New Study- Concealed Carry Permits Up, Firearms Deaths Down

[irishScott]

..and that "Study" is very weak.

I meant the study supporting your side.

 

[daishi5]

This is still incorrect. It shows that CC has not made things worse, but it does not show that Strict Gun Control would not be significantly better.

Well yeah, the CCW studies don't show that gun control doesn't work they didn't study the effects of strict gun control. The study by Rossi and Wright, does study gun control, and they did find it had no effect.

 

[PrinceofWands]

This is still incorrect. It shows that CC has not made things worse, but it does not show that Strict Gun Control would not be significantly better.

Actually that's EXACTLY what it all shows when taken together, as the NAS study did. It shows absolutely NO positive impact from ANY form of gun control EVER.

It doesn't say prolific gun possession or cc make things better, but it ABSOLUTELY says there's no evidence it makes anything worse.

Therefore gun control does not help period, and gun ownership doesn't hurt period. It can't be made any plainer than that.

 

[sandorski]

Actually that's EXACTLY what it all shows when taken together, as the NAS study did. It shows absolutely NO positive impact from ANY form of gun control EVER.

It doesn't say prolific gun possession or cc make things better, but it ABSOLUTELY says there's no evidence it makes anything worse.

Therefore gun control does not help period, and gun ownership doesn't hurt period. It can't be made any plainer than that.

"Hemenway said that the most definitive review to date — a 2004 look at research on the topic by the National Research Council — “found no credible evidence that passage of right-to-carry laws increases or decreases violent crime.”

Also of note, there is no official Data collection concerning whether CC carriers are involved in Crimes, but there is at least one Anti-CC group claiming to have Data on it and that quite a few Crimes are perpetrated by CC carriers.

 

[sandorski]

I meant the study supporting your side.

I didn't, but my response lacked clarity.

 

[Anarchist420]

Concealed carry=100x less firearm deaths. It's common sense.

 

[PrinceofWands]

"Hemenway said that the most definitive review to date — a 2004 look at research on the topic by the National Research Council — “found no credible evidence that passage of right-to-carry laws increases or decreases violent crime.”

Also of note, there is no official Data collection concerning whether CC carriers are involved in Crimes, but there is at least one Anti-CC group claiming to have Data on it and that quite a few Crimes are perpetrated by CC carriers.

Which is exactly what I've said the entire time. No research that gun control has any positives, no research that cc has any negatives. I never claimed that cc has positives, nor that gun control had no negatives.

Actually there's VAST amounts of research out there on concealed carry crime. Among others you can look up:

*Florida Department of State, “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
*FBI, Uniform Crime Reports, 2004 - excludes Hawaii and Rhode Island - small populations and geographic isolation create other determinants to violent crime.
*John Lott and David Mustard, “Crime, Deterrence, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns,” Journal of Legal Studies (v.26, no.1, pages 1-68, January 1997)
* William E. Sturdevant, “An Analysis of the Arrest Rate of Texas Concealed Handgun License Holders as Compared to the Arrest Rate of the Entire Texas Population,” September 1, 2000
*"D.C. Police Paying for Hiring Binge," Washington Post, 8/28/94
*Memorandum by James T. Moore, Commissioner of Florida's Department of Law Enforcement, to the Office of the Governor, dated 3/15/95

 

[Vette73]

Concealed carry=100x less firearm deaths. It's common sense.

wwybywb ?

 

[woolfe9999]

If you are interested in a quick overview of the information, the most non-biased source I know of would be the book "FIREARMS AND VIOLENCE" from the National Acadamies of the Sciences.
http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10881&page=R1 (this is a free online version of the book from their website, the review is rather short, but it helps to be familiar with stats to understand the debate.)

Lott is covered in Chapter 6, appendix A, B, and D.

Brief overview of their findings, they can confirm Lott's basic findings from his data, several other studies also find similiar effects, but other studies find no effect or even an opposite effect. Furthermore, while almost every test shows a reduction in crime, the effects are almost all statistically insignificant at the 5% level. His original paper covered 1977-1992. The effects he published held true with new data from 1992-2000, but the effects were less pronounced.

However, they do not cover any of the other studies that have found a connection between concealed carry and violent crime.

