Over 16.9 million people now carry guns for self-defense...and our crime rates went down...

[JoeB131]

and yet you don't want to punish the actual criminals who commit gun crimes

I'd prefer to prevent these things before they happen.

We already lock up 2 million people, and we still have a horrific crime rate compared to other industrialized countries.

 

[Geaux4it]

I have recently used my firearm to protect myself and wife during a home invasion. I think the perp thought we were not home. We were awakened to sound of our basement door being kicked upon. Then the upper deck was attacked. By the time I cleared my hallway and the upper staircase, the upper deck door was kicked in. I rounded the corner and came face to face with an intruder in my home. We were roughly 8-10 feet apart. He was unarmed so initially, I did not fire my weapon even though I was within the confines of law to drop the perp on the spot. Right there in front of my fireplace

Time seemed to stand still, but according to my wife who was freaking out, it took only about 3 seconds before she heard the dispatch of my 9mm.

Since the perp was unarmed, I elected to attempt to hold him at gunpoint for the police. I commanded for the perp to 'freeze' and according to the wife, I shouted 'why are you in my home"?

At that time the intruder made a sudden move. I did not wait to determine in which direction he was going so I immediately fired 2 shots at the intruder, and as it turned out, he was running for the door.

It was a point and shoot situation and luckily for the perp, I missed my mark.

Law enforcement came and did all kinds of forensics. They determined one of my rounds would have been a head shot and must of passed very close to the perps head as he exited the door. The second round they did not find. They brought in a canine that searched the woods in case the perp was bleeding out, but they only found footprints leading back up to the road

I can go into a lot more detail, including how the 911 call went and so on. I also reported the incident to the NRA

The intruder is still at large

-Geaux

 

[JoeB131]

Dude, you need to stop sharing your fantasies with the rest of us... Seriously.

 

[007]

I have recently used my firearm to protect myself and wife during a home invasion. I think the perp thought we were not home. We were awakened to sound of our basement door being kicked upon. Then the upper deck was attacked. By the time I cleared my hallway and the upper staircase, the upper deck door was kicked in. I rounded the corner and came face to face with an intruder in my home. We were roughly 8-10 feet apart. He was unarmed so initially, I did not fire my weapon even though I was within the confines of law to drop the perp on the spot. Right there in front of my fireplace

Time seemed to stand still, but according to my wife who was freaking out, it took only about 3 seconds before she heard the dispatch of my 9mm.

Since the perp was unarmed, I elected to attempt to hold him at gunpoint for the police. I commanded for the perp to 'freeze' and according to the wife, I shouted 'why are you in my home"?

At that time the intruder made a sudden move. I did not wait to determine in which direction he was going so I immediately fired 2 shots at the intruder, and as it turned out, he was running for the door.

It was a point and shoot situation and luckily for the perp, I missed my mark.

Law enforcement came and did all kinds of forensics. They determined one of my rounds would have been a head shot and must of passed very close to the perps head as he exited the door. The second round they did not find. They brought in a canine that searched the woods in case the perp was bleeding out, but they only found footprints leading back up to the road

I can go into a lot more detail, including how the 911 call went and so on. I also reported the incident to the NRA

The intruder is still at large

-Geaux

I've got a loaded .44 mag Taurus Raging Bull right next to me in the end stand in the front room, and a loaded .45LC Ruger Birdshead in a hard case by the back door. If someone was stupid enough to kick down either of my doors, I don't think I'd be as forgiving as you, although I've never been in that situation I've often contemplated it. I think I'd be more concerned with bloody splatter all over in my house than anything, but if an intruder was armed, I'd blow his filthy head off without hesitation. I'd just have to get the house cleaned.

 

[007]

Dude, you need to stop sharing your fantasies with the rest of us... Seriously.

Dude, you need to stop pretending you know it's a fantasy when you don't... seriously.

 

[Geaux4it]

I have recently used my firearm to protect myself and wife during a home invasion. I think the perp thought we were not home. We were awakened to sound of our basement door being kicked upon. Then the upper deck was attacked. By the time I cleared my hallway and the upper staircase, the upper deck door was kicked in. I rounded the corner and came face to face with an intruder in my home. We were roughly 8-10 feet apart. He was unarmed so initially, I did not fire my weapon even though I was within the confines of law to drop the perp on the spot. Right there in front of my fireplace

Time seemed to stand still, but according to my wife who was freaking out, it took only about 3 seconds before she heard the dispatch of my 9mm.

