For what it's worth, a "deferred prosecution agreement" is going to show on
those stats as a dismissal, as distinguished from a deferred adjudication,which would
probably show as a probated sentence. In such cases, the prosecutor has a nolo plea
in his file which will travel to the court's file if there is any violation of the
terms.
Deferred prosecution is sometimes a flakey case or somebody too important for
comfortable prosecution but it might also be a prosecutorial attitude toward firearms
offenses.
This is speculation. But so are the stats, and that's my point. Speculation
no matter which side you are on.
Steve Russell
> Phil Lee wrote:
>
> > The claim about CHL holders of Texas having a higher arrest rate than
> > average Texans is false. Take a look at the article below.
>
> The VPC cherry-picked the data and cited "weapons-related" arrests,
> rather than all arrests.
>
> http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/texaskey.htm
>
> # In 1996 Texas concealed handgun license holders were arrested for
> weapon-related offenses at a rate 22 percent higher than that of the
> general population of Texas aged 21 years and older.
>
> # In the first six months of 1997 the weapon-related offense arrest rate
> among Texas concealed handgun license holders was more than twice as
> high as that of the general population of Texas aged 21 years and older.
>
>
> As I wrote earlier, I believe it's a "correct" statement, but misleading
> because it ignores the circumstances and confusion surrounding the first
> two years of the Texas CHL law, before an extensive bill was enacted in
> 1997 (effective 9/1/97) to clarify the remaining issues. It also has an
> obvious fallacy: people legally carrying weapons are more likely to get
> arrested for weapons violations, because they aren't worried about
> getting caught and can more easily get tripped up by a misunderstanding
> of the law (either by the CHL holder or law enforcement).
>
> The confusion appears to have been primarily on the part of law
> enforcement, given the high rate of dismissals and the woefully low
> conviction rate. I have lost the original data, but dug up the summary
> information this afternoon:
>
> The numbers relevant to this discussion (for 1996 - 1998):
>
> Arrests Convictions Dismissals
> Felony UCW 70 8 35
> Misdemeanor UCW 112 25 41
> UCW by CHL hldr 191 36 62
> Dischrg Firearm 16 4 4
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Totals 389 73 142
>
> That table may look bad if your email agent doesn't use a
> non-proportional font.
>
> (UCW is "Unlawfully Carrying Weapon", a reference to several sections i
> Chapter 46 of the Texas Penal Code)
>
> Convictions were reported for only 19% of the arrests, while charges
> were dismissed in 36% of the arrests. 45% of the arrests had no
> reported disposition at all.
>
> The conviction rate is especially bad for felony UCW, probably because
> the confusion in law enforcement until the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Cod
> was updated (carrying a handgun into a restaurant that served alcoholic
> beverages was a felony, and is still so for non-CHL holders).
>
> I don't have arrest or conviction data for non-CHL holders during this
> period, so I can't make a direct comparison.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
> http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof
>
>
_______________________________________________
To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof
