IMI Systems Quote of the Day: Concealed Carry Killers?

“Concealed carry permit holders are supposed to be the ‘good guys with guns,’ but our research shows that far too often the opposite is true. Permit holders don’t stop mass shootings, they commit them. They don’t help protect law enforcement officers, they kill them.” – VPC Legislative Director Kristen Rand in More Than 1,100 Non-Self Defense Deaths Involving Concealed Carry Killers Since 2007, Latest VPC Research Shows [via commondreams.org]

IMI-Israeli Ammo

comments

  1. avatar Weskyvet says:

    How does one fit so much B.S. into one statement without their pants literally catching fire?

    1. avatar Timothy says:

      Let’s break this down using total gun deaths since 2007 as a baseline. The CDC gives an average of 11,000 firearm homicides for 2014. That’s 110,000(ish) for a 10 year period. Probably higher as violent crime of all kinds is on the decline.

      1100 deaths, but only 310ish convictions.

      310 divided by 110,000 = 0.002% of all murders are committed by CCW holders. 6% of the population commits 0.002% of all murders. VPC has proven that a conceal carry holder is literally three hundred TIMES less likely to kill you than an average citizen. That means if you were in a room with 300 CCWs and ONE! non CCW person and you get murdered. Odds are 50/50 it was the one non CCW holder person.

      1. avatar Timothy says:

        I see my math was a bit hasty. Should be 6% of the population with their CCW commits 0.2% of murders. 30 TIMES LESS LIKELY TO KILL YOU than the average citizen.

        1. avatar Norincojay says:

          Its ok people always forget to move the decimal two places when you convert to a percent.

    2. avatar BierceAmbrose says:

      They’re trained professionals. Do not try this at home.

    3. avatar henry bowman says:

      CCW holders need to sue these people for slander, its the only why to stop them from spewing lies.

      1. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

        It’s not the only way. Hell, it’s not even the most preferable way. But it is the most non violent way, so it should be considered.

  2. avatar DrewR55 says:

    Yeah, sixteen million-ish permit holders and 1,100 ‘non-self defense’ deaths over ten years. Based upon those numbers I’d feel safer surrounded by a bunch CC permit holders then any other demographic.

    VPC can f’ off.

    1. avatar The Duke says:

      Yeah that’s about 0.007% of CCW holders being bad guys. And we all know the other 99.993% are obviously just as bad

    2. avatar Mark says:

      Keep in mind that they also include homicides where the permit holder has been charged and not yet convicted.
      Anything to keep those numbers up.

      1. avatar NYC2AZ says:

        They also include suicides of permit holders. If memory serves, the person didn’t even have to kill themselves with a gun to be included, they just had to have a permit.

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          Reading the entire linked article, I think the notation about suicide is that the offender was not arrested and tried, but punked-out to avoid being tried. Did not conclude the article was discussing suicides not related to CCW offenders.

        2. avatar NYC2AZ says:

          It makes the argument weak. If the cause is just, why lie/inflate/exaggerate?

        3. avatar Sam I Am says:

          The article was simply placing CCW holders-gone-rogue in categories of outcome. Not strengthening, or diminishing VPCs argument. Unless….VPC wanted to show that the rogue CCW holders were cowardly deplorables as well.

    3. avatar BLoving says:

      Curious to know how many of those 1100 took their own lives. Pretty safe bet those were counted as examples of CCW violence.

      1. avatar Jonathan - Houston says:

        From the article, 399 were suicide-only.

        I’d be curious to know how many of the criminal homicides were even committed with firearms. Really, if someone murders someone with a pick ax, what difference does it make whether the killer has a concealed carry permit, or a library card, a subway tokens, or a subscription to “Cat Fancy” magazine?

        Not that any of the stats matter, anyway. My right to armed self-defense is my own, regardless what some murderer does. What’s more, all of my rights are my own, regardless what anyone else does or how they abuse others.

        1. avatar Sam I Am says:

          “what difference does it make whether the killer has a concealed carry permit, or a library card, a subway tokens, or a subscription to “Cat Fancy” magazine?”

          Simple….”proves” gun owners, and CCW holders in particular, are not of proper character to be allowed to possess firearms. Just because the CCW holder used a hammer to kill someone, we cannot trust them with firearms, right? CCW publicize that they are the most law-abiding group in the country, but their actions prove otherwise. Oh yeah, and there are only 224 legitimate DGUs in 2017. Meaning that over the ten years of the reporting period, one could estimate that there were only 2240 DGUs where a life was saved. Ooohhhhh…uhm….

        2. avatar Frank says:

          ” Oh yeah, and there are only 224 legitimate DGUs in 2017″

          What is legitimate, Sam I Am? Are you referring to DGU as incidents where the gun was fired? Because the vast majority of defensive uses of guns do not involve the gun being fired and are not counted in the statistics the gun control crowd likes to cite. Mass shootings have been stopped by guns that were not even fired. Do they not count as legitimate? Are the lives saved not legitimate? See incidents #1,# 2, and #8 on the following site for three examples, all of which can be verified on conventional news outlet websites with a quick web search:

          http://controversialtimes.com/issues/constitutional-rights/12-times-mass-shootings-were-stopped-by-good-guys-with-guns/

        3. avatar Sam I Am says:

          If you re-read, you see that I was/am using the stats to create an embarrassing conclusion for VPC. Their stats show 1100 instances of CCW holders being no different than ordinary criminals. My projection shows 2240 lives saved in the same time period. Meaning (is it really necessary to explain?) there were twice as many lives saved as lost. Meaning VPC would prefer an additional 2240 lives lost (3340 in all).

    4. avatar Joe R. says:

      Yeah, but are they Fing off with your tax dollars. The POS (D) pad their coffers in a lot of kick-back ways.

      VPC needs to be pushed to a back dry teat.

  3. avatar Joel L says:

    Put in perspective there are about 400 lightning injuries and 50 deaths per year in the USA. https://www.outsideonline.com/1912401/lightning-deaths-and-injuries-numbers

    You are literally four times more likely to be struck by lightning than be murdered by a ccw license holder in the US.

    1. avatar Timothy says:

      The difference is even greater than that. Only 305 murder convictions over that 10 year span. That’s 30 CCW murders per year compared to 400 lightning strikes.

  4. avatar Lawbob says:

    Notice also it said deaths.

    Probably 2/3rds (since 2/3 of all gun deaths are suicides) of the 1100 are suicides which 1) would have occurred regardless of the permit 2) are irrelevant to the conversation. And how many of those were accidental, and how many were causal (if not for the ccw, the person wouldn’t have had a gun?)

    So, to clarify, you are now 12x more likely to die by lightning strike than be shot and killed by a ccw holder, unless you include self then it’s 4x more likely – but the selfs have control over that variable.

    1. avatar samuraichatter says:

      They even admit as much:

      “In the vast majority of the 904 incidents documented in Concealed Carry Killers (780, or 86 percent), the concealed carry permit holder either committed suicide (399)”

      I challenge their numbers but they own up to over a 1/3.

    2. avatar dhg says:

      And 3,000X more likely to die in a car accident.

  5. avatar Mike Oregon says:

    I haven’t deconstructed the V.P.C. “Research” but I’d be willing to bet that in their 110 per year statistic they included suicides.

  6. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

    Yup- 399 of the 904 CCW “KILLERS” got counted in this mess because they committed suicide. Nearly half of all these people that they’d like you to think were violent, instead hurt no one but themselves.

    1. avatar No one of consequence says:

      Directly, anyway.

      I find it reprehensible that VPC would use suicides to bolster their statistics in this way, but – as a separate topic – suicide is often devastating to the family and friends left behind. It does need looking at, just not by these clowns.

  7. avatar HP says:

    Wow, that’s a doozy. Complete nonsense, from top to bottom.

  8. avatar No one of consequence says:

    Violence policy center. Hmm.

    Wonder why not “Violence prevention policy center.” Could it be because they’re not really interested in stopping violence? Many of the rank-and-file there probably are sincere, but the overall goals, well …

  9. avatar Mocking Jay says:

    **but our research shows….**

    That is the key phrase right there. Since your organization has an agenda (civilian disarmament), all of your so called “research” is suspect.

  10. avatar Stephen M Beaudet says:

    I challenge them to find ONE instance where a CCW holder shot a uniformed police officer.
    I bet they can’t. Not one instance EVER.

    1. avatar Nanashi says:

      Are we counting cops that were blatantly engaging in illegal activity while in uniform?

  11. avatar Pete says:

    Ah, this explains the sharp rise in homicide that has not happened in every state to enact CCW.

  12. avatar Mark says:

    I’ve developed a new found appreciation for the VPC as of late. They thoughtfully provided data that supports my contention that those who carry are safer and more law abiding than the general public.
    Using their data and some basic math the homicide rate for carry permit holders comes to about 1 per 100,000. The national homicide rate is 4.9 per 100,000. And if we remove the suicides that the VPC includes, the rate drops to .6 per 100,000.

  13. avatar Idaho Bob says:

    IIRC, they included murders in states with constitutional carry. Any murderer with with a gun in these states had a “permit” by default. This is where the shot police officers count comes into play.

  14. avatar Paul53 says:

    Step 1: State a clear assumption.
    Step 2: Find data that supports your opinions.
    Step 3: Draw nice lines on a chart.
    Step 4: Plot your data.

    1. avatar Ex-californian says:

      #3 Probably should be “draw nice lines with fat magic marker.” You don’t want the dots to line up so well that everyone knows the data is cherry picked.

  15. avatar Brainman says:

    That’s interesting research. Other interesting research already has shown that, at least in Texas, CHL holders commit crimes at a much lower rate than police officers. Guess we should ban cops, too, huh?

  16. avatar TyrannyOfEvilMen says:

    The research methodology does not matter. Leftist groups like VPC have discovered that dumb Democrats will believe anything that they tell them as long as their conclusions demonizes a group that Democrats find deplorable.

    And just to confirm Godwin’s Law here, these are the same tactics that the Nazis used to dehumanize the people who they ultimately put into the ovens, so it is not enough to just call these kinds of studies out as “bad research”.

  17. avatar Porkchop says:

    Well, according to the Crime Prevention Research Center, there were 387,054 concealed carry permit holders in Virginia as of March 16, 2015 (based on an inquiry to the Virginia State Police). The Violence Policy Center reports 18 incidents over a ten-year period — that comes to 1 incident for every 21,503 concealed carry permits — the likelihood that a Virginia concealed carry permit holder will be involved in such an incident is 0.004651%. And that is counting:

    (a) One suicide,
    (b) two accidental discharges,
    (c) five cases involving murder of family members inside the home where no permit would have been required,
    (d) one case in which a permit holder had been carrying openly (no permit required), and another individual snatched his pistol, shot the open carrier, and subsequently shot several others, and
    (e) one case in which the weapon actually used was a rifle.

    There were only eight cases in which a concealed carrier actually shot someone else outside the home, and two involved estranged wives. So, there were only 6 cases in which permit holder shot and killed a stranger over ten years — 1 for every 64,509 concealed carry permits (0.00001550%).

  18. avatar Brandan says:

    Why is it that the left, which is, broadly speaking, pro-assisted suicide against it when the act is carried out with a firearm? As a true (classic) liberal I think people own their own lives and should be able to end them if they so choose. I suspect most on the left would agree…and yet they seem to have no problem contorting their virtues by padding their statistics with suicides.

    The VPC is shameless….

  19. avatar Geoff says:

    The Left always cherry picks the data they want and then twists it around to their mindset.
    And now opioid deaths outnumber ALL gun deaths.
    Data for 2015.
    All firearms deaths – 36,252
    Opioid deaths – 52,404
    https://gun-control.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=006094
    https://www.asam.org/docs/default-source/advocacy/opioid-addiction-disease-facts-figures.pdf

    Opioids are more regulated than guns.

  20. avatar MontieR says:

    What a gold plated load of bullshit. It is disgusting how these brain dead liberals will take ANYTHING turn it inside out and present it as fact. I a so damned tired of the deliberate lies and deception these scum bags thrive on.

  21. avatar Chris Morton says:

    The only bigger liars than anti-gun cultists are Holocaust deniers… and not by much. Of course in my experience, there’s more than a little overlap between the two.

  22. avatar Anonymous says:

    Firstly, if this was true, this proves that regulations on concealed carry don’t work. Permits and licenses for them are a waste of time, effort, and taxes. A concealed carry permit doesn’t magically make you a good person, and nefarious people can seek them out as well. Secondly, even if it was true, I don’t give a sh!t. Self defense is a natural unalienable right. This right was extended to firearms hundreds of years ago, with a very clear statement explicitly stating “keep and bear.” Also, this right is not to be infringed upon, which was also explicitly stated (As if it needs to be stated again!@??) Secondly, even if none of it was explicitly stated, we don’t blanket regulations and controls on the entirety of the united states based on the criminal actions of a few. It’s called freedom, communists. I know you don’t like it. But you can FO.

    So. Lets recap.

    1) 2nd amendment is an inalienable right
    2) 2nd amendment is not to be infringed upon regarding “keep and bear arms”
    3) 2nd amendment is unacceptably already being infringed upon because people need to obtain a CCW permit or license to bear arms.
    4) Said CCW permit or license obviously isn’t working as intended, is costly to tax payers, and should be discarded in lieu of embracing freedom.
    5) Communists can FO.

  23. avatar Darkman says:

    Chiraq had more than 1100 murders in the last 2 years alone. CCW holders are the real danger? Maybe in the minds of minds of agenda driven sociopaths. One of the major signs of someone being a sociopath is compulsive lying in order to make oneself seem important. Which is a hallmark of the democratic party and it’s leadership.

    1. avatar Brandan says:

      The gun controllers don’t really care about crime which is why in recent years they’ve focused on CCW permitting and “assault weapons.”*

      This (for them at least) is the culture war under a new name. Outfits like the VPC are assailing symbols of an America that they don’t care for (never mind that racial, geographical and class participation in gun ownership are broadening everyday). This is why the control side of the debate is desperate to paint the NRA and like minded outfits, as well as their members has a bunch of slack jawed, racist, sexist, male troglodytes.

      It’s politics. Simple as that.

      *Please make note that I used scare quotes.

  24. avatar David Thompson says:

    I’m going apple picking tomorrow, but wondering where they found those nice, fresh cherries!

  25. avatar willford says:

    The “SHROOMS” these DOLTS are on, MUST be good? They regularly come out of the DREAM state to make such ASS~ININE statements. What gets me is “DOLTS” believe this tripe as fact? SMH until my neck hurts. DAMN

  26. avatar Kc in NorCal says:

    Not sure if it was this “study” or another but one I saw counted any killing by a gun owner in constitutional carry states like laughner in az. Because technically they can legally carry a gun although I’m sure a good chunk of them would be prohibited for one reason or another. Plus sense in the one I looked at they just inferred rom news stories if they had a permit in some cases they didn’t and one I remember I’m pretty sure the guy was former Leo carrying under leosa. But don’t let the truth get in the way of the narrative.

  27. avatar Bob999 says:

    I would like to see just one statistic quoted by an anti-2nd amendment group that wasn’t a lie. Just one.

    1. avatar jwm says:

      Without lies they got nothing.

  28. avatar Tom says:

    They counted all the suicides.

  29. avatar BierceAmbrose says:

    It seems like the Violence Policy Center has made a pretty good case that guns aren’t the problem. They seem to have worked toward the agenda in their name despite their best efforts not to. Um … kudos?

  30. avatar 2Asux says:

    Flinging arrows in your favorite pub again, I see. All puff and bluff, but not a whit in opposition to the data. Did the deaths occur as reported, or did they not? Makes a diff, mate. Your preferred response is always, “Whatabout…..cause of death?”. And you say my side ignores data and logic? So let me get to my favorite challenge, “If even one of your lot proves irrational, illogical, irresponsible, or of bad character, it puts paid to the notion of “the most law biding…etc, etc.”. When you become the disease, you need to be quarantined (put under tight controls, for those who can’t manage your impulse to accuse me of wanting to eliminate gun owners).

    You love your stats and date, but they represent real, blood and flesh humans killed; families destroyed. So long as us hide behind dehumanizing numbers and rations, you can avoid the truth of what your type does…destroy lives with guns.

    1. avatar AFGus says:

      Wow……you’re almost as full of crap as this article is. Keep trying…..you’ll get there eventually. 😏

      1. avatar 2Asux says:

        “Wow……you’re almost as full of crap as this article is. Keep trying…..you’ll get there eventually. ”

        And there you have it. A fully reasoned, logically presented, statistically supported and cogent response.

        I am humbled, amazed, and compelled to flee in the face of superior intellect.

        1. avatar AFGus says:

          And so you should. You don’t need to describe the smell of crap, to know that it is in fact crap. It’s always obvious that shit is shit.

        2. avatar 2Asux says:

          “And so you should. You don’t need to describe the smell of crap, to know that it is in fact crap. It’s always obvious that shit is shit.”

          Well….that’s tellin’ me, eh?

          So many replies here are proof positive we contend with limited thinking, supporting what you might call “stereotype” of gun owners.

          In the vernacular, is this the best you got?

    2. So let me get to my favorite challenge, “If even one of your lot proves irrational, illogical, irresponsible, or of bad character, it puts paid to the notion of “the most law biding…etc, etc.”. When you become the disease, you need to be quarantined (put under tight controls, for those who can’t manage your impulse to accuse me of wanting to eliminate gun owners).

      So you think black people need to be quarantined?

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        Are black people a disease? Does AMA know?

        The above is about as serious as I can muster in reply to an insipid question.

  31. avatar Pete says:

    780 of these are suicide. Amazingly bad abuse of numbers by this hack.

  32. avatar HAVOC4223 says:

    TTAG does so much to spread antigunners messages for them. Nobody woukd have seen most of this garbage if you guys werent giving them a platform. But, anything for more ad revenue, so you fellas can buy more toys to show off, get more clicks, buy more toys….you have become a self-licking ice cream cone in your search for ever-greater revenue.

    1. avatar TrueBornSonofLiberty says:

      Nah. It’s imperative we know our enemies, their strategies, their agendas, their goals and their tactics. It’ll be equally helpful, when the time comes, to know their names and addresses, too.

      1. avatar HAVOC4223 says:

        We already know VPC is full of it, and pishing an agenda. Its obvious. Less obvious is why this site has to wcho everything they say and do, ensuring it reaches a much larger audience. Nothing knew to be learned about VPCs hate for armed citizens. Its about more clicks for this site. If guns werent a hot subject, it would be something else. There are no ideological heroes here, just people chasing profit. Which is fine, if they were more honest about it.

    2. avatar Sam I Am says:

      Could you suggest, please, an alternative method of funding the weblog? Perhaps subscription? Maybe selling the site to a gun or ammunition manufacturer? Or one of the major membership sustained industry groups?

      The best gun and ammo tester on the internet (Shooting The Bull) has almost abandoned the effort because he cannot displace his “day job” income with income from those who support his testing. We all get/got an amazing amount of information from STB’s ammo testing, but it seems we did not do enough in return to keep him going.

      Everything you ever see/get as “free” costs something, and the provider needs a means of reimbursing cost and providing incentive to continue to provide “free” stuff.

      Next …..

      TTAG keeps us abreast of the zany anti-gunner follies. We need to keep tabs in order to detect new avenues of propaganda that may frustrate our efforts to preserve what 2A rights we have. If we cannot detect the movements of the enemy, we can be outflanked in our ignorance.

    3. We make no bones about TTAG being a for-profit business…just like every one of our competitors. So if you look at producing content our readers enjoy and want to read as chasing “more clicks,” so be it.

      That said, we are Second Amendment absolutists. And we highlight the extremism and lies peddled by the VPC and other dedicated civilian disarmament orgs because sunlight is a wonderful disinfectant.

      These groups work day and night to curtail a fundamental civil right. They spout demonstrable lies like the one above because they don’t have the facts on their side. Crime has plummeted while the number of guns has doubled over the last 25 years. All they can do is try to paint gun owners as violent, racist, inbred fascists.

      Falsehoods like that need to be highlighted and broadcast loudly and clearly at every opportunity. You can’t counter and fight what you don’t know about. If that’s not to your liking, the great thing about the internet is there are plenty of alternatives out there that provide exactly the kind of content you want.

      1. avatar Sam I Am says:

        Dan, a goodly number of us want to hear our beliefs and prejudices reinforced, repeated and solidified. We like reading other people reform and repeat what we just wrote. We are comfortable in our self-assurance, convinced that anyone who does not think and respond as we do is, at best, a wuss; a traitor to our religion at worst. So much of what goes on around us, and in the world, disturbs our sense of self that we do not want to have it intrude upon our meditations. In short, information needs to be loosed of monitizeation. Information we like should be free, and non-commercial. And we definitely do not want to see ads from companies that would charge you, or us, money to have internet content.

        Or something.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email