CCW Permit Holders' Records "better than our uniformed police"

[TPaine7]

More than 190,000 Tennesseans have permits, issued by the state, to carry handguns.

These days, lawmakers are debating ideas to let them carry their guns into more places: college campuses, state parks, even bars.

Proponents say those gun permit holders may be armed, but there's no evidence that they are dangerous.

...

"Their behavior records is better than our uniformed police," Niceley tells NewsChannel 5's chief investigative reporter Phil Williams. "We've had no problems. We've not had shoot-outs at the OK Corral, like some of these people predicted."

It's a sentiment echoed by state Rep. Eddie Bass, D-Prospect.

"From a law enforcement perspective and with 20 years, I've never, never had a problem with a gun permit holder," the former sheriff says.

Source: http://www.newschannel5.com/Global/story.asp?S=8069038&nav=menu374_6_8

The story goes on to talk of permit holders who committed crimes, and there are a few. But police murder, rob and commit other crimes. No segment of humanity is perfect.

The bottom line, rational question is:

If concealed carry permitted citizens have a better criminal record than uniformed police officers, why do they make folks nervous while officers don't?

For many, the answer is ignorance or misinformation. They believe what media sensationalism implies--police are safe while citizens can't be trusted with guns. But there are many here who have read the facts, who still support armed police and disarmed people. Why are armed officers ok though they are more likely to shoot you--accidentally or on purpose? Is safety really the issue?

Is anti-concealed-carry gun control rationally grounded?

[sasquatch]

1. I've always noticed that its us, fireman and ems that're first responders not the damned cops

[amdezurik]

2. well, only a few were DETAILED in that story

but at least 500 were mentioned as possible match-ups, as a first run. But the ones detailed forced rape at the point of the CCW gun, murders and manslaughters. Not a stellar record. And seriously you think people are not nervous around cops? Puh-lease...Oh and this was an extra special part of the piece;

But even when permit holders have committed serious felonies, our investigation last month discovered that the Department of Safety had been, in some cases, renewing their permits.

It's a revelation that forced the state to overhaul how it handled those renewals.

"I blame Safety for that, and our system for not following up," Rep. Bass says.

Ironically, Bass and other proponents now want to close the public records regarding gun permits -- records that open-government advocates argue are the only way to really know what's happening.

[virginia mountainman]

3. Potental matches??!?!?!!?

What BULLSHIT.

How about these cops, these are NOT "Potental matches" this IS, them.

3 NYPD officers charged in subway sodomy case

"A police officer warned a tattoo parlor worker that if he reported being sodomized with a baton during an arrest at a New York subway station, officers would lock him up for a felony, prosecutors said Tuesday." ...

"With Mineo in a 'helpless position' with his pants down, Kern took out a retractable baton and shoved it into the victim's buttocks, said Assistant District Attorney Charles Guria. The baton pierced Mineo's underwear, tore his rectum and drew blood, the prosecutor said."

"To cover his tracks and with the other officers' knowledge, Kern wrote Mineo "a bogus summons" that was purposely backdated so it would be invalid, then warned him to keep quiet or face a felony, prosecutors said."

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20081209/D94VG32G0.html


Cop in Child Pornography Investigation Kills Self Behind Church

"A St. Louis police officer who was under investigation in a child pornography case jumped out of a police car, ran away, and killed himself, authorities said Wednesday."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,465026,00.html

Trolley Square hero accused of molesting woman during arrest

"The Ogden assistant police chief says a federal lawsuit filed against officer Ken Hammond, who confronted the gunman during the Trolley Square shooting, was the first time his department became aware of allegations Hammond abused a suspect and sexually assaulted a woman earlier this year."

"... department will begin an internal investigation into the case. Misconduct allegations against police officers are common, and Hammond is presumed innocent until proven guilty ..." ...

"The allegations in the lawsuit ... are not the first Ogden police are investigating in connection with Hammond. The officer has been on administrative leave since November pending an investigation into unrelated misconduct allegations ..."

http://www.sltrib.com/ci_11184639

Hunter police officer arrested on sex charges

A Hunter police officer has been arrested on charges he had a sexual relationship with an underage girl.

