PDA

View Full Version : What's the reality on prosecution for CCW without a permit?


CCWFacts
04-28-2009, 11:53 AM
Here is an interesting publication from the AG (http://www.ag.ca.gov/cjsc/publications/misc/cfc03/12031.pdf) with statistics about what happens with PC 12031 (CCW without a permit).

It's a lot of statistics, but they are nicely presented. Here are the conclusions I take from it:


3/4 of the prosecutions are for illegal CCW in conjunction with some other chargers (drug dealing, theft, assault, etc)
Most of the people convicted are young; many are under 21 and couldn't even legally buy a handgun. The younger the offender, the more likely it is to be charged as a felony
Most of the time it's charged as a felony. I assume it goes to felony because the gun isn't registered to the guy carrying it. I assume the major reason they changed the law to make (illegal CCW + unregistered gun = felony) so that they can bring felony charges against people who acquired the gun "not through normal channels" who are carrying
Blacks are twice as likely to be charged with a felony under PC 12031 as whites
There aren't a whole lot of convictions. In 2003 only 2140 convictions for PC 12031; 2/3 of them felony. The bulk of these were in circumstances where there was also some other criminal conduct, like drug dealing
Women are very rarely charged with PC 12031. 97% of the charges are against men.


Anyway, it's interesting to see what's the reality of prosecutions for illegal CCW: who does it, what the circumstances are, and what the consequences are.

edwardm
04-28-2009, 12:04 PM
Interesting how the numbers for whites and blacks are almost exactly opposite in terms of felony v. misdemeanor filings.

Here is an interesting publication from the AG (http://www.ag.ca.gov/cjsc/publications/misc/cfc03/12031.pdf) with statistics about what happens with PC 12031 (CCW without a permit).

It's a lot of statistics, but they are nicely presented. Here are the conclusions I take from it:


3/4 of the prosecutions are for illegal CCW in conjunction with some other chargers (drug dealing, theft, assault, etc)
Most of the people convicted are young; many are under 21 and couldn't even legally buy a handgun. The younger the offender, the more likely it is to be charged as a felony
Most of the time it's charged as a felony. I assume it goes to felony because the gun isn't registered to the guy carrying it. I assume the major reason they changed the law to make (illegal CCW + unregistered gun = felony) so that they can bring felony charges against people who acquired the gun "not through normal channels" who are carrying
Blacks are twice as likely to be charged with a felony under PC 12031 as whites
There aren't a whole lot of convictions. In 2003 only 2140 convictions for PC 12031; 2/3 of them felony. The bulk of these were in circumstances where there was also some other criminal conduct, like drug dealing
Women are very rarely charged with PC 12031. 97% of the charges are against men.


Anyway, it's interesting to see what's the reality of prosecutions for illegal CCW: who does it, what the circumstances are, and what the consequences are.

RomanDad
04-28-2009, 12:12 PM
Here is an interesting publication from the AG (http://www.ag.ca.gov/cjsc/publications/misc/cfc03/12031.pdf) with statistics about what happens with PC 12031 (CCW without a permit).

It's a lot of statistics, but they are nicely presented. Here are the conclusions I take from it:


3/4 of the prosecutions are for illegal CCW in conjunction with some other chargers (drug dealing, theft, assault, etc)
Most of the people convicted are young; many are under 21 and couldn't even legally buy a handgun. The younger the offender, the more likely it is to be charged as a felony
Most of the time it's charged as a felony. I assume it goes to felony because the gun isn't registered to the guy carrying it. I assume the major reason they changed the law to make (illegal CCW + unregistered gun = felony) so that they can bring felony charges against people who acquired the gun "not through normal channels" who are carrying
Blacks are twice as likely to be charged with a felony under PC 12031 as whites
There aren't a whole lot of convictions. In 2003 only 2140 convictions for PC 12031; 2/3 of them felony. The bulk of these were in circumstances where there was also some other criminal conduct, like drug dealing
Women are very rarely charged with PC 12031. 97% of the charges are against men.


Anyway, it's interesting to see what's the reality of prosecutions for illegal CCW: who does it, what the circumstances are, and what the consequences are.
I think one of the major factors in this is the anecdotal statistic that many CCW holders can tell you.

Ive NEVER been asked to see my PERMIT... Let alone the gun.

