Do you have any statistic that show the number of CCW licenses issued and the violent crime incidence in a year for the states that have CCW? I don't think you can say there is no cause/effect on just a gut feeling or the fact that you haven't heard of highway shootouts.
I'd be curious of the raw data - Number of permits issued and the incidence of violent crime.
Well, what about you and your gut feeling? There doesn’t seem to be much of a grass roots call to repeal these laws. Hell, even the anti-gun Chicago Tribune is somewhat bullish on this issue. There is Lott’s study from the University of Chicago…
1. A comprehensive national study in 1996 determined that violent crime fell after states made it legal to carry concealed firearms. (10)
2. The results of the study showed:
* States which passed concealed carry laws reduced their murder rate by 8.5%, rapes by 5%, aggravated assaults by 7% and robbery by 3%; and
* If those states not having concealed carry laws had adopted such laws in 1992, then approximately 1,570 murders, 4,177 rapes, 60,000 aggravated assaults and 12,000 robberies would have been avoided yearly. (11)
10. John R. Lott, Jr. and David B. Mustard, "Crime, Deterrence, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns," University of Chicago, (13 July 1996). See also Lott, Jr., "More Guns, Less Violent Crime," The Wall Street Journal (28 August 1996).
11. Ibid.
Regardless, there doesn’t seem to be much of an issue with CCW people going on rampages, since the Brady Campaign is even weaker than usual in its hand wringing rationale over this issue… “People might misuse it!” "Surveyed non-gun owners feel scared!" If they can’t even manufacture bogus statistics like the “crime traces” used for their AWB efforts, for example, then the case much be exceedingly weak.
Were the kids raped first? Just curious.
Apples and oranges.
No, not apples and oranges in the least. You want to take away or seriously dilute my Constitutional rights based upon an incident where a gunman killed four students. It’s only “apples and oranges” if you see a distinction between “saving the children” from gun violence and saving them from the ravages of alcohol, which would mean far greater personal restrictions (or even prohibition) on something you may actually enjoy doing yourself. If you like hard apple cider, then it’s really great to see a gun as an orange
Maybe you're not a drinker, but just have an emotional disconnect. Regardless, a life is a life, and a loss is a loss and we have to make choices as a society. Hopefully those will be made on the basis of fact and not emotion or ignorance. I won't hold my breath.
1. More children will be killed by lightening in any given year than will be killed in incidents similar to the Amish incident.
Statistics are fragmented, but here's one trumpeted by gun control supporters: Between 1994 and 1999, there were 220 school associated violent events resulting in 253 deaths - - 74.5% of these involved firearms. Handguns caused almost 60% of these deaths. (Journal of American Medical Association, December 2001). That's roughly 37 per year, and this includes gangland slayings and slayings not necessarily in the school itself.
Roughly 100 people are killed each year from lightening. Don't know the percentage of children, but when you look at a total population of 300 million I think you can say that they are at least roughly comparable. If you could factor out just those intruder scenarios or where a shooting took place inside the school and not just on school grounds, or on the way to and from school, lightening deaths would be far greater.
2. The general, broader risk to children from alcohol is directly comparable to the risk from firearms, including the fact that much of the firearm death affecting the “children” involves inner city criminal gangland activity.
Three teens are killed each day when they drink alcohol and drive.1 At least six more die every day from other alcohol-related causes.2
According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 6,002 young people ages 16-20 died in motor vehicle crashes in 2003. Alcohol was involved in 38% of these deaths.3
In 2003, 3,571 young drivers ages 16-20 died in motor vehicle crashes. Of these, 1,131 - approximately 32% - had been drinking, and 26% were legally drunk at the time of the crash.4 http://camy.org/factsheets/index.php?FactsheetID=7
Alcohol has been reported to be involved in 36 percent of homicides, 12 percent of male suicides, and 8 percent of female suicides involving people under 21—a total of about 1,500 homicides and 300 suicides in 2000. Homicide is the second leading cause of death for 15- to 24-year-olds6 (Reducing Underage Drinking, 61). http://camy.org/factsheets/index.php?FactsheetID=13
Underage drinking is a factor in nearly half of all teen automobile crashes, the leading cause of death among teenagers. http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/3557.html
That adds up to roughly
3,285 total alcohol related deaths among teens using the first bullet point (no pun intended). I don’t think it even counts younger children killed by others under the influence. By comparison, in 1998 (a higher crime year I believe) firearms accounted for
3,761 deaths of children aged 19 and under. Pretty much the same direct level of threat, give or take a small percentage.
http://72.14.209.104/search?q=cache:7pUNhdpQJiYJ: preventionpathways.samhsa.gov/pdfs/fact_yfirearms.pdf+death+firearms+youth&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=48&gl=usThe rape point you bring up in the “apples and oranges” quote also has a strong alcohol angle.
ndividuals under the age of 21 commit 45 percent of rapes, 44 percent of robberies, and 37 percent of other assaults,7 and it is estimated that 50 percent of violent crime is alcohol-related8 (Reducing Underage Drinking, 61).
Further, for comparison, some 2000-3000 children are killed by their parents or caretakers each year.
All out of a population of 300 million people. My children are at far greater risk from somebody’s happy hour than they are from a legal gun owner.
Charon
