Texas CHL stats that prove CHL Holders are menaces.

[texanjoker]

In reality any stats that matter IMO would be if a gun was involved or they were carrying one when it occurred. If they were not, then at that time they were just joe the plumber vs joe the chl holder.

[JKTex]

In reality any stats that matter IMO would be if a gun was involved. If they were not, then at that time they were just joe the plumber vs joe the chl holder.

I fixed that for you.

The point is, overall CHL's are less likely to commit crime than just about any other segment of society, even Law Enforcement. When you look at relevant crimes, where guns are used, it's even smaller, by a long shot.

[texanjoker]

In reality any stats that matter IMO would be if a gun was involved. If they were not, then at that time they were just joe the plumber vs joe the chl holder.

I fixed that for you.

The point is, overall CHL's are less likely to commit crime than just about any other segment of society, even Law Enforcement. When you look at relevant crimes, where guns are used, it's even smaller, by a long shot.

If you are going to bring LEO's into this, post the proof. I have read Charles post that as well, but he won't post the stats he uses to justify it. If there is a new thread with those stats let me know. I am most interested in the LEO's if they are on or off duty incidents, but that is another topic.

[sugar land dave]

I haven't done much math in awhile, but wouldn't that be .23% ?

[jmra]

I haven't done much math in awhile, but wouldn't that be .23% ?

I believe you are correct.

[SRH78]

I haven't done much math in awhile, but wouldn't that be .23% ?

Yes, it would.

[RX8er]

In reality any stats that matter IMO would be if a gun was involved. If they were not, then at that time they were just joe the plumber vs joe the chl holder.

I fixed that for you.

The point is, overall CHL's are less likely to commit crime than just about any other segment of society, even Law Enforcement. When you look at relevant crimes, where guns are used, it's even smaller, by a long shot.

If you are going to bring LEO's into this, post the proof. I have read Charles post that as well, but he won't post the stats he uses to justify it. If there is a new thread with those stats let me know. I am most interested in the LEO's if they are on or off duty incidents, but that is another topic.

It's not Texas but you could translate the number over to any major city and expect similar results.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/28/nyreg ... ted=1&_r=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I'm sure I will get beaten because it is NYC and not Dallas or Houston or Austin.

This is also a good article that I'm pretty sure you have read.
http://www.policeone.com/officer-miscon ... u-pay-for/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I think if you read the headlines of the papers from the cities, you will find you answer to your question but not the numbers. I think that is like asking a congressman to keep stats on how many of their own have committed crimes or asking the fox just how many chickens he's eaten. It ain't gonna happen.

[texanjoker]

In reality any stats that matter IMO would be if a gun was involved. If they were not, then at that time they were just joe the plumber vs joe the chl holder.

I fixed that for you.

The point is, overall CHL's are less likely to commit crime than just about any other segment of society, even Law Enforcement. When you look at relevant crimes, where guns are used, it's even smaller, by a long shot.

If you are going to bring LEO's into this, post the proof. I have read Charles post that as well, but he won't post the stats he uses to justify it. If there is a new thread with those stats let me know. I am most interested in the LEO's if they are on or off duty incidents, but that is another topic.

It's not Texas but you could translate the number over to any major city and expect similar results.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/28/nyreg ... ted=1&_r=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I'm sure I will get beaten because it is NYC and not Dallas or Houston or Austin.

This is also a good article that I'm pretty sure you have read.
http://www.policeone.com/officer-miscon ... u-pay-for/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I think if you read the headlines of the papers from the cities, you will find you answer to your question but not the numbers. I think that is like asking a congressman to keep stats on how many of their own have committed crimes or asking the fox just how many chickens he's eaten. It ain't gonna happen.

Sorry but you have to show stats from TX. I keep reading people trying to compare chl vs leo in stats, but none are produced. The only real stat IMO would be same state, and incidents involving both chl/leo on gun related charges. The LEO stat would also need to be for off duty incidents only, as leo's get charged in on duty shootings and those are scope of employment which a chl would not have a comparison. I think the point of these stat posts is to show chl are good guys and there is no dispute. The antis want to paint us (I have one as well) as bad. Show incidents involving guns. Anybody can get a dwi, but if a chl or leo wasn't carrying a gun the I would ask what does that have to do with people carrying guns?

AH think of this. For those of us LEO's that maintain a CHL, we could be a negative stat for both sides if we did something

[jmra]

In reality any stats that matter IMO would be if a gun was involved. If they were not, then at that time they were just joe the plumber vs joe the chl holder.

I fixed that for you.

The point is, overall CHL's are less likely to commit crime than just about any other segment of society, even Law Enforcement. When you look at relevant crimes, where guns are used, it's even smaller, by a long shot.

If you are going to bring LEO's into this, post the proof. I have read Charles post that as well, but he won't post the stats he uses to justify it. If there is a new thread with those stats let me know. I am most interested in the LEO's if they are on or off duty incidents, but that is another topic.

It's not Texas but you could translate the number over to any major city and expect similar results.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/28/nyreg ... ted=1&_r=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I'm sure I will get beaten because it is NYC and not Dallas or Houston or Austin.