CCWFacts
04-28-2009, 12:12 PM
Yeah, if you want a PC 12031 felony, the best way to get it is to be an 18-year-old black male drug dealer with an unregistered gun. I'm sure we're all surprised by that. Conversely if you don't want a PC 12031 felony, the best way to avoid it (other than having a CCW, or not carrying a gun) is to be a middle-aged white woman who's not involved in any other criminal activities, and has the gun properly registered.

yellowfin
04-28-2009, 12:15 PM
Considering that it's for concealed carry, no wonder it's rare. Unless you're doing something else wrong or really bad at it there's nothing to go on.

CCWFacts
04-28-2009, 12:22 PM
Ive NEVER been asked to see my PERMIT... Let alone the gun.

Yeah. It's called a) you're not involved in any situations that would make an officer want to search you and b) you're not of a profile that officers want to search. In fact once they find out you're an attorney, you're of the profile they want to avoid dealing with.

Anyway, here's another question: What fraction of people who carry illegally get busted for it? Well, 2,000 convictions in that year mean that 0.005% of California's population was convicted of PC 12031 in that year. I'm certain that more than 0.005% of California's population carries a gun without a permit. If I had to guess, I would guess between 0.1% and 0.5% of the population here carries semi-regularly without a permit, so it's only the few who combine bad luck, bad profile, and other misconduct who are getting busted for it.

JDay
04-28-2009, 12:22 PM
Yeah, if you want a PC 12031 felony, the best way to get it is to be an 18-year-old black male drug dealer with an unregistered gun. I'm sure we're all surprised by that. Conversely if you don't want a PC 12031 felony, the best way to avoid it (other than having a CCW, or not carrying a gun) is to be a middle-aged white woman who's not involved in any other criminal activities, and has the gun properly registered.

The best way to avoid it is to not break the law in the first place.

G30 Steve
04-28-2009, 12:25 PM
Yeah, if you want a PC 12031 felony, the best way to get it is to be an 18-year-old black male drug dealer with an unregistered gun. I'm sure we're all surprised by that. Conversely if you don't want a PC 12031 felony, the best way to avoid it (other than having a CCW, or not carrying a gun) is to be a middle-aged white woman who's not involved in any other criminal activities, and has the gun properly registered.I don't know where you're trying to go with the stats but
I'd bet an overwhelmingly high percentage of convictions are due to being involved in criminal activity while armed.
I've never been asked for mine either RD.;)

Librarian
04-28-2009, 12:25 PM
12031 is loaded - 12025 is concealed without CCW.

They're often charged together, of course.

The link to the 12025 pub is
http://www.ag.ca.gov/cjsc/publications/misc/cfc03/12025.pdf

In FY 2003,
Of the 3,738 males charged with PC section 12025:
Felony-level filings accounted for 58.1 percent (2,170).
Misdemeanor-level filings accounted for 41.9 percent (1,568).

Of the 192 females charged with PC section 12025:
Felony-level filings accounted for 46.9 percent (90).
Misdemeanor-level filings accounted for 53.1 percent (102)

In FY 2003, there were 3,030 charges filed in
addition to a primary charge of felony PC
section 12025. Of these additional charges:
Felony-level filings accounted for 89.8 percent (2,721).
Misdemeanor-level filings accounted for 10.2 percent (309).

CCWFacts
04-28-2009, 12:31 PM
12031 is loaded - 12025 is concealed without CCW.

They're often charged together, of course.

The link to the 12025 pub is
http://www.ag.ca.gov/cjsc/publications/misc/cfc03/12025.pdf

Ah, good point and good find. It looks like the stats on 12025 are very similar to PC 12031, except there are almost twice as many 12025 charges (close to 4,000 vs. close to 2,000).

It's still all rare, and the bulk of the people busted for either of them are people engaged in other criminal activities (drug dealing, theft etc) and who meet certain profiles (young, black, male).

Still, wouldn't want to risk it, because I've got things to lose, as they say.

G30 Steve
04-28-2009, 12:48 PM
Ah, good point and good find. It looks like the stats on 12025 are very similar to PC 12031, except there are almost twice as many 12025 charges (close to 4,000 vs. close to 2,000).

It's still all rare, and the bulk of the people busted for either of them are people engaged in other criminal activities (drug dealing, theft etc) and who meet certain profiles (young, black, male).

Still, wouldn't want to risk it, because I've got things to lose, as they say.Profiles? Racial profiling won't hold up in court. Probable cause does.

What difference does race, age or gender make? If you're involved in criminal activity, you give the arresting officer(s) PC to take you to jail.

Seems like you're trying to connect the wrong dots.

Standard
04-28-2009, 12:50 PM
So if one is CCWing without a permit, and it's loaded, you get charged with both? Would that be a felony then? For a 25 yr old white male with no criminal record, not involved in a crime, carrying a gun registered to him (so about 75% of Calguns):)

CAL.BAR
04-28-2009, 12:57 PM
I can only speak for OC, but after 15 years of defending cases brought by the OC DA's office, I can say that for unlicensed CCW you can almost COUNT ON prosecution.

CCWFacts
04-28-2009, 12:57 PM
So if one is CCWing without a permit, and it's loaded, you get charged with both? Would that be a felony then?

If nothing else is wrong (no school zone, the gun is registered, a million other "if"s), then it's two misdemeanors: 12025 and 12031.

For a 25 yr old white male with no criminal record, not involved in a crime, carrying a gun registered to him (so about 75% of Calguns):)

It's very unwise to carry without a permit unless there's some overwhelming reason to do it. You'll probably get away with it, if you're not involved in any other criminal activities or bad situations, but there's a lot to lose and nothing to gain.

RomanDad
04-28-2009, 1:05 PM
Ah, good point and good find. It looks like the stats on 12025 are very similar to PC 12031, except there are almost twice as many 12025 charges (close to 4,000 vs. close to 2,000).

It's still all rare, and the bulk of the people busted for either of them are people engaged in other criminal activities (drug dealing, theft etc) and who meet certain profiles (young, black, male).

Still, wouldn't want to risk it, because I've got things to lose, as they say.
And I bet if you DIDNT have "Things to lose" you still wouldnt break the law, because youre a LAW ABIDING PERSON.... You go out of your way to obey the LAW, EVEN when you disagree with it, and EVEN when it may ultimately be harmful to you. You and me and people like us stop at the red light on the deserted road at 2 am, even if theres not another car around for a hundred miles and wed never get caught running it..... Because its in our DNA to FOLLOW THE LAW.

And thats really the POINT....

LAW-ABIDING People, DON'T carry because they dont have a permit and they dont break the law, which makes them vulnerable to the NON LAW ABIDING, for whom the misdemeanor of carrying a concealed gun is a drop in the bucket to the felonies they plan on committing with it.

G30 Steve
04-28-2009, 1:07 PM
So if one is CCWing without a permit, and it's loaded, you get charged with both? Would that be a felony then? For a 25 yr old white male with no criminal record, not involved in a crime, carrying a gun registered to him (so about 75% of Calguns):)You get arrested for both. If you're within 1000 feet of a school or playground add 626.9.

Librarian
04-28-2009, 1:13 PM
And I bet if you DIDNT have "Things to lose" you still wouldnt break the law, because youre a LAW ABIDING PERSON.... You go out of your way to obey the LAW, EVEN when you disagree with it, and EVEN when it may ultimately be harmful to you. You and me and people like us stop at the red light on the deserted road at 2 am, even if theres not another car around for a hundred miles and wed never get caught running it..... Because its in our DNA to FOLLOW THE LAW.

And thats really the POINT....


I think I'd like to amend that slightly.

We're law abiding at least partially because we don't see the law and the effort to obey it as an unreasonable burden.

That can change.

CnCFunFactory
04-28-2009, 1:17 PM
Interesting how the numbers for whites and blacks are almost exactly opposite in terms of felony v. misdemeanor filings.

That's because, "George Bush hates black people" don't ya know. :smilielol5:

gbran
04-28-2009, 1:34 PM
My in-law was cited (misdemeanor) for a loaded handgun in a vehicle. He and another fellow were in the mountains shooting when a DF&G warden (female) dorve up. My in-law didn't want to make her uncomfortable so he took his Sig out of his holster and set it on his tailgate and stepped away from it.

She responded to his thoughtfulness by citing him. He explcained the circumstances to the judge who gave him the smallest fine he could.

hill billy
04-28-2009, 1:41 PM
I got caught racing home from the range and forgot to take it out and stow it.I was speeding and the CHP was very polite considering I was carrying and didn't have my wallet( I know) He ran the gun,gave it back to me loaded and made me lock it up and gave me a ticket for the speed. I played the lotto that night. :D

Kid Stanislaus
04-28-2009, 1:41 PM
The best way to avoid it is to not break the law in the first place.