Since the perp was unarmed, I elected to attempt to hold him at gunpoint for the police. I commanded for the perp to 'freeze' and according to the wife, I shouted 'why are you in my home"?

At that time the intruder made a sudden move. I did not wait to determine in which direction he was going so I immediately fired 2 shots at the intruder, and as it turned out, he was running for the door.

It was a point and shoot situation and luckily for the perp, I missed my mark.

Law enforcement came and did all kinds of forensics. They determined one of my rounds would have been a head shot and must of passed very close to the perps head as he exited the door. The second round they did not find. They brought in a canine that searched the woods in case the perp was bleeding out, but they only found footprints leading back up to the road

I can go into a lot more detail, including how the 911 call went and so on. I also reported the incident to the NRA

The intruder is still at large

-Geaux

I've got a loaded .44 mag right next to me in the end stand in the front room, and a loaded .45LC Ruger Birdshead in a hard case by the back door. If someone was stupid enough to kick down either of my doors, I don't think I'd be as forgiving as you, although I've never been in that situation I've often contemplated it. I think I'd be more concerned with blood splatter all over in my house than anything, but if an intruder was armed, I'd blow his filthy head off without hesitation. I'd just have to get the house cleaned.

I hear you. I have a home defense shotgun right by my bed but instinct took me to the 9mm.

If the perp had been armed I would have started firing from the get go. I always thought I would shoot first and ask questions later. In the end, I couldn't shoot an unarmed man who at that moment, was not a threat. But when he moved, I double tapped while he was still in my house, but turns out, was headed for the door

-Geaux

 

[Geaux4it]

Dude, you need to stop sharing your fantasies with the rest of us... Seriously.

Whatever Joe.....

-Geaux

 

[Geaux4it]

I have recently used my firearm to protect myself and wife during a home invasion. I think the perp thought we were not home. We were awakened to sound of our basement door being kicked upon. Then the upper deck was attacked. By the time I cleared my hallway and the upper staircase, the upper deck door was kicked in. I rounded the corner and came face to face with an intruder in my home. We were roughly 8-10 feet apart. He was unarmed so initially, I did not fire my weapon even though I was within the confines of law to drop the perp on the spot. Right there in front of my fireplace

Time seemed to stand still, but according to my wife who was freaking out, it took only about 3 seconds before she heard the dispatch of my 9mm.

Since the perp was unarmed, I elected to attempt to hold him at gunpoint for the police. I commanded for the perp to 'freeze' and according to the wife, I shouted 'why are you in my home"?

At that time the intruder made a sudden move. I did not wait to determine in which direction he was going so I immediately fired 2 shots at the intruder, and as it turned out, he was running for the door.

It was a point and shoot situation and luckily for the perp, I missed my mark.

Law enforcement came and did all kinds of forensics. They determined one of my rounds would have been a head shot and must of passed very close to the perps head as he exited the door. The second round they did not find. They brought in a canine that searched the woods in case the perp was bleeding out, but they only found footprints leading back up to the road

I can go into a lot more detail, including how the 911 call went and so on. I also reported the incident to the NRA

The intruder is still at large

-Geaux

I've got a loaded .44 mag right next to me in the end stand in the front room, and a loaded .45LC Ruger Birdshead in a hard case by the back door. If someone was stupid enough to kick down either of my doors, I don't think I'd be as forgiving as you, although I've never been in that situation I've often contemplated it. I think I'd be more concerned with blood splatter all over in my house than anything, but if an intruder was armed, I'd blow his filthy head off without hesitation. I'd just have to get the house cleaned.

I hear you. I have a home defense shotgun right by my bed but instinct took me to the 9mm.

If the perp had been armed I would have started firing from the get go. I always thought I would shoot first and ask questions later. In the end, I couldn't shoot an unarmed man who at that moment, was not a threat. But when he moved, I double tapped while he was still in my house, but turns out, was headed for the door

I saved the perps life that evening

-Geaux

 

[007]

I have recently used my firearm to protect myself and wife during a home invasion. I think the perp thought we were not home. We were awakened to sound of our basement door being kicked upon. Then the upper deck was attacked. By the time I cleared my hallway and the upper staircase, the upper deck door was kicked in. I rounded the corner and came face to face with an intruder in my home. We were roughly 8-10 feet apart. He was unarmed so initially, I did not fire my weapon even though I was within the confines of law to drop the perp on the spot. Right there in front of my fireplace

Time seemed to stand still, but according to my wife who was freaking out, it took only about 3 seconds before she heard the dispatch of my 9mm.