This is also a good article that I'm pretty sure you have read.
http://www.policeone.com/officer-miscon ... u-pay-for/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I think if you read the headlines of the papers from the cities, you will find you answer to your question but not the numbers. I think that is like asking a congressman to keep stats on how many of their own have committed crimes or asking the fox just how many chickens he's eaten. It ain't gonna happen.

Sorry but you have to show stats from TX. I keep reading people trying to compare chl vs leo in stats, but none are produced. The only real stat IMO would be same state, and incidents involving both chl/leo on gun related charges. The LEO stat would also need to be for off duty incidents only, as leo's get charged in on duty shootings and those are scope of employment which a chl would not have a comparison. I think the point of these stat posts is to show chl are good guys and there is no dispute. The antis want to paint us (I have one as well) as bad. Show incidents involving guns. Anybody can get a dwi, but if a chl or leo wasn't carrying a gun the I would ask what does that have to do with people carrying guns?

AH think of this. For those of us LEO's that maintain a CHL, we could be a negative stat for both sides if we did something

I disagree with the criteria you have stipulated.
The purpose of the comparison is in response to those who believe that only police can be trusted with guns. The statistics show that CHL holders are just as trustworthy as police. The numbers speak to character. We, along with the general public, know that the vast majority of police forces are made up of men and women of outstanding character. The comparison shows the general public that CHLs have an equivalent character.
The reason Chas has given in the past, IIRC, for not making the actual numbers public is to prevent people from using the data to critize police as that is not and never was the intent of the comparison.

[RX8er]

In reality any stats that matter IMO would be if a gun was involved. If they were not, then at that time they were just joe the plumber vs joe the chl holder.

I fixed that for you.

The point is, overall CHL's are less likely to commit crime than just about any other segment of society, even Law Enforcement. When you look at relevant crimes, where guns are used, it's even smaller, by a long shot.

If you are going to bring LEO's into this, post the proof. I have read Charles post that as well, but he won't post the stats he uses to justify it. If there is a new thread with those stats let me know. I am most interested in the LEO's if they are on or off duty incidents, but that is another topic.

It's not Texas but you could translate the number over to any major city and expect similar results.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/28/nyreg ... ted=1&_r=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I'm sure I will get beaten because it is NYC and not Dallas or Houston or Austin.

This is also a good article that I'm pretty sure you have read.
http://www.policeone.com/officer-miscon ... u-pay-for/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I think if you read the headlines of the papers from the cities, you will find you answer to your question but not the numbers. I think that is like asking a congressman to keep stats on how many of their own have committed crimes or asking the fox just how many chickens he's eaten. It ain't gonna happen.

Sorry but you have to show stats from TX. I keep reading people trying to compare chl vs leo in stats, but none are produced. The only real stat IMO would be same state, and incidents involving both chl/leo on gun related charges. The LEO stat would also need to be for off duty incidents only, as leo's get charged in on duty shootings and those are scope of employment which a chl would not have a comparison. I think the point of these stat posts is to show chl are good guys and there is no dispute. The antis want to paint us (I have one as well) as bad. Show incidents involving guns. Anybody can get a dwi, but if a chl or leo wasn't carrying a gun the I would ask what does that have to do with people carrying guns?

AH think of this. For those of us LEO's that maintain a CHL, we could be a negative stat for both sides if we did something

My MIL is a deputy for Dallas County and I don't ever want to have to put up with the trash that she deals with on a daily basis. As jmra said, Chas has his reasons and I have no intention of trying to figure it out. My main point was that I doubt that the data is even available wide spread as you don't like to tattle or point out your own flaws. I just know that LEO and CHL seem to get the brunt of the news if there is crime involved. Over all, CHL, LEO and yes even Catholic Father's are law abiding citizens and we need them all to make the world go around. I hope to meet you some day and shake your hand, just hope it's not for a speeding ticket.

[texanjoker]

In reality any stats that matter IMO would be if a gun was involved. If they were not, then at that time they were just joe the plumber vs joe the chl holder.

I fixed that for you.

The point is, overall CHL's are less likely to commit crime than just about any other segment of society, even Law Enforcement. When you look at relevant crimes, where guns are used, it's even smaller, by a long shot.

If you are going to bring LEO's into this, post the proof. I have read Charles post that as well, but he won't post the stats he uses to justify it. If there is a new thread with those stats let me know. I am most interested in the LEO's if they are on or off duty incidents, but that is another topic.

It's not Texas but you could translate the number over to any major city and expect similar results.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/28/nyreg ... ted=1&_r=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I'm sure I will get beaten because it is NYC and not Dallas or Houston or Austin.

This is also a good article that I'm pretty sure you have read.
http://www.policeone.com/officer-miscon ... u-pay-for/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I think if you read the headlines of the papers from the cities, you will find you answer to your question but not the numbers. I think that is like asking a congressman to keep stats on how many of their own have committed crimes or asking the fox just how many chickens he's eaten. It ain't gonna happen.

