OMG! New Study Shows a LOT More Americans Are Carrying Guns. OMG!

omg horror

Bigstock

This is the kind of news that’s really going to bother Joe Biden. It might even frighten Diane Feinstein. It should worry Shannon Watts. It’ll gravely concern Julian Castro. It could muddle Chris Murphy. And it should downright perturb Mayor Pete.

A report released by the nonprofit Crime Prevention Research Center this week needs a trigger warning: Nearly 19 million U.S. citizens have permits to carry a concealed handgun.

Just since last year, the number’s grown by 8 percent — an increase of 1.4 million.

A whole lot of those guns, as you know, would be semi-automatic — which clueless goobers on MSNBC and CNN have unendingly denounced as if the designation means a machine gun.

Sorry, major news networks; it’s a machine gun free-for-all.

19 million. Semi-automatic.

Take that, goofy memes!

So which states do you think have the highest concentration of gun-wearers?

Well, in first place, Roll Tide: ‘Bama is a titanic wave of firearm ownership. Some folks there prefer open carry — don’t be scared if the dude behind you at the Citgo’s sportin’ a Glock like he’s Wyatt Earp.

A whopping 26% of adults in the Heart of Dixie have concealed carry permits.

Indiana trails with 18. South Dakota hits the list with 16.

Across the nation, 7.3% own cards.

Three states — Georgia, Texas, and Pennsylvania — have more than 1 million permit holders.

Florida has 2 million.

And here’s something: 16 states don’t require permits.

– Alex Parker in The Far Left’s Wors(t) Nightmare: A Study Reveals A Huge Increase In Americans Carrying Guns

comments

  1. avatar Tom Edwards says:

    It is not the ones who carry guns you have to lookout for. It is the thugs from Democrat ran cities that steal or buy gun out of someones trunk!

    1. avatar H says:

      The Dem candidates don’t care about the urban dwellers who illegally use illegal guns.
      They care about the carriers that are the subject of the article.

      1. avatar Art out West says:

        Those politicians and street thugs are on the same team. Team crook. They work together to rip off and terrify the honest and decent people of the world. The more decent people that carry guns, the safer we will all be.

        1. avatar Roger says:

          That’s what the police in Alabama where I live say

    2. avatar Craig in IA says:

      I just wish those who had permits, and those in states not requiring permits would just carry every day, everywhere they are “allowed” to. It’d be intersting to find out just how many of those permit holders actually carry on a daily basis. 10% maybe. That’s probably high…

      1. avatar Miner49er says:

        Yes, more far as being carried would make us all much safer especially this woman:

        “An Oklahoma woman was shot in the thigh when a dog inside the vehicle with her jumped onto a back seat console, causing a gun under the console to fire.

        The Enid News & Eagle reports that Tina Springer was in the passenger seat of the vehicle that had stopped Thursday to wait for a train in Enid in northern Oklahoma. The yellow Labrador retriever, which belongs to the 79-year-old driver Brent Parks, was in the back seat and jumped onto the folding console. That’s when the .22-caliber handgun under the console went off.”

        I would submit that not every American citizen is really qualified to carry a lethal weapon in a safe manner.

        1. avatar Vinny says:

          Wouldn’t’ve happened if it were on her hip!

        2. avatar M. Albritton says:

          I call bullshit. A pistol, INSIDE a console randomly fired when a dog jumped on the console lid? NONSENSE. Negligent discharge yes… Dog on console, nope. He was making a big fat excuse.

        3. avatar Ing says:

          49er, I would submit that the anecdote you provided is merely a stinky red herring unworthy of consideration. Submit something that isn’t transparently pointless next time.

        4. avatar MtnDewey says:

          I am raisin the bullshit flag on that one….

      2. avatar Graywolf12 says:

        This site should start the poll to see what people will say. As a CCL holder I carry 100% of the time. Why spend the time and money to acquire a CCL if you do not carry when legal.

        1. avatar Aven says:

          There are reasons to get a permit without carrying 100% of the time. I live in Virginia where open carry is permitted as long as it is visible. I initially elected to get my permit in case my gun was laying in the seat of my car or on my body and it got accidentally covered by a jacket, newspaper or something else that would make me illegal.

      3. avatar Don Estle says:

        Most of my friends selective carry which I detest ! I point out everywhere of possible danger areas & people. I never leave home w/o 2 guns & decide upon arrival which to carry depending on what I’m wearing. I also point out the Luby’s shooting in Texas several years ago where a mother talked her daughter into leaving her gun in the car & both her parents were killed in the afternoon. Carry now & always. You never find a thug or criminal w/o his gun.

