You are on page 1of 18
Why Campus Carry 1. Why should a trained , licensed, carefully screened adult (age 21

Why Campus Carry

1. Why should a trained, licensed, carefully screened adult (age 21 or above) be allowed to carry a concealed handgun at a movie theater on Friday, at a shopping mall on Saturday, and in a church on Sunday but be prohibited from doing so in a college classroom on Monday?

2. Why should that same license holder be allowed to carry a concealed handgun at a municipal library but not a college library, at a health club but not a campus recreation center, and at a restaurant but not a university dining hall?

3. Does licensed concealed carry inhibit free expression in Texas churches or prevent heated debates in the Texas Capitol—two places where concealed carry is currently allowed?

4. Given that college campuses are open environments with uncontrolled points of entry (no metal detectors or bag checks) and that a person could just as easily walk into a classroom carrying a backpack full of guns as carrying a backpack full of books, why should a professor be more concerned about issuing a bad grade to someone who might secretly be a trained, tested, carefully vetted license holder carrying a gun LEGALLY than to someone who might secretly be an untrained, untested, unvetted criminal carrying a gun ILLEGALLY?

5. Given that the debate is about changing WHERE concealed handgun license (CHL) holders can carry guns and would not change WHO can carry a gun, why do opponents keep talking about the relative immaturity of college students?

6. Given that 90% of suicides occur in the victim's home, that most students over the age of 21 live off-campus, that the pending legislation would allow universities to regulate the storage of firearms in on-campus housing, and that CHL holders are already allowed to keep handguns in locked vehicles parked on campus, what is the factual basis for claiming that campus carry would lead to an increase in student suicides?

7. Given that the legalization of campus carry would not change the laws at fraternity houses, off-campus parties, tailgating events, or bars—the places where students (particularly those old enough to obtain a CHL) are most likely to drink—why do opponents spend so much time talking about the dangers of mixing guns and alcohol?

8. How could three to ten SECONDS of exchanged gunfire (the average length of a gunfight, according to most experts) possibly result in greater loss of life than a three- to ten-MINUTE uncontested, execution-style massacre?

9. If most shootouts are over in three to ten seconds, what are the odds of police encountering an ongoing shootout and being unable to distinguish the good guys from the bad guys?

10. Given that CHL holders are taught to move away from danger and would be required to keep their guns concealed unless facing an IMMEDIATE threat, how significant is the risk of police mistaking a good guy for a bad guy?

11. Given that Texas CHL holders are convicted of violent crimes at approximately 1/5 the rate of the general population and that a Texan is significantly more likely to be struck by lightning than to be murdered or negligently killed by a Texas CHL holder, why should anyone assume that these vetted, licensed adults who aren't causing trouble elsewhere in Texas will cause trouble on college campuses?

12. Given that more than 150 U.S. college campuses currently allow licensed concealed carry and have done so for an average of five years, without a single resulting assault, suicide attempt, or accidental death, why should anyone expect different results in Texas?

13. What is the benefit of a state law or school policy that stacks the odds in favor of any criminal or psychopath willing to ignore state law and school policy?

Madison D. Welch Southwest Regional Director Students for Concealed Carry

madison.welch@concealedcampus.org

www.ConcealedCampus.org

The truth about campus carry http://tribtalk.org/2015/05/22/the-truth-about-campus-carry/ By Madison Welch , May 22,

http://tribtalk.org/2015/05/22/the-truth-about-campus-carry/

http://tribtalk.org/2015/05/22/the-truth-about-campus-carry/ By Madison Welch , May 22, 2015 Opponents of legislation

By Madison Welch, May 22, 2015

Opponents of legislation to legalize the licensed concealed carry of handguns on Texas college campuses have a problem.

Try as they might, they have no factual basis for their claim that campus carry, as it’s known, would make Texas colleges less safe.

Seventeen years of Texas Department of Public Safety statistics show that Texas’ concealed handgun license (CHL) holders are convicted of violent crimes at about one-fifth the rate of the general population. Outside of Texas, more than 150 U.S. college campuses currently allow licensed concealed carry and have done so for an average of five years, without a single resulting assault, suicide, homicide or accidental death. Unable to prove that campus carry is too dangerous, opponents adopted a new tactic this year claiming that campus carry is too expensive.

The University of Texas System says campus carry legislation would cost the system $39 million over six years, the Houston Chronicle reported earlier this year. Curiously, the system estimates needing $22 million in security upgrades for the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston a teaching hospital that serves fewer than 6,500 trainees, offers no on-campus residences and, under the proposed law, would retain the right to prohibit guns in any facility operating as part of a licensed hospital.

The University of Houston System claims it would need $9 million over that same six-year period to build and staff secured facilities to store handguns belonging to the estimated handful of UH dorm residents who, according to Students for Concealed Carry research, are CHL holders. The UH System insists that these expenses are necessary, even though the bill in question wouldn’t mandate safe-storage facilities and would allow cheaper options such as requiring dorm residents to store firearms at the campus police station or keep their firearms locked in their cars, as state law currently allows.

It's no coincidence that both M.D. Anderson and the University of Houston are in the district of state Sen. Rodney Ellis, D-Houston. During the 2011 legislative session, Ellis helped derail similar legislation by saying on the Senate floor that the bill would cost each of the colleges in his district up to a million dollars per year in additional insurance premiums. Our group later showed this claim to be dubious, but not before it succeeded in costing the bill one of the 21 votes it needed, under the Senate's old "two-thirds" rule, to receive a floor vote. It's no surprise that Ellis has once again played the "unfunded mandate" card.

Aside from safe-storage facilities, most of the requested security upgrades are reported to be things like key card readers and "judgment" training for staff and security personnel general security measures that are optional. Locations such as shopping malls, movie theaters and churches manage to allow licensed concealed carry without such security features. Texas' college campuses have also so far managed to allow licensed concealed carry in their parking lots, outdoor walkways, grassy quads and other outdoor areas without major security upgrades or additional police training, so why would allowing concealed carry in campus buildings suddenly require such expenditures?

A few university officials have tried to generate concern about volatile chemicals stored in campus labs. If carrying a handgun in close proximity to these chemicals poses such a safety risk, why have the state's universities so far been content with only the security offered by honor-system-based “gun-free” policies? Why are administrators more concerned about the danger from lawfully carried handguns than about the danger from illegally carried handguns? Aren’t a bunch of ready-made bombs scattered around a densely populated campus an invitation to terrorists and psychopaths?

