Concealed Carry Means Fewer Murders, Says New Study

Concealed carry ArmedinHeelsQuinnipiac University economist Mark Gius has published a new study, "An examination of the effects of concealed weapons laws and assault weapons bans on state-level murder rates," in the journal Applied Economics Letters. From the abstract:

The purpose of the present study is to determine the effects of state-level assault weapons bans and concealed weapons laws on state-level murder rates. Using data for the period 1980 to 2009 and controlling for state and year fixed effects, the results of the present study suggest that states with restrictions on the carrying of concealed weapons had higher gun-related murder rates than other states. It was also found that assault weapons bans did not significantly affect murder rates at the state level. These results suggest that restrictive concealed weapons laws may cause an increase in gun-related murders at the state level. The results of this study are consistent with some prior research in this area, most notably Lott and Mustard (1997).

Intriguing.

For more background: The most recent Reason-Rupe poll reports that 63 percent of Americans don't believe that stricter gun laws would keep weapons out of the hands of criminals.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • ||

    Weapons bans have never been about the crime rate. They've always been about control, control, and control. I predict this study will not change the banners' message one tiddly wink.

  • ||

    That is a safe prediction. I'm jumping on board. Also, gun control is about stopping dirty Micks like you from getting guns. Which I wholeheartedly support, by the way.

  • ||

    If I weren't so drunk I'd have a pithy retort.

  • ||

    Just go beat your woman. You'll feel better.

  • UnCivilServant||

    What if the drunkeness was a result of her departure?

  • ||

    Then find another one. The Micks pump out about 13 children each, so that shouldn't be too hard.

  • kinnath||

    Not since the pill. We keep it to half a dozen or so.

  • UnCivilServant||

    I'm stuck in a town full of Italians, and they don't leave their community!

  • ||

    Just lay down a trail of spicy meat-a-balls and you'll lure one in quick enough. Just make sure she's been depilated.

  • tarran||

    That's easy; the ones that don't look like a dog are depilated.

  • UnCivilServant||

    There is a distinct shortage of redheads in that group though.

  • ||

    Northern Italians have a fair amount of red hair occurring. Just ask her if her ancestors are from Florence, Lombardy, or Venice.

  • UnCivilServant||

    I can look, but the evidence so far has been pointing to Scicily and Naples.

  • Brett L||

    Has this been reported? The greatest engineer of guns since John Moses Browning, Gen. Mikhail Kalashnikov has passed away.

  • The Rt. Hon. Serious Man, Visc||

    Damn, 94. He was born before, and outlived by 22 years, the entire existence of the Soviet Union. He survived Operation Barbarossa and the Great Patriotic War, and he developed the most reliable and widely-copied weapons in history.

    Got to tip your hat to him.

  • ||

    he developed the most reliable and widely-copied weapons in history.

    I am pretty sure the spear beats the AK on both counts.

  • Kyfho Myoba||

    Not in total numbers, the world population is much, much larger than in cave man era, but market penetration as a percentage of population, I suppose that the spear would win.

  • playa manhattan||

    I'm still trying to acquire one of his creations. They're hard to come by in my neck of the woods.

  • ||

    I'm just waiting for prices to return to "normal" before I do. I don't even shoot rifles but once in a blue moon, and I already have an SKS, but man I want an AK.

  • UnCivilServant||

    Does a Saiga rifle count? It's an AK action built for a .308 . I haven't been able to fire it in a while because of ammunition shortages.

  • ||

    Maybe, but I want a straight-up AK-47. A friend of mine has an ex-Egyptian paratrooper's AK-47 and it is so much fucking fun to shoot.

  • sarcasmic||

    47 or 74?

  • ||

    I have no desire for a 5.56x45 rifle; the 7.62x39 can share ammo with my SKS.

  • R C Dean||

    Pfeh. I have no desire for any rifle that fires some kind of girly metric Euro caliber.

    I favor the .308, myself. Best all-purpose round ever invented. Great range and accuracy, enough stopping power for bear, moose, and elk.

    That reminds me: need to check inventory on my favorite load.

  • ||

    So you like the 7.62x51? Because that's a girly Euro caliber that's pretty much exactly the same as a .308.

    But hey, don't waste an opportunity to tell us how manly you are because of the girly Euro caliber you use. I assume you never leave the house without your .50 cal Desert Eagle for "stopping power" too.

    (shakes head at the pathetic stupidity of determining "manliness" by caliber)

  • ||

    Look, Epi, I have never felt more like a man than when I shot that Desert Eagle without flinching. After the men I was with smacked themselves in the face with it. So there.

  • ||

    You're a chick?!? Since when?

  • ||

    I have never felt more like a man

    Feminists tell me swords and spears were invented by women so they could be more effective in warfare against men and their superior upper body strength.

    You will never be a real man until you kill wearing nothing more then a sharp stone in you hands.

  • sarcasmic||

    Pfeh. I have no desire for any rifle that fires some kind of girly metric Euro caliber.

    Whatever. I'm fine with low-caliber plinking in the backyard.

  • Zeb||

    And it helps that it costs 1/4 as much too.

  • AlbertP||

    I shoot .308 Win in my handgun (Encore). I prefer the 416 Remington Magnum in my rifle. I must be Superman. LOL :)

  • playa manhattan||

    The maadi is banned by name in CA, so I'm stuck with an Arsenal or WASR. I had a deposit on the WASR for $500, and after a year, it still hadn't shipped. I'm sure that they were shipping plenty at $1200 a piece, though. I ended up with an HK USC instead.

  • ||

    I just picked up a pre-ban Chinese Poly Tech red side folder for $800. It is in pristine shape and had less than 200 rnds through it in 25 years.
    looks just like this one that sold for $2200 two weeks ago.
    http://www.gunbroker.com/Aucti.....=380035488

  • Kyfho Myoba||

    I'm told the Chinese versions are cheaper, more abundant, and more reliable.

  • Boisfeuras||

    Has this been reported? The greatest engineer of guns since John Moses Browning, Gen. Mikhail Kalashnikov has passed away.

    Ahem. Eugene Stoner has been dead a while, but Gaston Glock is still kicking... commie.

  • Tejicano||

    I have long heard that the carbine which came to be known as the Kalashnikov was developed by a team which was led by the man of that name. The Soviets always loved a hero so they granted him that status as a PR move.

    But there is no argument with the genius of the design. So simple any nation with the most basic of infrastructures could make it. So robust it would work in any environment.

    Compact but big enough to keep control of. Powerful but light recoil. More accurate than most lower-powered sub-machineguns. It brought combat-range, full-auto fire to the hands of conscripts. (Yeah, the Nazis pioneered the concept but couldn't produce them at the same rate)

  • sarcasmic||

    You mean disarming law abiding citizens empowers armed criminals? No way! That wasn't the intention! How could it possibly be the result if it wasn't the intention?

  • R C Dean||

    You mean disarming law abiding citizens empowers armed criminals

    If by "armed criminals" you mean "agents of the Total State", you are correct.

    And what makes you think that isn't the intention?

  • sarcasmic||

    I don't think they intend for law abiding citizens to be at the mercy of armed thugs who aren't agents of the state. They intend for these laws to somehow magically disarm criminals. As if people who ignore the law will somehow disarm because the law tells them to.
    So when crime goes up they can cry about their good intentions and demand that gun laws be more vigorously enforced.

  • LarryA||

    "But it's only reasonable that if the criminals don't have to worry about victims shooting back, then they won't need to carry guns."

    See?

  • Redmanfms||

    So when crime goes up they can cry about their good intentions and demand that gun laws be more vigorously enforced.

    Or they point to some much smaller nation that banned (or severely restricted) firearm ownership and also has lower "gun crime" rate than the U.S. ignoring that the "gun crime" rate was already lower before the ban/restrictions. They will also go on to ignore that the country has a violent crime rate an order of magnitude or so higher than the U.S., or they will defend it with some navel-gazing dipshitery about "gun crime" somehow being worse than "ordinary" violent crime.

