Study Finds Shall Issue States have 9% increase in homicides

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • JerseyMike

    Active Member
    Dec 16, 2019
    437
    Germantown
    Saw this on reddit (r/liberalgunowners) and thought I’d post it here to get some different perspectives.

    Link to the article: https://opensourcedefense.org/blog/gun-policy-needs-a-decision-support-system
    Link to the study: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11606-019-04922-x

    The only 3 policies studied that had any impact on homicide rates were:

    1) Universal background checks, either through required background checks for all sales or through a firearm purchase permit, reduced gun homicides by 14.9% and had no effect on suicide.

    2) Prohibiting those convicted of a violent misdemeanor from buying a handgun reduced gun homicides by 18.1%, and had no effect on suicide.

    3) Shall-issue laws, which ensure that law enforcement officers can’t discriminate when issuing concealed carry permits, increased gun homicides by 9.0% and had no effect on suicide.

    Interesting, in particular I have trouble logically reconciling how constitutional carry has no impact, but shall issue led to an increase in 9%. All I can think of is the difference in historic crime numbers generally for constitutional carry states.

    My question is, when faced with these statistics in your advocacy, do you: (1) accept the study’s conclusions and argue then argue concealed carry is an inalienable right and therefore should not be infringed; (2) attack or dismiss the study.

    These aren’t mutually exclusive, but I think it may be more effective to acknowledge studies that hurt the cause and then hammer away at the right to self-defense argument. This study does a lot to undermine the usual gun control talking points, so it would be helpful to use it in advocacy. However, I think it would be intellectually disingenuous and hurt our credibility to “cherry pick” results from various studies depending on the policy proposal at hand.

    Since I’m new to 2A advocacy I’m trying to draw on the knowledge/experience of the veterans in here.
     

    rseymorejr

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 28, 2011
    26,015
    Harford County
    My first question would be: Are they including justifiable homicides(self defense) in those numbers?

    From living in a state where it's very difficult to get a permit (Maryland) and one where it was very easy (Alabama) I can tell you which one has more extremely violent street crime in the major cities.
     

    Qbeam

    Ultimate Member
    Apr 16, 2008
    6,074
    Georgia
    You may want to look at the method they used to come to the conclusions. Many studies explain their methods, but sometimes do not look at the grouping with a subjective eye. Most are biased depending on who is doing the study, but "neutral" party studies usually hold their findings.

    Q
     

    JerseyMike

    Active Member
    Dec 16, 2019
    437
    Germantown
    My first question would be: Are they including justifiable homicides(self defense) in those numbers?

    From living in a state where it's very difficult to get a permit (Maryland) and one where it was very easy (Alabama) I can tell you which one has more extremely violent street crime in the major cities.

    Good point. When I think homicide I think murder, aka unjustified shooting. Need to be aware of that in the future thanks for pointing it out!
     

    EDA98

    Active Member
    Dec 4, 2019
    121
    Laurel MD
    Interesting. Personally I have no qualms with things like background checks. I just think that all should be free if it is forced upon us. Same with waiting periods and such. Since I’m young. I have time, but not much money. That being said. If you can pass a BG check I think that should be final and the govt shouldn’t be able to say “no you can’t have that”I don’t want people dying. But I also should have a right to protect myself.
     

    XCheckR

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Mar 20, 2013
    4,202
    HdG
    Unless the study identifies how many of those homicides were committed by those exercising their shall issue freedom the data is NOT relevant
     

    JohnnyE

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 18, 2013
    9,466
    MoCo
    The term "homicide" is often misunderstood. Many folks think all homicides are illegal. Not so.

    Homicide is simply and generally the taking of a life by another. This includes all acts that result in the death of another, whether reckless or negligent, willful and deliberate, justified or unjustified.

    As I understand it, for instance, when an inmate in lawfully executed, their death was a homicide. In that case it was a lawful, court ordered homicide, and no crime was committed be the executioner.

    Murder is an unlawful homicide.

    Homicides may be up in shall issue states, but we need to know more.
     

    davsco

    Ultimate Member
    Oct 21, 2010
    8,607
    Loudoun, VA
    first of all, we have the 2nd friggin' amendment. so study all they want, but taking my guns away isn't making me or anyone else safer.

    also no one and i mean no one is talking about banning cell phones or alcohol despite all the drunk and distracted driving deaths. and they don't have 2nd amendment protections.

    not seeing how going shall issue ==> 9% homicide increase. unless the increase is more permit holders killing criminals that attack them.

    here are the stats i want to see. how many shootings have been perpetuated by ones that have been arrested for violent crimes before. how many from illegals. how many from gangs. how many from suicides. my guess is you remove these and the usa is a pretty safe place, esp given the millions and millions of guns out there.

    iirc fairfax va just had it's first shooting this year. while dc has had double and triple shootings every day (night). va clearly has the laxer gun laws. what statistic is someone going to make up that blames this on guns? all the guns are coming to dc from va, right? well then why aren't virginians just holding onto those guns and killing people in va? pretty sure it has nothing to do with guns and it's more a people, legislation, judicial & enforcement issue.
     

