Search This Blog

Wednesday, January 4, 2012

Incomplete Picture from the NY Times

The New York Times contains an editorial on January 4, 2012 entitled "Reckless Disregard for Safety". In it, they write:
"A review of state databases of criminal court cases and concealed carry licensees found more than 2,400 permit holders with felony or misdemeanor convictions over the past five years, excluding traffic-related offenses."
Comparing NC and Texas
  • 5 years from 2005-2009, inclusive:
    • Convictions of CHL holders
      • NC: 2,400
      • TX: 645*
    • TX: Total convictions: 314,317
  • In 2009 alone:
    • CHL holders
      • NC: 240,000
      • TX: 402,914
    • Convictions of CHL holders
      • NC: 480 (0.2% of CHL population), (estimated from 2,400/5 years)
      • TX: 101 (0.025% of CHL population)
    • Texas data
      • 2009 population: 24,782,302*
      • 2009 total convictions: 65,561 (0.265% of the population)

This is not heavy-lifting math:
  • 2009 convictions of TX CHL holders: 0.025% of the CHL population
  • 2009 convictions overall in TX: 0.265% of the overall population
  • The conviction rate of CHL holders was less than 1/10 that of the general population, in Texas. I didn't see the NY Times report THAT.
I stand by the rigorous Federal and State background checks, the mandated education, and the proficiency that must be displayed before licenses can be granted in Texas. Other states have less stringent requirements. (For my Indiana license, there was no mandated education or proficiency.)


Note that NC's conviction rate of CHL holders is roughly equivalent to that of the general population's conviction rate in Texas. Taking only these two states, the differences of rigorous background checks and qualification for a CHL might make an impact. That's an analysis that would be worth doing.


Let's look at the data, and then raise the national standard to that of Texas and not lower the qualifications to those of North Carolina. 


I'm a CHL instructor in Texas, and I speak for myself and not the state, other instructors, or even for my Labradors. Not for my employer. Just me.

*Texas population data come from the Texas Department of State Health Services. Texas CHL and conviction numbers come from the Texas Department of Public Safety.

n.b.: The population covers all age groups, the CHL population in Texas is, generally, over 21 (there are a few exceptions). So the overall crime convictions are against a larger population sample size (skewing the overall numbers lower, not the CHL numbers) than a fairer comparison against only the population over 21.

1 comment:

  1. Rob, interesting piece in NYT and agree with your comments. What concerns me the most is the the NYT is making a few logic leaps that are not worthy of the Times... 1 - People who have CHLs are committing crimes because they have CHLs. 2 - No reference to gun crimes(specifically, handguns) overall in NC, similar to you math, if they looked at that data, how would it compare?

    ReplyDelete