New Dr. Lott study on Concealed Carry

[hillbillyreefer]

I only posted the summary the actual report is 18 pages.


http://crimepreventionresearchcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Concealed-Carry-Permit-Holders-Across-the-United-States.pdf


The last comprehensive report on the number of concealed carry permit holders was completed three years ago by the U.S. Government Accountability Office and showed that 8 million Americans held a concealed carry permit.
CPRC collected the most recent data available for each state and the results showed that there are total of 11,113,013 Americans who currently hold concealed carry permits representing 4.8 percent of the total population.
The number of concealed carry permit holders is likely much higher than 11.1 million because numbers are not available for all states that issue permits, such as New York. Additionally, four states and the majority of Montana do not require that residents have a concealed handgun permit to carry within the state so the number of residents who carry a concealed weapon is not recorded.
The percent of the adult population with concealed handgun permits is determined by how difficult it is to get the permits, how long the permits have been available, and whether the government has discretion over who gets the permit.
The report also examines the violent crime rate in relation to the rising percentage of the adult population with concealed carry permits. Between 2007 and the preliminary estimates for 2013, murder rates have fallen from 5.6 to 4.4 per 100,000 – a 22 percent drop in the murder rate at the same time that the percentage of the adult population with permits soared by 130 percent. Overall violent crime also fell by 22 percent over that period of time

[Sundancefisher]

I only posted the summary the actual report is 18 pages.


http://crimepreventionresearchcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Concealed-Carry-Permit-Holders-Across-the-United-States.pdf


The last comprehensive report on the number of concealed carry permit holders was completed three years ago by the U.S. Government Accountability Office and showed that 8 million Americans held a concealed carry permit.
CPRC collected the most recent data available for each state and the results showed that there are total of 11,113,013 Americans who currently hold concealed carry permits representing 4.8 percent of the total population.
The number of concealed carry permit holders is likely much higher than 11.1 million because numbers are not available for all states that issue permits, such as New York. Additionally, four states and the majority of Montana do not require that residents have a concealed handgun permit to carry within the state so the number of residents who carry a concealed weapon is not recorded.
The percent of the adult population with concealed handgun permits is determined by how difficult it is to get the permits, how long the permits have been available, and whether the government has discretion over who gets the permit.
The report also examines the violent crime rate in relation to the rising percentage of the adult population with concealed carry permits. Between 2007 and the preliminary estimates for 2013, murder rates have fallen from 5.6 to 4.4 per 100,000 – a 22 percent drop in the murder rate at the same time that the percentage of the adult population with permits soared by 130 percent. Overall violent crime also fell by 22 percent over that period of time

Ahh Statistics.

Unfortunately no proof can be brought forth to link CC to violent crime reduction.

During that same time in Canada our crime rate dropped as well. In general I believe crime dropped in developed countries.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2012001/article/11692/c-g/11692-chart1-eng.jpg

As for the violent crime rate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

This is the list of countries 5 above and 5 below the US with murder rate.


Belarus 5.1
Mauritania 5.0
Thailand 5.0
Estonia 5.0
Albania 5.0
United States 4.8
Yemen 4.8
Niger 4.7
Latvia 4.7
F.S. Micronesia 4.6
Georgia 4.3

This is the list of countries 5 above and 5 below CANADA with murder rate.


Israel1.8
Libya1.7
Bhutan1.7
Romania1.7
Greece1.7
Canada 1.6
Tajikistan 1.6
Finland 1.6
Belgium 1.6
Slovakia 1.4
Macedonia 1.4



Please try pulling just violent crime statistics and see which group the US falls into.

I would also hazard a guess to suggest violent crime rates more closely track wealth and earning income stats versus CC stats.

[silverdoctor]

All one need do is look at Chicago for proof, stats be frigged.

[Sundancefisher]

All one need do is look at Chicago for proof, stats be frigged.

Chicago is interesting. Studies show all the weapons used basically came from jurisdictions with lax gun laws...especially on background checks. In turn guns flood to poverty areas of Detroit and Chicago.

I would love to see a study on gun crime by average income. I strongly suspect most gun crime occurs in poverty and low income areas.

People in affluent areas likely experience less crime.

I need to go target shooting again. Can you buy sticks that hold skeets off the ground? Maybe just sticks and duct tape would work.

[silverdoctor]

Chicago is interesting. Studies show all the weapons used basically came from jurisdictions with lax gun laws...especially on background checks. In turn guns flood to poverty areas of Detroit and Chicago.

I would love to see a study on gun crime by average income. I strongly suspect most gun crime occurs in poverty and low income areas.

People in affluent areas likely experience less crime.

I need to go target shooting again. Can you buy sticks that hold skeets off the ground? Maybe just sticks and duct tape would work.

But, But, But, it was supposed to drop crime? How come it didn't work?

</sarcasm>

[Unregistered user]

Chicago is interesting. Studies show all the weapons used basically came from jurisdictions with lax gun laws...especially on background checks. In turn guns flood to poverty areas of Detroit and Chicago.

I would love to see a study on gun crime by average income. I strongly suspect most gun crime occurs in poverty and low income areas.

People in affluent areas likely experience less crime.

I need to go target shooting again. Can you buy sticks that hold skeets off the ground? Maybe just sticks and duct tape would work.

Not just crimes with guns but all crimes, makes sense. Gun laws have little effect, where there's a will there's a way.

[HunterDave]

Dr John Lott is a quack. It's well documented and he has ZERO credibility with anyone except with the NRA. :1041:

[JamesB]

Dr John Lott is a quack. It's well documented and he has ZERO credibility with anyone except with the NRA. :1041:

Really? Maybe you can produce some of this documentation?

[JamesB]

Ahh Statistics.

Unfortunately no proof can be brought forth to link CC to violent crime reduction.

During that same time in Canada our crime rate dropped as well. In general I believe crime dropped in developed countries.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2012001/article/11692/c-g/11692-chart1-eng.jpg

As for the violent crime rate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

This is the list of countries 5 above and 5 below the US with murder rate.


Belarus 5.1
Mauritania 5.0
Thailand 5.0
Estonia 5.0
Albania 5.0
United States 4.8
Yemen 4.8
Niger 4.7
Latvia 4.7
F.S. Micronesia 4.6
Georgia 4.3

This is the list of countries 5 above and 5 below CANADA with murder rate.


Israel1.8
Libya1.7
Bhutan1.7
Romania1.7
Greece1.7
Canada 1.6
Tajikistan 1.6
Finland 1.6
Belgium 1.6
Slovakia 1.4
Macedonia 1.4



Please try pulling just violent crime statistics and see which group the US falls into.

I would also hazard a guess to suggest violent crime rates more closely track wealth and earning income stats versus CC stats.

I don't think you actually read the report right? He does not compare wildly dissimilar countries, but similar counties in the US. Some with and some without CCW. The CCW areas showed larger drops in crime than the non CCW areas. Your posting some random stats really provides nothing to counter his thesis.
Of course if we do take your stats at face value, one conclusion is that firearms laws have no effect on homicide rates.