State Police said Nathan Vanfleet, 30, of Durham is charged with rape, criminal sex act, endangering the welfare of a child and official misconduct. He is accused of having sex with the girl multiple times when he was working and when he was off duty.

http://capitalnews9.com/content/top_stories/129638/hunter-police-officer-arrested-on-sex-charges/Default.aspx

Ex-Kanabec sheriff surrenders to authorities

"Former Kanabec County Sheriff Von Thompson has turned himself into authorities after spending about a week as a fugitive."

"Thompson was charged in October with four felonies for allegedly swindling a 91-year-old man out of $179,000."

http://www.startribune.com/local/35804354.html

State Reports Misconduct by 'Rogue' Supervisor in Its Manhattan Narcotics Office

"Left unchecked by his State Health Department bosses, a supervising narcotics investigator with a yen for addictive fentanyl lollipops took over a New York City narcotics control office, abused suspects’ rights and endangered lives, the New York State inspector general has found."

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/08/nyregion/08parking.html?_r=2&ref=nyregion

[amdezurik]

4. no not the cops

the folks with conceled carry permits being matched. hell, as far as i am concerend the police are just the biggest gang of crooks around...

[TPaine7]

19. You make some solid points.

Some innocent and decent folks are nervous around police, true, but no one talks about disarming officers even though they are more dangerous than CCW permit holders.

The system must be corrected to maximize felon control.

Privacy should be protected--individual privacy--not the mistakes of officials. The data of the innocent, with personal identifiers removed, should be publicly available. Records of people who have been removed for crimes should be publicly available. The heinies of the "Department of Safety" should not be covered.

[iverglas]

24. quite astounding

officers ... are more dangerous than CCW permit holders.

Quite simply astounding.

[iverglas]

5. you let morons like this in your party?

Cited as examples of what this particular moron calls "a few bad apples":

Among them:

Phillip Douglas Seals, convicted of first-degree murder, shot and killed his estranged wife and her boyfriend in cold blood.

Dale Mardis, convicted of second-degree murder, gunned down a codes inspector who wrote him a warning citation.

Eugene Kovalsky and Thomas Astringer, both permit holders, pleaded guilty to voluntary manslaughter after shooting a man point-blank in the head while he was down on the ground.

... Kimberly Cunningham, convicted of voluntary manslaughter, shot and killed a man she believed had raped her daughter.

Wesley England, who pleaded guilty to attempted second-degree murder, chased down an old girlfriend and her new companion, repeatedly firing his gun.

And Frank Brzezowski, convicted of aggravated rape, held his gun to a woman's head while he raped her.

... "If the total violent crime is reduced 20 percent -- as it is in most all these states -- that's huge," he insists.

If pigs could fly, Niceley might have said something meaningful.

[iverglas]

6. Forgive me!

Now why would I have assumed someone was quoting a Democrat here? It says "R" right in that article.

http://www.metropulse.com/news/2008/oct/22/17th-district-race/

Incumbent Frank Niceley, 61, is a conservative Republican from Strawberry Plains. He has served four two-year terms in the House of Representatives: 1988-92, and 2004-present. He is a graduate of Jefferson County High School and the University of Tennessee, and lists his occupation as a farmer/business owner. He is anti-taxes, pro-gun, and anti-abortion and has the endorsements to prove it.

Phew. No surprises here.

[spin]

7. Did you notice the Democrat quoted in the same article?

I]t's a sentiment echoed by state Rep. Eddie Bass, D-Prospect.

"From a law enforcement perspective and with 20 years, I've never, never had a problem with a gun permit holder," the former sheriff says.

Some Democrats, even some prominent Democrats support concealed carry. One example is Gov Bill Richardson.

William Blaine "Bill" Richardson III (born November 15, 1947) is a Democratic politician and the current Governor of New Mexico. Prior to being elected governor, Richardson served in the Clinton administration as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations and Energy Secretary. Richardson has also served as a U.S. Congressman, chairman of the 2004 Democratic National Convention, and chairman of the Democratic Governors Association. On December 3, 2008, President-elect Barack Obama designated Richardson for appointment to the cabinet-level position of Commerce Secretary.

************snip***************

In 2003, Richardson backed and signed legislation creating a permit system for New Mexicans to carry concealed handguns. He applied for and received a concealed weapons permit, though by his own admission he seldom carries a gun.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Richardson

[iverglas]

8. at least the Democrat didn't sound like a complete fucking lying moron

"From a law enforcement perspective and with 20 years, I've never, never had a problem with a gun permit holder" is anecdotal testimony. It's obviously offset by the reports of real problems caused by real permit holders. One wonders why he thought his personal experience was of some importance, given that, of course.

