• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

If CCW's were easier to get nationwide would crime go down?

Maidenrules29

Death to all but METAL!!
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 12, 2018
Messages
5,507
Reaction score
2,746
Location
Idaho
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Scenario..... A new law is passed that any law abiding U.S. citizen who passes a comprehensive background check can get a CCW. Soon after, news reports say that millions of CCW licenses have been granted nationwide. Soon after that, many stories a day about people defending themselves against criminals using their CCW guns. Would crime start going down if the would be criminals started being afraid that they might be killed if they tried victimizing someone?
 
Scenario..... A new law is passed that any law abiding U.S. citizen who passes a comprehensive background check can get a CCW. Soon after, news reports say that millions of CCW licenses have been granted nationwide. Soon after that, many stories a day about people defending themselves against criminals using their CCW guns. Would crime start going down if the would be criminals started being afraid that they might be killed if they tried victimizing someone?

CCW's are for individual protection.

Not for fighting crime.
 
America has more guns per capita than any other country on earth, by far, yet is one of the most dangerous first world nations. Sprinkling more guns into a society doesn't magically make it safer, otherwise the US would have one if the lowest violent crime rates instead of one of the highest.
 
Scenario..... A new law is passed that any law abiding U.S. citizen who passes a comprehensive background check can get a CCW. Soon after, news reports say that millions of CCW licenses have been granted nationwide. Soon after that, many stories a day about people defending themselves against criminals using their CCW guns. Would crime start going down if the would be criminals started being afraid that they might be killed if they tried victimizing someone?

And the number of mass shootings stays at over one per day - many committed by CCW holders

Innocent people are gunned down because CCW holders claimed their lives were under threat....even when cell phone footage shows one man gunned down as he was running aay.
The CW holder's defense was that the man was a criminal and could have been going for help to attack him/her

Sensible states like NY and NJ raise a legal challenge saying the new law impinges on states' right and that Congress has no Constitutional authgority to pass such a law under the enumerated poweers stated in the Constitution
Non-citizens complain that the new law discriminates against them and leaves them in mortal danger


The law is struck down as unconstitutional and crime levels, slowly go back down, until after 3 years they're back at 2020 levels.
 
CCW's are for individual protection.

Not for fighting crime.
You are correct and in my scenario the CCW holders are merely defending themselves not being "crime fighters"
 
And the number of mass shootings stays at over one per day - many committed by CCW holders

Innocent people are gunned down because CCW holders claimed their lives were under threat....even when cell phone footage shows one man gunned down as he was running aay.
The CW holder's defense was that the man was a criminal and could have been going for help to attack him/her

Sensible states like NY and NJ raise a legal challenge saying the new law impinges on states' right and that Congress has no Constitutional authgority to pass such a law under the enumerated poweers stated in the Constitution
Non-citizens complain that the new law discriminates against them and leaves them in mortal danger


The law is struck down as unconstitutional and crime levels, slowly go back down, until after 3 years they're back at 2020 levels.
The ratio of total CCW holders in the U.S.right now to actual cases where a CCW holder has been convicted of unnecessarily killing someone is minuscule.
 
And the number of mass shootings stays at over one per day - many committed by CCW holders

Innocent people are gunned down because CCW holders claimed their lives were under threat....even when cell phone footage shows one man gunned down as he was running aay.
The CW holder's defense was that the man was a criminal and could have been going for help to attack him/her

Sensible states like NY and NJ raise a legal challenge saying the new law impinges on states' right and that Congress has no Constitutional authgority to pass such a law under the enumerated poweers stated in the Constitution
Non-citizens complain that the new law discriminates against them and leaves them in mortal danger


The law is struck down as unconstitutional and crime levels, slowly go back down, until after 3 years they're back at 2020 levels.
Note that in my scenario the potential CCW holders must go through a comprehensive background check. Not every who applies gets one, just like today.
 
Scenario..... A new law is passed that any law abiding U.S. citizen who passes a comprehensive background check can get a CCW. Soon after, news reports say that millions of CCW licenses have been granted nationwide. Soon after that, many stories a day about people defending themselves against criminals using their CCW guns. Would crime start going down if the would be criminals started being afraid that they might be killed if they tried victimizing someone?

I doubt crime would go down. Out in the street crime might take a hit butt overall nothing will change.
 
America has more guns per capita than any other country on earth, by far, yet is one of the most dangerous first world nations.

No, the US is only dangerous in certain areas where there is a high concentration of democrats:

The United States can really be divided up into three types of places. Places where there are no murders, places where there are a few murders, and places where murders are very common.

In 2014, the most recent year that a county-level breakdown is available, 54% of counties (with 11% of the population) have no murders. 69% of counties have no more than one murder, and about 20% of the population. These counties account for only 4% of all murders in the country.

The worst 1% of counties have 19% of the population and 37% of the murders. The worst 2% of counties contain 28% of the population and 51% of the murders. The worst 5% of counties contain 47% of the population and account for 68% of murders.

Murders in US very concentrated: 54% of US counties in 2014 had zero murders, 2% of counties have 51% of the murders - Crime Prevention Research CenterCrime Prevention Research Center

If you exclude these counties filled with democrats murdering each other in broad daylight, then the US is an extremely safe country.
 
Note that in my scenario the potential CCW holders must go through a comprehensive background check. Not every who applies gets one, just like today.

As many CCW holders who became mass shooters did - like Stephen Paddock.
 
No, the US is only dangerous in certain areas where there is a high concentration of democrats:If you exclude these counties filled with democrats murdering each other in broad daylight, then the US is an extremely safe country.
If you exclude all the cities, America's big murder problem doesn't look so bad!
 
As many CCW holders who became mass shooters did - like Stephen Paddock.

Hmm... one example does not indicate "many". BTW, your CCW holder example did not use a concealed handgun for his mass shooting.
 
Hmm... one example does not indicate "many". BTW, your CCW holder example did not use a concealed handgun for his mass shooting.


How many do you need ?


The CCW meant that he, I presume, went through some kind of background check ?
 
How many do you need ?


The CCW meant that he, I presume, went through some kind of background check ?

Anyone who buys a gun from a FFL dealer goes through a NICS BGC. The only additional requirement for a Texas LTC (open or concealed handgun carry license) is passing a NRA gun safety course (cost of about $100 plus 50 rounds of ammo), supplying fingerprints and paying a non-refunbable, application fee (now about $24, IIRC).
 
Anyone who buys a gun from a FFL dealer goes through a NICS BGC. The only additional requirement for a Texas LTC (open or concealed handgun carry license) is passing a NRA gun safety course (cost of about $100 plus 50 rounds of ammo), supplying fingerprints and paying a non-refunbable, application fee (now about $24, IIRC).

In Georgia, you don't even need to take a test...just pay the processing fee.
 
In Georgia, you don't even need to take a test...just pay the processing fee.

Hmm... so it's just a user fee for keeping one's full (and bear) 2A rights - basically a constitutional rights rental agreement.
 
As many CCW holders who became mass shooters did - like Stephen Paddock.
I will also do my own research but please find me more than one CCW holder who became a mass shooter . However like I said, which I guess you chose to ignore, the ratio is still minuscule.
 
Scenario..... A new law is passed that any law abiding U.S. citizen who passes a comprehensive background check can get a CCW. Soon after, news reports say that millions of CCW licenses have been granted nationwide. Soon after that, many stories a day about people defending themselves against criminals using their CCW guns. Would crime start going down if the would be criminals started being afraid that they might be killed if they tried victimizing someone?

Arizona went to permitless CCW, and our crime rates didn't change at all, in any category. No more or less violent crimes, no more or less property crimes.

It is unconnected to crime, apparently.
 
I will also do my own research but please find me more than one CCW holder who became a mass shooter . However like I said, which I guess you chose to ignore, the ratio is still minuscule.

I'm just guessing that the Vegas shooter had a CCW, just like the Pulse Nightclub shooter probably had one, as probably did the Dallas shooter....


But after a quick Google search for "mass shooting, CCW holder, I got this right off the bat:


"On August 9, 2012, concealed handgun permit holder Ryan Clark Petersen allegedly shot and killed Cameron Eubanks, 20, Tiffany Grissett, 31, and Thomas Robins, Jr., 39, at Teasers, a nightclub located 12 miles west of Dothan, Alabama..."


Mass Shootings Committed By Concealed Carry Killers | VPC: Concealed Carry Killers
 
I'm just guessing that the Vegas shooter had a CCW, just like the Pulse Nightclub shooter probably had one, as probably did the Dallas shooter....


But after a quick Google search for "mass shooting, CCW holder, I got this right off the bat:


"On August 9, 2012, concealed handgun permit holder Ryan Clark Petersen allegedly shot and killed Cameron Eubanks, 20, Tiffany Grissett, 31, and Thomas Robins, Jr., 39, at Teasers, a nightclub located 12 miles west of Dothan, Alabama..."


Mass Shootings Committed By Concealed Carry Killers | VPC: Concealed Carry Killers

A statement of speculation, unsupported. Earlier, you made a statement as if it was fact, now admitting it was speculative.

"As many CCW holders who became mass shooters did - like Stephen Paddock."
 
Back
Top Bottom