I really like the theory of constitutional carry -- that abolishing licenses will work just fine, because the only people that shouldn't carry a gun are probably not legally authorized to own one. Of course, theory is good, but an ounce of experience is worth a pound of theory. There are, at least to my mind, legitimate concerns that at least some people who are legally authorized to own a firearms probably should not carry a gun: those with short tempers; those who spend a lot of time getting drunk in public places; people with mental illness problems that have not yet led to an adjudication that disarms them.

The University of Alaska Justice Statistical Analysis Center has a new report out examining firearm use in crimes in Alaska and the U.S. as a whole for the period 1985-2012, and the results are quite interesting. Until 1994, Alaska was an open carry state -- and concealed carry was prohibited. From 1994 to 2004, Alaska had a progressively more liberal shall-issue concealed carry permit law. Since 2004, it has been constitutional carry. And what happened during that period?





Murder rates in the U.S. fell, with both guns and non-guns. Murder rates in Alaska also fell, with both guns and non-guns. Even more intriguing -- the gun murder rate in Alaska fell faster than the non-gun murder rate -- not at all what you would expect from a bunch of manly men (we know about you Last Frontier sorts) carrying guns with no restrictions!





I would be curious to know what results we get from Arizona, Wyoming, which also went constitutional carry in recent years. At first glance, Alaska makes me less concerned about constitutional carry.