That's true, but the law SUCKS big time and the truth of the matter is that sometimes you'd be stupid not to.

Untamed1972
04-28-2009, 2:13 PM
That's kinda been my take on it. If you're a law-abiding citizen who isn't out doing stupid stuff to attract LEO attention to yourself, the reality is you could prolly carry your whole life and never get caught. And if you are truly keeping it properly concealed then who is ever gonna know?

Not saying I do, or would, or anyone else should either. Just stating an opinion.

Situations that might cause you to get caught through no overt action of your own:

You have the unfortunate luck of matching the description of a wanted person and are detained and searched because of matching the description.

You get into a car accident, or get creamed in a crosswalk, or have a heart attack and gun is discovered by paramedics while treating you.

You're careless and let it show and someone calls the COPs on you.

For some reason you get searched at a CBP checkpoint.

I'm just trying to think of my daily life and things that could happen or I could do inadvertantly that would cause me to have LEO contact. Reality is I haven't had personal (unrequested) contact with a LEO in years because I don't speed or blantantly break traffic laws, I keep my tags up to date, I dont hang out in questionable places and questionable hours with questionable people, and in general I just don't do stupid crap to draw attention to myself. I have never had my person, or my vehicle searched ever in my nearly 40yrs of life.

All of which I think describes most people in this state who would like to have a CCW permit. Those that want them are prolly the least likely people to hafta use the gun because they already protect themselves by being smart about where they go and what they do and who they do it with, and they are the least likely people to just randomly do stupid stuff period, let alone with their gun.

Gryff
04-28-2009, 2:23 PM
I was talking to a senior patrol officer with a Bay Area police department the other day. He actually told me that he thought a person was insane these days to not carry a gun all the time...CCW or not.

Untamed1972
04-28-2009, 2:24 PM
I was talking to a senior patrol officer with a Bay Area police department the other day. He actually told me that he thought a person was insane these days to not carry a gun all the time...CCW or not.

Yeah.....he says that.....but would he choose NOT to arrest an otherwise law-abiding citizen for doing were he to discover it?

2ATom
04-28-2009, 2:29 PM
I try to stay within the law. I would love to have CCW for my security as I carry receipts to deposit for my business. It would be my luck though to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and get searched. Therefore, I just won't break that law in the first place, hopefully I won't die because I tend to be law abiding.

I usually carry concealed in my place of business and transport in combo locked Cannon safe and feel real uncomfortable doing even that. :eek:

pnkssbtz
04-28-2009, 2:36 PM
Interesting how the numbers for whites and blacks are almost exactly opposite in terms of felony v. misdemeanor filings.

That statistic is some what disingenuous. I am thinking of a cum hoc ergo propter hoc issue with it.


The statistic is for overall convictions, and makes no distinction between the extraneous circumstances that CCWFacts pointed out, such as other criminal charges and being under legal age to possess the handgun.



E.G. if there are 15 people of ethnicity A and 1,000 people of ethnicity B. Both Ethnicity A and B are charged with the crime of CCW without a permit.

14 of the Ethnicity A crimes occured in conjuction with other felonious criminal charges, where as only 6 of those from ethnicity B involved other felonious charges.

Of ethnicity A, 15 were charged as felonies, and of Ethnicity B only 7 were.

That is about a 50% more people of ethnicity A were charged with felonies. However that straight "50%" statistic ignores the fact that each one of the people in ethnicity A had other felonious charges that compounded their cases.

Out of context it appears that there is discrimination going on. But in fact nothing of the sort took place.

Theseus
04-28-2009, 3:00 PM
You get arrested for both. If you're within 1000 feet of a school or playground add 626.9.

Playground? No. 626.9 does not cover parks not attached or part of the school grounds.

fuegoslow
04-28-2009, 3:13 PM
Even though California doesn't have reciprocity for Utah CCW, would more people be willing to CCW in CA with an out of state permit? Legally, there's no recourse, I know. But how would it look in court if charged? You've gone through all the proper training and education, FBI background, full fingerprints, etc.

ChuckBooty
04-28-2009, 3:19 PM
What I'd like to know is if anyone has ever CCW'd w/o a permit, needed to actually USE it in self defense, and has been charged.

Gryff
04-28-2009, 3:22 PM
Yeah.....he says that.....but would he choose NOT to arrest an otherwise law-abiding citizen for doing were he to discover it?

