Good article on CCW (John Lott, CPRC study, 2014)

[mshill]

A large contribution to both states being safer places to life is the LDS influence...an emphasis upon the moral values that the Founding Fathers emphasized.

-hanko (who's incidentally not LDS)

It was no accident that I chose Utah as an example

Moral values, family, and agency to choose.

[RobertMW]

Article states Peruta is waiting an en banc review by the entire circuit?

Just the lack of research and knowledge by the writer. Hell, most people that TRY to follow the case don't understand the exact status the case is in right now. But no, en banc review has not been granted, in fact, it technically hasn't even been asked for, officially. If KH is granted intervention, her request for appeal is basically back-dated.

If you go through the rules of the court, and the precedings of the case, you will see that this is an unusual situation.

[-hanko]

It was no accident that I chose Utah as an example

Moral values, family, and agency to choose.

I'm with you. Same reason I and family chose Idaho...no comparison, thank God, to California.

[klewan]

Lott wrote a book in '96, More Guns, Less Crime. Not about CCW, but just gun ownership in general.

[PutTogether]

We WANT to believe that the increase in LTC directly led to less murders (and it MIGHT actually be true), but wanting to believe it does not make it so.

We HAVE to remember that correlation is not the same as causation.

You can not definitively use those number to PROVE that LTC caused a drop in the murder rate. You CAN definitively prove that increases in LTC did NOT lead to an uptick in the murder and violent crime rates - which is still a huge win.

This helps disprove the 'blood in the streets' argument that we for some reason still hear from the antis. Making the argument that LTC issuance went up, so violent crime dropped is easily torn apart, and can not be proven. However, we can absolutely make the argument that LTC issuance has obviously not increased violence - which is one of their top arguments/whines against us.

[Quiet]

Here's what the CDC had to say...

Back in January 2013, the current Administration issued an Executive Order that enabled the CDC to conduct a study on firearm violence.
The CDC released their report in June 2013, but it was not given a lot of media attention.

snippets from that report...

"Defensive use of guns by crime victims is a common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed. Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million, in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008."

"A different issue is whether defensive uses of guns, however numerous or rare they may be, are effective in preventing injury to the gun-wielding crime victim. Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was “used” by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies. Effectiveness of defensive tactics, however, is likely to vary across types of victims, types of offenders, and circumstances of the crime, so further research is needed both to explore these contingencies and to confirm or discount earlier findings."

http://www.iom.edu/Reports/2013/Priorities-for-Research-to-Reduce-the-Threat-of-Firearm-Related-Violence.aspx