More Crooked Proganda from the VPC

[MTT TL]

Apparently in the last twelve years more than 1300 people have been killed by CHL holders. Well sort of. Of the 1300 more than 500 were suicides. There next claim is that around 500 cases were bad shoots due to the CHL being found guilty of a crime. This is curious as they often delete files on CHL's who kill their attacker and are later cleared in court. If anyone has access to reliable numbers I would be curious to see them.

https://www.newsweek.com/concealed-carry-study-gun-policy-1467602

There are several important caveats to their analysis, including that the weapons involved were not necessarily related to the individuals' practice of concealed carry. But in a conversation with Newsweek, the group's legislative director, Kristen Rand, explained that the purpose of the analysis was to reflect on the behavior of people who receive these licenses, not necessarily the practice of concealed carry itself.

The real targets are the CHL's themselves.

 

[44 AMP]

Some years back, when the leading spokesmen for the anti-gun crowd were calling themselves Handgun Control Inc, they put forth a "study" about "Deaths of Children due to Handguns".

The number was shockingly large (of course...)

A bit later, a "defector" from inside their organization revealed the data they used. For "death of a child due to a handgun" they used

everyone under the age of 25 was a "child"

They counted suicides.

They counted gang on gang killings.

They counted those people shot and killed by the police in the line of duty.

They counted shot by any gun as "death due to a handgun".

Some of the same people in charge of these groups then are still in charge today, others are run by their handpicked replacements, who are also trained to lie and misrepresent facts to further their agendas.

The only thing one can take at face value from any of these groups is that there will be some degree of fabrication and misrepresentation of facts. (if there are actually any facts at all )

They have predetermined conclusions, and fabricate studies that appear to support them. They did it then, they are still doing it now.

 

[Tom Servo]

Well, they don't provide a link to the study, which is telling.

A couple of years ago, they did a very similar study. It claimed that there were less than 50 incidents per year in which people used guns in legitimate self-defense. Given that the lower boundary for defensive gun uses is around the 700,000 mark, that was pretty weird.

It turns out, they only counted cases in which someone was killed in a shooting, it went to a jury trial, and the shooter was exonerated on grounds of justifiable homicide. That was blatant cherry-picking, and it was intentional.

The vast majority of DGU's don't involve the weapon being fired, much less someone being shot, much less a homicide. The study ignored all those. It also ignored cases in which the prosecutor declined to press charges and cases that never saw a jury due to "stand your ground" laws.

Without the actual study, I can't tell, but these guys are known for massive bias and "selective" data, so I'd be very skeptical.

 

[Spats McGee]

...The real targets are the CHL's themselves.

The real target is CHL holders. I found this point telling:

There are several important caveats to their analysis, including that the weapons involved were not necessarily related to the individuals' practice of concealed carry.

So if I were to (Heaven forbid) accidentally kill someone in a deer hunting accident later this year, that would add to the total because I have a CHCL. Not because I got into a road rage incident. Not because I got drunk and shot my BIL at the family cookout. Not because I tried to intervene in a domestic dispute. Because I have a CHCL. That's enough for them.

These garbage studies annoy the crap out of me. Enough that I couldn't resist the urge to go dig it out. The VPC article about the study is here: http://vpc.org/press/more-than-1330...latest-violence-policy-center-research-shows/

So I'm going to put on my lawyer hat and take the VPC article apart just a little. Let's start with their most sensational claims:
The headline:

More Than 1,330 Non-Self Defense Deaths Involving Concealed Carry Killers Since 2007, Latest Violence Policy Center Research Shows

The opening line:

Innocent victims continue to die at the hands of private citizens with permits to carry concealed handguns, according to ongoing research from the Violence Policy Center (VPC).

Let me pause there to note that a shooting "involving" a CCL holder is not necessarily the same as "innocent victims dying at the hands of" a CCL holder. Case in point:

Overall, Concealed Carry Killers documents 1,104 fatal, non-self defense incidents since May 2007 in 40 states and the District of Columbia, resulting in the deaths of 1,335 people. Thirty-five of the incidents were fatal mass shootings as defined by federal law (three or more victims killed), resulting in the deaths of 167 victims.

Wait. So 35 of those incidents were "fatal mass shootings." Let's assume that they're technically correct in that. What I want to know is: Of those 35 incidents, how many were in fatal mass shootings carried out by a CCL holder. There's a big difference. If a CCL holder is shot and killed in a mass shooting incident, that's a "mass shooting involving a CCL holder." Technically, the Winnemucca bar shooting was a shooting "involving" a CCL holder, but not "carried out by" one. Arguably, it wasn't even a "mass shooting," but that's in part because the initial aggressor was shot a CHCL holder.

