We do know it wasn’t concealed carry.
Even if criminals were responsive to indirect deterrence from concealed carry permit holders (which the evidence shows they aren’t),
the areas with the most per capita permits are already low crime areas. This is clearly seen in the Illinois concealed carry data we previously analyzed, which showed permits are concentrated in white, rural areas with low levels of crime. If there are few criminals in an area to deter, indirect deterrence cannot be significantly reducing overall crime rates.
- Snip -
So if concealed carry cannot be responsible for the significant, two decade drop in crime rates, what is? A report from the Brennan Center for Justice published earlier this year sought to tackle that question. Analyzing 40 years of data from all 50 states, the report examined a number of potential causal factors, including RTC laws, and found that
the most likely causes were various demographic and socioeconomic factors, the end of the crack cocaine epidemic, and superior policing techniques. However, even these factors were insufficient to explain the entire crime decrease, and the authors concluded that we still don’t fully know why crime dropped precipitously.
But what we do know is that rigorous studies on RTC laws and permit holders, combined with empirical data on defensive gun use and studies of people’s perception of gun prevalence,
provide powerful evidence that concealed carry does not reduce crime.
https://www.thetrace.org/2015/10/lower-crime-rates-not-caused-by-concealed-carry/
Wow...really? You mean that the aging, white, married demographic buying more guns is not responsible for the decrease in gun homicides?
According to the “More Guns, Less Crime” hypothesis, states with higher levels of gun ownership would expect to see lower crime rates in those categories.
By contrast, the study found that states with the lowest rates of firearm ownership (Connecticut, Hawaii, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New York, California, Florida, Illinois, and Maryland) had significantly lower rates of firearm-related assault and robbery, firearm homicide, and overall homicide.
States with the highest gun-ownership levels (Wyoming, Montana, South Dakota, Arkansas, Arizona, West Virginia, North Dakota, Idaho, Mississippi, and Alabama), meanwhile, had 6.8 times the rate of firearm assaults, 2.8 times the rate of firearm homicides, and twice the rate of overall homicides than states with the lowest gun-ownership levels.
https://www.thetrace.org/2015/06/new-study-is-latest-to-find-that-higher-rates-of-gun-ownership-lead-to-higher-rates-of-violent-crime/NRA talking points evaporate when a little sun shines on them, and in reality more guns equals more gun violence.
= new reply since forum marked as read