What did this girl have that she needed?

[pErvinalia]

He's not necessarily wrong, because correlation doesn't equal causation. For the nth time.

[Hermit]

He's not necessarily wrong, because correlation doesn't equal causation. For the nth time.

You know that. I know that. Seth knows that. That said, I just keep telling everybody about the criterion by which he distinguishes one from the other.

[Blind groper]

I have had to specify my point a little more closely. The actual number of guns in the USA is not the point. It is the number of gun owners that determines how many murders occur. More gun owners means more murders. Fewer gun owners mean fewer murders.

The last 35 years has seen a slow reduction in the percentage of Americans who own guns, and a reduction in the murder rate at the same time.

The main cause for this drop in murders, however, is the reduction in the percentage of youths as part of the population, because young men commit more violent crimes than older men.

However, the fact that the number of gun owners is getting less shows that there is no correlation as Seth suggests. In fact, there is a negative correlation between number of guns and number of murders. But more importantly, there is a clear cut positive correlation between the drop in numbers of gun owners, and numbers of murders.

[Seth]

I have had to specify my point a little more closely. The actual number of guns in the USA is not the point.

Goalpost shift! Your argument's been destroyed so now you're trying to weasel and obfuscate.

It is the number of gun owners that determines how many murders occur. More gun owners means more murders. Fewer gun owners mean fewer murders.

The last 35 years has seen a slow reduction in the percentage of Americans who own guns, and a reduction in the murder rate at the same time.

Wrong. In the last 35 years the number of Americans who not only own guns, but who have obtained permits to carry them concealed in public has gone from a very small and indeterminate number to an enormous number without a corresponding increase in murder.

This website claims that at least 11,522,647 concealed carry permits have been issued in the US. It lists a state-by-state total. Data is provided by users, so it may or may not be accurate due to the constantly changing numbers.

Here's a CBS report from last year confirming that in excess of 11 million law-abiding citizens have CCW permits and that the violent crime rate continues to drop. More guns, less crime, you lose.

Report: Number Of Concealed Carry Permits Surges As Violent Crime Rate Drops
July 10, 2014 10:30 AM
View Comments
A surge in the number of Americans with permits to carry concealed weapons coincides with a significant drop in violent crime in the U.S. . (credit: Quinn Rooney/Getty Images)

A surge in the number of Americans with permits to carry concealed weapons coincides with a significant drop in violent crime in the U.S. . (credit: Quinn Rooney/Getty Images)
Related Tags:
concealed carry permits, CPRC, Crime Prevention Research Center, gun permit

WASHINGTON (CBS DC) – A surge in the number of Americans with permits to carry concealed weapons coincides with a significant drop in violent crime in the U.S., a new report finds.

The “Concealed Carry Permit Holders Across the United States” report from the Crime Prevention Research Center released Wednesday analyzed parallels between a 22 percent drop in the overall violent crime rate in the same time period in which the percentage of the adult population with concealed carry permits soared by 130 percent.

The report finds that 11.1 million Americans now have permits to carry concealed weapons, which are up from 4.5 million in 2007. This 146 percent increase parallels a nearly one-quarter (22 percent) drop in both murder and violent crime rates during the same time period.

Regarding right-to-carry laws as a form of deterrence to violent crime, the study authors note that the large majority of peer-reviewed academic studies conclude that permitted concealed handguns reduce violent crime. Those debates center around those who claim concealed handgun permits reduce crime and those who say it has no effect. The CPRC report focuses on states that allow right-to-carry permits and states that don’t require permits for concealed weapons rather than just the amount of permits.

Additionally, the report notes that the number of concealed carry permit holders “is likely much higher than 11.1 million,” because numbers are not available for all statues that issue permits, such as New York. And four states and the vast majority of Montana don’t require residents to have a permit to carry concealed handguns within the state – most of those permits are issued to carry outside the state.

Using that foundation, the report finds that the six states that allow people to carry concealed handguns without a permit have much lower murder and violent crime rates than the six states with the lowest permit rates. Additionally, the murder rate is nearly one-quarter (23 percent) lower in states not requiring permits, and the violent crime rate is 12 percent lower.

The murder and violent crime rates are lower in the 25 states with the highest permit rates compared to the rest of the U.S.

