Page 1 of 1

Are There Before/After Stats On The Castle Doctrine?

Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 10:01 am
by Abraham
Since it's inception, are there statistics being kept regarding the incidence of home invasions or burglaries?

I wonder if they're lower or remain relatively the same or is it just to early to know?

Anyone know?

Re: Are There Before/After Stats On The Castle Doctrine?

Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 10:19 am
by seamusTX
Crime statistics are published about a year after the calendar year, and they encompass an entire year. Texas castle doctrine went into effect in September 2007. It would be difficult or impossible to distinguish before-and-after effects for that year.

In 2007, Texas had a total of 38,769 robberies. The data are not presented in a way that would tell us how many of these would have fallen under castle doctrine. However, most robberies are in homes or business, with workers in the business being the target of the robbery.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2007/data/table_05.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The final report for CY 2008 is not available yet. The data that is available is not divided by state. The preliminary report shows that overall violent crime was down about 2% from 2007 to 2008: http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/2008prelim/table_3.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Personally, I doubt that castle doctrine or the number of CHLs will affect crime rates.

The rate of violent crime and theft is a function of the number of young men, roughly age 15-25, who are living in poverty and what used to be called "broken homes," combined with the state of the economy. These young men are not very bright, if not outright crack babies; and they do not think of consequences.

To put it bluntly, they do not think, gee, I had better not rob people, because they might shoot me. They are living in a fantasy of some gansta hip-hop video.

There is also a fairly constant rate of mentally ill people and deranged people in failed relationships who commit assault and murder. Those people also do not think of consequences. Look at the number of men who kill their estranged wife or girlfriend and then commit suicide, either directly or by cop.

P.S.: I used robbery instead of burglary because the victim of a robbery is always a person who is present. Burglary can involved an occupied or unoccupied building, probably more often unoccupied. In 2007, there were 228,313 reported burglaries in Texas.

- Jim

Re: Are There Before/After Stats On The Castle Doctrine?

Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 10:47 am
by Excaliber
Abraham wrote:Since it's inception, are there statistics being kept regarding the incidence of home invasions or burglaries?

I wonder if they're lower or remain relatively the same or is it just to early to know?

Anyone know?
National statistics are not kept on home invasions, which in most states are a type of robbery and not a separately reported crime.

National statistics are also not kept on justifiable use of firearms by civilians for personal defense.

You can see what statistics the FBI gathers in their uniform crime reporting statistics here.

Re: Are There Before/After Stats On The Castle Doctrine?

Posted: Mon Feb 16, 2009 1:45 pm
by Liberty
seamusTX wrote:
Personally, I doubt that castle doctrine or the number of CHLs will affect crime rates.

The rate of violent crime and theft is a function of the number of young men, roughly age 15-25, who are living in poverty and what used to be called "broken homes," combined with the state of the economy. These young men are not very bright, if not outright crack babies; and they do not think of consequences.
I think the publicity of incidents like the Joe Horn event does temperarily have an effect on those types of crimes. After a few weeks they forget though.

Re: Are There Before/After Stats On The Castle Doctrine?

Posted: Tue Feb 17, 2009 4:31 pm
by jorge
Even if shooting and killing robbers doesn't have a scared straight effect it does prevent those robbers from committing future crimes.

Re: Are There Before/After Stats On The Castle Doctrine?

Posted: Tue Feb 17, 2009 7:19 pm
by Fangs
On top of that, I've heard that something like 70% of crimes are committed by 3% of the population*. Therefore "stopping" a couple hundred BGs per year may very well prevent 300-400 crimes.

*I totally made up those stats just now, but it was something to the effect of a small group causes the majority of crimes.

Re: Are There Before/After Stats On The Castle Doctrine?

Posted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 5:45 pm
by Abraham
Thanks all.

I've also wondered if country dwellers are less preyed upon (burglarized, invaded) proportionally than typical, suburban folks?

Re: Are There Before/After Stats On The Castle Doctrine?

Posted: Wed Feb 18, 2009 5:57 pm
by seamusTX
Affluent suburbs are the safest parts of the U.S. on a per-capita basis.

The most dangerous places to live are poor neighborhoods of large cities, for the most part. There are a few very dangerous smaller towns like East St. Louis, Illinois, that are special cases.

Rural areas are also pretty safe. The small population makes the few violent crimes greater per-capita.

Your life and well-being are not endangered by some lunatic who kills his ex-wife and her family, but such an event really boosts the murder rate for a small town or rural county.

- Jim