[bane]

I am wondering if anyone knows whether or not I can contact BCI (or some other agency) and get statistics which reflect Utah CCW permits with respect to zip codes, crime stats with respect to zip code, etc???

I am not looking at trying to tag the permits to certain individuals or addresses, just grouping them by zip codes.

The reason is that I am considering tackling a summer programming project and want to implement this data into a format which will graphically plot concentrations of CCW permits vs. crime indices in order to graphically show any correlations that may exist.

Also, if the code allowed user feedback on things like "frequency of carry" (daily, rarely, "to work", etc) would you be willing to provide that input along with your zip code but no other personal information???

NOTE: To make it clear, I am *NOT* proposing collecting nor disseminating any information more personal than zip codes.

 

[Dustin WJ]

I like the idea. It would be great if the information was open to the public. That way, if enough people were carrying, criminals might think twice before committing violent crimes.

 

[Jeff Johnson]

Statistical reports are available at BCI, but don't cover what you're asking about.

You'd have to call BCI and see if they make that kind of zip code data public. However, I would say that I'm opposed to going very far down that path, i.e. making CFP data public, because of the abuse of that type of information by news organizations in those states where they can get that information.

News organizations have published names of CCW permit holders in several states.

 

[Mazellan]

I agree Jeff. Although I would be willing to submit my zip and frequency of carry if It wasn't through the BCI making it public.

 

[bane]

Yes, I'm aware of the problems in other states and I also agree that the BCI giving out personal information regarding carriers is a very bad thing.

To clarify, however, are you guys arguing that you wouldn't even want to see the information compiled by ZIP code (which would mean I'm barking up the wrong tree with this project) or are you just saying that you hope BCI nor anyone else will ever release information MORE PERSONAL THAN ZIP CODES???

I guess I'm just confused about which aspect concerns you. If most CC'ers would be worried about data published with respect to ZIP's (though I can't imagine why) then I won't even waste my time going down that road.

But if the general feeling is that ZIP-code info. is OK as long as more personal information isn't involved, then I would be in total agreement. I certainly don't want someone to be able to use the records to determine that I carry or that I probably have guns available for theft in my home!

What's the consensus here????

 

[xmirage2kx]

Many gun owners have a bit of the Tinfoil Hat mindset. There are others who end up on the front page of news papers. Most gun owners fall closer to group 1 than group 2, so ANY info about them in any way is bad.

 

[Mazellan]

I would feel better if BCI was not involved. I guess you could say that it's a "Slippery Slope." If they start to make any information public, it could eventually whittle away the privacy. Does that make sense?

If it were a third party and the only data they collected was zip and frequency I would be game. I hope this clarifies my opinion.

 

[Jeff Johnson]

I think that I would still not be comfortable with BCI divulging anything that would start down that path.

However, a survey or a poll conducted independently of BCI would probably be fine, since an individual CFP-holder can always choose whether or not to answer a poll.

Anti-gun forces just love to misuse any publicly available information to try to strengthen their attempts to grab guns, and intimidation through the release of personal information of CFP-holders is one of their tricks.

I prefer aluminum hats, thank you. Tin is not as effective...

 

[xmirage2kx]

I prefer aluminum hats, thank you. Tin is not as effective...

:ROFL:
Good to know

 

[GeneticsDave]

I would feel better if BCI was not involved. I guess you could say that it's a "Slippery Slope." If they start to make any information public, it could eventually whittle away the privacy. Does that make sense?

If it were a third party and the only data they collected was zip and frequency I would be game. I hope this clarifies my opinion.

:agree:
I would suggest getting crime information from the State regarding felonies in each zip code. I would then set up an online form for CCWers to enter their zip code and how often they carry (or what other info you want). This way BCI is not involved and release of private information is not messed with. Your database will grow with time and should accomplish nearly the same effect.

 

[Cinhil]

Maybe you could check here:

http://www.census.gov/compendia/smadb/TableA-25.pdf

2003 seems to be the latest data.

 

[bane]

Yes, I certainly do understand the "slippery slope" described... I don't always agree with such views but I definitely understand where you are coming from... even more so in regards to 2A issues b/c of the aggressive anti's.

That being said, it looks like this project is dead (at least for now)... I was invited today by the Chair of the Philosophy Dept. at SLCC to prepare a presentation for the next Regional Philosophy Conference and I'm going to have to spend my summer reading about the philosophy of John Rawls instead of doing extra programming.

It's an idea maybe I'll tackle next year.

 

[treesloth]

If your project gets finished and is publicly-viewable, I'd be curious to know if the crime rates go up in areas shown to have low numbers of CCP holders. It would almost be like putting a "Gun-Free Zone" sign on large geographical areas.

 

[bane]

If your project gets finished and is publicly-viewable, I'd be curious to know if the crime rates go up in areas shown to have low numbers of CCP holders. It would almost be like putting a "Gun-Free Zone" sign on large geographical areas.

Hahaha... well, I've abandoned that project for now... that's pretty funny though!