The estimates offered by these universities are not only baseless but also wildly inconsistent small campuses claim to need millions of dollars while larger campuses, including UT-Austin, have estimated no additional cost. The bottom line is that the multimillion-dollar price tags claimed by the UT and UH systems aren't about safety; they're about politics. University officials, aided by like-minded legislators, have honed the anti-campus-carry argument to appeal to the fiscally conservative majority in the Texas Capitol. It's an ends-justifies-the-means approach that practitioners hope will kill campus carry legislation or, at the very least, pad university coffers.

legislation or, at the very least, pad university coffers. Madison Welch Regional director of Students for

Regional director of Students for Concealed Carry

Dear Members of the 84 th Texas Legislature:

As you consider legislation to legalize the licensed concealed carry of handguns on Texas college campuses, I hope you’ll take a moment to watch these three video clips from the 2014 and 2011 Students for Concealed Carry national conferences.

In this seven-minute clip from the 2014 conference, Holly Adams recounts the pain of losing her daughter Leslie in the 2007 Virginia Tech massacre and explains, “If you were in my shoes, you would probably eagerly sacrifice your own life if only, on that horrible day, someone on campusin the dorm or in the classroomcould have carried a weapon and stopped the killer in his tracks before he claimed thirty-two precious lives": http://youtu.be/fHHUUqhZ7U0

Of course, mass shootings such as the 2007 Virginia Tech massacre are not the only reason students, faculty, staff, and visitors should be allowed the means to protect themselves on college campuses. In this eight-minute clip from the 2011 conference, Amanda Collins bravely recounts how she was sexually assaulted in a parking garage at the University of Nevada, Reno: http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4505990/amanda-collins-speaks-2011-scc-national-conference

In her address to the conference, Amanda argued that she could have stopped her assailant if only the university and the Nevada Legislature had allowed her the same measure of personal protection on campus that she, as a concealed handgun license holder, was allowed virtually everywhere else in the state. Her assailant was later arrested and convicted for the kidnapping, sexual assault, and murder of nineteen-year-old Brianna Denison ( http://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/brianna-denisons-life-ends-in-brutal-rape-and-murder ). Amanda believes that if she had been allowed the means to protect herself in that university parking garage, Briannawho was abducted and murdered three months latermight still be alive.

In this nine-minute video from the 2014 conference, Dartmouth student Taylor Woolrich tells the story of how she was relentlessly stalked by a sixty-three-year-old man whoafter meeting her at the coffee shop where she workedfollowed her, harassed her, assaulted her boyfriend, repeatedly violated a restraining order against him, and was ultimately arrested outside her parents’ home, carrying what police described as a “rape kit”:

http://youtu.be/b5I6uBBW9i0

When Taylor asked university officials to grant her permission to carry a concealed handgun for protection against this stalker, the request was flatly denied with no option for appeal. Taylor explained, “The operator at Safety and Security at Dartmouth College told me that I could call for a security escort if I felt unsafe. I've done this, and I got responses such as, You can't keep calling us all the time,’ or ‘You can only call after 9 PM.’ I'd like to say that my stalker doesn't really care what time of day it is. He doesn't care if it's light or dark or if I'm on the East Coast or the West Coast or out of the country. I have an out-of-control situation, and I'm asking for my control back.”

The push to legalize campus carry is not a ploy by “gun nuts” looking for an excuse to play cop or hero; it is about real people looking for the means to defend themselves against the types of horrors experienced by Leslie Adams, Amanda Collins, and Taylor Woolrich. SCC is not asking to lower the CHL age limit or to otherwise redefine who can carry a gun. We're not asking to change the concealed carry laws at bars, off-campus parties, fraternity houses, tailgating events, or any other location where college students are likely to consume alcohol. We are simply asking that trained, licensed, carefully screened adults (age 21 and above) be afforded the same right in college classrooms, lecture halls, libraries, and cafeterias that they’re already afforded in churches, movie theaters, shopping malls, grocery stores, restaurants, banks, and even the Texas Capitol.

Thank you for considering this important issue.

Sincerely,

Madison D. Welch Southwest Regional Director, Students for Concealed Carry

Madison.Welch@ConcealedCampus.org

www.ConcealedCampus.org

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - 12/09/2014

CONTACT:

Madison D. Welch, Southwest Regional Director, Students for Concealed Carry (SCC) madison.welch@concealedcampus.org SCC Board of Directors: organizers@concealedcampus.org

TEXAS A&M STUDENT BODY PRESIDENT SIGNS CAMPUS CARRY RESOLUTION

COLLEGE STATION, TX - On Monday, December 8, 2014, Texas A&M Student Body President Kyle Kelly signed a Student Senate resolution calling on school officials and state legislators to allow licensed concealed carry (of handguns) in university buildings.

The Personal Protection Act, which the A&M Student Senate passed on December 3, by a vote of 39 to 12, calls for the adoption of a state law or school policy ensuring that concealed handgun license holders are allowed the same measure of personal protection on A&M's College Station campusincluding in campus buildingsas they currently enjoy in most other locations (e.g., movie theaters, shopping malls, restaurants, grocery stores, banks, churches, and even the Texas Capitol).

In his official signing statement, Kelly wrote, It is imperative that dialogue on this difficult issue be founded in facts and not feelings.” Speaking with A&M’s student newspaper The Battalion, he said, “I have gone from being against the issue and of the position of vetoing the bill to now signing it and being in favor of concealed carry on campus. Part of that is because [of] what I have learned, through the process, that I didn’t know.”

Madison Welch, Southwest regional director for Students for Concealed Carry, commented:

It’s reassuring to see student leaders looking past the myth that campus carry is about giving everybody the right to have any gun anywhere, at any time. The A&M student government understands that concealed handgun license holders are trained, licensed, carefully screened adults whose general trustworthiness is borne out in statistics from the Texas Department of Public Safety and on the approximately 150 U.S. college campuses that currently allow concealed carry. Why should a license holder be allowed to carry a concealed handgun in a movie theater on Friday, in a shopping mall on Saturday, and in a church on Sunday but be prohibited from doing so in a lecture hall on Monday? What is the logic behind allowing concealed carry at municipal libraries but not at campus libraries, at health clubs but not at student recreation centers, and at restaurants but not at campus dining halls?

With a total enrollment of 62,185 students, Texas A&M is the largest university in the state of Texas and the fourth largest university in the United States. The Personal Protection Act now represents the official position of A&M’s undergraduate student body (47,567 students).

