Concealed Handgun Permit Holders Have Killed at Least 139 Since May 2007

[struggle4progress]

Including 9 Law Enforcement Officers—“Concealed Carry Killers” Web Site February Update

WASHINGTON - February 19 - Concealed handgun permit holders have killed at least nine law enforcement officers in addition to 130 private citizens (including 14 shooters who killed themselves after an attack) since May 2007 according to the latest update of Concealed Carry Killers, a Violence Policy Center (VPC) on-line resource that tallies news reports of such killings. The web site, located at http://www.vpc.org/ccwkillers.htm, is updated monthly to include new fatal shootings since May 2007 by concealed handgun permit holders and any changes in the legal status of permit holders facing criminal charges. (Any concealed handgun permit holders who are eventually acquitted of their alleged crimes are not included in the tallies maintained on the site although the facts surrounding the shooting are detailed.)

The VPC web site categorizes the 78 incidents, which occurred in 22 states, and offers detailed descriptions of each incident (some incidents may fit into multiple categories). Of these incidents, 14 were murder-suicides involving firearms and 13 were mass shootings (three or more victims) that claimed as many as 11 lives at a time. Law enforcement officers were killed in Alabama, Florida (two incidents), Idaho, Ohio, and Pennsylvania (two incidents). All of the law enforcement killings were committed with guns ...

Violence Policy Center Legislative Director Kristen Rand states, "When the National Rifle Association launched its state-by-state campaign for lax concealed handgun laws, it made this promise: ‘People who get permits in states which have fair right-to-carry laws are law-abiding, upstanding community leaders who merely seek to exercise their right to self-defense.' To the contrary, concealed handgun permit holders are killing people over parking spaces, football games, and family arguments."

Because most state systems that allow the carrying of concealed handguns in public by private citizens release little data about crimes committed by permit holders, the VPC reviews and tallies concealed handgun permit holder killings primarily as reported by news outlets. It is likely that the actual number of fatal incidents involving concealed handgun permit holders is far higher.

http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2010/02/19

[baldguy]

1. But the rest of us are supposed to trust them?

I don't think so.

[Euromutt]

34. Do you trust licensed drivers?

Well over 40,000 motor vehicle traffic collision deaths every year, but 1/1000 of that number and you bust out the (self-)righteous indignation? I think your prejudices are showing.

[struggle4progress]

46. Over 250 million vehicles in the US. Many people spend hours/day on the road.

If there were comparable gun handling, you see a lot more gun injuries

[Euromutt]

57. But probably more like 215 million licensed drivers

Still, why don't we run with the 250 million number for the sake of the argument? So given that there are an estimated 5 million CCW permit holders in the United States, we'd have to multiply the number of unlawful deaths caused by CCW permit holders by 50 to arrive at the numbers we'd get if there were as many CCW permit holders as there are licensed drivers.

So 139 deaths over 33 months gives us an average of ~4.21/month. Multiply that by 600 (12 months times 50), and we get 2,527.3 deaths/year. Compared to over 43,000 motor vehicle traffic deaths/year.

It's a crude comparison, of course, but not unreasonable; quite a lot of CCW permit holders spend more time with a firearm about their person than they do operating a motor vehicle. According to the VPC, every minute that they do they're potential killers, so every minute counts toward the equation.

[customerserviceguy]

2. This is about as relevant

as how many licensed drivers have killed people with their cars by driving too fast or drunk.

[struggle4progress]

5. "Relevant" takes a preposition phrase: "relevant to ..." n/t

[customerserviceguy]

14. That reminds me

I forgot "dictionary drive-bys" from English majors.

I stand corrected, and yes, I do want fries with that.

[burrfoot]

55. Hey, grammar cop-

I think that term you were actually looking for was "prepositinonAL phrase."

How about we stick to substance, though? Cause we can spend all day pointing out each other's typos, or we could...well, pretty much anything else we could do would be better.

I, for one, am going to the dog park.

(and I may or may not be carrying while I'm there :evilgrin:)

[struggle4progress]

70. Claim "that's irrelevant" invites rejoinder "irrelevant to what?" It's not mere grammar:

it's a question about what the actual complaint is

[Merchant Marine]

3. So they're about as deadly as lightning strikes?

Good to know.

[struggle4progress]

6. Rather more: there are over 200000 annual firearm injuries in the US, and somewhat

less than 300 lightning strike injuries

[X_Digger]

9. Are those 200000 firearm injuries all by permit holders? No?

Shame, shame, shame on you then.

[Euromutt]

35. It helps your argument when you don't fabricate your numbers

According to the CDC's WISQARS, in 2006 (the most recent year available) there were 30,896 deaths and 71,417 nonfatal injuries from gunshot wounds; a total of 102,313, and that's for all intents, including legally justified shootings.

Not "over 200,000"; half that.

[struggle4progress]

41. If you like the WISQARS estimates, 100000 still considerably exceeds 300

The purported 95% confidence intervals typically range up to 1.5 of the raw numbers, so WISQARS isn't ruling out (say) 150000 deaths and injuries

For accidental firearm injuries, the nonfatal:fatal ratio is something like 6 and may be due to medical intervention. A similar ratio for all firearm injuries would lead one to expect something like 200000 total injuries

Part of the problem is we really don;'t know the actual numbers here

[Euromutt]

54. "We really don't know the actual numbers here"; didn't you have term for that situation?

Ah, yes: post #15 in this thread you dismissed a number that was not wholly certain as a "wild guess." And yet, you have no compunction about presenting as fact a number you admit you can't substantiate ("we really don't know the actual numbers here"). Though, of course, you didn't admit you can't substantiate it until after it was challenged. I think you need to work on holding yourself to the standards you impose on others.

The fact that 100,000 > 300 remains less than relevant, considering that this thread is explicitly about unlawful homicides inflicted specifically by CCW permit holders. Even given the VPC's padding of the numbers (by including the suicides in murder-suicides, non-firearm homicides, and firearm homicides that were not facilitated by possession of a CCW permit), and even if we were to include nonfatal injuries in the discussion, that's still a very small subset of total firearm injuries.

[struggle4progress]

60. 31 cases in the last month corresponds to an annual rate of 372 cases a year,

well above the expected 90 lightning deaths per year

[Euromutt]

63. Read your own thread title and stop cherry-picking

Your thread title says 139 deaths since May 2007; that's currently the widest range of data available. You can't pick the one months that best suits your purposes out of those 33 and use only that; that's data selection, and in science, it's fraudulent. The honest thing to do is to use the widest range of data you have available.

We have 139 dead in 33 months; that's an average of ~50.4/year, well below your estimated 90 deaths by lightning a year.

[struggle4progress]

66. Data are based on newspaper reports and depending on reporters asking the question

"Who here had a permit?"

379 cases in the last 2.75 years (11/month or 50/year), 62 cases in the last 0.333 year (15/month or 186/year), 31 cases in the last 0.083 year (31/month or 372/year) might suggest a sudden growing epidemic of violence from permit holders or it might suggest that the news reports are providing a more complete picture now than in the past

If you have a better source of trend data, let us know

[AtheistCrusader]

75. Please prove the 'permits' involved in 'newspaper stories' are CPL's, and not just firearms permits

some states require them, some do not. I can think of more than one instance where a reporter could not tell the difference between a CPL (concealed pistol license) and a license to purchase a handgun, as required in Indiana.

[Euromutt]

79. Problem: 31 deaths were added to the list in the past month; they didn't all happen in that time

I've just finished going over the "Total Killed" list, looking just for incidents in 2010. They are:

01/08/2010 - Pennsylvania, 1 dead
01/19/2010 - California, 2 dead*
01/19/2010 - Virginia, 8 dead
01/29/2010 - Utah, 1 dead
02/01/2010 - Massachusetts, 2 dead**

* Disputable entry; shooter was a security guard, not a CCW permit holder
** Padding; death toll includes suicide of shooter

So what we actually have is 14 deaths in 2010 so far, markedly less than 31 in the past month (or so). The balance presumably consisted of incidents that took place prior to 01/01/2010, but had not yet been added to the list. I acknowledge this was rather hard to work out, since the VPC doesn't bother to tabulate the numbers, but groups "vignettes" by state. One has to wonder why they seem to be going out of their way to make the data difficult to analyze...

Be that as it may, your speculation was based on an invalid premise.

[GreenStormCloud]

87. Good work !!. N/T

[struggle4progress]

95. If the data sources are reasonably good, the rate at which cases are discovered

can't differ much from the rate at which they occur. If the data is rather incomplete, of course, the rate at which cases are discovered will fall somewhat below the actual incidence rate

[Euromutt]

97. Even so, that doesn't make your claim of "31 dead/month translates to 372 dead/year" correct

You can speculate all you want, but at least have the grace to acknowledge that you were mistaken when you asserted that the 31 dead who had been added to the list were all killed in the preceding month (and that all arguments based on this premise were therefore also mistaken).

Here's a tip for you: when using some piece of research to argue in favor of or against some hypothesis, always check to see that the researchers' conclusions are actually supported by the data. Even more so when the data is being padded as blatantly as it is in this "study."

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

40. So CCW permit holders are less dangerous than lightning.

[Callisto32]

52. Try to follow the conversation.

You can't have a discussion if you keep moving the goalposts.

[slackmaster]

64. WISQARS reports 78,622 non-fatal firearm injuries in 2008, and

http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/nfirates2001.html

The National Lightning Safety Institute reports 756 lightning strikes on people from 1990 - 2003.

http://www.lightningsafety.com/nlsi_lls/fatalities_us.html

[struggle4progress]

47. 62 cases since October 2009 works out to about 186 cases a year in the news

[SteveM]

58. HUGE number. WOW! Over 2 per STATE! WHEN will it END?!

[struggle4progress]

59. 31 cases in the last month works out to 372 cases a year: this is probably an effect

of better reporting, as newspaper begin to ask this question; I don't know when the numbers will stabilize

[SteveM]

62. Yes, we could stand some better reporting about guns from MSM...

"...the one-sided character of much of the news reporting on the gun issue is a serious matter, although clearly not one that has been widely acknowledged among opinion leaders. Media manipulation in general has certainly not gone unnoticed (see, e.g., Cohen and Young (198l), concerning media treatment of crime, deviance and social problems; Bagdikian (l987) on economic and political issues in general; and Herman and Chomsky (l988) on political, especially foreign policy, issues). However, the unequal character of the propoganda struggle over guns is not as well known or as frequently addressed by scholars." -- "Media Bias: Gun Control, Assault Weapons, Cop-Killer Bullets, the Goetz Case, and Other Alarms in the Night," originally presented at the annual meetings of the American Society of Criminology, San Francisco, November 20-23, 199l.

I feel confident that MSM will cover any crimes by CCW-holders in a fair and unbiased way. Yep. Really. This time. I'm sure.

[Euromutt]

83. 31 cases added to the list; not 31 cases occurred

See my post #79 http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x294892#295605

[struggle4progress]

96. Discovery rate for a short time period is unlikely to exceed incidence rate, and when data

is incomplete the discovery rate over a short time period is likely to fall rather below the incidence rate

[virgogal]

4. And about 13,000 people die,per year,from falling in the USA.

[struggle4progress]

12. Gravity is an irremediable fact of life: absolutely everyone is exposed to it 24/7

So there's no much one can do to eliminate tripping incidents where people sustain fatal head trauma, for example. On the other hand, the WISQARS data indicate about 60% of fatal falls occur in the 65+ age group; and plenty of folk work to mitigate this threat to the elderly

Since firearms disproportionately kill the young, and falls disproportionately kill the old, there is a substantial difference in the expected years of life lost

[virgogal]

24. So that means approx. 5200 people under 65 die per year from

falls and approx.40 per year die from concealed handgun permit holders.

Big difference.

The OP is a non story IMHO and I have never fired or owned a gun in my life.

[struggle4progress]

42. If you have practical ideas about how to reduce fall deaths, many people will be interested.

[Callisto32]

53. Firerarms are just Newtonian motion.

I'm pretty sure that this is also an "irremediable" fact of life. Though why you would want to remedy these things is beyond me.

[X_Digger]

7. Of 5M permit holders?

Even smaller rate than another class of folks- police officers.

[struggle4progress]

15. Permit statistics aren't available from most states, so your number is a wild guess

[X_Digger]

19. So take TX & FL, the states with the most permit holders who DO publish those stats..

.. and apply it to the rest of the permit holders.

After all, the 'anti-' bias is usually applied to those two states more than many others, and if those two states are representative of other states' permit holders, or even the worst as some would have you believe, then extrapolating based on those two would yeild a worst case scenario- a worst case scenario that is still a better rate than cops.

[struggle4progress]

67. The Texas statistics can't be independently verified since Texas sealed these records:

but, of course, it is worth noting that Texas' carelessness in issuing permits has been a matter of some concern in the past

[X_Digger]

72. Matrix-worthy dodge there.

eta: I'll quote your own words back to you: "If you have a better source of trend data, let us know"

[Euromutt]

33. "Rough estimate" = "wild guess," got it.

The five million is an admittedly rough estimate, and you might call it a guess, but that doesn't make a "Wild" one. It's based on the fact that where numbers of issued permits are known, permit holders tend to form 2-4% of the population over 21. Thus, the figure of 5 million is derived from being ~3% of the total population of the 40 "shall issue" states.

I'll be sure to remember, whenever you posit a number that is not exactly known and documented, to dismiss it as a "wild guess."

[Tim01]

37. NO, it's a good guess based on facts and numbers. nt

[spin]

8. As usual the VPC report was flawed...

Flaw #1: How did they identify permit holders?

The report makes it clear that they have no idea whether or not they are accurately identifying these parties as permit holders. In the study, they admit as much, “Because of the secretive nature of concealed handgun permit laws, the VPC relied primarily on news accounts.”

***snip***

Flaw #2: Charged with a crime does not equal conviction

Many of the alleged permit holders noted in this report are described as having been charged with a crime but no further information is provided as to the disposition of the charge. This is an important and glaring attempt to cloud the issue.

In many states and jurisdictions, a citizen who properly and legally defends themselves from an attack may well expect to be initially charged with a crime. The charges may later be dropped or may be no-true-billed at the grand jury level. A charge does NOT equal a conviction and yet the VPC, an organization that promotes itself as a public policy think-tank on legal and constitutional issues, treats them as synonymous.

***snip***

Flaw #3: Does my permit allow me to carry a strangling cord?

Another blatant attempt to pad the data was brought to my attention by Mr. Deeds. It comes in the form of several data points involving non-handgun related killings by “permit holders” (see Flaw #1).

Carry permits allow a person to carry a handgun for personal protection. In cases where rifles or other weapons are used to commit a crime, the fact that the person may or may not have been a permit holder is a moot point and not germane to the issue at hand.

***snip***

Flaw #4: Who is more dangerous?

The VPC concludes their report by stating that these examples illustrate clearly that concealed carry laws are not good public policy because permit holders are dangerous. Furthermore, there is a clear implication that they are more dangerous than the general public.

Let’s take a closer look at the statistics to refute this wild inaccuracy. According to the FBI Uniform Crime Report, across the general public in the United States, there are an average of .042802 murders per 1,000 citizens per year.

Now … even if we concede all 51 deaths detailed in the VPC report as wrongful deaths, averaging them across the over 6 MILLION permit holders in the United States and taking into account the two year timeframe, we get an average of .00425 per 1,000 per year.

In other words, even if they are 100% correct in their wildly flawed report, they have simply proven that permit holders commit murders at a rate that is 1/10th of the general public. emphasis added
http://www.examiner.com/x-3253-Minneapolis-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m7d21-Lies-damn-lies-and-VPC-statistics?cid=exrss-Minneapolis-Gun-Rights-Examiner

edited for spelling error. Fat fingers again.

[DissedByBush]

94. I've never seen an honest VPC report

It's all lies, all the time.

That's what you have to do to whip up a public anti-gun fervor, because the truth doesn't support it.

Their fight against the .50 BMG was particularly full of lies and distortions.

[PavePusher]

10. How many were lawful shoots?

Let me point out to you that the sky is not falling, and permit holders are still a safer catagory than non-permitted citizens.

Your attempt to manufacture hysteria and mislead people will get you no-where.

[struggle4progress]

20. Too lazy to look at /www.vpc.org/ccwkillers yourself?

[PavePusher]

32. Just as I thought.

The site does not specify, but gosh what a catchy title.

No-one trying to fan the flames of hysteria there, uh-uh. :tinfoilhat:

[struggle4progress]

43. The site DOES specify. It provides a list of instances, together with

an indication of whether the instance was counted or not. You just couldn't be bothered to look

[PavePusher]

50. My mistake, I missed the link to the list.

Sorry about that.

However, a lot of those (the majority of the first 20-odd pages, I'll look futhar after a good nights sleep) seem to be of the "Pending" catagory. I'll take this up again in the A.M.

[cowman]

11. Do you

really think that we are going to believe a fucking word coming out of the VPC propoganda machine. Get real

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

13. PA and FL alone have about 1,250,000 active ccw permit holders.

There's likely many more when you consider the other states that allow carry.
I think the average rate for CCW in shall issue states is 2%-4% of the population. It fluctuates, but most state are around this range.
Figure that there are about 33 states are shall-issue states with 2%-4% ccw rates. (man, where did I put my calculator?)
I guess it's safe to say... there are several million active ccw holders in america.

For the sake of ease, lets just use the known numbers from PA and FL, 1.25M ccw holders.
So, the VPC could only dig up 78 incidents involving murder by ccw holders? :scared:
We'll even ignore the fact that the VPC included some ACQUITTED and PENDING cases in their shit-stain of a report.

Well I guess that's it! :eyes:
Lets revoke the rights of the 99.994% of CCW holders NOT involved with killing people because of 78 incidents.
:sarcasm:

Sometimes, I think anti-2A people have never passed a practical statistics class in their lives.
Alternatively, judging by their demonstrated maturity, most may not be old enough to have taken such courses so maybe there's hope yet.

[GreenStormCloud]

76. 38 states are shall-issue, 2 states are constitution-carry.

Constitution-cary mean no permit is required to carry concealed. You just have to be a legal gun owner and citizen of the state, AL & VT.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[beevul]

17. Really?

Can you point one ANYONE that wants to force those that don't wish to, to be armed?

Let alone any significant number of them?

Didn't think so.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

18. Correction: "Gun nuts will not be happy until all Americans* have the freedom to be well** armed."

* Americans who are not Felons nor mentally adjudicated. Courts uphold the denial of civil rights to certain individuals by due process of the law.
** "Well armed" meaning access to common modern firearms which are discriminate in nature.

[spin]

21. Define "gun nut". If you are using it to describe all gun owners...

than you are definitely wrong.

Those who don't want to own a firearm have every right not to own one.

Not all people who do want to own a firearm should be allowed to. Some people have a history of violence, abuse alcohol, have anger management problems, suffer from severe mental disorders or live in a volatile relationship with a significant other. Such individuals are examples of people who should not own firearms.

Some people are unwilling to take the necessary time to learn how to use a firearm safely. Another example of people who should not own a firearm.

It's easy to paint people with a broad brush but it's also foolish.

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[X_Digger]

25. "owning something capable of killing another human being with the squeezing of a trigger"

So all those contractors with pneumatic nailers? *gasp* Murderer!

All those referees at track and field competitions with starter pistols? *shock* Killa!!

All those people with car keys in their pockets? *faint* oh noes! Savages!

[Ernesto]

23. Call me a gun nut then!

However I'm a combat veteran of the USMC, own a Colt .45 automatic pistol like the one I had in Vietnam (haven't touched it in 10 years, BTW).
And, I think the NRA is a crock of shit rip-off of tea-bagger type morAns.
Just MHO. No offense intended.

[spin]

26. Well obviously I'm a "gun nut" by your definition and I don't think everyone should own guns...

and I believe that the overwhelming majority of gun owners feel as I do.

Therefore, you do indeed paint with a very broad brush.

[bossy22]

27. i think using that term is now against the rules in this forum

[spin]

28. Especially when you use it to paint all gun owners.

as the poster did when asked to define what the term meant.

Often people turn to name calling and insults when their arguments fail.

[bossy22]

30. its a variation on Godwins Law

[Euromutt]

29. How many threads have we had about this already?

This was the big one, over a month ago: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x282461

As a follow-up, there was this one: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=118x278818 where the likelihood of being unlawfully killed by a CCW permit holder was compared to the risk of being struck by lightning.

So we've been over this before. Let's all try to bring something new to the discussion, please?

[spin]

31. The VPC and the Brady Campaign need to come up with something new...

until then we will continue seeing the same old flawed report.

[struggle4progress]

44. 31 additional cases found in the month since that post; expected deaths by

lightning strikes per month is maybe 7

[Euromutt]

56. I love the way you present that as if 31 dead/month is a typical number

Of course, even accepting the VPC's blatant padding of the numbers, 139 dead over 33 months gives us an average of about 4.2 dead/month. Still significantly fewer than your estimate of the number of deaths by lightning.

[struggle4progress]

61. It's based on news reports, hence depends on newspapers asking the question:

139 over the last 33 months; 62 cases over the last 4 months; 31 cases over the last month -- that's 4+ cases/month, 15+ cases/month, 31 cases/month, probably indicating that the true numbers are rather underestimated by news reports

[PavePusher]

65. Errr, you mean relying on the same newspapers...

that routinely call civilian firearms "machine guns", state that a suspect's weapon was licenced and registered (in states with no such mechanisms), call low caliber target rifles "high power assault rifles", etc., etc., and make any number of other technical and factual errors?

We should trust these sources for accurate reporting on if a person had a concealed carry permit?

Ummm, not without firm proof. Perhaps a suitably edited copy of the permit, or verification from the State's permit issuing department.

[struggle4progress]

68. That's clever, since the gun lobby has been pushing successfully to shield such records from public

view -- so (as you are no doubt aware) such verification will in many cases be completely impossible to obtain

[beevul]

71. Uh...

"That's clever, since the gun lobby has been pushing successfully to shield such records from public view -- so (as you are no doubt aware) such verification will in many cases be completely impossible to obtain"

Some examples of this - please - I mean where the gun lobby pushes to keep permit info private AFTER a conviction?

I'll admit that effort has been taken to shield that info from simple "fishing expeditions", but thats not what you were referring to, was it.

[PavePusher]

74. Wat you said. n/t

[Euromutt]

98. I've got a brilliant idea:

Let's create a publicly accessible database listing addresses of households that are likely to contain handguns, so that burglars can know where to steal them and fence them into the criminal circuit.

Does that not sound like a good idea? No? Well, maybe it's not such a good idea to have CCW permit records publicly accessible, then.

Though there is a possible compromise: have the records publicly accessible, but have the authorities keep records of everyone who requests access to them, and have any CCW permit holder whose record is queried informed of the full identity and address of the inquiring party. That way, if the permit holders guns are stolen by a burglar, we'll know who to suspect first; and any one who wants to invade a CCW permit holder's privacy will have to surrender some of their own first.

That seems fair.

[Euromutt]

80. See my post #79 above

Direct link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=294892&mesg_id=295605

[struggle4progress]

45. Note that the lightning strike data is not accurately known either:

[GreenStormCloud]

89. They don't have anything new. N/T

[Tim01]

36. Wow! Such a tiny amount in this huge country.

VPC is a bunch of fucking morons trying to spin gold out of straw. AND I question their motives.

[Pavulon]

38. How many died from latex allergies

induced by rubbers? Just curious?

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

39. That's a remarkably low number.

[proteus_lives]

48. +1

Why should we be scared again?

[Hoopla Phil]

49. Not this crap again?

[Callisto32]

51. 78 people in 3 years?