Since the perp was unarmed, I elected to attempt to hold him at gunpoint for the police. I commanded for the perp to 'freeze' and according to the wife, I shouted 'why are you in my home"?

At that time the intruder made a sudden move. I did not wait to determine in which direction he was going so I immediately fired 2 shots at the intruder, and as it turned out, he was running for the door.

It was a point and shoot situation and luckily for the perp, I missed my mark.

Law enforcement came and did all kinds of forensics. They determined one of my rounds would have been a head shot and must of passed very close to the perps head as he exited the door. The second round they did not find. They brought in a canine that searched the woods in case the perp was bleeding out, but they only found footprints leading back up to the road

I can go into a lot more detail, including how the 911 call went and so on. I also reported the incident to the NRA

The intruder is still at large

-Geaux

I've got a loaded .44 mag right next to me in the end stand in the front room, and a loaded .45LC Ruger Birdshead in a hard case by the back door. If someone was stupid enough to kick down either of my doors, I don't think I'd be as forgiving as you, although I've never been in that situation I've often contemplated it. I think I'd be more concerned with blood splatter all over in my house than anything, but if an intruder was armed, I'd blow his filthy head off without hesitation. I'd just have to get the house cleaned.

I hear you. I have a home defense shotgun right by my bed but instinct took me to the 9mm.

If the perp had been armed I would have started firing from the get go. I always thought I would shoot first and ask questions later. In the end, I couldn't shoot an unarmed man who at that moment, was not a threat. But when he moved, I double tapped while he was still in my house, but turns out, was headed for the door

-Geaux

I've got a Maadi AK-47 in the bedroom with 2 full 30 round clips under the bed. If someone got all the way to there, chances are they're going to get turned into swiss cheese.

You're correct you have every right to shoot someone who has forced their way into your home... and I would. You don't break into someone's home to cordially say hello. You're there for reasons that should get you shot.

 

[007]

Dude, you need to stop sharing your fantasies with the rest of us... Seriously.

Whatever Joe.....

-Geaux

The dude is an idiot.

 

[Skull Pilot]

and yet you don't want to punish the actual criminals who commit gun crimes

I'd prefer to prevent these things before they happen.

We already lock up 2 million people, and we still have a horrific crime rate compared to other industrialized countries.

then we should put you in jail for the crimes you are sure to commit one day

and as I have said repeatedly we lock up the wrong people. Prison should be for violent pieces of shit. non-violent pieces of shit should get some sort of alternate sentencing

 

[itfitzme]

.....At the same time that carry permits have increased at an astonishing rate, violent crime has decreased,

False: The study is inconclusive and the data does NOT show this claim to be correct. From the paper itself, "There is a lot of noise in
these estimates both because the permit numbers come from many different years as well as the estimated number of murders in 2013. These estimates have a great deal of measurement error and should only be taken as suggestive."

The data for this study simply does not lead to any conclusion, in either direction, as to the affect of gun ownership on the murder rate.

 

[itfitzme]

The actual stats show you are completely wrong....

False: The actual stats do not lead to this conclusion. The OP study data does not lead to the conclusion stated. In fact, the OP study says, "
These estimates have a great deal of measurement error and should only be taken as suggestive."

This statement, "should only be taken as suggestive" is a b.s. way to say that the data analysis is inconclusive. It is specifically used when an author wants to say the hypothesis is true but can't back it up with conclusive data and statistics.

I've been through this attempt an showing a connection between gun ownership and murder rate. I got the same inconclusive results. The available data simply cannot prove or disprove the hypothesis.

 

[itfitzme]

Here is a look at the new numbers for concealed carry in this country....

