Except that you didn’t just say “a lot”. You said, “… it is highly likely that the eleven million conceal-carry permit holders are the primary source of guns used in crimes.”
I don’t believe it’s a claim that you can support with factual citations. It seems to just be a guess, and a poor one at that.
Where is it written what training CCW owners take and what care they take of their weapons? I would think the gathering of such information would be frowned upon by 2nd Amendment supporters such as they.
Each state has laws or regulations that describe what training, if any, is required to qualify for a permit. I don’t have any knowledge of whether any states have laws about storage or locks.
I haven’t run into any chatter on message boards or among my gun-owning friends that is against the training requirements for hunting or CCW licenses.
Michigan’s CCW training course requirements, for example:
The training must include the following:
safe storage, use and handling of a pistol including, but not limited to, safe storage, use and handling to protect a child;
ammunition knowledge, and the fundamentals of pistol shooting;
pistol shooting positions;
firearms and the law, including civil liability issues;
avoiding criminal attack and controlling a violent confrontation;
all laws that apply to carrying a concealed pistol in this state; and
at least 8 hours of instruction, including 3 hours of firing range time.
Agree with myself? Yes, I have said that here. Do I agree with the pediatricians who advise parents to safety dispose of guns in the house? Absolutely. Do I want an end to deer hunting? No.
I suppose you want me to roundly attack liberal proposals such as those of Hilary Clinton, and doubt I will. If so, you are correct. My priorities are different from her’s, and I’d hope anything that was passed would be enforced with a light hand. But Hilary sends the right basic message. This country has too many guns. The countries on this list with a gun ownership rate of 30 per hundred residents are examples I would look at, not so much for their laws as for their gun culture.
There’s a difference between supporting an individual gun control law because one believes that it, on its own merit, will reduce crime, and supporting a law because it furthers the overall goal over reducing or eliminating the total number of guns.
I have some respect for those on the gun control side that hold the second position, even though I strongly disagree. I hold nothing but disgust for those that pretend a law will provide some benefit on its own, while knowing full well that it won’t, but supporting it anyway as a step towards the goal.
Incidentally, what’s magical about the 30 guns per 100 residents? A quick look at the countries on the chart in your link shows the average homicide rate for countries with above 30 guns per 100 people is 2.32 per 100,000, while the average homicide rate for those with fewer than 30 guns per 100,00 residents is 7.27 per 100,000.
No political content - my comment was meant to be economic. I freely admit that I have no idea how the hypothetical cost would shake out. My estimate was the local cost of a physical plus the local cost of a doctor writing a two-page letter. I think it’s a reasonable first guess, but have no great attachment to the number.