TexasCHLforum.com

The San Antonio Express news is blaming the 22 percent increase in the city's homicide rate on an increase in CHL holders !

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_ ... 815703.php" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Your title seems to be a complete mischaracterization of that article. The author suggests blame for an amended castle doctrine, the Martin shooting and other factors , in addition to people carrying guns for self defense. It's a poorly argued piece of writing but no way an indictment of CHL.

Guess we aren't reading the same article. i don't see where CHL holders are being "blamed" - mentioned, yes - blamed no.

From 2007 to the end of 2011, new concealed handgun licenses increased by more than 45 percent in San Antonio and 39 percent statewide, according to the Texas Department of Public Safety.

Criminologists say this increase has also led to more officer-involved shootings, since suspects are more likely to be armed.

I think this is the part that is being referenced to CHLs. There is no basis in the article for this conclusion to be drawn.

All five people shot by police before July 1 were armed.

I'd be willing to bet that any of those who were shot by LE had a CHL, it would have been plastered all over the news. The stories that describe each of the officer shootings have no connection to CHL.

“Our studies are showing that in general, in states where the law hadn't changed in five or six years, we're generally not seeing an increase in homicides,” he said. “In Texas, there definitely has been an increasing trend of homicides classified as justifiable.”

Perhaps it was because there is a group of criminals who has yet to get the message that this isn't NY or NJ and that Texas citizens are not victims, ready for the taking, like the 87 year old veteran in Chicago. In fact, how these "researchers" can dismiss the exploding murder rate in their studies defies any logic in their conclusions.

chasfm11 wrote:

From 2007 to the end of 2011, new concealed handgun licenses increased by more than 45 percent in San Antonio and 39 percent statewide, according to the Texas Department of Public Safety.

Criminologists say this increase has also led to more officer-involved shootings, since suspects are more likely to be armed.

I think this is the part that is being referenced to CHLs. There is no basis in the article for this conclusion to be drawn.

I agree... you need to use liberal logic to reach that conclusion.

This article doesn't flat out blame CHL's for the increase in murders, but it's not a pro-gun piece either.

Homicide is not murder. But murder is a type of homicide. Homicide says a human was killed by another human. However Murder is the unlawful premeditated killing of another human being. That's why there are catagories like negligent homicide, vehicular homicide and in this case justified homicide


Analogy: when the army first introduced helmets head injuries increased dramatically. Why were helmets causing head injuries? They were not, bullets to the head were causing injuries the helmets prevented them from becoming classified as deaths.

The justifiable homicide rate has gone up but rape, assault, robbery should have gone down too.

Article is bias

The article may be bias, but I thought it made the point that people were no longer hiding in fear from thugs and taking responsibility for their own protection.

Prior to that, with laws like those that still exist in many liberal "enlightened" cities/states where one could be in trouble for defending themselves many people either weren't allowed to possess firearms or were afraid to use them for fear of being prosecuted.

The author attempts to obfuscate the facts to strengthen the lead in of concern about increased homicides. The decedant had a gun in his waistband. The reporter offers no information as to how the young lady would get into a struggle with the guy. We only know it was ruled justifiable. I can imagine all sorts of scenarios where she was in fear of her life from a guy who had a gun on him. I don't think it's an indictment of CHL. The comment about the "alarming trend" of self defense is alarming in itself.

puma guy wrote:The comment about the "alarming trend" of self defense is alarming in itself.

This reminds me of "Patch Adams" being accused of "excessive happiness."

puma guy wrote:The author attempts to obfuscate the facts to strengthen the lead in of concern about increased homicides. The decedant had a gun in his waistband. The reporter offers no information as to how the young lady would get into a struggle with the guy. We only know it was ruled justifiable. I can imagine all sorts of scenarios where she was in fear of her life from a guy who had a gun on him. I don't think it's an indictment of CHL. The comment about the "alarming trend" of self defense is alarming in itself.

Regarding that particular incident, I'm a little confused how she was acting in self defense when she was quoted saying,

“Once I saw the gun, I just went at him to take the gun away,” Rios told police. “I don't know how I took it away but I did, and when I did, I shot right at him.”

She didn't say he threatened anyone with the gun. In fact,

It was Rios, 21, who would fatally shot Champion, 20, after the two struggled over a gun in his waistband.

So, It seems to me that, while he may have been failing to conceal or illegally possessing the gun in the first place, she attacked him, took his gun away, and shot him with his own gun.

Hopefully, there are many more facts not mentioned in this article that led to this being labelled as justifiable.

“People are not being prosecuted when they've acted in self-defense"

If they would read what they themselves write...

We had a report in Houston similar to this one. Trying to link "murder rates" with the castle doctrine and CHLers. When you filter through the gun bias propaganda what they were really trying to cover up is thugs were being killed while trying to rob/harm armed people... so, to the normal person we read : Good for the good guys, not so good for the bad guys...


"All five people shot by police before July 1 were armed."

So, bad guys carry guns. I read that as - If you don't have your CHL, you need to get one.

I noticed that inference in the article as well. Either biased reporting, poor exposition, or both.

Steve

You mean the guy with a face tattoo wasn't a good guy?

The PRIMARY reason I decided to carry was the increased rate of murders and crimes in states that have bans or strict gun control laws. Even the liberal media can't spin the fact that the states with the most stringent gun control law have the worst crime rates. Of course they wont' report on it, but the silence is deafening.

To me, the story was short on valid information and long on vague innuendo and mis-placed logic. One interesting concept that was mentioned in the article - .....“The ‘duty to retreat' premise is that life should be saved at all costs, even if the life you're saving is someone who's attacking you,......".

So, justifiable homicides are on the increase? Would that statistic imply that consequently there are fewer murders to report?