A Bogus Study on Concealed-Carry Killings

Acujeff

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jul 4, 2006
Messages
932
Likes
397
Location
Boston
A Bogus Study on Concealed-Carry Killings
Permit holders are model citizens who fight crime, not rogues responsible for murders.
Nov. 7, 2019

https://patriotpost.us/articles/66632-a-bogus-study-on-concealed-carry-killings-2019-11-07?mailing_id=4640&utm_medium=email&utm_source=pp.email.4640&utm_campaign=digest&utm_content=body



The anti-gun Violence Policy Center (VPC) released a study recently with an eye-popping claim: Concealed-carry-permit holders have killed 1,335 people since 2007. “Too many concealed-carry permit holders are a direct threat to public safety,” warns the VPC.

Purporting to review “non-self-defense incidents” involving firearms, the VPC says its research proves that “allowing random people to carry guns endangers public safety.” We’re shocked — shocked — to report that this is fake news.

First of all, there are roughly 18 million permit holders now — three times as many as when the VPC started tracking this data in 2007. A crime wave among them would be big news, but instead concealed-carry-permit holders are, as a group, more law-abiding than police officers. They are model citizens, not “random people” apt to commit crime.
That’s true for a couple of reasons. Permit holders in many states undergo training before receiving their permits, and every state that issues permits requires a bear minimum of a background check first. People who submit to such requirements are almost by definition more law-abiding than those who don’t — at least compared to other “random people” carrying guns without permits.

Did we mention that law-abiding gun owners, whether holding a concealed-carry permit or not, stop hundreds of thousands and perhaps millions of crimes each year? That includes stopping mass shootings. For this reason, as the number of gun owners and permit holders has drastically increased, crime has gone down.

So what gives with the VPC’s bogus research? Well, as The Daily Signal’s Amy Swearer explains, “The anti-gun group defines ‘non-self-defense incident’ to include virtually any fatality involving a concealed-carry permit holder, including ones that do not remotely resemble the type of intentional homicide evoked by the Violence Policy Center’s strong claims about public safety. For example, roughly 40% of the deaths (534 of 1,335 [recorded in the study]) are suicides. While tragic, firearm suicides are not what a term like ‘concealed-carry killer’ brings to mind.”

The VPC also counts shootings in which the courts have not yet determined claims of self-defense, meaning the VPC preemptively convicted people for the purposes of “research.” This study is clearly meant to spread fear and opposition to national reciprocity — despite the fact that drivers kill far more people than guns do each year, and yet we have national reciprocity for drivers’ licenses.
 

C. Stockwell

NES Member
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Dec 12, 2018
Messages
1,654
Likes
1,414
Location
RI
Old news, I cited to this back in like 2013. "Killed" is the correct verb because the carrier ended the life of the other person. Doesn't imply criminal liability. "Shot" obviously also works.

Edit: yeah, they fluff the data with suicides. Standard anti practice.

Someone is going to collect this data and obviously our side isn't going to try and highlight killed/wounded/stopped by permit holders to protect the carrier's identity.

I actually used their data against them to argue that permit holders are overwhelmingly responsible people. VPC's data, back in 2013, cited one death caused by a permit holder in RI - a police lieutenant murdered a firefighter neighbor (murdered because the cop was convicted). So out of thousands of permit holders in RI, the only one to be a threat to the public was a hothead cop.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom