In Florida, number of CCW permits up, violent crimes down

Rate this post

Somewhere some Lib’s head is about to explode with these facts


Just ran across this lovely article and thought I would share. Now if some nincompoop would like to debate the fact that having people armed to defend themselves makes for a safer society, well just jam some of these facts down  their throats. 😀                      ~Steve~

Florida Update: Concealed Carry Permits Up, Violent Crime Down.

Written by  
The recent report from ABC News that in Florida, where there are more concealed weapons permits than anywhere else in the country, violent crime has dropped to the lowest point in history, delighted Sean Caranna, executive director of Florida Carry, Inc. “We’re happy to have facts and statistics put into these debates, because every time they do, we win,” he said.
Firearm-related violent crimes in Florida have dropped by one-third in just four years, 2007 to 2011, while concealed carry permits jumped by 90 percent in that period. Further, violent crime of any kind dropped almost as much, 26 percent.
There were naysayers, but their voices are becoming muted as more and more states have adopted “shall-issue” carry laws and have seen their own crime rates drop as well. One of the naysayers was Gary Kleck, a Florida State criminologist who calls himself “as liberal as they get.” He said the link between more permits and less crime might just be a coincidence. He said that nationally, crime has been falling steadily since 1991 and Florida’s numbers might just be part of that trend. He warned against drawing too hasty a conclusion that one statistic caused the other. “The real problem there in drawing conclusions is that you’re guessing why that decline or change in gun violence has occurred,” he stated.
In a backhanded support of Kleck’s warning, Arthur Hayhoe, the executive director of the Florida Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, said “It’s difficult to attach gun control to the reduction of crime, and vice versa. We don’t know what works. We can’t prove that gun control works because we don’t have gun control laws.”
( Excuse me while I move this rock…  OK ,Mr. Hayhoe, hey that sounds like..ah never mind. You say we can’t prove it because we don’t have gun control laws. Well since you’ve been under a rock, believe it or not they have laws in New York, Chicago, Los Angeles. Guess what? As far as helping your argument, they suck. Just so you know. Scurry back under that rock now.    ~Steve)
Kleck has authored numerous books and articles over the last 20 years, but none garnered as much national attention as his 1994 National Self-Defense Survey which, based on a survey of 5,000 households, concluded that there were far more incidents where gun owners defended themselves against potentially violent crime than there were actual crimes involving the use of guns. This outraged liberals who thought Kleck would find something that would support their typically anti-gun posture. One such was Marvin Wolfgang, another liberal Florida criminologist who described himself as being “as strong a gun-control advocate as can be found among all criminologists in this country.” He said,
I would eliminate all guns from the civilian population and maybe even from the police. I hate guns — ugly, nasty instruments designed to kill people…. What troubles me is the article by Gary Kleck … The reason I am troubled is that [he has] provided an almost clear-cut case of methodologically sound research in support of something I have theoretically opposed for years, namely, the use of a gun in defense against a criminal perpetrator … I do not like [his] conclusions that having a gun can be useful, but I cannot fault [his] methodology….
Such a report from Florida must encourage Professor John Lott, who in 2000 authored the groundbreaking book More Guns, Less CrimeLott never intended to become the lightning rod for the anti-gun forces. He began the study initially because he saw that much of what passed for valid statistical analysis in the field was poorly done, and he saw an opportunity to correct and update it. What it did was change his life, and not necessarily for the better. In his recent update to the book, Lott wrote,
