Estimated reading time: 0 minutes
In their paper, “Estimating the Effect of Concealed Carry Laws on Murder,” economists Carlisle Moody and John R. Lott push back against claims that right-to-carry laws increase violent crime.
Their research highlights flaws in prior studies and provides fresh evidence that concealed carry laws may reduce murder rates over the long term.
Forward this video to friends & family to understand just how evil the government has been
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 29, 2024
pic.twitter.com/XgRnikMK6J
The Problem: Flawed Data and Comparisons
Moody and Lott’s work critiques how prior studies, such as those by Bondy, Donohue, and others, analyze the effects of concealed carry laws.
These studies often truncate their data, focusing only on “late-adopting” states (those implementing right-to-carry laws after 1991).
This approach, the authors argue, leads to “forbidden comparisons” by comparing the effects of late adoption to states that had already adopted right-to-carry laws years earlier.
The authors demonstrate that such comparisons can produce misleading results, showing increases in crime where none exist.
They also criticize these studies for overlooking key variables, such as differences in fees and training requirements across states. For example:
- States like Illinois, a late adopter, have significantly higher permit fees and training requirements, reducing the number of permits issued.
- Early-adopting states, which often have fewer restrictions, see greater permit issuance and potentially larger crime-reduction effects.
Key Findings
Using a more comprehensive dataset spanning from 1970 to 2018, Moody and Lott applied advanced statistical methods that account for state and time-based differences.
Their findings challenge earlier claims:
- Both right-to-carry and constitutional carry laws were associated with lower murder rates in the long term, though the effects were not always statistically significant.
- Earlier-adopting states saw greater reductions in crime compared to late adopters, suggesting that implementation barriers (e.g., high fees) limit the benefits of concealed carry laws.
- The supposed increases in crime found in previous studies may result from biased comparisons and truncated data samples.
Critique of Bondy et al.
Moody and Lott specifically address criticisms from a 2023 paper by Bondy, Cai, and Donohue, which claimed that concealed carry laws increased homicide rates. They argue Bondy’s analysis:
- Relied heavily on truncated data (1991-2018), amplifying biases.
- Failed to account for variations in permit accessibility and adoption timing.
- Used selective event-study methods that artificially inflated short-term crime increases without considering long-term effects.
“Bondy et al.’s selective methodology misses the bigger picture,” the authors state. “When all data is considered, there is no evidence that right-to-carry laws significantly increase murder rates.”
A Call for Better Research
Moody and Lott advocate for comprehensive, long-term studies that include all states and account for critical factors like permit fees, training requirements, and the timeline of law implementation.
They also urge researchers to move away from outdated statistical methods, such as two-way fixed effects models, which they argue are ill-suited for this type of analysis.
Conclusion
The debate over concealed carry laws continues to divide researchers and policymakers. However, Moody and Lott’s study highlights the importance of thorough, unbiased analysis.
Their findings suggest that concealed carry laws may contribute to lower murder rates, challenging the anti-gun narrative that such laws are harmful.
For 2A advocates, this study reinforces the argument that concealed carry rights play a vital role in public safety, especially in states where implementation barriers are minimal.
The research also underscores the need for vigilance in how gun-related policies are evaluated and debated. Learn more at CPRC.
*** Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! All Local Sales are FREE! ***