“When you allow people to carry concealed handguns, you see changes in the behavior of criminals,” John R. Lott, the center’s president, told Fox News. “Some criminals stop committing crimes, others move on to crimes in which they don’t come into contact with victims and others actually move to areas where they have less fear of being confronted by armed victims.”

Although cautioning that nationwide “simple cross-sectional comparisons” can present misleading data, the report used new state -level permit data from 2007 on to determine that for each one percentage point increase in the percent of the U.S. adult population holding permits is roughly paralleled with a 1.4 percent drop in the murder rate.

“We found that the size of the drop [in crime] is directly related to the percentage of the population with permits,” Lott told Fox News.

A few highlights of the concealed carry data by state: Florida has issued the most concealed carry permits at 1.28 million, although South Dakota, Indiana and Alabama all sit above 10 percent for the state’s population that holds concealed carry permits. Eight percent or more of the population in 10 states hold concealed carry permits.

The number of permits increased by roughly 2.7 million permit holders in 1999 to 4.6 million eight years later in 2007. But in December 2011, the federal Government Accountability Office estimated that there were at least 8 million concealed handgun permits, and by June 2014 that number had increased beyond 11.1 million U.S. adults.

The CPRC notes on its website that much of the academic research on gun data is supported by foundations and funding that are more interested in researching gun violence and gun control legislation rather than purely scientific analysis of guns, crime and public safety. In addition to founding the CPRC, Dr. John R. Lott, Jr. is an economist, crime expert and author of books including “More Guns, Less Crime,” “The Bias Against Guns,” and “Freedomnomics.”

The main cause for this drop in murders, however, is the reduction in the percentage of youths as part of the population, because young men commit more violent crimes than older men.

Irrelevant and utterly unsupported ex-recto assertion. More guns, less crime. Fact. Get over it.

However, the fact that the number of gun owners is getting less shows that there is no correlation as Seth suggests. In fact, there is a negative correlation between number of guns and number of murders. But more importantly, there is a clear cut positive correlation between the drop in numbers of gun owners, and numbers of murders.

How do you explain the 11 million plus more people packing heat in the US and the dropping violent crime rate? You can't and you know it. You're really struggling and scratching to try to support your thesis and you're failing miserably.

More guns, less crime. Fact.

[Blind groper]

Seth

When you accused me of shifting goalposts, in a sense you were right. However, it is not goalpost shifting so much as moving with the evidence, which is something you are incapable of doing. When new evidence appears that is sufficiently credible, I accept it, and adjust my view accordingly. It is called being flexible.

In this case, the new evidence was that the number of guns is less important than the number of gun wielders. That is so much common sense that I have no problem with it, though I predict that you do, since your opinions suffer from atherosclerosis.

The total number of guns in the USA is not the most important factor. It is the total number of people with guns.

So I change my assertion from 'more guns, more gun crime' to an updated assertion of 'more gun wielders means more gun crime'.

Since it now appears from the University of Chicago annual surveys that the number of gun wielders is diminishing, that ties in rather well with a reduced murder rate (though that is only part of the story).

Your hero, John Lott, with his more guns, less crime hypothesis is the greatest liar in this arena.

[Seth]

Seth

When you accused me of shifting goalposts, in a sense you were right.

In a sense? Horseshit, you were and have absolutely been kicking the goalposts all over the field as I destroy every one of your specious arguments.

However, it is not goalpost shifting so much as moving with the evidence, which is something you are incapable of doing. When new evidence appears that is sufficiently credible, I accept it, and adjust my view accordingly. It is called being flexible.

In your case it's called "bias" and "bigotry." The actual evidence is perfectly clear: more than 11 million people now carrying guns in public and no crime increase by those persons has even been alleged.

In this case, the new evidence was that the number of guns is less important than the number of gun wielders.

I kinda figure you ought to have known that a long, long time ago. Evidently you didn't, so you've learned something anyway, for all the good it's done you.

That is so much common sense that I have no problem with it, though I predict that you do, since your opinions suffer from atherosclerosis.

It is common sense, which until now you have been entirely bereft of.

The total number of guns in the USA is not the most important factor. It is the total number of people with guns.

Actually, you're still wrong. It's more complex and nuanced than that. The actual most important factor is specifically who possesses guns that are used for the purposes of committing crimes.

So I change my assertion from 'more guns, more gun crime' to an updated assertion of 'more gun wielders means more gun crime'.