Really? I mean, really?

[struggle4progress]

69. Incomplete data include one permit holder who killed eleven other folk

[Euromutt]

82. And at least one permit holder who shot only himself, another who wasn't a CCW permit holder

And a third who strangled a friend of his wife's to death.

I can't demonstrate that the numbers aren't incomplete, but I can sure as hell demonstrate they're padded.

[spin]

73. Why the VPC report and its conclusions are flawed...

From the VPC report at http://www.vpc.org/studies/ccw2009.pdf

Concealed Handgun Permit Holder: Max Wesley Horn, Jr.

Circumstances: On March 29, 2008, Max Wesley Horn, Jr. allegedly fired six shots at Joe
Martell with a .45 pistol equipped with a laser sight outside the Hot Shotz bar during the
Chasco Fiesta street festival, fatally wounding him. The two had “scuffled” prior to the
shooting. While Horn claimed self-defense, a police detective stated that based on the
forensic evidence, Martell “was either turning away, being pulled away or he was not in
direct confrontation with the person with the gun.” ...

The shooter was acquitted:

Jury acquits shooter in Pasco's 'stand your ground' trial

Max Wesley Horn spent the past two years behind bars, awaiting trial for shooting a man at a crowded street festival.

He killed Joe Martell, but he believed he was right in doing it.

After deliberating nearly three hours Thursday, a jury agreed.
http://www.tampabay.com/news/courts/criminal/jury-acquits-shooter-in-pascos-stand-your-ground-trial/1068849

*************

Circumstances: On March 8, 2008, Christine Burroughs, naked and covered with blood, ran
to neighbor Alice and Lance Lather’s house seeking refuge from her enraged husband,
Arthur Burroughs. Burroughs followed his wife to the home, fatally shooting Lance Lather.
Burroughs then barricaded himself in the neighbors’ bathroom with his wife. A SWAT team
and hostage negotiator were called to the house, but Burroughs shot and killed his wife and
then himself. Christine Burroughs had previously told Alice Lather that her husband wanted
to kill her because she wanted a divorce. Burroughs had been previously employed in loss
prevention and security for T.J. Maxx and had possessed a concealed handgun permit since
at least 1999.emphasis added
Source: “Domestic Dispute Spurred Shooter,” Palm Beach Post, March 10, 2008.

One major problem...CHRISTINE BURROUGHS DIDN'T DIE !!!

Widow Of Hostage Gunman Apologizes

A heartbroken apology as the woman held hostage by her husband Saturday night says a neighbor sacrificed his life to save hers. Chris Burroughs explains, when she asked her husband, Arthur for a separation, he beat her. She ran next door to help. The residents helped her hide in their bathroom.

Then, Chris claims, Arthur barged in and fatally shot the homeowner, Lance Lather. Arthur then held Chris hostage at gunpoint before taking his own life. For Chris, watching her husband die, and the physical pain she's in, pale in comparison to the sorrow she feels for the family of the man she calls her 'hero.'
http://www.wptv.com/mostpopular/story/Widow-Of-Hostage-Gunman-Apologizes/wu4QFUEkO0yOM_zvbxiI6Q.cspx

****************************

Concealed Handgun Permit Holder: Charles Podany

Circumstances: On February 29, 2008, Charles Podany allegedly killed Casey Landes
following a dispute over a speeding pickup truck in which Landes was a passenger. The
incident began when Podany, on a bicycle, approached the truck and asked the driver to slow
down. Landes became upset, got out of the truck, and punched Podany in the face. Podany
fell to the ground and Landes prepared to strike him again. Podany then pulled a .40 Glock
pistol and fired two shots, hitting Landes once in the face. Detectives reported that Podany’s
injuries were abrasions and a cut to the left side of his lower lip, “which does not justify
deadly force.” Podany, who had a concealed handgun permit, was charged with
manslaughter.
Source: “Man Shot After Speeding Confrontation,” The St. Petersburg Times, March 2, 2008.

Stand-your-ground defense clears Thonotosassa bicyclist in fatal shooting

Hillsborough Circuit Judge Robert Foster agreed Tuesday to toss out Podany's manslaughter charge after his attorneys argued Podany fired in self-defense under Florida's "stand-your-ground" law and deserved immunity from prosecution. The law allows people to meet force with force when they feel threatened.

Defense attorney Stephen Romine said Podany's case met the stand-your-ground test: Podany wasn't engaged in unlawful activity; he had a right to be there; and if he hadn't acted, he may have been seriously injured or killed.
http://www.tampabay.com/news/courts/criminal/stand-your-ground-defense-clears-thonotosassa-bicyclist-in-fatal-shooting/1032920

*******************************

Circumstances: On December 15, 2008, William Littleton allegedly killed his neighbor,
72-year-old Luther Kaemming, shooting him three times in the chest with a rifle. Kaemming
was a prosecuting witness in a court case against Littleton on charges that Littleton had
obstructed drainage ditches in front of his property causing water to back up into neighbors’
yards. Littleton, who was issued a concealed handgun permit in 1998, was charged with
murder.

William Littleton was issued a CCW in 1998 but it would have expired in 2003 since North Carolina has a five year license.




I could do more research and find many more flaws, but I have far more important things to do (like watching the Olympics.) I did notice that some of the reports involved rifles, which are hard to conceal, strangulation and accidental shootings. I'm not sure exactly how these incidents pertain to CCW.

Those who support CCW don't claim that a person who gets a carry license suddenly transforms into an angel. But statistics DO show that people who have concealed carry licenses are very honest and also use their firearms in a responsible way.

[Euromutt]

81. The problem is that Sugarmann wants to have his cake and eat it

(Or as the French say, rather more coherently, he wants the butter and the money for the butter.)

He wants to show that issuing CCW permits creates a public safety hazard, by enabling citizens to commit homicides with firearms that they would, absent the CCW permit, not have had on hand. But to approach that in an honest fashion, the VPC would have to count only incidents in which the permit holder used a firearm that he could only have been carrying legally thanks to having a CCW permit. That means excluding homicides with anything other than a handgun (long guns, personal force, non-firearm weapons); homicides in the home (where you don't need a CCW permit); homicides in locations where even licensed concealed carry is a criminal offense (e.g. locations with "30.06 signs" in Texas), and I'm sure we can come up with a few more examples.