###

ABOUT STUDENTS FOR CONCEALED CARRY Students for Concealed Carry (SCC) is a national, non-partisan, grassroots organization comprising college students, faculty, staff, and concerned citizens who believe that holders of state-issued concealed handgun licenses should be allowed the same measure of personal protection on college campuses that current laws afford them virtually everywhere else. SCC is not affiliated with the NRA or any other organization. For more information on SCC, visit ConcealedCampus.org or Facebook.com/ConcealedCampus.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - 02/23/2015 (REVISED 03/21/2015)

CONTACT:

Madison D. Welch, Southwest Director, Students for Concealed Carry (SCC) - madison.welch@concealedcampus.org SCC Board of Directors: organizers@concealedcampus.org

TEXAS UNIVERSITIES USE FABRICATED COSTS TO CAST DOUBT ON CAMPUS CARRY

During the 2011 Texas Legislative Session, Senator Rodney Ellis (D-Houston) announced on the Senate floor that, according to the administrators of colleges in his district, then-pending legislation to legalize the licensed concealed carry of handguns on Texas college campuses would cost those institutions millions of dollars in increased insurance premiums. That claim was quickly refuted (http://is.gd/t3CvDt) but not before the fabricated specter of an "unfunded mandate" succeeded in derailing the bill in question. In light of this history, it's no surprise that college administrators, again aided by Senator Ellis, are once again warning of expenses that exist only in their imaginations. According to an article (http://is.gd/YWO9wX) published in the Sunday, February 22, edition of the Houston Chronicle, the UT and UH systems believe that Senate Bill 11the "campus carry" billwould cost them an aggregate of $47 million over six years. Not surprisingly, most of that purported cost would be borne by campuses in Senator Ellis's own district. Reportedly, $22 million (approximately 47%) would be needed by the on-campus police department at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, for "the installation of gun safes and lockers, additional administrative personnel and to fund 'de-escalation' and 'judgment' training for staff and on-campus security." That's $6.5 million per year, over the initial six years, for an institution (http://is.gd/hFPTly) that serves fewer than 6,500 trainees (mostly graduate students and post-doctoral residents and researchers), that offers no on-campus housing, and that would (under SB 11) retain the right to prohibit guns in any facility functioning as part of a licensed hospital. The University of Houston System, which operates primarily in Senator Ellis's district, claims it would spend $3 million the first year and $1.2 million each year thereafter, to "create, maintain, and staff secured weapons storage facilities in nine dormitories." According to a 2013 article (http://is.gd/Wj4ygx) in the Houston Chronicle, the main UH campus has a dorm capacity of 8,008 students (the second-largest dorm capacity of any Texas university, behind only Texas A&M). According to the website (http://is.gd/lanSTS) for UH-Victoria, the UH-Victoria campus has a dorm capacity of just over 600. No other UH campus offers on-campus housing. This means thatbased on the low rate (http://is.gd/Kgqgnx) of concealed handgun licensure among persons of typical undergraduate age (18- 23) and the low rate (http://is.gd/8WtGpC) at which persons over the age of 21 live in on-campus dormsthe UH System is concerned about securing fewer than a half-dozen handguns per year. Madison Welch, Southwest regional director for Students for Concealed Carry, commented, "If the University of Houston System can't figure out a way to secure handguns for less than $200,000 per handgun per year, they have much bigger problems than campus carry." Nothing in Senate Bill 11 (http://is.gd/1DnM1m) would require universities to create or staff "secured weapons storage facilities." The bill simply states that institutions of higher education would be allowed to "establish rules, regulations, or other provisions concerning the storage of handguns in dormitories or other residential facilities that are owned or leased and operated by the institution and located on the campus of the institution." Based on the wording of that provision, universities could presumably require the handful of dorm residents who possess a valid concealed handgun license (CHL) to check their firearms at the campus police station before turning in for the night. Or UH could do what the University of Colorado System does (http://is.gd/9rWw1b) and offer only one gun-friendly residence hall per campus (the UH System appears to have only two campuses with dormitories). Alternatively, UH could simply continue its current policy (per state law) of allowing CHL holders living in on-campus housing to store their guns in their cars. As for the need to provide additional training for staff and on-campus security, Madison Welch noted:

For more than nineteen years, it has been legal for a CHL holder to park her car in a campus parking garage, take a leisurely stroll through campus, and stop to read a book under one of the trees in the middle of the campus quad, all while carrying a concealed handgun. Yet we're expected to believe that letting that same license holder carry her concealed handgun into a campus building would necessitate millions of dollars in additional training for the same security officers who didn't need any additional training to protect the parking garage, the sidewalk, or the quad. Either universities are fishing for funding for security improvements they should have implemented decades ago, or they and their friend Senator Ellis are once again relying on fuzzy math and fuzzy ethics to derail good legislation.

###

ABOUT STUDENTS FOR CONCEALED CARRY Students for Concealed Carry (SCC) is a national, non-partisan, grassroots organization comprising college students, faculty, staff, and concerned citizens who believe that holders of state-issued concealed handgun licenses should be allowed the same measure of personal protection on college campuses that current laws afford them virtually everywhere else. SCC is not affiliated with the NRA or any other organization. For more information on SCC, visit ConcealedCampus.org or Facebook.com/ConcealedCampus.

RELATED: http://tinyurl.com/scc-oped-aas | http://tinyurl.com/scc-oped-dmn | http://tinyurl.com/txscc-why-campus-carry

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - 02/26/2015

CONTACT:

Madison D. Welch, Southwest Regional Director, Students for Concealed Carry (SCC) madison.welch@concealedcampus.org SCC Board of Directors: organizers@concealedcampus.org

IF CAMPUS CARRY WOULD COST UT SYSTEM TENS OF MILLIONS, WHY DOES UT-AUSTIN ESTIMATE ITS COST AT ZERO?

