Minnesota/Texas: "Texans disagree on the effects of conceal/carry"

Status
Not open for further replies.

cuchulainn

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
3,297
Location
Looking for a cow that Queen Meadhbh stole
Neat little false dichotomy behind this article: The Dept of Public Safety doesn't keep the records; therefore, they don't exist, so both opinions are equally valid :rolleyes

from the KSTP site

http://www.kstp.com/article/view/94737/
Texans disagree on the effects of conceal/carry

Updated: 04-28-2003 10:53:49 PM


Minnesota has a new, highly controversial conceal and carry law. Texans have lived with a similar conceal and carry law for almost eight years.

The Texas Department of Public Safety doesn't monitor gun crime, so it's tough to tell statistically how the concealed gun law has fared there.

But there’s no shortage of opinion on the issue. Texas state representative Suzanna Hupp has long been a fervent supporter of her state’s conceal/carry law. She said, "It saves lives, that's it in a nut shell, it saves lives."

In the 7 years since then Governor George W. Bush made it legal for people to carry concealed handguns, she says gun violence has gone down.

She said, "We heard that there would be blood in the streets and that it would be Dodge City all over again, that simply hasn't occurred."

Hupp has very personal reasons for backing conceal/carry. She was eating lunch with her parents at Luby's Cafeteria in Killeen, when a man drove through the door and started shooting.

That was before the law. She said, "At the time in the state of Texas we didn't have the ability to be able to protect ourselves from nuts like that."

People were killed, including Hupp's parents. Her handgun, that she argues could've saved their lives, was in its only legal place at the time...her pickup truck.

Nina Butts is with an organization called Texans Against Gun Violence. Nina Butts has a completely different take on the law.

She said, "The concealed handgun law has been a complete disaster here in Texas."

She says conceal/carry has made Texas a more dangerous place, and has nothing to do with public safety.

She said, "The purpose of the concealed handgun law in Texas and in every state is to promote and sell handguns."

What will happen in Minnesota when conceal carry becomes law remains to be seen.

But if it's anything like Texas, it will always depend on who you ask.
 
I think you are right. How can this woman make a statement like this when there is no data to support it?
She says conceal/carry has made Texas a more dangerous place, and has nothing to do with public safety.
I was one of the first people in Texas to get a CHL and carried until I left in 2000 to move to Florida. I didn't see that a CHL law made a difference either way but especially in a negative manner.
 
Well, while it is technically true that Texas DPS does not track "gun crime", you can make a number of inferences from the information that it does track.

First, violent crime in Texas has remained essentially flat (no significant trend in either direction) since the law took effect. Even if you interpret that in the worst possible light, it doesn't sound like a "complete disaster" to me.

Second, in 2001 the rate of convictions among CHL holders for violent crimes like murder, sexual assault, aggravated assault and robbery were essentially half that of non-CHL holders. This is counterintuitive to the idea that having a concealed weapon makes you more dangerous....

Looks to me like a clear cut case of lazy (and possibly biased) reporting.
 
I want to correct myself. While I don't have time to comb through the data, Texas DPS does track the type of weapon used in violent felonies. I'm sure with a little digging it would be very easy to run a time-series analysis of the rate of firearm use in violent felonies over the last ten years in Texas based on this data.

So the question stands, lazy reporting, or intentional bias? (Or perhaps both....)
 
It wasn't half it was .05%

1/20th as likely to be convicted of a serious felony.
 
Well, I could be wrong, but the way I read the data is that 1/2% of all persons convicted of a serious felony are CHL holders. Of the total population, a little over 1% are CHL holders. Thus my logic is that if they make up 1% of the population, but onlly 1/2% of the serious felony convictions, they are half as likely to be convicted of a serious felony.

I would be very happy if the statistic were 1/20th, but I don't think the numbers support that. Please correct me if I am mistaken.
 
This might help.

No4Mk1,

This might help a little. I don't think 135 convictions by CHL holders would equate to 1/2 of total felony convictions being a very likely or plausible figure.

http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/chl/basis.htm

Granted this does not specify gun related crimes in these felonies but if you look at some of the designations the likelyhood of the crime being gun related could go in either direction. If I were a bettin' man I would be willing to bet that the majority had nothing to do with gun involvement but rather only the fact that the offender had a CHL.

I can't find the exact number but the .05% sounds right. I'll keep looking though and if I find it I'll post it.

Take care,

DRC
 
In 2001, there were 180 convictions of CHL holders and 35,070 convictions of non-holders. So, for every 1 CHL convict, there were 194 non-holder convicts. That works out to about a half-of-one-percent or .513%. (.513% x 195=1)
http://www.tsra.com/DPS_convictions.htm
In regard to crime rates within groups, CHL holders are convicted at a rate of 81 per 100,000, while non-holders are convicted at a rate of 252 per 100,000 or three times the rate. I guess that makes CHLers' rate 33% of non-holders' rate.
We're doing pretty well, don't you think? :cool:

MR
 
I guess I wasn't clear.

DRC, I didn't say 1/2 of all convictions, I said 1/2%, or 0.005, or 0.5%.

This is from the same source you linked.

So, CHL holders represent .5% of these convictions (180 out of 35,250). They represent roughly 1% of the population (220 thousand in a population of 21.3 million).

So by that math, they are convicted at roughly 1/2 the rate of the general population.

The TSRA numbers exclude minors from the population, thus dropping the number a bit.

Don't get me wrong, I still think this is a great number and I'm on the same side as you, just also feel it is important we have our facts straight when we enter into the debate. :)

The whole point of this anyway was to say that the "reporter" that put this piece together was more than a bit lazy in saying that there is no empirical evidence to support one argument or the other. As I see it, one side is supported by facts, the other by emotion....
 
Sorry.

No4Mk1,

Sorry. I thought you were saying that you "wished" the conviction rate was 1/20th and of a percent and that the CHL conviction rate was 1/2 of the total number of convictions. My bad.

"The whole point of this anyway was to say that the "reporter" that put this piece together was more than a bit lazy in saying that there is no empirical evidence to support one argument or the other. As I see it, one side is supported by facts, the other by emotion...."

Don't get me started on laziness and reporting especially on this subject. I'm a CHL instructor here in Texas and so I look this stuff up as a teaching tool to show people what they are up against where CHL is concerned. I've got some doosies.

Anyway, I agree also. The numbers are pretty good for a state who's streets were supposed to run red as soon as people started getting CHL's. I'm still trying to locate the source but the violent crime numbers in Texas have dropped since the inception of the CHL it's just that it has slowed because the higher rate decreases happen in the beginning and level out a little after about 5 years (according to stats) but there has been a noticeable decline since the CHL came to be in Texas.

Take care and I wasn't trying to be argumentitive, just pointing out info but on my misinterpretation of what you said. Again I apologize.

DRC
 
Nina Butts is with an organization called Texans Against Gun Violence. Nina Butts has a completely different take on the law.

Does anyone else think that Nina might be a little anal? Oh yeah, if she is a member of Texans Against Gun Violence does that makes us Texans For Gun Violence?
 
Up until this year, the Texas Dept of Public Safety posted on their website a detailed breakdown by offense of the numbers of arrests and convictions for permit holders. When I called them earlier this year, I was told they were changing the format to percentages. The woman I spoke with inferred that the reason was to keep groups like the VPC from distorting the numbers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top