Check out the “safe” concealed carry owners below, in new numbers compiled by the Violence Policy Center, who are only scratching the surface since many states don’t want you to know how many CC owners commit crime.
Connecticut beer truck driver Omar Thornton, who in August shot to death eight co-workers before taking his own life, was a concealed handgun permit holder according to new information obtained under Connecticut’s Freedom of Information Act by the Violence Policy Center (VPC) for the October update to Concealed Carry Killers. In his permit application, Thornton listed “job” as the reason for his requiring the permit.
Concealed Carry Killers is an on-line VPC resource that tallies news reports of killings by concealed handgun permit holders that have not been determined to be legitimate self defense. According to the October update, concealed handgun permit holders have killed at least 213 individuals since May 2007--including 17 mass shootings claiming a total of 73 lives.
“It is now commonplace for mass shooters to be licensed to carry concealed handguns. It is clear that the licensing systems are completely ineffective at weeding out applicants who are likely to kill in anger rather than self-defense.Of the 125 incidents in 28 states that resulted in the 213 deaths, in more than half (71 incidents) the concealed handgun permit holder has already been convicted, committed suicide after the incident, or was killed in the incident. Of the 54 cases still pending, the vast majority (44) of concealed handgun permit holders have been charged with criminal homicide, two were deemed incompetent to stand trial, two incidents were unintentional shootings, and six incidents are still under investigation.
A summary of each of the 125 incidents is available at http://www.vpc.org/ccwkillers.htm, clicking on each category leads to a state-by-state breakout for the incidents with current known status.
Among 6 million of anyone, you'll find a tiny fraction that screw up. If (as is the case with concealed carry license holders) the rate of screwups is equal or less than the general population, it is fairly obvious that licenses are not responsible for an increase in violence.
ReplyDeletein many of these cases listed by the VPC, a concealed gun was not used. Others are on their face ludicrous--a janitor with documented mental problems and domestic violence conviction with a rare, legal $30,000 machine gun, for example makes it obvious that no significant effort was made in fact checking.
Again, the stats included here represent a small fraction of CC killers not reported by the press or states. You're argument doesn't hold up.
ReplyDeleteBack up your claim that CC guns weren't used in the crimes listed, and argue why if that were true, I should feel better a CC license holder used a different gun to kill.
Otherwise, thanks for response.
So what is your point? That a tiny percentage of CCL holders have killed people? Ok, I can buy that, however I feel reasonably certain that the CCL didn't cause the person to shoot someone. I figure these individuals would have shot someone with or without the CCL.
ReplyDeleteHad they incountered a GUN FREE ZONE sign maybe they wouldn't have committed a crime, but I don't have any hard data on that.
You have claimed that we concealed carry license holders are dangerous. It is you that has to prove it.
ReplyDeleteLuckily, we don't have to discuss this with you. We are winning, and your "call the cops and report them" antics will get you charged with harrassment or whatever the equivelent is in your state.
So go ahead and piss off the cops with false reports. Go ahead and complain to the business owners. You will only marginalize yourself.
The web site featured in the story is proving it, not me personally. I know you've never asked why state lawmakers tried to keep CC guns violations from the public, but I did. Are they trying to hide something? You have to wonder.
ReplyDeleteLike the elections where Republicans didn't have to have any kind of agenda, your comment "Luckily, we don't have to discuss this with you. We are winning" pretty much says it all. As long as you're "winning," who cares what most Americans think.
Charging us with harrassment is ridiculous, because I'm not the one with a gun that KILLS or scares people, and threatens the security and safety of my family! Gun loons are a public threat.
As for "Go ahead and complain to the business owners?" You really think they won't care? Really? They should, because it could be a real jobs killer too.
You're losing the argument in many ways, because the small minority of CC holders don't make up for the massive number of people against carrying guns in public. If anyone is marginalizing themselves it's gun owners showing off their paranoia and insecurity to everyone around them. By the way, if guns are so safe, why not insist your politicians allow guns in their state capitals?
"...state lawmakers tried to keep CC guns violations from the public... Are they trying to hide something? You have to wonder."
