Firearm fatalities climbed after concealed carry law passed in 2016
- Thread starter NutcaseConservative
- Start date
No they don't. But letting everyone carry a concealed gun without any training whatsoever is completely stupid. Way to go WV Repugs.
There isn't a logical lineage between those things. On the other hand, if you allow more people to carry weapons, it isn't a leap to think that heat-of-the-moment fatalities will occur.
Most shootings aren't planned events. They happen based on a short-lived emotion of anger. When you allow more people the opportunity to carry, more people will then have the ability to be violent with firearms.
There isn't a logical lineage in anything based on a one year period. Statistical anomalies happen. We won't know for a few more years if the time cited was an anomaly. Thus I will mock this article with some outrageous claims.
The article states that a state trooper went on a domestic dispute call and was shot. I would think, historically, domestic dispute calls are one of the most dangerous situations an officer can go to.
That's entirely false.
Give every single 14 year old boy a handgun and the legal ability for it to be a concealed carry. In one year, I guarantee that the number of shootings will increase drastically. That is a logical lineage in one year.
That's not the law and thus is irrelevant to this discussion.
It also stated a woman was caught in gunfire while leaving a bar at 4 am. That would be an illegal bar, because last call by state law is 2 am. I would argue there are certain places one should expect nothing good to happen, and outside an illegal after hours bar at 4am would be one of those places.
I would also suspect that drinking and carrying concealed in WV is illegal. It is in my sate even with a carry permit. I would suspect, that some the characters are not legally able to carry regardless of wv law.
The story is not telling the full story and acting on emotion.
The story is not telling the full story and acting on emotion.
Yes, it is called an analogy. Let me know if you need an explanation of what that is.
Wait: so you're telling me that allowing people to carry weapons results in people doing illegal things with them? Yes. That is my point. It increases shootings.
They are going to do it anyway. Your analogy is not reality. but since you like them, chicago has tough guns laws. How about the shootings there? There is not enough of a data set to make valid conclusions on wv's new law.
So if they're going to do it anyway.. Then you agree that we should make it easier? Because that's what the law does.
How does it make it easier to someone who is not going to obey the law(s) to start with. The guy going off the deep end at his wife is going to take someone out. He is not going to worry about the conceal carry laws are.
It makes it easier because it isn't against the law anymore. Your argument is they will do it anyway. Mine is.. So we make it easier?? It doesn't make sense to me.
obviously it wouldn't make it easier for those who don't follow the law. hell, they get guns now, no paperwork.
A guy killing his wife doesn't give two shits about the conceal carry law. He is gone off the deep end.
What? No, I am telling you if you hang out until 4am in a ghetto, illegal after hours bar bad things may happen to you. I read up on the matter...neither man involved in the shooting could legally possess or carry a firearm, both were criminals. Go figure. Criminals don't give a shit about the law. The article example Herdman quoted is even dumber as it has zero to do with the new law, the cop was shot at a residence. Isn't it odd that the article author chose two examples to show causation but neither had anything to do with the new law? Perhaps there were zero examples of law abiding citizens now legally permitless carrying actually shooting someone. Or the author is really lazy. My money is on the former.
Give me a couple of years of statistics showing a number of previously law abiding citizens suddenly and newly using permitless carry suddenly blasting people and perhaps you are on the something. Otherwise, given the nature of what the author chose to cite, I'll assume criminals and domestic abusers just had a busy year in WV.
Permitless carry has zero legal relationship to having firearms in one's residence. Before having a conceal carry permit, or the new law if I still lived in WV, I often had a loaded firearm in my residence. And that was perfectly legal. So no, permitless carry has in no way made it easier for someone to blow away their wife in their home. Or blow away the cops when they come.
Your quote that I challenged you on had absolutely nothing to do with any specific examples in the article. It had to do with you claiming, through analogies, that there was no relationship between a high increased in the number of CCWs and the overall number of shootings. That's false, and you should just need common sense instead of years of data to see that.
There are plenty of legally carrying (or possessing) citizens who illegally shoot somebody. Your premise is that only bad guys who are carrying illegally will shoot people. That's false. There will be (and are) plenty of citizens who carry legally who end up shooting people.
Just throw some hypothetical numbers out there:
100 bad guys carrying guns illegally which is neither increased nor decreased with any CCW laws. 100 of them would shoot if need be in a dispute.
100 additional good guys carrying guns legally if CCWs are easier to obtain. Of those 100, 20 of those "good" guys have bad tempers/decision making skills. That leads to a percentage of those being shooters in the right situation.
This isn't a case of "if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns." Yes, the "bad" guys will still carry regardless if it is legal or illegal. But good guys make bad decisions, too, and in the heat of the moment (most shootings), those good guys become shooters if it is far easier for them to conceal carry. Ignoring that is blocking out common sense.
