LOL, Yeah, those minor number of occurrences are justifiable fear mongering to justify taking ALL firearms owners rights away.

Lets see, taken in the context of reality, these numbers by the VPC included people who had a permit to buy or own, and carry, so what were the actual details in total as the VPC never, ever, uses partial data or statements to justify their position, ROTFLMFAO yeah they do, all the time.

Shall we even go into the real issue of risk here as we are talking about concealed carry?
As for crimes of the concealed carry license, many by inference seem to want everyone to believe that a revoked license means the license holder committed a violent crime using a firearm when the facts or circumstantial evidence prove otherwise. Lets look at http://licgweb.doacs.state.fl.us/stats/cw_monthly.html for Florida’s actual data.

Today there approx 1.7 million licenses granted (not the total, that is higher) of which 5,250 have ever been revoked, 591 reinstated, for an average of 211 revoked per year for any reason (1987 to today). Of those revoked only 167 or .009% of license holders had utilized a weapon in a crime or just over 7.5 per year. Now referencing the FBI UCR data and multiple studies, we see that a firearm is fired between 8-15% of the time it is used in a crime.

The 2008 FBI UCR http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2008/offenses/violent_crime/index.html In 2008, offenders used firearms in 66.9 percent of the Nation’s murders, 43.5 percent of robberies, and 21.4 percent of aggravated assaults. (Weapon data are not collected for forcible rape offenses.) (See Expanded Homicide Data Table 7, Robbery Table 3, and Aggravated Assault Table.) which equals approx 381,000 violent crimes reported with a firearm.

Now the only ones qualified by the anti's only hit their target a total of 25% at the high end of the time. Do the numbers and wow, those studies closely mirror the actual murders by firearms 9,484 and injuries 70,000 reported in hospitals. Of course it doesn’t account for those who didn’t seek treatment, after all as per the 1990’s Chicago police study between 60-76% http://www.popcenter.org/problems/drive_by_shooting/PDFs/Block_and_Block_1993.pdf of all shooters and injured were both involved in criminal activity. Nor does that dispel the USDOJ Gang activity report 2008 showing up to 80% of all violent crime is committed by gang members/career criminals http://www.justice.gov/ndic/pubs32/32146/index.htm#Contents.
So knowing those percentages to be true, means that 8% to15% chance those 7.5 who use a firearm will fire a shot or 1.1 persons or that a 25% chance

http://www.virginiacops.org/Articles/Shooting/Combat.htm
http://www.theppsc.org/Staff_Views/Aveni/OIS.pdf
they will hit the target = .2525 people. Divide that by the entire population of Florida Census Bureau estimate 18.3 million = .00000001% chance of you being shot by a concealed license holder. Wow such astronomical odds and unfortunately for you, that trend is consistent throughout any state with concealed carry.

Of course we have the JAMA that identifies that the 700,000 physicians in the US annually make mistakes leading to 98,000 deaths or an average of .14 per physician.

Is a .14 average death per physician mistakes a larger risk than an average .00000001 for concealed carry license holders. Yeah, sure is, in fact it approaches a million times more likely to be harmed by a physician than a concealed license carrier. So guess the VPC is sucking hind tit again!

A single numerical value is statistically meaningless. For a meaningful evaluation of data, the number of concealed deadly weapons permit holders who have committed criminal homicide must be compared with the total number of concealed deadly weapons permit holders, to establish the percentage that commits criminal homicide. This may be compared to the percentage of the adult population as a whole who commits criminal homicide acts. It is also useful to establish the means by which a homicide was committed; unless a concealed deadly weapons permit holder used a firearm that he or she had been legally carrying due to having a permit to commit a homicide, rather than a non-concealed firearm and rather than a non-firearm implement, then it is entirely dishonest to suggest that the murderer's concealed deadly weapon permit enabled the act of homicide.

The Violence Policy Center has been known to rely upon dishonesty and public "confusion" as a means of advancing their agenda. They should not be considered to be a reliable source of information.

I've never understood the gun control crowd, the one place I deviate from classic progressive ideas.

But to cite an average of less than 50 deaths annually is pretty weak.

Tasers kill more people when used by trained cops.

So your statistic, even if true, defeats your argument. Cars, tobacco, flu, malaria, acetaminophen, etc. kill waaaaay more people, even when used as directed.

And shoot, this should be obvious by now, but allowing the government and criminals to be the only ones to have weapons puts those weapons precisely into the hands most likely to misuse them, either "officially" or in a crime.

An individual reading of this report from another forum conducted cursory research showing the claims of the Violence Policy Center to be flawed and dishonest: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=294892&mesg_id=295438

I think this article fails to mention how many police officers committed and been convicted of felony with their fire arms. Maybe that nonsense should also be used to justify des-arming police. I also think this article purposefully miss-represent NRA's claim about license holders vs. criminals as though NRA promised that license holders are perfect human been. The fact is license holder commit 10% or less felony (per Texas Department of Public Safety statistics) do indicate that license holders are better citizens. Licenses holders by no mean the ‘perfect’ citizens.