Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Weapon type
Continuing with the robbery theme this week, I did a little checking on the types of weapons used in robberies. The "other" category is interesting: pepper spray, screwdrivers, and PlayStation (click to enlarge).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
30 comments:
Just curious Chief. In reference to the Channel 10 news story last night where they reported the use of airsoft "guns" during a robbery, how are airsoft "guns" categorized?
They're not actually firearms and not sold as such, so if they're reported as "guns" wouldn't that skew the results?
Speaking of a gun and home invasion robbery, does the recent HIR at 28th & F become only the 3rd HIR in your memory with a completely innocent victim, or does that count still stand at 2?
That's a pretty high-risk way for three armed men (with just one gun, so they might be hurting for cash) to steal an XBOX, when they could have just done a lower risk street robbery or hit the Kwik-Shop just down the block. I say "high-risk", because a resident could easily (and legally) be packing a pistol while sitting on their own porch, whereas the Kwik-Shop clerk or a walking citizen (in that lower-income area) isn't likely to be packing, either due to company policy or the cost of taking the required class and applying for a CHP.
7:19-
Unless you solve the crime and recover that gun (or BB/pellet?airsoft gun) you never actually know which ones were the real McCoy. Yesterday's case with the teenagers is the first one this year I can recall with a confirmed non-firearm gun.
8:25-
I'm standing pat with two, for the moment.
Thank you! My Magic 8-Ball seems to side with two as well; when I asked it "Is there a back story to this incident?", it came up "Signs point to yes".
How come the %'s don't add up to 100?
12:31-
Maybe your calculator's broke.
19+3+2+37+4+8+27=100
12:31-
I made the same mistake. Guns aren't 54.27% rather, there were 54 incidents, making it 27%. Click to enlarge.
Is this abuse?
Please readers, let me hear you.
My sons mom is a nurse. Of sound mind. This is the same person who just text message me and said, I better not abuse my sons phone like I have abused him.
This is my abuse to my son, as she claims.
1. My son sold a drug that could have killed my nephew.
2. I reported the incident to the parole officer.
3. My 16 year old was drunk. I had him cited for MIP (minor in possession)
4. I have taken my son to counseling for three years.
5. I and he, disclosed sexual abuse that happened in his prior living situation.
6. I hold my son accountable for all drug and alcohol use issues.
7. I do not enable my sons usage.
8. My son has been in three treatment centers. And one institution in four years.
9. I do NOT play games. I have CLEAR EXPECTATIONS and CLEAR CONSEQUENCES.
10. I enforce rules.
11. Number one rule. No drug use, NO alcohol use.
That's not abuse jim j, that's being a parent.
Re: Jim J
I sure don't think it is...and I sure can't that imagine anybody who says otherwise is of sound mind.
Chief;
The report reminded me of your stance on CCW. I would imagine that not one robbery was committed by a CCW holder?
On a related item-I recently viewed the Q&A between the British PM and Parliament. The item of discussion was that they are now considering banning knives in England...
The argument being that people will always find a way to kill each other.
One day, I for one, would like you to blog about the number of CCW holder's in Lincoln, and the lack of crimes they have commited- followed by an admission that your stance was wrong.
I enjoy your blog, it's usually thought provoking. Thanks, Chief.
To Jim J, sounds like you have more problems than the posters on the blog can solve. It probably isnt even appropriate to air out your problems on here. If you cant handle your son, give him back to his mom or get him to Bryan LGH West before the next two weeks. And regards to the gun issue, an airsoft gun can cause alot of pain, or even put an eye out.
bob-
"One day, I for one, would like you to blog about the number of CCW holder's in Lincoln, and the lack of crimes they have commited- followed by an admission that your stance was wrong."
Glad you enjoy The Cheif's Corner. You really don't want me to blog about concealed carry permits, because if I did, I'd have to point out that exactly what I said would happen has indeed happened. A handful of permit holders have done some pretty stupid stuff--both with and without their pistols. It's a tiny percentage, though, just as I predicted.