Sorry but you have to show stats from TX. I keep reading people trying to compare chl vs leo in stats, but none are produced. The only real stat IMO would be same state, and incidents involving both chl/leo on gun related charges. The LEO stat would also need to be for off duty incidents only, as leo's get charged in on duty shootings and those are scope of employment which a chl would not have a comparison. I think the point of these stat posts is to show chl are good guys and there is no dispute. The antis want to paint us (I have one as well) as bad. Show incidents involving guns. Anybody can get a dwi, but if a chl or leo wasn't carrying a gun the I would ask what does that have to do with people carrying guns?

AH think of this. For those of us LEO's that maintain a CHL, we could be a negative stat for both sides if we did something

My MIL is a deputy for Dallas County and I don't ever want to have to put up with the trash that she deals with on a daily basis. As jmra said, Chas has his reasons and I have no intention of trying to figure it out. My main point was that I doubt that the data is even available wide spread as you don't like to tattle or point out your own flaws. I just know that LEO and CHL seem to get the brunt of the news if there is crime involved. Over all, CHL, LEO and yes even Catholic Father's are law abiding citizens and we need them all to make the world go around. I hope to meet you some day and shake your hand, just hope it's not for a speeding ticket.

to that beer some day. I don't write speeding tickets so no worries.

[Charles L. Cotton]

In reality any stats that matter IMO would be if a gun was involved. If they were not, then at that time they were just joe the plumber vs joe the chl holder.

I fixed that for you.

The point is, overall CHL's are less likely to commit crime than just about any other segment of society, even Law Enforcement. When you look at relevant crimes, where guns are used, it's even smaller, by a long shot.

If you are going to bring LEO's into this, post the proof. I have read Charles post that as well, but he won't post the stats he uses to justify it. If there is a new thread with those stats let me know. I am most interested in the LEO's if they are on or off duty incidents, but that is another topic.

It's not Texas but you could translate the number over to any major city and expect similar results.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/28/nyreg ... ted=1&_r=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I'm sure I will get beaten because it is NYC and not Dallas or Houston or Austin.

This is also a good article that I'm pretty sure you have read.
http://www.policeone.com/officer-miscon ... u-pay-for/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I think if you read the headlines of the papers from the cities, you will find you answer to your question but not the numbers. I think that is like asking a congressman to keep stats on how many of their own have committed crimes or asking the fox just how many chickens he's eaten. It ain't gonna happen.

Sorry but you have to show stats from TX. I keep reading people trying to compare chl vs leo in stats, but none are produced.

If you want me to publish the proof here on the Forum, just say the word. I've refused to do so in the past for the reasons I've stated; I don't want to make this to appear as an attack on LEOs. You won't like it, but say the word I'll post it.


Chas.

[JJVP]

Just kidding, about the menacing part that is.

I went ahead and went onto the Texas DPS website and looked up, added, and divided the total amount of convictions committed by general public versus CHL holders. This went back as far as 1996, and ranges to 2011. DPS waits two years to release stats.

Total amount of convictions (population size) from 1996-2011 = 852,270
Total amount of convictions from CHL holders from 1996-2011 = 1,972. !!!!!!

When dividing CHL by general, 1,972/852,270, we see that since 1996, CHL holders accounted for only .0023% !!!!!!!

Now tell me how there will be blood in every classroom if I'm legally protected from carrying on campus. I mean, we are all crazy, redneck, bible thumpers who don't know pink slime meat from a t-bone but its just my silly observation. I'm darn proud to be a Texas CHL holder with these stats, you know why? BECAUSE THE GUN-GRABBERS CAN'T REFUTE STATISTICAL, UNALTERED DATA!!

Thank you for your time. I wish our leaders were as wise as some on this forum.


Edit. ** I changed the word "crime" to "convictions" since that's what is listed on the stats per DPS.

Just to be a fly-in-the-ointment, what figure do you get if you divide the total number of CHL convictions by the total number of CHL holders?

1972 CHL convictions / 518,625 CHL holders. ( viewtopic.php?f=7&t=61824" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)

= 0.38%

[baldeagle]

Just to be a fly-in-the-ointment, what figure do you get if you divide the total number of CHL convictions by the total number of CHL holders?

Without looking at the numbers (yet again), I'm going to speculate that they won't change. The numbers are convictions were x number of people. I'm pretty sure that means convictions per 100,000 of general population vs convictions per 100,000 of the CHL holder population.

Edit: Yup, I was right. Here's the titles of the columns: Total Convictions in TX Conviction Rate Per 100,000 Inhabitants Convictions of CHL Holders Conviction Rate Per 100,000 CHL Holders

So the numbers show that CHL holders as a group compared separately from the general population have a much lower conviction rate than the general population as a group.

For example, for 2011 there were a total of 120 convictions of CHL holders in a population of 518,625 or 122/5.185625 = 23.15 convictions per 100,000. The general population rate is 63,679/175.68188 = 362.47 convictions per 100,000. So 362.47/23.15 = 15.66, meaning the general population is 15.66 times more likely to be convicted of a crime than the CHL population.

[TREKFAN]

I haven't done much math in awhile, but wouldn't that be .23% ?

Yes, you are correct. I forgot to carry the decimal over . My bad.