If the University of Texas System honestly believes that Texas Senate Bill 11, the "campus carry" bill authored by Senator Brian Birdwell (R-Granbury), would cost (http://is.gd/YzFo7U) the system $39 million over six years, why did the system's flagship universityUT-Austin, which serves more than 51,000 studentssubmit a fiscal note claiming that it expects to incur zero cost associated with the bill? An article (http://is.gd/m2JdQe) in the February 26, 2015, edition of the UT-Austin student newspaper The Daily Texan, states, "According to UT-Austin’s fiscal note, which estimates expenses associated with campus carry, the policy would not cost the University any additional funds." The article quotes UT-Austin spokesman Garry Susswein as saying that dorm residents in need of secured firearms storage would be expected to bear those costs themselves. This begs the question: If UT-Austin, the largest university in the system and the second largest university in the state, would not incur any notable costs as a result of Senate Bill 11, where would the purported $6.5 million annual cost be incurred? The article explains:

Most significantly, the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center estimated it would require $22 million dollars to increase staff size and training for its police department and to install security systems, such as card readers, UT System spokeswoman Jenny LaCoste-Caputo said. “It’s clear that there are inherent safety risks in a medical setting that present specific challenges, such as medical equipment, the presence of chemicals held under high pressure, safety concerns for patients and providing necessary storage for handguns that doesn’t currently exist,” LaCoste-Caputo said in an email. UT-Dallas, UT-El Paso and UT-Rio Grande Valley have also requested additional funds to accommodate campus carry if the bill were to pass. Combined, the institutions requested about $630,000 for security measures.

Given that on-campus housing is the only location where Senate Bill 11 would allow universities to regulate the storage of handguns but that the bill would allow universities to continue to prohibit handguns in any facility operating as part of a licensed hospital, why would MD Andersonwhich offers no on-campus student housing and comprises primarily hospital facilitiesspend money to install handgun storage facilities? Furthermore, why would allowing licensed concealed carry in non-hospital teaching and administrative buildings necessitate the installation of card readers or the hiring of additional police? If carrying a handgun in close proximity to "chemicals held under high pressure" poses such a safety risk, why has MD Anderson thus far been content with only the security offered by an honor-system-based "gun-free" policy? Now that they've announced to the world's terrorists that their facilities are rife with ready-made IEDs, won't they need to implement these security measures regardless of the final disposition of Senate Bill 11? SCC Southwest Regional Director Madison Welch commented, "When an institution that has taken no steps to mitigate the dangers posed by the illegal possession of firearms claims to need tens of millions of dollars to mitigate dangers posed by the lawful possession of a firearms, that tells me that the administrators are less concerned with security than with pushing their own political agenda or padding their institution's coffers."

###

ABOUT STUDENTS FOR CONCEALED CARRY Students for Concealed Carry (SCC) is a national, non-partisan, grassroots organization comprising college students, faculty, staff, and concerned citizens who believe that holders of state-issued concealed handgun licenses should be allowed the same measure of personal protection on college campuses that current laws afford them virtually everywhere else. SCC is not affiliated with the NRA or any other organization. For more information on SCC, visit ConcealedCampus.org or Facebook.com/ConcealedCampus.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - 03/18/2015

CONTACT:

Madison D. Welch, Southwest Regional Director, Students for Concealed Carry (SCC) - madison.welch@concealedcampus.org

OPPONENTS OF CAMPUS CARRY ASSUME VOTERS HAVE SHORT ATTENTION SPANS

AUSTIN, TX - The legislators and gun-control activists who incessantly parrot the claim that Senator Brian Birdwell (R- Granbury) is pandering to Baylor University (the largest employer in his district) by exempting private colleges from his "campus carry" legislation (SB 11) are clearly hoping voters won't remember that the language exempting private colleges originated in campus carry legislation by former Senator Jeff Wentworth (R-San Antonio), whose district encompassed the state's fifth-largest public university but no large private universities. During the Wednesday, March 18, floor debate on Senate Bill 11, Senator Rodney Ellis (D-Houston), remarked to Senator Birdwell, “It is interesting that you would put this in public universities—in other people’s districts—but not private, when the largest employer in your district is a private university.” This is a favorite talking point among opponents of the bill, but it ignores the fact that the opt-out language for private universities originated in Senator Wentworth's committee substitute to his 2009 campus carry bill (SB 1164). Senator Wentworth included the same language in his 2011 campus carry bill (SB 354), and Senator Birdwell repeated it in his 2013 bill (SB 182). Because Senator Wentworth's district encompassed the town of San Marcoshome to Texas State Universitybut did not include any large private universities, there is no evidence that the language is intended to create a carve-out for Baylor or any other individual institution. Madison Welch, Southwest regional director for Students for Concealed Carry, commented:

Opponents hope to derail this bill by pushing the false narrative of a "double standard," but the reality is that the ability of private colleges to operate free of many of the restrictions placed on public colleges is fundamental to the existence of private colleges. When you consider that private colleges have wide latitude to require church attendance, enforce morality codes, and place restrictions on students' freedom of speech, it makes sense that those same institutions would be allowed to restrict the rights of concealed handgun license holders on campus. If that is a double standard, it's the same double standard that always exists between private property and public property. There is nothing unethical or unusual about allowing private property owners to set their own policies but requiring state-funded colleges to honor state-issued licenses.

The double-standard narrative is one of two popular talking points among opponents of campus carry. The other is that campus carry would place a heavy financial burden on Texas colleges. For example, the University of Houston recently claimed it would need $3 million for the first year and $1.2 million for each subsequent year, to build and staff secured storage facilities to house the guns of concealed handgun license (CHL) holders living in on-campus dorms. Ignoring the fact that Senate Bill 11 does not mandate secured storage facilities and would allow UH to continue its current policy of requiring CHL holders living in dorms to store their handguns in their locked vehicles parked on campus, the university's cost estimate is beyond absurd. The number of UH dorm residents with concealed handgun licenses can be estimated using statistics from the University of Texas. According to Austin NBC news affiliate KXAN, only 2.5% of the students living on campus at UT-Austin are 21 or older. According to the UT-Austin website, the university has an on-campus housing capacity of 6,956. If we take 2.5% of 6,956, that’s 174 on-campus residents who are 21 or older. Because 9.5% of UT-Austin students are foreign nationals, we’re looking at about 157 who are eligible for a Texas CHL. If we use the rate (1.3%) at which Texans age 21-23 are licensed to carry a concealed handgun, to estimate how many of those 157 students are CHL holders, we can calculate that there are approximately two CHL holders living in on-campus housing at UT-Austin. According to a 2013 article in the Houston Chronicle, UH has a dorm capacity of 8,008 students, which is just 15% greater than that of UT-Austin. Assuming that the demographic makeup of UH is comparable to that of UT, we can estimate that UH has between two and three CHL holders living in on-campus dorms (2.4 using the exact percentages from UT; 2.6 if we don't discount for foreign nationals). This means the University of Houston claims to need $1.5 million to $400,000 per year per handgun. Welch quipped, "The university could save at least fifty percent by buying each of the CHL holders a house to live in."

###

ABOUT STUDENTS FOR CONCEALED CARRY Students for Concealed Carry (SCC) is a national, non-partisan, grassroots organization comprising college students, faculty, staff, and concerned citizens who believe that holders of state-issued concealed handgun licenses should be allowed the same measure of personal protection on college campuses that current laws afford them virtually everywhere else. SCC is not affiliated with the NRA or any other organization. For more information on SCC, visit ConcealedCampus.org or Facebook.com/ConcealedCampus.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - 04/01/2015

CONTACT:

Madison D. Welch, Southwest Regional Director, Students for Concealed Carry (SCC) - madison.welch@concealedcampus.org SCC Board of Directors: organizers@concealedcampus.org

ADMIRAL BILL MCRAVEN MAY UNDERSTAND GUNS, BUT HE DOESN'T UNDERSTAND CONCEALED CARRY IN TEXAS

AUSTIN, TX - Retired Navy SEAL turned University of Texas Chancellor William H. McRaven may be an expert on the use of firearms in combat, but he has repeatedly demonstrated that Texas's concealed carry laws fall outside that area of expertise. According to the UT-Texas student newspaper The Daily Texan, Admiral McRavenspeaking at a March 31 conferencecriticized pending legislation to legalize the licensed concealed carry of handguns on Texas college campuses, stating, "I think what will happen over time [is] we will begin to have a little bit of a barricade mentality … because, frankly, we’ll have to make sure that students carrying those weapons — well you’re going to have to check your gun at certain areas where you’re not allowed to carry those." The suggestion that students would need to be screened for weapons or that concealed handgun license (CHL) holders would need to check their handguns demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of not only how concealed carry laws are implemented throughout the rest of Texas but also of what those laws currently say. Throughout Texas, there are shopping malls and retail centers where licensed concealed carry is allowed in most businesses but prohibited (either by statute or by choice) in a few. A bar where concealed carry is statutorily prohibited or a jewelry store where the owner has made the choice to prohibit concealed carry isn't required to screen patrons for or provide safe storage for handguns. As would be the case at prohibited locations on college campuses, those businesses are simply required to post signs informing patrons that licensed concealed carry is not allowed on the premises. As with most concealed carry laws, the burden of compliances is borne by the license holder. If Admiral McRaven is so concerned about making sure students don't carry guns into gun-free-zones, why does the entire University of Texas System currently operate on an honor-system-based gun-free policy? Given that licensed concealed carry is currently legal on most of UT-Austin's forty acresincluding in any parking lot, parking garage, walkway, sidewalk, street, or other publicly accessible outdoor areashouldn't the UT System already have weapons checks at the entrances to campus buildings? Because Texas colleges cannot prohibit licensed students from keeping handguns in their private vehicles parked on campus, doesn't Admiral McRaven's logic dictate that students should be searched as soon as they step out of their cars? University buildings located outside the main campus are sometimes not readily identifiable as being owned or operated by an institution of higher education, yet Admiral McRaven and the state's other university administrators apparently believe that CHL holders follow the law at those locations. Therefore, doesn't it stand to reason that CHL holders would follow the law at the handful of on-campus locations that, under the proposed law, would be easily identified by the required signage? Madison Welch, Southwest regional director for Students for Concealed Carry, commented, "Why does Admiral McRaven feel that an honor-system-based gun-free policy is sufficient if it covers all campus buildings but insufficient if it covers just a few well-marked locations such as hospitals, K-12 schools, and sporting events?" Admiral McRaven's comment about a "barricade mentality" isn't the first time he has demonstrated a fundamental misunderstanding of licensed concealed carry. During a February 5 event hosted by the Texas Tribune, Admiral McRaven asked, "If you’re in a heated debate with somebody in the middle of a classroom, and you don’t know whether or not that individual is carrying, how does that inhibit the interaction between students and faculty?" This ignores the fact that, in the absence of metal detectors at every entrance to every campus building, students and faculty already don't know if someone is carrying a gun. All they know for sure is that the people concerned with obeying the law aren't carrying guns. And according to statistics, the people concerned with obeying the law aren't the ones students and faculty need to worry about. Madison Welch noted:

When you consider that Texas concealed handgun license holders are convicted of violent crimes at approximately 20% the rate of the general population; that licensed concealed carry is already allowed in Texas churches, Texas office buildings, and even the Texas Capitol; and that any person unconcerned with following the rules can just as easily walk into a college classroom carrying a backpack full of guns as carrying a backpack full of books, the suggestion that classroom debates are sufficient reason to prohibit licensed concealed carry on Texas college campuses is patently absurd. I respect Admiral McRaven's service to his country, and I respect that he is trying to back the men and women under his command, but his arguments don't stand up to scrutiny.

###

ABOUT STUDENTS FOR CONCEALED CARRY Students for Concealed Carry (SCC) is a national, non-partisan, grassroots organization comprising college students, faculty, staff, and concerned citizens who believe that holders of state-issued concealed handgun licenses should be allowed the same measure of personal protection on college campuses that current laws afford them virtually everywhere else. SCC is not affiliated with the NRA or any other organization. For more information on SCC, visit ConcealedCampus.org or Facebook.com/ConcealedCampus.

RELATED:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - 04/20/2015

CONTACT:

Madison D. Welch, Southwest Regional Director, Students for Concealed Carry (SCC) madison.welch@concealedcampus.org SCC Board of Directors: organizers@concealedcampus.org

STUDENTS FOR CONCEALED CARRY RELEASES TV AD IN TEXAS

AUSTIN, TX - Students for Concealed Carry today unveiled a television ad and website (www.WhyCampusCarry.com) aimed at rebutting the misinformation and false claims spread by opponents of pending legislation to legalize the licensed concealed carry of handguns on Texas college campuses. The ad, which will begin airing in Texas later this week, directly targets an earlier ad released by the gun-control organizations Everytown for Gun Safety and Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America.

Madison Welch, Southwest regional director for Students for Concealed Carry, explained, "SCC's primary focus is on educating legislators and the public about the facts of campus carry. When we saw that our opponents were using television ads to make false claims about where guns would be allowed under the proposed law, we knew we needed to set the record straight."

The ad from Students for Concealed Carry also points out that the only impartial poll on the subject found more Texans in support of campus carry than opposed to it. The earlier ad from Everytown and Moms Demand Action cites the findings of an internal poll that, according to The Dallas Morning News, included questions "clearly designed to push [respondents] in a certain direction."

Welch added, "Although we trust our lawmakers to research this issue and see through our opponents’ lies, we understand that the average Texan doesn’t have time to read all six thousand bills pending before the Texas Legislature. Our hope is that people who care about this issue will see our ad and visit the accompanying website to get the full story."

###

ABOUT STUDENTS FOR CONCEALED CARRY Students for Concealed Carry (SCC) is a national, non-partisan, grassroots organization comprising college students, faculty, staff, and concerned citizens who believe that holders of state-issued concealed handgun licenses should be allowed the same measure of personal protection on college campuses that current laws afford them virtually everywhere else. SCC is not affiliated with the NRA or any other organization. For more information on SCC, visit ConcealedCampus.org or Facebook.com/ConcealedCampus.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - 04/22/2015

CONTACT:

Madison D. Welch, Southwest Regional Director, Students for Concealed Carry (SCC) madison.welch@concealedcampus.org SCC Board of Directors: organizers@concealedcampus.org

TEXAS GUN-CONTROL GROUP CITES SAME POLL IT SOUGHT TO DISCREDIT

AUSTIN, TX - Although the gun-control organization Everytown for Gun Safety and its offshoot Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America have spent a small fortune trying (http://is.gd/wjUeyU) to discredit a Texas Tribune/University of Texas poll that found more Texans in support of campus carry than opposed to it, they continue to cite that same poll's finding on open carry.

The Michael-Bloomberg-funded gun-control conglomerate Everytown for Gun Safety can't afford to let the public believe that a plurality of Texas voters support campus carry, so Everytown created a follow-up poll designed to sway respondents in the opposite direction. Everytown might have justified its follow-up poll by claiming that the original Texas Tribune/University of Texas poll was flawed in some way, if not for the fact that Everytown’s subsidiary group Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America continues to cite the original poll's finding that 68% of Texans oppose open carry.

poll's finding that 68% of Texans oppose open carry. This April 21, 2015 (6:58 AM CDT)

This April 21, 2015 (6:58 AM CDT) Facebook post from Moms Demand Action cites the same Texas Tribune/University of Texas poll that found more Texans in support of campus carry than opposed to it.

Madison Welch, Southwest regional director for Students for Concealed Carry (SCC), noted, "It's quite telling that Everytown and Moms Demand Action would simultaneously attack and tout different findings of the same poll, depending on how those findings reflect on their agenda. Apparently, they think they can have their cake and eat it too."

This week, SCC launched a website (WhyCampusCarry.com) and a television advertising campaign aimed at unveiling this type of deception from the gun-control activists working in Texas. Welch concluded, "These carpetbagging fearmongers aren't giving Texans enough credit. But they'll learn."

###

ABOUT STUDENTS FOR CONCEALED CARRY Students for Concealed Carry (SCC) is a national, non-partisan, grassroots organization comprising college students, faculty, staff, and concerned citizens who believe that holders of state-issued concealed handgun licenses should be allowed the same measure of personal protection on college campuses that current laws afford them virtually everywhere else. SCC is not affiliated with the NRA or any other organization. For more information on SCC, visit ConcealedCampus.org or Facebook.com/ConcealedCampus.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 04/28/2015 2:00 PM CDT

CONTACT:

Madison D. Welch, Southwest Regional Director, Students for Concealed Carry (SCC) madison.welch@concealedcampus.org SCC Board of Directors: organizers@concealedcampus.org

GUNS ALLOWED AT UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS RALLY TO "OPPOSE GUNS ON CAMPUS"

AUSTIN, TX - As if to illustrate the disconnect between opponents of campus carry and the current laws governing licensed concealed carry in Texas, the group UT Students Against Guns on Campus plans to hold an anti-campus carry rally in an area of the UT-Austin campus where the licensed concealed carry of handguns is already legal.

The "Oppose Guns on Campus" rallyadvertised on a Facebook event page emblazoned with the slogan "KEEP GUNS OFF THE UT CAMPUS!"is scheduled to take place at 5 PM Tuesday, April 28, in the west mall rally space on the UT- Austin campus. Because current Texas gun laws do not classify the publicly accessible outdoor areas of a college campus (e.g., UT-Austin's west mall rally space) as part of the "premises" of the college, and because this event is not sponsored by UT, nothing in the Texas Penal Code would prohibit a concealed handgun license (CHL) holder from carrying a concealed handgun at the rally.

Madison Welch, Southwest regional director for Students for Concealed Carry (SCC), quipped, "In case it wasn't already clear how little these anti-campus carry activists understand about the issue they're protesting, they've chosen an area of campus where concealed carry is already allowed, to give speeches about how dangerous campus would be if concealed carry were allowed."

If the campus carry legislation pending before the Texas Legislature were to become law, the firearm restrictions in campus buildings would still be much more stringent than are the current firearm restrictions in UT-Austin's west mall rally space. Under the proposed campus carry law, only trained, licensed, carefully screened adults (age 21 or above) would be allowed to carry concealed handguns in campus buildings. Under the current law, any non-felon over the age of 18 may lawfully possess a long gun (rifle or shotgun) in the publicly accessible outdoor areas of campus. Welch noted, "One of the rally goers could choose to hang her protest sign from the barrel of an AK-47, and she wouldn't be in violation of the law."

Despite the irony of the location chosen for this anti-campus carry rally, SCC has no plans to encourage members to carry concealed handguns at the rally. Furthermore, SCC leaders chose to withhold this press release until just three hours before the rally, so as to avoid inspiring a counter-protest by radical factions of the state's (unrelated) open carry movement, some of whom have a history of carrying long guns to events sponsored by gun-control organizations. Welch explained, "SCC's mission is to educate, not intimidate, those who oppose us. There is no need for any type of counter-protestthe very existence of this rally belies the argument that licensed concealed carry threatens free speech on college campuses."

###

ABOUT STUDENTS FOR CONCEALED CARRY Students for Concealed Carry (SCC) is a national, non-partisan, grassroots organization comprising college students, faculty, staff, and concerned citizens who believe that holders of state-issued concealed handgun licenses should be allowed the same measure of personal protection on college campuses that current laws afford them virtually everywhere else. SCC is not affiliated with the NRA or any other organization. For more information on SCC, visit ConcealedCampus.org or Facebook.com/ConcealedCampus. For more information on the debate over campus carry in Texas, visit WhyCampusCarry.com.