If I go to Concealed Carry Killers, it actually does make the claim that the 35 incidents were "carried out by" CCL holders. The "fact sheet" linked at the bottom claims to identify 33 such incidents. But I only count 32 incidents listed. The VPC claims that these are just "the tip of the iceberg," I'm no math wiz, but even I can count to 35 and do proper rounding off without too much trouble. The VPC seems to be having some problems here.

Next up:

VPC Legislative Director Kristen Rand states, “Concealed carry killers continue to claim innocent lives at a shocking pace....

So, we start with their number: 1,335. Each and every one of those deaths is a tragedy to someone. Each and every one of the deceased was someone's child, someone's brother. With that said, since when is 1,335 deaths over a 12 year span in a population of 300M significant? That's an average of 112 deaths per year. 112. Out of 300M.

Perhaps most telling is this paragraph:

In the vast majority of the 1,104 incidents documented in Concealed Carry Killers (995, or 90 percent), the concealed carry permit holder either committed suicide (534), has already been convicted (379), perpetrated a murder-suicide (62), or was killed in the incident (20). Of the 72 cases still pending, the vast majority (59) of concealed carry killers have been charged with criminal homicide, four were deemed incompetent to stand trial, and nine incidents are still under investigation. An additional 37 incidents were fatal unintentional shootings involving the gun of the concealed handgun permit holder.

Suicides: 534
Since the VPC counts "murder-suicide" separately, we can safely assume that only the CCL holder died in the suicides. Is the deceased then an "innocent victim?" I don't know, but for purposes of formulating public policy, I'd exclude the suicides, bringing VPC's number down to 801, or 67 deaths per year.

The VPC isn't known for its honesty in its studies and this is a classic example of why.

 

[J.G. Terry]

Is it Propaganda?

Is it Propaganda? I try to keep up with data from the anti-gun organization. Numbers are dubious and citations are pretty sketchy. The pro-gun organizations sometimes are in the same business. The most recent email from "Everytown for Gun Safety" has to do with domestic violence. The drive there is to take action related to the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA).

You may want to check those numbers. If people on either side footnote their information it would help get past some of this cooked (not a typo)data. Reckless use of data backfires. Citing questionable sources with sloppy numbers is part of this dance.

 

[rickyrick]

So Newsweek says new research shows blah blah blah... and the research is from an article on VPC that has “Concealed Carry Killers” in the title. Uses words like “innocent”, “shocking” and of course this gem of how they get their data (which is from another website called concealedcarrykillers.org)

the examples on Concealed Carry Killers are taken primarily from news reports along with the limited information collected by a few states.

so yes this is propaganda. Very sloppy propaganda at that. By their own admission, the information used to determine the numbers stated isn’t even data.

 

[T. O'Heir]

"...Is it Propaganda?..." Usually called lies. However, you can prove anything you want to prove using statistics.
Asher Stockler appears to be one of the many rabidly anti-firearm ownership media hacks. He seems to think the mere possession of a government issued permit makes you homicidal. I wonder if he think having a driver's licence does that too. According to The Association for Safe International Road Travel, based in Maryland(an anti-firearm State), nearly 1.25 million people die in road crashes each year. An average 3,287 deaths per day or well more than double the number Asher claims were shot in 12 years.

 

[J.G. Terry]

Is this propaganda to inform the uncommitted or to pump up the home team? Both?

 

[MTT TL]

Is this propaganda to inform the uncommitted or to pump up the home team? Both?

It is best to be somewhat informed on the lies those opposed to your viewpoint are spreading.

 

[J.G. Terry]

This dance makes all data suspect. How can I identify a semi-lie? One that came by recently was that three times the number fatalities are caused by knives than guns. Later, it came by that five times more people were killed by knives than by rifles. Point being is that there is much crap flying around. Maybe, by attacking the small so-called information points then the entire message can be derailed. If this "fact"is bogus is the rest phony? Could it be us pro-gun people need an ongoing solid truth squad? How about dividing the number of firearm deaths from all causes by the estimated number of guns in America. What would that tell the world. How many zero's would be behind that decimal point. Go figure. (not snarky).

You get into this correlation or causation argument on permits. I went out an shot my rarely carried concealed Glock yesterday. At no time did the thought of homicide come up. A sample of one don't count. I happened it have a permit. I did not plan on killing anybody not even the "She devil from hell."