    3. avatar Suzanne McClain says:

      Amen!

    4. avatar Micala Molnar says:

      Actually, the Dems don’t want “anyone” who disagrees with their agendas to own a gun. Dems feel threatened when Americans can shoot back at those blockheads, so they want to take all our guns so we can’t do a darn thing when they force their twisted agendas down our throats. But Surprise! SURPRISE! NO American is going to give up their guns no matter how much dems scream and whine! We’d rather have a Revolution than give in to those crackheads!!
      Also, Dems are so grossly stupid about taking our guns. Do they honestly think criminals will turn in their guns? They won’t…and neither will we!

  2. avatar Gadsden Flag says:

    The bigger nightmare for the left is firearms owners tend to vote.

  3. avatar No One Special says:

    19 million is only around 5.8% of the country’s population. If the people in states that do not require a permit are not included let’s say generously 10% of the country’s population carries a gun. That’s not very stellar numbers in the scheme of things. It’s actually pretty sad.

    1. avatar CLarson says:

      Is carrying a gun on your person an unalloyed virtue? I suspect at some point there would be diminishing social returns. I am with you that the current percentage is too low. I have heard historians estimate that a third of the colonists supported the Revolutionary war. That sounds like a good target percentage for Americans to keep tyranny in check.

      1. avatar No One Special says:

        Do I carry everyday everywhere I can comfortably get away with it? Absolutely!

        Don’t get me wrong here. I completely understand that there are some people that carry a gun and probably shouldn’t. Same as there are people that don’t carry a gun that society would benefit from if they did. I can’t read minds so either one is not for me to decide. I do agree with 1/3 being a good place to start.

      2. avatar MarkPA says:

        “. . . at some point there would be diminishing social returns.” Absolutely true. To understand increasing/decreasing impact, carry out the following exercise.

        Imagine a violent criminal’s thought process. He lives in a relatively homogeneous county; not much difference in demographics from precinct to precinct. There, he practices his chosen profession.

        From time to time he becomes aware that:
        – 1% of the population carries guns;
        – 2% ” ” ” ” ”
        – 5% ” ” ” ” ”
        – 10% ” ” ” ” ”
        – 15% ” ” ” ” ”
        – 20% ” ” ” ” ”
        – 30% ” ” ” ” ”
        – 40% ” ” ” ” ”
        – . . .
        – 95% ” ” ” ” ”
        – 99% ” ” ” ” ”
        How does his probability of making a poor choice of victim change when the number of gun carriers goes from:
        – 1 – 2%?
        – 2 – 5%?
        – 5 – 10%?
        – 10 – 20%?
        – 20 – 30%?
        – 30 – 40%?
        – 95 – 99%?
        If he is rational, his perception of risk changes very little when the number of carriers changes from 1 – 2%. Likewise, his perception of risk changes very little when the number changes from 95 – 99%. (He might not be sensitive to his knowledge; but reality will nonetheless have its impact. He won’t likely get shot when the number of gun carriers is either 1% or 2%. He WILL likely get shot when the number is 95% or 99%.)

        The criminal’s perception is likely to change when the percentage of carriers goes from 10% -> 20% -> 30%. That’s where the criminal’s sensitivity to a change in percentage of carriers will be most heightened. And, even if he doesn’t make responsive judgements he is likely to get shot and find himself dead or in prison as a consequence.

        It’s really unlikely that more than 20% or so of the population will carry guns. As the criminals respond (one way or the other) the motivation to carry will decline. To some degree, paranoia will cause a few more people to choose to carry; but, if normal people are rational, they will respond to the “free rider” effect. ‘Why should I bother carrying when criminals figure that odds are 20% that anyone they choose to victimize is carrying?’

        Our goal should be to try to move the percentage of carriers from single-digits (= 10%). That’s when we should see some impact.

        And, we should AVOID claiming a goal that “EVERY-body” should carry. There are plenty of people who are temperamentally ill-suited and not interested enough to acquire and maintain the skills. We are much better off if these folks choose not-to-carry of their own self-awareness.

        1. avatar GeorgiaBob says:

          Your argument fits only very loosely with actual recent history. Since the early 1990s the number of guns in private hands has grow significantly. The number of handguns sold in that time is very, very large. The number of people permitted or licensed to carry a firearm has grown steadily. And crime has steadily decreased over that same time. Some argue that the decrease in crime is the result of changes in police practices. There are several different claims made disassociating the two facts.

          Others have argued that it is the ready presence of firearms that is the primary factor in the decrease in crime. Some support for that argument can be found in FBI crime stats that show crime not decreasing, or often actually increasing, in urban areas where citizen carry is prohibited or severely restricted (places like Chicago, Detroit, LA, Miami, etc.), while decreasing significantly in areas where firearms carry is newly allowed. There are no detailed studies to support or dispute this theory.

          My argument is that over 10% of the people you see on the street (outside of the high crime, democrat cities) already are carrying. What we need is a way to dissuade the very liberal corporate media from demonizing People of the Gun and actually start fairly reporting defensive gun uses. Criminals are not into stats, but they do want to live. If a criminal knows, or knows of, people who died or were arrested because of a civilian defensive use of a firearm, that criminal is less likely to put themselves in a position where they might die. When the media suppresses facts about defensive firearm use, crime is not reduced as much as when media reports those facts (my opinion, no study reports on this either).

        2. avatar UpInArms says:

          OK, a good argument from a statistical standpoint. But it’s only really valid inside the universe of street crimes. I don’t have any statistics on what percentage of violent confrontations make up street crime, but I suspect it is not that high in terms of the overall picture. When I read stories of defensive gun use, the most frequent, by a pretty wide margin, scenario is some kind of home invasion or carjacking. In those cases, no permit is necessary– the pistol is retrieved from inside the home or the car.

          So I’m not so sure that a 30% concealed (or even open) carry rate is really that significant. It’s a good goal, and I’m all for it and more. But the real impact, I believe, is simply having a gun accessible in the two places most people spend 90%+ of their time, and that would be the home and the car, and not necessarily hanging off one’s hip.

          That being said, I encourage everyone to get a permit (if required) and pack a pistol anyway.

      3. avatar Reason says:

        About 1/3 supported the revolution but only about 2 or 3 percent actively did so. The remaining supported with donations and moral support.
        It is where the term 3 percenter comes from.

        1. avatar Washington says:

          There’s a bit of misinformation in this common belief. Actually 3% are those who fought the front lines, but they had very high support in the population. They needed food, clothing, places to sleep, bathe, wash clothes, more guns & ammo, etc. Those who support the fighters are every bit as important as the fighters. I’d wager if you include supporters, it was closer to 50% or more.

        2. avatar No One Special says:

          That’s like saying “yeah, I was deployed but leaving out the fact of being in the rear with the gear”. Either it’s in the thick of it or not and if not than it’s not the same thing.

    2. avatar GS650G says:

      Considering the vast restrictions and rules on where a gun may be carried and you have the reason it’s not 20 or 35 percent or higher.

      I’d bet a third of this land would carry if not for the byzantine maze of rules you have to follow.

      1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

        GS650G,

        And don’t forget the non-trivial time and expense required to satisfy state government employees before you can carry a handgun without risk of significant fines and/or prison time from those state employees.

        Training can easily be $200 and licensing can easily be $100 or more every few years.

        Thus, your up-front cash expense is often at least $300 (not including the cost of your handgun, holster, and belt). And many people will have to spend an entire day (8 hours minimum) at training. That has a cost associated with it as well, especially if you have to miss work.

        Eliminate the expense of time and money before you can carry and a few more percent of the population will carry in public.

        1. avatar FormerParatrooper says:

          Illinois is 16 hour minimum. Few exceptions will lower the time to 8hrs, a honorable discharge is one, 4 hrs of credit can be applied if you have a hunter safety course.

        2. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

          ” And many people will have to spend an entire day (8 hours minimum) at training.”

          Here in Florida, there are instructors who will work around your schedule for you. It costs more, but is do-able.

          If you work 6 or 7 days a week, it doesn’t have to done in one 8-hour block of time…

    3. avatar GeorgiaBob says:

      There were 158 million registered voters in the USA in 2018 and 2020 will probably be close to the same. That means the 19 million “card carrying” concealed carry voters are actually about 12% of registered voters – but that does NOT include anyone carrying in the 16 constitutional carry states. Nor does it include voters who carry openly where permission is not required for open carry. Add another million for the police officers who carry all the time and do not have a concealed carry permit.

      My rough guess is that there are closer to 40 million people in the USA who carry, at least on certain occasions. It is reasonable to assume that a very large number of these people will NOT vote for a democrat who wants to confiscate their guns. Also consider that most of these people will vote in 2020. SO, if about 125 million people vote in 2020 (similar to 2016) and about 35 million of those voters carry firearms on their person and will likely vote Trump over any democrat, that’s 28% of expected voters.