Yeah I Wikied John Lott and looked over the summary of the controversy, and this was generally the impression I got. I was tempted to check out the book from the library, but then I realized:

1. I never bought into the fearmongering from certain people on the left over this issue.

2. I do not support gun control in general (except restricting violent felons from ownership);

3. It seems unlikely to me that CCW has a strong affect on crime in either direction, and that seems to be what the emerging consensus is. Maybe it has no statistically significant effect, or maybe it reduces it slightly. There are so many other variables which impact crime and I think this one is getting seized on because it's a talking point.

My only point in this thread was I dislike people passing off logical fallacy as legitimate argument. If you want to persuade that CCW reduces crime, you have to do better than pointing to a simple correlation, and when the logical objection is raised, ignoring it just won't do.

Thanks for the link.

- wolf

 

[Red Dawn]

You're a criminal. Now stick your hand in this box. It may or may not contain the most poisonous snake on the planet. Your choice - do stick your hand in or not?

How about I throw my wallet in first to see if there's a snake?

 

[shadow9d9]

I don't believe I ever did.

However, we can look at comparisons over time for one country, rather than the more difficult attempt to compare two different countries.

What has changed in the US in the last 30 years? Drugs still out of control, social programs still lacking, violence in all media forms increasing, church affiliation stagnant or decreasing in most areas, more hatred among demographic groups, higher population, more diversity, higher unemployment, less benefits, higher costs of living...and yet even with ALL of that crime is dropping despite widespread increases in firearm ownership and concealed carry prevalence.

Did CC CAUSE the crime reduction? Maybe, or maybe not...but we can be basically 100% assured that it in no way inhibited it...hence there is no appreciable danger/down side of properly implemented private firearm ownership/use.

Wait, so church affiliation decreasing should cause more violence? AHAHAHAHA!

 

[PrinceofWands]

Wait, so church affiliation decreasing should cause more violence? AHAHAHAHA!

Actually yes. In study after study affiliation with a community religious organization has correlates to crime and violence. It was called by Tocqueville even before the studies were done, but they pretty much confirmed it (with some outliers).

http://law.jrank.org/pages/1940/Religion-Crime--Hellfire-Delinquency-beyond.html

Again, not causal, but correlative. The underlying question is rather it's fear of spiritual reprisal or the church replacing social programs or individual support networks.

 

[shira]

Well by that logic:

Population of Canada: 33,311,389
Population of the US: 307,006,550

US population / Canadian population ~= 9.22

So multiply Canadian murders by 9.22, and you'd get Canadian murders if Canada had the population of the US (read: it would be much larger). I would again like to emphasize by that logic.

Stuff like that is just one of the reasons I more-or-less ignore the international comparison arguments (even some that work in my favor, although I will bring in the latter if my opponent persists with international comparisons). There are simply too many additional variables to account for.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

The Canadian murder RATE (murders per 100,000 people) is 1.83. The United States murder RATE (murders per 100,000 people) is 5.4, or roughly THREE times the Canadian rate.

 

[shira]

A couple of interesting factoids:

In Russia, it's generally illegal for citizens to own handguns. Yet the murder rate in Russia has gone down by more than 50% in the last 8 years, from 31 per 100,000 in 2002 to 14.9 per 100,000 currently.


Wikipedia mentions two theories on why violent crime in the U.S. peaked in 1993, and has decreased since then:

Over the past thirty years, the crime rate rose throughout the 1980s, reached its peak in 1993 and then began to decrease throughout the 1990s and 2000s. One hypothesis suggests there is a causal link between legalized abortion and this drop. Another possibility is the introduction of the Three Strikes Law in 1993 by state governments which saw felony offenders who committed a third offence receive life imprisonment.

Isn't it interesting that the increase in concealed carry permits isn't mentioned?

 

[daishi5]

Isn't it interesting that the increase in concealed carry permits isn't mentioned?

No, even the studies that find a reduction in crime find a small effect, therefore it would not be cited as a cause for a major shift in crime. Also, note that according to your last two posts, the murder rate in russia is three times as large as it is in America, when Russia has much more strict gun control.

You may wish to take a quick look at a few of the links I have already provided.