Does concealed carry [and OC] support law enforcement?

imported post

June 11, 2009

Does concealed carry support law enforcement?


(Photo courtesy of Oleg Volk)



FBI justifiable homicide data indicates that police officers may be safer in states where law-abiding citizens are empowered to carry concealed handguns in public.

Each year, the FBI publishes violent crime data collected from state law enforcement agencies. This publication includes justifiable homicide (JH) totals for both law enforcement and private citizens. Upon request, state-level JH is also available.

In its Uniform Crime Reporting Handbook, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) defines justifiable homicide:
Certain willful killings must be classified as justifiable or excusable. In UCR, Justifiable Homicide is defined as and limited to:
· The killing of a felon by a peace officer in the line of duty.
· The killing of a felon, during the commission of a felony, by a private citizen.


Justifiable Homicides By Police

In 2007, about two-thirds (67.2%) of the U.S. population lived in 40 states with shall-issue concealed carry laws, where law-abiding citizens can obtain a license to carry a concealed handgun. These laws are also known as Right-to-Carry (RTC). Over half (55.8%) of all justifiable homicides by police occurred in these states.

States without RTC laws (10 states plus the District of Columbia) contained about one-third (32.8%) of the population and 44.2% of all police JH. With an average of 35 police JH occurring in each non-RTC state while RTC states averaged 7, this means that police justifiable homicides occurred about 5 times more often in non-RTC states.

Of the 398 police justifiable homicides in 2007, 243 were self-defense, and 22 were in defense of another officer’s life: 56.6% occurred in RTC states, and 43.4% occurred in non-RTC states. RTC states averaged 3.8 incidents in 2007, while non-RTC averaged 10.5.

Police officers in non-RTC states had to defend their lives from violent criminals nearly three times as often as officers in RTC states.

FBI data shows that in 2007, the average violent crime rate for RTC states was 400.5, and their average murder rate was 4.9 (per 100,000 population). The average violent crime rate for non-RTC states was 524.3 and their average murder rate was 6.8.

These data indicate that police officers’ lives in non-RTC states are in greater jeopardy from violent criminals who have no compunction about attacking police.


Justifiable Homicides By Private Citizens

Over four-fifths (80.9%) of civilian justifiable homicide occurred in RTC states, while non-RTC states had under one-fifth (19.1%). Both groups averaged about 8 justifiable homicides for 2007. However, when compared to police justifiable homicides, an interesting trend appears: In RTC states, for every 100 citizen JH there were 107 police JH, closer to a one-to-one ratio. In non-RTC states, for every 100 citizen JH there were 359 police JH, over a three-to-one ratio. In RTC states, civilian justifiable homicides were relatively more common when compared to the number of police justifiable homicides.

For civilians, 40.6% of all justifiable homicide occurred in self-defense (94 of 256) and defense of police officers (10): 81 (77.9%) of these occurred in RTC states–including all 10 defense of police officers; 23 (22.1%) occurred in non-RTC states.

In RTC states, a firearm was used in 81.6% of all civilian JH, 25.0% more than the 65.3% in non-RTC states. Considering that criminals were 30.9% more “successful” in completing violent crime––and 38.6% more “successful” in completing murder attempts––in non-RTC states, a firearm is an effective self-defense tool. An armed citizen is less likely to become a violent crime statistic.

In Right-to-Carry states, private citizens have greater freedom to defend themselves in public. Because the ratio of justifiable homicides by police and citizens is more balanced, and because the level of police defensive justifiable homicide is lower, one can only conclude that armed citizens are adept at self-defense, enough to provide a quantifiable level of protection for law enforcement. In non-RTC states, the reduced self-defensive capability of the citizenry correlates with higher rates of violent crime and a more dangerous work environment for police officers.


References
Violent crime and justifiable homicide data derived from Excel spreadsheet compiled from Federal Bureau of Investigation, Supplementary Homicide Report – 2007. Spreadsheet available upon request.

http://www.examiner.com/x-2879-Austin-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m6d11-Does-Concealed-Carry-Support-Law-Enforcement

imported post

The question is not "Does CC/OC support Law Enforcement?" but "Why does Law Enforcement not support citizens carrying firearms legally?"

Too many studies have demonstrated that the carrying of firearms has both direct positive effect for the person carrying and by-product positive effect for those who do not carry.

Too many LEOs get caught up in the morass of dealing with bad people all day every day to the point of seeing everyone but fellow LEO as bad people. That's a problem LEO administration still refuses to deal with - often claiming there are just too many other issues with higher priorities.

Part of the OC Movement is to educate the rest of the community that not all people who walk around with guns in holsters (but not wearing cop clothing) are bad people, and that the mere presence of a gun is not TEOTWAWKI. Obviously I'm preaching to the chior here, but the chior needs to be more active in contacting these editorial/essay writers and reminding them that LEOs are no different from other citizens and that bad people doing bad things, not guns, are the problem.

stay safe.

skidmark

imported post

skidmark wrote:

The question is not "Does CC/OC support Law Enforcement?" but "Why does Law Enforcement not support citizens carrying firearms legally?"

Too many studies have demonstrated that the carrying of firearms has both direct positive effect for the person carrying and by-product positive effect for those who do not carry.

Too many LEOs get caught up in the morass of dealing with bad people all day every day to the point of seeing everyone but fellow LEO as bad people. That's a problem LEO administration still refuses to deal with - often claiming there are just too many other issues with higher priorities.

Part of the OC Movement is to educate the rest of the community that not all people who walk around with guns in holsters (but not wearing cop clothing) are bad people, and that the mere presence of a gun is not TEOTWAWKI. Obviously I'm preaching to the chior here, but the chior needs to be more active in contacting these editorial/essay writers and reminding them that LEOs are no different from other citizens and that bad people doing bad things, not guns, are the problem.

stay safe.

skidmark

Click to expand...

Don't know about your area, but LEO in mine seem to be just fine with LAC's carrying. I live in Perry County Tn, where we only have a small Sherriff's Dept. One deputy told me the other day that they only have about 8 patrol officers on the payroll. That means that on average, we may only have 3 to5 deputies on duty at any given time, scattered throughout the county. Since none of them have inquired about my having a permit, when they see me OC (required in Tn), I suspect they are glad to know that they might have instant backup if they should need it.

The OP is quite interesting to say the least. The Brady Bunch are probably having a cow.