      That is clout.

      1. avatar No One Special says:

        Given current state of affairs and the number of people that don’t vote or vote third party (which is the same thing to me). Your assertion seems like presumptuous assumptions.

        1. avatar rt66paul says:

          Voting third party sends a message. If you live in a state(say Ca or NY) where federal Democratic vote is a forgone conclusion, you might as well vote your conscience, the electoral votes are all going Dem. You also have to remember that many Republicans will claim to be pro gun, but later they will say that is only for others like them and the people on the wrong side of the tracks don’t deserve it.

        2. avatar No One Special says:

          It is that exact kind of thinking that is part of the problem. If you are not going to vote main party you just as well not vote. It is absolutely absurd to think doing anything else is going to accomplish anything. Except for being able to say I voted thinking that insignificant waste of time earns the right to bitch. No it doesn’t because it is the same as not voting. I don’t give a damn if the electoral vote goes Democrat. What will be the excuse if by some chance they decide to get rid of the electoral college? It is absolutely about voting for the lesser of two evils. Anything less is futile. If this is how you really vote do me and every other freedom loving American the favor and just stay at home. You will be doing just as much good.

        3. avatar Toni says:

          Personally if you have to vote for the lesser of 2 evils and either party is going to f#%& you in some way then you should already be voting with the cartridge box and the hangmans noose. It is just a matter of getting enough together that feel that way strongly enough to do so

      2. avatar Where are the lost sheep says:

        The sad fact of the matter is you have to factor in a percentage of those folks just won’t vote. You can drop rocks on them and they still will not be moved to vote. I know there are plenty of people who make zero effort to get involved. If the majority of so-called “Christians” got off their rear-ends and voted, especially like they were actually Christians we would not have all these leftist-marxist-fascists running around shutting down our Constitutional rights. Either they are just that lazy or they have been duped by the wolves in their congregation that Christians should abandon the political field as though voting is something dirty. Christians more than outnumber any one voting block, too many just won’t vote. It is easier to sit back and complain I guess.

        1. avatar No One Special says:

          This sounds like you have a vendetta against Christians instead of people that don’t vote. I’m a gun carrying, voting, imperfect Christian. There are many that are like me that I associate with. I would say your tirade is sorely misplaced.

        2. avatar Toni says:

          sadly there are quite a number of churches that have climbed on board the leftist/marxist movement. Seen way too many of them who only think with their emotions and nothing else.

        3. avatar rt66paul says:

          The truth here is many people feel disenfranchised and are too busy trying to keep a roof over their family’s head to even vote. These tend to be the poor that would otherwise vote Democrat. Be careful what you wish for………….

    4. avatar napresto says:

      You should really do that math using adults as a baseline, excluding both children and the elderly/infirm who cannot carry a firearm (I mean people in nursing homes and things like that). When you calculate the percentage from the entire population of the US, it is technically accurate, but not especially meaningful. Not that I don’t agree that people should exercise their second amendment rights when they can.

      1. avatar No One Special says:

        At a generous 200 million that puts the percentage at 9.5%. Allow for those not counted and that gives maybe 16-17% maybe. On the conservative side of things that leaves roughly 16% unaccounted for in the 1/3 assertion.

    5. avatar SoCalJack says:

      US population is 1/4 under 18 years old, using 2018 total popluation and the 19 mil permitted carry, we have roughly 7.4% of US adult population have carry permits. Good metrics to know, but is it data that can scare the gun grabbers to take action?

    6. avatar Garrison Hall says:

      Actually, the numbers are significant. The increasing numbers of concealed carry citizens represents a significant demographic change. As the number slowly increase, the incidences of armed citizens defending themselves and others against spree killers , home invaders, and other armed criminals is also increasing. What this means is that it’s only a matter of time before the kind of armed attack that did such harm in El Paso is going to run head on into one or more armed citizens who will fight back. And when that happens—especially if our numbers increase to the point were fighting back becomes more and more common—the attractive vulnerability of defenseless places like churches, schools, and rock-concerts will of necessity begin to decline. 2nd Amendment rights signify the belief that it’s always better to have a fighting chance rather than no chance at all. I don’t know where the critical-mass moment for an armed citizenry is but as America continues to arm itself we’re destined to find out sooner rather than later.

      1. avatar Ed Schrade says:

        But “the fly in the ointment ” is all the gun free zones that will impede what you described. Outlaw or discourage the gun free zone by holding the people responsible for that posting criminally liable for the protection of anyone in the so called gun free zone. Never found any free guns there anyway !

