No conclusion in ongoing gun debate, just as intended

[SecularMotion]

Does the right of citizens to carry guns fuel crime or help stop it?

That’s the ongoing debate surrounding so-called concealed carry legislation around the country and it’s not likely to be settled anytime soon because in many states, the law makes it difficult to analyze data.

In Wisconsin, for example, a third of the gun permits revoked last year were revoked because of criminal activity, according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel today. And some police departments are objecting to a provision in that state’s law that prohibits police from sorting crime data by whether the criminal had a gun permit.

“The law directly contradicts efforts to be data-driven: it expressly prohibits police agencies and the State of Wisconsin from describing the impact — both good and bad — of our concealed carry law,” the Milwaukee police department said in a statement.

http://blogs.mprnews.org/newscut/2015/06/no-conclusion-in-ongoing-gun-debate-just-as-intended/

[pipoman]

1. Certainly this isn't the same in all 50 states

And since all 50 states have cc in some form....

Then there is the FBI and CDC statistics which demonstrate absolutely no increase in crime or accidents, in fact a consistent decrease, over the years that concealed carry went from 3 states to all of them..and we mustn't forget that this decrease happened over years when gun sales set records....

No, big gun control has run its coarse....

[Shamash]

2. I am somewhat confused

If "a third of the gun permits revoked last year were revoked because of criminal activity" and "law that prohibits police from sorting crime data by whether the criminal had a gun permit", then it would seem that the crime data can be sorted based on gun permits.

Someone has obviously collected the data. The linked story links to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, which references "Act 35" of Wisconsin law, of which the Milwaukee PD is quoted as saying "The law directly contradicts efforts to be data-driven: it expressly prohibits police agencies and the State of Wisconsin from describing the impact — both good and bad — of our concealed carry law."

The law in question does say:

(19) Statistical report. By March 1 of each year, the department shall submit a statistical report to the legislature under s. 13.172 (2) and to the governor that indicates the number of licenses applied for, issued, denied, suspended, and revoked under this section during the previous calendar year. For the licenses denied, the report shall indicate the reasons for the denials and the part of the application process in which the reasons for denial were discovered. For the licenses suspended or revoked, the report shall indicate the reasons for the suspensions and revocations. The department may not include in the report any information that may be used to identify an applicant or a licensee, including, but not limited to, a name, address, birth date, or social security number.

So either I am confused in my reading of the law, or the department is confused in its. I'll leave it to the readers to follow the link and wade through it to come to their own conclusion on that aspect of the story.

[Duckhunter935]

3. Any comments on this?

Lets look at some facts as you do not seem to have put any out in the OP from some blog.

Wisconsin residents continue to seek and obtain licenses to carry concealed guns, submitting more than 37,000 applications in 2014, the third full year after concealed carry was approved, according to a report released Tuesday.

Nearly 34,000 were issued permits, raising the total number in Wisconsin to 242,488, according to an annual report from the Department of Justice.
More than 500 applications were rejected because the applicants were not legally qualified to carry a gun, much less have a concealed carry permit, according to the report. The reasons for rejection included applicants with a felony conviction, having been found mentally incompetent or found guilty of domestic violence
The new report says 166 applications were rejected because of misdemeanor convictions.

So Wisconsin has just about a quarter of a million permits issued since 2011, right?
Homework for you, is there blood running in the streets?

Now lets look at the revoked numbers this blog you linked to seems so interested in...

The state also revoked 860 permits, nearly 400 simply because the holder no longer lives in Wisconsin. The second most common reason for revocation was unlawful use of a controlled substance, which can be any type of minor drug use offense. The same federal prohibition is a reason often cited by prosecutors who argue against the return of guns — seized in Milwaukee under a variety of circumstances — to their otherwise lawful owners. The state revoked 156 permits for that reason.

Twenty-four revocations were because the permit holders were involuntarily committed for mental health treatment, or found not guilty of a crime by reason of mental disease or defect. Other revocations were for convictions, domestic abuse, harassment restraining orders, noncitizen status or other reasons.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/wisconsin-concealed-carry-permit-applications-slowing-but-still-strong-b99438246z1-290673141.html

Seems like a quite low percentage to me. So would you like to discuss these numbers or are you just going to do another Google;e dump and run away as you have done multiple hundreds of times here.

[blueridge3210]

4. Google dump.

No discussion?

[Duckhunter935]

5. Guess he is back to his ways, sigh

If you post enough like this it tends to look like you are spamming a group.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1172&page=21&sort=author
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1172&page=22&sort=author
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1172&page=23&sort=author
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1172&page=24&sort=author
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1172&page=25&sort=author
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1172&page=26&sort=author
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1172&page=27&sort=author
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1172&page=28&sort=author

[blueridge3210]

6. Yup.

Post and run away.

[Duckhunter935]

7. That is normal

Like putting a bag of crap in a bag at somebodies door and lighting it on fire. Very childish in my opinion.

[ileus]

8. My life is important...no matter what.

Safety first, dying because of crappy gun laws never.

[beevul]

9. Yes, there is a conclusion.

No amount of gun control will ever satisfy most of the vocal anti-gunners you rub shoulders with and give safe haven to.

You, and they, have given we who are pro-gun no reason to trust you, and every reason to distrust you.

Theres your conclusion.


I close, with the words of someone whom most here are familiar with:

Do you love it?

Do you hate it?

There it is

The way you made it.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

10. Kinda an ironic title considering your posting style.

[Eleanors38]

11. Where do you get this stuff? Please reference #2 & #3 below. My lord. nt

[ileus]

12. I'll keep my right to carry and pass on the "debate"

Safety first as I always say...

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

13. "Does the right of citizens to carry guns fuel crime or help stop it?"

A simple answer for a simple question: No. CC neither causes nor stops crime.

Next question please. Perhaps something a bit more puzzling like: "Is water really wet?"