  • Don'tTreadOnMe||

    "….same navel-gazing dipshitery….."

    Hehehe….

  • Rasilio||

    Wait, I hereby declare that bra to be an illegal weapon and demand she remove it immediately

  • 2ndClassProle||

    This!!

  • Brett L||

    You can skip the academy and go right to Seargant in any police force in America with that attitude.

  • sarcasmic||

    Aye!

  • prolefeed||

    the results of the present study suggest that states with restrictions on the carrying of concealed weapons had higher gun-related murder rates than other states.

    Devil's Advocate -- correlation is not causation. For examples, states with huge cities like Illinois / Chicago might have high murder rates due in part to the urban density and a higher percentage of poor people, leading to poorly thought out restrictions on concealed carry.

    For this study to be useful in eliminating these background influences, one would need to look at states that CHANGED their gun laws, and see if that change led to more murders or not compared to trend lines before the change.

    Not sure if this study actually does that based on wording above.

    That said, I'd inclined to believe that restricting concealed carry emboldens criminals for obvious reasons.

  • DrunkenAsparagus||

    That's essentially what fixed and time effects do, which are controlled for in this study. Without getting too much into statistical jargon, these essentially control for both overall differences over time and the unseen and unmeasured differences between each state. That being said, the study could lack some necessary controls. I wish that the study wasn't behind a pay-wall, so we could see them.

  • UnCivilServant||

    I don't really mind the pay wall (they need funding somehow and I hate adverts), but those prices were a tad obscene.

  • pan fried wylie||

    For this study to be useful in eliminating these background influences, one would need to look at states that CHANGED their gun laws, and see if that change led to more murders or not compared to trend lines before the change.

    I was told there would be no calculus.

  • AlbertP||

    "Devil's Advocate -- correlation is not causation. For examples, states with huge cities like Illinois / Chicago might have high murder rates due in part to the urban density and a higher percentage of poor people, leading to poorly thought out restrictions on concealed carry."

    First off, I am a fervent supporter of the 2nd Amendment. Not disagreeing with you here, or you other comments. After researching this topic for many years, it seems to me, that the actual reduction in the homicide rate with liberal CCW laws is actually quite small. Some anti-gunners declare it statistically insignificant. Personally, I fully support the right-to-carry laws. One thing for certain -- it does not increase violent crime. One thing my personal research shows, however, is that highly publicized CCW programs, and other programs promoting an armed citizenry, have very significant effects on reducing certain types of crime. The classic example were the tens of thousands of bumper stickers declaring "You Can't Rape a .38" a few decades ago, I believe, in the Miami area. Many small towns have passed (generally symbolic) "mandatory firearm ownership." In the cases I have found, in each instance, violent crime went down. When trying to deter crime, the criminals' perception seems to be what is important.

  • 2ndClassProle||

    Hey, this doesn't fit my reality..Gunz are bad!!

    /progectionist

  • MJGreen||

    I got into it a little bit with gun grabbers last week. The amount of projection, evasion, and disdain for "gun nuts" exhausted me within 20 minutes. It's fascinating how people who go on and on about "empathy" will do everything in their power to avoid empathizing with gun owners. Apparently, the only reason to own a gun is because you're an insecure, paranoid freak who thinks he's secretly Rambo.

  • ||

    That's exactly why one of the gun grabbers would own one; projection is the core of their being. They want them banned so that they can't get their hands on one, because they are afraid of what they would do with one, and of course project their weakness on everyone else.

  • sarcasmic||

    It's fascinating how people who go on and on about "empathy" will do everything in their power to avoid empathizing with gun owners.

    Tolerant people do not have to tolerate intolerance. Gun owners are intolerant people because they disagree with the progressive left. Therefore they are not to be tolerated. That's what it means to be tolerant. The more hostile and intolerant you are of those who disagree with the left, the more tolerant and inclusive you are. It's all in the name of equality. The progressive left is equal, while everyone who disagrees with them are inferior.

  • Rasilio||

    Actually if I were to own a gun it would be because I know without a doubt that I am not Rambo.

    If I thought I were Rambo I could get by just fine with a knife and a bow (both of which he used in the movies) and remember, in the first movie he didn't have a gun till he took them off the bodies of cops sent to arrest him.

    No if I thought I needed it I'd have a gun because I know that I'm a fat 43 year old with arthritic knees and almost no cardiovascular conditioning thanks to a desk job and a reasonably fit 17 year old could kick my ass.

  • sarcasmic||

    a reasonably fit 17 year old could kick my ass.

    "God created man, Sam Colt made them equal."

  • Harvard||

    I've got over 20 years on your fat 43 yr old ass and I can vow to you that I won't even stand for an ass whipping anymore.

    Google up Suzanna Hupp and you'll understand the frustration at being law abiding but unarmed when evil drops in.

    Knife and bow indeed.

  • ||

    I have not seen that for a long time.

    Christ, that really pisses me off. Every legislator who votes for gun control should have to watch helplessly as their families are gunned down and then they are shot through the spine.

  • 2ndClassProle||

    I'm a fat 43 year old with arthritic knees and almost no cardiovascular conditioning thanks to a desk factory job and a reasonably fit 17 year old could kick my ass.

    Damn, we could be twins!

  • prolefeed||

    I'm a fat 43 year old with arthritic knees and almost no cardiovascular conditioning thanks to a desk job

    They have this newfangled invention called "gyms", which you can visit after your desk job.

    I used to kind of fit your description, but I turned it around with daily workouts.

  • Rasilio||

    Yeah and I am sure I could as well but with a wife and 4 kids at home and somehow living paycheck to paycheck despite an income that puts me in the top quintile with very little debt (a car payment, about $4k in credit cards, and my wifes student loans), an no expensive hobbies/habits coming up with the time/energy/money to actually do it on anything approaching a regular basis is largely impossible.

    Hell as it is I hang out and post on here all day when I should be coding because this is as close as it gets for me to having a social life because I don't have time for one.

  • ||

    You sound pretty busy, but you could do a workout every day in less than an hour. Just do one of the primary lifts each day; deadlift or bench or overhead press or squat. Do a 5x5 and you'll be done in about half an hour. With changing, the lift, then showering and getting dressed, you should be under an hour. You'll feel a lot better.

  • prolefeed||

    Half an hour a day of vigorous exercise would make a world of difference. Even 10-15 minutes would be an improvement.

    Even a little is better than nothing, and you'll feel better and more energetic the rest of the day.

  • Rasilio||

    Actually this is not true. It works great for people who are already in fairly good shape, for those who are basically sedentary even that 15 minute workout daily drains you more than energizes you for the first 3 - 6 months until your body gets used to exercising again

  • ||

    Wut? Gym? Fuck that.

    Come to my house. I have a trailer load of fresh oak that needs splitting.

  • Killaz||

    There is also these two other great inventions called space and gravity which if one makes proper use of, one can stay in pretty good shape. Just thought I'd throw that in if he couldn't afford a membership to one with reasonably attractive people.

  • R C Dean||

    the only reason to own a gun is because you're an insecure, paranoid freak who thinks he's secretly Rambo.

    EVen if that's true, so what? How does that justify more gun control?

  • sarcasmic||

    EVen if that's true, so what? How does that justify more gun control?

    Because it feels good to take things away from people you don't like.

  • UnCivilServant||

    But the cops are still armed.

  • sarcasmic||

    You kidding? Gun grabbers love cops!

  • MJGreen||

    They're the trained, responsible ones!

  • LarryA||

    Not really. In 2004 when LEO nationwide reciprocity was in Congress the gun-control folks testified against it.

    They need cops only to disarm us.

    Once civilian guns are gone it'll be the Japanese model for LEOs, leave your guns at the station. Or the British, carry a truncheon and call for an armed officer after SHTF.

  • LarryA||

    Not really. In 2004 when LEO nationwide reciprocity was in Congress the gun-control folks testified against it.

    They need cops only to disarm us.

    Once civilian guns are gone it'll be the Japanese model for LEOs, leave your guns at the station. Or the British, carry a truncheon and call for an armed officer after SHTF.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Wingnut propaganda.

