Awesome Site, dealing with Gun Facts
I found it funny that in florida, you are twice as likely to be attacked by a gator than by a person with a CCW permit.
I'd rather be attacked by the gator
My friend's dog got eaten by a gator in florida, so I believe it.
On a more serious note. Statistics, especially on these political hot topics, can, as we all know, often mean whatever the surveyor/publisher wants them to mean.
So on the one hand I like that the site itself is very clear about their reasons for compiling this and doesn't seem to assert that's it's non-biased. On the other hand, the whole 'the numbers speak for themselves' approach subtely tries to avoid the issue of bias saying basically 'yeah, we believe X; we're biased, but we got numbers, which aren't'.
I mean, I obvioulsy haven't read through the whole thing, but their are alot of question to ask, for example:
This sounds great, but wait, there's a large descrepancy for the concealed carry folks in terms of their involvement in violent/non-violent crime. Clearly, when involved in a crime, a concealed carry permit owner is more likely to be commiting a violent crime than a non-ccp owner commiting a crime. Then you say 'but their overall liklihood of being involved in crime at all is lower'. True, but considering that the ccp statistic draws only from people who are law-abiding enough to get the permit, whereas the non-ccp statistic draws from anyone else, criminal or not, this is unsurprising. It's fair to assume most criminals would not bother obtaining a ccp. So this leads to questions about the psychology of people comfortable and, in fact, happy with their ability to carry around weapons and their possible pre-disposition towards violence.
Fact: People with concealed carry permits are:
• 5.7 times less likely to be arrested for violent offenses than the general public
• 13.5 times less likely to be arrested for non-violent offenses than the general public
Then you can say that's hogwash.
And then we return to the sad fact that sociology, politics, whatever are not 'hard' sciences and that the issue of civilian armament might be better dealt with as a moral/ideological issue, rather than bringing in too many statistics and figures, which are painfully reminiscent of math and science, two subjects in which we, as a people, and our government are not very skilled at.
True, if you assume that arrests=involvement and that violent=violence, which is not always true under U.S. law.
There are several categories of "Unlawful Use of a Weapon" in many states that are considered violent crime even though no actual violence occurs, simply because a weapon is involved and weapons=violence.
Your point about their numbers is well-taken, though.
This is a good point and one I wasn't fully aware of. Thank you.
Originally Posted by Don Gwinn
Permit holders must pass a background check anyways. It's just like saying that people who are proven to be non-felons are much less likely to commit crimes than those who did not go through such a check.
Still, it does debunk the stupid myths that the gun grabbers try to spew.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO