Ready, aim, misfire

When Troy Brake was convicted of killing four people, authorities threw the book at him. They took his freedom. They took his gun.

But did they take his license to carry a concealed weapon? Prosecutors in two counties that convicted Brake could not recall sending the required notices to the Newaygo County gun board from which he obtained his license.



http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2011/06/ready_aim_misfire_analysis_fin.html

Among those charges?

What is the rate of "Charges" of non CCW?

How many CCW holders were there in each year? What are those charges for?

diagram for you....wait, I did. Well it looks like to me people with carry permits are being arrested more and more. Something like 50 in 2002 and over 1,200 in 2008. Was the chart that hard for you to understand?

2002 and 2008?

Wow, color me as completely unsurprised that you would hold such a view. And note that we have no idea exactly what sort of "charges" are being brought on these people.

If you ever use your firearm in self defense. Even if you were no billed later.

Wonder how many of that 1800 fall under that category?

BTW don't you have a permit? What makes you so much more qualified that the rest of us little people?

if I calculate it right (I think the paper messed up when they said 250 per 100,000), and remember that most of those are non-gun-related offenses.

The comparable rate for non-CCW holders (according to that article) is 3,300 per 100,000. So what group is more law-abiding, on average?

BTW, here's the summary article for the series you posted a link to part of:

http://www.mlive.com/news/index.ssf/2011/06/worst_fears_about_concealed_gu.html

And another one about a county that's doing things right:

www.mlive.com/news/muskegon/index.ssf/2011/06/nothing_to_hide_muskegon_count.html

All in all, the series is far less alarmist than you make it out to be.

FWIW, as far as the initial increase after 2001 that leveled off, I don't think Michigan had shall-issue CCW until 2001, so the number of licensees was starting out closer to zero. When you go from a few thousand at most to 272,000, 0.5% or whatever of that total is going to graph as an increase for a while until the total population it's a subset of plateaus.

Keep up the good work. It helps to illustrate the mendacity prevalent amongst the gun control crowd....

Ben would concede that the chart shows that their is a correlation between the number of permits issued and the number of crimes committed. That correlation shows it is rising. As the gun permit holder population grows so does the crime rate among the holders. What is your saturation point?

Nice try, and my mellow is fine. The chart is right in front of you, the report says the numbers are actually higher because some counties haven't reported. Sorry to ruin your day but some of us knew the facts all along.

This chart is the reason the NRA fights to keep the names of permit holders secret.

You'd have to show that the over-all rate of arrests went up, not just the total number in a steadily growing subset.

Your statistics profs want you to come back to class... and you're not going to enjoy it.

Toodles!

How many CCW holders each year and, by extension, their annual rate of "charges"? Bonus points for how many of what various "charges".

You can't just point to a number, with no context, and jump up and down screaming "See! See! I told you so!".

Or, as your math teachers would say, "Show your work".

The way things work in this country, at least notionally, is that a person charged with a criminal offense is still innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

You seem to be perpetrating the same bullshit certain gun control advocacy organizations did by pointing to arrest data from Texas in the wake of "shall issue" legislation being adopted there. The reason it was bullshit was because a large number of arrests were performed by LEOs who weren't cognizant of changes to the law, thus weren't aware the persons arrested hadn't actually done anything illegal, and the bulk of the charges were consequently dropped.

The idea that being arrested, charged or indicted for an offense is ipso facto an indication of guilt is a reliable sign you're living in a police state, and while it may be hard to believe, the U.S. is overall further away from being a police state than most countries.

...of an occurrence in a population and the 'rate' of that occurrence in a population, right? Because honestly, I'm beginning to strongly question that you do.

...so instead, I will ask you this:

Why should the names of permit holders be treated differently than the names of drivers' license holders?

Is this another example of an attempt at "gun culture control"?

You say:

"This chart is the reason the NRA fights to keep the names of permit holders secret."

When asked about your Washington State CCW you said:

" yes and I answered it last week. I can buy a hand gun without the waiting period..."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=423465&mesg_id=423668

Since you state all CCW information should be public, prove it.

Post your REAL NAME, and a scan of your Washington State permit right here, right now.

or can we expect more hypocrisy?

"I do believe that waiting periods have saved lives."

"I enjoy shooting, I don't like waiting."

"I can buy a hand gun without the waiting period."

Classic demonstration of privilege and entitlement, your unabashed declarations of "Rules for Thee, not me!"

They just can't help it, can they? Hypocrisy tends to out its possessor. Or is that possessee?

I sure wish DU had an upvote feature.

But that kind of thing doesn't mean a thing to you, does it?

If so, this chart makes sense. If every year a certain number of new permits were issued, then by 2010 there would be a substantial pool of permits by now.

And as the number of permits in circulation increased every year, so would the number (if not the rate) of arrests of CCW permit holders would increase, too.