Here is what you should be looking at in any study,

"
ln(murder rate) = -.2499 (7.15) percent of adults with permits -.8197 (5.50) police per 1,000 Americans –
0.0023 (3.41) Prison Population per 100,000 people + 0.0068 (2.51) year time trend -8.95 (1.76)
Constant
Using the percent of the population in prison instead of a time trend produced very similar results.
27 To estimate this we ran a couple simple regressions on the murder rate on the percentage of adult
population with permits as well as with and without state and year fixed effects. There is a lot of noise in
these estimates both because the permit numbers come from many different years as well as the
estimated number of murders in 2013. These estimates have a great deal of measurement error and
should only be taken as suggestive. That said, the simplest estimate regressing the murder rate on the
percentage of the adult population with permits produces a coefficient and absolute t-statistics of -
12.68 (1.66). With fixed effects, the estimate was 6.8 (0.82).
28 Regressing the percent change in murder rates on the percent change in the share of the adult
population between 2011 and 2014 gives us this:
Percent change in murder rates = -.136 (1.38) the percent change in the share of the adult population +
.212 (0.99) Constant
F-statistics = 1.92, Adjusted R-squared = 0.0242"

This is the science of statistical inference. All of the rest of the paper is a story about the data about the data. But the story means very little if this science is inconclusive. It means little, if anything. As the author says, "should only be taken as suggestive"

 

[2aguy]

.....At the same time that carry permits have increased at an astonishing rate, violent crime has decreased,

False: The study is inconclusive and the data does NOT show this claim to be correct. From the paper itself, "There is a lot of noise in
these estimates both because the permit numbers come from many different years as well as the estimated number of murders in 2013. These estimates have a great deal of measurement error and should only be taken as suggestive."

The data for this study simply does not lead to any conclusion, in either direction, as to the affect of gun ownership on the murder rate.

That is why you look at the other research......

http://crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Bartley-Cohen-Economic-Inquiry-1998.pdf


The Effect of Concealed Weapons Laws: An Extreme Bound Analysis by William Alan Bartley and Mark A Cohen, published in Economic Inquiry, April 1998 (Copy available here)

.....we find strong support for the hypothesis that the right-to-carry laws are associated with a decrease in the trend in violent crime rates.....

Paper........CCW does not increase police deaths...

http://crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Mustard-JLE-Polic-Deaths-Gun-Control.pdf

This paper uses state-level data from 1984–96 to examine how right-to-carry laws and waiting periods affect the felonious deaths of police. Some people oppose concealed weapons carry laws because they believe these laws jeopardize law enforcement officials, who risk their lives to protect the citizenry. This paper strongly rejects this contention. States that allowed law-abiding citizens to carry concealed weapons had a slightly higher likelihood of having a felonious police death and slightly higher police death rates prior to the law. After enactment of the right-to-carry laws, states exhibit a reduced likelihood of having a felonious police death rate and slightly lower rates of police deaths. States that implement waiting periods have slightly lower felonious police death rates both before and after the law. Allowing law-abiding citizens to carry concealed weapons does not endanger the lives of officers and may help reduce their risk of being killed

========

http://johnrlott.tripod.com/tideman.pdf


Does the Right to Carry Concealed Handguns Deter Countable Crimes? Only a Count Analysis Can Say By FLORENZ PLASSMANN AND T. NICOLAUS TIDEMAN, Journal of Law and Economics, October 2001

However, for all three crime categories the levels in years 2 and 3 after adoption of a right-to-carry law are significantly below the levels in the years before the adoption of the law, which suggests that there is generally a deterrent effect and that it takes about 1 year for this effect to emerge.

=======

http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/323313

Testing for the Effects of Concealed Weapons Laws: Specification Errors and Robustness*




Carlisle E. Moody
College of William and Mary
Overall, right‐to‐carry concealed weapons laws tend to reduce violent crime. The effect on property crime is more uncertain. I find evidence that these laws also reduce burglary.
====
http://crimeresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Helland-Tabarrok-Placebo-Laws.pdf
Using Placebo Laws to Test “More Guns, Less Crime”∗ Eric Helland and Alexander Tabarrok

We also find, however, that the cross equation restrictions implied by the Lott-Mustard theory are supported.
-----
Surprisingly, therefore, we conclude that there is considerable support for the hypothesis that shall-issue laws cause criminals to substitute away from crimes against persons and towards crimes against property.
===========
http://johnrlott.tripod.com/Maltz.pdf


Right-to-Carry Concealed Weapon Laws and Homicide in Large U.S. Counties: The Effect on Weapon Types, Victim Characteristics, and Victim-Offender Relationships By DAVID E. OLSON AND MICHAEL D. MALTZ, Journal of Law and Economics, October 2001