  • AntiCitizenOne||

    Is that seriously the best you got, without any ACTUAL REBUTTAL?

  • R C Dean||

    Does this mean the science is settled?

  • UnCivilServant||

    Science, by definition, cannot be 'settled'. It is always subject to testing and new hypotheses.

  • Brett L||

    You're out of your fucking element, Donny!

  • UnCivilServant||

    ???

    Just because I never got to use the truth in babbling on global temperature patterns...

    I'm not really sure what you're saying, Brett.

  • ||

    You should probably watch this if you want to understand a fair number of quotes on this site.

  • ||

    It'd actually be interesting to assess blog commentariats (is that a word?) based upon the top 3 quoted movies/shows.

  • ||

    As much as I try to pump up the ATHF, Always Sunny, and Futurama quotes, I would say that the top three here are Wrath of Khan, The Big Lebowski, and...I'm not sure what #3 would be. For a brief time, it may have been Real Genius, but that time is over.

  • Brett L||

    Based on the other thread, I think Army of Darkness is making a run. Also useful are Monty Python's catalog that made it to America.

  • Rasilio||

    But can you hammer a 6 inch spike through a board with your penis?

  • ||

    Not right now.

  • fish||

    Not right now.

    ...and yet he lectures the rest of us about physical fitness.

  • ||

    The Real Genius days are done and gone (just like Socrates). Does Star Trek as a series count separately?

  • ||

    There is a fair amount of TOS quoting going on, but so is there for Futurama too. And there's a good amount of Archer as well. But they're not from enough of a spectrum of commenters to take #3, I don't think.

  • sarcasmic||

    ATHF, Always Sunny, and Futurama

    dork

  • ||

    "Also they told me you guys look like dorks!"

  • ||

    "They look like dorks!!!"

  • UnCivilServant||

    I tried. I couldn't force myself to finish it.

  • ||

    Then enjoy not getting references. Maybe you should get stoned and try it again.

  • Zeb||

    I tried. I couldn't force myself to finish it.
    What are you, some sort of communist or something?

  • 2ndClassProle||

    Do not forget the Archer quotes. Reason I started watching the show is because of Epi.

  • Brett L||

    Reason I started watching the show is because of Epi.

    Goddammit. Now he's gonna be big-headed for a week.

  • ||

    That's because of the Viagra, not his comment.

  • sarcasmic||

    Did the scientists vote? It's not science without a consensus.

  • ||

    An armed society is a polite society.
    Robert A. Heinlein.

  • ||

    "Our main agenda is to have ALL guns banned. We must use whatever means possible. It doesn't matter if you have to distort facts or even lie. Our task of creating a socialist America can only succeed when those who would resist us have been totally disarmed."
    HCI President Sarah Brady to Senator Howard Metzenbaum, The National Educator, January 1994, p.3

    "I don't care about crime, I just want to get the guns." Senator Howard Metzenbaum, 1994

  • Heroic Mulatto||

    Justice would be Meztenbaum's afterlife consisting of waking up as a denizen of the Warsaw Ghetto circa 1940 and helplessly watching as his loved ones are loaded into cattle cars.

  • fish||

    I'm going to do my best to stay on your good side in case you are ever put in charge of the "Ironic Punishments Division"!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3ZcZ2h4Ths

  • Brian||

    People who hate guns will always want to ban guns. Since they disarm themselves, and enjoy trusting the police, they consider anyone else who is armed as a threat.

    Or, they're in the ruling class, and they avoid self-defense by contracting it out, or special government-provided protection. In which case, they're not exactly disarmed, since their appointed guardians satisfy all the special exceptions to gun possession, but they still view private firearms as a threat, since they don't own and wield any themselves.

    Gun control is always only for the plebes. The people who don't live in gated communities guarded by armed security 24/7 and can't rely on the police are the people who need to own firearms, and they're the people who are always most effected by gun control.

  • RishJoMo||

    Jam da Man says that aint never gonna play out man.

    www.AnonIs.tk

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement