IL Criminals should consider career change.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Trent

Trent

Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2010
Messages
25,151
Location
Illinois
I saw updated numbers today on IL Concealed carry holders.

From ISRA bulletin:

TOTAL PAID CCL APPLICATIONS 72,447
TOTAL ACTIVE LICENSES 49,980
Click to expand...

According to the Census of State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies, Illinois has 321 sworn law enforcement personnel per 100,000 residents.

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/csllea08.pdf

With a population of 12.88 million, this means ACTIVE concealed carry holders out number the sworn police in Illinois by a pretty wide margin (390/100,000 residents), while those who have applied so far (total) widen the gap even further (565/100,000 residents).

Will be interesting to see what effects this has (if any) on the levels of crime in this state.

And... if we rewound time two years ago, before the 7th circuit decision, think of all those disarmed, vulnerable people who can now defend their lives.
 
Will be interesting to see what effects this has (if any) on the levels of crime in this state.
Click to expand...

Probably none. It's not because armed citizenry isn't a deterrent to crime, but because this portion of the citizenry are highly unlikely to be in the same places at the same times that the violent crimes occur. Let's be realistic; there is a vanishingly miniscule likelihood that your upstanding working professional/homeowner/father who holds a CCW permit will be in that dark alley in the red light districts at 2:15 AM.

The paradigm will always hold true, and it's why some areas are very high crime and others have almost none. We have an exceptionally high percentage of the population with CCW, and at last estimate, over 97% of the homes in this county are armed. But the communities out here range from semi-rural to full-on farms and ranches, the population density is 13 people per square mile, the median income is upper middle class, the populous is pretty homogenous (98% white), the majority of households are Christian or Catholic, and the values among most residents are pretty traditional. As such, our low crime rate has very little to do with CCW. If kids get into trouble out here, they most likely still have two parents at home who will whip their butt after the sheriff is done with them.
 
Catholics are not Christians? I must have missed the memo. (sorry, off topic)
I'm not sure that concealed carry deters the thugs. I'd bet shooting them does a much nicer job.
 
rs7 said:
Catholics are not Christians? I must have missed the memo. (sorry, off topic)
I'm not sure that concealed carry deters the thugs. I'd bet shooting them does a much nicer job.
Click to expand...
Christian is used in the south as a semi-synonym for Protestant. In KY it generally means all the Christian churches that aren't Catholic, Episcopal or perhaps Mormon. I'm sure no offense was intended.

Hasn't the well-established nationwide trend been that crime drops in states when CCW is implemented? I see no reason to expect IL to be any different.
 
With a population of 12.88 million, this means ACTIVE concealed carry holders out number the sworn police in Illinois by a pretty wide margin (390/100,000 residents), while those who have applied so far (total) widen the gap even further (565/100,000 residents).
Click to expand...

Well, the licenses may be active, but that does not mean the license holders will actively being carrying. Elsewhere in the US, only a small fraction of the folks with licenses or permits actually carry on a regular basis. So the threat to the bad guys really hasn't changed in any discernible manner from the bad guy perspective.

Will be interesting to see what effects this has (if any) on the levels of crime in this state.
Click to expand...

The number of gun owners or CCW people in a state has never been shown to actually cause a change in the rate of crime. People want to believe it does, but it doesn't.

The notion that having CCW license holders, even if armed, would change the rate of crime would assume things such as the 1) the criminals knowing, 2) the criminals caring, 3) CCW folks actively stopping crimes in vast numbers. Do you think the average crackhead type person really has a clue?

Given that the crime rate was already falling before this went into effect, it will be hard to attribute drops in crime to people CCWing. To do so would mean ruling out all the other factors currently causing the overall reduction in crime that has been ongoing for years now, since about the 1990s.
http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/ilcrime.htm
 
^Good link there^
WA has had OC and Shall issue forever. Our violent crime rate doesn't fluctuate that much from year to year, it just keeps growing. CC isn't a deterrent to crime just like capital punishment isn't. Someone else said it best, a well placed bullet or three will do a lot more to lower the crime rate. It will also save the taxpayer some money.
 
Right, the only place where CCW has an affect on crime is at the individual level in helping to determine the outcome of the event. This is a very critical level, of course.

Society, as a whole, doesn't not radically change because a teeny weeny percentage of folks may legally carry firearms. Run this up to 70% or 80% who actually do, and things might change.

Since Trent provided us with the numbers, let's take a look...

With a population of 12.88 million, this means ACTIVE concealed carry holders out number the sworn police in Illinois by a pretty wide margin (390/100,000 residents), while those who have applied so far (total) widen the gap even further (565/100,000 residents).
Click to expand...

So if everybody with applications in were granted licenses and if everybody with licenses actually carried all the time, you are still looking at an 0.565% chance, as a bad guy, of running into a good guy with a gun. The number is so small as to being virtually meaningless from an odds perspective as a bad guy.

Things are actually a little better than that. The population estimate includes all ages of people and about 30% of the US population is below the age of 21. So instead of 565/100k you are looking at 565/70k potential adult carriers and so 0.807% of the legal aged population that could carry may be armed. The only problem is, a lot of crime happens to people under the age of 21 and even in the above 21 age set, the bad guys sill have a better than 99% chance of not running into a legally armed cop or CCW person even if they all did carry. Those numbers just are not scary to bad guys, assuming they actually took the time to figure out what they meant, noticed, or cared.
 
Criminals will have to either find honest work or move to DC for easy prey

Criminals will have to either find honest work or move to DC for easy prey.
 
Double Naught Spy said:
Right, the only place where CCW has an affect on crime is at the individual level in helping to determine the outcome of the event. This is a very critical level, of course.

Society, as a whole, doesn't not radically change because a teeny weeny percentage of folks may legally carry firearms. Run this up to 70% or 80% who actually do, and things might change.

Things are actually a little better than that. The population estimate includes all ages of people and about 30% of the US population is below the age of 21. So instead of 565/100k you are looking at 565/70k potential adult carriers and so 0.807% of the legal aged population that could carry may be armed. The only problem is, a lot of crime happens to people under the age of 21 and even in the above 21 age set, the bad guys sill have a better than 99% chance of not running into a legally armed cop or CCW person even if they all did carry. Those numbers just are not scary to bad guys, assuming they actually took the time to figure out what they meant, noticed, or cared.
Click to expand...

In addition to this is the geographic disbursement of concealed carriers. I haven't looked up or correlated these numbers state-wide, but Tazewell county (where I live) ranks 11th on number of applications / permit holders. While it ranks 15th in population.

Meanwhile, we rank *48th* in overall crime statistics. (Just did the number crunching from the IL State Police UICR reports in Excel)

yg2iApBh.png

(Raw data can be obtained here: http://www.isp.state.il.us/crime/cii2011.cfm)

yg2iApBh.png

Now lethal force can only be used to stop "forcible felonies" outside of the home in Illinois (or to prevent serious bodily injury or death). So assuming that we ONLY track forcible felonies... (I made a column combining forcible felony columns, multiplied by 100,000, then divided by population to create a rate; then sorted by rate descending)

C4Tp3B4h.png

Found out Tazewell ranks #41 on violent crime.

But we rank #11 on sheer NUMBER of permits.

We rank #41 on violent crime and #48 on ALL crime.

Dumping the ISRA data in to Excel, to get # of permits as rate of population. Had to add Woodford county to ISRA data since they neglected to copy it in; with one missing county I could extrapolate that they have 281 active permits by comparing the totals ISRA reported vs. the totals of the "missing data"

ILF7a7Th.jpg

I also had to massage the data and fix up counties so they matched since obviously one of the lists wasn't sorted alphabetically (state UICR data lol) and I didn't notice until I'd already dumped the data in to new columns.

Aaaanywho.

We arrive at some telling numbers!

fxuBRiuh.png

Tazewell ranks #14 in number of active concealed carry permits by population rate.