Believe it or not, that's what he said. He felt that if caught someone carrying illegally, and they didn't have a record and he got the vibe that they weren't a dirtbag-in-training, he would turn a blind eye.

Untamed1972
04-28-2009, 3:23 PM
What I'd like to know is if anyone has ever CCW'd w/o a permit, needed to actually USE it in self defense, and has been charged.

I posted a thread about that awhile back. Someone posted a link to an article of a case in San Diego back in 2006 I think it was. The shooting was ruled justified but shooter was being charged for CCW w/o a permit. Never got any followup on the disposition of the case though.

Untamed1972
04-28-2009, 3:25 PM
Believe it or not, that's what he said. He felt that if caught someone carrying illegally, and they didn't have a record and he got the vibe that they weren't a dirtbag-in-training, he would turn a blind eye.

that's cool......too bad all LEO's aren't that cool. I'd be curious to hear from LEO's how often if hardly ever they come across a citizen with a clean background carrying w/o a permit.

G30 Steve
04-28-2009, 3:28 PM
Playground? No. 626.9 does not cover parks not attached or part of the school grounds.I stand corrected 626.95. On the grounds of a playground, youth center etc., not within 1,000 feet like 626.9.

CCWFacts
04-28-2009, 3:31 PM
that's cool......too bad all LEO's aren't that cool. I'd be curious to hear from LEO's how often if hardly ever they come across a citizen with a clean background carrying w/o a permit.

When you carry without a CCW, you put yourself at the mercy of chance - if, through some situation, you end up getting searched, do you get an officer who's pro-gun, who likes the way you look, and is in a good mood? Or do you get the officer who loves to memorize the PC and make arrests and hates guns and is a Brady Campaign member and whose dog died that morning?

Librarian
04-28-2009, 3:43 PM
What I'd like to know is if anyone has ever CCW'd w/o a permit, needed to actually USE it in self defense, and has been charged.

Almost certainly. Self defense is a defense against a lot of charges, but one must usually prevail in court. That means getting charged. Charges can be dropped before trial, and sometimes are.

U2BassAce
04-28-2009, 6:37 PM
My in-law was cited (misdemeanor) for a loaded handgun in a vehicle. He and another fellow were in the mountains shooting when a DF&G warden (female) dorve up. My in-law didn't want to make her uncomfortable so he took his Sig out of his holster and set it on his tailgate and stepped away from it.

She responded to his thoughtfulness by citing him. He explcained the circumstances to the judge who gave him the smallest fine he could.

Nice of the judge to do that.;) But that person even under Shall Issue CCW (forget about it under current law for life) might not get one.

U2BassAce
04-28-2009, 6:42 PM
Even though California doesn't have reciprocity for Utah CCW, would more people be willing to CCW in CA with an out of state permit? Legally, there's no recourse, I know. But how would it look in court if charged? You've gone through all the proper training and education, FBI background, full fingerprints, etc.

IMHO 95% (might be more like 99.9999%) of the time irrelevant and don't count on it helping you.....is all I can say.;)

About like saying I am an NRA life member.

You have to think like a jury. In California a good portion of them are anti gun. The others will default to follow the letter of the law. (I think the average person on jury duty is going to follow the letter of the law) Either way you are scr*ewed.

mk3mitch
04-28-2009, 7:10 PM
That's kinda been my take on it. If you're a law-abiding citizen who isn't out doing stupid stuff to attract LEO attention to yourself, the reality is you could prolly carry your whole life and never get caught. And if you are truly keeping it properly concealed then who is ever gonna know?

Not saying I do, or would, or anyone else should either. Just stating an opinion.

Situations that might cause you to get caught through no overt action of your own:

You have the unfortunate luck of matching the description of a wanted person and are detained and searched because of matching the description.

You get into a car accident, or get creamed in a crosswalk, or have a heart attack and gun is discovered by paramedics while treating you.

You're careless and let it show and someone calls the COPs on you.

For some reason you get searched at a CBP checkpoint.

I'm just trying to think of my daily life and things that could happen or I could do inadvertantly that would cause me to have LEO contact. Reality is I haven't had personal (unrequested) contact with a LEO in years because I don't speed or blantantly break traffic laws, I keep my tags up to date, I dont hang out in questionable places and questionable hours with questionable people, and in general I just don't do stupid crap to draw attention to myself. I have never had my person, or my vehicle searched ever in my nearly 40yrs of life.

All of which I think describes most people in this state who would like to have a CCW permit. Those that want them are prolly the least likely people to hafta use the gun because they already protect themselves by being smart about where they go and what they do and who they do it with, and they are the least likely people to just randomly do stupid stuff period, let alone with their gun.



All of those reasons are good you cited, one more reason you may be caught, YOU MAY ACTUALLY HAVE TO USE YOUR FIREARM. This is california, If some guy tired to stab you for your wallet and you had to use your non-licensed CCW, they are still going to charge you! Even though you absoultely needed to use it in fear of your life.

Untamed1972
04-28-2009, 8:04 PM
All of those reasons are good you cited, one more reason you may be caught, YOU MAY ACTUALLY HAVE TO USE YOUR FIREARM. This is california, If some guy tired to stab you for your wallet and you had to use your non-licensed CCW, they are still going to charge you! Even though you absoultely needed to use it in fear of your life.

Yeah....there is always that. But hmmm.....be dead or severly wounded, possibly mamed/disabled for life or pay some fines/legal fees for a first time offense and live a fairly normal life for years to come? Tough call. :confused:

N6ATF
04-28-2009, 8:09 PM
Reminded of a Fresh Prince of Bel Air episode where Will said you should act crazier than the criminal to scare him away, like pretend to have a full-body spastic attack...

If you don't want to get charged for pulling your CCW, you could pull out your own knife and hold it up to your throat if you get robbed, and rant crazily that you'll kill yourself and you don't even have your wallet. Then shout the Galaxy Quest motto "Never give up, never surrender!" repeatedly.

tazmanian devil dog
04-28-2009, 8:16 PM
You know, after all the commentary and debate, it still boils down to this:

1. It is illegal, if caught, count on being arrested, charged and convicted.

2. If you shoot someone while CCWing w/out a permit, justified or not, you will be arrested and charged with murder or manslaughter, depending on whether or not it is an election year for the D.A.


If it were me, just buy a civilian Taser (available online) and holster. That will solve most of your self defense needs and it's completely legal. No CCW required.

I would like to CCW too, but I will not and would not risk it in this state. So I do carry a Taser instead of a pistol.

That's my two cents.

N6ATF
04-28-2009, 8:37 PM
Don't Tasers cost about as much as Makarovs?

Librarian
04-28-2009, 8:47 PM
Don't Tasers cost about as much as Makarovs?

One model (http://www.beststungun.com/taserc2.html) is $350. Another (http://www.beststungun.com/taserx26c.html), modeled closely on the one used by police, is $1k.

And of course, they're one-shot devices - subsequent use requires stepping into grappling range if the shot misses or is ineffective.

edwardm
04-28-2009, 8:55 PM
When I made my comment, I actually wasn't thinking discrimination (overt or otherwise). I was thinking more about circumstances. I.e. a white, clean-cut guy who carries w/o permit strictly for personal defense of self and others vs. the (typical?) disenfranchised youth who carries w/o permit to TCB or the like and the attendant piling up of felonies along with the 12025/12031 charges.

Also perhaps the possibility that the caucasian probably legally bought and DROS'd the gun, and its in AFS, whereas the DY 'borrowed' it from his uncle's dresser drawer and gets the felony enhancement. More a question of circumstances in my mind, really. That was all.

That statistic is some what disingenuous. I am thinking of a cum hoc ergo propter hoc issue with it.


The statistic is for overall convictions, and makes no distinction between the extraneous circumstances that CCWFacts pointed out, such as other criminal charges and being under legal age to possess the handgun.



E.G. if there are 15 people of ethnicity A and 1,000 people of ethnicity B. Both Ethnicity A and B are charged with the crime of CCW without a permit.

14 of the Ethnicity A crimes occured in conjuction with other felonious criminal charges, where as only 6 of those from ethnicity B involved other felonious charges.

Of ethnicity A, 15 were charged as felonies, and of Ethnicity B only 7 were.

That is about a 50% more people of ethnicity A were charged with felonies. However that straight "50%" statistic ignores the fact that each one of the people in ethnicity A had other felonious charges that compounded their cases.

Out of context it appears that there is discrimination going on. But in fact nothing of the sort took place.

N6ATF
04-28-2009, 8:55 PM
Yep, I'd rather spend $350 on a Mak...