concealed carry holster draw pistol
Shutterstock
Previous Post
Next Post

Bad guys, listen up: John Lott has released a new report outlining the state of legal concealed carry in America. In it, he reveals a staggering 10.5% increase in carry licenses despite (because of?) COVID restrictions. Today, more than 8% of adult Americans have a license to carry a firearm. That number is 10% outside of restrictive, may-issue states.

The good people of Alabama are not only friendly, but they’re also well-fixed when it comes to packing heat. Almost a third of adults in the Yellowhammer State have a carry permit. Perhaps there’s some correlation between well-armed and well-mannered.

Meanwhile, almost a quarter of Indianans are licensed. And don’t forget that twenty-one states now don’t even require law-abiding folks to apply for a license to carry a firearm.

Hoplophobic harridans like Shannon Watts think, Gabby Giffords and Kris Brown think it’s just a bunch of old white guys who are getting licenses. It’s not the first time their woefully uninformed about guns and the people who own them. In states that report carry license data by gender, women applicants grew 108% faster than men.

Not only that, but new black applicants outstripped white applicants by 137%, and Asians out-applied Caucasians by 93%.

To read the whole thing, click here.  Here are some highlights:

Among the findings of our report:

■ Last year, the number of permit holders grew by a record 2 million. This is more than the previous record increase of 1.8 million in 2017. Part of that is due to many states reopening concealed carry applications after the pause due to COVID-19.

■ 8.3% of American adults have permits. Outside of the restrictive states of California and New York, about 10.0% of adults have a permit.

■ In fifteen states, more than 10% of adults have permits. Since 2019, Arkansas and Oklahoma have fallen below 10%, but they are now all Constitutional Carry states, meaning that people no longer need a permit to carry. Virginia’s concealed carry rate has risen to above 10%.

■ Alabama has the highest concealed carry rate — 32.1%. Indiana is second with 21.6%, and Iowa is third with 16.5%.

Six states now have over 1 million permit holders: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Pennsylvania, and Texas. Florida is the first state to have over 2.5 million permits.

■ Twenty-one states have adopted constitutional carry for their entire state, meaning that a permit is no longer required. Because of these constitutional carry states, the nationwide growth in permits does not paint a full picture of the overall increase in concealed carry. Many residents still choose to obtain permits so that they can carry in other states that have reciprocity agreements, but while permits are soaring in the non-Constitutional Carry states, they fell in the Constitutional Carry ones even though more people are clearly carrying in those states.

■ In 2021, women made up 28.3% of permit holders in the 14 states that provide data by gender, an increase from the 26.4% last year. Seven states had data from 2012 to 2020/2021, and permit numbers grew 108.7% faster for women than for men.

■ Three states that have detailed race and gender data for at least a decade show remarkably larger increases in permits for minorities compared to whites. In Texas, black females saw a 6.3 times greater percentage increase in permits than white males from 2002 to 2020. Oklahoma data from 2002 to 2020 indicated that the increase of licenses approved for Asians and American Indians was more than twice the rate for whites. North Carolina had black permits increase twice as fast as whites from 1996 till 2016.

■ From 2015 to 2020/2021, in the four states that provide data by race over that time period, the number of Asian people with permits increased 93.2% faster than the number of whites with permits. Blacks appear to be the group that has experienced the largest increase in permitted concealed carry, growing 135.7% faster than whites.

■ Concealed handgun permit holders are extremely law-abiding. In Florida and Texas, permit holders are convicted of firearms related violations at one-twelfth of the rate at which police officers are convicted.

■ If the Supreme Court strikes down the “proper cause” requirement in the eight May Issue states, we estimate that there could be at least 2.3 million more concealed handgun permits. The eight states with that rule have issued permits to only 1.24% of their adult population compared to 10.77% for the other states.

It’s good to see greater and greater numbers of Americans with licenses and packing heat.  I can remember back just six years ago when Professor Lott released a similar study that showed only 5.2% of adult Americans had a carry license at the time.

Onward from here. I’m looking forward to seeing 20% or more of adults with carry licenses within a few more years.

Previous Post
Next Post

92 COMMENTS

  1. A license to carry.
    Wouldn’t a license be a restriction, wouldn’t a restriction be an infringement.
    The Right to Breath Air Shall Not be Infringed. as long as you’ve got your breath air license.

    • Don’t let Perfect be the enemy of Good Enough.

      We strive for Perfect. But Good Enough will get us through the hard times.

      I predicted a couple of years ago that we would have nation wide constitutional carry by the end of Trumps second term.

      Thanks to biden that may still yet happen.

        • The right to keep and bear arms included keeping a firearm in a purse without asking and paying for a permission slip. A right that started out perfect went to piss poor bit by bit…IMO.

        • Well short of being blinded by Christ on the road to Damascus, it takes time for the majority of society to realize how far from the Constitution and the Bill of Rights we’ve wandered. I remember signing a petition for ‘constitutional carry’ at the Iowa straw poll in 2007 thinking it was a pretty far out proposal even though I’d been a gun owner for about 15 years at the time. In 2011 IA did away with ‘may issue’ and this year we got ‘constitutional carry’. Imagine if Republicans had refused to vote for ‘shall issue’ because it wasn’t ‘constitutional carry’. I think that’s called ‘cutting off your nose to spite your face’.

        • “Let’s just not become complacent with Good Enough”

          Let’s not become complacent, and start thinking “constitutional carry” is a constitutional amendment; it]’s just simple, majority rules, legislation at the state level.

          And even state constitutions can be overruled by federal courts.

      • To Jethro WM

        Your knowledge about the many conflicting State laws on concealed carry show you know less than a piss ant about the complexity of Constitutional carry and how it is impractical if not impossible.

        • Remember folks. lil’d has proven, time and again, that he is mentally ill. Do not engage.

          He isn’t even sane enough to recognize that federal law super cedes state law. One scotus ruling and we have constitutional carry.

          Leave him in the dustbin of history. One more failed fascist.

        • Again Jethro you show your complete ignorance. A Constitutional Carry law would not trump the legality of all of the various and different deadly force laws in each of the states creating a legal nightmare both for the states and the person traveling through such states as to when and when not he could use deadly force. This is the major reason that there never has been a serious attempt to pass a Constitutional carry law. The appeals and lawsuits over such a Constitutional carry law would go on for months if not years.

          Try again Jethro you are making once again a complete fool of yourself.

        • Proof of what I’m saying here, folks. I never brought up or spoke of deadly force laws. Just constitutional carry. Two entirely separate issues.

          Which the non mentally ill would realize. Remember, do not address the poor benighted Sod. He’s beyond help.

        • Jethro you are such a Moron, concealed carry and deadly force, the two go hand in hand. What good would it do you to carry across state lines if you could not use deadly force or did not understand when you could or could not shoot. On a long trip you cross many state lines and if you do shoot someone you could end up in jail for a long, long time if you violated this or that state law in regards to using deadly force.

          Now you Moron what part of this do you not understand.

        • lil’d. Proud of his mental disability. Showing it off every chance he gets.

          I understand that I’ve wasted my time addressing you, lil’d. You have nothing useful to add to the conversation.

    • Abolutely
      HOWEVER, consider how bad thigns were twenty five years ago. This is massiv eprogress, and particulary signficant in the face of the absolute totalitarion and tyrannical moves these past fifteen years t take all our guns away. Clowns like Gifford, the kinyiun, Holder, Bloomie, Die Fie, Pugliugly, and their pals haave spent billioins to try and disarm us, Aus and NZ and UK style,,, and numbers have more than doubled in that time? This is good news.

      Ye,s could be a lot better, but continuing to grow in the face of such concerted efforts to completely disarm all of us is progress in the face of adversity.

  2. Maybe a nitpick, but the concealed carry photos for Thursday’s ‘Don’t be that guy’ article were way better than this one.

  3. breath in not the same as breathe. try using the correct words? and there is no right to breathe air(at least not clean air). not a chance in the air that flows east from the most polluted country in the world from china to the usa. it’s already nasty before it gets here…. 🙂

  4. Excellent resource.

    Stats that favor my positions are always more valid and authentic* than stats favoring someone else’s position.

    * always be skeptical of “stats”; they depend on the underlying “what ‘is’ is” determination.

      • “It has been convincingly demonstrated that 86.7% of quoted statistics are made up on the spot.”

        Not true !

        I own/control 93% of the screen names that appear, and I make up all my claims and statistics long before submitting them here (some are copied from elsewhere). Git ‘cher facts straight.

  5. If the only statistic of interest is CCW’s (for handguns) then it vastly underestimates the number of people who are armed with something other than a handgun. Specifically, shotguns and rifles, which is likely north of 100 million. Let’s not forget that in our rush to publish numbers. 🙂

    • No one said it is the only one “of interest” It is here for those who ARE interested. I’d bet for every Mother May I Card out there, there are at least five handguns and perhaps another five to ten long guns. I’ve seen the total number of estimated firerams in private hands in the US, lawfully possessed, at above 400 Mn. That’s about one and a third for every man woman and child in the nation. That’s a good start.

    • Re Indiana…my good friends both just got lifetime carry in Indiana. Total novices. I’m their guru I guess. Neither one has carried as far as I know. Babies steps. Guns r good!

    • My point was that only looking at .gov permission slips is a poor measure of how many people in this country are armed. The ‘other side’ reads this kind of thing also, but a great many of them assume (wrongly) that if you don’t have permit you can’t have a firearm. Since that is true in many countries, immigrants (legal and otherwise) often don’t have a good understanding of the level of firearms ownership in this country. There are political consequences in the voting booth as a result of that lack of understanding.

      • That was covered in the piece. The ting is, anyone with a Mother May I Crd might have twent handguns. Others may own five or ten but not want to carry them, so no Card. Other states, including Vermont since its beginnin,g never demanded a Mother May I Card as a precondition to exercising their right to arms, including handguns. I know LOTS of folks in Califoria that own handguns, but live in counties where the head law enforcement officer refuses to issue the Cards. Some states allow open carry wiht no Mother May I Card, and lots do that. And, as clearl detailed in the piece, some states do not require the Permissioni Slip to carry concealed or openly and so there is no way of knowing how many activel carry in those states.
        The one takeaway from this is that, despite increasing pressure to disarm us all, despite rampant stomping on what rights we do have, despite all-in attempts to “take them all away” as ORourke insists is the only answer, to “keep us safe”. Thanks all the same BayToe, I have my own ideas about “keeping me safe” both from the silly virus alledgedy floating about in the air and those “bad guys” that may up and attempt to cause me serious bokily harm or death. And you are NOT part of that equation.

        • What applies in commiefornia does not in normal states. In the partially free states handguns are NOT listed on a permit or card.

  6. The armed citizens of this country constitute the largest armed force on this planet. We may not all think alike, we may not all have the same beliefs, nor the same levels of fortitude and conviction, but we are a threat that every enemy must consider as dire.

    • I think about this. Living on the east coast, i think about who would be silly enough to invade our country as we’d cause a traffic jam trying to get on I-95 with our ar’s.

    • “The armed citizens of this country constitute the largest armed force on this planet.”

      Disorganized, inexperienced, untrained for combat, lacking a cohesive mission statement. We are not the “Minute Men” of the American Revolution; not even the militia of the day. We don’t know who our allies are, we can’t even identify those who would resist revolution.

      Revolutions cannot succeed with just an armed mob or two, scattered across the country.

      • People who make the statement you’ve quoted haven’t paid attention, particularly to the last 70 or so years of warfare.

        Something like this isn’t masses of people shooting each other. It’s messier. Kidnappings, assassinations, torture, targets of opportunity, ambushes, theft, sabotage, IEDs. No one is safe and family is a legit target. Oh, and red v blue? Nah, you’re gonna need to break out the color wheel for this.

        But regardless of the factions or the issues you can be fairly well assured that nothing focuses someone’s mind like a cardboard box on their front porch that contains bits of their family member(s) or friend(s) or standing in front of what used to be a friend/family member(s) house when they realize that the fire was intentional and the fact that no one made it out was by design.

        I often reference Algeria. But for Americans who don’t know much history and can’t be bothered to read it, perhaps the Mexican drug war is a better anaolgy.

        Since I referenced the work earlier, perhaps a Shakespeare quote is appropriate.

        “Ay, that I had not done a thousand more.
        Even now I curse the day–and yet, I think,
        Few come within the compass of my curse,–
        Wherein I did not some notorious ill,
        As kill a man, or else devise his death,
        Ravish a maid, or plot the way to do it,
        Accuse some innocent and forswear myself,
        Set deadly enmity between two friends,
        Make poor men’s cattle break their necks;
        Set fire on barns and hay-stacks in the night,
        And bid the owners quench them with their tears.
        Oft have I digg’d up dead men from their graves,
        And set them upright at their dear friends’ doors,
        Even when their sorrows almost were forgot;
        And on their skins, as on the bark of trees,
        Have with my knife carved in Roman letters,
        ‘Let not your sorrow die, though I am dead.’
        Tut, I have done a thousand dreadful things
        As willingly as one would kill a fly,
        And nothing grieves me heartily indeed
        But that I cannot do ten thousand more.”

        -Aaron

        • The beautiful part of having constitutional carry is, it makes their job a whole lot more difficult when they eventually get around to demanding they be turned in.

          Yes, the .gov has a fair idea of who the gun owners are via the 4473s and credit card recipes, but *millions* of guns are in the hands of lawful people who got them off-the-books, like inheriting a dead parent or grandparent’s .38 spl or bartering with neighbors and friends.

          I kinda like the idea of them feeling a little queasy at the lack of proof as to where they all are… 🙂

        • “Something like this isn’t masses of people shooting each other. It’s messier. Kidnappings, assassinations, torture…”

          Look around at the revolutions since 1945. None of them were conducted, or won by leaderless mobs, individuals, rag tag civilians. Every successful revolution has identifiable leaders, cohesive goals, and an infrastructure of people to fill vacated leadership positions once held by the previous government. Nowhere, absolutely nowhere were revolutions/insurgencies simply a spontaneous uprising of leaderless individuals.

          The means of conducting a revolution, such as you mentioned are ‘normal’, but to revolutionary forces were not separated from the overall conduct of military operations. One of the very basic principles of any type warfare is deconfliction of allied operations. If your mob (of two or three) don’t know what my mob of two or three are doing, there is grave risk that we will annihilate each other out of ignorance of force distribution, or even recognition that we are affiliated with each other. When you don’t know who is who, you can’t determine who to support, or who to kill. Disorganized actions are doomed the fail in the long run (whatever stretch of time that might be).

          With no one in charge, everyone is in charge, and everyone is at risk. Chaos never bringd order. Select the most evil and vicious revolutions, since 1945 you would like to highlight; there was ultimately organization, and concentration of purpose (win or lose). But there were no general gangs of killers and disruptors unconnected to any raison d’être. A handfull of murders and bombings has yet to bring the US to its knee in the past, wouldn’t bet my life, or my values on discoordinated gangs with guns.

          There will be no successful general uprising that overturns the current government, and is competent to organize a nation in the aftermath.

        • It’s interesting that you think this is, or even could be, a directed revolution. Kindly note that I never used that word nor any language that would suggest such a thing.

          I have never said that because such a thing was never in the cards. To think it was/is a realistic possibility is myopic.

          No, this is far messier than any revolution. Made all the more messy be the fact that no faction actually has any idea what it wants. And when they realize it, mostly they’ll lack the balls to accomplish their goals.

          No, this will be a very sticky wicket and the first to realize “qui audet, vincit” will be the victor.

        • Oh, yeah, and re Constitutional Carry and off-the-books guns.

          What they know and who they know it about is immaterial at this point in time.

          The game that’s afoot is much wider and deeper than that. It’s also been going on longer than most people seem to realize. And if *they* get to their goal what you own or don’t own and their knowledge or ignorance of it will be likewise immaterial. You will submit or you will die.

          What, you think these people are strangling supply lines, small business and employment by accident?

          You think gaslit ‘tards screaming that the un-v-a — x x e d are “self genociding” is by accident? You think the cognitive dissonance required to say that about people they viscerally dislike and wish harm on is an accident?

          The former mayor of Chicago told you what’s going on. If you bother to listen.

      • so true.. and yet when Push comes to Shove, we Yanks have risen to the challenge quickly and well. Sure, we’d be better of fwith twice weekly drills, commmittes of correspondence, “mechanics”, coordinatoing better for communication, etc. But the very fact that Mother MayI Cards have so radically increased these past few years means the potential is far greater than at any time since Jesse Adair ordered the men of Lexington to “la down our arms and disperse, ye damned rebels”. And most considered twhat they had then and there “a bunch of stupid farmers with their squirrel guns.
        General Gage had to write a VERY embarrassing report to send back t the king. In that report he included words to this effect: there are men amongst them who know very well hat they are about”. This, after declaring that anyone who thought the Patroios would be easiy subdued by a couple thosand more troops sent accross the Puddle would be “very much mistaken”.

        Fun fact: a Patriot of Massachussetts volunteered to carry aboard his fast schooner whatever reports he could get, and put them into the hands of folks in London who could use them well to help sway sentimant that side thePuddle. As we know, the first reports are most often taken as the accurate or valid ones. This was true in this instance. The vessel, the Quero, arrived two full weeks before Gage’s report, and rached the King himself. Oh my the stir THAT news caused!!

        • “when Push comes to Shove, we Yanks have risen to the challenge quickly and well.”

          Never as disorganized, fragmented tiny groups of individuals; not in sustained combat against any opposing force.

          So many people love the idea of shooting up the town, but who knows how to lead a revolution, end one, organize the aftermath.

      • Yeah, keep thinking that way.🤪
        Ever hear of the virtues that come with “fighting the good fight”?🤔

        The quote “one man with courage is a majority” applies here. It explains how when courageous people with strong values stand up for what for what they strongly believe, they become an unstoppable force.
        Strike one down, 100 will take the fallen ones place.

        Mount an army that has no beliefs in why they fight, or worse, only fight for a paycheck? Watch it fall to those who BELIEVE in what they fight for.

        Our military leadership and the top level political leftards selling out to globalization/NWO know this. Hence the non-stop propoganda being firehosed in public schools and lamestream media. It’s simple, brainwash as many as you can to think the country, liberty and rights are bad, then use them as your “army” to remove those “bad” liberties and rights by destroying those who believe.🤔 Post is prologue.

        That quote is attributed to both T. Jefferson and A. Jackson.

        • Also, your comment “So many people love the idea of shooting up the town” shows you have NO idea of what’s going on.
          Almost all RESPONSIBLE firearm owners thank God they have the RIGHT to defend their lives and rights with arms, but pray to that same God they never need to use those arms. It’s called being a responsible American citizen who believes in what this country was founded on.

          May the chains rest lightly………

        • I don’t live in virtue-city. An honorable death is a death, rendering the individual ineffective in the future of the fight. A moral victory is a loss.

          A government controlling the media will suppress reports of revolt, if government decides that is what is happening. How do disorganized, disconnected, individuals communicate to the public…especially when those individuals an/or groups are hiding out in the wide open spaces, suspicious of everyone (do you really thing the virtuous revolutionaries can be easily identified, as opposed to the people who take advantage of one revolt, to launch their own?

          Truth: the “partisan” groups we know about from then contemporary and now historical information, did not overthrow the Germans anywhere, and did not win the war. Mao had a full army to support his revolution.

          For those who believe that a few dead bodies of government agents will put and end to tyranny need to revisit revolutions. How many times did an established government surrender, or decide to “do right” as a result of their agents being killed by revolutionaries?

          The leaders of the American Revolution of the founding of the nation were organized, and of a single mind; not a disparate gathering of rifles held by people with a multitude of agendas, or even no agenda at all. The American revolutionaries had leaders, and interconnected militia. Ultimately, it was not a bunch of disorganized revolutionaries who won independence, but an organized army of regulars and militia working in concert.

          What do we know about armed revolution in the America of today? Bundy 1 and Bundy 2.

          Bundy 1 was made up of a rag tag group of armed people. Bundy 1 was considered successful because nothing happened. Bundy 2 was a failure because the existing government crushed the small rag tag group of armed opponents of government.

          What was, and is, significant is the fact that in neither B1 nor B2 was there a general uprising of patriots energized by outrage at government suppressing a renegade group of “patriots”.

  7. @Geoff “I’m getting too old for this shit” PR
    “…but *millions* of guns are in the hands of lawful people who got them off-the-books, like inheriting a dead parent or grandparent’s .38 spl or bartering with neighbors and friends.”

    How does the era of “constitutional carry” (which it is not) alter the same behavior you identify, behavior that existed prior?

    Keep in mind, “constitutional carry”, does not eliminate federal and state mandated BGCs, or purchase permits.

    • I don’t speak for the man but I’d suggest that Geoff’s suggestion here is akin to that of the “Liberator” pistol of WWII.

      • “I don’t speak for the man but I’d suggest that Geoff’s suggestion here is akin to that of the “Liberator” pistol of WWII.”

        Now, that could very well be.

  8. @strych9

    Didn’t interpret your writing as mentioning, recommending, or contemplating a “directed revolution”. Simply noted that a leaderless revolution cannot succeed at toppling a government, or re-establishing one. There is zero possibility that a few, random, deadly acts of disconnected insurgents can prevail. The theory that seems to underpin the power and success of uncoordinated groups seems to be that the government will somehow decide, “This is getting dangerous; we better straighten up and fly right.” (thus avoiding any concern of having to “build back, better” a new government and nation).

    From reading the accounts of happenings on the southern border, most of the illegal aliens seem to be male, 17-45; military age. These bandits are being dropped into unsuspecting cities across the nation. Wondering if these invaders can be organized into counter revolutionary units if needed? That might make un-directed revolution by “patriots” more complicated. The cartels might see a profitable situation here, contracting for training an armed reserve suitable for all sorts of mischief.