I gave the data for calendar year 2007 in response to a comment back in January. It's at 8:52 PM, so you'll have to scroll down to find it. The 2008 data will be similar--mostly traffic, including a couple of DWIs, a couple disturbing the peace cases, (one that is pretty scary), and my guy with a hole in his bucket. I checked the data a couple weeks ago, but I don't have it here at home with me.
In response to your question, obviously none of these robberies was commited by a CCH permit-holder. Neither was one thwarted by a permit holder. We're having a record year on robbery, while every other crime is falling. It seems to me that if the theory is true that concealed handguns deter street criminals, robbery would be the crime most likely to be impacted. So much for the theory.
Nonetheless, I expect that we will eventually have a crime thwarted by a concealed carry permit holder. It's happened twice during my career, that I can recall--once in 1980, once in 1988.
I'm reasonably at peace with the situation today, primarily because the number of permits is way lower than had been predicted. I think the training requirement and cost has caused some of the less stable potential applicants from applying. I also get the sense (although there is no data on this) that most permit holders don't actaully carry their handguns on their person very often--if at all.
Chief;
I am also at peace with the way the CCH has turned out. As a relative of a retired member of LPD, I too could blog about some pretty stupid stuff- involving firearms, that members of LPD have done while both on and off duty....but won't go there. As to permit holders with guns on their person- I think you are right, most do not. You could always ask one of your students to poll them.
Committing an armed robbery is not only a major felony, it's also a dumb thing to do, but committing an armed robbery with a fake gun (including BB/pellet and airsoft guns) is double-dumb. When your victim or a bystander sees that fake gun, they might pull a real gun and shoot you. It isn't worth it, and your mother would probably cry and make a scene at your funeral. Don't rob, get a job instead.
Here's how this "job" thing works, at least on a basic level: You show up at your "workplace" at the same time every day, be polite and get along with other people, perform a defined set of tasks (your "boss" or "manager" will fill you in), then leave at the same time every day. Every week or two, the boss guy gives you a "paycheck", which you can trade for real cash money at a bank. You'll have a couple of "days off" each week where you don't go to your job, and you can get drunk or whatever you like on those days. It's more time-consuming than stealing and robbing, but it's pretty cool to get money and not have the police wanting to arrest you for it. Really! Try it for a few months and see what you think.
If you stick with the job thing long enough, the boss will probably start paying you more money (sounds good, doesn't it), and maybe even make you sort of an junior boss, which pays even more money (see how this works?), and you can then tell some other people (now doing your old job) what to do. Your boss's boss might even offer to pay for part of some extra school.
Oh, did I mention that your workplace will probably give you other stuff, like health insurance, vacation (paid time off!) and other stuff. Try it, it's all pretty cool, and the police will just smile and wave at you, instead of chasing you down the street and throwing you in jail every time they see you.
bob-
That's why I could be reasonably certain that some concealed handgun permit holders would have occasional mishaps and sometimes use bad judgement: I've seen a whole lot of highly-trained, intensely-screened, closely-disciplined police officers (who took polygraph and psychological exams) have those mishaps over the years--self included.
Much like there are very few traffic accidents, just collisions brought about by negligent driving, there are almost no "accidental" discharges of firearms, just negligent discharges (unintentional, certainly, but still negligent).
On another note, I'd bet half the family jewels that departments which issue sidearms with magazine-disconnect safeties have a lower rate of NDs than do departments whose sidearms don't have MD safeties, especially NDs during clearing, as long (as they remove the magazine before clearing, of course).
Bob—
Don’t you know that the chief and his boys in blue are the “only ones” responsible enough to carry firearms!
They would never do anything foolish like he reported in “permit holders have done some pretty stupid stuff”
Wait never mind…
March 27 2007
Omaha World-Herald (Omaha, NE)
Byline: Lynn Safranek
“Road incident costs driver job as police officer.”
“A 53-year-old Omaha man recently lost his job as an Omaha police officer after he was accused of taking his road rage another step -- waving a gun at a man and his pregnant wife in traffic.”
Well gosh, if we're going to ban an activity because some might do stupid things or otherwise act irresponsibly, we'd better ban alcohol sales to the general public but pronto!
Judging by the years and years of experience in other states with legal CCW, I'd say the danger posed by CCW permit holders exists mostly in the minds of the opponents of CCw.
