When the public is polled about constitutional carry, the support for the measure is…mixed. While many of us fully support the law and we know gun control advocates don’t, people in the middle tend to be nervous. The idea of just anyone carrying a gun however they want is troubling to them.

However, proponents have long claimed that it would save lives.

Critics, though, claim such measures will do the opposite. Yet the numbers from Indianapolis, which Cam talked about earlier this week, show it seems to be working.

Yet it also seems that Indianapolis isn’t an anomaly.

From The Truth About Guns:

As of 2020, the most recent year for which detailed CDC data is available, 16 states had already embraced constitutional carry. By looking at the homicide rates in those states as well as their gun homicide rates in particular, we can get an idea of whether constitutional carry states actually are more dangerous than the nation as a whole.

If the anti-gun argument is correct, constitutional carry states should be far more violent, especially in the crime-surge year of 2020.

Fortunately, the CDC provides very detailed statistics on public health, including data on underlying causes of death, so we can check. The statistics are reported online through the CDC’s WONDER tool, an acronym which stands for “Wide-ranging ONline Data for Epidemiologic Research.” All of the data I am about to discuss can be found through that tool.

…

With that in mind, the results are as follows: the average overall homicide rate among the sixteen constitutional carry states in 2020 was 6.9 per 100,000, beating the national average of 7.5 per 100,000. Perhaps more surprisingly, constitutional carry states also saw a lower gun-related homicide rate: 5.3 per 100,000, compared to the national figure of 5.9 per 100,000.

Now, the author acknowledges that this difference may not reach statistical significance. However, he also fudged the numbers a bit in reaching that.

I can hear the anti-gunners proclaim “GOTCHA!”

However, they need to sit back down for a moment. Author Konstadinos Moros did fudge the numbers, but it’s how he did it that’s interesting.

You see, he didn’t have data for New Hampshire or Vermont. So, for the sake of argument, he counted all of their homicides as gun homicides while acknowledging that wasn’t remotely likely. He’s right, it’s not. But I also understand why he did it. He can’t be accused of undercounting gun homicides if he counted all.

Yet despite doing that, the averages are still lower.

While this may or may not reach statistical significance, it doesn’t matter, nor does it matter about the numbers from the two states who failed to provide any to the CDC. It flies directly in the face of the claim that constitutional carry increases gun violence.

And really, why would it?

Criminals–you know, the people who kill other people–generally aren’t known for complying with carry laws as a general thing. They carry if they want to.

Those who will only carry without a permit because of the law don’t represent any kind of threat to society. They’re law-abiding folks who will, you know, abide by the law. It’s what they do.

So while anti-gunner scream about how constitutional carry will increase violence, the numbers show that it doesn’t.