CCW Question

P

phoenix

New member
Hello, all...I am new to this site and forum, but I have some questions on CCW and am having trouble locating the info I need in onine searches.

I am currently writing a research paper on CCW. My hypothesis is:

"States that have concealed carry permits are less likely to have a high rate of gun-related felonies."

To validate that statement, I need to find stats, by state, based on pre-CCW and post-CCW law.

I can find info on differnt states, even on their CCW laws, but I can't find a lot that tells me when the CCW law was passed in a particular state. I have managed to get info on about 10 states so far...and am drawing a blank on the others.

At any rate, I thought a CCW forum might be a good place to find a wealth of info on this topic...although it will be hard to cite. :) Any/all input would be appreciated greatly.

Thx
 
Thank you G50AE...I'll add that date to my list. I'm plugging away at it one state at a time, it seems. LOL

Also, thank you, NavyLT. I'll check out the site.
Just an aside...My father was in the Navy for 20 years...Navel Intelligence...and my brother served aboard a fast-attack nuclear sub as a seal-trained diver. Both my father and brother went into writing in later life. My brother just published a book through Harper-Collins called Red November. It talks about the submarine cold war between Russia and US. He interviewed a number of submariners, both American and Russian...as well as documenting his own espionage missions. Very interesting reading, if you're into that kind of history. This is his website, if you're interested in knowing more: Welcome to the Official Website of Bestselling Author

Thx again for the research help.
 
You might ask the NRA. They have tons of data and will be sympathetic to your thesis. But to really do a good job, you should start with an open mind and decide what your thesis is after you see the data. If you don't, you will be accused of doing what the anti's do.:biggrin:
 
JimPage said:
You might ask the NRA. They have tons of data and will be sympathetic to your thesis. But to really do a good job, you should start with an open mind and decide what your thesis is after you see the data. If you don't, you will be accused of doing what the anti's do.:biggrin:
Click to expand...

Yea, I second that one.
 
JimPage said:
You might ask the NRA. They have tons of data and will be sympathetic to your thesis. But to really do a good job, you should start with an open mind and decide what your thesis is after you see the data. If you don't, you will be accused of doing what the anti's do.:biggrin:
Click to expand...


We had to come up with what the instructor called a thesis statement, and from that, research to prove it right or wrong, citing documentation and research for the final conclusion. We were shown several samples of statements we might use (poli sci class), and I saw one that said the exact opposite of what I chose. It said that in states which had passed CCW, violent crime rates increased. A few years ago, when Nebraska passed CCW, I was on a police forum and opened a thread asking what law enforcement thought about CCW. In my mind, it seemed that it would be frightening to think that anyone could carry, and police would have no way of really knowing. I felt it might be more dangerous. Surprisingly enough--at least to me--they were almost unanimously in favor of CCW. They felt the citizens who took the time to train for and secure their CCW, were responsible, law-abiding citizens, and that criminals will get guns either way. Based on that discussion, I actually changed my perspective, but then again, I went into the discussion with an open mind, just wanting to know their thoughts and feelings. So, because of that background, I thought I would counter the statement that said CCW states had higher crime rates post-CCW laws, and research to see what the facts panned out to be. So, to answer your suggestion...I can't research first. I have to make a stand, then prove it right or wrong. So, I'm making a stand...lol...based on what the law enforcement officers told me in that forum discussion two years ago.

And, ty for the suggestion. I will check out the NRA site.
 
phoenix said:
We had to come up with what the instructor called a thesis statement, and from that, research to prove it right or wrong, citing documentation and research for the final conclusion. We were shown several samples of statements we might use (poli sci class), and I saw one that said the exact opposite of what I chose. It said that in states which had passed CCW, violent crime rates increased. A few years ago, when Nebraska passed CCW, I was on a police forum and opened a thread asking what law enforcement thought about CCW. In my mind, it seemed that it would be frightening to think that anyone could carry, and police would have no way of really knowing. I felt it might be more dangerous. Surprisingly enough--at least to me--they were almost unanimously in favor of CCW. They felt the citizens who took the time to train for and secure their CCW, were responsible, law-abiding citizens, and that criminals will get guns either way. Based on that discussion, I actually changed my perspective, but then again, I went into the discussion with an open mind, just wanting to know their thoughts and feelings. So, because of that background, I thought I would counter the statement that said CCW states had higher crime rates post-CCW laws, and research to see what the facts panned out to be. So, to answer your suggestion...I can't research first. I have to make a stand, then prove it right or wrong. So, I'm making a stand...lol...based on what the law enforcement officers told me in that forum discussion two years ago.

And, ty for the suggestion. I will check out the NRA site.
Click to expand...

Yes, you have the proper way of it. A hypothesis is to be proved or disproved by the data, not the other way around.

I sponsored a CCW class through my store a couple of years ago. One of the students came in and told me that when he went to the neighboring village police department to get fingerprinted the chief did it for him. When the chief found out what it was for he invited the student in and had coffee and a talk. The chief's attitude, stated, was that "You're one of us. Glad to have you."
 
NMHunter: "Yes, you have the proper way of it. A hypothesis is to be proved or disproved by the data, not the other way around."

In true data logic that is correct as I recall from scientific research classes, especially in statistics. However I have found in practice that frequently, particularly in emotion laden areas like this, 'researchers' tend to only 'find' data that upholds their theses. Take a look at Brady et al and see the data mining and selective use of data.
 