Thanks to ben Ezra and others for supplying the full data needed to pop the OP's bubble.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

How does that compare to the general public per 100,000?

I'll bet the conviction rate in that group is as good, or better than CCWs.

Plus there is nowhere to get reliable info on CCWs convicted because as the OP indicates -- it doesn't get reported/collected like that.

The states of Florida and Texas, at least, provide that very information online. And since they are two of the largest states

in the US, I'd argue that their stats can be extrapolated to the country as a whole.


Given the dislike for both Texas and Florida shown by certain posters here, you might say that CCW permit holders

are actually less likely to commit crimes than the FL and TX statistics indicate...

Stuff like that often gets left on someone's desk. If you read the OP, you'll see how it happens: "Prosecutors in two counties that convicted Brake could not recall sending the required notices to the Newaygo County gun board from which he obtained his license."

Of course, since it works in the favor of those claiming gun carriers are paragons of society, I doubt you'll agree when the facts are presented to you.

If you can show evidence that the Florida Department of Law Enforcement or the Texas Department of Public Safety

are keeping and/or posting inaccurate arrest records online, please do so.


You are claiming one of two things. Either:


a) Michiganders with CCW permits are, for some unspecified reason, more criminally inclined than their counterparts in other states.


This is highly unlikely, as the 30+ "shall issue" states have demonstrated that the notable lack of criminality

amongst CCW permit holders is consistent nationwide.


b) The online stats re CCW permit holders from the states that do publish them are wrong.


You have provided no evidence whatsoever, save for your own assertions.

Then, go check with that agency and make sure it was entered correctly. Then, you'll know. I suspect you'll find a lot of stuff missing -- but that wouldn't help bolster your assertion that gun owners are paragons of society.

There is no separate 'gun board'. The DPS are the cops, and the DPS administer the license. If you are indicted on a charge that would make you ineligible for a permit, the permit is immediately suspended (automated system, no 'sending a request' bullshit.) If you are convicted, that changes to revocation.

As a precaution against errors, the DPS re-runs a records check every year on every person with a license.

Try harder next time, will ya?

We can only hope...

http://theprogressivetruth.blogspot.com/2007/01/felons-in-florida-are-getting-concealed.html

And there is plenty more if you look -- better yet, think.

That means 1 of every 293 or about 341/100,000. That's better than what benEzra calculated from the articles linked to the OP:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x435991#436066





Even if you were to add the two groups together (DQd because of prior conviction + DQd for post-licensing conviction or charge),

with no overlap (which is doubtful in the real world as felons tend to repeat), you'd get a rate of 706/100,000.

And that would include a healthy proportion of charges, not convictions.


-1 to you for math fail.

Then, you have the felons whose wife gets a gun. Or one of our gunners here, sells one in those cherished private deals. Or whatever.

Point is it happens and happens a lot. Now, go count your guns so you'll feel better.

And though the OP has labored mightily to conflate 'charged with' with 'convicted of', they are still not equivalent anywhere

outside a police state.


An article of faith, no matter how deeply held, is no substitute for evidence.

You are promulgating Creationism, not criminology.

If the permit has been yanked then they don't have a CCW.

Florida also tracks crimes committed by permit holders. Thing is, they are convicted at a rate that is a miniscule fraction that of other Floridians.

Your link does not dispute that. Perhaps you meant to post a different link, hrmm? Or is that the best you can find?

Nothing wrong with faith, per se- but it's a poor substitute for evidence.

carriers maybe more so. Can't speak for mental health, but at least I can walk out of my house without a gun.

I know, it stings, but the truth will set you free.

It has been brought up that it is an unfair comparison as people with prior convictions that would make them exempt from holding a CHL are lumped into the General Population group(thus raising the General Population's probability for committing a crime). I agree.

Let's look at the General Population conviction rates for each year in Texas and compare them to the CHL holder's conviction rates. I do not have the same info for Michigan, however this should still give you an idea.

We will subtract 56% off of the top of the general population's number. This reduction will account for DOJ reports that 56% (between 1990 and 2002) of violent felons had a prior conviction(could be anything not just what would exempt you from a CHL, however I will still include them), 38% had a prior felony conviction(would exempt you) and 15% percent had been previously convicted for a violent felony(not sure of the difference).

We will look at all of the males subtracting out the 56% from just the GP that would have exempted them from the report.

1996 GP Rate: 720 CHL Rate: 106
1997 GP Rate: 698 CHL Rate: 175
1998 GP Rate: 656 CHL Rate: 157
1999 GP Rate: 622 CHL Rate: 154

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/newsroom/pressreleases/2006/BJS08062006.htm
http://www.txchia.org/sturdevant.pdf

Edited to fix broken link...
So basically what this is saying is that of the General Population who is legal to, however does not have a conceal license is still shown to have been convicted of 4 to 6 times more crimes than those who have a license.

There is no reason to believe that Ohio would be any different as their laws are very similar.

Such data has been posted here many times. Here is the link: http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/chl/convrates.htm

Data on those who could pass the criterea for CC but choose not to is not collected by anybody and is pure guesswork. I would suspect that it would be nearly identical to those who do legally carry.

If you review the graph that has been posted several times throughout this thread, you will see that the total of charges for CCW license holders for that last year of the report was 1005.

So we have CCW = 1005

Now the 270,000 CCW folks fall into a subset of the population, as they are all over 21 and at the time of being licensed; free from a criminal history. So now we need the info on a similar subset, of the general population.

First we need to find the total population of Michigan for adults over the age of 21. This is 6,914,135.
Now we need to find the number of arrests for persons over the age of 21. This is 212,011.
Next we need to weed out felons from those arrests. According to the DOJ 56% of felons arrested have a prior record. So this reduces our total number of arrests to 93,284.
Then we need to subtract the total number of CCW license holder arrests from that to get 92,279.

Now since you are looking for rate, we need to run the following formula: (Number of Arrests / Specific Population) X 100,000 = Crime Rate per 100,000
CCW arrest rate = 1005/270,000*100,000 = 372.222 per 100k
Law-abiding Public arrest rate = 92,279/6,914,135*100,000= 1,334.642 per 100k

So it would appear that by using all of the data available, the law-abiding general public is charged 3.585 times more often than CCW license holders.

The first amendment is certainly abused more than the second.

This causes issues with how you are trying to portray the information.

1. The vast majority of the charges listed in the graphic you included are non-violent offenses. Meaning that even if convicted the individual would not lose their license, nor their ability to legally posses a firearm.
2. As has been pointed out to you several times, the graphic is listing "charges" not "convictions". So again, you have a total listed where an individual may be found innocent, have the charges dropped or is acquitted.
3. The total number of charges does not give a "rate", only a total. "Rate" is the most important way of determining the overall scope of an issue. For example: If in the first year you have 1,000 people in the state with permits and out of those, 1 were charged you would have a rate of 100 per 100k. Now the next year 1,000 more people apply for a permit and 2 people are charged, your rate would be exactly the same as the prior year even though your total number of charges has doubled. Then ten years later lets say you have 100,000 people with permits and 100 people were charged, again the rate would still only be 100 per 100k even though the total number of charges has increased 100 fold. The rate is where you could draw a correlation that people with permits are causing more of an issue or an increase in overall crime.
4. Another issue is that again it is a list of charges. This is not a list of individuals. So one individual can be charged with multiple crimes in one instance. So your graph shows 1,005 charges, however this does not equate to 1,005 people.

How many of the charges listed ended in a conviction? What types of crimes were these individuals charges with? Are we talking contempt charges for failing to pay a parking ticket, or are we talking murder? How many of these individuals used or had possession of a firearm when they were charged with committing a crime?

I wonder how many times she'll post that graph in rebuttal....

So, in other words, in spite of more stringent reporting, and in spite of including charges instead of convictions, CCW permit holders are still 9 times less likely to be charged with crimes than non-CCW permit holders.


I do not think this article says what you think it says.

For the record, I think this kind of data is great. I'm glad to see the automated tools are working to point out those who should not own firearms.

But the data still clearly shows that the rate of even charges for crimes for CCW permit holders is far, far less than the population at large.

Emphasis in bold mine.

Throughout this thread, you've been illustrating Mr. Forsyth's point perfectly.

In 2010 the total number of charges as your chart shows that there was 1,005 charges. The chart itself states that the source was the: Michigan State Police concealed licensing monthly and annual reports. So I used the same source.

Here is what is in that report.
Out of 1005 charges total
268 were violent crimes

Out of those 268 violent crimes
121 were found not guilty or the charges were dismissed.

Out of the remaining 147 violent crimes
78 cases are still pending

The remaining 69 violent crimes
63 resulted in a conviction.

Out of all of the 268 violent crimes
141 were not in possession of a firearm at the time.

Out of all of the 63 violent crimes that resulted in a conviction
0 were for sexual offenses

Here is a detail for the convictions...
Crime and Code - Number of Convictions
Second degree murder. 750.317 - 1
Manslaughter. 750.321 - 1
Resisting or obstructing an officer causing bodily injury requiring medical attention. 750.479a(3) - 1
Assault and battery. 750.81 - 13
Domestic violence. 750.81(2) - 21
Aggravated assault. 750.81a - 9
Domestic violence. 750.81a(2) - 2
Assaulting battering resisting obstructing opposing person performing duty. 750.81d(1) - 2
Assault with a dangerous weapon. 750.82 - 11
Assault with intent to do great bodily harm less than murder. 750.84 - 1
Reckless discharge causing injury. 752.861 - 1

It was the number 1 charge leveled against license holders.

However the entire state had over 14,000 charges in the same period.

I do hate drunk drivers.