Article: Police Commit More Gun Crimes Than Concealed Carry Permit Holders

Status
Not open for further replies.

Aim1

member
Joined
Oct 24, 2015
Messages
2,310
Good news.






http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...re-gun-crimes-concealed-carry-permit-holders/





Police Commit More Gun Crimes Than Concealed Carry Permit Holders

by AWR HAWKINS27 May 2017

Lott’s assessment is not for the purpose of disparaging police. Instead, it is to show that concealed carry permit holders are among the most law-abiding citizens, and their armed presence on campus is a deterrent, rather than a cause for concern.

Lott then shows that from January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2007, the yearly rate for firearms violations was .017 percent. The yearly rate for Texas’ concealed carry permit holders in 2015 was .0024 percent.
 
Well, I see this thread going nowhere good, and probably fast.

Are the police crimes resultant from bad uses of force (either poor judgement, poor training or plain stupidity) and officers getting subsequently indicted for such? Or does Lott show statistics about cops committing actual crimes, unrelated to the performance of their duties?
 
Something about this doesn't seem quite right to me. I wish they had gone into detail about the nature of these crimes supposedly being committed by cops.
 
A penetrating glimpse into the obvious if you ask me. An armed individual whose job requires him to routinely insert himself in volatile social situations will be orders of magnitude more exposed to scrutiny and second-guessing by legions of others will be far more at risk of having committed a "crime" than someone whose only need is to protect himself with deadly force, an event that most of us will have the good fortune to never experience.

Agreed though, the purpose of the article is to show that concealed carry permit holders pose far less of a threat to campus security than armed security or police, and it accomplishes that.

Someone ought to also point out that the anti's constant hysterical forecasts of "blood in the streets" has never came to pass, anywhere, anyplace on Earth in which legally armed citizens are permitted to just go about their business. If anything, the opposite has been true. "Gun-free" schools and campuses have only been target-rich environments for evildoers.
 
The Left would also disarm civilian police forces. The Pro-Government Left would much prefer an armed Federal Police Force in every community. They could control the law and weapons from Washington D.C.
To whom are you referring? Do you have anything to support those assertions? How are your comments relevant to the article?
 
The Federalization of Police has been in the news for many years.I posted a link regarding the experimenting of Federal interloping into civil authority. The word "Speculation" does not imply a personal commitment or believe. Speculation a noun.which may stand until pertinent facts are presented?
What are the facts. Shall we assume there is no intent by the Federal Government to intrude on state and local jurisdictions? Your thoughts?
 
The word "Speculation" does not imply a personal commitment or believe.
You asked the question, "is 'it" my personal opinion?". What, pray tell?
Shall we assume there is no intent by the Federal Government to intrude on state and local jurisdictions?
The OP started with an article comparing police firearm crime statistics with those of concealed carry permit holders. You responded by asserting that "the left" would "disarm civilian police forces". How does this latest question relate to either point?
 
The article cited is someone's commentary on a study someone else did. There is no discussion of the experimental methodology, validity of the comparability of data sets, consistency in the time periods covered or the definitions used for the amgibuous terms employed.

From the article, it is not possible to reach any meaningful conclusions on the study itself. It is, however, easy to conclude that the article itself falls within a category that could be termed "junk reporting".
 
The Left would also disarm civilian police forces. The Pro-Government Left would much prefer an armed Federal Police Force in every community. They could control the law and weapons from Washington D.C.
Most wouldn't.

You don't expect them to break their own eggs to create their Marxist omelette, do you?

Without pliant police, they'd have to endanger THEMSELVES to suppress their opponents.

Perhaps you missed the recent amusing spectacle of violent, black clad Maoists at Berkley demanding to be protected from their intended victims by the same police they condemned...
 
Google "Chicago Police Department" + "SOS" + "Jerome Finnegan".

When cops decide to engage in organized criminal activity, their capacity for harm is virtually limitless.

In some cases there aren't just "bad apples". There are bad orchards too.
 
It's a short article about a John Lott paper. It's a waste of time to discuss second hand, truncated information. We have no idea exactly what Lott said, why he said it, how he supported what he said, nor upon what data he relied. Without all of that, there's nothing to discuss.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top