Nothing in this press release should be construed as legal advice.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 04/29/2015

CONTACT:

Madison D. Welch, Southwest Regional Director, Students for Concealed Carry (SCC) madison.welch@concealedcampus.org SCC Board of Directors: organizers@concealedcampus.org

Michael Cargill, Owner, Central Texas Gun Works customerservice@centraltexasgunworks.com

FEWER THAN 50 TURN OUT FOR ANTI-CAMPUS CARRY RALLY AT UT-AUSTIN

AUSTIN, TX - With more than 75,000 students, faculty, and staff, the University of Texas at Austin is by far the largest university to see its administration and student government take a stance against the legalization of licensed concealed carry on Texas college campuses; however, fewer than 50 peopleincluding speakers and photographersturned out Tuesday for a well-publicized rally to oppose the two campus carry bills currently pending before the Texas Legislature.

The rally was meant to demonstrate overwhelming opposition to the pending legislation, but news photographs (http://is.gd/oiM7X1) show only about 45 people gathered in the west mall rally area of the UT-Austin campus.

Conversely, a 2011 concealed handgun licensing class (http://is.gd/iQzFnJ) hosted on the UT-Austin campus by Students for Concealed Carry attracted more than 60 UT-Austin students, faculty, and staff, plus several SCC members from other schools.

Texas concealed handgun licensing instructor Michael Cargill, who taught the class, noted, "We had roughly 70 students show up on campus at 8 AM on a Saturday, to spend all day taking a class for which they got no credit. In my mind, that takes a lot more commitment than showing up on a Tuesday afternoon, to spend forty-five minutes listening to speeches."

Madison Welch, Southwest regional director for Students for Concealed Carry, added, "Opponents of campus carry desperately want the Texas public and the Texas Legislature to believe that academics are fiercely against this legislation, yet their big rally against the bill didn’t attract one tenth of one percent of the UT-Austin population. If this rally says anything at all about the bill's opponents, it's that they're uninformed and unmotivated."

###

ABOUT STUDENTS FOR CONCEALED CARRY Students for Concealed Carry (SCC) is a national, non-partisan, grassroots organization comprising college students, faculty, staff, and concerned citizens who believe that holders of state-issued concealed handgun licenses should be allowed the same measure of personal protection on college campuses that current laws afford them virtually everywhere else. SCC is not affiliated with the NRA or any other organization. For more information on SCC, visit ConcealedCampus.org or Facebook.com/ConcealedCampus. For more information on the debate over campus carry in Texas, visit WhyCampusCarry.com.

RELATED: http://tinyurl.com/scc-2015-texas-handout | http://tinyurl.com/texas-chl-requirements | http://tinyurl.com/chl-tx-prohibited-locations

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 04/30/2015

CONTACT:

Madison D. Welch, Southwest Regional Director, Students for Concealed Carry (SCC) madison.welch@concealedcampus.org SCC Board of Directors: organizers@concealedcampus.org

WHEN FACTS FAIL YOU, PLAY BEER PONG IN LEGISLATORS' OFFICES

AUSTIN, TX - Still refusing to acknowledge the legal distinction between a college campus and an off-campus party, members of the Texas chapter of the gun-control group Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America spent Wednesday toting a portable "beer pong" game around the Texas Capitol.

Late Wednesday afternoon, the group posted pictures (http://is.gd/ZfuPGb) to its Facebook page, showing members posing with ping pong balls and red plastic cupsstaples of the infamous drinking gamein various locations throughout the Texas Capitol. This latest bit of theatrics is part of the group's ongoing efforts to mislead the public and the legislature into believing that pending legislation to legalize the licensed concealed carry of handguns on Texas college campuses would impact off-campus parties.

In a television commercial (http://is.gd/wjUeyU) released by Moms Demand Action earlier this month, images of a beer pong game are accompanied by a voiceover claimingfalselythat the legislation in question would "force colleges to allow guns" at "frat parties." In reality, fraternity houses are privately owned or leased by the overseeing fraternal organization and aren't covered by the current statutory prohibition (http://is.gd/qvvJ5v) against the possession of a firearm on the physical premises of an educational institution. Under the pending campus carry legislation, these fraternal organizations would retain the right to establish their own firearm policies at their fraternity houses.

Madison Welch, Southwest regional director for Students for Concealed Carry, commented, "I've spent the past five years on Texas college campuses, and I've never seen a beer pong game at any location that would be impacted by campus carry. It's been my experience that universities tend to frown on wild parties in lecture halls and libraries."

Neither Texas Senate Bill 11 nor Texas House Bill 937 would change the laws at fraternity houses, bars, tailgating events, or off-campus partieslocations not covered by the current campus gun ban. A separate statutory prohibition against concealed carry in bars would remain in effect, as would a statutory prohibition against carrying a concealed handgun while intoxicated (http://is.gd/HKc92u).

Welch noted, "Every day, Texas college students attend parties where licensed concealed carry is allowed under current law. In fact, most college parties take place in locations where licensed concealed carry is allowed under current law. To point to those parties, where concealed carry is already legal, as a reason to continue to prohibit concealed carry in locations such as classrooms, libraries, and cafeterias is the most twisted kind of logic."

###

ABOUT STUDENTS FOR CONCEALED CARRY Students for Concealed Carry (SCC) is a national, non-partisan, grassroots organization comprising college students, faculty, staff, and concerned citizens who believe that holders of state-issued concealed handgun licenses should be allowed the same measure of personal protection on college campuses that current laws afford them virtually everywhere else. SCC is not affiliated with the NRA or any other organization. For more information on SCC, visit ConcealedCampus.org or Facebook.com/ConcealedCampus. For more information on the debate over campus carry in Texas, visit WhyCampusCarry.com.

January 1, 2015, Texas Concealed Handgun Licensure Among Persons Age 18-23

Licenses Issued Minus Licenses Revoked

 

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

Age

18*

18

16

11

15

13

19*

78

61

39

42

40

20*

140

108

73

72

   

21

3271

2810

2085

 

22

2520

2508

 

23

2453

 

TOTAL

SUBTOTAL

8480

5503

2208

129

53

16373

License issuance and revocation numbers courtesy of Texas Department of Public Safety:

https://www.txdps.state.tx.us/rsd/chl/reports/demographics.htm

NOTE: A first-time license issued in 2009 expired before the end of 2014.

Texas Population Estimates by Age

 

18

396586

19

396835

20

400420

21

403126

22

397679 (approx.)

 

23

397679 (approx.)

