Are concealed permit holders more responsible and law abiding?

[mljdeckard]

Your friend should understand a couple of things. People with permits are exposed to scrutiny that most people aren't. We have given the government an open pass to scrutinize pretty much everything on paper regarding our pasts. We have been taught, at least to a cursory degree, the law concerning the use of deadly force. We are also advised that we are part of a group with exceptional standards for upholding the law, and the group very much wants to keep it that way.

For the first several years that Utah was shall-issue, exactly zero permit holders were convicted of a felony, either before or after they got the permit. Now, I haven't looked in a while, but as best I remember, since then there have been several felony convictions of permit holders or past permit holders, but I couldn't see that any of the felonies were related to the firearm. (This is out of probably 200,000 total past and present permit holders in a state of 2,000,000 total people.) Maybe I'll take a minute here to see if I can find something more current.

Tell your friend to look on his own, and find ANY examples of a state where crime has risen since they started issuing CCW. If he is making the claim that permit holders are mor or less violent or criminal, then the burden of proof is on HIM, not you.

(Not all states hold permit holders as public record.)

 

[mljdeckard]

The stats I found were from '01, and a LOT has happened since then, but they are vague. There were numerous revocations for felonies, but the ones that are specifically firearms related, there were a grand total of 9 revocations between '94 and '01, and it doesn't say exactly how many of these were felonies, just firearms related.

 

[mlandman]

Of the 576,299 active permits (CWL, Security Officers, PI, etc.) at this time, the actionable numbers from 7/1/06 through 5/31/07 were 1591 (342 revoked and 1249 suspended). That is a loss of permit rate of 0.2761%. The general arrest rate in 2003 was 5710.8/100,000, or 5.7108%

Have your friend do the math! Here's a hint...







(20.7 time less likley to be aressted for a serious crime)

 

[MD_Willington]

In WA State, not only are you scrutinized with a background check via local and FBI records, you are also agreeing to the following:

Note: A signed application for a concealed pistol license shall constitute a waiver of confidentiality and written request that the
Department of Social and Health Services, as well as mental health institutions and other health care facilities, release
information relevant to the applicant’s eligibility for a concealed pistol license to an inquiring court or law enforcement agency.

So that goes to say that they aren't exactly putting the CPL in a "Mr Cluck" 25 cent vending machine and letting any Yahoo have one of these...

 

[CNYCacher]

From the Report:

"CHL Holder Percentage of Total Convictions" is a percentage derived from the ratio of CHL holder convictions to total
convictions for the offense.
End of Report

In other words, non CHL holders committed 99.7% of the crimes.

Correct, but that does not tell us anything about how law-abiding CHL holders are as a group, unless we know what percentage of the population is a CHL holder.

For example, what if CHL holders only made up 0.3% of the population of Texas? Now that 0.3% of the population did 0.3% of the crime, and that means that CHL holders are about average in terms of lawfullness.
Now imagine that 50% of the people in Texas held CHLs, if 50% of the population was responsible for 0.3% of the crime, then that is a huge difference between holders and non-holders.
See the difference?
The real number for Texas is likely somewhere between 0.3% and 50%, I am going to guess it is in the single-digit range, but still much higher that 0.3%, which is their crime share.

 

[TheOld Man]

New Member


Join Date: 06-18-07
Posts: 5

Lane County, Oregon Data
I don't have all the right data. This is the best approximation I can do.

Lane County, Oregon, has roughly 10,400 CHL holders, of whom only 57 have ever been revoked.

A CHL is revoked for any misdemeanor or felony. So half a percent of CHL holders have committed a misdemeanor or worse since obtaining their CHL.

The FBI website reports 76,538 criminals they have profiled in Oregon for their National DNA Index System. The state has about 3,700,800 people. So my rough estimate for what percent of the general population has committed a misdemeanor or worse is about 2%.

This in my county it appears that CHL holders are roughly four times less likely to commit a crime than the average population.

This is probably less positive news than the pro-carry folk want to hear, but of course much more positive than the anti-gun folk depict.

D_Willington In WA State, not only are you scrutinized with a background check via local and FBI records, you are also agreeing to the following:. . .

These are all good statistics/facts. I live in Washington state (Skamania County) and have a WA CCW. I have not yet been able to come up with a "Legal and Compelling Business Reason" per Oregon statute that will satisfy the Sheriffs Office. I don't carry in Oregon. I no longer even carry my WA permit when I travel in Oregon as it has resulted in my being spread eagled and my car searched, to the point of having the seats torn out. I have found that some parts of Oregon (Portland) seem to have the attitude, which was openly expressed to me by LEO, is that a CCW holder is considered by police to be "Armed and Dangerous" and you are more likely to be shot by police. Be aware of such things when traveling.

 

[LAK]

General Geoff

Innocent until proven guilty.

That's our legal jurisprudence. It does not however address the fact that relating to the subject of permits and background checks that having a clear background check is not a measure of anything more than what is in the official record. Nothing more. And amongst legal permit holders there is an unaccountable number of people who have in fact commited crimes - and just not been identifed and arrested.