    7. avatar Gadsden Flag says:

      Except that many more own firearms. They vote too.

    8. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      No One Special,

      I believe the “sweet spot”, in terms of greatly discouraging violent criminals from plying their trade, will occur when 1 out of every 6 adults are armed in public. And I mean armed in public, not licensed and unarmed.

      Look at it from a violent criminal’s perspective. Would he/she risk personal injury to attack an adult when there is only a 1-in-20 chance (5% of the adult population) of the victim being armed? Probably. Would he/she risk personal injury to attack an adult when there is a 1-in-6 chance (17% of the adult population) of the victim being armed? Probably NOT.

      Of course most criminals would be even less likely to risk personal injury attacking an adult if even greater numbers of adults were armed.

      1. avatar No One Special says:

        Generously speaking we are possibly already at 16-17% of the adult population. That is not people that are armed as much as possible when away from home or vehicle though. I would say again generously there is probably a quarter to a third of the whole that are armed that often. Given your example (which I too would like to see) we are a ways from those numbers.

    9. avatar Jonathan-Houston says:

      It’s only approximately 5.8% of the U.S. population if you included everyone who lives in the U.S. in the denominator. That is permanently downward biased fake news statistic because not everyone who lives in the U.S. is even eligible for a concealed handgun permit, or even to possess any firearm, for that matter.

      First off, you have to exclude non-adults, meaning anyone under 18, because no state allows them eligible for a carry license. Moreover, you should exclude adults under 21, too, because there are few state exceptions for granting the adults under 21 crowd a licence. You also need to exclude all of the illegal aliens and temporary residents, such as those on temporary work or education visas. They’re ineligible for licenses.

      Then you have to exclude all of those who are incarcerated or institutionalized. You’re not getting a carry license when your permanent address is a prison or a mental hospital. Neither are you getting one if your last address was such and you left with a felony or major misdemeanor record, or having been adjudicated as a mental defective or drug addict.

      The biggest impediment of all, however, has nothing to do with your personal traits. It’s geographic. If you live in various slaves states, you’re either never going to get a licence because it’s a “may issue”, aka, “never going to happen” state, or because the licencing requirements are expensive and onerous. Hawaii, it has been reported, has not issued even one concealed carry license in this entire century-to-date.

      If you strip away all those from the denominator who are ineligible or for whom licensing is extremely impractical, then you’ll begin to arrive at a more reasonable measure of Americans who lawfully choose to carry a self-defense sidearm. What is that figure? I don’t know; you do the math. I’m sure it’s a helluva lot higher than 5.8%, though.

      1. avatar No One Special says:

        “I’m sure it’s a helluva lot higher than 5.8%, though.”

        Actually I did do the math at generously speaking that only brings it up to 16-17%. That is total not the much smaller percentage that carries everyday everywhere they can possibly get away with.

  4. avatar D.B. Cooper says:

    Thanks to Castro’s scumbag brother doxing Trump supporters in San Antonio, there’s probably a few more packing personal protection.

  5. avatar Chip Bennett says:

    We’re number two! We’re number two!

    (We’re working on making it even better, but Indiana is comparatively a great state for gun rights.)

    1. avatar VicRattlehead says:

      Yup, fellow Hoosier here.
      -Free permits
      -No force of law on ‘no guns’ signs (except schools and Gov’t buildings)
      -top notch legal protection from ‘wrongful death’ suit
      -great castle doctrine
      -Accepting ‘no big deal’ culture pertaining to guns and carrying.
      -Stong hunting culture (I know, it brings out the Fudds but it also normalizes guns in the general culture)

      IN may not be perfect but it is at least very, VERY good.

  6. avatar Richard Coon says:

    Not horrible….Roughly one out of six people are carrying and if you eliminate those states where nobody carries, ie Hawaii, California…It probably comes closer to one our of four…

    I feel safer already, especially since I’m one of the ones…

    1. avatar tdiinva says:

      It’s nowhere near 1/4. Probably the same percentage of people in permitless States carry as in permited States. Just because your State does not require a CHL doesn’t mean everybody is packing. And don’t forget a lot Fudds have permits so they can carry while bow hunting. Virtually every State with a permit requires that you have one if you want to carry during bow season. The number of people who carry on a daily basis is disappointingly low.

      1. avatar Rincoln says:

        I fully agree with the notion that many, maybe even most, don’t carry daily. But, I wholeheartedly disagree with the conjecture that the numbers are lower in permitless states. There’s a reason they’re permitless. The majority of people voted in congress members that passed those laws. Also, you’re completely omitting people who will never have a permit, whether they need it or not, but carry anyway.

    2. avatar No One Special says:

      I would be pleasantly surprised if the ratio was one in ten people that carry a gun.

      1. avatar Reason says:

        I always thought if 10% of the adult population would carry we would have a much safer nation. I know I would think twice before attempting a crime of violence if I knew I had a 1 in 10 chance of getting shot.

        If the news would put on that 10% were packing daily instead of BS about gun control maybe they would scare a few criminals straight.

    3. avatar I Haz A Question says:

      Richard,

      Believe me, here in CA people carry. People in conservative counties get permits. People in Democrat counties cannot get permits, but carry anyway. I myself “carry” here in Los Angeles, though my gun(s) aren’t actually on my physical person at all times. To navigate the myriad laws here, I have to have multiple guns stationed in multiple locations and stored per CA requirements. So while I cannot legally carry on my hip, I nevertheless have a gun within reach at home, in my vehicle, my wife’s vehicle, my place of employment, etc. All different guns, but always something within reach throughout the day. Not the optimum method of self-protection as compared to those who are fortunate enough to live in permitless carry states, but when you’re dealing with anti-2A Lefties in charge, you work with what you’ve got.

      So that means you can add literally several guns from my neck of the woods to that low-balled 19 million total in the article above. And I’m just one person. I think you can probable double that number for a more realistic nationwide total.

      1. avatar rt66paul says:

        Transporting a gun in a vehicle in Ca is legal, keeping one in said vehicle is not. Good luck to you if you are involved in an accident and the gun is found in the wreckage. We kept a gun at our place of business and have a few around the house, but I do not ever want give any jerk police cheif a reason to red flag us and take our self defense away from us.

        1. avatar Geoff "I'm getting too old for this shit" PR says:

          “Good luck to you if you are involved in an accident and the gun is found in the wreckage.”

          I’m finding that difficult to believe, knowing my limited knowledge of Georgia gun laws.

          The legislature there is pretty decent on 2A rights. No one has ever introduced a bill there curing that specific situation?

          That just fails the common-sense sniff test…

  7. avatar Green Mtn. Boy says:

    “This is the kind of news that’s really going to bother Joe Biden. It might even frighten Diane Feinstein. It should worry Shannon Watts. It’ll gravely concern Julian Castro. It could muddle Chris Murphy. And it should downright perturb Mayor Pete.”

    WGAFF about the feelz of those or any Leftards,the more carriers the safer this nation will be.

  8. avatar napresto says:

    Don’t you think it’s a little disingenuous to post almost an entire article written by someone else without crediting the original author until the very end (and much less prominently than the byline at the beginning)? If I did this with a research paper, it would be rightfully rejected and my academic career would be over.

    1. avatar No One Special says:

      Honor amongst theives?

    2. The post is listed as the quote of the day. The author is named and site linked properly.

      In the almost nine years we’ve been running these, literally no one has ever claimed that we’re using someone else’s content improperly.

      Until now.

      1. avatar napresto says:

        I’m proud (but also disappointed) that I’m the first.

  9. avatar ChoseDeath says:

    Damn it Carolina’s, we’ve gotta do better! 8%, pathetic.

  10. avatar Aven says:

    I don’t think you can judge the number of carriers by the number of permit holders. My daughter had her permit but the only gun she ever shot was for her permit in Tennessee. I asked her why she even got one and she said she was going to exercise her constitutional right. Of the people I know that have their concealed permit, almost none carry but they want the option if they want. Our local sheriff (a democrat) provides free concealed carry classes and waives his part of the fee. You can get a 5 year concealed carry permit for $15 in this county in Virginia and a lot of locals have taken advantage of it but have no intention of carrying.

    1. avatar uncommon_sense says:

      Aven,

      I tend to agree. I think at most half of all concealed carry licensees carry almost all the time. And it may be that only one quarter (1/4 th) of all concealed carry licensees carry almost all the time.

  11. avatar Andrew Lias says:

    Let the pearl clutching commence!

    I don’t care why people do it, just that it’s being done means that people see value in it. If anything only to make a statement on rights they believe in.

  12. avatar Dude says:

    Looked at the map and liberal Washington state and Colorado are right there with the southeast states at 10-15%.

  13. avatar GunnyGene says:

    Y’all need to be careful about getting too far down in the statistical weeds with this and similar “studies”. The margin of error is huge and might even exceed the point estimate by a significant amount. You could obviously, and rationally, say there are more carriers now than there was a year ago, but trying to pin down an absolute percentage is impossible.

    1. avatar No One Special says:

      True but those that carry everyday religiously I would bet is a lot less than what some might otherwise believe. What use is a gun at home if you’re not at home?

      1. avatar GunnyGene says:

        That’s an equally valid assumption. 🙂

        Btw, I’m one of those who has never had a permit, but have carried legally and not so legally in a variety of states for over 50 years. Sometimes concealed, sometimes not.

        1. avatar No One Special says:

          Gunny, I admit there was a time when carrying a gun into someone else’s home was a little uncomfortable for me. I once considered it disrespect to do so. Now I consider it something I owe my family and myself for the sole reason of defense no matter where I/we happen to be. I’m sitting in my mother-in-laws living room and I’m carrying. On the way home I’ll be stopping by the base commissary. Granted I’ll have to leave my firearm in the car but as soon as I get back in the car it will go back in the holster. We need people that don’t look at being armed an inconvenience but rather a duty to themselves, their family, and their fellow man.

  14. avatar Bob says:

    I have always wondered about the percentages of licensed carriers in South Dakota (my home state), and was kind of amazed it was that high. But it is higher, because as of this year we became one of the 16 states that no longer require a license.

  15. avatar Chris T in KY says:

    I don’t understand why some in the “Gun community” have a resistance to wearing or carrying an American flag when they open carry. Are they embarrassed by the flag? Do they hate their own country? Are they afraid to be associated with people who openly express love for America?

    If you are offended by my questions are you also offended by Antifa when they open carry with Red Communist hammer and sickle flags? They seem to be very proud to carry a gun and a communist flag at the same time.

    The open carry rifle fool in springfield Missouri don’t think he needed to have an American flag. Nor did he think he needed to have a sign stating “I’m the good guy here to protect you”.

    Its interesting that Antifia have not open carried a rifle into a retail store. Only in the “gun community” have done that.

    They also wear Red hammer and sickle face masks.
    https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/antifa-brings-ar-15s-to-seattle-counter-pro-constitution-rally/

    1. avatar EndDangerEd says:

      I for one hope Antifa keeps on wearing the orange/red facemasks… makes them real easy to see. As to the American flag…. I’d rather take a moment to see what a person’s DOING than make an incorrect GUESS based upon his clothing. Ever hear of “offensive camouflage”? Same as “hiding in plain sight”. God, bless America!

      1. avatar Chris T in KY says:

        I agree. I’ve said it before I’m glad the enemy is proud to wave their flag while carrying guns.
        But is does seem that some in the “gun Community” are just as uncomfortable carrying an American flag as Antifa is.

        If you embarrassed about the American flag it’s ok. If you hate the country that’s ok too. You don’t have love this country to receive the Constitutional benefits. Antifa and the rest of the Left proved that a very, very long time ago.

        As I and my platoons mates use to tell each other, “that guy coming over the hill or around the corner had better have an American flag tattooed on his @ss.”

        That rule has worked pretty well for the last 200 plus years for the American military overseas.

        We will see when the second American Civil starts who still is embarrassed to wave an American flag. And who is proud to wave a communist red flag.

    2. avatar Proud to be American! Joel says:

      I usually conceal carry but I’m wearing an American flag shirt as I type. My open carry holster has the stars and strips screen printed onto the Kydex. My boots have the flag stitched onto them. A lot of my clothes and gear sport either the Texas or American flag. 😎🇨🇱🇺🇸

  16. avatar Alan says:

    16 states don’t have permit to carry requirements. Should be a whole lot more than 16 in my view. By the way, the punishment for armed crime should be certain and severe.

  17. avatar Just A Person says:

    If we could get this group of almost 20 million to vote as a block, the 2A would be safe forever

  18. avatar Kendahl says:

    Based on his interactions with people while on duty, Ohio police officer Greg Ellifritz (activeresponsetraining.net) estimates that only one quarter of those with concealed carry permits actually carry on a routine basis. I suggest you divide your numbers by four and work from there.

  19. avatar MADDMAXX says:

    Closer to 20 million Concealed Carry Permit holders does not include 16 states w/no permit Open Carry.. How many? 5 million 25 million? These people are ALL of legal voting age in a pool of approximately 153 million potential voters which means fully one third of all possible voters (closer to 100 million ACTUAL voters) are packing for personal protection and are NOT likely to vote for some dumbass that is promising to take most of their disposable income and their guns.. This does not bode well for ANY of the current wanna be dictators UNLESS they can run a “get out the vote” campaign among all the big city NON FELON gang bangers that want the general population disarmed, that shoiuld give them a couple of hundred votes nation wide… Keep talking Libtards keep that money rolling in to the RNC and keep those new gun owner numbers growing….

  20. avatar rt66paul says:

    It may not be so here in Ca, since is is so hard to get a CCW in most counties. We can fight back against some of this – there is an effort to recall Gov. Gavin Newsom. If you see someone setup outside a grocery store or wherever, you might just want to sign the petition. Dan, maybe you can write about this. It is not just his view on firearms, but that is a good enough reason to get rid of him.

  21. avatar Shire-man says:

    Obvious fake news is obvious. We all know gun related research is banned by some magical force. That’s what MSNBC keeps telling me, anyway.

  22. avatar Leighton Cavendish says:

    plenty carrying illegally as well…especially criminals…duh…
    if there was a problem with gun owners…there would be millions dead by guns each year
    800,000+ abortions vs 35,000 gun deaths…compare the numbers…

  23. avatar Datahut says:

    Wow, lots of stats and speculation. As a former analyst/consultant in a huge ‘evil’ corporation I could add more of both, but job well done commentors. I take heart at the numbers/stats, and thanks for this article. My take away is that the numbers of voters with permits, and those who carry at least some of the time, plus those who wish they had a permit or own firearms but don’t bother getting a permit is significant. Enough so that as an optimist any gun grabbing is still pie in the sky politically or otherwise. Meanwhile I go about my day feeling safer in a shall issue state whether carrying or not. Criminals, and from lots of experience, harassing pricks alike will only go so far under the circumstances.

  24. avatar StuckInIllinois says:

    Still waiting on my permission card so I can legally carry in the awesome state of Illinois; 134 days and counting. They don’t make legal carry easy or timely here unfortunately.

  25. avatar strych9 says:

    So South Dakota has issued eight permits statewide?

  26. avatar SouthAl says:

    War Eagle! Contrary to the article, I rarely see anyone open carrying in Bama. Although I do see many, including myself, who couldn’t care less about printing, exposure when reaching for something on a high shelf, etc.

    I know one or two with a permit who almost never carry, plenty with a permit who carry regularly but not all the time, and some who carry regularly without a permit.

  27. avatar Mark H says:

    Arizona has 347153 active permits. Also Constitutional carry.

    No way to know how many are held by residents. AZ doesn’t keep track.

  28. avatar LEO says:

    WHAT THE HELL DO THESE NITWITS THINK. WE ARE GOING TOO BE VICTIMS OF SOME OF THESE CRIMINALS COMING INTO OUR COUNTRY. .WHEN YOU ALLOW SEVERAL MILLION ILLEGALS TOO ENTER THE COUNTRY.SOME OF THEM ARE GOING TOO BE CRIMINALS. I FOR ONE WILL NOT BE A VICTIM.. I HAVE CARRIED FOR 45 YEARS AND I WILL CONTINUE TOO PROTECT ME AND THE INNOCENT.

  29. avatar Pamela says:

    Their main GOAL is to disarm all law abiding voters so their Dictator Politicians, such as, Killery & Obama and the low-life degenerates from other countries, can run this country as they wish..That is their only GOAL, they could care less how many are killed by illegals. AGAIN, their GOAL is to rule this country as Hitler did in Germany and nothing is going to stop them, unless we vote out the ENTIRE DEM POPULATION….

  30. avatar Busterdog says:

    I have been carrying legally for close to 21 years in Florida. Those fucking carpetbaggers in the Northeast can write all the laws or regulations they want. Because the South has risen again and we don’t give a damned what you want. Come and take it.

  31. avatar David says:

    The anti-gun side only cares about the law abiding because those are the ones they can get money from.

    Every time there is a push for gun control… there is a buying frenzy. The leftists better recognize the fact that all those legally purchased firearms are NOT going to be surrendered after people have spent all that money to get armed.

    Just as it was for the colonists, when the state seeks to force people to “Turn ’em in”, the people will resist…. even the armed liberal ones. Confiscation didn’t work for King George III and the British Army who marched to Lexington & Concord to talk it over with the colonists. Just as the colonists did, people in Australia, UK, and every state where bans have been imposed, the people have practiced “CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE”. How many so called “assault rifles” and “high capacity magazines” have been turned in, moved out of state, or destroyed? Australia found a black market in firearms being smuggled in from Indonesia along with illegal Muslim aliens.

    Even the Founders recognized that a law the people refuse to comply with is unenforceable.

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