categories

archives

meta


"walls of the city" logo conceptualized by Oleg Volk and executed by Linoge. Logo is © "walls of the city".

a criminal perspective

Speaking of the growing number of individuals around the country with handgun carry permits, concealed carry of weapons permits, and whatever other equivalent permits and licenses there may be out there, I was going to give John Lott the quote of the day for this post, but then I realized I could not replicate his math. So, instead, I will simply embark on some mathematics of my own.

From 01OCT87 to 31JAN10, Florida has issued 1,704,624 concealed weapon/firearm licenses, with 692,621 permits still valid.

Of those nearly-two-million licenses, and in those not-quite 23 years, a grand total of 5,308 licenses have been revoked, with 592 of those being reinstated since January of 1990.

Taking out those licenses that were reinstated (given that reinstating the license indicates that the state did something wrong when it first revoked the license), that gives me an overall failure rate over those 23 years of 0.277%. If we take out the 522 licenses that should never have been granted due to crimes committed prior to licensure (something the government of Florida should have caught when background checking applicants), the failure rate drops to 0.246% (though that is not entirely accurate, given that some of those licenses might have been reinstated).

Additionally, the state of Florida’s failure rate for licenses in general (i.e. the state not catching disqualifying crimes committed before licensure) is 0.031%, and the state’s failure rate at revoking licenses (i.e. the state erroneously revoking a license) is 11.2%.

The important take-away from all those numbers? After 23 years of licensing those who wish to carry handguns, Florida has only had to revoke, at most, 0.277% of those licenses for cause.

As a somewhat random reminder, I would point out that Mayors Against Illegal Guns has had 2.2% of its members arrested, charged, and convicted of criminal activities (assuming 500 mayors – a number that is fiercely debated and probably artificially inflated).

Comparatively speaking, Mayors Against Illegal Guns members are almost eight times more likely to be convicted of crimes than Florida concealed firearm license holders – but that number is based off 23 years of licenses versus four years of MAIG. Assuming the mayors had as much history as the licenses, and assuming the same trend (11 mayors convicted in four years – a sizeable assumption, but it is all the data we have to operate on), you are looking at MAIG members being over 45 times more likely to be convicted of crimes than Florida concealed firearm license holders. How funny is that?

6 comments to a criminal perspective

  • Heh Great post, but it pisses me off! Why can’t Co-Founder Thom Meneno of Boston be one of the 2%??

    He’s already committed the crime:
    http://www.dandunn.org/blog/2009/09/meninos-email-problem-just-got-a-lot-bigger/

    And likely the Emails were deleted to mask his connection to two state legislators who were nabbed taking bribes from undercover FBI Agents for pay-to-play liquor licenses.

    Authoritarians are generally a dangerous lot!

  • divemedic

    I am one of those whose permit was revoked and then reinstated. A month after I broke up with my live in gf of 12 months, she went to the court and filed for a domestic violence restraining order against me, which revoked my CCW automatically. She then offered to drop it for $10,000. It took me 6 months and 4 court hearings to the the ex parte order lifted so I could get my permit back. I am told that this is a common tactic for divorce lawyers to gain the upper hand in divorce cases.

  • […] at or received criminal charges has grown so much that someone as a web page tracking it. And for comparison: Comparatively speaking, Mayors Against Illegal Guns members are almost eight times more likely to […]

  • Weer’d: Give him time. His eventual conviction may help bump the MAIG’s numbers up a little – and rightfully so, from the looks of things.

    divemedic: And your unfortunate story more than adequately demonstrates why our current system simply sucks – from my understanding, restraining orders can be filed for no better reason than someone wanting one, and require absolutely no substantiation of any threat, perceived or real. Using one person’s unproven, unverified word to deprive another person of their natural, Constitutionally-protected rights is plain and simply wrong.

    Of course, given the expense and trouble you went through, I can see why scumbags use it to gain leverage…

  • straightarrow

    I would think that after such an attempt at extortion tried on divemedic most probably with the knowledge and maybe even the help of a lawyer, that divorce lawyers would be the ones wanting the TRO’s.

  • Well, that is certainly what anti-rights advocates would have others believe about us, is it not?