TO October 30, 2008 11:05 PM
You say to drop off a young man at Bryan LGH West.
WRONG!
Why do people think like that?
As for going to live with mom. Not an option as the abuse issues still fester. I will NEVER return legal custody to her without a Judges order to do so. And I do not think that will happen.
We made a team decision and sent him to live with his sister. No parole and he is cut free. His health insurance will end next month further saving tax dollars. In Nebraska it is three stages in youth development as far as law is concerned.
1. Minor (17 under)
2. Adult (19 and older)
3. 18 Years old (the gray area)
At 18, you are not an adult but not a minor. The other topic I would pick out of the post you made is about what should be on this blog. LPD has been involved from day one. LPD is often the first contact a youth has on the way to the courts. I put this up now because this issue is closed. LPD will not get another call from our family about our addict/alcoholic. They have helped when we have asked and have done an outstanding job of working with HHS and us as parents. NO decision was made by HHS without my stamp of approval. I never felt like they did not look for the clients best intrest first.
Furthermore,
I think we could all predict accidents and misdeeds done by CCW permit holders. After all, no one's perfect.
Unfortunately, the fact that permit holders are not (and never will be) perfect seems to be more than enough reason to ban the practice, according to some anyway.
Why has the bar been placed so high for permit holders? Why do some expect so much more of them than they do of other segments of society? Apparently if permit holders can't be perfect, then legal CCW cannot be allowed. Isn't this attitude just a tad unrealistic?
Because private citizens are not perfect, should qualified candidates be denied a relatively effective means of self defense outside their home (should they choose to jump through all the legal hoops?) Are private citizens lesser beings because they don't have a badge and are not employees of the state? I'm sorry but this attitude smacks of elitism IMHO and frankly, I find it insulting.
As far as training, it's been my experience that safety is more an attitude than of training. Firearms safety isn't rocket science. If a person can safely operate a motor vehicle, then operating a firearm safely is a piece of cake IF they have the right attitude.
If everyone followed the 4 basic rules of gun safety and followed them religiously, then there would be no firearms related accidents. I don't care how much training a person acquires or how much is mandated by the state, if a person doesn't take it to heart, be they a private citizen or a 20 year LEO, they will be dangerous.
And while we're talking about firearms safety, I'd like to raise a point. Some towns in Nebraska still forbid CCW by law abiding citizens. To pass through these intolerant towns legally, I must have the weapon unholstered and in plain sight.
We all know that one of the safest locations for a handgun is when it is secured in a quality holster. However, to be legal, I have to have the handgun unsecured in the vehicle, most likely lying on the seat beside me where it can be launched and sent flying to God knows where if I am forced to make a sudden maneuver in traffic. If I wedge it down in between the seats in an attempt to secure it, then technically I am in violation of the law as it is no longer in "plain sight."
One of the concerns/fears voiced by CCW opponents was accidents caused by the handling of handguns. But wouldn't you know, here they are requiring extra handling of a handgun due to the law as written.
There is no safer place for my 1911 to ride than secured in a Milt Sparks VMII.
I'd be glad to see you blog about CCW, Chief. Let's get the facts out there. I for one, am tired of the nonstop pessimism and the cynical predictions put out by the opponents of CCW. If CCW was anywhere near the problem it's made out to be by some, it wouldn't be legal in some form or another in 48 states.
There have been newspaper articles written about Missouri's and Minnesota's experience for example. (As far as I know, the St Louis Post Dispatch and the St Paul MN newspaper are not in the employ of the evil NRA.)
Just where has CCW been a problem?
Absolutely agree with lorimar. The biggest hazard I am caused is by having to remove my gun from it's hiding place by silly signs or ordinances. Hell, I can't even enjoy the city parks anymore now that I am a "licensed" individual. And if I want to go eat at Vals for some pizza or go in many other local businesses that post no-carry signs, I am faced with a horrible choice: Don't go in at all, or go in and show the world that I have a gun (carry open). Not exactly great choices are they? Seems much safer to just let me go about my business in peace.
Bottom line is, from Nebraska data and similar data from states all over the country, CCW permit holders are statistically some of the least violent and troublesome members of society. SO WHY ARE WE TREATED AS SECOND CLASS CITIZENS BECAUSE OF IT???