"If the total violent crime is reduced 20 percent -- as it is in most all these states -- that's huge" is just dishonest bullshit.


Richardson? Well, yeah, it's your party, you can invite whomever you like, I guess.

I don't think he quite falls to the level of the buffoon I had mistaken for a Democrat here initially, of course. So I'm not quite sure why you'd be raising him here.

One might have thought you could actually tell what I was talking about just by reading my post and the comments by the buffoon in question that I quoted ...

[jeepnstein]

9. Yes, that's right...

It is our Party. How are you registered? It certainly isn't as a voter in the United States.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[iverglas]

11. Do you make a habit

of telling people of colour that their race disqualifies them from identifying and denouncing right-wing lies? How about women; does their sex make them ineligible to comment? Are senior citizens precluded by their age?

If you choose to attack a participant in a discussion based on his/her nationality, when nationality is of no relevance to the topic at hand, thus demonstrating nothing but bigotry (well, and a fine grasp of the fallacy of attacking the speaker rather than the speech), I find it quite easy to imagine you would do the same in those situations.

[east texas lib]

12. If you're going to dish it out...

Better learn to take it.;)

[iverglas]

14. "it"

At least try to speak sense, can't you?

[iverglas]

13. oops

I was reading my own post trying to figure out what this "it" I was dishing out was, and mistakenly posted in reply to that one ...

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

15. Bigotry????

Would saying that no decent person would ever carry a concealed weapon qualify as bigotry?

[iverglas]

20. nope

Have you asked for a dictionary for Christmas or the holiday of your choice, Dave?

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[iverglas]

31. Of course I am; I'm not a US citizen

The reason your nationality is a topic, I would surmise, is because as a non-citizen I doubt anyone here really gives a flying fuck what you think about US gun-laws, nor should they.

Apparently you imagine that I give a flying fuck what you or anyone else gives a flying fuck about!


Clearly you post here for your own self-aggrandizement, because your incessant bloviating on this particular subject couldn't possibly matter, or count for, any less. Take a break every now and again, and you're bound to discover nobody will miss you much at all, if any.

Goodness gracious.

Apparently I have heretofore failed to notice your existence. If this has made you feel small and insignificant, you have toutes mes excuses.

[spin]

16. I just figured that you overlooked the comment by the Democrat...

which was uncharacteristic of you.

I personally like Bill Richardson. He has had an interesting career and held a lot of different positions in government. He lacked the charisma to become the nominee of the Democratic Party for President, but I'm glad Obama designated him for Commerce Secretary.

I wish we had more prominent Democrats like him and I always put in a plug for him when I get a chance. While I definitely agree with his viewpoint on concealed firearms, I have followed him for years and have been impressed with his intelligence and his ability.

[iverglas]

21. no, I was just confused

The bit of the article pasted in the OP identified the Democrat as D, but the other speaker was just identified by surname. It wasn't until I went back to the article and sifted through it that I realized that the one whose claims were the main focus of the OP was a right-wing asshole.

Richardson is indeed interesting. That doesn't make him a paragon, of course.

There are lots of people I think are intelligent and trustworthy but just wrong. I am a huge fan of Joe Biden because I think he is eminently intelligent and trustworthy. There are still things on which he is plain wrong, and worrisome. All depends on how worrisome the worrisome things are.

I fully supported the coalition formed to bring down the Conservative govt here a couple of weeks ago, with Liberal Stéphane Dion to be Prime Minister. I would have supported a totally Liberal minority government supported by / kept in check by NDP and Bloc votes. Even though I would personally never vote Liberal unless there was a dire need to defeat a greater evil and my candidate had no hope. (I did that once recently. I also voted Progressive Conservative once for the same reasons, long ago. Pierre Trudeau was intelligent all right, but not trustworthy.) Dion seems to be an intelligent, decent, trustworthy individual (just a total failure as a politician). Most of his party is not so much so. Michael Ignatieff, the new Liberal leader as of this week: very intelligent, but not so trustworthy; the same with his rival, who conceded to him, Bob Rae. But you can't always get what you want.