JimPage said:
NMHunter: "Yes, you have the proper way of it. A hypothesis is to be proved or disproved by the data, not the other way around."

In true data logic that is correct as I recall from scientific research classes, especially in statistics. However I have found in practice that frequently, particularly in emotion laden areas like this, 'researchers' tend to only 'find' data that upholds their theses. Take a look at Brady et al and see the data mining and selective use of data.
Click to expand...


That is exactly correct. That is why John Lott is such a valuable resource, he is an honest researcher and doesn't "cook the data".
 
To be honest another thing you should look at when doing this paper is to limit the amount of states you write about.

I am currently in a English Comp 2 course and that was one of the best pieces of advice I received from my professor.

I would find stats on a couple of states that are Shall Issue States with high population (South Carolina, Virginia are a few), and then a couple of states that are May Issue, or Don't Issue (Maryland, New York)

To make the argument even more valid, the states that you use should be close in population size. Then it will eliminate the professor that will come back with "But the states you are comparing have very uneven numbers in the population and there would be more acts of violence there" Yes, most english professors or teachers are tree huggin liberals who hate guns.

Good Luck with the paper...
 
lol..thanks. I'm finding that is what I'm going to have to do. I just cannot find all the stats I need on every state, in the limited time I have to complete the research and writing. However, I have found some really good info, in particular on the GunCite website. There are a lot of articles that will help.
http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcdgcon.html

Also, Gary Kleck and John R. Lott, Jr. were authors I've found helpful. I also have access to the book Stopping Power Why 70 Million Americans Own Guns, by J.N. Schulman.

So far, I have like 20 sources, and a few tables with data that I will throw in, but I think I have what I need to at least make a stab at this. I don't think it really matters what you research, if you really want to, you will find the supporting data to back your stance. I just have to use what I can, and what I have found, and hope it holds enough water to at least impress my instructor.

One nice article was by M.E. Wofgang, called A Tribute to a View I Have Opposed. A gun control advocate applauding research of Kleck and Gertz. The following is an excerpt:

"I am as strong a gun-control advocate as can be found among the criminologists in this country. If I were Mustapha Mond of Brave New World, I would eliminate all guns from the civilian population and maybe even from the police. I hate guns--ugly, nasty instruments designed to kill people....What troubles me is the article by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz. The reason I am troubled is that they have provided an almost clearcut case of methodologically sound research in support of something I have theoretically opposed for years, namely, the use of a gun in defense against a criminal perpetrator. Maybe Franklin Zimring and Philip Cook can help me find fault with the Kleck and Gertz research, but for now, I have to admit my admiration for the care and caution expressed in this article and this research."
 
tyjack09 said:
Yes, most english professors or teachers are tree huggin liberals who hate guns.

Good Luck with the paper...
Click to expand...

LOL....just for the record....I am a teacher...but I don't hug trees, and I'm not a liberal, and I support the second ammendment, and the right to carry. Then again, I've never been accused of being typical.:smile:
 
Hello, I'm new to this site as well, however it will be very hard to find solid statistics to bolster you hypothesis. Reason being, I have always said the same thing but only find "blanket stats". Gun crimes/violence is usually lumped together. I have yet to find data that differentiates between illegal and legal gun crimes. The way I see it is that individuals whom are "law abiding citizens" generally like to keep it that way and follow the rules/laws. That being said, it doesnt mean there arent people who stray away from that. Your best chance is to go to your local municipality and ask for their records. Statemaster.com has pretty good stats but percents are based on population. Good luck.
 
When I served as a deputy sheriff in Arizona, there was no provision for citizens carrying concealed. That was reserved to police or military in connection with their job. When I moved to Washington for two years , then went back, the legislature had passed the CCW law. You had to attend a 32-hour class which included a trip to the range, and you had to pass a written test with ascore of 100, and shoot at least 70% on the range. Now I have a Washington Concealed Pistol License, which is a revenue device. There is no requirement for any type of education, and you do not even have to show you know how to load your weapon. Scary. When the Senate voted on the National Carry Bill, both of our weak sister Senators, Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell voted no on the bill. the Democrats had decided that instead of a simple majority, this bill required a super majority of 60 votes to pass. It got 58 votes. I confronted Ms. Murray on it and she gave me this garbage about not wanting other people to come in and tell us what our gun laws should be. They actually fell for Barbara Boxer's fairy tale about legally armed citizens carrying burlap bags of illegal guns into California. As far as I know the only states more lax than Washington are Alaska and Kentucky, where one does not even need a permit to carry concealed.
 
wuzfuz said:
There is no requirement for any type of education, and you do not even have to show you know how to load your weapon. Scary. As far as I know the only states more lax than Washington are Alaska and Kentucky, where one does not even need a permit to carry concealed.
Click to expand...

Why do you consider no training required to obtain a Concealed Pistol License to be scary? There is no evidence to suggest that this practice causes any problems at all. There are no more accidental shootings or innocent bystanders getting shot in Washington than in any other state.

Kentucky does require a permit to conceal carry, and does require training in order to obtain the permit. Alaska, Vermont and recently Arizona do not require a permit to conceal a firearms. In these and other states that do not require training to conceal carry, there has been no evidence of negative effects due to lack of training requirements.

I am all for getting handgun training. I can't support making training a government requirement to carry a firearm. I don't believe the word trained appears in the 2nd Amendment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 78 (members: 0, guests: 78)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
49,523
Messages
610,661
Members
74,992
Latest member
RedDotArmsTraining

Share this page

Back
Top