LOL I love how you assume stuff. Just for your info, Everyone in my family has permits. Most of my friends have permits. And we are ALL more often than not carrying. You are a foolish, power hungry individual who does not belong behind a badge. That's just my opinion of course.
As a supporter of the Concealed Handgun law for years before it was passed, and the first person in the state to receive a permit, I am pleased to be able to say that I have not had to use my guns in self-defense in the nearly two years since getting the permit. I am also pleased that there have been no real incidents involving permit holders during that time. The few stupid things that were done by permit holders were done, as far as I know, without actually involving the use of the weapon (except for the bucket incident which apparently had nothing to do with carrying concealed outside of the fact that the perpetrator had a permit). I would probably agree with the chief that this individual should never have gotten a permit in the first place.
As for the crime deterrant effect of concealed carry; who cares? That's not why I supported the measure. I support it because I should have the right to defend myself, with a firearm if necessary, and it makes more sense to carry concealed than out in the open for a variety of reasons. No one needs to know if I'm armed or not, and it is far less likely for something bad to happen if no one does.
The fact that robberies have increased so much is even more of a reason for me to carry.
Not all law enforcement people are as paranoid about permit holders as certain people here in Lincoln. The one time I was contacted by a Sheriff's deputy and I told him, as required, that I had a permit and was carrying, he didn't even ask to see the permit or the firearm.
Fear the ones who don't have the permits, not the rest of us.
Let us Blog about CCW topics we all could use a law enforcement view, what have you to lose.
We can compare the amount of CCW holder violations to Police Officer violations.
Texas has some handy stats posted, including demographic information of permit holders and applicants, as well as a very interesting set of conviction rate reports, which show how many people were convicted of all sorts of offenses, and how many of those were CHL holders. Just like here in Nebraska, permit holders very rarely ever commit any offense of any sort.
Their permit/license fee is $140, a bit more expensive than our $100, yet their permit rate is almost 10 times higher (~290,000 active permittees and a total pop of ~23.5M).
"I think the training requirement and cost has caused some of the less stable potential applicants from applying. I also get the sense (although there is no data on this) that most permit holders don't actaully carry their handguns on their person very often--if at all."
Interesting assumptions. The CHP class was one of the least expensive I've taken. But then, I typically attend formal firearms training four or five times a year. Typical length of class is 3-5 days, typical cost $400-$1,200. I do have a lifetime membership at Front Sight, though, so all training I take there is free.
I suppose I should figure in the cost of running about 200+/- rounds a week of .45 ACP in practice as well.
Don't carry very often? I carry every time I leave the house. There has not been a day I haven't carried since my permit arrived in May of 2007. I took the class in February, but back then the permits took months to issue.
Maybe it's my past experience as a rape victim in Chicago that gives me a different perspective on just who really is responsible for my personal safety.
hecate-
It's just my sense from those that I know personally that many CCH permit holders aren't carrying regualarly. I'm sure some do, and some don't. From what I know personally, some people primarily want to be able to lawfully keep a pistol in the console or glove box of their car. Maybe I'm wrong, and most CCH permit holders are like you--committed afficianados with lifetime memberships to Front Sight, who fire over 10,000 practice rounds annually. I imagine CCH class instructors would be in a much better position than I am to tell us about the "average" CCH permit applicant. It's really not an assumption on my part--just a guess. I have no idea, and it doesn't really matter.
Chief - you're kind of right. When I took the class, the instructor asked us who plans to carry on a regular basis, only about half the hands went up. There were several older, obviously "farm" types that just didn't want to get in trouble for having their six-shooter left in their console or what have you.
Though there are those of us who do carry (basically whenever we leave the house), you just don't hear about it much from us.
Tom' please it is called a Concealed Handgun Permit CHP and I too practice a minimum of ever other week plus have taken classes on Advanced Pistol Shooting. The people that I know carry daily, it does you no good at home when a car jack-er taps on your window, or a robber approaches you in the shopping center parking lot. This is emphazised at CCP class. Many permit holders wisely do not advertise that they are carrying, it is a private matter. This is fact not a assumption or sense.
Post a Comment