    • Sam:

      The “revolution” already happened. If you’re trying to fight it at this point it is you that is the counter-revolutionary.

      Go read the excerpt I gave you on the Yamane article and think about what Ike said as he left office. Then consider Schumer’s first public comments on Trump being an idiot and why he thought Trump was an idiot.

      • Yeah, “revolution” can be a slippery word. So far, I use the term to mean the revolt against established government, not the leftist revolution that started in the 1960s. Opposition to which is more like counter-revolution.

        I read Mao’s little red book. Revolution sparking counterrevolution is always a concern of tyrants. Reading Mao’s book, one can understand not only how revolution can succeed, but how the leaders defend against counterrevolution.

        When the ones originally demanding social revolution become the government controllers, is opposition “revolution”, or “counter revolution”. Does the distinction have meaning when it comes to people predicting, endorsing, supporting armed opposition to the existing government?

  9. @strych9
    “The game that’s afoot is much wider and deeper than that.”

    The “covid crisis” is the dry run. Look how easily government impose Stalin-like rules for what the entire population is permitted to do.

    • I don’t think it’s a dry run. It’s an opening salvo.

      The opening it presents is that TPTB are not very competent at what they’re doing. But the one thing they are good at is directing the public’s ire towards a bunch of even more incompetent buffoons.

      But the buffoons aren’t really in charge of much except at the local level where things are too distributed for fine central control.

      The question so many people ask is “Why?”. I’d suggest that you look at global debt. Global debt-to-GDP is something like 267%, ~$200T in debt. That we know about, with leverage… who really knows? Then of course there’s all the other sets of books that might be out there.

      People talk up a “Covid recovery”. LOL, sure. China’s entire $60T real estate market is on the verge of collapse. It’s the ONLY way to save money for the Chinese people. How’s that going to end for them? And with their complete control over, shit just start with half a dozen critical markets, how does that end for the world?

      Gee, golly gosh, I wonder why they want CBDCs? “The better to pick your pocket with until you’re enslaved” said the Wolf.

      Of course, it doesn’t much matter at this point because the people in charge of all this are not very bright and they’ve fucked up everything real good now. They forgot that they can’t print food, energy or anything else that really matters and they turned off everything last year without ever thinking about how to turn it back on. Whoops.

      This isn’t a revolution, as I said, that already happened. This is the fall of empire which will probably dissolve into war on a variety of levels. The question is what happens on the other side.

      • The amount of information that China has gleaned from unleashing the virus on the world and our reaction to it can’t be measured. Unfortunately this administration happily does China’s heavy lifting for them.

  10. When the constitutional-carry bill was being debated in Oklahoma a few years back, predictions of blood running in the streets were rife among the usual suspects and their bed-wetting useful idiots. It was almost a word-for-word recitation of the hysteria attending passage of the 1996 Self-Defense Act.

    Waiting . . .

    Waiting . . .

    • First occurrence was Florida’s “shall issue” in 1987. And included warnings of the dreaded “two-gun cowboy rig” and gunfights over parking spaces. It’s been 35 years, the whisky dreams remain the same, and nothing of the sort has EVER happened.

  11. “JOHN LOTT: Concealed Carry Licenses Jump 10.5% in 2020, 8.3% of Adults Now Have Carry Permits”

    hmmmm….it was 10.5% up from what they counted in 2020, not a 10.5% jump in 2020.

    Part of their count period data inclusion happened in 2021 – so up to the end of their count period data inclusion it was 10.5% up from what they counted in 2020. This up to the 2021 count period data inclusion end brings it up to 21.52 million by 2021 which is a 48% increase since 2016.

    • “hmmmm….it was 10.5% up from what they counted in 2020, not a 10.5% jump in 2020.”

      This is why I am skeptical of stats, especially those touting percentage change. And especially, especially if the stats are presented only as percentage change, with no baseline number(s).

        • “I was referring to the article title, its wrong. Its wasn’t a 10.5% jump in 2020.”

          Indeed. My point exactly. Stats are useless without data context.

  12. I just started 7 weeks ago and I’ve gotten 2 check for a total of $2,000…this is the best decision I made in a long time! “Thank you for giving me this extraordinary opportunity to make extra money from home.go to this site for more details…

    Open this web…… http://Www.WorkJoin1.com

  13. Any kind of neighborhood pc is going to be from the specific crd neighborhood wires utilizing a neighborhood software program charge card, (also known as any kind of “NIC”, “nick”, or maybe neighborhood adapter). A number of NICs are often place in inside a computer: the specific PC is going to be subjected along with a neighborhood charge card is going to be linked in to one of several individual pc’s within enhancement movie online poker devices. crd

  14. Objectives. We investigated the possible relationship between being shot in an assault and possession of a gun at the time.

    Methods. We enrolled 677 case participants that had been shot in an assault and 684 population-based control participants within Philadelphia, PA, from 2003 to 2006. We adjusted odds ratios for confounding variables.

    Results. After adjustment, individuals in possession of a gun were 4.46 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in possession. Among gun assaults where the victim had at least some chance to resist, this adjusted odds ratio increased to 5.45 .

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2759797/

    • Resisting an armed robber drastically increases the risk of death to the victim, according to results from a new study done at the University of Chicago.

      While victims actively resisted in only 7 percent of the robberies studied, those incidents accounted for 51 percent of the deaths.

      https://www.nytimes.com/1984/12/11/science/don-t-resist-robbery-chicago-study-warns.html

      Conclusions. On average, guns did not protect those who possessed them from being shot in an assault. Although successful defensive gun uses occur each year, the probability of success may be low for civilian gun users in urban areas. Such users should reconsider their possession of guns or, at least, understand that regular possession necessitates careful safety countermeasures.