[HunterDave]

Really? Maybe you can produce some of this documentation?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lott

Controversy

Charges that gun makers or the NRA have paid for Lott's research
In 1996 when Lott's research first received media attention, Charles Schumer wrote in the Wall Street Journal: "The Associated Press reports that Prof. Lott's fellowship at the University of Chicago is funded by the Olin Foundation, which is 'associated with the Olin Corporation,' one of the nation's largest gun manufacturers. Maybe that's a coincidence, too. But it's also a fact."[52] Olin Foundation head William E. Simon strongly denied Schumer's claims in a reply letter. Olin Foundation was funded by the personal estate of the late John M. Olin independently of Olin Corp. Like all candidates, Lott was selected to receive his Olin Fellowship by the faculty of the university, not by Olin Foundation and certainly not by Olin Corp.[53][54]

In a debate on Piers Morgan Tonight on July 23, 2012, Harvard Law School Professor Alan Dershowitz claimed: "This is junk science at its worst. Paid for and financed by the National Rifle Association." Lott countered: "The NRA hasn't paid for my research." Dershowitz continued: "Your conclusions are paid for and financed—The National Rifle Association—only funds research that will lead to these conclusions."[55][56] Separately both Lott and the NRA have denied NRA funding of Lott's research.[57] (In January 2000, criminologist Otis Dudley Duncan questioned Lott's statistics because the NRA was not citing them.)[58]

Disputed survey
In the course of a dispute with Otis Dudley Duncan in 1999–2000,[58][59] Lott claimed to have undertaken a national survey of 2,424 respondents in 1997, the results of which were the source for claims he had made beginning in 1997.[60] However, in 2000 Lott was unable to produce the data, or any records showing that the survey had been undertaken. He said the 1997 hard drive crash that had affected several projects with co-authors had destroyed his survey data set,[61] the original tally sheets had been abandoned with other personal property in his move from Chicago to Yale, and he could not recall the names of any of the students who he said had worked on it. Critics alleged that the survey had never taken place,[62] but Lott defends the survey's existence and accuracy, quoting on his website colleagues who lost data in the hard drive crash.[63][self-published source?]

Use of econometrics as proof of causation
In 2001, Rutgers University sociology professor Ted Goertzel[64] considered multiple regression to be not of much use in proving causal arguments in studies by Lott (and by Lott's critics Levitt, Ayres and Donohue).[65]

The National Academy of Sciences panel that reported on several gun control issues in 2004 looked at Right-To-Carry laws in Chapter 6 and endorsed neither the Lott & Mustard (1997) level and trend models as definite proof nor the Ayres & Donohue (2003) hybrid model as definite refutation of Lott's thesis: the majority of the panel concluded that econometrics could not decide the issue, suggesting instead alternate research, such as a survey of felons to determine if RTC changed their behavior.[66] The criminologist on the NAS panel, James Q. Wilson, wrote a dissent from the econometricians' conclusion. Wilson noted in the report that all the panel's estimates on murder rates supported Lott's conclusion on the effect of RTC on murder.[67] The Committee responded that "[w]hile it is true that most of the reported estimates [of the policy on murder rates] are negative, several are positive and many are statistically insignificant."[68] They further noted that the full committee, including Wilson, agreed that there was not convincing evidence that RTC policies had an impact on other kinds of violent crime.

In a 2011 article for ALER, Donohue claimed the NRC panel results published from the hybrid model "could not be replicated on its data set".[69] Lott replicated the NRC's results using the NRC's copy of the Ayres & Donohue model and data set, pointing out that the model used for the ALER article was different and introduced a truncation bias.[70]

Mary Rosh persona
In response to the dispute surrounding the missing survey, Lott created and used "Mary Rosh" as a sock puppet to defend his own works on Usenet and elsewhere. After investigative work by blogger Julian Sanchez, Lott admitted to use of the Mary Rosh persona.[62] Sanchez also pointed out that Lott, posing as Rosh, not only praised his own academic writing, but also called himself "the best professor I ever had".

Many commentators and academics accused Lott of violating academic integrity, noting that he praised himself while posing as one of his former students,[71][72] and that "Rosh" was used to post a favorable review of More Guns, Less Crime on Amazon.com. Lott has claimed that the "Rosh" review was written by his son and wife.[72][broken citation]

"I probably shouldn't have done it—I know I shouldn't have done it—but it's hard to think of any big advantage I got except to be able to comment fictitiously," Lott told the Washington Post in 2003.[72][broken citation]

[Sundancefisher]

I don't think you actually read the report right? He does not compare wildly dissimilar countries, but similar counties in the US. Some with and some without CCW. The CCW areas showed larger drops in crime than the non CCW areas. Your posting some random stats really provides nothing to counter his thesis.
Of course if we do take your stats at face value, one conclusion is that firearms laws have no effect on homicide rates.

my point was he is saying crime rates came down...yet they came down across the country at the same time. TO say that CC caused that also can not be shown as an area without CC showed similar drop in crime.

What he needs to do is overlay the socio-economic factors over the study area to see if there are any connections.

Otherwise...saying how wonderful the crime rate dropped in the US regardless of cause still contains a crime rate number far higher than Canada.

So in other words their is a far more complicated story that this person is trying to insinuate.

Still...some will buy it because it is a topic they are emotional on and have no interest in thinking more broadly on the topic.

read this

http://thesocietypages.org/papers/crime-drop/

[Unregistered user]

^ As others will dismiss it for the same reason.

[expmler]

Ahh Statistics.

Unfortunately no proof can be brought forth to link CC to violent crime reduction.

During that same time in Canada our crime rate dropped as well. In general I believe crime dropped in developed countries.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2012001/article/11692/c-g/11692-chart1-eng.jpg

As for the violent crime rate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

This is the list of countries 5 above and 5 below the US with murder rate.


Belarus 5.1
Mauritania 5.0
Thailand 5.0
Estonia 5.0
Albania 5.0
United States 4.8
Yemen 4.8
Niger 4.7
Latvia 4.7
F.S. Micronesia 4.6
Georgia 4.3

This is the list of countries 5 above and 5 below CANADA with murder rate.


Israel1.8
Libya1.7
Bhutan1.7
Romania1.7
Greece1.7
Canada 1.6
Tajikistan 1.6
Finland 1.6
Belgium 1.6
Slovakia 1.4
Macedonia 1.4



Please try pulling just violent crime statistics and see which group the US falls into.

I would also hazard a guess to suggest violent crime rates more closely track wealth and earning income stats versus CC stats.

So using your data it would seem to prove that CC does not increase crime, so what is the objection?

[Sundancefisher]

So using your data it would seem to prove that CC does not increase crime, so what is the objection?

The OP listed a link to say CC reduces crime. Given the nature of the link and the fact it can't stand up to even simple scrutiny... I don't need to prove anything.

He presented a study...fun read but not much substance.

As for law abiding citizens of the US carrying guns whenever they want...either CC or otherwise...that is their business...not for you or me to decide.

[rugatika]

good people with guns stop bad people from doing bad things.

No study needed.

When we ask a soldier to stop bad people do we give hime a gun or o pot of flowers?

When we ask a police officer to stop bad guys, do we give hime a gun?

Bad people will always have access to guns, no matter the laws.

Good people will have access to guns when the law allows.

Pretty simple concepts.

[Fredo]

good people with guns stop bad people from doing bad things.

No study needed.

When we ask a soldier to stop bad people do we give hime a gun or o pot of flowers?

When we ask a police officer to stop bad guys, do we give hime a gun?

Bad people will always have access to guns, no matter the laws.

Good people will have access to guns when the law allows.

Pretty simple concepts.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Nothing more to add.

[fish gunner]

good people with guns stop bad people from doing bad things.

No study needed.

When we ask a soldier to stop bad people do we give hime a gun or o pot of flowers?

When we ask a police officer to stop bad guys, do we give hime a gun?

Bad people will always have access to guns, no matter the laws.

Good people will have access to guns when the law allows.

Pretty simple concepts.

Good people without guns also stop bad people doing bad things, have for a long time ie the UK bobby .
Bad people in the US it would appear have much easier time getting guns than bad people in Canada. Over all the US just has more bad people. thought I cant say my experience would show this.
It would be some what clear mr lotts credibility is some what in question on this subject.
What Chicago shows is no amount of law will stop bad people driving 30+min to the getting place to access a gun . Sad but true.

[Mulehahn]

There is no doubt that socioeconomics plays a role. You can take the worst, I mean the absolute worst area in Canada, and it wouldn't compare to an average "ghetto" in the States. Go into the worst areas of a big city and you will understand. That is why they have a higher murder rate. And yes, my dad is American I have spent a lot of time in the States, I have a solid understanding. If someone compared Canada and USA violence on an even scale, with equal socioeconomic status, and population you would likely find a gun violence higher in the USA, but violence over and murder rate to be equal. Unfortunately these studies don't garnish the same attention and this lack the funding.

