crime rates of CCWers vs crime rates of police?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Igloodude

Member
Joined
Sep 24, 2004
Messages
750
Location
southern NH
All,
I've been arguing on the internet for a while that CCW legalization (and more to the point, that allowing CCW permit holders to carry in schools and the like) is a good idea, and one of my supporting arguments is that CCW holders are less likely to commit violent crime than police are. I'm looking on guncite.com to the cites they use to support that for Florida and Texas.

http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/news/reports.html
http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/chl/basis.htm

The problem is that while one can find (with a little drilling) what the rates of CCWers committing violent crimes and/or having their permits revoked is, and general public crime rates are pretty easy to come by, I'm not able to find any statistics there for the rate of law enforcement committing violent crime. Can anyone help me out? I've tried some websearching, but as you might imagine "police crime rates" and the like isn't getting me the stats I'm looking for.

Thanks,
-IglooDude
 
The problem is that while one can find (with a little drilling) what the rates of CCWers committing violent crimes and/or having their permits revoked is, and general public crime rates are pretty easy to come by, I'm not able to find any statistics there for the rate of law enforcement committing violent crime. Can anyone help me out? I've tried some websearching, but as you might imagine "police crime rates" and the like isn't getting me the stats I'm looking for.

I am not surprised. It is like any thread that goes anti-LEO on THR. It quickly gets locked down.
 
We had some stats like this that the NCDOJ released a couple years back (on the LEO crime rates), and I also haven't been able to find them again.
 
I'd guess that somewhere in the DOJ website files would be the best chance.

If nothing else, I'd email them and ask.

I'd ask how many sheriff's deputies there are, and how many city cops. I'm not sure that any centralized records would differentiate between "street cops" and clerical, however.

Art
 
If Domestic Viloence is considered, then, LAPD has 16% of it's force with DV issues. Of course DV means LEO can not carry firearms.

I recieved this information when attending the LAPD Commissioners meeting one tuesday morning.

My guess is that LEO have a higher percentage of DV and criminal behavior than the general population.

CCW holders are less likely to commit violent crime than police are.

It also appears that when LEO get into a shooting the other person dies more often than when a CCW holder is involved.
 
You are more likely to commit a crime if you do not have a license/permit to carry a firearm than if you are licensed to carry one.
 
freakshow10mm said:
You are more likely to commit a crime if you do not have a license/permit to carry a firearm than if you are licensed to carry one.

This is probably mostly due to self-selection bias. Only law-abiding citizens can get a CHL. Thus, those who hold one are a subset of the general population who are more likely to abide by the law to begin with.

An interesting statistic would be to compare those in the general population who would qualify for a CHL to those who actually hold one, and see if there's any difference at that level of stratification.
 
I can tell you that here in NM more cops including state, APD and other LEO departments state wide have way more offenses than us CCW holders. At least on the news here which is very liberal biased against guns like it is everywhere else, you hear about some LEO being arrested for something at least once a month. I have yet to hear about any CCW holder being arrested for anything, and after talking to a "reporter for channel 4 KOBTV" he told me that in a meeting he was told to check the CCW roles whenevr someone gets arrested and is the basis for a news story! I asked him why and he said the News manager is very anti gun.
 
Whats next,who are the least likely to commit crimes,people with diabedes or people with cancer?Let me just say one thing about cops who break the law.My dept had 2 guys that were charged with a break and entering and the other one was taking stuff from businesses that were broken into.Both of them were arrested by our own guys and one of them was shot and wounded.Neither guy had any previous record and both went to jail after being found guilty.Although I am glad they were sent away,I never in 32 yrs ever saw a civilian go away for a first conviction unless it was a murder.The point I am trying to make is at least as far as my dept. went ,that was 2 guys out of aprex 200 cops.I don't believe there are 98% of civilians out there who have never commited a crime?Maybe I am naive,but I truly think most cops try to stay on the right road.
 
pbearperry said:
Maybe I am naive,but I truly think most cops try to stay on the right road.

LEOs are human, subject to human weaknesses, just like everybody else. Their duties probably often place them in tempting situations often. Moreover, they are subject to much higher standards and scrutiny than the general population (much like teachers and clergy).

LEOs do often get harsher sentences for serious first offenses than other people do, as their offense includes breaking the trust the public put in them to uphold and enforce the law.
 
LEOs do often get harsher sentences for serious first offenses than other people do, as their offense includes breaking the trust the public put in them to uphold and enforce the law.


the other side of that is some times the blue line keeps officers safe from being charged... and before you say I'm cop bashing. I've wittnessed it twice where a off duty officer commited a felony in veiw of a ON DUTY officer and was not arrested after ID themselfs as a LEO.
 
TAB said:
the other side of that is some times the blue line keeps officers safe from being charged... and before you say I'm cop bashing. I've wittnessed it twice where a off duty officer commited a felony in veiw of a ON DUTY officer and was not arrested after ID themselfs as a LEO.

I was talking about an officer arrested and in the hands of the justice system -- whether or not an officer arrests another officer depends on the level of professional courtesy they are willing to give each other.

Though, I'd find it pretty unconscionable to ignore a felony; ignoring a moving violation, or similar petty offenses, I can understand.
 
CA, 1st one was right accross the street. Same agency too... they guy was shooting off bottle rockets on 4th of july. (every one has shake roofs in my hood.) I personally don't care as long as its done in a safe manor.(where I live its not safe to do so) which is a big time felony in CA. Some one called( not me) watched him light one off just as the car rolled down the street. They are kind of hard to miss, besides he had hundreds left. Now I know all officers get training every year before 4th of july for this very thing. Its also put in all the papers and on the news exactly what is and is not legal. 2 min convo, out came the badge... off drove the LEO, and he went back too shooting them off.

The 2nd one had to do with vandalizm, breaking car windows while drunk. once again, as soon as the badge came out, they let him go.
 
Though, I'd find it pretty unconscionable to ignore a felony; ignoring a moving violation, or similar petty offenses, I can understand.

what diffrence does it make rather is a felony or a infraction? both partys know the law( or should) so there is no reason for them NOT to write the ticket.
 
TAB said:
what diffrence does it make rather is a felony or a infraction?

Speaking purely on ethics, none at all.

But most people don't make decisions as ethical/legal absolutists. Cops do give other cops a nod and a wink for small infractions -- the degree of infraction influencing the officer's decision to press the matter or not.

I have heard from a number of acquaintances that a "100 Club" sticker on the back of your car combined with a CHL will similarly get you a measure of forebearance from LEOs for minor moving violations.
 
There are two things no one can ever take from you: your pride and your word. Both those things must be given away. Why would some one give away both at the same time?

Thats what they are doing when they let another LEO off.



edit damn caps lock
 
TAB said:
There are two things no one can ever take from you: your pride and word. Both those things must be given away. WHY would some one give away both at the same time?

Thats what they are doing when they let another LEO off.

I'm not justifying it -- I'm merely stating it happens, and given that I tend to think in non-binary terms, I consider it less a problem for minor moving violations than I do for felonies.
 
I see it as a very big prob.

I'll use a term that is often used by progun orgs.

"slippery slope"
 
TAB said:
I see it as a very big prob.

I'll use a term that is often used by progun orgs.

"slippery slope"

I understand what you're saying, but unless I'm mistaken, an officer has the right to decide whether to issue a warning or a citation for moving violations. An officer has no right to decide to ignore serious crimes. Affording "professional courtesy" for those offenses where the officer has the right to make judgment calls, and could just as well have excused me, just doesn't get my dander up. But I draw the line when the offense is in a category the officer may not legally ignore.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top