2392325

Population estimates courtesy of the Texas Department of State Health Services:

https://www.dshs.state.tx.us/CHS/Popdat/Dtl/DTL2014p/

*A person age 18-20 can only obtain a Texas CHL if he or she is a member or veteran of the U.S. Armed Forces. As of January 1, 2015, there were a maximum of 324 active Texas CHLs held by military personnel and veterans age 18-20. Among Texans in that age range, that's approximately 0.027%, or one person out of every 3,685.

As of January 1, 2015, the rate of concealed handgun licensure among Texans age 21-23 is approximately 1.3%, or one person out of every 75.

As of January 1, 2015, the rate of concealed handgun licensure among Texans age 18-23 is approximately 0.68%, or one person out of every 146. (This is up from roughly 0.5%, or one person out of every 198, on January 1, 2013.)

Convictions of Texas CHL Holders for Aggravated Assault with a Deadly Weapon

 

Total Convictions -

Aggravated Assault

CHl Convictions - Aggravated

 

Population

CHL Holders

% CHL Holders

w/Deadly Weapon

Assault w/Deadly Weapon

% CHL Convictions

2013

26,640, 165

708,048

2.6578%

2,292

10

0.4363%

2012

26,130,047

584,850

2.2382%

2,852

6

0.2104%

2011

25,674,681

518,625

2.0200%

2,765

0.1085%

2010

25, 145,561

461,724

1.8362%

3,079

0.0974%

2009

24,782,302

402,914

1.6258%

2,603

4

0.1537%

2008

24,326,974

314,574

1.2931%

2,600

o

0.0000%

2007

23,904,380

288,909

1.2086%

2,513

7

0.2786%

2006

23,507,783

258, 162

1.0982%

2,701

9

0.3332%

2005

22,859,968

248,874

1.0887%

2,632

5

0.1900%

2004

22,490,022

239,940

1.0669%

2,901

0.1724%

2003

22,118,509

239,863

1.0844%

2,626

0.1142%

2002

21,779,893

224,172

1.0293%

2,408

0.1246%

2001

21,325,018

218,670

1.0254%

1,767

0. 1132%

2000

20,85 1,820

215,836

1.03

5 1%

1,912

0.2615%

1999

20,044,141

203,878

1.0 171%

1,629

4

0.2455%

1998

19,759,614

183,078

0.9265%

1,468

4

0.2725%

1997

19,439,337

162,597

0.8364%

1,458

0.4801%

1996

19, 128,261

113,640

0.5941%

1,269

0.1576%

 

AVERAGE:

1.3157%

 
  AVERAGE: 1.3157%   0.2083%

0.2083%

A Texas CHL holder is approximately 1/6 as likely to be convicted of aggravated assaul t with a deadly weapon.

Convictions of Texas CHL Holders for Murder, Negligent Homicide, or Manslaughter

 

Total Convictions - Murder.

CHl Convictions - Murder.

Negligent Homicide.

Negligent Homicide.

 

Population

CHL Holders

% CHL Holders

Manslaughter

Manslaughter

% CHL Convictions

2013

26,640,165

708,048

2.6578%

585

4

0.6838%

2012

26,130,047

584,850

2.2382%

660

3

0.4545%

2011

25,674,681

518,625

2.0200%

722

7

0.9695%

2010

25,145,561

461,724

1.8362%

740

8

1.0811%

2009

24,782,302

402,914

1.6258%

649

0.1541%

2008

24,326,974

314,574

1.2931%

617

0.4862%

2007

23,904,380

288,909

1.2086%

586

1.1945%

2006

23,507,783

258, 162

1.0982%

543

0.3683%

2005

22,859,968

248,874

1.0887%

560

0.5357%

2004

22,490,022

239,940

1.0669%

521

o

0.0000%

2003

22, 118,509

239,863

1.0844%

449

0.2227%

2002

21,779,893

224,172

1.0293%

389

0.5141%

2001

21,325,018

218,670

1.0254%

256

o

0.0000%

2000

20,851,820

215,836

1.035

1%

145

0.6897%

1999

20,044, 14 1

203,878

1.0171%

124

o

0.0000%

1998

19,759,614

183,078

0.9265%

82

o

0.0000%

1997

19,439,337

162,597

0.8364%

99

o

0.0000%

1996

19, 128,261

113,640

0 .5 941%

74

o

0.0000%

 

AVERAGE:

1.31

57%

AVERAGE:

0.4086%

A Texas CHL holde r is approximately 1/3 as like ly t o be co n victed of murder, negligen t homicide, or manslaughter.

Convictions of Texas CHL Holders for Aggravated Sexual Assault

 

Total Convictions-

CHL Convictions - Aggravated

 

Population

CHL Holders

% CHL Holders

Aggravated Sexual Assault

Sexual Assault

% CHL Convictions

2013

26,640,165

708,048

2.6578%

117

1 0.8547%

2012

26,130,047

584,850

2.2382%

157

2 1.2739%

2011

25,674,681

518,625

2.0200%

162

o

0.0000%

2010

25, 145,561

461,724

1.8362%

255

0.7843%

2009

24,78 2,3 02

402,914

1.6258%

202

o

0.0000%

2008

24,326,974

314,574

1.2931%

204

o

0.0000%

2007

23,904,380

288,909

1.2086%

204

o

0.0000%

2006

23,507,783

258, 162

1.0982%

173

o

0.0000%

2005

22,859,968

248,874

1.0887%

207

o

0.0000%

2004

22,490,022

239,940

1.0669%

22 1

0.9050%

2003

22, 118,509

239,863

1.0844%

301

o

0.0000%

2002

21,779,893

224, 172

1.0293%

245

o

0 .0000%

2001

21,325,018

218,670

1.0254%

178

o

0.0000%

2000

20,851,820

215,836

1.035

1%

192

o

0.0000%

1999

20,044, 14 1

203,878

1.0171%

157

0.6369%

1998

19,759,614

183,078

0.9265%

191

o

0.0000%

1997

19,439,337

162,597

0.8364%

225

o

0.0000%

1996

19,128,261

113,640

0.5941%

186

o

0.0000%

 

AVERAGE:

1.3157%

AVERAGE :

0.2475%

A Texas CHL h older is approximately 1/5

as likely t o b e convic t ed of aggravated sexua l assault.

Po p ul at io n estimates cou rt

https:!/www.dshs.state.tx.us/CHS/Popdat/Dtl/DTL2014p/

esy o f t h e Texas Depart m ent of Sta t e Hea lth Se rv i ces:

Co nvic t ion n u mbers co u rtesy o f t h e Texas Depar t ment of Publ ic Sa f ety:

https://www.txdps.state.tx.us/rsd/chl/reports/convrates.htm