Ten years have passed since the second edition of this book. During that time, both the argument and the data have been hotly debated. This debate has often been unpleasant, vociferous, and even disingenuous. To say that my career has suffered as a result is something of an understatement.… And yet … within the scholarly community [my] research has withstood criticism and remains sound. Further, the additional ten years of data provide continued strong support for [my] arguments.…
When Florida passed the first “shall-issue” law requiring authorities to issue concealed weapons permits to qualified citizens upon request in 1987, critics warned that the Sunshine State would soon become the “Gunshine” State, with predictions of differences being settled by gun fights in the streets, and crime soaring. The exact opposite happened. As noted, “homicide rates dropped faster than the national average [and] through 1997, only one permit holder out of over the 350,000 permits issued, was convicted of homicide.”
That was then. This is now. Lott provided an update on right-to-carry laws for the Maryland Law Review last October in which he noted that there are now more than 912,000 permit holders in Florida, many of whom have had their permits for years. Across the country, as some 40 other states have joined Florida in its decision to allow “shall-issue” permits to its citizens, the number of permit holders has reached nearly eight million, and is still climbing. And Lott is getting support for his once-controversial view by recent studies showing similar declines in violent crime. Wrote Lott:
There have been a total of 29 peer reviewed studies by economists and criminologists, 18 supporting the hypothesis that shall-issue laws reduce crime, 10 not finding any significant effect on crime … and [one] paper … finding that right-to-carry laws temporarily increase one type of violent crime: aggravated assault.
He noted that the predicted disasters following passage of such laws never happened. In fact, despite more and more states adopting them, not a single one of those laws has been repealed. As Lott noted,
One simple measure of how well these laws have worked is a political one: despite states adopting right-to-carry laws as long ago as the 1920s, there has never even been a legislative hearing held to rescind these laws.
In that paper, Lott took delight in debunking so-called studies by anti-gun groups that have distorted the data to prove a different, and less favorable, conclusion:
A June 2010 analysis of the gun control groups’ claims examined those groups’ claims for Florida: the Brady Campaign and the Violence Policy Center portray Florida as Ground Zero for problems with concealed handgun permit holders.
They boldly assert that seventeen Florida permit holders have “killed” people with their guns over the past three years [from May 2007 to May 2010] and that this one state by itself accounts for seventeen of the ninety-six “killer” permit holders nationwide.
( Liar Liar Big Fat Stupid Pants on Fire…. I’m such a child.  LOL)
Yet even though a newspaper reported on the shooting, seven cases were such clear-cut cases of self-defense that no one was even charged with a crime, three cases involved suicide, and two of the other cases, including one involving a police officer, actually didn’t involve permit holders. [Emphases added.]
That means that, following Lott’s rigorous refutation of those inflated statistics, just five out of more than half a million permit holders were involved in a criminal case in that three-year period.
That latest information from Florida just confirms what Lott had discovered years ago: Carrying reduces crime. Wrote Lott: “Armageddon never happened … in state after state when right-to-carry laws have been adopted, the entire debate quickly becomes a non-issue within a year.”
The time is almost here when carrying a concealed firearm is so commonplace that it won’t even be worth commenting on. Florida and Professor John Lott have led the way.
A graduate of Cornell University and a former investment advisor, Bob is a regular contributor to The New American and blogs frequently at, primarily on economics and politics. He can be reached

Please follow and like us:

0 responses to “In Florida, number of CCW permits up, violent crimes down

  1. Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition, now and forever!

  2. I live in Florida ( for now ) and am waiting for my CCP delivery which should be any day now. There have been so many applications that it is taking up to 3 months for processing. Although they deposited my payment check in a hurry !

    • Jane, wow 3 months now. I’ve had mine for about 10 yrs, but I seem to recall that it was like 30 days. Even sorta remember it was kind of the law that they had to do it in 30. Oh well you’re almost there.
      It’s a nice warm , cozy feeling when you go out knowing that you can keep you and your loved ones safe.
      I hope you never need it, but it’s nice knowing it’s there.
      If you are going to carry, then everytime you go out that door you get it.
      EVERYTIME!. Make it like the keys.
      Because the one time you leave it home just might be a time you need it.
      Stay safe and May God Bless.

  3. Just out of curiosity as to statistics: how old are you, and did you feel insecure, or at some risk before you decided to get a sidearm? If so, was there a specific reason for feeling that way? When my first wife felt that way it was because we lived in a low rent, rough neighbourhood, and at 25, w/o any physical or martial arts skills, she felt that was best.

    • Just ran across this on Drudge
      70,291,049 Background Checks for Gun Purchases Under Obama
      A snippet from article..
      “Over the same time period, the number of background checks completed under President George W. Bush was 36,090,415, or about half the number conducted under Obama.”

      • Dennis H Bennett

        This is an Obama response to my Twitter activity questioning his agenda. It SOUNDS so goooooood!! Lengthy, but reveals his insidious seductions with language:The White House, Washington
        Dear Dennis:
        Thank you for taking the time to write. I have heard from many Americans regarding firearms policy and gun violence in our Nation, and I appreciate your perspective. From Aurora to Newtown to the streets of Chicago, we have seen the devastating effects gun violence has on our American family. I join countless others in grieving for all those whose lives have been taken too soon by gun violence.
        Like the majority of Americans, I believe the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms. In this country, we have a strong tradition of gun ownership that has been handed down from generation to generation. Hunting and sport shooting are part of our national heritage. Yet, even as we acknowledge that almost all gun owners in America are responsible, when we look at the devastation caused by gun violence—whether in high-profile tragedies or the daily heartbreak that plagues our cities—we must ask ourselves whether we are doing enough.
        While reducing gun violence is a complicated challenge, protecting our children from harm should not be a divisive one. Most gun owners agree that we can respect the Second Amendment while keeping an irresponsible, law-breaking few from inflicting harm on a massive scale. Most also agree that if we took commonsense steps to curtail gun violence, there would be fewer atrocities like the one that occurred in Newtown. We will not be able to stop every violent act, but if there is even one thing we can do to reduce gun violence—if even one life can be saved—then we have an obligation to try.
        That is why I asked Vice President Joe Biden to identify concrete steps we can take to keep our children safe, help prevent mass shootings, and reduce the broader epidemic of gun violence in this country. He met with over 200 groups representing a broad cross-section of Americans and heard their best ideas. I have put forward a specific set of proposals based off of his efforts, and in the days ahead, I intend to use whatever weight this office holds to make them a reality.
        My plan gives law enforcement, schools, mental health professionals, and the public health community some of the tools they need to help reduce gun violence. These tools include strengthening the background check system, helping schools hire more resource officers and counselors and develop emergency preparedness plans, and ensuring mental health professionals know their options for reporting threats of violence. And I directed the Centers for Disease Control to study the best ways to reduce gun violence—because it is critical that we understand the science behind this public health crisis.
        As important as these steps are, they are not a substitute for action from Congress. To make a real and lasting difference, members of Congress must also act. As part of my comprehensive plan, I have called on them to pass some specific proposals right away. First, it is time to require a universal background check for anyone trying to buy a gun. Second, Congress should renew the 10-round limit on magazines and reinstate and strengthen the assault weapons ban. We should get tougher on those who buy guns with the purpose of selling them to criminals, and we should impose serious punishments on anyone who helps them do this.
        These are reasonable, commonsense measures that have the support of the majority of the American people. But change will not come unless the American people demand it from their lawmakers. Now is the time to do the right thing for our children, our communities, and the country we love. We owe the victims of heartbreaking national tragedies and the countless unheralded tragedies each year nothing less than our best effort—to seek consensus in order to save lives and ensure a brighter future for our children.
        Thank you, again, for writing. I encourage you to visit to learn more about my Administration’s approach.
        Barack Obama

    • Joseph, I decided to carry my firearm after receiving death threats on our blog. The guy even cited my home town so I took it seriously. Since that time there was a break in at my neighbors and two attacks in the parking lot at my local grocery store. I never leave home without it.

      • Kinda like the old Karl Malden and Amex commercial.
        “Don’t leave home without it”
        I’m dating myself. errrr, my handsome and much older brother told me about it. LOL

      • Yup… when it comes to nasty folk, “conflict resolution” means being able to hit your target more often than left/libtards would like.

  4. I’ll NEVER forget the time I was pinned under fire coming from another property nearby, but I couldn’t tell the correct direction as the bush was too heavy. Boy, did it EVER make me aware of leaving my rifle at home, “only” a few hundred feet away, but it might as well have been Eternity. When the firing stopped I got home, phoned the RCMP, and we soon figured out what the Hell was going on: completely irresponsible teenagers on a nearby farm property ‘fooling around target shooting’ was their excuse. One NEVER fires at targets unless s/he knows exactly what is behind them. They thought my forty acres of forested land was ’empty’.

    • Yikes!!!

    • Dennis H Bennett

      I stayed several months on the Detroit Medical Campus several years ago (1990) and faced the same dilemma. Just walking to my car in broad daylight, in a “secured” parking lot, hearing gunshots, not knowing if I should duck, had got in a line of fire or was being singled out as an innocent victim, made me a believer in defending myself. Obama wants to reduce us to the state of the unborn child, completely defenseless. This is not the America I have fought for.

  5. Dressage Rider

    How many of us will need those new fangled “printers” to make our own ammo?

    • These have been over-hyped by people promoting stocks or their newsletter. The technology exists and it works. BUT –and here’s the kicker– it requires a VERY complex, expensive mechanism to feed the required materials into the printer in EXACTLY the correct amounts at the precise time they are needed. These are not like the heyday of office copiers, where they went from $10,000 to $500 in say ten years. If it were so, then we’d have the long-awaited sci-fi dream of the Universal Assembler that makes us all kings & queens in our apartments, with diamonds as cheap as elemental carbon! I’ve read one fool writing about poorly-educated Chinese wage slaves paid US$ 5/a day to run a factory full of such devices, and put highly-trained makers of complex devices such as large X-ray machines out of work forever. It ain’t gonna happen, at least not any time soon. Even if it did, a new category of highly-paid & highly-trained technician-mechanics will be needed to service the 3-d printers. Older readers will recall the hype of trade schools to train people for the high-paying job of the future as program writers for computers!! Then software came along and the rest is, well, history.

  6. Marvin Wolfgang is a classic example of the lib/ progressive mindset . Don’t dare confuse him with facts or the truth because , like a movie line from a few years ago ; ” HE CAN’T HANDLE THE TRUTH “.
    The only problem with a C.C.W. permit is you are telling the gov’t where to look first when it comes down to confiscation . Personally , I’d rather fly under the radar and be judged by 12 than carried by 6 .
    This might be the non-conformist in me but since when did it become mandatory to apply for a permit to exercise a constitutional / God – given right of self-protection . Gov’t can pound sand up there wazoos .

  7. Why would anyone tell the gument anything. Let them, and they probably will, find out on their own.

  8. Of Wolves, Children, and Dogs
    Imagine for a moment that wolves were a pervasive problem across the country.
    We were left with contending at any given moment a solitary wolf slipping into the school yard, play ground, or birthday party and attacking children. The public out cry began to build and the government in all of it’s infinite wisdom decided it should step in.
    After much conferring with people who knew nothing about wolves and had never seen a wolf decided that the only real answer was to not risk another child’s life. From the Senate to the White House a solution was provided.
    Every domestic dog that weighed over 25lbs was to be rounded up and slaughtered.
    Dog owners and lovers became enraged “our dogs are not wolves”, yet the Government responded “we have talked with experts and have concluded that since dogs are all descendents from the wolf we can not afford, for the sake of the children, to risk what we see as ticking time bombs in our homes. We feel that every dog lover can be reasonable and accept that dogs 25lb and under can keep the average dog lover happy”.
    The public pointed back “but what are you going to do about the wolves coming out from the woods and attacking our children?”
    Of course such a question could not be effectively answered because wolves are wild and one does not know where they all live.
    Dogs on the other hand live in homes and have rabies tags and there are records where they live.
    Such is the philosophy of gun control.


Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.