      In one study it was shown that people who resisted being robbed and shot it out with the robbers on average were less likely to survive the encounter than if they had done nothing.

      Trying to play Clint Eastwood of Dirty Harry fame is not worth losing your life over saving the theft of your property. When you are dead your possessions are meaningless but this is way over the head of the stingy, cheap ass far right who regard money as more important than losing their life. In other words, they would rather be dead than lose a single penny of their money. Many get their wish. A world with less Ebenezer Scrooges is a better world to live in anyway.

      • Jethro you are now telling us you know more than a Harvard study. You would have looked less ridiculous if you had said “Do not confuse me with the facts because I wish to remain ignorant.

        • Argumentum ab auctoritate is a logical fallacy.

          Were you half as smart as you imagine yourself, you might know this.

          Take the first study, for example: Done in Philadelphia, PA, the study has over 90% males in the population, over 85% black, with members of the control or experiment arms having prior arrests from 37% to 54% of the group that they’re in.

          This is guaranteed to skew the results of the study. You cannot look at this population cohort and compare them to law-abiding gun owners.

        • Gunsmith you surprised me as you are even dumber than Jethro. The results were your survival rate in a robbery if you resisted or if you did not resist. You are using you subliminal racism to try and discredit the survey which was and is very valid.

          Of course the survey used data that was most prevalent in high crime areas. You are trying to insinuate they should have done it perhaps in mostly white Beverly Hills amongst a neighborhood with multi-million dollar homes complete with armies of security guards. Get real for once.

          And by the way your reading comprehension leaves a lot to be desired as I gave two different studies and the one stated “A Chicago Study”. I regret to inform you that Chicago is not in Pennsylvania. There have been other studies done as well but no matter how many I give you , you will reject them all with a wave of the hand because it does not fit your far right political “no gun control” agenda and your harlequin “OK Corral” shoot out fantasies.

          The real facts are that if you resist in a robbery the odds are always against you. Even a retard would know that the robber has the element of surprise and he will not hesitate to kill you while most normal people who have not lived a life of extreme violence would hesitate just that one fraction of a second to shoot because they have too much to lose in lawsuits and living with the act of taking a human life. All this runs through the mind of a law abiding sane person and its enough in many cases to get them killed.

          And remember too that with our largely untrained and un-vetted sadistic police you run more of a chance of being killed by police than the criminals precisely because you have a gun on you. As in the Philando Castile case even telling a cop you have a legally concealed weapon will not save you from being killed by a panicked cop opening fire on you as many concealed carry people have found out in the worst way. In other words there concealed carry hand gun got them killed by the cops.

          Again all this goes counter to the Far Right people and their fantasies of being another Charles Bronson in the movie “Death Wish” or Clint Eastwood playing “Dirty Harry”. It just does not happen that way in real life.

          I might also mention the Bernard Goetz case often known as the “Subway Vigilante”. Although the Far Right cheered on Goetz in real life the legal nightmare he got himself into was not worth the few bucks he would have lost if he had given his money to the thugs that threatened him. Federal law now bars him from ever owning a weapon again as well. If the thugs had been armed he would not have survived a gun fight even if he had been armed with a high capacity automatic pistol instead of the snub nose revolver he had against all the thugs that were there threatening him.

          Twenty years ago my lawyer told me that if I got my concealed carry license and shot someone it would cost me at least $100,000 in legal fees for him to defend me in court from the inevitable laws suits even If the cops did not charge me with any crime in a self defense incident because the crooked lawyers representing the deceased relatives would find his relatives even if they had to go to the other side of the world to find them and initiate a lawsuit against me.

          When you carry concealed its a crap shoot as to whether it was the right move or the dumbest move you ever made in your life. Only the aftermath will ultimately tell. The famous line from the Dirty Harry movie was “Do you fell lucky punk” because it will only be luck that will determine your fate.

  15. @James Campbell
    “Also, your comment “So many people love the idea of shooting up the town” shows you have NO idea of what’s going on.”

    Ever challenge your own assumptions? Any possibility you have “spoken” without thinking?

    My comment was directed to those here believe one day they will rise up in righteousness, and as a confused, uncoordinated, undisciplined armed mob, “take back” America from the leftists, statists, authoritarians, Dims, and whoever.

    The “patriots” aren’t thinking through what their dream will actually look like, how to control the uprising (as in plans, intelligence collection, deployment, and rebuilding). They are building castles in the air, thinking that after “the uprising”, the government will function as before, and people will pretty much go back to some “normal”.

    I am “Cassandra”, warning of opening Pandora’s box.

    • Wow, not sure who you sound most like.🤔
      Let’s see……

      1) King George.
      2) French Ruling class shortly before the revolution.
      3) Slave owners against freeing slaves.
      4) Abusive spouse/parent speaking to the abused person.

      I could list many other examples.

      Those who understand “choosing “dangerous” liberty over “peaceful” tyranny” know it would not be a “shoot up the town and go home” affair.
      Just as those of faith who understand they’re NOT promised a calm passage, just a safe landing.
      Things worth fighting for are rarely easy, and ALWAYS come with discomfort and sacrifice.

      Again, your comment about “shoot and go home” is directed toward idiots and neophytes.
      Thinking adults who value liberty and faith know full well what the sacrifices would be.

      Seems really telling that tyrants last words are always along the lines of “you won’t be able to do anything without us”, or “you’ll never be anything without our guidance”. Just like victims of abusive relationships hear. 🤔

      Coincidence?
      Intelligent Patriots DON’T think so.

      • “Wow, not sure who you sound most like.🤔
        Let’s see……”

        You are writing comments to a 2A absolutist (currently considering whether prisoners should be denied any natural, civil and human right (other than the restriction to a specific location).

        I also am iconoclastic, a Cassandra, opposed to echo chambers. capable of holding countervailing ideas simultaneously (particularly the place of military service, and who in the populace should be allowed to legally possess firearms), often pushing back on “conventional wisdom” (particularly the idea that a disconnected, disorganized, unfocused armed mob will rise up and restore the nation to the constitutional conditions of the founding).

  16. Way, way back when, when a bunch of us RKBA advocates would meet in SF with legal scholars like Don Kates and self-defense experts and California lawyers who were pro-RKBA, we’d sit around after the meeting and ponder this exactly question: “If we’re successful – really, really successful – how many people might apply for CCW’s?”

    The most we ever envisioned was about 5%. One in twenty. We reckoned that far fewer people would actually carry on a regular basis, because of how CCW laws used to be structured in the early 90’s. We never envisioned this many states would have “Constitutional carry” laws. Never.

    Thanks to the feckless idiots in the DNC who are the world’s best gun salesforce, we’ve surpassed our wildest prior estimates of CCW’s in the general population. We never, ever foresaw that female CCW stats would get near this point – ever.

    Another three years of our national dementia patient and his termagant side-kick, and who knows how high the numbers could go?

    • Yeah Gunsmith it resulted in road rage murder going to astronomical levels proving that yes ccw people lose their tempers and in an instant commit murder that would not have happened if they had been unarmed.

      Robert Reich has quoted many studies proving that the rise in gun ownership not only among criminals but among ordinary citizens sparked a rise in the murder rate.

      And how about the case of George Zimmerman and Trayvon Martin who shot the black man because he was peering into windows on his street. Again a confrontation that never would have taken place if a so called “law abiding citizen” would not have been armed and emboldened to take the law into his own hands.

      Concealed carry has always been a double edged sward and the statistics caused most civilized nations to outlaw it decades ago.

      • dacian is mentally ill, he has been urged many many times to seek professional help. In his mentally incompetent mind he can not understand the difference between criminals and law abiding citizens.

        Seek professional help dacian. You are a danger to all around you, do it for them.

      • *** “Yeah Gunsmith it resulted in road rage murder going to astronomical levels proving that yes ccw people lose their tempers and in an instant commit murder that would not have happened if they had been unarmed.”

        False

        Road rage occurs when a driver experiences extreme aggression or anger intending to create or cause physical harm. Aggressive driving is a factor in 54% of all fatal motor vehicle crashes, according to the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. Theses are the aggressive driving traits: Tailgating – Speeding when in heavy traffic – Cutting off another driver – Running red lights – Weaving in and out traffic – Frequently changing lanes.

        Not a one of them involve a firearm.

        The most common types of road rage(s) are tailgating, yelling or honking at another vehicle, and are a factor in more than half of all fatal crashes.

        Its about 30 deaths and 1,800 injuries per year caused by road rage. This includes where a firearm was involved and used by the “rage” person. This is not “astronomical” and proves nothing about people who CCW.

        *** “Robert Reich has quoted many studies proving that the rise in gun ownership not only among criminals but among ordinary citizens sparked a rise in the murder rate.”

        Seriously, you need to stop using that word “prove” because you obviously have no concept of what it means.

        False.

        Robert Reich has quoted many studies that failed to include reverse causality deliberately, and failed to prove anything. Its an important thing, its like over half the picture in the statistics. When reverse causality is factored in there is a decrease in violent crime, including murder, when law abiding citizens own or carry firearms. Also, the FBI pointed out in their 2019 report a decrease in violent crime, including murder, when the number of law abiding concealed carriers increased and that as defensive gun use increased the murder rate went down.

        A Pew Foundation report found that; 79% of male gun owners and 80% of female gun owners said owning a gun made them feel safer, and 64% of people living in a home in which someone else owns a gun felt safer. The statistics for defensive gun use substantiate that these are safer and more likely to survive a violent attack with a gun used for defense.

        The acknowledged leading research on the matter that points out the reverse causality issue is by criminologist Gary Kleck. In his rsearch he looked at the 41 studies most often presented by gun control advocates as conclusive and empirical on the relationship between gun ownership rates and violent crime was reviewed. Kleck’s review examined whether the studies were able to overcome three methodical challenges.

        First, whether a validated measure of gun prevalence was used; second, whether the authors of a given paper controlled for the effects of more than a handful of confounding variables; and third, whether the researchers used suitable methods for ruling out reverse causality — that is, the possibility that a positive correlation between guns and crime is the result of higher crime rates increasing gun ownership, rather than vice versa.

        Kleck’s findings were revealing. Of the 41 studies, 21 documented a statistically significant, positive correlation between gun ownership and homicide rates, lending some credence to the “more guns, more murder” hypothesis.

        However, here are the parts ignored from the study by gun control advocates and something you obviously have no knowledge of;

        The quality of most of the studies were very poor when examined in depth. Of the 41 studies papers Kleck examined, less than a third relied on valid measures of gun prevalence, only 12 percent controlled for more than five statistically significant confounding variables, and just 7 percent used suitable methods for ruling out the possibility of reverse causality. Just four studies overcame all three methodological challenges. Of these, not one confirmed the “more guns, more murder” hypothesis. One of these high quality studies (Kovandzic et al 2005) noted that if one ignored the reverse causality problem, it appears that more guns do lead to both higher firearm homicide rates and higher overall homicide rates. But, according to the authors, “when the [reverse causality] problem is addressed, the association [between firearm prevalence and firearm/overall homicide rates] disappears or reverses.”