Our results indicated that the direction of effect of the shall-issue law on total SHR homicide rates was similar to that obtained by Lott and Mustard, although the magnitude of the effect was somewhat smaller and was statistically significant at the 7 percent level. In our analysis, which included only counties with a 1977 population of 100,000 or more, laws allowing for concealed weapons were associated with a 6.52 percent reduction in total homicides (Table 2). By comparison, Lott and Mustard found the concealed weapon dummy variable to be associated with a 7.65 percent reduction in total homicides across all counties and a 9 percent reduction in homicides when only large counties (populations of 100,000 or more) were included.43

===============

This one shows the benefits, in the billions of CCW laws...

http://johnrlott.tripod.com/Plassmann_Whitley.pdf

COMMENTS Confirming ìMore Guns, Less Crimeî Florenz Plassmann* & John Whitley**

CONCLUSION Analyzing county-level data for the entire United States from 1977 to 2000, we find annual reductions in murder rates between 1.5% and 2.3% for each additional year that a right-to-carry law is in effect. For the first five years that such a law is in effect, the total benefit from reduced crimes usually ranges between about $2 and $3 billion per year. The results are very similar to earlier estimates using county-level data from 1977 to 1996. We appreciate the continuing effort that Ayres and Donohue have made in discussing the impact of right-to-carry laws on crime rates. Yet we believe that both the new evidence provided by them as well as our new results show consistently that right-to-carry laws reduce crime and save lives. Unfortunately, a few simple mistakes lead Ayres and Donohue to incorrectly claim that crime rates significantly increase after right-to-carry laws are initially adopted and to misinterpret the significance of their own estimates that examined the year-to-year impact of the law.

=============

http://crimeresearch.org/wp-content...An-Exercise-in-Replication.proof_.revised.pdf

~ The Impact of Right-to-Carry Laws on Crime: An Exercise in Replication1

Carlisle E. Moody College of William and Mary - Department of Economics, Virginia 23187, U.S.A. E-mail: [email protected] Thomas B. Marvell Justec Research, Virginia 23185, U.S.A. Paul R. Zimmerman U.S. Federal Trade Commission - Bureau of Economics, Washington, D.C., U.S.A. Fasil Alemante College of William and Mary, Virginia 23187, U.S.A.


Abstract: In an article published in 2011, Aneja, Donohue and Zhang found that shall-issue or right-to-carry (RTC) concealed weapons laws have no effect on any crime except for a positive effect on assault. This paper reports a replication of their basic findings and some corresponding robustness checks, which reveal a serious omitted variable problem. Once corrected for omitted variables, the most robust result, confirmed using both county and state data, is that RTC laws significantly reduce murder. There is no robust, consistent evidence that RTC laws have any significant effect on other violent crimes, including assault. There is some weak evidence that RTC laws increase robbery and assault while decreasing rape. Given that the victim costs of murder and rape are much higher than the costs of robbery and assault, the evidence shows that RTC laws are socially beneficial.

=======

States with lower guns = higher murder....and assault weapon ban pointless..

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13504851.2013.854294

An examination of the effects of concealed weapons laws and assault weapons bans on state-level murder rates
Mark Gius

Abstract
The purpose of the present study is to determine the effects of state-level assault weapons bans and concealed weapons laws on state-level murder rates. Using data for the period 1980 to 2009 and controlling for state and year fixed effects, the results of the present study suggest that states with restrictions on the carrying of concealed weapons had higher gun-related murder rates than other states. It was also found that assault weapons bans did not significantly affect murder rates at the state level. These results suggest that restrictive concealed weapons laws may cause an increase in gun-related murders at the state level. The results of this study are consistent with some prior research in this area, most notably Lott and Mustard (1997).





Taking apart ayre and donahue one....




“The Debate on Shall-Issue Laws” by Carlisle e. Moody and Thomas B. Marvell, published in Econ Journal Watch, volume 5, number 3, September 2008 It is also available here..