I would think Richardson would not have been the worst choice for Democratic candidate, from that standpoint (but like Dion, not up to the politician aspect of it, as you say). Joe would still have been the best choice, of course. ;)

[spin]

25. I wondered how you felt about the Canadian political situation...

and now I know. Interesting.

Yes, I liked Joe Biden and also feel he might have been the best choice for President. He's very anti-gun but also very intelligent and very experienced.

But I do have a lot of hope for Obama. Because of his lack of experience he will be challenged and tested both nationally and internationally. He seems very intelligent and has surrounded himself with a lot of experienced people. If he does well, he will be considered one of our greatest Presidents.

[TPaine7]

17. Let's see

20 years of police of police work is not, strictly speaking, anecdotal...

anecdote

/annikdot/

• noun 1 a short entertaining story about a real incident or person. 2 an account regarded as unreliable or as being hearsay.
Source: http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/anecdote?view=uk

...unless, of course, there is a rationale for believing he is lying or misremembering his career. (A rationale that doesn't involve the fact that he took the "wrong" position with respect to gun control, that is.)

His experience may not be anecdotal, but it is a collection of personal experiences--just with a lot more weight than your average randomly reported experience. So iverglas is on semi-solid ground.

It's obviously offset by the reports of real problems caused by real permit holders.

Also true--to a degree. But there is an obvious weakness. A collection of reports on CCW offenders is a list of exceptions. It is far less random than recollections over 20 years of law enforcement. Slanted as this comparison is, iverglas is correct in the basic idea--personal experiences and anecdotes tend to cancel each other out.

One wonders why he thought his personal experience was of some importance, given that, of course.

Pushing it a little far. His 20 years experience is certainly stronger than the posted results of a google search, say on AK47 "ish" guns used in crime. And iverglas has found such a list important enough to post. On DU. Funny that.

Ok, so far this stuff is a little twisted, but it could be the somewhat flawed positions of a basically honest person. With substantial bias. There is one little kink, however, that I have trouble fitting into that model.

While 20 years of unbiased police experience is "obviously offset" by a collection of cherry picked CCW offender stories, official FBI statistics can't get any respect:

hoplophile Fri Dec-05-08 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #21
33. Actually FBI statistics show that just under 3% of all homicides are

committed with a rifle. Of course this is a response to your statement:

"Nobody commits murder with a rifle. So the story's just bogus to start with."

And of course if NOBODY commits murder with a rifle then why is there such a debate about banning semi-automatic rifles?

That quote, "Nobody commits murder with a rifle" is iverglas'.

And here is her reply:

iverglas Fri Dec-05-08 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #33
37. oh no paco!!


It's the FBI statistics!!!

Somebody should have told the Chicks about them. They'd still be alive now.

A concealed handgun wouldn't have done the trick, but those FBI statistics surely would have.

If collected, cherry picked lists of anecdotes "obviously offset" a 20 year police career of random experience, why can't the national, official FBI statistics outweigh a single anecdote?

It seems that from some folks' point of view, google searches and the anecdotal experience of the Chicks (along with any other anti-gun anecdotes one can dredge up) should win the day and be the basis of US gun policy. It seems that comprehensive, rigorously scientific data that doesn't tend to support the anti-gun agenda should be dismissed. It seems that strawmen must be deployed as needed.

No one--no intelligent adult in full possession of her faculties--believes that "nobody commits murder with a rifle." That strawman/sarcasm is simply a way of avoiding reality--of warping it to protect gun control. And no one--no unbiased, intelligent person--believes that pro gun anecdotes "obviously offset" a 20 year police career and FBI statistics.

Could it be that anti-gun policy preferences--at least the ones that require such contortions to prop them up--actually do stem from an irrational base?

Look closely. Can't you see the shimmer of the "gun control reality distortion field?"

[iverglas]

22. clearing away the cobwebs ...

A dictionary definition of "anecdote". Fascinating. And yet, no one said "anecdote".

"From a law enforcement perspective and with 20 years, I've never, never had a problem with a gun permit holder" is anecdotal testimony.

Testimony is oral evidence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence
(my emphasis)

The expression anecdotal evidence has two quite distinct meanings.

(1) Evidence in the form of an anecdote or hearsay is called anecdotal if there is doubt about its veracity: the evidence itself is considered untrustworthy or untrue.