As for the example of the UK where the police don't carry guns, fly into Germany where the police are armed better then our soldiers. Or fly out of of Switzerland where the tarmac is patrolled by heavily armoured APCs. There is countless arguments on both sides.

[hillbillyreefer]

So using your data it would seem to prove that CC does not increase crime, so what is the objection?

The objection is that guns are scary and we've be indoctrinated to believe no one but the police and military should have them. Even those familiar with firearms in Canada seem to have an anti bias. The last generation of Canadian gun owners is alive right now.

[fish gunner]

The objection is that guns are scary and we've be indoctrinated to believe no one but the police and military should have them. Even those familiar with firearms in Canada seem to have an anti bias. The last generation of Canadian gun owners is alive right now.

I see no reason my unborn grand children won't own a firearm . I will admit the will have to jump thur more hoops than my father but that may not be a terrible thing.

[rugatika]

The objection is that guns are scary and we've be indoctrinated to believe no one but the police and military should have them. Even those familiar with firearms in Canada seem to have an anti bias. The last generation of Canadian gun owners is alive right now.

Yup. Too many people in Canada, even on this forum, that have no problem with liberals ratcheting up gun control.

Unfortunately, history and logic are foreign concepts for far too many voters.

[guywiththemule]

Yup. Too many people in Canada, even on this forum, that have no problem with liberals ratcheting up gun control.

Unfortunately, history and logic are foreign concepts for far too many voters.

What???? You mean the wonderful, "all knowing" ,benevolent government we all enjoy, doesn`t have our best interests at heart ??:sHa_sarcasticlol:

[greylynx]

Dr John Lott is a quack. It's well documented and he has ZERO credibility with anyone except with the NRA. :1041:

He has 100 percent credibility with Greylynx et al...

[greylynx]

I see no reason my unborn grand children won't own a firearm . I will admit the will have to jump thur more hoops than my father but that may not be a terrible thing.

When Justin is PM there will no longer will be any hoops. Ha Ha Ha :sHa_shakeshout:

[BeeGuy]

Looks great.

I'll believe anything that supports my preconceived opinions, regardless of merit.

[fish gunner]

When Justin is PM there will no longer will be any hoops. Ha Ha Ha :sHa_shakeshout:

You suggest the public will roll over on firearms to the point of total ban. Id have more belief in canadians:)

[canadiantdi]

You suggest the public will roll over on firearms to the point of total ban. Id have more belief in canadians:)

Not a fast roll.. Slowly maybe.

[houndsmen]

Yup. Too many people in Canada, even on this forum, that have no problem with liberals ratcheting up gun control.

Unfortunately, history and logic are foreign concepts for far too many voters.

I couldn't agree more Rug. When I was growing up it seemed liberals were like albino deer, you heard about them and knew they existed, you just never saw one or heard of one close to home.

Now they seem to be spreading like the plague.



It makes me sick when I think about how much things have changed regarding guns in just the last 15 or so years.

It makes me sick to think how things will be another 15-20 years from now.

And the liberal, Disney-fied Cityiots that have made things this Really make me sick!

[BeeGuy]

I couldn't agree more Rug. When I was growing up it seemed liberals were like albino deer, you heard about them and knew they existed, you just never saw one or heard of one close to home.

Now they seem to be spreading like the plague.



It makes me sick when I think about how much things have changed regarding guns in just the last 15 or so years.

It makes me sick to think how things will be another 15-20 years from now.

And the liberal, Disney-fied Cityiots that have made things this Really make me sick!

What is the extent of your political and social engagement?

[canadiantdi]

I couldn't agree more Rug. When I was growing up it seemed liberals were like albino deer, you heard about them and knew they existed, you just never saw one or heard of one close to home.

Now they seem to be spreading like the plague.



It makes me sick when I think about how much things have changed regarding guns in just the last 15 or so years.

It makes me sick to think how things will be another 15-20 years from now.

And the liberal, Disney-fied Cityiots that have made things this Really make me sick!

Someone should change their name to albinodeerguy.

But ya, it seems that people are tripping over each other trying to be more liberal. I don't get it!

[BeeGuy]

I spent $40 on my NFA membership for the year.

Did my part. :thinking-006:

[silverdoctor]

You suggest the public will roll over on firearms to the point of total ban. Id have more belief in canadians:)

I wouldn't suggest anything, I'd put money on it. When you are criminalized by the stroke of a CFO's pen, you have to stop and wonder if gun ownership is a right. It is not a right, you have been given permission to own a gun. They pull permission?

Many aussies talked tough but look at the end result.

[Au revoir, Gopher]

It won't be a total ban in one step, it will be a series of smaller "reasonable" steps that end in a total ban. We are about half way there, getting rid of the long gun registry only slowed the process.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=149029
Abstract:
Whenever civil liberties issues are contested, proponents of greater restrictions often chide civil liberties defenders for being unwilling to offer moderate concessions. Frequently, persons advocating restrictions on civil liberties claim that the "moderate" restriction will not infringe the core civil liberty. When rights advocates raise the "slippery slope" argument, they are criticized for being excessively fearful. The goal of the article is to refine our understanding of "slippery slopes" by examining a case in which a civil liberty really did slide all the way down the slippery slope.

The right to arms in Great Britain was entirely unrestricted at the beginning of the twentieth century; as the century ends, the right is dead, and only a feeble, severely constricted privilege to possess certain "sporting" guns remains. The article examines, step-by step, how Britain moved from a strong, unfettered right to near-total prohibition of that right. While each of Britain's incremental steps towards gun control was, in itself, reasonable, the cumulative effect was to destroy the right gradually.

Although the right to arms is the focus of the article, the article also discusses many other civil liberties, and their fate in twentieth century Britain and America. The article concludes that, in light of historical experience, organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Rifle Association of America, which vigorously resist even the smallest perceived infringements on constitutional rights, may be acting prudently in the long term, even though their "no concessions" stance may appear unreasonable in the short term.


ARG

[JamesB]

my point was he is saying crime rates came down...yet they came down across the country at the same time. TO say that CC caused that also can not be shown as an area without CC showed similar drop in crime.

What he needs to do is overlay the socio-economic factors over the study area to see if there are any connections.

Otherwise...saying how wonderful the crime rate dropped in the US regardless of cause still contains a crime rate number far higher than Canada.

So in other words their is a far more complicated story that this person is trying to insinuate.

Still...some will buy it because it is a topic they are emotional on and have no interest in thinking more broadly on the topic.

read this

http://thesocietypages.org/papers/crime-drop/

And they went down faster and farther where higher rates of CCW were encountered. Please read the article.

[JamesB]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lott

Controversy

Charges that gun makers or the NRA have paid for Lott's research
In 1996 when Lott's research first received media attention, Charles Schumer wrote in the Wall Street Journal: "The Associated Press reports that Prof. Lott's fellowship at the University of Chicago is funded by the Olin Foundation, which is 'associated with the Olin Corporation,' one of the nation's largest gun manufacturers. Maybe that's a coincidence, too. But it's also a fact."[52] Olin Foundation head William E. Simon strongly denied Schumer's claims in a reply letter. Olin Foundation was funded by the personal estate of the late John M. Olin independently of Olin Corp. Like all candidates, Lott was selected to receive his Olin Fellowship by the faculty of the university, not by Olin Foundation and certainly not by Olin Corp.[53][54]

In a debate on Piers Morgan Tonight on July 23, 2012, Harvard Law School Professor Alan Dershowitz claimed: "This is junk science at its worst. Paid for and financed by the National Rifle Association." Lott countered: "The NRA hasn't paid for my research." Dershowitz continued: "Your conclusions are paid for and financed—The National Rifle Association—only funds research that will lead to these conclusions."[55][56] Separately both Lott and the NRA have denied NRA funding of Lott's research.[57] (In January 2000, criminologist Otis Dudley Duncan questioned Lott's statistics because the NRA was not citing them.)[58]

Disputed survey
In the course of a dispute with Otis Dudley Duncan in 1999–2000,[58][59] Lott claimed to have undertaken a national survey of 2,424 respondents in 1997, the results of which were the source for claims he had made beginning in 1997.[60] However, in 2000 Lott was unable to produce the data, or any records showing that the survey had been undertaken. He said the 1997 hard drive crash that had affected several projects with co-authors had destroyed his survey data set,[61] the original tally sheets had been abandoned with other personal property in his move from Chicago to Yale, and he could not recall the names of any of the students who he said had worked on it. Critics alleged that the survey had never taken place,[62] but Lott defends the survey's existence and accuracy, quoting on his website colleagues who lost data in the hard drive crash.[63][self-published source?]