ReplyDeleteHere's the info from North Carolina.
http://www.ncdoj.gov/CHPStats.aspx
A quick Google search and a bit of looking around and I had this in 2 minutes. You might try the same, but it would destroy your "evil cabal" theory.
So in the total time of Concealed Handgun Permit issue, 12-1-95 until 6-30-10 there have been 1007 permits revoked out of 195,553 active permits. This is just over 1/2 of 1%. (0.51494%) If you want to know more, I suggest you contact the 100 Sheriffs in NC and they might give you some idea of the causes.
" As long as you're "winning," who cares what most Americans think. "
ReplyDeleteIf Americans as a group were concerned about their fellow citizens legally carrying guns, there would be consequences at the polls for politicians who have supported concealed carry. Since no one has ever been voted out of office for supporting Concealed Carry reform, I guess that there isn't much resistance to the idea. There have, however, been many politicians who have been given the boot because of obstinate refusal to pass CC reform.
"Charging us with harrassment is ridiculous"
ReplyDeleteSo you happen to catch sight of a gun carried legally by a citizen and you call the police and falsely report an alarm, pulling police off actual crime to investigate your fears, and I'm being ridiculous? Get a grip on yourself. I would also remind you that the internet is forever. You have already, in a public forum, stated your intention to make a false police report. When someone sues you for harrassment, this is evidence.
"As for "Go ahead and complain to the business owners?" You really think they won't care? Really?"
nope. Most rational people don't fear guns. Secondly, if they refuse service due to legal gun carry, they will get boycotted.
http://paopencarry.org/no-guns-no-money-cards
you may look at the Starbucks Open Carry situation. Starbucks basically told Brady Campaign to get bent. And this was over Open Carry, in California, not concealed carry in Wisconsin. I would not put much hope in business owners pissing off a large group of motivated customers like us.
I fail to see how this proves that allowing concealed carry is more dangerous than not allowing it. The information given states that 276 people have been killed by Concealed Carry Permit (CCP) holders since May 2007. I haven't gone through them, but I bet more than a few of those are justified shootings. Also, in the few accounts I read, I noticed one who "had a permit to carry a
ReplyDeletefirearm as a security guard." That is not the same as a CCP, and claiming that it is is irresponsible. I wonder how many more of these irresponsibilities there are?
Anyway, in that same time, how many total firearm homicides were there? 40000? 50000? Now tell me, why are CCP holders a danger?
Oh, and some states do allow concealed carry inside their capitol, Texas being one.
You view the VPC as an authoritative source without doing the math yourself?
ReplyDelete125 incidents out of 6 MILLION CCW holders. That is an "incident rate" of 0.000025%.
That means your odds of being killed by a CCW holder are half that of being killed by ANY other person. (roughly 15,000 murders in the US per year. 15k/300mil = 0.0005)
The numbers prove show concealed carry holders are twice as safe as the "average citizen".
Of course I'm surprised that the folks at the VPC remember to breathe most days.
"You're losing the argument in many ways, because the small minority of CC holders don't make up for the massive number of people against carrying guns in public."
ReplyDeleterefer back to my recent comment. If the gun banners were of any significant numbers, there would be political consequences. There are none. Politicians can tell Brady, VPC, and CSGV to jump in a lake every day of the week and twice on Sundays, and suffer not the least at the polls in November. Piss us off and out on the street they go. When you can have political success like that, I'll believe in your "massive" numbers.
"By the way, if guns are so safe, why not insist your politicians allow guns in their state capitals?"