Summary and Conclusion Many articles have been published finding that shall-issue laws reduce crime. Only one article, by Ayres and Donohue who employ a model that combines a dummy variable with a post-law trend, claims to find that shall-issue laws increase crime. However, the only way that they can produce the result that shall-issue laws increase crime is to confine the span of analysis to five years. We show, using their own estimates, that if they had extended their analysis by one more year, they would have concluded that these laws reduce crime. Since most states with shallissue laws have had these laws on the books for more than five years, and the law will presumably remain on the books for some time, the only relevant analysis extends beyond five years. We extend their analysis by adding three more years of data, control for the effects of crack cocaine, control for dynamic effects, and correct the standard errors for clustering. We find that there is an initial increase in crime due to passage of the shall-issue law that is dwarfed over time by the decrease in crime associated with the post-law trend. These results are very similar to those of Ayres and Donohue, properly interpreted. The modified Ayres and Donohue model finds that shall-issue laws significantly reduce murder and burglary across all the adopting states. These laws appear to significantly increase assault, and have no net effect on rape, robbery, larceny, or auto theft. However, in the long run only the trend coefficients matter. We estimate a net benefit of $450 million per year as a result of the passage of these laws. We also estimate that, up through 2000, there was a cumulative overall net benefit of these laws of $28 billion since their passage. We think that there is credible statistical evidence that these laws lower the costs of crime. But at the very least, the present study should neutralize any “more guns, more crime” thinking based on Ayres and Donohue’s work in the Stanford Law Review

 

[2aguy]

Here is a look at the new numbers for concealed carry in this country....

Here is what you should be looking at in any study,

"
ln(murder rate) = -.2499 (7.15) percent of adults with permits -.8197 (5.50) police per 1,000 Americans –
0.0023 (3.41) Prison Population per 100,000 people + 0.0068 (2.51) year time trend -8.95 (1.76)
Constant
Using the percent of the population in prison instead of a time trend produced very similar results.
27 To estimate this we ran a couple simple regressions on the murder rate on the percentage of adult
population with permits as well as with and without state and year fixed effects. There is a lot of noise in
these estimates both because the permit numbers come from many different years as well as the
estimated number of murders in 2013. These estimates have a great deal of measurement error and
should only be taken as suggestive. That said, the simplest estimate regressing the murder rate on the
percentage of the adult population with permits produces a coefficient and absolute t-statistics of -
12.68 (1.66). With fixed effects, the estimate was 6.8 (0.82).
28 Regressing the percent change in murder rates on the percent change in the share of the adult
population between 2011 and 2014 gives us this:
Percent change in murder rates = -.136 (1.38) the percent change in the share of the adult population +
.212 (0.99) Constant
F-statistics = 1.92, Adjusted R-squared = 0.0242"

This is the science of statistical inference. All of the rest of the paper is a story about the data about the data. But the story means very little if this science is inconclusive. It means little, if anything. As the author says, "should only be taken as suggestive"

And then we have this.....the basic belief of the gun control advocates is that more guns in more hands means more crime...that is the center of their belief system....and time, and actual reality shows they are wrong.....As the U.S. shows....over 21 years....


Nothing the anti gunners predicted came true....more guns does not create more crime.....in particular, more guns do not create more gun crime....

We went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 16.3 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2017...guess what happened...


-- gun murder down 49%
--gun crime down 75%
--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.


Concealed carry permit number....
New Study: Over 16.3 million concealed handgun permits, last year saw the largest increase ever in number of permits - Crime Prevention Research Center

actual study...

Concealed Carry Permit Holders Across the United States: 2017 by John R. Lott :: SSRN
=======

 

[jillian]

Here is a look at the new numbers for concealed carry in this country. While more Americans have decided to protect themselves by carrying a gun, this has not resulted in more crime....demonstrating in cold hard numbers that law abiding people, not only owning guns, but actually carrying them, does not increase the gun crime rate, the gun murder rate or the violent crime rate. In fact, many studies show that law abiding people carrying guns for self defense helps to lower the crime rate.......

America Is Changing — One Carry Permit at a Time

At the same time that carry permits have increased at an astonishing rate, violent crime has decreased, and concealed-carry permit holders remain remarkably law-abiding. From 2007 to 2015, murder rates decreased by 12.5 percent and “overall violent crime fell by 18 percent.” At the same time, “the percentage of adults with permits soared by 190 percent.” And yet despite that growth, available data still indicate that permit holders are substantially more law-abiding than the police. For example, using data from Florida and Texas, Lott found that “permit holders are convicted of misdemeanors and felonies at less than a sixth of the rate for police officers.” 00:57U.S. bans citizens from visiting North Korea

-----
Simply put, American culture is changing from the ground up, and if present trends continue the gun-control debate will be settled by the sheer number of weapons in law-abiding hands. To borrow the Left’s language, it looks like the arc of history is bending, and it’s bending toward an armed citizenry.
------

It’s always interesting to see data merge with observed experience. The independent, courageous, responsible reality I see with my own eyes is reflected not just in statistics showing that permit holders are extraordinarily law-abiding but also in the repeated incidents where they come to the aid of friends and neighbors in need. More permit-holders do not lead to more gun crime. They do, however, mean more help and protection for the innocent and the vulnerable.