        Ultimately, Kleck summarized his findings as follows: “Technically weak research mostly supports the [more guns, more murder] hypothesis, while strong research does not. It must be tentatively concluded that higher gun ownership rates do not cause higher crime rates, including homicide rates.”

        • To booger nose

          Your baloney that no one gets gunned down in road rage incidents is laughable. That bold face lie really was over the top.

  17. “You cannot look at this population cohort and compare them to law-abiding gun owners.”

    Sure can. Why last week it was reported that one-in-four high school students were vaping. The controlled study included 100 randomly chosen students who were questioned about smoking habits and vaping. 25% admitted they were vaping. The subjects were high school students; 25% is one-in-four.

    My data set, my rules.

    The cohort you are talking about are bad guys. The average populatin living in the US are bad guys. Comparing behavior of a subset of bad guys to a general population of bad guys is indeed valid, rational, and dispositive of general behavior.

    I will sort through data sets until i can get the results I want. Short of that, I will just make things up, because the general population never goes behind headlines and outrageous claims.

  18. Twenty-one states have adopted constitutional carry – vastly underrated condition. HUGE # of Iowa residents carry (last year the requirement for a permission slip was abolished). They may or may not have carried before this. I’m pretty sure huge increase in carry by lawful citizens that would not dare the previous un-Constitutional “Law”. The # would be interesting.

    All 3 of my sister-in-laws now carry.

    • “All 3 of my sister-in-laws now carry.

      Good.

      Of 2,500,000 annual DGU’s more than 7.7% (192,500) are by women defending themselves against sexual abuse. FBI and other studies show; when a woman was armed with a gun 3% of rape attacks were completed compared to 32% when the woman was unarmed. The probability of serious injury from a sexual based attack is 2.5 times greater for women offering no resistance than for women resisting with guns.

      Even Arthur Kellerman, a staunch anti-gun god among anti-gun and gun control people and one of the most used and cited researchers for anti-gun and gun control groups admitted “If you’ve got to resist, your chances of being hurt are less the more lethal your weapon. If that were my wife, would I want her to have a .38 Special in her hand? Yeah.”

      The 2019 FBI uniform crime report showed that as defensive gun use increased that the murder rate went down.

      A Pew Foundation report found that; 79% of male gun owners and 80% of female gun owners said owning a gun made them feel safer, and 64% of people living in a home in which someone else owns a gun felt safer. The statistics for defensive gun use substantiate that these are safer and more likely to survive a violent attack with a gun used for defense.

      According to a paper by David Kopel, Paul Gallant, and Joanne Eisen, “[F]irearms are used over half a million times a year against home invasion burglars; usually the burglar flees as soon as he finds out that the victim is armed, and no shot is ever fired,” and “Annually, three to six times as many victims successfully defend themselves with handguns as criminals misuse handguns”

      Approximately 2/3’rds of the voters in the U.S. own or use a firearm.

      The premise underlying most arguments in favor of gun control is the belief that firearm prevalence and availability will necessarily result in a higher murder rate. Policies that reduce civilian access to firearms are thus considered to be essential to reducing the incidence of homicide.

      There are a number of empirical studies that document a strong correlation between gun ownership and firearm homicide and overall homicide rates. However, the research isn’t as “high quality” and conclusive and empirical as gun control advocates like to frequently present it.

      In the leading research, and the research relied upon by Biden’s US Department of Justice, on the subject by criminologist Gary Kleck the quality of 41 studies most often presented by gun control advocates as conclusive and empirical on the relationship between gun ownership rates and violent crime was reviewed. Kleck’s review examined whether the studies were able to overcome three methodical challenges.

      First, whether a validated measure of gun prevalence was used; second, whether the authors of a given paper controlled for the effects of more than a handful of confounding variables; and third, whether the researchers used suitable methods for ruling out reverse causality — that is, the possibility that a positive correlation between guns and crime is the result of higher crime rates increasing gun ownership, rather than vice versa.

      Kleck’s findings were revealing. Of the 41 studies, 21 documented a statistically significant, positive correlation between gun ownership and homicide rates, lending some credence to the “more guns, more murder” hypothesis.

      However, here are the parts ignored from the study; the quality of most of the studies were very poor when examined in depth. Of the 41 studies papers Kleck examined, less than a third relied on valid measures of gun prevalence, only 12 percent controlled for more than five statistically significant confounding variables, and just 7 percent used suitable methods for ruling out the possibility of reverse causality. Just four studies overcame all three methodological challenges. Of these, not one confirmed the “more guns, more murder” hypothesis. One of these high quality studies (Kovandzic et al 2005) noted that if one ignored the reverse causality problem, it appears that more guns do lead to both higher firearm homicide rates and higher overall homicide rates. But, according to the authors, “when the [reverse causality] problem is addressed, the association [between firearm prevalence and firearm/overall homicide rates] disappears or reverses.”

      Ultimately, Kleck summarized his findings as follows: “Technically weak research mostly supports the [more guns, more murder] hypothesis, while strong research does not. It must be tentatively concluded that higher gun ownership rates do not cause higher crime rates, including homicide rates.”

      • To clarify; Its the “Technically weak research mostly supports the [more guns, more murder] hypothesis” part that Biden’s DOJ is relying on, in other words the 41 studies analysis bought together in Kleck. But the Biden DOJ ignores the Kleck conclusions and overall analysis with reverse causality and the fact of how flawed the 41 studies are.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here