Use of econometrics as proof of causation
In 2001, Rutgers University sociology professor Ted Goertzel[64] considered multiple regression to be not of much use in proving causal arguments in studies by Lott (and by Lott's critics Levitt, Ayres and Donohue).[65]

The National Academy of Sciences panel that reported on several gun control issues in 2004 looked at Right-To-Carry laws in Chapter 6 and endorsed neither the Lott & Mustard (1997) level and trend models as definite proof nor the Ayres & Donohue (2003) hybrid model as definite refutation of Lott's thesis: the majority of the panel concluded that econometrics could not decide the issue, suggesting instead alternate research, such as a survey of felons to determine if RTC changed their behavior.[66] The criminologist on the NAS panel, James Q. Wilson, wrote a dissent from the econometricians' conclusion. Wilson noted in the report that all the panel's estimates on murder rates supported Lott's conclusion on the effect of RTC on murder.[67] The Committee responded that "[w]hile it is true that most of the reported estimates [of the policy on murder rates] are negative, several are positive and many are statistically insignificant."[68] They further noted that the full committee, including Wilson, agreed that there was not convincing evidence that RTC policies had an impact on other kinds of violent crime.

In a 2011 article for ALER, Donohue claimed the NRC panel results published from the hybrid model "could not be replicated on its data set".[69] Lott replicated the NRC's results using the NRC's copy of the Ayres & Donohue model and data set, pointing out that the model used for the ALER article was different and introduced a truncation bias.[70]

Mary Rosh persona
In response to the dispute surrounding the missing survey, Lott created and used "Mary Rosh" as a sock puppet to defend his own works on Usenet and elsewhere. After investigative work by blogger Julian Sanchez, Lott admitted to use of the Mary Rosh persona.[62] Sanchez also pointed out that Lott, posing as Rosh, not only praised his own academic writing, but also called himself "the best professor I ever had".

Many commentators and academics accused Lott of violating academic integrity, noting that he praised himself while posing as one of his former students,[71][72] and that "Rosh" was used to post a favorable review of More Guns, Less Crime on Amazon.com. Lott has claimed that the "Rosh" review was written by his son and wife.[72][broken citation]

"I probably shouldn't have done it—I know I shouldn't have done it—but it's hard to think of any big advantage I got except to be able to comment fictitiously," Lott told the Washington Post in 2003.[72][broken citation]

So Wikipedia as a reliable source for data? First of all most of this is BS, and as proof I would draw your attention here:

Charges that gun makers or the NRA have paid for Lott's research
In 1996 when Lott's research first received media attention, Charles Schumer wrote in the Wall Street Journal: "The Associated Press reports that Prof. Lott's fellowship at the University of Chicago is funded by the Olin Foundation, which is 'associated with the Olin Corporation,' one of the nation's largest gun manufacturers. Maybe that's a coincidence, too. But it's also a fact."[52] Olin Foundation head William E. Simon strongly denied Schumer's claims in a reply letter. Olin Foundation was funded by the personal estate of the late John M. Olin independently of Olin Corp. Like all candidates, Lott was selected to receive his Olin Fellowship by the faculty of the university, not by Olin Foundation and certainly not by Olin Corp.[53][54]

In a debate on Piers Morgan Tonight on July 23, 2012, Harvard Law School Professor Alan Dershowitz claimed: "This is junk science at its worst. Paid for and financed by the National Rifle Association." Lott countered: "The NRA hasn't paid for my research." Dershowitz continued: "Your conclusions are paid for and financed—The National Rifle Association—only funds research that will lead to these conclusions."[55][56] Separately both Lott and the NRA have denied NRA funding of Lott's research

This is apparently an unfounded allegation yet leads the article. Secondly if who pays for the research decides its truthfulness, check out who is paying those that oppose Lott's research. And finally Lott's first book was peer reviewed repeatedly without any of these allegations being made. Most of the allegations refer to later works. So say what you will he has made a very strong case that guns in the right hands reduce crime, and if you cannot see fit to believe his thesis the alternative is certainly that there is no correlation between gun ownership rates and crime.

[JamesB]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/648703/posts

Here is a counterpoint article to the anti Lott Wikipedia BS.

[fish gunner]

And they went down faster and farther where higher rates of CCW were encountered. Please read the article.

But there still five times (roughly) higher than canadas where there is no ccw. ??? Hmmm kind of throws a wrench in to the whole argument... if I lived in Beruit or Kandahar then maybe ccw is a valid answer for self protection, but seeing as we in one of the worlds happiest peaceful countries we can rely on happy peaceful folks to umm basically you know be unarmed in 99.9999999999 of our day to day life . You suggest changing the fabric of what is canada over the smallest worse case scenario... that is irrational fear full stop.

[expmler]

But there still five times (roughly) higher than canadas where there is no ccw. ??? Hmmm kind of throws a wrench in to the whole argument... if I lived in Beruit or Kandahar then maybe ccw is a valid answer for self protection, but seeing as we in one of the worlds happiest peaceful countries we can rely on happy peaceful folks to umm basically you know be unarmed in 99.9999999999 of our day to day life . You suggest changing the fabric of what is canada over the smallest worse case scenario... that is irrational fear full stop.

What makes you think that CCW would change the happy peaceful people of Canada into blood thirsty killers.

That was the argument against abolishing the LGR, that somehow people would be less safe and blood would run in the streets.

I think your fear of an inanimate object and responsible gun owners is irrational.

[JamesB]

But there still five times (roughly) higher than canadas where there is no ccw. ??? Hmmm kind of throws a wrench in to the whole argument... if I lived in Beruit or Kandahar then maybe ccw is a valid answer for self protection, but seeing as we in one of the worlds happiest peaceful countries we can rely on happy peaceful folks to umm basically you know be unarmed in 99.9999999999 of our day to day life . You suggest changing the fabric of what is canada over the smallest worse case scenario... that is irrational fear full stop.

No, now you are ignoring all of the socio economic differences that occur between different countries. He is very specifically comparing similar situations between states and counties and you are trying to compare very different countries. FWIW you might look at western European countries that allow concealed carry. Furthermore I am not advocating CCW in Canada I am simply trying to stop the misinformation being strewn on this site wrt gun laws and their effects on violent crime. The correlation is minimal.

[Sundancefisher]

No, now you are ignoring all of the socio economic differences that occur between different countries. He is very specifically comparing similar situations between states and counties and you are trying to compare very different countries. FWIW you might look at western European countries that allow concealed carry. Furthermore I am not advocating CCW in Canada I am simply trying to stop the misinformation being strewn on this site wrt gun laws and their effects on violent crime. The correlation is minimal.

What is the socio economics differences between states and counties? Please pull 3 that show CC helped...versus 3 that suggest CC would of helped. No disputing your belief in the data as to what it tells you. I am just looking broader to show that what you think you see could be a result of different drivers.

So pull some socio economic drivers for the counties in question.

How did mean income change over that time and what were the year over year mean incomes.

Thanks

SDF

[fish gunner]

What makes you think that CCW would change the happy peaceful people of Canada into blood thirsty killers.

That was the argument against abolishing the LGR, that somehow people would be less safe and blood would run in the streets.

I think your fear of an inanimate object and responsible gun owners is irrational.