    Glaron

    Camp pureblood 13R
    BANNED!!!
    MDS Supporter
    Mar 20, 2013
    12,752
    Virginia
    Since I’m new to 2A advocacy I’m trying to draw on the knowledge/experience of the veterans in here.

    I'm used to... Yes, I like the Constitution, BUT
    This call itself science, but is mind games. I lost interest when it started talking about the Nile. WTF?

    I focused on disclaimers.
    This is a presumption that may not hold true, because correlative studies sometimes* don’t show causality, particularly across cultures. The culture of Alabama is very different than the culture from California. This presumption is the most generous possible case for the gun-control side.

    So, lying with numbers. Im done with this piece of crap.
    *All the time.
     

    Glaron

    Camp pureblood 13R
    BANNED!!!
    MDS Supporter
    Mar 20, 2013
    12,752
    Virginia
    pretty sure it has nothing to do with guns and it's more a people, legislation, judicial & enforcement issue.

    Correct.

    The study clearly states it ignores culture. Inner city Chicago is the same as the Virginia country side.
    Chicago: Weekend shootings? Murders, and turf wars.
    Virginia Country: Weekend shooting? Hunting or weapon practice.

    All the same. Right? :shrug:
     

    JerseyMike

    Active Member
    Dec 16, 2019
    437
    Germantown
    I'm used to... Yes, I like the Constitution, BUT
    This call itself science, but is mind games. I lost interest when it started talking about the Nile. WTF?

    I focused on disclaimers.


    So, lying with numbers. Im done with this piece of crap.
    *All the time.

    Yeah I’m not a fan of the way the article presents the study either. This study concluded that, after studying various gun laws for a quarter century, AWB, Magazine Capacity restrictions and laws that focus on handgun features have zero effect on homicide rates. The question is, do we use this study for advocating against these policies? If we do, how do we address the findings RE: shall issue states?

    If we don’t use it, are we hurting the cause? No study is perfect, as all of them will have sampling flaws, assumptions and biases that can significantly impact the results. There has to be some threshold though where you say a certain study has too much junk in it to be worth anything. Is this one of those studies?
     

    Uncle Duke

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 2, 2013
    11,667
    Not Far Enough from the City
    Will it matter if I can present evidence to refute the statistical claims made here? Maybe to a fence sitter. To a hard core anti? To an anti politician? It will not matter. Not in the least.

    I'm honestly tired of the continual circle jerk and the refutation efforts. They matter little anymore.

    My argument to them is this. In this, a world known to be filled with homicide? For whatever reasons? By whomever the perpetrator? Street criminal? Wingnut crazy? Psychopath? By a government with an agenda perhaps?

    You want to know whose homicide figures I'm concerned about?

    I'm primarily concerned about preventing mine.
    I'm concerned about preventing those of my family and friends. I may even be concerned about preventing yours as well. When armed, in very much an armed world, I may well be able to accomplish any and all of those things. Unarmed, not so likely.

    But here's a fact. YOU aren't going to decide for me, which way it's going to be. Strive to take away my means to do so, to decide for myself, and the fact is we can't and won't be friends. Also a fact that I am no longer interested in taking turns with the dance, and the back and forth circle jerk. Equally no longer interested in the unconstitutional ********, and in having decisions that belong to me alone, usurped by you or by anyone else. You may think not. For my part, I know otherwise.

    Its just as simple as that. Take it to mean what you will.
     

    TheBert

    The Member
    MDS Supporter
    Aug 10, 2013
    7,687
    Gaithersburg, Maryland
    Interesting. Personally I have no qualms with things like background checks. I just think that all should be free if it is forced upon us. Same with waiting periods and such. Since I’m young. I have time, but not much money. That being said. If you can pass a BG check I think that should be final and the govt shouldn’t be able to say “no you can’t have that”I don’t want people dying. But I also should have a right to protect myself.


    Would you have a problem wit requiring a background check for the 1A, 4A, 5A?

    Why does the government need to perform a background check for something you already have, the right to self defense?
     

    CrueChief

    Cocker Dad/RIP Bella
    Apr 3, 2009
    2,999
    Napolis-ish
    All one needs to ask, even if the stats are real and true is.......How many of those homicides were committed by lawful firearm carriers? Because if the 9% increase was not by those lawfully carrying a firearm then the stats boarder on meaningless as it relates to this premise.
     

    Skipjacks

    Ultimate Member
    My first reaction is that the increase in carry permits followed the increase in homicides, not the other way around

    I don't feel a need to carry when I visit rural Idaho. But when I do to downtown Baltimore I am legit scared that I can't carry

    So crappy crime areas cause more carry permits
     

    OLM-Medic

    Banned
    BANNED!!!
    May 5, 2010
    6,588
    All one needs to ask, even if the stats are real and true is.......How many of those homicides were committed by lawful firearm carriers? Because if the 9% increase was not by those lawfully carrying a firearm then the stats boarder on meaningless as it relates to this premise.

    Yep and it is a pretty trackable statistic since CCL is a government license.

    I'd say the study mentioned is hogwash.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,931
    Messages
    7,259,516
    Members
    33,350
    Latest member
    Rotorboater

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom