CCW in Texas: 10 years later

[Jeff22]

The Concealed Handgun Law: Ten Years Later

Published: 1/6/2006

By Commissioner Jerry Patterson

When the Texas Concealed Handgun Law took effect in 1996, pundits and naysayers predicted anarchy. Any minute, there would surely be mass violence as armed Texas citizens began roving the streets settling arguments with gunfire. Certainly, several proclaimed, within a year there would be blood in the streets as Texas returned to the days of the Wild West.

Ten years later the facts paint a different picture. Texas under the Concealed Handgun Law isn’t the Wild West, but the Mild West. No recurrent shootouts at four-way stops, no blood in the streets. Quite the contrary, Texans are safer than before.

But why are we safer? Why did the fears of the naysayers fail to materialize?

One of the reasons I authored Senate Bill 60, the Concealed Handgun Law, was because I trust my fellow Texans. Contrary to opinions expressed on almost every editorial page across the state, I knew that when law-abiding Texans’ constitutional right to keep and bear arms was restored with the passage of S.B. 60, they would exercise good judgment and behave responsibly.

Ten years later, and the statistics continue to prove the point.

Since the passage of the Concealed Handgun Law, the FBI Uniform Crime Report shows an 18% drop in handgun murders, down from 838 in 1995 to 688 in 2004. And a 13% drop in handgun murders per 100,000 population, down from 4.5 murders per 100,000 Texans in 1995 to 3.95 per 100,000 in 2004.

In 2000, on the fifth anniversary of the Concealed Handgun Law, the National Center for Policy Analysis issued a report that indicated Texans with concealed carry permits are far less likely to commit a serious crime than the average citizen.

According to the report, the more than 200,000 Texans licensed to carry a concealed firearm are much more law-abiding than the average person.

The report illustrated that Texans who exercise their right to carry firearms are 5.7 times less likely to be arrested for a violent offense. They are 14 times less likely to be arrested for a non-violent offense. And they are 1.4 times less likely to be arrested for murder.

H. Sterling Burnett, a senior policy analyst at the NCPA and the author of the report, concluded:

“Many predicted that minor incidents would escalate into bloody shootouts if Texas passed a concealed-carry law. That prediction was dead wrong,” Burnett said.

With 247,345 concealed handgun licenses active in Texas as of December 2005, the number of law-abiding licensees has had a positive effect on the crime rate.

Texas Department of Public Safety Uniform Crime Report indicates the overall crime rate in Texas has continued to drop over the past 10 years. In 1997, DPS reported 5,478 crimes per 100,000 Texans, based on a population of 19,355,427 Texans. In 2004, with almost 3 million more Texans, the crime rate is 5,032 per 100,000.

The effect of the Concealed Handgun Law has been so positive, it has converted some of its most outspoken initial critics.

John Holmes, former Harris County district attorney, wrote to me several years after the passage of the law.

“As you know, I was very outspoken in my opposition to the passage of the Concealed Handgun Act. I did not feel that such legislation was in the public interest and presented a clear and present danger to law abiding citizens by placing more handguns on our streets,” Holmes wrote. “Boy was I wrong. Our experience in Harris County, and indeed state-wide, has proven my initial fears absolutely groundless.”

Glenn White, president of the Dallas Police Association, shared this view. “I lobbied against the law in 1993 and 1995 because I thought it would lead to wholesale armed conflict. That hasn't happened,” White told the Dallas Morning News. “All the horror stories I thought would come to pass didn't happen. No bogeyman. I think it's worked out well, and that says good things about the citizens who have permits. I'm a convert.”

To the supporters of individual liberty and the constitutional right to keep and bear arms, this outcome is no surprise. However, the Concealed Handgun Law isn’t just about personal safety. Perhaps even deeper than its roots in constitutional freedom, the Concealed Handgun Law is about trust.

And after ten years, the Concealed Handgun Law is a shining example of what happens when elected officials have faith in their fellow Texans.

The legacy of Senate Bill 60 is grounded in the concept that our government should place its trust in us, not the other way around.

