PDA

View Full Version : Human Events article: "Concealed Carry Permits Rise, Police-Officer Killings Decline"


Paladin
12-16-2009, 9:55 PM
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=34849

Concealed Carry Permits Rise, Police-Officer Killings Decline
by David Alan Coia
12/17/2009

The number of people applying for and receiving permits to carry concealed weapons has risen dramatically throughout the United States during the last two years, and it continues to rise, yet the number of felony killings of police officers has declined just as precipitously over the same period.

Inexplicable? “This is just the type of thing that was predicted,” economist John R. Lott told HUMAN EVENTS. Lott, author of More Guns, Less Crime (Chicago University Press), pointed to research done eight years ago by David P. Mustard and published in Chicago University’s Journal of Law and Economics.

“States that enact concealed-carry laws are less likely to have a felonious police death and more likely to have lower rates of felonious police deaths after the law is passed,” Mustard concluded in his 2001 journal article.

A sampling of concealed-carry permit (CCP) activity in various states illustrates the increase in demand for concealed weapons:

* Ohio: Sheriffs issued 33,864 regular CCPs in 2008, 53% more than in 2007 (73 temporary emergency licenses were also issued), according to the Buckeye Firearms Association.
* Oklahoma: As of June, the state had 78,000 CCP holders, with more than 21,000 CCPs issued in 2008 -- twice the number issued in 2007, according to The Oklahoman newspaper.
* Utah: The Bureau of Criminal Identification processed 2,548 CCP applications in February 2008 and 8,142 in February 2009. For March the numbers were 4,412 in 2008 and 10,878 in 2009.
* Forsyth County, N.C.: In the first six months of 2007 there were 1,362 applications for permits to buy pistols, the Winston-Salem Journal reported. In the same time period in 2008 and 2009, there were 1,974 and 2,935 applications, respectively.

Despite the increase in the number of legally carried concealed weapons, 41 law enforcement officers were feloniously killed in 2008, a decline of 17 killings from the previous year’s total, according to the 2008 U.S. Department of Justice report, Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted. Firearms were used in 35 of those killings, 25 of which were by handguns. Many other police officers died in the line of duty, but the majority of those deaths resulted from auto accidents during police chases.

The 41 killings is the lowest in recent decades, matched only in 1999 when there were 42 felonious killings of police officers, 25 of which were also by handguns.

“Letting law-abiding citizens carry guns reduces the rate at which criminals are carrying guns,” Lott said. Armed citizens increase the risk to armed criminals, who typically prefer to avoid life-threatening risk and so are less likely to use guns in the commission of a crime, he said.

Lott explained that where there is an increase in CCPs, there is also a drop in violent crime relative to property crime -- fewer armed robberies and more larcenies. Also, criminals tend to move from areas in which more citizens are armed, resulting in an increase in crime in counties and states that restrict gun ownership and CCPs.

“License holders, like gun owners in general, are not the extremists the anti-gun crowd tries to paint,” Jim Irvine, chairman of the Buckeye Firearms Association, told the Chillicothe, Ohio Gazette in June. “They are honorable citizens who want protection from real dangers. Responsible people carry a gun to protect them from a criminal attack.”

“To date [Oct. 2001] we have no examples of law-abiding citizens with concealed-weapons permits assaulting police officers,” Mustard wrote. “In contrast, there is at least one example of such a citizen coming to the aid of an officer.”

“Criminals tend to avoid activities that are risky to them,” said Lott. Chicago University Press this spring will issue a third edition of More Guns, Less Crime, which Lott has updated to include an additional decade of information. The first two editions sold more than 100,000 copies, according to the publisher.

Mr. Coia is a freelance journalist based in Arlington, Virginia.

bigcalidave
12-16-2009, 10:04 PM
How do you get THOSE stats out on the AP??

I wonder if any news agencies would even cover it.

guayuque
12-16-2009, 10:07 PM
Interesting. it is anecdotal since there are just so many potential other explanations, but interesting and encouraging nonetheless.

LiberalGunner
12-17-2009, 9:06 PM
One has nothing to do with the other. Crime has been on the decline for years. Trying to attribute this to more people carrying is a fallacy. It would be like saying less cops are dying because there are fewer polar bears on the arctic ice caps. NO RELATION!

Paladin
12-17-2009, 9:14 PM
One has nothing to do with the other. Crime has been on the decline for years. Trying to attribute this to more people carrying is a fallacy. It would be like saying less cops are dying because there are fewer polar bears on the arctic ice caps. NO RELATION!
Unfortunately, for you, unlike your polar bear example, this effect was predicted back in 2001. From the 2nd paragraph of the article above: “This is just the type of thing that was predicted,” economist John R. Lott told HUMAN EVENTS. Lott, author of More Guns, Less Crime (Chicago University Press), pointed to research done eight years ago by David P. Mustard and published in Chicago University’s Journal of Law and Economics."

There's a lot of good information re. how violent crimes decrease when "Shall Issue" Right-to-Carry laws are passed over at:
http://www.NRAILA.org/Issues/FactSheets/Read.aspx?id=18&issue=003

Hopi
12-17-2009, 9:17 PM
One has nothing to do with the other. Crime has been on the decline for years. Trying to attribute this to more people carrying is a fallacy. It would be like saying less cops are dying because there are fewer polar bears on the arctic ice caps. NO RELATION!

Very interesting first few posts here. Welcome to the forum.

Paladin
12-17-2009, 9:25 PM
Interesting. it is anecdotal since there are just so many potential other explanations, but interesting and encouraging nonetheless.What anecdotes?

The number of LEOs killed came from "2008 U.S. Department of Justice report, Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted", which sounds like an exhaustive study to me.

The number of CCWs issued in each state comes from what the article describes as "A sampling of concealed-carry permit (CCP) activity in various states illustrates the increase in demand for concealed weapons". Just because they listed only a "sampling" does not mean that an exhaustive study was not completed and formed the basis of their conclusion.

Yes, the article is weak in not clearly stating who asserting the correlation rises to causation. Hopefully, Dr. Lott will have this info (and more) in detail in the updated edition of his book, More Guns, Less Crime, that is mentioned at the end of the article.

guayuque
12-17-2009, 9:35 PM
What anecdotes?

The number of LEOs killed came from "2008 U.S. Department of Justice report, Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted", which sounds like an exhaustive study to me.

The number of CCWs issued in each state comes from what the article describes as "A sampling of concealed-carry permit (CCP) activity in various states illustrates the increase in demand for concealed weapons". Just because they listed only a "sampling" does not mean that an exhaustive study was not completed and formed the basis of their conclusion.

Yes, the article is weak in not clearly stating who asserting the correlation rises to causation. Hopefully, Dr. Lott will have this info (and more) in detail in the updated edition of his book, More Guns, Less Crime, that is mentioned at the end of the article.

That is far from exhaustive. An exhaustive proper scientific method study would exclude all other factors in the decline. Since it does not is is merely anecdotal.

LiberalGunner
12-17-2009, 9:35 PM
Paladin, I live in San Diego...which is pretty representative for large american cities with restrictive anti ccw stances. Crime has gone down here for the last 5 years, including homicide...though I'm not sure about LEO killed. I'm not going to say it's because our sheriff has been increasingly strict on issuing CCW. I'm going to say it's simply part of a larger, and good trend sweeping this country. Defend CCW all you want to...I may even support your arguments, but don't draw false conclusions. It only weakens your case.

curtisfong
12-18-2009, 10:25 AM
It only weakens your case.

So how does one weaken the argument that CCWs increase crime?

Paladin
12-18-2009, 10:36 AM
That is far from exhaustive. An exhaustive proper scientific method study would exclude all other factors in the decline. Since it does not is is merely anecdotal.
What is far from exhaustive? I mentioned the three things that were mentioned in that article: (1) the DOJ report; (2) the admitted "sampling" of CCW activity; and (3) Dr. Lott's book, More Guns, Less Crime. Plus, you could be referring to the article itself, so that would be #4.

Please specify.

Paladin
12-18-2009, 10:40 AM
Paladin, I live in San Diego...which is pretty representative for large american cities with restrictive anti ccw stances. Crime has gone down here for the last 5 years, including homicide...though I'm not sure about LEO killed. I'm not going to say it's because our sheriff has been increasingly strict on issuing CCW. I'm going to say it's simply part of a larger, and good trend sweeping this country. Defend CCW all you want to...I may even support your arguments, but don't draw false conclusions. It only weakens your case.I don't defend Shall Issue on your experience in SD, or even its newly asserted effect on reducing LEO deaths, but rather on the fact that in every state that has passed Shall Issue, violent crime has decreased.

In case you've never seen it before, Radical Gun Nuttery has an animation that shows the progress of Shall Issue across the nation over the past almost 25 years.

http://www.gun-nuttery.com/rtc.php

SteveH
12-18-2009, 10:48 AM
I think the decrease in police officer deaths has more to do with better training, equipment, body armor and medical treatment than CCW permits. Body armor gets better and better every year. Cops are getting dynamic training much better than the static square range training of years past. The Taser has definately safely ended incidents that would have went to guns or knives just a couple years ago. Trauma treatment has improved to the point that people survive injuries now that would have killed them in the past.

Kid Stanislaus
12-18-2009, 10:59 AM
That is far from exhaustive. An exhaustive proper scientific method study would exclude all other factors in the decline. Since it does not is is merely anecdotal.

Agreed, its a "post hoc ergo proctor hoc" argument ("After this, therefore because of this"). That's one of the basic falacies of human thinking.

yellowfin
12-18-2009, 11:33 AM
I think the decrease in police officer deaths has more to do with better training, equipment, body armor and medical treatment than CCW permits. Body armor gets better and better every year. Cops are getting dynamic training much better than the static square range training of years past. The Taser has definately safely ended incidents that would have went to guns or knives just a couple years ago. Trauma treatment has improved to the point that people survive injuries now that would have killed them in the past. All of it contributes, and all of it good I suppose. It's like picking which part of a Snickers bar you like best, the chocolate, the peanuts, the caramel, or the other stuff in it. You just don't think that CCW's are the chocolate, or maybe you don't think it's the peanuts, but it could be the caramel.

Glock22Fan
12-18-2009, 11:34 AM
I can understand the hypothesis that the supposed cause and the observed effect are not necessarily the only linkage and that there may be other factors, and that the causative linkage may be quite low.

But consider this. There have been several studies that suggest that increased CCW issuance leads to less crime - and these studies have been attacked by the antis. However, and this is a big point, there is no evidence whatsoever that increased CCW issuance leads to MORE crime.

I think this is pretty close to what we have here.

A suggestion, but not a formal statistical proof, that more CCW's lead to less LEO deaths, which may or may not be strongly linked, but evidence nevertheless that increased CCW issuance definitely isn't a threat to LEO's,

510dat
12-18-2009, 4:18 PM
owever, and this is a big point, there is no evidence whatsoever that increased CCW issuance leads to MORE crime....

A suggestion, but not a formal statistical proof, that more CCW's lead to less LEO deaths, which may or may not be strongly linked, but evidence nevertheless that increased CCW issuance definitely isn't a threat to LEO's,

And because of this, the state has no legitimate interest in protecting the public safety from CCWs. And because of that, restricting legal concealed carry is an infringement on the 2A.

Canute
12-18-2009, 9:10 PM
Violent crime has been dropping for years in this country practically everywhere. I think at the very least this shows that CCW/gun ownership doesn't increase crime as most states have become less restrictive with their handgun laws in the past 20 years. Аs a matter of fact, crime rates and CCW/civilian gun ownership may even be completely uncorrelated.
While that possibility is not 100% what we want to hear, at least it puts the lie to the gun control position. If that's our worst case I'll take it.
EDIT: Then all we'd have to prove is that gun prohibition increases the risk of violence. To me, that's just intuitive, but I don't have hard numbers on it. God made men, Colt made them equal :).

a1c
12-18-2009, 9:41 PM
So how does one weaken the argument that CCWs increase crime?

You just ask for evidence. And there isn't any.

But as is often repeated, causation and correlation are two different things. If you start using some statistics to make a point, even though there are thousands of other factors at play, be prepared for the other side to play the same game with equal conviction.

hvengel
12-20-2009, 12:33 PM
One has nothing to do with the other. Crime has been on the decline for years. Trying to attribute this to more people carrying is a fallacy. It would be like saying less cops are dying because there are fewer polar bears on the arctic ice caps. NO RELATION!

The problem is that polar bear populations have been INCREASING for some time now (Since the 1970s). See

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2009/06/28/polar-bear-testimony-suppressed-due-inconvenient-truths

Also the move toward "liberalizing" CCW laws started in the late 1980s which was BEFORE crime rates started declining in the early 1990s. This does not prove that more CCW permits caused the decline in crime rates but it is consistent with the possibility that increasing numbers of CCW permits starting in the late 1980s could have been a significant factor in the reduction in crime rates that has occurred since the early 1990s.

press1280
12-20-2009, 5:54 PM
I can understand the hypothesis that the supposed cause and the observed effect are not necessarily the only linkage and that there may be other factors, and that the causative linkage may be quite low.

But consider this. There have been several studies that suggest that increased CCW issuance leads to less crime - and these studies have been attacked by the antis. However, and this is a big point, there is no evidence whatsoever that increased CCW issuance leads to MORE crime.

I think this is pretty close to what we have here.

A suggestion, but not a formal statistical proof, that more CCW's lead to less LEO deaths, which may or may not be strongly linked, but evidence nevertheless that increased CCW issuance definitely isn't a threat to LEO's,

+1. Although the crime rate falling could be because of numerous factors, CCW liberalization has NOT caused an increase in crime, which was what the antis always claimed would happen. Thus the reason to NOT issue has no rational basis, other than a local sheriff can't sell CCWs anymore to campaign contributors.

kick Z tail out
12-21-2009, 6:03 AM
One has nothing to do with the other. Crime has been on the decline for years. Trying to attribute this to more people carrying is a fallacy. It would be like saying less cops are dying because there are fewer polar bears on the arctic ice caps. NO RELATION!
No relation... yet the LiberalAntiGunners want you to think CCWs are related to crime increasing. I guess it's not a 2 way street... at least not for the lefties.

DVLDOC
12-21-2009, 6:18 AM
In case you've never seen it before, Radical Gun Nuttery has an animation that shows the progress of Shall Issue across the nation over the past almost 25 years.

http://www.gun-nuttery.com/rtc.php


Cool animation! When is CA turning "Blue"? :rolleyes:

Paladin
12-22-2009, 8:01 AM
Cool animation! When is CA turning "Blue"? :rolleyes:First McDonald, then Sykes (perhaps w/after a brief pause for Nordyke), then de facto "Shall Issue" Right-to-Carry. My *guess* is that all this will be occur sometime before spring 2012.

Info. re. the Sykes case:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=180923