CCW or permitless carry is pretty much the same in a shall issue state. It just saves the law abiding citizen from paying an onerous money-grabbing fee.
The change in the law has not changed WHO may legally carry a handgun. That's a pretty important thing to note. We know conceal carry permit holders commit violent crimes at a much lower rate than the general public....lower even than police officers. Add in that open carry was already legal in WV without a permit, and it's hard to fathom that a bunch of law abiding folks suddenly began shooting people.
Common sense and data often do not match up. Common sense would say that increasing speed limits leads to more traffic fatalities. Speed kills, right? Yet deaths per miles driven decreased after national speed limits were removed.
Again, if causation was obvious surely the author could have and would have cited examples supporting that. Even one or two examples...should be easy to do with causation and a 15% increase in shooting deaths, right?
The funniest part about this whole discussion? People thinking WVians weren't carrying concealed firearms without a permit prior to this law.
Fact is, most 18+ year old males in WV carried a firearm without a permit prior to the passage of this law, and most would still if the law were repealed. Same for most other rural states.
Fact is, most 18+ year old males in WV carried a firearm without a permit prior to the passage of this law, and most would still if the law were repealed. Same for most other rural states.
Last edited:
I hate to tell you this but the majority of West Virginians have guns and always have and always will. Using a domestic dispute case is ludicrous and using an illegal person carrying is also headline grabbing.
That has nothing to do with my stance. It comes down, once again, to basic common sense.
If you have one person carrying a gun, you have a chance to be shot by one person. If you have 100,000 people carrying guns, you have a chance to be shot by 100,000 people. Now, you can argue that a huge increase in those who carry will discourage the use of a firearm by others in order to preserve themselves, but in the heat of the moment, rational thinking goes by the wayside.
This has nothing to do with bad guys using guns. Even if those with CCWs commit violent crimes at a far lower amount, an increase in those with CCWs results in an increase in violent crimes.
Data from many reputable organizations shows that an increase in speed limits results in more fatalities. Trying to match data from an area pre-increase to data 25 years post-increase has much more to do with safety increases in vehicles than it does any inverse effect of fatalities.
In their truck or on their body? If the latter, that's complete bullshit.
This isn't about having guns. It is about a drastic increase in CCWs.
Do you think the guy outside the bar gave two shit about the law? or the guy that shot a cop on a domestic abuse call? No.
Obviously the guy at the bar doesn't give a shit.. But had he gone and bought a permit, and did the training he would know that you absolutely do not take a gun to a bar. I think the argument being made is pretty logical. If you have more people carrying a concealed gun without receiving any training that goes along with it, it's not a surprise at all then that more people will die from guns. It's the heat of passion crime that will increase.
Neither thug in that shooting could receive a permit, much less own a gun, due to their records.
I don't know why you continue this "common sense" argument when the discussion is did permitless carry directly lead to a 15% increase in WV gun homicides, which is what the article claims. Assumptions have no place in statistical analysis...at least if you want to be honest with the results. Unless you can show me hard evidence that the 15% increase was due to previously law abiding citizens who never had a permit now carrying and deciding to shoot someone, your argument is bunk. As the author could not find such examples and thus evidence I would advise you to not waste your time.
25 years post increase hell, I remember the years immediately following the removal (1987, IIRC). Deaths did not skyrocket. If you wish to further argue this point, be aware I do not accept studies from the IIHS as legit, as they have a known and proven bias.
Shit, a more valid argument would be that an increase in gun crime could be more correlated to a worsening state economy over the implementation of this law.
That is retarded. That is like saying if the Bloods and Crips in Chicago took a gun safety class they wouldn't point guns at each and shoot each other.
I went back to look at the shooter and that's a fair point. I still expect to see a rise in gun death's though in WV. My opinion is this law will contribute to it along with the lack of jobs, opportunities for people. People begin to lose hope and resort to crime and drugs.
How much did drug related activity in the state increase in the last year?
A better way to draw a conclusion is to simply ask how many of the shootings were by a shooter that would be able to obtain a CC permit under the previous rules and how does that vary from previous years?
My guess would be that if the answer to that question was known the article never would have went to press.
A better way to draw a conclusion is to simply ask how many of the shootings were by a shooter that would be able to obtain a CC permit under the previous rules and how does that vary from previous years?
My guess would be that if the answer to that question was known the article never would have went to press.
My guess is that it went to press regardless of what was known because the desire to restrict guns is near the top of every social agenda.
I've always contended that my family is MUCH safer without guns in the house. I understand the argument about living in certain areas that have high amounts of crime, but I don't. My kids are mostly grown, but no way I would consider my house safer if I had guns. Teenagers are emotionally immature. Every event that causes stress or strife is magnified. No way I'm allowing my kids possible access to that kind of power. Plus...if you've ever raised kids you know they figure stuff out. Hell...we need to get them just to hook up the vcr (back in the day). Kids will find anything you hide from them.
That response has always been met with...well...that's why you lock them up. So...to my logical thinking, how can a locked up gun protect you? Someone breaks into your house in the middle of the night. Do you say...excuse me...I need to unlock my gun? And even when you do have access to a gun during a robbery or crime, pulling it out escalates the whole thing. You pull out a gun and now the criminal is forced to defend themselves. You might win, but if you lose you really lose. I know in our heads we can spit some Beechnut in that dudes eye and shoot him with your old .45...but that stuff only works in songs.
I'm not against gun ownership and I understand the whole constitutional right to do so. If you like to hunt have at it. But me personally...I have zero fascination with them. I know many of you are stockpiling waiting for that apocalyptic situation where you can survive the pursuing mayhem with guns to fend off the roving bands of people that will come to take your stuff. I know that you can skin a buck and run a trot line and you take pride in that stuff. But me...ill take my chances that when I drive through McDonalds and order a Bug Mac that it will be waiting for me at the other end.
That response has always been met with...well...that's why you lock them up. So...to my logical thinking, how can a locked up gun protect you? Someone breaks into your house in the middle of the night. Do you say...excuse me...I need to unlock my gun? And even when you do have access to a gun during a robbery or crime, pulling it out escalates the whole thing. You pull out a gun and now the criminal is forced to defend themselves. You might win, but if you lose you really lose. I know in our heads we can spit some Beechnut in that dudes eye and shoot him with your old .45...but that stuff only works in songs.
I'm not against gun ownership and I understand the whole constitutional right to do so. If you like to hunt have at it. But me personally...I have zero fascination with them. I know many of you are stockpiling waiting for that apocalyptic situation where you can survive the pursuing mayhem with guns to fend off the roving bands of people that will come to take your stuff. I know that you can skin a buck and run a trot line and you take pride in that stuff. But me...ill take my chances that when I drive through McDonalds and order a Bug Mac that it will be waiting for me at the other end.
It works in reality. There are ways to store and keep guns from kids. Plus, you train your kids to respect the firearm and you teach them gun safety. There are ways to keep and store guns and then have them at night accessible, etc. for a home defense situation.
I am not following you on the guy breaking in when you are there and making him react because you have a gun. That guy breaks into your house when you are there. That goes beyond a petty thief breaking in during the day to steal some jewelry or a tv. That is more than likely a life and death situation. There is going to be no talking that guy of a ledge.You are in a very serious situation.
I have one rule in this regard. Non negotiable. You break in my house. I will defend at all cost necessary. That means to the death. I will protect my family and my life. A firearm gives me and my family the best protection.
Maybe city kids are different. My daughter was raised that a gun is just another dangerous tool on the farm. Farms are full of stuff that can hurt you. She learned to use those tools and be respectful of their danger.
Break in my place in the middle of the night and you better be prepared to see the business end of a shotgun. I am a firm believer that chambering a round in a pump shotgun is a distinctive sound and a strong motivator for a bad guy to GTFO out of my home. If he is dumb enough to stay and ignore my verbal judo he is getting peppered. That's life, it can be harsh to the foolish.
Exactly. I was born and raised in Huntington. Went to HHS. My guess is most of you are from the country. Which has alot to do with our different political ideologies.
I hear you guys...but I'm convinced within a shadow of a doubt that I'm safer without them. I think statistics prove that as well. There are over 300 million guns owned in the U.S. In 2012, there were 259 justifiable homicides. Those are homocides committed in the act of defending themselves. Compare that In the same year with 20,666 suicides committed with guns and 548 accidental deaths by guns. There were 8352 deaths by guns in the commission of crime. So there's only one justifiable death for every 32 committed in the act of crimes. So even with this saturated proliferation of guns, gun owners aren't putting a dent into protecting themselves.
When you further compare 20,666 suicides and 548 accidental deaths to 259 justifiable homocides, by my math you are 82 times more likely to off yourself than you are to protect yourself. Live in a low crime area (the best thing you can do for your family) and keep guns out of your house and you're statistically safer. Much safer.
Again...I'm not anti gun. Load up if you must. But it just feels like a lot of the "protect my home" rhetoric is influenced by this romanticized vision that we have indoctrinated in us growing up. I lay my head on my pillow at night without fear. And if I'm cautious enough to stay away from areas we know are problems, I think I'm playing the odds right.
When you further compare 20,666 suicides and 548 accidental deaths to 259 justifiable homocides, by my math you are 82 times more likely to off yourself than you are to protect yourself. Live in a low crime area (the best thing you can do for your family) and keep guns out of your house and you're statistically safer. Much safer.
Again...I'm not anti gun. Load up if you must. But it just feels like a lot of the "protect my home" rhetoric is influenced by this romanticized vision that we have indoctrinated in us growing up. I lay my head on my pillow at night without fear. And if I'm cautious enough to stay away from areas we know are problems, I think I'm playing the odds right.