And, you're still demonstrably wrong.

Since it now appears from the University of Chicago annual surveys that the number of gun wielders is diminishing, that ties in rather well with a reduced murder rate (though that is only part of the story).

Sadly for your argument, at least 11 million (and more likely upwards of 25 million) more people are actually carrying guns concealed in public, as opposed to just owning a gun.

You see, when you say "gun wielders" you are again creating red herrings out of strawmen. You refuse to distinguish between those who "wield guns" in socially and legally appropriate ways and never commit crimes or have accidents and those who wield guns for the purposes of committing crimes or those who wield guns carelessly or negligently.

Trying to conflate all those different categories of gun wielders is, as is very usual for you, an ignorant and childish attempt to shoehorn your pre-determined conclusion into the facts rather than allowing the facts to determine the conclusion. That's called "bias."

A fact that we can state with a good deal of certainty is that there are now more legally-armed citizens, who are orders of magnitude less likely to commit any crime than even your average unarmed citizen, than there are armed criminals in the US. This is a good thing.

Your hero, John Lott, with his more guns, less crime hypothesis is the greatest liar in this arena.

Except of course that the simple calculus involved doesn't come from Lott, it comes from the DOJ and the FBI. More guns (FBI), less crime (DOJ)

Quod erat demonstrandum

You lose.

[hackenslash]

Never try to argue with a fuckwit. He'll drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

Actually, I argue with fuckwits all the time, present company included, and I find it endlessly amusing.

That's because you're already at that level, fuckwit, and always have been.

[Seth]

Never try to argue with a fuckwit. He'll drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

Actually, I argue with fuckwits all the time, present company included, and I find it endlessly amusing.

That's because you're already at that level, fuckwit, and always have been.

Nah, I just enjoy slumming with the proletarian useful idiots, it's so much fun baiting them and watching them foam ineffectively at the mouth.

Would you like a napkin for that spit all over your screen?

[Blind groper]

Once more Seth produces the intellectual garbage promulgated by Lott, and ignores the updated studies that show Lott was wrong. I donot know why I bother.

[Seth]

Once more Seth produces the intellectual garbage promulgated by Lott, and ignores the updated studies that show Lott was wrong. I donot know why I bother.

Except that Lott is not wrong, and your studies have been "updated" and shown to be false and misleading.

More guns, less crime. Fact.

I don't know why you bother either. You could just stop wasting everybody's time if you'd just STFU about things you know nothing about.

[Blind groper]

Seth

Your comments would carry more weight if you had shown you knew what you were saying. But you have repeatedly shown you have no understanding at all for the mathematical discipline of statistics.

[Seth]

Seth

Your comments would carry more weight if you had shown you knew what you were saying. But you have repeatedly shown you have no understanding at all for the mathematical discipline of statistics.

Pot, kettle, black.

More guns, less crime. Fact.

[pErvinalia]

Once more Seth produces the intellectual garbage promulgated by Lott, and ignores the updated studies that show Lott was wrong. I donot know why I bother.

Except that Lott is not wrong, and your studies have been "updated" and shown to be false and misleading.

More guns, less crime. Fact.

I don't know why you bother either. You could just stop wasting everybody's time if you'd just STFU about things you know nothing about.

You clearly don't know about the difference between correlation and causation.

[pErvinalia]

Seth

Your comments would carry more weight if you had shown you knew what you were saying. But you have repeatedly shown you have no understanding at all for the mathematical discipline of statistics.

Pot, kettle, black.

More guns, less crime. Fact.

Moar cheese, less crime. FACT!

[Seth]

Once more Seth produces the intellectual garbage promulgated by Lott, and ignores the updated studies that show Lott was wrong. I donot know why I bother.

Except that Lott is not wrong, and your studies have been "updated" and shown to be false and misleading.

More guns, less crime. Fact.

I don't know why you bother either. You could just stop wasting everybody's time if you'd just STFU about things you know nothing about.

You clearly don't know about the difference between correlation and causation.

Don't care about stinky causation, correlation is adequate to refute the anti-gun argument. If more guns does not produce more crime, which it doesn't, then there is no need to restrict guns in the hands of law-abiding citizens. Anyone maintaining that there is such a need is merely a hoplophobe who puts ideology over facts.