Is there a statistic somwhere that shows that CCW make you less of a victim?

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Shung

Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2008
Messages
1,682
Location
Geneva, Switzerland
Hi guys.

In here, i saw a couple of weeks ago a statistic showing that gun owners, or CCWers were less probably victim of a violent crime..

i cannot find it anymore, and badly need it in a discussion with an enti. Can you help me here ?

thx
 
I'm sorry I can't help, but I'm not even sure how a statistic like that could be faithfully compiled.

In addition, try not to fall into the trap of endless statistic after statistic. People are wowed by numbers - the challenge is making them relevant and logically correct.

I don't understand why there is such a large aversion to logic, or maybe just backing out and looking at the bigger picture.

If you're a responsible CCW holder who has the mindset of not becoming a victim, why *wouldn't* you become less of a victim, if such a situation comes to you? It's just logical, IMO.

To me, the constant grabbing at any and all statistics, no matter how irrelevant, and using that to justify some pretty extreme viewpoints just shows that these folks are unfortunately just extremely scared and so, try to ban what they do not understand. It's a sad state when that happens. Banning things one does not understand has always happened throughout human history, and still happens today, including in the US on several issues... and unfortunately, also extends to firearms.

AGain, sorry I can't give you the statistics you need for your friend.
 
I think Paul is correct that a ccw holder is a probably a more upstanding citizen that isn't involved in situations and avoids them if possible. Bring up how the anti benefits also because of the insecurity a villain has on whether his victim is armed or not. Gun ownership provides a blanket even for those who don't believe in them. Outlaws damn sure are aware and sobered. Ask them.
 
Heck.. this is not a friend !

but the typical, usual, weedsmockin', idealist, naïve , brain formatted leftist, european... A tough one !

I know he is a lost cause... but since I had this talk with him on a web article, I want to proove him that such statistic exist.. because i've seen links to them here not long ago..

these people only believe in numbers (i know what you think.. give him 45... but this is not very high road ;) )
 
If you have legally defend yourself against an assailant, are you still a victim?

This question is what will make the data unreliable. Some will say yes, some no.

A more appropriate study may involve gun free zones and/or cities that do not allow CCW and/or guns.
 
Miami, which allows CCW just went a month without a homicide. Compare that to Chicago or Washington, DC which does not.
 
Your likelyhood of victimization is unchanged. An offender's likelyhood to initially engage you is no different, since they would not have prior knowledge that you're a CHL holder... What IS different is that you're better able to deal with the situation, should it present itself.
 
There is something wrong with you if you can't disagree with a friend
Click to expand...

i'd say, what's wrong with YOU !? ;)

I never said it was a friend.. he is not. And this do not depend upon his ideas or whatever. he is not a friend, that's all.

I have a couple of old friends that are "typical, usual, weedsmockin', idealist, naïve , brain formatted leftist, europeans..." but this particular one is not a friend. Actually I never met him..

Thank you for all the information provided guys, i will try to use them.

but, i am sure that I saw such statistics on THR lately.. maybe it was on the "twin" forum.. I gotta check that.
 
Have you tried the stats showing the decrease of crime overall in states that have pro-gun stances?

Here in Fla. we had a demonstrable reduction in violent crime after the state became a "Shall Issue" state, IIRC.

As I recall, the anti's were scampering to try to de-fuse that statistic. Even to the point of putting up a propaganda sign on I-75 stating a "Warning!" that Florida residents have the right to shoot to kill.
I always wondered how many migrating criminals saw that sign and turned around and left for more favorable hunting ground.

BTW, That sign came down a few months ago. I wonder if they noticed an even greater reduction in crime after they posted it. :D
 
statistics--location--??
but just being situtionally aware means a lot. if i am in a state that i cannot carry in i am still safer cause i am aware of my surroundings. eg; not acting like a tourist with a map and a perplexed look on my face. or absorbed/distracted by a ipod or cellphone. my wife laughs a lot as real out of towners seem to gravitate to me for directions. funnier still is how often i know the answer cause i looked at the city map before we arrived.
 
Here in Fla. we had a demonstrable reduction in violent crime after the state became a "Shall Issue" state, IIRC.
Click to expand...

That was in 1987? Sure, violent crime dropped then, and then went up in 1988, 1989, and 1990.

Here is the table, but it is better seen here...
http://www.fdle.state.fl.us/FSAC/UCR/1996/trends.aspViolent Crime in Florida
Year Total Violent
Crime Volume % Change Total Violent
Crime Rate Per
100,000 Population % Change
1971 38,572 0.0 547.80 0.0
1972 40,248 4.3 540.90 -1.3
1973 46,430 15.4 591.80 9.4
1974 54,852 18.1 665.00 12.4
1975 57,663 5.1 679.60 2.2
1976 54,543 -5.4 637.80 -6.2
1977 57,916 6.2 664.40 4.2
1978 65,784 13.6 733.60 10.4
1979 73,866 12.3 799.00 8.9
1980 94,068 27.3 982.00 23.0
1981 98,090 4.3 971.40 -1.10
1982 93,406 -4.8 900.30 -7.3
1983 88,298 -5.5 833.70 -7.4
1984 95,368 8.0 872.50 4.7
1985 106,980 12.2 948.50 8.7
1986 120,977 13.1 1,037.70 9.4
1987 123,030 1.7 1,021.50 -1.6
1988 138,343 12.4 1,114.10 9.1
1989 145,473 5.2 1,136.70 2.0
1990 160,554 10.4 1,220.90 7.4
1991 158,181 -1.5 1,198.70 -1.8
1992 161,137 1.9 1,200.30 0.08
1993 161,789 0.4 1,188.90 0.9
1994 157,835 -2.4 1,137.20 -4.3
1995 150,208 -4.8 1,061.60 -6.6
1996 151,350 0.8 1050.20 -1.1

It is hard to say that the drop in violent crime was because of concealed carry laws, LOL.

The same holds for Texas in 1996. It is lauded as showing a remarkable drop in crime when CHLs were allowed, but then again, crime dropped in some 43 states in 1996, including some that did not have concealed carry or that were anti concealed carry.
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/Cius_97/96CRIME/96crime2.pdf

So the demonstrable reduction in violent crime in Florida is a bit dubious as are the claims of crime reduction because of concealed carry. At best, what is evident is an nonunderstood correlation, but no evidence of causation.
 
At best, what is evident is an nonunderstood correlation, but no evidence of causation.
Click to expand...

Or less than that. The two studies I trust the most - one from the CDC and the other from the National Academy of Science - found no evidence of a link between any gun legislation ("gun control" or CCW) and crime. My guess is that economic/cultural factors swamp any legislative effect.

The specific question you ask is probably hard to measure. The kinds of people - by and large - who jump though the legal/financial hoops to get a CCW are statistically unlikey to be the victims of violent crime. So any drop in such crime is hardly noticeable. That sort of makes sense - somebody cited a study in Richmond a while back that found that 90% of murder victims were convicted felons.

Mike
 
Even if there were such a statistic, I wouldn't actually believe that the CCW in itself is what makes you less of a victim because this would be purely observational data and not a designed experiment.

As stated, Correlation doesn't imply causation. Those who are more likely to get their CCW and exercise it are less likely to be a victim to begin with.
 
I agree with Mark. By engaging in self defense, you therefore prevent yourself, hopefully, from being a victim of a violent crime! Which is the primary objective of concealed carry and home defense, to be able to counter deadly force with a threat of your own which hopefully will deter any would be assailant or home invader. I realize this does answer the question about statistics, however, it is reasonable to assume that one would have a better chance of survival in a violent situation if they had the means to defend themselves, their property, and those aroudn them!
 
I think perhaps it's a little more complicated than some might make it out to be here.
When you look at statements like, "people who get thier CCW are less likely to be a victim in the first place" - well, by what standard? What is their probability of being a victim to begin with? What gives them a lower probability of being a victim? Is it purely the fact that they're carrying? I personally find that a little bit of a stretch. There's plenty of people who carry who ARE victims of violent crime. Granted, many of them are criminals themselves - but does the CCW come with some sort of magic shield?
I don't think carrying a gun really changes the probability of someone trying to attack you, or commit some sort of crime against you. All it does is provide you with an option to defend yourself should that attack come. If you live in a high-crime/dangerous area - you are more likely to be the victim of crime. If you live in a low crime area, you are less likely. Whether or not you have a gun (which, if it's concealed nobody knows about anyways) really doesn't change that.
 
You're quoting me completely out of context. The point is that the CCW is something that happens to go along with a person who is already less likely to become a victim.

A CCW is a proactive response and a reflection that they understand that may live in an unsafe area. Obtaining and exercising the CCW is just one of many ways that they lessen the chances of being victimized.

At CCW courses, though very briefly, they discuss situational awareness and other related matters that would lessen the chances of them being in a situation where they would be the victim. It's mentioned that people who are in condition white all the time are more likely to be victimized than those who are aware of their surroundings and the people in it.

It's probably doing things like not walking alone at night, having your car keys ready when you're going to the parking lot, being aware of your surroundings etc. that make you less of a victim. I would think that a CCW would be the variable that is very strongly correlated with all of those things. For most people, a CCW is one of many preventative measures. For a lot of women, it's one of many "Never Again" measures.

That is why I believe that "Correlation doesn't imply causation" applies here.
 
crime

a better statistic is to check the states that have ccw and the states that dont.check New York,Mass,New Jersey,ect crime in Mass went up after the draconic gun act of 1998.the NRA would be a good place to start.by the way Mass has "permit to carry" and "MAY issue"not "SHALL".
 
a better statistic is to check the states that have ccw and the states that dont.check New York,Mass,New Jersey,ect crime in Mass went up after the draconic gun act of 1998.the NRA would be a good place to start.by the way Mass has "permit to carry" and "MAY issue"not "SHALL".
Click to expand...

This is exactly the statistical trap i was talking about trying to avoid.
Looking solely at CCW and crime in a vacuum is one surefire way to lose the argument. When you look at those two statistics by themselves, there are simply far too many other factors that can be brought up and used against you.
Those factors do not by themselves have to be 100% correct to discredit you. All they have to do is show that your comparison is incomplete - and that there are other factors at play, and your whole argument loses water. It's a sucker's game - don't do it.
 
Not sure about statistics but you may find this interesting. There is a high probability that CCW's are more aware of their surroundings and situations to avoid. This would make them less likely of a target. Something else I find interesting is from a criminals standpoint. I learned in a class years ago, that most criminals pick their victims based on weakness. Sort of like hyenas do in the wild, they prey on the most vulnerable. People who have been trained to respond to an attack carry themselves differently. They are more confident. Does that mean just because you carry you'll never get attacked? Of course not. But criminals are generally lazy, a seasoned criminal will probably avoid you and go onto the weaker looking victim. It is much easier to take what you want without worrying about a fight. Food for thought.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

R
  • Locked
CCW Victimization Statistics?
Replies
16
Views
1K
Vern Humphrey
V
MachIVshooter
  • Locked
Help; Need links
Replies
0
Views
303
MachIVshooter
MachIVshooter
D
  • Locked
Banning Private Sales Costs Lives (Published Study)
Replies
2
Views
496
Dean Weingarten
D
O
  • Locked
Utilitarian argument must fail.
Replies
21
Views
1K
royh
R
S
  • Locked
UK: 14,000 knife victims a year
2 3
Replies
58
Views
2K
hso
hso
Back
Top