active CHL Holder". The general populace of Texas in 2007 is 2.24 times MORE LIKELY to be convicted of murder than "Active CHL Holders".

Wasn't gonna source this but then I got carried away, so here are all sources:

http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/adminis.../convrates.htm
http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/adminis...Report2007.pdf
http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/adminis...dInstr2007.pdf
http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/txcrime.htm
http://www.texascancer.info/scripts/mgwns.html

Last edited by Sefner; July 16, 2010 at 10:29 AM. Reason: found actual number of police killings, it is nine, not five as I original thought
Sefner is offline  
Old July 16, 2010, 07:34 AM   #13
thallub
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 20, 2007
Location: South Western OK
Posts: 2,112
Sefner: Thanks for your informative post.
thallub is offline  
Old July 16, 2010, 07:53 AM   #14
Double Naught Spy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague County, Texas
Posts: 10,466
Quote:
I don't trust their data, but, it might be worth a read.
Right. Pretty much you should never trust the data presented by a group with a strong political agenda.

Quote:
I think I read somewhere that the rate of violent crime convictions for CHL holders was actually lower per capita than that for nuns.
Classic example, but usually it is given that CCW folks have crime rates much lower than the general population as if that somehow shows that they are safer. Well of couse CCW people have crime rates lower than the general population because many of the crimes committed in the general population are specifically things that keep people from being able to obtain CCWs. The general population is composed of a goodly percentage of felons and repeat felons. So this makes for a decidedly biased presentation of the data that is done for politically motivated reasons.

Did you know that women are less likely to get prostate cancer than the general population?

So with the nun example, you can be a felon and be a nun. The two are not mutually exclusive.

You never see the comparison between CCW people and their crime rates against the general population of CCW eligible people from the general population who opt not to get a CCW. Do CCW people actually commit less crime than their "equals" in the general population?
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher."
-- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011
Double Naught Spy is offline  
Old July 16, 2010, 08:08 AM   #15
CajunBass
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 6, 2005
Location: North Chesterfield, Virginia
Posts: 3,460
Quote:
I recently saw a statistic of about seven million. Do you have some sort of citation? I would love to be able to say the number is higher than I thought.
Pick a number. Any number. It works for "them."

Quote:
Shouldn't you be asking about police officers UNLAWFULLY shot by CCW's?
I'm curious. How many do you think were "lawfully" shot?
__________________
For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
John 3:16 (NKJV)
CajunBass is offline  
Old July 16, 2010, 08:17 AM   #16
ISC
Junior member
 
Join Date: August 5, 2007
Location: Florida
Posts: 1,982
I suspect that you'd find that there were alot more shootings committed per capita by off duty cops than by CCW holders, despite the favorable prejudice that cops almost always get from other officers.
ISC is offline  
Old July 16, 2010, 09:43 AM   #17
TailGator
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 8, 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 2,012
Quote:
I recently saw a statistic of about seven million. Do you have some sort of citation?
No, actually, I made some rough calculations of my own. I checked a few states whose figures were readily available, calculated that as a percentage of their population, then extrapolated that to the US population. I figured that the no-issue states might be balanced by the states where no permit is required. I did this because I couldn't find any decent figures. The figure you found, depending on its source, may be just as valid or more so. My means was admittedly rough in its estimation.

Still, the point remains that even with "just" seven million CCW holders, the per capita rate of violent crimes among them is miniscule. Even if the nuns pass us up, it won't be by much.
TailGator is offline  
Old July 16, 2010, 10:01 AM   #18
Glenn E. Meyer
Staff
 
Join Date: November 17, 2000
Posts: 15,737
CCW/CHL population is usually older, better educated, better incomes than the general pop.

I haven't seen a study of the gun pop vs. a matched demographic population on crime. Might be out there somewhere.

However, even if the crime rates were equally low, it would argue that the presence of the gun per se doesn't lead to aggressive behavior as they drive you crazy. Of course, the demos of that population might be resistant to gun primed aggression.

There's a bit of evidence that gun presence in not so charming demographics leads to more aggressiveness.

The argument revolves around whether the action of bad people with guns should lead to a prohibition that includes good people with guns.
__________________
NRA, TSRA, IDPA, NTI, Polite Soc.
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...05_Feature.htm
Being an Academic Shooter
http://www.teddytactical.com/archive...11_Feature.htm
Being an Active Shooter
Glenn E. Meyer is offline  
Old July 16, 2010, 10:01 AM   #19
Sefner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 24, 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 769
Quote:
Originally Posted by Double Naught Spy
Classic example, but usually it is given that CCW folks have crime rates much lower than the general population as if that somehow shows that they are safer. Well of couse CCW people have crime rates lower than the general population because many of the crimes committed in the general population are specifically things that keep people from being able to obtain CCWs. The general population is composed of a goodly percentage of felons and repeat felons. So this makes for a decidedly biased presentation of the data that is done for politically motivated reasons.

Did you know that women are less likely to get prostate cancer than the general population?

So with the nun example, you can be a felon and be a nun. The two are not mutually exclusive.
Double Naught Spy makes a very good point here. But I still find the comparison valid because the Brady Campaign wishes to make the comparison. If the BC is going to begin publishing emotional stories of kids killed by people with CCWs they to look at statistics.

It is very true that the statistics are skewed because you cannot be convicted of a crime and then hold a CCW, bringing about a bit of an issue with repeat offenders. But remember, license carriers are by nature law-abiding because they spent sometimes hundreds of dollars to make sure they are following the law when they carry their weapons. The same cannot be said for criminals. That is the argument I make when someone tells me that I just want to shoot the place up, etc etc: That I spent hundreds of dollars and went through various background checks and hours of training to get this license and cannot continue to carry this license if I have a felony conviction. Thus, the fact that I still have one is a pretty good indicator I'm a law abiding citizen. But again, this is not fool proof.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Double Naught Spy
You never see the comparison between CCW people and their crime rates against the general population of CCW eligible people from the general population who opt not to get a CCW. Do CCW people actually commit less crime than their "equals" in the general population?
This would be interesting, but you risk running the same fallacy. Either way, we can speculate. Between 1990 and 2002, 56% of felonies resulting in conviction were committed by repeat offenders (SOURCE: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m.../ai_n17194955/) So we can cut out over half of felonies when we would examine the data of comparing CPL holders to the eligible population. This lends credence to your original statement, but remember we are talking about rates. It is very possible that people with CPLs are just as likely to commit a felony as their eligible counterparts, but logic does not sway that way. If someone was going to a crime, they would do it regardless of their license status (they are already breaking the law after all). I would also ask in how many of those cases, if the eligible person would have had a CPL, would that have mattered? Conversely, in the crimes people with CPLs commit, do the CPLs come into effect (ie: if they committed murder-suicide in their home with a shotgun, that has no bearing on their CPL status, anyone could do that).

Statistics are a sticky issue, but we can draw some conclusions from logic. My argument is rarely ever that the CPL population is much less likely to commit a crime because of the fallacy DNS stated. It is much more often that the process, time, money, and hassle one has to go through to ensure that they are following the law when carrying their weapon is a much better indication of their intentions when it comes to committing crimes.
Sefner is offline  
Old July 16, 2010, 11:28 AM   #20
csmsss
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Orange, TX
Posts: 2,986
Quote:
Distinction without a difference in this instance.
Is that right? Would you care to elaborate upon this peculiar logic? Are you really saying that you would consider lawful and unlawful shootings in the same manner?

Let's be honest - there are countless examples of LEO's acting illegally - many even committing criminal assaults and even murders upon citizens. It isn't far-fetched, by any means, to consider that one or more of CCW's shootings of law enforcement officers were fully justified under the self defense laws of the state in which it occurred. How on earth would you sconsider that in the same vein as an illegal shooting? Doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
csmsss is offline  
Old July 17, 2010, 04:42 PM   #21
Wagonman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 11, 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 987
Quote:
Is that right? Would you care to elaborate upon this peculiar logic? Are you really saying that you would consider lawful and unlawful shootings in the same manner?
I am saying that lawful shootings of Police Officers are so rare as to be considered a non-occurrence by people without an anti-police agenda.
Wagonman is offline  
Old July 17, 2010, 05:37 PM   #22
Glenn Dee
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 9, 2009
Location: South Florida
Posts: 1,487
Anecdotal information.

In my time in policing... I've seen only two civilian's shoot a police officer in self defense. In both cases the officers died. Of the two only one was an actual case of self defense, the other was an abuse of the self defense statute.

If any one is interested in the particulars. I'll post them later.

Glenn
Glenn Dee is offline  
Old July 17, 2010, 09:06 PM   #23
csmsss
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 24, 2008
Location: Orange, TX
Posts: 2,986
Quote:
I am saying that lawful shootings of Police Officers are so rare as to be considered a non-occurrence by people without an anti-police agenda.
Nonsense. You're revealing your own agenda here. Think back to the premise of your thread - that you had no information whatsoever on how many LEO's have been shot by CCW's. Therefore, you're completely unqualified to make any sort of judgement whatsoever about the nature of those shootings.

I suggest that with such an infinitesimally small population of CCW's shooting police, each incident could be examined individually and an individual assessment made of the legality of the shooting.

And, for the record, the count of LEO's who've committed any number of serious crimes, up to and including multiple murders, is legion. It is, to say the least, outrageous to simply assume that those who've been shot by CCW's are arbitrarily innocent of any wrongdoing without examining the circumstances of each case.
csmsss is offline  
Old July 17, 2010, 10:54 PM   #24
Edward429451
Junior member
 
Join Date: November 12, 2000
Location: Colorado Springs, Colorado
Posts: 9,494
Yea but your not supposed to talk about it. LOL
Edward429451 is offline  
Old July 18, 2010, 12:07 AM   #25
Wagonman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 11, 2008
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 987
Yeah, you are right I am exposing my own pro CCW and RKBA agenda. I am also exposing my agenda that I believe that approximately 99.9998% of Police Officers do their jobs in such a manner as to not be shot in legitimate self defense by a CCW.

However, you OTOH are exposing your anti-Police mindset when you twist my query in an illogical way
Wagonman is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.13255 seconds with 9 queries