(2) Evidence, which may itself be true and verifiable, used to deduce a conclusion which does not follow from it, usually by generalizing from an insufficient amount of evidence. For example "my grandfather smoked like a chimney and died healthy in a car crash at the age of 99" does not disprove the proposition that "smoking markedly increases the probability of cancer and heart disease at a relatively early age". In this case, the evidence may itself be true, but does not warrant the conclusion.

In both cases the conclusion is unreliable; it might happen not to be untrue, but it doesn't follow from the "evidence".

The former police chief's statement cannot be used as the basis for any conclusions about the prevalence of crimes committed by holders of concealed weapons permits. You really did miss the point, didn't you? So much work, for so much naught.


If collected, cherry picked lists of anecdotes "obviously offset" a 20 year police career of random experience, why can't the national, official FBI statistics outweigh a single anecdote?

Some things just passeth all your understanding, don't they?

Actual events contrary to someone's experience preclude conclusions from that experience that fail to take into account those actual events.

Why can't statistics outweigh a single anecdote? "Outweigh" for what purpose, my sweet? In the case of the individuals in question, their main purpose was probably to continue breathing. The statistics didn't help them achieve that purpose, it seems.

[TPaine7]

28. Hmm.

Anecdotal evidence does not equal evidence consisting of anecdotes. Got it.

I like learning.

The former police chief's statement cannot be used as the basis for any conclusions about the prevalence of crimes committed by holders of concealed weapons permits.

I disagree, at least for his territory. If we assume he is not being disingenuous, this strongly implies that he is not familiar with his officers having had (more than a tiny number of) problems either.

Some things just passeth all your understanding, don't they?

Actual events contrary to someone's experience preclude conclusions from that experience that fail to take into account those actual events.

Why can't statistics outweigh a single anecdote? "Outweigh" for what purpose, my sweet? In the case of the individuals in question, their main purpose was probably to continue breathing. The statistics didn't help them achieve that purpose, it seems.

(Unless I am mistaken, "passeth" was only used with singular nouns. "Some thing passeth understanding" was correct, "some things passeth understanding" was not.)

What definitely doesn't pass my understanding is the tactic being used here. The comment by iverglas was posted to a thread concerning a public policy--policy on concealed carry in National Parks. After dismissing legitimate scientific evidence--FBI data--with a strawman, she made a point using an anecdote. And of course the subject under discussion morphed from public policy to the individual, personal experience of the Chicks.

The purpose was apparently not to illuminate the public policy debate, but to evade it. Readers were not supposed to weigh the single solitary anecdote against the FBI data for the purpose of evaluating the advisability of this or that policy. They were supposed to dismiss the FBI data and examine the Chick anecdote in isolation. I see through it.

Why can't statistics outweigh a single anecdote? "Outweigh" for what purpose, my sweet? In the case of the individuals in question, their main purpose was probably to continue breathing. The statistics didn't help them achieve that purpose, it seems.

For what purpose? The purpose of assessing and discussing public policy--the purpose of the thread.

[TPaine7]

18. It must be comforting

to evaluate a comment--not a political position, but an objective claim--based on a single letter by a speaker's name.

Never mind whether there is abundant evidence that corroborates it, just look for that letter.

prejudice

• noun 1 preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or experience. 2 unjust behaviour formed on such a basis. 3 chiefly Law harm that may result from some action or judgement.

Source: http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/prejudice?view=uk

Of course racism, sexism and extremism comfort their practitioners, too.

[iverglas]

23. do you find it so?

It must be comforting
to evaluate a comment--not a political position, but an objective claim--based on a single letter by a speaker's name.

Whatever gets you through the night, I guess.

Interesting that I first assumed that the person you were quoting, Nicely, was a Democrat. Kinda refutes your entire thesis, I'd say.

And then of course there's the simple fact that assessing someone's character and worth based on the political affiliation that s/he has chosen really just isn't the same thing as assessing someone's character and worth based on his/her inherent personal characteristics, such as skin colour and sex.

How anyone could say that assessing someone's political positions based on his/her chosen political affiliation, and/or the person's own words as I did initially in this case, is "pre-judging", I just don't know.

Anyhow, when making such assessments, me, I prefer research. Like what I did. Surprise!

