A new study by a law researcher at the University of Chicago shows that when states pass “right to carry” laws for concealed weapons, criminals respond to the possibility that their victims may be armed by committing more property crimes and fewer violent crimes against people.

 

“Criminals respond substantially to the threat of being shot by instead substituting into less risky crimes,” says author John Lott, a John M. Olin Fellow in Law and Economics at the University of Chicago Law School.

 

Yes, and less risky crimes also present less physical risk to those they are being perpetrated against. You have proven the point, threat of being shot decreases overall violence. Peace Through Strength, someone needs to reincarnate Ron Reagan.

I don't care how "responsible" they are. The scenario we first talked about can still happen. And it can only happen if guns are allowed in the classroom.

 

Teachers and students are presently dying or injured in alarming numbers IN the classroom and guns are not allowed IN the classroom.

 

If we are playing hypotheticals, your scenario might happen 3 times in a year. While in the 5-7 school shootings that seem to occur each year, a teacher could take the shooter out at the first classroom and possibly save 10-15 kids/teachers from being injured/killed.

 

Seems hypothetically, the numbers work out in favor of letting the teachers carry a concealed weapon.

A new study by a law researcher at the University of Chicago shows that when states pass “right to carry” laws for concealed weapons, criminals respond to the possibility that their victims may be armed by committing more property crimes and fewer violent crimes against people.

 

“Criminals respond substantially to the threat of being shot by instead substituting into less risky crimes,” says author John Lott, a John M. Olin Fellow in Law and Economics at the University of Chicago Law School.

So he admits that RTC laws are working. Less violent crimes, I'm good with that.

So he admits that RTC laws are working. Less violent crimes, I'm good with that.

 

Don't you love it when they disprove their own point.:lol::jump::sssh:

Yes, and less risky crimes also present less physical risk to those they are being perpetrated against. You have proven the point, threat of being shot decreases overall violence

Ah, but you spoke too soon! The above shows an increase in property crimes. Now, let's see what a later, more scientifically balanced study found regarding Lott's claims of decreased violent crime:

 

John R. Lott and David B. Mustard conclude that right-to-carry laws deter violent crime. Our reanalysis of Lott and Mustard's data provides no basis for drawing confident conclusions about the impact of right-to-carry laws on violent crime. We document that their results are highly sensitive to small changes in their model and sample.

 

Without Florida in the sample, there is no detectable impact of right-to-carry laws on the rate of murder and rape, the two crimes that by the calculations of Lott and Mustard account for 80 percent of the social benefit of right-to-carry laws.

 

A more general model based on year-to-year differences yields no evidence of significant impact for any type of violent crime. As a result, inference based on the Lott and Mustard model is inappropriate, and their results cannot be used responsibly to formulate public policy.

 

 

So, we can see that with concealed carry, we get increased property crime, and no verifiable evidence of decrease in violent crime.

So he admits that RTC laws are working. Less violent crimes, I'm good with that.

Read above. Don't ya just just hate when you step into a trap?

Teachers and students are presently dying or injured in alarming numbers IN the classroom and guns are not allowed IN the classroom.

Yeah, so let's throw a classroom full of guns into the equation. That ought to soften up the numbers.

Read above. Don't ya just just hate when you step into a trap?

I didn't step into anything. You need to beware of these biased studies.

 

The FBI reports that the nation’s total violent crime rate declined every year between 1991-2004, to a 30-year low in 2004, and that it has risen slightly in the last two years. By comparison, the most recent Bureau of Justice Statistics crime victim survey found that “at the national level crime rates remain stabilized at the lowest level experienced since 1973,” when the first such survey was conducted.

The FBI’s data show that since 1991, when the violent crime rate hit an all-time high, and 2006, total violent crime has decreased 38%, murder 42%, rape 27%, robbery 45%, and aggravated assault 34%. During 2004-2006, total violent crime was lower than anytime since 1974. For the last eight years, the murder rate (fluctuating between 5.5 and 5.7 per 100,000 annually) has been lower than anytime since 1965. Why do you think that is?

 

Nice try though, BF.

So he admits that RTC laws are working. Less violent crimes, I'm good with that.

Not in the case of mass murder, like at Virginia Tech. RTC laws don't effect those individuals, because most of them know that it won't end with them alive. They're more concerned about body count than their own life. They're either killed by police or they kill themselves.

How many times do you pick up your local paper and see in the court section "Posession of a firearm by a convicted felon?" And how much time does this person serve as a result?The fact is,If you want a firearm..you can get it. Legal or illegal.

Let's face the cold hard truth here...if the government comes to my house and confiscates EVERY registered fiream I have...I will GUARANTEE you that within ONE hour I can replace each and every one of them with an UNREGISTERED one...24-7-365! And I am a law abiding citizen...If I can do this,imagine what the average criminal can do!!

Wake up!

I didn't step into anything. You need to beware of these biased studies.

Ditto.

How many times do you pick up your local paper and see in the court section "Posession of a firearm by a convicted felon?" And how much time does this person serve as a result?The fact is,If you want a firearm..you can get it. Legal or illegal.

Let's face the cold hard truth here...if the government comes to my house and confiscates EVERY registered fiream I have...I will GUARANTEE you that within ONE hour I can replace each and every one of them with an UNREGISTERED one...24-7-365! And I am a law abiding citizen...If I can do this,imagine what the average criminal can do!!

Wake up!

Of course this has nothing to do with if we should allow hidden guns in schools and universities, but....

Of course this has nothing to do with if we should allow hidden guns in schools and universities, but....

agreed...but...(point taken and given)!

Without throwing myself into this argument, I'd like to mention a college-based movement that a.) is local, and b.) shows the other side of the coin against gun violence. Kurt Gohde, an Art professor at Transylvania University has begun a program called Rings of Responsibility that will use public artwork and red rings to symbolize the number of deaths in each city that it is located in due to gun violence. This idea came directly from the tragedy at Virginia Tech, and plans for this project also call for exhibits to be placed on college campuses. The website is very basic and still under construction, but you can get a general idea of this project at http://www.ringsofresponsibility.com.

Yeah, so let's throw a classroom full of guns into the equation. That ought to soften up the numbers.

 

Yes it should. The gunman in Cleveland as show stalking classrooms may have been stopped by a teacher in the first classroom and that would have been the only classroom he would have stalked.