Tazewell ranks #11 in number of active concealed carry permits TOTAL.

Meanwhile we are currently ranked (using 2011 data) as #41 on violent crime and #48 on ALL crime (including drug charges and other nonviolent offenses.)

Our # of active permit holders rate is 790/100,000 (.79%)

Violent crime (forcible felonies) rate is 650/100,000 (.65%)

I used Murder, Rape, Assault, and Robbery for my forcible felony column. Which means a "victim is present at the time of the offense."

People seem to think that forcible felonies aren't THAT common, and they are right. Your chances of experiencing a violent offense in this county in a given year are 1 in 153. (And we're #41 in violent crimes)

This seems like a striking number - 1 in 153, that's not what you'd call one in a million! But this DOES mean you could live through 2 average lifespans without being a victim of violent crime.

But consider this - it also means that for one of every 2 friends or family members you have, ONE of them will be a victim of violent crime *at some point during their life*. (And... Remember we're calm county, #41 in violent crime of 102 counties).

So during your life, assuming an average lifespan, ONE of every TWO people you know will be murdered, raped, robbed, or assaulted (felony level).

Have two kids? One will be murdered, raped, robbed, or assaulted at some point during their life if they live their entire lives in my county. (FWIW, I have 5 children and I've taught them ALL to shoot. Statistically if they carry a firearm everywhere they can during their lives, at least two of five will use them to defend themselves at some point.)

Anyway looking at "when I walk out the door TOMORROW what are my chances of using a firearm to defend myself?" (Which, coincidentally is also the percentage of a criminal actually facing armed response if they commit a crime and making the nightly news).

Statistically speaking each day in Tazewell county, assuming a perfectly even distribution of crime over the course of the year (don't have data for seasonality to go that granular), there are going to be 882 forcible felonies a year, or 882/365 = 2.416 forcible felonies a day. On a population of 135,661 that means that there is a 0.0000178091 chance of facing a violent crime on any given day.

If .79% of the population is armed here full time, it means a chance of 0.00000014 of a violent felon meeting an armed citizen tomorrow.

So much for the "high noon showdown" and "rampant blood in the streets" the anti-gunners try to flout with concealed carry.

The statistics just don't support it.

Will YOU or a LOVED ONE face a violent felon at some point in your life? Truly, flip a coin. Heads you win, tails you live a nice peaceful life with nary a scrape.

If you don't carry every day, full time, your odds of facing them unarmed are statistically equivalent to how often you are disarmed.

E.g. if you carry a gun "once a month" then there's a 97% chance that IF YOU DO face an armed individual, you will be UNARMED at the time.

Think about that. :)
 
Note the data above doesn't reflect "will I *witness* a forcible felony?"

(E.g. be able to intervene)

The data ONLY shows if you would be a direct victim of the forcible felony in one county in the US. So take it for what it's worth (I wanted numbers for ME, HERE).

Your chances of witnessing a forcible felony in your life are UNDOUBTEDLY much higher than being a victim of one. But no one collects data for "how many witnessed a crime."

So keep that in mind, if you choose to intervene, your chances are going to be higher than what is shown. (If an average of 2 people witness each forcible felony, you WILL see one in your lifespan, statistically. Something to chew on).
 
Log onto the FBI statistics web site and take a look. they have all kinds of stats that reflect violent crime rates v.s. ownership and laws that apply to self defense carry. Really interesting stuff.

One ting I did see that reflects states that are less restrictive, is those states such as Arizona show about a 30% reduction in violent crime per cap, over those which infringe on defensive carry or ownership. And the site breaks it down nationally, by state, and city.

GS
 
You have to keep in mind that quite a lot of violent crimes are gang vs gang and in areas where violent crime is prevalent (e.g. in bad areas of most cities and towns).

Now, the people who live in these bad areas and who now carry may be more likely to encounter serious threats than the rest of the general population. I was happy when the citizens of Chicago and Cook County were able to buy handguns for home defense where they are more likely to need it in the crime-ridden areas than the country towns. IL has come a long way for the law-abiding ctizen but the poor people who have few options may benefit the most. They are no longer sitting ducks.
 