We do. It's a slow process. Two examples for you. First, Pennsylvania bans firearms in the Capitol building solely because State law prohibits firearms in courts, and the State Supreme Court is in that building. Were there no court in the building, we'd be legal to carry there. Second, Texas does allow Concealed Carry in the Capitol building due to a relatively recent law change. There's a humorous story that goes along with this. Since you can carry in their Capitol, all you have to do is show your concealed carry license and you get to bypass security. This pissed the lobbyists off, who had to go through normal security. They have, in significant numbers, gone and gotten their own concealed carry licenses in order to bypass security themselves. Some reporters have followed suit.
http://tinyurl.com/27qxlze
I use a simple, bright line distinction to determine if a place may morally deny me the right to carry. They must have two things,
1. Armed guards throughout the building, not just at the doors
2. Limited access with strict security.
if they have both, then I'm ok with leaving my gun in a locker under the care of the police like Pennsylvania requires at Courthouses (including the Capitol)
"You're losing the argument in many ways, because the small minority of CC holders don't make up for the massive number of people against carrying guns in public."
ReplyDeleterefer back to my recent comment. If the gun banners were of any significant numbers, there would be political consequences. There are none. Politicians can tell Brady, VPC, and CSGV to jump in a lake every day of the week and twice on Sundays, and suffer not the least at the polls in November. Piss us off and out on the street they go. When you can have political success like that, I'll believe in your "massive" numbers.
"By the way, if guns are so safe, why not insist your politicians allow guns in their state capitals?"
We do. It's a slow process. Two examples for you. First, Pennsylvania bans firearms in the Capitol building solely because State law prohibits firearms in courts, and the State Supreme Court is in that building. Were there no court in the building, we'd be legal to carry there. Second, Texas does allow Concealed Carry in the Capitol building due to a relatively recent law change. There's a humorous story that goes along with this. Since you can carry in their Capitol, all you have to do is show your concealed carry license and you get to bypass security. This pissed the lobbyists off, who had to go through normal security. They have, in significant numbers, gone and gotten their own concealed carry licenses in order to bypass security themselves. Some reporters have followed suit.
http://tinyurl.com/27qxlze
I use a simple, bright line distinction to determine if a place may morally deny me the right to carry. They must have two things,
1. Armed guards throughout the building, not just at the doors
2. Limited access with strict security.
if they have both, then I'm ok with leaving my gun in a locker under the care of the police like Pennsylvania requires at Courthouses (including the Capitol)
Thanks for the examples. Now if every other state would do the same thing, great. That would be 47 of them...soon to be my own Wisconsin.
ReplyDeleteIt's funny how you assume the NRA lobbying power and money behind guns isn't really an issue, and that there would be political conseguences for conservatives after forcing down the publics throats gun carry laws. The NRA and conservatives are on the same team. And because of that unanswered power, Democrats are falling in line, like they have with the horrific idea of vouchers.
Oh, and how would you like to be on the "unarmed" side protesting against armed paranoid CC thugs, worried that their dangerous hobby is being threatened with safety regulations. There's a reason you don't see large numbers of protesters.
But I hope to change all that. If we can voice loudly the public threat by calling the police and business owners, we'll have larger more powerful numbers than ever before. You can't get away with making everyday people in society a gun zone filled with paranoid lunatic hobbyists (I have a friend who is breaking our no carry law) who feel so inadequate that nothing else makes them feel useful.
One final note: When you described "a place (that) may morally deny me the right to carry," you scared me. If anyplace had that kind of security, I would know immediately we've lost our freedoms and liberties in this country to the point of hopelessness.
In regards to my looking up on Google the stats on CC, forget it.
ReplyDeleteThis isn't totally my issue, as yet. The Violence Policy Center covers everything you've mentioned here and more. When new stats come out, I'll cover them.
I have to laugh though, when I think of the arguments for creating concealed carry laws in the first place. You know, those very responsible law abiding, citizens out to protect the public types, who would go through all the trouble to get a permit.
1,007 revoked that we know of, what about the other 47 states? Those are big numbers for responsible citizens who have never broken the law, and doesn't even count those who have threatened or injured people. That half percent is your argument unraveling.
But you're right, we have the laws now and as a family man, and I have found my freedoms and liberties restricted and society less safe due to likes of gun nuts.
Thanks for a civil fact based discussion. You're good in the debate.
Wow. You are a very hateful person. You lash out at normal Americans, painting them as crazy killers, solely because they participate in an activity you disagree with.
ReplyDeleteGrow up.
“Oh, and how would you like to be on the "unarmed" side protesting against armed paranoid CC thugs, worried that their dangerous hobby is being threatened with safety regulations.”
ReplyDeleteIt’s funny you see me as a paranoid thug. I’m not the one who is afraid of my fellow citizens carrying a gun. Maybe you need to spend a little time getting to know your neighbors and finding out how little like thugs they are. A rational decision to carry a firearm is not paranoia. Fear that the most law abiding group of people in the US probably is.
“When you described "a place (that) may morally deny me the right to carry," you scared me. If anyplace had that kind of security, I would know immediately we've lost our freedoms and liberties in this country to the point of hopelessness.”
I simply described any courthouse I’ve ever been to. There are cops all over the place, and metal detectors. I think that in that case it is reasonable for me to allow them to handle security while I am there. You will notice that your average mall isn’t secure. The mall cops aren’t armed, and there is no secure access. Anyone bent on harm can bring in a weapon, and if I am disarmed by law or owner’s policy, I cannot effectively defend myself.
“1,007 revoked that we know of, what about the other 47 states? Those are big numbers for responsible citizens who have never broken the law, and doesn't even count those who have threatened or injured people. That half percent is your argument unraveling. “
Someone in Texas did a study on their revocation rate and found that the average Texan is 5.3 times more likely to be arrested for violent crime and 14 times more likely for non-violent crime than the average Texas Concealed Handgun License holder. Someone (I can’t find the study) even compared it to the rates of Police officers and found that CHL holders were more law abiding than the Police.
http://concealedguns.procon.org/sourcefiles/sturdevant.pdf
“But you're right, we have the laws now and as a family man, and I have found my freedoms and liberties restricted and society less safe due to likes of gun nuts.”
How, exactly? My freedom does not affect your freedoms at all. Your liberty is not infringed by my right to carry. You may be more scared, but that’s not my doing. I would respectfully suggest that you are the one with the problem. You are afraid of an inanimate object. You are projecting your fears of the gun on to me by calling my friends and me paranoid thugs and paranoid, lunatic hobbyists. Maybe you should go and deal with your fears in a constructive way.
You can act like gun crazy losers are normal sane average people, but I know a few myself, and they are paranoid ractionary authoritarian conservatives. They have good qualities too, but in a stress situation, I wouldn't want them armed. It's hardly a "rational decision" to carry a hidden gun.
ReplyDeleteYour self important vision of yourself precludes you from identifying with the majority of people who feel threatened...by you and your gun. Guns have that affect, shocking huh!
Anecdotes can be usefully misleading, but statistical analysis of concealed carry permit holders shows that they are *more* law-abiding than the general public.
ReplyDeleteSee http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1369783 (p. 50 et seq)
'It's hardly a "rational decision" to carry a hidden gun.'
ReplyDeleteIt's a very rational decision. By carrying a gun you are making sure that you have the most effective means to thwart an assault or robbery. I don't see how that's so 'crazy'.
'Your self important vision of yourself precludes you from identifying with the majority of people who feel threatened...by you and your gun. Guns have that affect, shocking huh!'
Why do you feel threatened by me? Seriously, what's the deal? I have a gun to defend myself, so unless you plan on stealing my possesions or raping my girlfriend, you have nothing to worry about.
There a scientific term for what you are feeling, its called 'Hoplophobia', the irrational fear of weapons.
If my gun scares you, thats not my problem. If my decision to exercise my constitutional rights 'offends' you, tough. You can leave.
'You can act like gun crazy losers are normal sane average people'
Statements like that don't 'further your cause', they make you look like a ignorant, pretentious jerk.
Also, that 'majority of people feel threatened' bit? Thats pure fiction. Support for civil rights violations (AKA: gun control) is at a several-decade low.
Perhaps you ought to compare concealed carry license holders to licensed drivers of motor vehicles or licensed medical doctors. Given the numbers--319 (presumably illegal) killings since 2007 out of some six million licensees--you'd be hard pressed to find a safer group of people.
ReplyDeleteWhat this does show is that statistics are more dangerous to the user than to the target and ought to be banned. Get on that, would you?