Violent Crime Keeps Dropping as Carry Expands
The United States is tracking toward another historic decline in violent crime rates, directly contradicting anti-gun advocacy groups' central warning about permitless carry laws. Since the Supreme Court's 2022 Bruen decision eliminated may-issue permitting in most states, gun owners predicted violent crime would remain stable or decline. Data now confirms that prediction. More people carrying daily has not triggered the escalation of arguments into shootings that groups like Sandy Hook Promise warned would follow constitutional carry expansion.
Key Details
- Violent crime rates are declining to levels not seen in decades
- The downward trend continued after Bruen loosened carry restrictions across the country
- Anti-gun groups' core argument—that more armed citizens equals more armed conflict—has found no support in crime statistics
- Sandy Hook Promise has continued making claims about rising violence that contradict available data
Why It Matters for Gun Owners
This data collapse removes one of the strongest remaining arguments anti-gun legislators use to justify carry restrictions and licensing schemes. For gun owners in states considering or implementing permitless carry, these numbers provide legal ammunition in court challenges to remaining permitting regimes. Constitutional carry advocates can now point to real-world evidence that expanded carry access does not correlate with increased violent crime—a critical point in any Second Amendment litigation post-Bruen. For those in restrictive states, this data strengthens arguments that may-issue permitting serves no public safety purpose and should be eliminated. The trend also validates the underlying assumption that defensive gun ownership and lawful carry expand, not contract, the margin of public safety.
DownRange Analysis
The Bruen decision was based partly on text and history, but the real test was practical: would constitutional carry actually cause the social breakdown its opponents predicted? The crime data suggests it will not. This matters because it removes a major empirical claim from anti-gun litigation strategy. Courts reviewing remaining carry restrictions will find it harder to claim that licensing schemes serve a compelling state interest in public safety when violent crime declines as carry expands. The pattern also isolates Sandy Hook Promise and similar groups as relying on hypothetical harms rather than observed ones—a disadvantage in a courtroom focused on evidence. Gun owners should expect this data to appear in the next generation of carry litigation, particularly in states like California, New York, and Hawaii that are still fighting Bruen compliance.