The unhappy shootfests that just coincidently randomly continually keep occuring in our southern neighbor . from middle to upper class folks ,some of whom were perfectly legal firearms owners till they weren't. I have no fear of an inamate object I have concern of those that the cluster fudge example set down south. is suggested in any way superior to our exemplar of a happy peaceful society over some miniscule eventuality that for all intensive pouposes is at the edge of irrational to think more firearms would make safer ???? Safer than what??? in the one of the top five safest countries on the planet

[expmler]

The unhappy shootfests that just coincidently randomly continually keep occuring in our southern neighbor . from middle to upper class folks ,some of whom were perfectly legal firearms owners till they weren't. I have no fear of an inamate object I have concern of those that the cluster fudge example set down south. is suggested in any way superior to our exemplar of a happy peaceful society over some miniscule eventuality that for all intensive pouposes is at the edge of irrational to think more firearms would make safer ???? Safer than what??? in the one of the top five safest countries on the planet

So are you telling me that people who own handguns now in this country would suddenly turn violent if allowed CCW?

I look at CCW as being no different than carrying insurance. The odds of your house burning down are slim but people buy insurance just in case it happens.

[fish gunner]

So are you telling me that people who own handguns now in this country would suddenly turn violent if allowed CCW?

I look at CCW as being no different than carrying insurance. The odds of your house burning down are slim but people buy insurance just in case it happens. it would increase the chances of misuse by a staggering amount . The farmer charged thread is a fine example of abuse of current laws so one can easily see the correlation. Do you wesr a helmet when you drive ?in canada you actually have a much high chance of loosing you home to fire tha being shot in the comission of a crime. With high levels of training and much hoop jumping I would support a very restrictive and limited open carry. concealment carries intent and severely limits the practicality that is the reason for carring.

[greylynx]

All Lott did in the OP referenced paper was perform a little t-test correlation.

He then showed the results of his little t-test and published them.

What is the big deal? Lott did not imply any causation from his correlations as is seen with the slimy liberal gun banning crowd.

All I can say is his little paper is elegant, And most important it will be shown to be reliable and valid.

I love how some people try to slam Lott's character with a big word dump from Wikipedia. Sort of shows how much you know about Lott and statistical methods.

Econometrics....blah blah blah. A t-test is just a simple statistical procedure that can be learned by anyone.

[expmler]

it would increase the chances of misuse by a staggering amount . The farmer charged thread is a fine example of abuse of current laws so one can easily see the correlation. Do you wesr a helmet when you drive ?in canada you actually have a much high chance of loosing you home to fire tha being shot in the comission of a crime. With high levels of training and much hoop jumping I would support a very restrictive and limited open carry. concealment carries intent and severely limits the practicality that is the reason for carring.

I would say that the farmer is a perfect example of why CCW should not be feared. The farmer had a gun and was in a dispute. Nobody got shot. It shows me that just because he was carrying a gun doesn't mean that someone was going to get shot.

I wear a helmet when I ride my motorcycle, snowmobile, quad, I don't wear one driving my truck because it obstructs my vision, I do wear my seat belt.

Your fear that somehow the presence of a gun means that the problems of everyday life are going to end up in a shooting is irrational.

[fish gunner]

I would say that the farmer is a perfect example of why CCW should not be feared. The farmer had a gun and was in a dispute. Nobody got shot. It shows me that just because he was carrying a gun doesn't mean that someone was going to get shot.

I wear a helmet when I ride my motorcycle, snowmobile, quad, I don't wear one driving my truck because it obstructs my vision, I do wear my seat belt.

Your fear that somehow the presence of a gun means that the problems of everyday life are going to end up in a shooting is irrational.

Im not sure you understand ive faced a fire arm from the wrong end on a couple of occasions without any issue of removing the offender from said firearm . I dont fear fire arms I do dislike the idea of concealed weapons of any kind . It speaks of fearfulness imo.
The farmer used the fact he was armed to escalate and in turn assault the two lads wrongly imo. Firearms turn cowards in to men of action till the situation degrades and we ebd up with a coward with a firearm bad mixture as the case in Florida with the young man getting murderd by a fellow that instigated the situation and as a result got a kicking and shot an innocent person .

[expmler]

Im not sure you understand ive faced a fire arm from the wrong end on a couple of occasions without any issue of removing the offender from said firearm . I dont fear fire arms I do dislike the idea of concealed weapons of any kind . It speaks of fearfulness imo.
The farmer used the fact he was armed to escalate and in turn assault the two lads wrongly imo. Firearms turn cowards in to men of action till the situation degrades and we ebd up with a coward with a firearm bad mixture as the case in Florida with the young man getting murderd by a fellow that instigated the situation and as a result got a kicking and shot an innocent person .

Trayvon Martin escalated the situation by physically attacking Zimmerman and paid for it.

Martin was guilty of attempted murder when he died, had he not been shot he likely would have been guilty of manslaughter.

[ali#1]

Trayvon Martin escalated the situation by physically attacking Zimmerman and paid for it.

Martin was guilty of attempted murder when he died, had he not been shot he likely would have been guilty of manslaughter.

Trayvon was being stalked for no good reason other than being black. His father lived there and he went to the store to buy skittles. Zimmerman started it by following and continuing to follow after being told not to by the police dispatcher, if he never had a gun he wouldn't have had the guts to do what he did. And in the end an innocent kid who was standing his ground got killed by a coward with a gun and a preconceived notion that he was a criminal because of the colour of his skin.

[dantonsen]

is there some sort of rising violence problem in canada that requires ccw or something? lol

I had a stranger apologize for bumping into me when I was probably more at fault. Its getting pretty dangerous out there boys and girls.... I better buy some hand guns in case some one holds a door open for me or helps pull me out of the ditch.

You never know what can happen in canada, the new neighbours might invite you over for a bbq after walking up to your door.

Shivering in my boots at the dangerous nature of canadians these days!!

[ali#1]

is there some sort of rising violence problem in canada that requires ccw or something? lol

I had a stranger apologize for bumping into me when I was probably more at fault. Its getting pretty dangerous out there boys and girls.... I better buy some hand guns in case some one holds a door open for me or helps pull me out of the ditch.

You never know what can happen in canada, the new neighbours might invite you over for a bbq after walking up to your door.

Shivering in my boots at the dangerous nature of canadians these days!!

A lot of people thing the grass is greener when blinded by political ideology.

[expmler]

Trayvon was being stalked for no good reason other than being black. His father lived there and he went to the store to buy skittles. Zimmerman started it by following and continuing to follow after being told not to by the police dispatcher, if he never had a gun he wouldn't have had the guts to do what he did. And in the end an innocent kid who was standing his ground got killed by a coward with a gun and a preconceived notion that he was a criminal because of the colour of his skin.

Martin was killed in the commission of a crime. End of story.

[6.5 shooter]

Even the anti gun people have infected this forum just read some of the above posts, yet they pass themselves off as pro gun etc......ahhh the enemy of my enemy is my friend ...... till he turns his back......

[ali#1]

Martin was killed in the commission of a crime. End of story.

The crime of being followed for being black.

[rugatika]

The crime of being followed for being black.

:thinking-006:

[rugatika]

is there some sort of rising violence problem in canada that requires ccw or something? lol

I had a stranger apologize for bumping into me when I was probably more at fault. Its getting pretty dangerous out there boys and girls.... I better buy some hand guns in case some one holds a door open for me or helps pull me out of the ditch.

You never know what can happen in canada, the new neighbours might invite you over for a bbq after walking up to your door.

Shivering in my boots at the dangerous nature of canadians these days!!

You know, I completely agree with you. I can't think of a single situation in Canada where I would feel the need to carry a handgun for protection from another person. Maybe for bear protection when I'm working in the bush, or fishing, or a 22 would be nice to have for plinking the odd grouse that hangs out too long on a trail. I would just never feel the need to go the mall with a handgun, or wherever.

Having said that, I really don't think the gov't has any business in restricting a law abiding person from doing so. When the government starts taking people's rights away, they better have an extraordinarily good reason to do so...not some ghost of a chance that something "bad" MIGHT happen.

[ali#1]

:thinking-006:

You think if he was a white kid in a suit and tie he would have been "these punks". ?.

[rugatika]

You think if he was a white kid in a suit and tie he would have been "these punks". ?.

I think if he was a white kid in a hoodie and baggy jeans out at that time of night etc he would have been "these punks", OR if he was a black kid in a suit and tie in the middle of the afternoon he wouldn't have been.

That is to say, if you want to portray yourself as a punk, you will likely be perceived as a punk no matter your colour.

George Zimmerman had a long and well documented history of being anything but a racist. The media saw the name Zimmerman, and in their racist zeal, hitched their wagons to the story of "white guy shoots black guy". A lot of people got all frothed up and fell for it.

Whether the entire encounter needed to happen OR happen the way it did, is of course all up for debate....one thing is pretty clear from Zimmerman's history is that he was not a racist. Look it up for yourself, or keep chanting "racist" if it makes you feel better about yourself.

[ali#1]

I think if he was a white kid in a hoodie and baggy jeans out at that time of night etc he would have been "these punks", OR if he was a black kid in a suit and tie in the middle of the afternoon he wouldn't have been.

That is to say, if you want to portray yourself as a punk, you will likely be perceived as a punk no matter your colour.

George Zimmerman had a long and well documented history of being anything but a racist. The media saw the name Zimmerman, and in their racist zeal, hitched their wagons to the story of "white guy shoots black guy". A lot of people got all frothed up and fell for it.

Whether the entire encounter needed to happen OR happen the way it did, is of course all up for debate....one thing is pretty clear from Zimmerman's history is that he was not a racist. Look it up for yourself, or keep chanting "racist" if it makes you feel better about yourself.

He's certainly a guy I would want having guns and patrolling my neighbourhood, just look at the incidents since Trayvon Martin.

On September 9, 2013, in Lake Mary, Florida, police responded to a 911 call by Zimmerman's estranged wife, who reported that Zimmerman had threatened her and her father with a gun and had punched her father in the face. Zimmerman was briefly detained and questioned by police.No gun was found at the scene. Police took a broken iPad from the scene for examination of a video recording of the incident to determine whether to press charges against either Zimmerman or his wife.His wife declined to press charges and said that she had not actually seen a gun but had assumed Zimmerman had had a gun from his stance and the way he was putting his hand in his shirt. She said, in a subsequent interview on the Today show, "In hindsight I should've [pressed charges], and I really regret that, but I'm on probation and the officers made it very clear that day if I pressed charges we were all going to go to jail and I would've been the only one to stay there."After determining that the iPad video could not be recovered, the Lake Mary police department announced they would not be pressing charges against Zimmerman, his wife, or her father.

On November 18, 2013, Zimmerman's girlfriend called the police alleging that after she had asked Zimmerman to leave her home, he had pointed a shotgun at her and begun breaking her belongings.When the police arrived on the scene and met her outside, Zimmerman initially would not let them inside or speak with them and instead called 911 himself, saying that he had nothing to say to the police and just wanted "everyone to know the truth".[35][36] The police subsequently reported that Zimmerman had barricaded himself inside the apartment before they had made their way inside and arrested him.He was charged with aggravated assault with a weapon – a felony – as well as domestic violence battery and criminal mischief.Zimmerman was initially represented by Seminole County public defenders, who said that he was indigent with about $2.5 million in debt,but he subsequently retained the services of Jayne Weintraub, a south Florida attorney who had done legal commentary on cable television.On December 6, Zimmerman's girlfriend said in an affidavit filed with the court by Zimmerman's attorney that she believed the police had misinterpreted her and that she may have misstated certain facts when she had earlier called the police to report Zimmerman.She asked that the charges against Zimmerman be dropped and that the restraining order barring him from seeing her be lifted, after which prosecutors said that they would no longer be pursuing a case against him.



What a well adjusted individual who I would want to live next to how about you ?

[expmler]

He's certainly a guy I would want having guns and patrolling my neighbourhood, just look at the incidents since Trayvon Martin.

On September 9, 2013, in Lake Mary, Florida, police responded to a 911 call by Zimmerman's estranged wife, who reported that Zimmerman had threatened her and her father with a gun and had punched her father in the face. Zimmerman was briefly detained and questioned by police.No gun was found at the scene. Police took a broken iPad from the scene for examination of a video recording of the incident to determine whether to press charges against either Zimmerman or his wife.His wife declined to press charges and said that she had not actually seen a gun but had assumed Zimmerman had had a gun from his stance and the way he was putting his hand in his shirt. She said, in a subsequent interview on the Today show, "In hindsight I should've [pressed charges], and I really regret that, but I'm on probation and the officers made it very clear that day if I pressed charges we were all going to go to jail and I would've been the only one to stay there."After determining that the iPad video could not be recovered, the Lake Mary police department announced they would not be pressing charges against Zimmerman, his wife, or her father.

On November 18, 2013, Zimmerman's girlfriend called the police alleging that after she had asked Zimmerman to leave her home, he had pointed a shotgun at her and begun breaking her belongings.When the police arrived on the scene and met her outside, Zimmerman initially would not let them inside or speak with them and instead called 911 himself, saying that he had nothing to say to the police and just wanted "everyone to know the truth".[35][36] The police subsequently reported that Zimmerman had barricaded himself inside the apartment before they had made their way inside and arrested him.He was charged with aggravated assault with a weapon – a felony – as well as domestic violence battery and criminal mischief.Zimmerman was initially represented by Seminole County public defenders, who said that he was indigent with about $2.5 million in debt,but he subsequently retained the services of Jayne Weintraub, a south Florida attorney who had done legal commentary on cable television.On December 6, Zimmerman's girlfriend said in an affidavit filed with the court by Zimmerman's attorney that she believed the police had misinterpreted her and that she may have misstated certain facts when she had earlier called the police to report Zimmerman.She asked that the charges against Zimmerman be dropped and that the restraining order barring him from seeing her be lifted, after which prosecutors said that they would no longer be pursuing a case against him.



What a well adjusted individual who I would want to live next to how about you ?

So his girlfriend lied to cops twice. How does that make him racist.

[ali#1]

So his girlfriend lied to cops twice. How does that make him racist.

Barricading yourself in isn't something I think of a well adjusted individual. This wasn't his only run in with the law either.

Maybe he's racist maybe not I don't know bit I do know he followed a black kid because he looked suspicious. The kid wasn't doing anything other than walking with skittles, maybe he thought he was suspicious because of something else besides his skin colour but I have my doubts.

[score]

Trayvon was being stalked for no good reason other than being black. His father lived there and he went to the store to buy skittles. Zimmerman started it by following and continuing to follow after being told not to by the police dispatcher, if he never had a gun he wouldn't have had the guts to do what he did. And in the end an innocent kid who was standing his ground got killed by a coward with a gun and a preconceived notion that he was a criminal because of the colour of his skin.

Were you there? This and the other "analyses" you are tossing about sound like direct transcripts from CNN....you talk like you *know* what happened to a tee. But you don't have any idea what really took place in fact.

[score]

Oh...and gooooo Georgia

[expmler]

Barricading yourself in isn't something I think of a well adjusted individual. This wasn't his only run in with the law either.

Maybe he's racist maybe not I don't know bit I do know he followed a black kid because he looked suspicious. The kid wasn't doing anything other than walking with skittles, maybe he thought he was suspicious because of something else besides his skin colour but I have my doubts.

Martin thought it was OK to violently attack someone he was suspicious of, "creepy ass cracker".

Wouldn't want him living next door to me.

[rugatika]

I don't know

Stick to that.

[ali#1]

Martin thought it was OK to violently attack someone he was suspicious of, "creepy ass cracker".

Wouldn't want him living next door to me.

The guy was following him was Martin supposed to run away ? Does he not have a right to stand his ground from a guy following him with a gun ?.

[ali#1]

Were you there? This and the other "analyses" you are tossing about sound like direct transcripts from CNN....you talk like you *know* what happened to a tee. But you don't have any idea what really took place in fact.

I watched the case and read the transcripts, a coward rental cop follows a black kid for no reason , catches a beatdown and pulls his gun and kills him.

[score]

^ he may have that right sure, but no one with any intelligence, honestly in fear for his life, would chose to exercise that right at that point in time.

[score]

I watched the case and read the transcripts, a coward rental cop follows a black kid for no reason , catches a beatdown and pulls his gun and kills him.

and was found not guilty......

[rugatika]

The guy was following him was Martin supposed to run away ? Does he not have a right to stand his ground from a guy following him with a gun ?.

Well he stood his ground against that "creepy ass cracker". Good for him. Skittles....ha...http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/06/what_the_media_choose_not_to_know_about_trayvon.ht ml

[ali#1]

and was found not guilty......

Dead men can't testify in court.

Lots of bad laws are on the books. Segregation jim crow laws were th law of the land in the south for decades. Doesn't make it a good law.

Zimmerman seems like a normal guy though how many times has he pulled guns on people ?

[ali#1]

Well he stood his ground against that "creepy ass cracker". Good for him. Skittles....ha...http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/06/what_the_media_choose_not_to_know_about_trayvon.ht ml

Why did Zimmerman follow him ?

[rugatika]

Why did Zimmerman follow him ?


Wow, for a guy that claims to know this case inside out and has read all the transcripts from the trial, you sure don't know very much about the case. I'll help you out though, because I'm a nice guy. But really, you should start another thread on this case if you want to know more about it. I feel as though we're getting off into the weeds for this thread.

4) Did George Zimmerman continue to follow Trayvon Martin after a police dispatcher told him not to do so? Keep in mind that George Zimmerman was a neighborhood watch captain and there had been 8 burglaries there in the preceding 14 months. Additionally, most of those crimes were committed by young black males. Furthermore, while there are no indications that Martin was doing anything illegal when he ran into Zimmerman, it's worth noting he had been suspended from school for possession of a "'burglary tool' and a bag full of women's jewelry." Given all of that, it doesn't seem remarkable that Zimmerman may have initially followed Martin.
However, after calling the police and reporting what he believed was Martin's suspicious behavior, the 911 dispatcher told Zimmerman he didn't need to continue to follow Martin. It's worth noting that the dispatcher had no legal authority to tell Zimmerman what to do and even if Zimmerman continued following Martin, it wouldn't be a crime. Regardless, Zimmerman says he obeyed and began walking back to his truck to meet with a police officer when Martin confronted and then attacked him shortly afterwards. While it's impossible to prove one way or the other with the evidence available, Zimmerman's story is consistent with the facts presented at trial.
http://townhall.com/columnists/johnhawkins/2013/07/13/answering-7-key-questions-about-the-george-zimmerman-trial-n1639838/page/full


So Trayvon was a kid on drugs, had been kicked out of school for possession of burglary tools and a bag of women's jewelry and was out late at night in a strange to him neighbourhood, getting 2 out of the 3 necessary ingredients to make the drug "lean" or "sizzurp".

[canadiantdi]

The crime of being followed for being black.

It's not illegal to follow someone you find suspicious. It is illegal though to attack someone who is legally following you.

[ali#1]

Wow, for a guy that claims to know this case inside out and has read all the transcripts from the trial, you sure don't know very much about the case. I'll help you out though, because I'm a nice guy. But really, you should start another thread on this case if you want to know more about it. I feel as though we're getting off into the weeds for this thread.

4) Did George Zimmerman continue to follow Trayvon Martin after a police dispatcher told him not to do so? Keep in mind that George Zimmerman was a neighborhood watch captain and there had been 8 burglaries there in the preceding 14 months. Additionally, most of those crimes were committed by young black males. Furthermore, while there are no indications that Martin was doing anything illegal when he ran into Zimmerman, it's worth noting he had been suspended from school for possession of a "'burglary tool' and a bag full of women's jewelry." Given all of that, it doesn't seem remarkable that Zimmerman may have initially followed Martin.
However, after calling the police and reporting what he believed was Martin's suspicious behavior, the 911 dispatcher told Zimmerman he didn't need to continue to follow Martin. It's worth noting that the dispatcher had no legal authority to tell Zimmerman what to do and even if Zimmerman continued following Martin, it wouldn't be a crime. Regardless, Zimmerman says he obeyed and began walking back to his truck to meet with a police officer when Martin confronted and then attacked him shortly afterwards. While it's impossible to prove one way or the other with the evidence available, Zimmerman's story is consistent with the facts presented at trial.
http://townhall.com/columnists/johnhawkins/2013/07/13/answering-7-key-questions-about-the-george-zimmerman-trial-n1639838/page/full


So Trayvon was a kid on drugs, had been kicked out of school for possession of burglary tools and a bag of women's jewelry and was out late at night in a strange to him neighbourhood, getting 2 out of the 3 necessary ingredients to make the drug "lean" or "sizzurp".

In sorry I missed the part where you said Zimmerman was a police officer.

[canadiantdi]

In sorry I missed the part where you said Zimmerman was a police officer.

Crap! Did he need to be one for some reason?!?

[rugatika]

In sorry I missed the part where you said Zimmerman was a police officer.

Do you know why you missed it? Because I never said it! It has zero bearing on anything. Zero.

Talk about letting your ideology get in the way of reasoning. You want so badly to believe that there are white racists lurking behind every tree so that you can feel better about yourself for pointing them out....real or imagined.

"Look everyone! I called that guy a racist. I'm a good guy aren't I? Yeah. Racist!!!!"

[ali#1]

Crap! Did he need to be one for some reason?!?

To follow and confront someone for being suspicious maybe.

Or we could get rental cops with itchy trigger fingers to do it and see how that works out for us.

[ali#1]

Do you know why you missed it? Because I never said it! It has zero bearing on anything. Zero.

Talk about letting your ideology get in the way of reasoning. You want so badly to believe that there are white racists lurking behind every tree so that you can feel better about yourself for pointing them out....real or imagined.

"Look everyone! I called that guy a racist. I'm a good guy aren't I? Yeah. Racist!!!!"

I dont need to imagine anything, Zimmerman was motivated by race and took the law I to his own hands because he had a gun, too bad he couldn't take his beating that he started like a man instead of resorting to pulling a weapon when he was losing. I guess Martin shouldn't have the same right to stand his own ground after having a guy follow him for no reason and ambush him. If your looking for a reason to promote ccw Zimmerman is a poor example.

[rugatika]

Maybe he's racist maybe not I don't know

:sEm_oops2:

[rugatika]

I dont need to imagine anything, Zimmerman was motivated by race .

:thinking-006:

[Moosejuice]

In sorry I missed the part where you said Zimmerman was a police officer.

Or a mind reader.
Or in the know on the kids history.

This kids history has nothing to do with whether the act was right or not anyway.
And that history is largely unproven allegations.

Why don't we talk about Z-mans history or what he has been up to since all of this happened.

All I know is that if some creepy guy tailed me home I'd probably turn around and step up on him before I opened my front door but maybe not in Florida I guess.

[Moosejuice]

I only posted the summary the actual report is 18 pages.


http://crimepreventionresearchcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Concealed-Carry-Permit-Holders-Across-the-United-States.pdf


The last comprehensive report on the number of concealed carry permit holders was completed three years ago by the U.S. Government Accountability Office and showed that 8 million Americans held a concealed carry permit.
CPRC collected the most recent data available for each state and the results showed that there are total of 11,113,013 Americans who currently hold concealed carry permits representing 4.8 percent of the total population.
The number of concealed carry permit holders is likely much higher than 11.1 million because numbers are not available for all states that issue permits, such as New York. Additionally, four states and the majority of Montana do not require that residents have a concealed handgun permit to carry within the state so the number of residents who carry a concealed weapon is not recorded.
The percent of the adult population with concealed handgun permits is determined by how difficult it is to get the permits, how long the permits have been available, and whether the government has discretion over who gets the permit.
The report also examines the violent crime rate in relation to the rising percentage of the adult population with concealed carry permits. Between 2007 and the preliminary estimates for 2013, murder rates have fallen from 5.6 to 4.4 per 100,000 – a 22 percent drop in the murder rate at the same time that the percentage of the adult population with permits soared by 130 percent. Overall violent crime also fell by 22 percent over that period of time

What were violent crime rates doing before those new laws came into effect?

As I recall the main thrust of our argument to get rid of the LGR was that it idid not result in a reduction in crime as claimed by the antis because violent crime rates had already been falling in Canada and across N. America for decades before it came into effect and---- at a rate consistent to the rate at which they fell during the registry.

IOW Lotts numbers mean nothing unless they can be measured against all relevant trends.

[canadiantdi]

To follow and confront someone for being suspicious maybe.

Or we could get rental cops with itchy trigger fingers to do it and see how that works out for us.

No maybe, he didn't have to be.

Seems like he took a beating before he pulled the trigger.. itchy fingers? Maybe, we'll never know for sure, but the evidence and his story line up. It's possible he shot the kid after the beat down and he had the opportunity to leave... but proving that??

[score]

So ali, given that this thread is about CCW and you have been going on about the Zimmerman case, and knowing your stance on the CCW issue, is it your contention then that the institution of CCW anywhere would result in a rash of race killings by drooling, gun toting yahoos? if so, no evidence exists that would substantiate that. In fact it's just the opposite, so what's your point?

Your arguments against CCW in this case are as invalid as any other anti. IMO you base your arguments on emotions that in fact have zero relevance to the debate. The same old topics always come up when CCW is discussed. They never hold water.

I don't know what you are afraid of. Not everyone that can carry carries. No one would force you to do so and in kind, you have no right to tell someone else what their choices should be.....based on your perceptions and world view.

Furthermore, Dr. Lott is highly regarded, has done extensive research and is certainly qualified to speak about this issue.

[JamesB]

What is the socio economics differences between states and counties? Please pull 3 that show CC helped...versus 3 that suggest CC would of helped. No disputing your belief in the data as to what it tells you. I am just looking broader to show that what you think you see could be a result of different drivers.

So pull some socio economic drivers for the counties in question.

How did mean income change over that time and what were the year over year mean incomes.

Thanks

SDF

Now you are not only ignoring what was written in the report but also what I wrote. You stated that the murder rate was higher in the US than Canada, and that it was dropping in both countries. I replied that it was higher in the US for reasons other than firearm ownership. If you have any evidence to suggest otherwise feel free to produce it.
If you are asking if Lott corrected for economic or other factors in his latest study, why don't you read it? My point was simply that he demonstrated an increased rate of reduction in states that had higher levers of CCW. So either his thesis is correct and CCW has a positive effect, or in the worst case there is no correlation between gun laws and gun crimes.

[riden]

I watched the case and read the transcripts, a coward rental cop follows a black kid for no reason , catches a beatdown and pulls his gun and kills him.

You really don't sound like you read the transcripts.

[ali#1]

So ali, given that this thread is about CCW and you have been going on about the Zimmerman case, and knowing your stance on the CCW issue, is it your contention then that the institution of CCW anywhere would result in a rash of race killings by drooling, gun toting yahoos? if so, no evidence exists that would substantiate that. In fact it's just the opposite, so what's your point?

Your arguments against CCW in this case are as invalid as any other anti. IMO you base your arguments on emotions that in fact have zero relevance to the debate. The same old topics always come up when CCW is discussed. They never hold water.

I don't know what you are afraid of. Not everyone that can carry carries. No one would force you to do so and in kind, you have no right to tell someone else what their choices should be.....based on your perceptions and world view.

Furthermore, Dr. Lott is highly regarded, has done extensive research and is certainly qualified to speak about this issue.

If Zimmerman didn't have a gun he wouldn't have had the guts to follow anybody. It gives "tough" guys extra courage knowing if they start losing they can pull a gun and equalize the situation.

If having ccw makes for lower crime rates why does the us have one of the highest murder rates in the first world, if you equate gun ownership to crime rate it would seem the more guns the more crime.

Dr Lott is paid for by the Olin corporation.

[greylynx]

What does a t-test have to do with who pays you.:sHa_sarcasticlol:

Design your own.

As for Zimmerman. Ever notice how the liberal hand wringing and screaming occurs when there is a "man bites dog" story and not the reverse?

What if this criminal had killed Zimmerman?

Nothing would have happened. The liberal media would have been quiet.

But this story allows for racism, guns, and CCW, to be made into a straw man to be blown down by every stinkin liberal in site including BO, and even that Jew hating Reverend Sharpton.

[ali#1]

What does a t-test have to do with who pays you.:sHa_sarcasticlol:

Design your own.

As for Zimmerman. Ever notice how the liberal hand wringing and screaming occurs when there is a "man bites dog" story and not the reverse?

What if this criminal had killed Zimmerman?

Nothing would have happened. The liberal media would have been quiet.

But this story allows for racism, guns, and CCW, to be made into a straw man to be blown down by every stinkin liberal in site including BO, and even that Jew hating Reverend Sharpton.

In sure you would have a different opinion if al gore paid for a climate study. Of course it matters who pays for the study.

What criminal the kid trying to defend himself from a stalker with a gun ? I guess black kids don't have a right to defend themselves against crazy people who follow and harass them. Glad to see the pro ccw crowd has latched onto the Zimmerman example as it will do nothing to help their cause in any way.

[rugatika]

In sure you would have a different opinion if al gore paid for a climate study. Of course it matters who pays for the study.

What criminal the kid trying to defend himself from a stalker with a gun ? I guess black kids don't have a right to defend themselves against crazy people who follow and harass them. Glad to see the pro ccw crowd has latched onto the Zimmerman example as it will do nothing to help their cause in any way.


Get some help.

[ali#1]

Get some help.

Don't need any I live in sanity where you call A coward with a gun what he is, and I don't live in fear of my fellow man, we live in a great country that's almost violence free, I have been to some of the slummiest places in canda like east Hastings and young street and never even felt the urge to carry a hand gun. Must be a scary place for the people on the mean streets of suburban edmonton and Calgary.

[hillbillyreefer]

I wish you guys would quit quoting Ali. He is on my ignore list for a reason, being anti gun, and a racist Hispanic hater.

[ali#1]

I wish you guys would quit quoting Ali. He is on my ignore list for a reason, being anti gun, and a racist Hispanic hater.

Racist Hispanic hater ?

:thinking-006:

[fish gunner]

Racist Hispanic hater ?

:thinking-006:

Now he can read it lol

[score]

Now he can read it lol

I take a siesta from around here and then come back and find that you are still an *******. one of a few....................................

[score]

Now he can read it lol

Grow up punk.......................you're sole purpose is to raise **** and to instigate. You be da man

[ali#1]

Now he can read it lol

He blocked me I didn't block him :scared0018:

[BeeGuy]

In sure you would have a different opinion if al gore paid for a climate study. Of course it matters who pays for the study.

What criminal the kid trying to defend himself from a stalker with a gun ? I guess black kids don't have a right to defend themselves against crazy people who follow and harass them. Glad to see the pro ccw crowd has latched onto the Zimmerman example as it will do nothing to help their cause in any way.

How true it is.

[BeeGuy]

He blocked me I didn't block him :scared0018:

Stand your ground Ali.

[ali#1]

Stand your ground Ali.

Lol

[fish gunner]

Grow up punk.......................you're sole purpose is to raise **** and to instigate. You be da man

Thank you for you kind words ,didnt even know you were missing one of the many ..........:sHa_sarcasticlol:

[bigbadjoe108]

I think with the requisite training any person young, old, male, female, black white or green should be allowed to carry.

I don't hope for these things for myself, but for women who have to jog or walk through crappy neighborhoods, old people who like to walk at night when it is not too hot, etc.

Calgary has been pretty safe, but lately I know of at least two stranger sex assaults on women which may or may not be prevented with CCW, but obviously the lack of it didn't help at all.

I know the fear is that too many 5.11 tuxedo wearing mall ninjas will start packing, but if there is a good, solid carry course available, I would love for some people I know to take it.