I notice their is a huge push by some to deny that CCW has any effect on crime. I am aware that the anti-gun nuts, have used this nonsense for some time. Why are supposedly pro-gun people now spouting it? While there have been some studies that dispute John Lott's "more Guns, Less Crime" statistics, none have disproven them, and a majority support it.

If our goal on this site, is to promote gun rights and the responsible use of guns, and most importantly, make us look good to people who hate guns, why promote controversial studies by anti-gun groups, that are not well supported by the facts?

If you tell people that passing pro-gun legislation is not going to help people oppressed by crime, then why pass it?

And why claim that it has no effect on crime when research says it does?
 
Well, this might change things.

http://www.cinewsnow.com/news/local...-Saturday-morning-his-parents--260531451.html

An IL State Representatives son was shot and killed in Peoria last night.

Very troubling news. Sad when a kid is murdered. Don't know any specifics, but with this being a State Rep's son, it is very likely to wake up the IL house & senate which has avoided hearing any gun legislation so far this year.
 
The question of the eventual effect of CCW on crime in Illinois has so far missed the effect of political attitudes toward citizens legally carrying concealed weapons. Chicago is the murder capitol of Illinois, with one or more fatal shootings every night, not to mention half dozen or more wounded. As is to be expected in President Obama's home-town, the official blame is laid upon the guns, not the individuals wielding them. When the passage of the CCW law was announced, Chicago's police commissioner went on TV to warn that because of the way his officers were trained, anyone exercising legal Concealed Carry in the city was liable to be be shot by his officers. So, if you venture into the gang-infested South- and West-sides of Chicago you have the choice of being an unarmed victim, or a target for officially sanctioned police trigger-happiness.

I live on the far-North side of Chicago, which has a much lower crime rate, but still a long way from safe by suburban standards. I'm seriously considering investing the hundreds of dollars in training and fees needed to get a concealed carry license. I've already gone through a similar process to become one of the few legally licensed gun owners in Chicago. The question is whether, given the political climate, I would dare to exercise my right to carry in my home town. In addition, by getting my license I have no doubt I would be placing myself on a hit-list kept by the political establishment for use incase an example needs to be made to cow those who would dare to exercise their rights. That may sound paranoid, but our former Mayor Daley organized a multi-county task force to perform raids on suspected gun malefactors. I'm sure our current Mayor Emmanuel, Obama's former Chief of Staff, has a similar organization on call if needed. A pitiful state of affairs in the city where I was born and raised, but what happens when one-party rule slowly strangles the exercise of our constitutional freedoms.
 
Analysis of the statistics is very difficult since everyone wants to simply sure up their position. It is already tough to get a real picture. In areas where guns are new, it will take time to see the trend.

Clearly, there will be mixed results. Citizens will vary in skill and situational awareness. Criminals will adjust their tactics. As some targets get harder, it just means soft targets will be hit more. Gun free zones will increasingly become killing zones.

Simply stated, the threat is molded, shaped and redirected, but it not eliminated.
 
Okay wana, what research actually substantiates more guns equals less crime? You claim it is out there but failed to cite specifics. I will embrace the study that shows an actual causative affect and not just correlations.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
Concealed Carry Permit Holders are One Third as Likely to Commit Murder as Police Off
2 3 4
Replies
86
Views
4K
Robert
Robert
W
  • Locked
IL now has 'written' CCL applications ready - but what a screwed up way to do it
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
orionengnr
O
Gary Slider
  • Locked
SC Honors MS Enhanced… DE Changes It Rules. . . NH Permitless Carry… OH and IL
Replies
5
Views
969
Squire Western
Squire Western
J
  • Locked
Texas CHL holders are criminals...So Wisconsin CCW holders should be made public.
2
Replies
26
Views
1K
Double Naught Spy
Double Naught Spy
N
  • Locked
300,000 Hoosiers have gun permits
2
Replies
42
Views
2K
El Tejon
E
Back
Top