If you have two people who's lives are identical in every way, with the exception of one being a gun owner, do they stand a greater chance of being prosecuted for a crime?





CCW statistics generally prove that people who have undergone the permit process are less likely to commit crimes, but CCW permitees are only a small subset of all gun owners.





My thinking is that being a gun owner subjects you to many more regulations to have to comply with, effectively increasing the number of laws you could potentially break. As a gun owner, one has to be more careful, knowledgeable, and well versed in the myriad local, state and federal firearms laws than one who does not own firearms.





It would seem that by pure probability, a gun owner (who has more laws to comply with) stands a greater chance of breaking a law than a non gun owner who has less laws affecting them.

 

It depends on the state.

In California, one has to be on top of things and be very diligent. The law is complicated and often vague (purposely, to discourage gun ownership.) One mistake, and one could get screwed.

Maybe people in Arizona and Texas have less to worry about.

count your blessings you live in a free state.

Many of good people have been hung up in NY for unknowingly violating some batshit law that confuses most lawyers.

I promise you I don't take it for granted. And while I am not familiar with all of NY's gun laws, I have read some that make my head spin, no doubt.



 

I lived in NY my whole life. Honestly, the rest of you have no idea what it is like there. Seriously, even normal arizona residents, who may not even approve of gun ownership, when I tell them what NY is like, they stop bashing AZ laws, or lack therof.

Not 'round these parts.

I dunno about that, but being a boat owner, angler, or hunter sure as hell increases the odds of getting a bullshit misdemeanor in this lovely fucktarded state.

With 922(r), I'd bet a very large portion of Arfcom is currently committing a felony.

I wouldn't be surprised.  

More than half the questions I get from people who want a firearm are about what they are, and are not allowed.

A lady I work with and her husband, went to the last fun show and picked up two XD's.  I had to play 20 questions with her just explaining the basics and permitting, etc.  WE know what we can and can't do, but they for the most part have limited experience and had no clue.    So if you call them average, I'd say yeah, they're more likely.

I would say it depends on the gun owner, and it depends on the law.


There are a ton of gun owners out there that aren't very serious about it, or have no interest in learning the law.


For most "firearms enthusiasts" (I hate that phrase), especially those who carry concealed, we understand that doing so begets great responsibility.


Of those is the duty to read and understand pertinent laws. We also understand that committing crimes can lead to loss of 2A rights––something that I am not willing to do.


Now, it could also be that concealed carry in itself attracts those who have more principled outlook on life––I'm not really sure.





Naturally, we have so many (way too many) laws on the books that most folks lacking a Juris Doctorate won't know them all, so the law itself comes into play.


I don't know every local, state, and federal code on the books (not even those writing them do), so it is foreseeable that I or others could unknowingly commit a crime.




So, I would guess that those who are serious about firearm ownership in large have at least a slightly better understanding of the law, and are at least slightly less probable to break them.

The extent to which this is valid I can't say with any certainty whatsoever




JMHO, YMMV.