Read more at: America Is Changing — One Carry Permit at a Time

Read more at: America Is Changing — One Carry Permit at a Time

Read more at: America Is Changing — One Carry Permit at a Time

Is violent crime lower in states with open carry?

 

[2aguy]

Here is a look at the new numbers for concealed carry in this country. While more Americans have decided to protect themselves by carrying a gun, this has not resulted in more crime....demonstrating in cold hard numbers that law abiding people, not only owning guns, but actually carrying them, does not increase the gun crime rate, the gun murder rate or the violent crime rate. In fact, many studies show that law abiding people carrying guns for self defense helps to lower the crime rate.......

America Is Changing — One Carry Permit at a Time

At the same time that carry permits have increased at an astonishing rate, violent crime has decreased, and concealed-carry permit holders remain remarkably law-abiding. From 2007 to 2015, murder rates decreased by 12.5 percent and “overall violent crime fell by 18 percent.” At the same time, “the percentage of adults with permits soared by 190 percent.” And yet despite that growth, available data still indicate that permit holders are substantially more law-abiding than the police. For example, using data from Florida and Texas, Lott found that “permit holders are convicted of misdemeanors and felonies at less than a sixth of the rate for police officers.” 00:57U.S. bans citizens from visiting North Korea

-----
Simply put, American culture is changing from the ground up, and if present trends continue the gun-control debate will be settled by the sheer number of weapons in law-abiding hands. To borrow the Left’s language, it looks like the arc of history is bending, and it’s bending toward an armed citizenry.
------

It’s always interesting to see data merge with observed experience. The independent, courageous, responsible reality I see with my own eyes is reflected not just in statistics showing that permit holders are extraordinarily law-abiding but also in the repeated incidents where they come to the aid of friends and neighbors in need. More permit-holders do not lead to more gun crime. They do, however, mean more help and protection for the innocent and the vulnerable.

Read more at: America Is Changing — One Carry Permit at a Time

Read more at: America Is Changing — One Carry Permit at a Time

Read more at: America Is Changing — One Carry Permit at a Time

Is violent crime lower in states with open carry?

Considering that we aren't talking about that......what is your point? The whole point is that your core belief, that more people carrying more guns = more gun crime is wrong. My past posts show this....

If you were right, the following wouldn't be true......the numbers would be going up, not down....

We went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 16.3 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2017...guess what happened...


-- gun murder down 49%
--gun crime down 75%
--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.


Concealed carry permit number....
New Study: Over 16.3 million concealed handgun permits, last year saw the largest increase ever in number of permits - Crime Prevention Research Center

actual study...

Concealed Carry Permit Holders Across the United States: 2017 by John R. Lott :: SSRN
=======

 

[itfitzme]

And then we have this.....
=======

That's a nice story. And your actual scientific proof is what? You are looking for an F-statistic,, p-value and confidence interval that proves your conclusion to be statistically significant. Then you have, at least, proven a statistical correlation even if you haven't yet proven actual causality. Then you have something worth considering.

Stories and coincidence isn't correlation or causality. You can post fake news all day long. But at the end of the day, you've proven nothing except a predisposition and bias.

 

[2aguy]

And then we have this.....
=======

That's a nice story. And your actual scientific proof is what? You are looking for an F-statistic,, p-value and confidence interval that proves your conclusion to be statistically significant. Then you have, at least, proven a statistical correlation even if you haven't yet proven actual causality. Then you have something worth considering.

Stories and coincidence isn't correlation or causality. You can post fake news all day long. But at the end of the day, you've proven nothing except a predisposition and bias.

Actual research shows you are wrong.....the basic, religious argument of the anti gunners is that more guns = more crime......since the 1990s when carry laws were relaxed and we went from 4.7 million to 16.9 million people carrying guns and hundreds of million more guns in circulation among the population.....the crime rate went down....in all the categories involving guns....

The anti gun argument about guns is wrong...and has no bearing in truth or reality.