Incumbent Frank Niceley, 61, is a conservative Republican from Strawberry Plains. He has served four two-year terms in the House of Representatives: 1988-92, and 2004-present. He is a graduate of Jefferson County High School and the University of Tennessee, and lists his occupation as a farmer/business owner. He is anti-taxes, pro-gun, and anti-abortion and has the endorsements to prove it.

You can also feel free to find the voting-record sites I consulted, if you care to do your own research.

Me, I would have done that before offering up the words of someone so easily demonstrated to be a source so unsavoury and unreliable (on the very face of his words -- not an "objective claim": utter bullshit) as true or even worth reading.

You, you're stuck with the choice you made. You offered up the words of a right-wing asshole, words that were worthless on their very face, as worthy of consideration in this forum. Your choice!

Just like it's your choice to make absolutely baseless, and quite simply false, accusations of prejudice in an attempt to score cheap points rather than defend your own choices.

[TPaine7]

29. Almost a good post

Interesting that I first assumed that the person you were quoting, Nicely, was a Democrat. Kinda refutes your entire thesis, I'd say.

I am compelled to agree with iverglas, at least as far as this particular incident is concerned.

And then of course there's the simple fact that assessing someone's character and worth based on the political affiliation that s/he has chosen really just isn't the same thing as assessing someone's character and worth based on his/her inherent personal characteristics, such as skin colour and sex.

How anyone could say that assessing someone's political positions based on his/her chosen political affiliation, and/or the person's own words as I did initially in this case, is "pre-judging", I just don't know.

For those who have forgotten, here is what I said:

It must be comforting
to evaluate a comment--not a political position, but an objective claim--based on a single letter by a speaker's name.

I definitely erred in this post, and iverglas refuted it. That actually made me chuckle.

But I guess a clean refutation was too much to ask. Either the CCW permit holders have a better record than the police or they do not. It is not a character or worth issue or a political position.

It is most definitely an objective claim.

[Indy Lurker]

26. What is the criminal record for police?

For CCW holders in TN it appears to be LESS THAN 0.263%

500 potential matches divided by the 190,000 permits issued equals only 0.263% of all permit holders.

I can't seem to Google anything useful.

[friendly_iconoclast]

27. Excellent question.

Someone will have to go datamining in FBI and Justice Department publications to figure this one out.


I have read in several places that CCW holders as a group are far less likely to commit crimes people
than the poulation as a whole. That is easily verifiable.

[roguelement]

32. Wizbanger claims Cops DON'T MAKE PEOPLE NERVOUS ?

Dear Friends : Can any of you out there really believe this
Wizbanger ? He has the Wisdom and Reference of mind to
actually claim that Cops with Gun's in Uniforms DON'T MAKE
AMERICANS NERVOUS ? WHAT THE What ? Maybe The Wizbanger should
ask the Young Man who pulled out his wallet and was Gunned
down by 3 NYC Cops {New Yorks finest} and 41 bullets later
they stopped Or My Daughter who watched from the car as
Language, Paranoia and a flat tire ordeal on the side of the
road turned into He was comin at Me with a Crow Bar So The Cop
had No choice but to defend himself and My Daughter sat back
and watched as the Paranoid Ossifer Emptied his Revolver into
an innocent Young mans chest ! So Mr You Ain't Nervous
Wizbanger the very next time your in a Cop Bar ask How Many
are Divorced and have a Drinking issue Or are already on Wife
# 3 Or maybe Before you Open your Pie Hole next time You may
want to check your Data against the National DataBase for Cop
Suicides Alcohol abuse Drug abuse Wife Abuse you name it Mr
Smart Guy they Lead the Nation in all aspects Of complete
disfunction But Hey You Ain't Nervous! Then you scare Normal
People. Why Oh Why is it that the People Who should Never Be
in a Position of such Power are exactly the Poor slobs they
have in the Positions Don't they realize Control over another
human being is nothing less than a very Sick twisted Illusion
....

[Jack_DeLeon]

33. Texas CHL conviction rates....

http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/crime_records/chl/convrates.htm

IIRC that includes all crimes regardless of severity.

I've heard that the Texas Department of Public Safety used to publish similar stats regarding law enforcement offcials, but discontinued them due to the fact that they were higher than the stats of CHL holders.