TexasCHLforum.com

I've uploaded the crime comparison spreadsheet that includes 2008 and 2009 just released by DPS. The numbers are absolutely incredible and getting better. The overall comparison went from 7 times less likely to commit a crime to 15 times! The other examples I pulled out are equally impressive. You can see them in the first post in this thread.

Keep up the great work folks!!

Chas.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

Ashlar wrote:Chas, I wanted to ask you- how do you aggregate the similar crimes? Could you post how you 'roll up' crimes, for those of us who may not know how the crimes are coded?

If you can explain it, I could combine my spreadsheet with yours, so that you'd have individual crimes as well as an overall rate.

I already have the individual crimes in the spreadsheet. The first tab is the per 100,000 comparison; the most meaningful to the public. The detail is in the other tabs.

Chas.

Thanks.. looking at the DPS report and comparing to the spreadsheet, there were a few that I wasn't sure how you rolled them up, like-

HOAX BOMBS
DEADLY WEAPON IN PENAL INSTITUTION
INJURY CHILD (multiple..)
OWNER/OPER (multiple..)

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I've uploaded the crime comparison spreadsheet that includes 2008 and 2009 just released by DPS. The numbers are absolutely incredible and getting better. The overall comparison went from 7 times less likely to commit a crime to 13 times! The other examples I pulled out are equally impressive. You can see them in the first post in this thread.

Keep up the great work folks!!

Chas.

Charles, a small quibble with your figure for TX Population, 21+ (2009 was all I checked)

You have it in the spreadsheet as 18,602,244.

If you go to http://www.dshs.state.tx.us/CHS/popdat/detailX.shtm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; and click on 2009, in the resulting spreadsheet, row 45-

Texas 2009 '21+' -- 17,074,479

Is there a reason you're using the 17+ number?

From the DPS report-

"Total Convictions in Texas" includes all convictions reported to the state criminal history repository for the offense during
the calendar year for individuals age 21 or over. CCH Conviction counts based on CDN codes 310, 311, 326, 331, 332,
334, 397, and 398.[/b]

Am I missing something?

(Using my calculation, that 13x less likely goes up to 15x less likely.)

Thanks,

Ashlar wrote:

Charles L. Cotton wrote:

Ashlar wrote:Chas, I wanted to ask you- how do you aggregate the similar crimes? Could you post how you 'roll up' crimes, for those of us who may not know how the crimes are coded?

If you can explain it, I could combine my spreadsheet with yours, so that you'd have individual crimes as well as an overall rate.

I already have the individual crimes in the spreadsheet. The first tab is the per 100,000 comparison; the most meaningful to the public. The detail is in the other tabs.

Chas.

Thanks.. looking at the DPS report and comparing to the spreadsheet, there were a few that I wasn't sure how you rolled them up, like-

HOAX BOMBS
DEADLY WEAPON IN PENAL INSTITUTION
INJURY CHILD (multiple..)
OWNER/OPER (multiple..)

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I've uploaded the crime comparison spreadsheet that includes 2008 and 2009 just released by DPS. The numbers are absolutely incredible and getting better. The overall comparison went from 7 times less likely to commit a crime to 13 times! The other examples I pulled out are equally impressive. You can see them in the first post in this thread.

Keep up the great work folks!!

Chas.

Charles, a small quibble with your figure for TX Population, 21+ (2009 was all I checked)

You have it in the spreadsheet as 18,602,244.

If you go to http://www.dshs.state.tx.us/CHS/popdat/detailX.shtm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; and click on 2009, in the resulting spreadsheet, row 45-

Texas 2009 '21+' -- 17,074,479

Is there a reason you're using the 17+ number?

From the DPS report-

"Total Convictions in Texas" includes all convictions reported to the state criminal history repository for the offense during
the calendar year for individuals age 21 or over. CCH Conviction counts based on CDN codes 310, 311, 326, 331, 332,
334, 397, and 398.[/b]

Am I missing something?

(Using my calculation, that 13x less likely goes up to 15x less likely.)

Thanks,

You're right, I missed the DPS statement that the total crimes figure is for age 21 and over. (I know better than to try to do this stuff when I should be in bed.) Initially I did the comparison using the population for age 21 and over, then I looked and didn't see the minimum age used. I went back and used age 17 and up since persons 17 and up are charged as adults. This makes the comparison more conservative. I'll change the numbers back to age 21 and over. Thanks for catching this! I always like looking better.

I see what you mean about aggregating some crimes for a usable crimes per 100,000 comparison. Most are pretty straight forward like combining the "Agg. Assault" offenses with "Assault" offenses, "Agg. Kidnapping" with "Kidnapping," etc. I'll put together a page that shows the content of each major category in the crimes per 100,000 layout. Thanks for the idea.

Chas.

Please note that assault versus aggravated assault is a big difference. Assault can be something as trivial as grabbing a person's clothing. Aggravated assault requires serious injury or use of a weapon and is always a felony.

This bit of trivia is often used to inflate crime statistics by those who have an interest in doing so. A shoving match or bar fight really is not in the same category with attempted murder, shooting, or stabbing.

For other offenses, such as kidnapping, sexual assault, and robbery, the "plain vanilla" and aggravated categories are all serious and mostly felonies.

- Jim

Happy to help!

I'm going to see if I can figure out another way to represent the data, that's a bit more amenable to casual perusal. The problem is that you're dealing with at least 3 dimensions of data- year, crime, and rates.

Maybe a graph with a drop-down that lets you specify a particular crime, or overall? Or a drop down for year, with all crimes or total rates, etc?

Let me think on it for a bit, I'm sure I can come up with something.

The new/old spreadsheet is up. If you downloaded the crime comparison spreadsheet within the last 12 hours, please delete it and download the current spreadsheet.

Chas.

We should have a companion spreadsheet showing the conviction rate for Nanny Bloomer's "Mayors Against Illegal Guns." Should be an interesting contrast...

It might be nice if we had here some nice 'boiler plate' letter templates to send out to our friends who post 30.06 signs, reminding them of how many there are of us, how our average annual income compares the the typical Texan, and how this is negatively impacting their bottom line. Citations referencing the sources of data would be the clincher. If there are 3-4% of the population refusing to walk through their doors, that would be staggering data to the owners. Add to that that we are 15 times less likely to commit a crime than their average patron, and have more money to spend by X%. Just a thought.

...good thoughts...when a business advertises, they're happy if they get a 3 or 4% response on mailed-out materials...yet they throw away that much business by slapping gun owners in the face...doesn't make sense, does it?!!! good points...how to get them to realize it, though...

It worked with Taco Cabana, and you might want to point out that Starbuck's has no problem with legal open or concealed carry in however many thousands of stores they have.

I wish we could say that no one ever had a problem that would have been prevented by a "no guns" sign. Unfortunately, there have been a few CHL holders who messed up.

There have been situations where a customer with a weapon probably saved the life of store personnel or other customers, but these morons don't want to hear that.

- Jim

Outstanding work. A very big thank you from me also!!

DPS recently released the data for 2010 and 2011. The CHL v. General Population comparison spreadsheet has been updated for 2010 and 2011 and concealed licensees continue to post an incredible record. Sarah Brady and her ilk continue to defame Texas CHLs and the entire CHL program in spite of conclusive proof that she/they are blatantly lying. It's great to have proof for use by our friends in Austin.

As in all prior years, my original post has been amended to include the updated spreadsheet and to give a short example of the more relevant crime comparisons. As with every year, numerous crimes cannot be compared because there were no CHL convictions. With over 500,000 Texas CHLs, there were only 120 convictions, for a rate less than 1/15th that of the general adult population. I wonder if I should start the long process (by law it's 10 days, but it actually takes months) of getting the data to compare Texas peace officers to the general population and to CHLs? It might prove handy when some folks try to water down or repeal the Texas version of the so-called "Castle Doctrine."

Chas.

Charles I thank you & this is great news. Great stuff.

I wonder if I should start the long process (by law it's 10 days, but it actually takes months) of getting the data to compare Texas peace officers to the general population and to CHLs?

PLEASE do this... or at least PM me on how I can do this. I'd be willing to bet quite a bit that the conviction rate among Texas peace officers is significantly higher than that of CHL holders. Even if the results prove to be similar, this can only help our public image.

I am particularly interested in this comparison because when speaking to anti's or the uninformed about good citizens carrying firearms, I often relate the requirements and characteristics of having a CHL to similarities of joining active commissioned law enforcement.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:I wonder if I should start the long process (by law it's 10 days, but it actually takes months) of getting the data to compare Texas peace officers to the general population and to CHLs? It might prove handy when some folks try to water down or repeal the Texas version of the so-called "Castle Doctrine."

It might also prove useful in an effort to move CHL's from TPC §46.15(b) to 46.15(a).

A variation on the theme, "better to have ammo and not need it, than to need it and not have it". Especially if getting the information takes months.