JERRY PATTERSON is the 27th Texas Land Commissioner and author of Senate Bill 60 the Concealed Handgun Law.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Where's that from? It's a good piece and the reference would be nice if we send it on.

[Kelly J]

Good solid testament to the fact that Concealed Carry, Is a good thing, and does help to reduce the crime rate where ever it has passed, the public are not a bunch of mindless, crazy, gun happy people, we just want to be able to Protect ourselves, and our families, from the criminal elliment, The Police simply can not do the job, in fact the term, "To Serve and Protect", is probably the most missleading statement to the Public there is, simply because the Police cannot Protect, by an acvt of preemption, they can only act after a crime has been commited, so to prevent the crime, it is basically up to the potential Victum.

Thanks Texas and Keep up the Good Work.

[Don H]

Link, please?

[Double Naught Spy]

Jeff, why the old news? You saw it was published on 1/6/2006, more that an year and a half ago.

Good solid testament to the fact that Concealed Carry, Is a good thing, and does help to reduce the crime rate where ever it has passed, the public are not a bunch of mindless, crazy, gun happy people, we just want to be able to Protect ourselves, and our families, from the criminal elliment, The Police simply can not do the job, in fact the term, "To Serve and Protect", is probably the most missleading statement to the Public there is, simply because the Police cannot Protect, by an acvt of preemption, they can only act after a crime has been commited, so to prevent the crime, it is basically up to the potential Victum.

It sounds cool, but it isn't true. The purported drop in Texas crime was NOT due to concealed carrying licensing. Sure, crime has dropped since the CHL went into effect, but how do you account for the several years that the crime rate in Texas was dropping prior to 1996? Obviously, the drop in those years had nothing to do with CHLs.

If you want to talk correlations with the Texas CHL and crime drops, do you realize that since Texas got its CHL program that it has been so effective to have caused crime to drop in MA, CA, NY, and ME over the last 10 years, the latter states not being terribly pro gun states at all (from Uniform FBI Crime Reports found online for each state). And that, my friends, demonstrates just how powerful the Texas CHL is. We do things bigger and better in Texas! Or does it?

Of course, I don't expect any of you to believe that Texas CHL has been so successful that it lowered the crime rates in distant states. What we have is a correlation, not a causation. When examined against the bigger picture, the crime rates in all of the states I mentioned were either all showing a marked decline in crime or fluctuating decline in crime with a generalized downward trend already in the years preceding 1996. So we can say that crime dropped in Texas after we instituted the CHL program, but based on the trend already in place, the crime rate was already in decline long before the CHL program.

People on both sides of the gun and CCW issue have been very quick to point out correlations that support their claims, indicating that the factors are causations when they cannot be shown to be be causations. Some, I am sure, know the difference, but some do not. Many of these folks believe that correlations substantiate causation and that is not necessarily the case as I sort of demonstrated with Texas CHL and crime rate information. You can verify by checking the source of my data which is the FBI Uniform Crime Reports.

Something to consider with all this is the fact that Texas instituted its CHL program and the trend of crime did not change. The crime rate was falling since 1992, I believe and simply continued its course. CHLs certain did not cause there to be more crime either. In other words, the impact of CHLs fails to demonstrate any actual trend changes on the state level in regard to crime rates.

The other aspect to the supposed widespread benefit of CHLs in Texas is that a drop in the overall rates of crime in the state does nothing to explain why particular types of crimes against persons still managed to have multi-year increasing trends in some major cities of the state. Take Dallas for example. Since 1996 when the CHLs came into effect and until 2004, Dallas has had one of the highest per capita murder rates in the country. 1996 marked the start of an increasing murder rate that had declined since 1992. If you want to make a causative between CHLs and murder in Dallas and other pro gun supporters are doing for the crime rates and CHL, it would give the impression that CHLs were most definitely a very bad idea since the murder rate in Dallas went up because of CHLs.

Correlations are NOT the same as causations.

And to understand whether or not CHLs are actually having an impact on the crime rate in anyway, the correct data are not being gathered to learn this. Whether or not the state allows licensed concealed carry in public has no impact on crimes committed in personal residences. Texans have always been allowed to have guns in their homes and to carry guns openly or concealed on their own property. So nothing has changed in the ability of Texans to protect themselves on their own property with the passage of CHL laws. So to determine if CHLs are having a trend sort of effect, crimes will have to be identified or classified as those where people could carry guns without permits versus those where a permit is required.

With that in mind, CHLs have most definitely made a huge difference in the lives of individuals who have had to draw on and sometimes shoot attackers with their legally carried guns. At times such as when you are being the victim of a particular crime, state and national trends mean nothing because at that moment, the only statistic is YOU. So CHLs have most definitely benefitted many individuals and no doubt saved the lives of many individuals and that aspect cannot be stated strong enough.

[Cowman]

You're right, but if nothing else the continuation of the trend at least suggests that CHLs don't cause more violence.

[Don H]

DNS,

The article cited was only published 8 months ago. What year is it in your world?

[Heist]

You saw it was published on 1/6/2006, more that an year and a half ago.

It's 2007 already?

[Kelly J]

Double Naught Spy , it seems you cain't see the forest for the trees, Ask the Criminal element, if the CCW laws make a difference to them, then post you stats that you are so fond of, big words don't make you smart.

[BigBlue]

Quote:"The purported drop in Texas crime was NOT due to concealed carrying licensing."
That may well be the case, but it does fly in the face of the statistics coming out of countries like Australia and Great Britain following their gun grab.
Here in Pennsylvania, the highest rate of gun related crime per capita is surely in the City of Philadelphia. Which strangly enough also happens to be the one and only place in the state where our CCW is not valid.
I guess I just happen to feel that I can trust the 95% of my fellow law abiding citizens to carry concealed legally, more than I can trust the 5% of the population that are criminals. Strange huh?
Don

[Doubletaptap]

I think that statement should be broadcast on the world news for a few days!!!!!!!
I got my CHL in Tx. about 8 years ago and ain't had to shoot nobody yet!!!!
Actually I rarely carry my gun.
Maybe when doing laundry at 2AM but usually I leave it home.
No need for it.
In fact I've lived in Houston and surrounding areas since 1975 and never had a problem.
And yes, I do leave home!




Poor Doublenaught Spy, back ta cipherin' some more!!

[Double Naught Spy]

The article cited was only published 8 months ago. What year is it in your world?

Well, according to the checks I wrote that day, it was 2007. My bad. I am sure I will get a nasty letter from the bank. Even so, it is an OLD article.

Double Naught Spy , it seems you cain't see the forest for the trees, Ask the Criminal element, if the CCW laws make a difference to them, then post you stats that you are so fond of, big words don't make you smart.

They don't care and they aren't impressed. Their chances of encountering a CHL person who will act during the commission of a crime is very low, so low that they don't care. In Texas, CHL holders account for a small fraction over 1% of the population, so not very many people.

Since you don't think my words are so smart, explain to me how it was that all the criminals in Texas realized in 1996 that people might have guns and so they started not committing crime out of fear of gun toters?

If concealed carry works so well for dropping the crime rate, what crimes are being stopped by it?

If concealed carry in Texas worked so well that is caused the crime rate to drop, then why did the crime rate in other states without concealed carry also drop?

That may well be the case, but it does fly in the face of the statistics coming out of countries like Australia and Great Britain following their gun grab.

This isn't a dichotomy to concealed carry. The crime rate in Texas before CHL in 1996 was going down anyway. Guns were present, yet crime dropped.

-------------------------------

I think a lot of people are confused by the notion that concealed carry lowers the crime rate versus concealed carry protecting individuals. The crimes are still being committed, but apparently more people who do carry concealed have managed to protect themselves or loved ones while concealed carrying. Maybe they stop the success of the crime all together. Maybe they just save their own lives. Either way, the crimes are still being committed, but the chance for surviving or even winning the encounter is greater for CHL holders who do carry.