But, of course, if you accept those restrictions, the pickings are going to be very thin indeed; even less impressive than the numbers they've produced, and those are low enough even though they've been shamelessly padded. So they've just included any homicide in which the shooter was licensed to carry a firearm in a non-governmental capacity.

A couple of egregious examples are:
Richard TAUCH; allegedly shot his ex-girlfriend and her new boyfriend in Monterey Park, CA. Problem: Tauch had a Security Guard Firearm Permit, which only allows open carry while in uniform; it is not a CCW permit.

Aubrey BERRY; allegedly shot rapper Roderick "Dolla" Burton in Los Angeles, CA. Problem: Berry had a Georgia Firearms License, but was not licensed to carry in California, and was thus illegally carrying the firearm.

Tony VILLEGAS; allegedly strangled his estranged wife's best friend to death in Fort Lauderdale, FL. Problem: not having a CWP would not have prevented him from strangling the woman.

David NESBITT: charged with negligent homicide after his 5 year-old son fatally shot himself with Nesbitt's Glock, which the boy had found in a closet in their home in Cincinnati, OH. Problem: Nesbitt's not possessing a CCW permit would not have prevented this incident from occurring. Moreover, the incident was the result of negligence, not malice.

Marc KIDBY: though he was under a domestic violence protection order, Athens County (OH) Sheriff's Dept. failed to suspend his CHP and confiscate his firearms, one of which--a .38 Spl--he used to shoot himself. Problem: the guy didn't kill anyone other than himself.

As noted, examples abound of homicides committed in the shooters' own homes, where they didn't require a CCW permit to have the firearm available. There are also some examples of negligent discharges in public, the inclusion of which is fair enough if you want to argue that CCW permit holders present a public safety hazard, but not if you want to illustrate that they commit violent crimes.

But given the VPC's track record, I'm guessing they're interested in creating heat, not light, and are counting on people who cite their numbers not to have actual read the report with a critical eye. We've already got a few examples of those on this forum.

[spin]

84. This report will continue to circulate for years...

and the VPC will update it on a frequent basis. Newspapers will refer to it as proof that CCW is a bad idea. The media will talk about the updated figures as if they were gospel and not misleading in the least.

But when research on legitimate use of firearms is published, the media will attack it as full of holes, unscientific and biased.

Sometimes I think we should require licenses for reporters to insure that they report facts not propaganda. If it's proper to criticize the research by Gary Kleck on his 1993 national survey that found that 2 million DGUs (Defensive Gun Uses)occur each year, than it would also be fair to examine and criticize the VPC's report.

It's not difficult to find problems with the VPC report. Some quick research on Google will quickly show that many of the incidents should never have be used as proof that CCW permit holders are dangerous. Any cub reporter could do the research.

[struggle4progress]

93. From the VPC website:

"... Max Wesley Horn ... This case is not included in the statistics cited in the Concealed Carry Killers website ...
... Arthur Burroughs ... <website currently does not list Christine Burroughs as killed> ...
... Charles Podany ... This case is not included in the statistics cited on the Concealed Carry Killers website ...
... William Littleton ... <website currently lists case as pending> ..."

In the first three cases, you incorrectly claim VPC is counting people they're not counting; in the final case, you merely speculate that Littleton's license had expired

[GreenStormCloud]

77. Thank You for helping to prove that CCWers really are extremely safe.

It took almost three years for the number to get to 139. And we don't know how many of those will be dismissed as lawful as many of those cases are still pending. Even if they are all unlawful, and each by a different person, that is still a very low number from a base of about 5 million. It is well below the general public number of about 15,000 from a base of about 240 million ADULTS in the country.

139 on a base of 5 million comes out to 2.78/100,000 for CCWers And that number includes non-gun killings

15,000 on a base of about 240 million comes out to 6.25/100,000 for the general population. And that number is gun killings only.

We are much safer than the general population when it comes to guns.

[hibby76]

78. Wouldn't it make sense to compare that...

Wouldn't it make sense to compare that to something like "lives saved by concealed weapons carriers"? I could make the same argument about cars (which I'm sure have killed 100 times more than that) and argue that all drivers licenses should be revoked. Cars aren't specifically given as a right in the constitution. Guns are.

[spin]

85. Yes, it would make sense...

but the VPC isn't in the business of being fair.

The driver's license argument is a good analogy. You could publish a report that shows that licensed drivers often fail to follow the law and the result is all too often serious injury or death. To make it really impressive, you could add stories in which the driver's license had been revoked or was a license to operate a crane, stories that involved the subject driving aircraft or trains and stories in which the person that was listed as dying wasn't injured at all.

Basically, the VPC inflated their report with stories that were factually incorrect or were later judged as a proper use of a firearm etc.

It obvious that they have an agenda and that the media lacks the honesty to point it out.

Welcome to DU.

[DainBramaged]

86. Totally acceptable loses to the gun crowd

doesn't matter to them, they get to keep their guns.....

[PavePusher]

88. Just as we have

"acceptable losses" for any other activity. It's about freedom and choice. They don't come wrapped in padding.

What's your point?

[DainBramaged]

90. I made my point.

[friendly_iconoclast]

92. What, that potential harm equals actual harm?

Here's where that mindset might lead:

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

[cowman]

100. The only

point you made is that you are a ridgid anti-gunner who won't listen to any other point of view

[friendly_iconoclast]

91. We accept that you (and everybody else) have the potential to do harm with your computer

You know, you could (not saying that you do or would, mind you) steal credit card information, hack someone else's
security system, run a scam, or traffic in child pornography.

Some other people have and will undoubtedly do so in the future, yet you still get to keep and use your computer and Internet connection.

Because you (I presume) haven't done anything wrong with them. It's called freedom

Thus, "acceptable losses".

[cowman]

99. Yeah

your right. We are all heartless bastards who care about nothing but our guns. I sit up all night just stroking my "gun" and hoping I get to use it.:sarcasm: Have you ever killed another human? Probably not. I have and I hope and pray that I never have to again, but if I am ever forced to becaused of someone else's actions, at least I will have the correct tool to defend myself

[russ1943]

101. a perspective..............

No one, the VPC, Brady or even the few people in favor of more restrictive gun control who still bother to read this forum would disagree that in general, CCW permit holders commit murders at a rate that is less than the general public. DUH……….A group that is scrutinized with background checks, as permit applicants for CCW are, will be less likely to commit murder with their firearms than a comparable group, who are not screened.

Again, no one, VPC is claiming otherwise.

The VPC site quotes Tanya Metaska, then the executive director of the National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action, promised, "As we get more information about right-to-carry, our point is made again and again...People who get permits in states which have fair right-to-carry laws are law-abiding, upstanding community leaders who merely seek to exercise their right to self-defense." This assertion, summarized by Metaksa in the blunt and absolute assertion that "these citizens don't commit violent crimes," was a key factor when state legislatures debated weakening concealed weapons laws to allow private citizens to carry concealed handguns in public.(Also John Lott's repudiated "More Guns Less Crime") Not all, but some posters on this board have made similar claims.
To present an on line resource that tallies news reports of such killings is an appropriate rebuttal to her (and others repeated) claim that CCW holders “don’t commit violent crimes”. The claim isn’t as posters on this thread repeatedly make, that CCW license holders are dangerous. VPC is not stating nor are they implying that CCW holders are more dangerous than the general public, just that there are CCW holders who have killed and VPC is providing a resource that tallies news reports of same. VPC has also provided an e-mail address and is apparently willing to accept input on cases noting “Recognizing that the VPC is relying primarily on news reports, the actual numbers are most likely far higher. This tally is updated monthly. Clicking on each category’s tally will link you to vignettes describing the circumstances for each killing, listed by state. The descriptions also include the current, known status of any charges filed against the permit holder as well as noting instances where the perpetrator committed suicide. (Any concealed handgun permit holders who are eventually acquitted of their alleged crimes are not included in the tallies maintained on the site although the facts surrounding the shooting are detailed).

[X_Digger]

102. Funny you don't quote the accompanying press release..

"VPC is not stating nor are they implying that CCW holders are more dangerous than the general public"

Stating, no.. implying? You decide..

"To the contrary, concealed handgun permit holders are killing people over parking spaces, football games, and family arguments."

http://www.vpc.org/press/1002ccw.htm

[Euromutt]

103. A counter-perspective...

A group that is scrutinized with background checks, as permit applicants for CCW are, will be less likely to commit murder with their firearms than a comparable group, who are not screened.

Again, no one, VPC is claiming otherwise.

Actually, they are; or at the very least, they're strongly insinuating it.
From the article quoted in the OP:

Violence Policy Center Legislative Director Kristen Rand states, "When the National Rifle Association launched its state-by-state campaign for lax concealed handgun laws, it made this promise: ‘People who get permits in states which have fair right-to-carry laws are law-abiding, upstanding community leaders who merely seek to exercise their right to self-defense.' To the contrary, concealed handgun permit holders are killing people over parking spaces, football games, and family arguments."

Italics mine. Then there was Josh Sugarmann's assertion in the HuffPo three months ago (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-sugarmann/keeping-track-of-killings_b_360572.html) that:

<...> the simple and deadly fact is that state concealed handgun systems are arming cop-killers, mass shooters, and other murderers.

Conspicuously absent is a complete lack of nuance in these statements. Nowhere is it acknowledged that we are, at this point, talking about 78 homicidal permit holders out an estimated population of 5 million (possibly much more by now, given the run on CCW permits since Obama was elected). And in actual fact, it's not even 78, given that the VPC's list includes at least one person who wasn't a CCW permit holder (Richard TAUCH, who had a California Security Guard Firearm Permit, which only permits open carry while in uniform), at least one who killed only himself (Marc KIDBY of Athens Co., Ohio), and at least one person whose kid shot himself with an unsecured handgun, but who didn't pull the trigger himself (Daniel NESBITT of Cincinnati, Ohio). We're talking about less than two thousandths of a percent here (0.00156%, to be precise).

The VPC claims that "Toxic Tanya"* Metaksa's assertion that "these citizens don't commit violent crimes" is wholly incorrect, when, based on currently available evidence, we have to provisionally conclude that it was 99.99844% correct.

Given the fact that VPC is already demonstrably padding the numbers, you'll have to forgive me if I'm more than a little skeptical that "the actual numbers are most likely far higher"; the reported numbers are already higher than what they can prove.

* And that was her nickname inside the NRA.

[Euromutt]

104. "Concealed handgun permit holders are killing people over parking spaces, football games ..."

Violence Policy Center Legislative Director Kristen Rand states, "<...> To the contrary, concealed handgun permit holders are killing people over parking spaces, football games, and family arguments."

It hadn't occurred to me before to actually check on this claim against the report, because I could not imagine that anyone would be so bare-faced as to make such an assertion without the evidence to back it up. But it seems I have been too generous.

On a whim, I searched the VPC's complete listing (http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/ccwtotalkilled.pdf) for incidents in which a CC permit holder had shot someone over a parking space, or a football game, and found not one report of either occurring.

That's right, ladies and gentlemen, Kristen Rand, Legislative Director of the Violence Policy Center is simply making shit up and stating it as fact to the news media; the news media who, I am disappointed but hardly surprised to note, did not bother to actually look into the report to verify Ms Rand's claims.

[PavePusher]

105. Uuhh... this is a revelation?

Just sayin'... :evilgrin:

[Euromutt]

106. I knew the VPC was dishonest; I'm just surprised they're this blatant about it

I assumed that Rand was at least referring to incidents they had gleaned from news reports, even if she was obviously trying to make it sound as if they happened on a near-daily basis, rather than once or twice in the almost three years that this survey covers up till now. To find that such incidents have not been found by the VPC to have happened at all is a bit of shocker, yes.

Exaggeration, I expected; total fabrication, I had not.

[russ1943]

107. Not VPC who is misleading

From the article quoted in the OP:
Violence Policy Center Legislative Director Kristen Rand states, "When the National Rifle Association launched its state-by-state campaign for lax concealed handgun laws, it made this promise: ‘People who get permits in states which have fair right-to-carry laws are law-abiding, upstanding community leaders who merely seek to exercise their right to self-defense.' To the contrary, concealed handgun permit holders are killing people over parking spaces, football games, and family arguments."


Clearly the perspective in Ms Rand’s statement is a response,………… a response….. to Tanya Metaska’s, the NRA’s (and unknown others) statements, claiming ‘People who get permits in states which have fair right-to-carry laws are law-abiding, upstanding community leaders who merely seek to exercise their right to self-defense’.

While you apparently spent time and effort to (sort of) check her statement, you may not have considered that one or more of her remarks about CCW holders killing people over parking spaces football games and family arguments may have occurred prior to the time frame (May 2007 to the Present) of the VPC on-line resource.

And then there is.............
Re parking space;
Maybe you missed on page 66 “Tennessee Concealed Handgun Permit Holder: Harry Raymond Coleman PENDING Date: February 6, 2009.” which the Memphis, Tennesee Commercial Appeal titled a June 5 2009 article "Argument over parking space ended in shooting".

Re football;
Maybe you missed on page 37 North Carolina Concealed Handgun Permit Holder: Lionel Loya CONVICTED Date: December 5, 2009.
The December 8, 2009 Omaha World-Herald, article titled. “Texas-Neb. Game sparks shooting.”

I notice you didn’t bother to try to rebut the “family arguments” category so maybe we can all agree there have been a few CCW license holders who have killed over family arguments.

[Euromutt]

109. No, I didn't miss those examples

It's just that I didn't take the VPC's representation of events at face value.

In the case of Harry Coleman fatally shooting Robert Schwerin, according to the article given as a source (http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2009/feb/09/cordova-man-accused-killing-man-car-dispute-makes-/):

The Associated Press quoted <counsel for the defense Leslie> Ballin as saying the argument "turned physical with Mr. Schwerin attacking Mr. Coleman's wife and threatening to attack Mr. Coleman. ... We look forward to trying the case in a court of law."

The argument between Coleman's wife (note: not Coleman himself) and Schwerin may have been over a parking space, but the subsequent shooting related to the circumstances of the argument. Coleman did not shoot Schwerin "over a parking space."

In the case of Lionel Loya, he pleaded guilty to involuntary manslaughter, without a plea deal. Again, I quote one of the articles listed as a source (http://www.newbernsj.com/articles/tuesday-62619-manslaughter-gets.html):

District Attorney Scott Thomas said the investigation revealed that it was an unintentional shooting that occurred due to careless and reckless conduct involving a gun and alcohol.

“There was no evidence of premeditation, which is required for a first-degree murder charge, and no evidence of malice, which is required for a second-degree murder charge,” Thomas said.

So as far as even the prosecution is concerned, Loya shot Rodriguez unintentionally as a result of stupidly messing around with a firearm while inebriated. Loya did not shoot Rodriguez "over a football game."

Rand, moreover, used the plural: "parking spaces, football games." Using the plural creates the impression that there are multiple instances of this happening; when you have at most one example of each, that is misleading. Note that I say "at most," because the VPC's representation of these incidents has been highly tendentious, omitting rather salient details, which is again misleading.

I notice you didn’t bother to try to rebut the “family arguments” category so maybe we can all agree there have been a few CCW license holders who have killed over family arguments.

Sure. But unlike parking spaces and football games, "family arguments" are not necessarily trivial things. One could describe the killing of 15 year-old Jamar Pinkney, Jr. by his father as stemming from a "family argument" (Pinkney, Jr. had just confessed to raping a 3 year-old relative, a fact that VPC euphemistically describes "inappropriate sexual contact"). Not that I want to try to justify any such killing, but shooting your wife while going through a messy divorce, in which she's already seeing someone else, is not in the same category as shooting a complete stranger because he snagged a parking spot you had your eye on.

But by lumping "family arguments" in with "parking spaces" and "football games," Rand is trying to foster by association the impression that these "family arguments" are minor disagreements, like over someone forgetting to do chores or getting the wrong kind of cheese at the grocery store.

And the bottom line remains that we're talking about a comparative handful of CCW permit holders who went off the rails and killed someone; several dozen out of an estimated population of five or six million. I crunched the numbers earlier in the thread: if there were as many CCW permit holders in the United States as there are licensed drivers (~215 million), and members of that population committed homicides at the same rate as the current population (~4.21/month going by the VPC's figures, for a population of 5 million), CCW permit holders would kill fewer than 2,200 people/year. By contrast, licensed drivers kill over 43,000 people/year in motor vehicle collisions. That number would be even higher if we were to count, as the VPC does, homicides committed by means not covered by the relevant license. (That is, the VPC's numbers include killings committed using means other than a handgun in a place in which the perpetrator could not have legally possessed a concealed handgun without a CCW permit, e.g. personal force, long guns, and handguns used in the home.)

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

110. Game, Set, Match!

[Statistical]

108. The "study" has so many holes in it that it would sink in a lake.

http://www.examiner.com/x-3253-Minneapolis-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m7d21-Lies-damn-lies-and-VPC-statistics

Flaw #1: How did they identify permit holders? News reports. Which often are inaccurate.

Flaw #2: Charged with a crime does not equal conviction. In many states even justifiable homicide results in charges which are eventually dropped.

Flaw #3: Does my permit allow me to carry a strangling cord? Includes suicides and homicides involving non-firearms.

Still even if you take the numbers at face value.... The VPC just "proved" that CCW holders are 1/100th as likely to commit a homicide as general population.

Thanks VPC!

139 homicides / 3 years = 46 per year. Approximately 8 million CCW issued. That works out to about 0.5 homicides per 100,000 permit holders. National average is 5.7 homicides per 100,000 persons.