Though it's still not a sufficient correlation by itself either. More info is needed. Was the number of permits the only thing that changed that could have led to the decline in crime? Maybe other measures were taken like more police patrols, CCTV, shrink of population size and so on. So while it's not necessarily wrong to say that more carried weapons mean less crime it also is no proof. We have to look at the whole picture to see what influences what.

Well if you look at his previous study based on his faked research people found things in the real figures which actually did match to the apparent changes in crime trends.
But it wasn't guns it was things like the illegal drugs market.

I seem to recall seeing some UK-based research that suggested that the clearest correlation for crime statistics in general (dating back over many years, rather than just cherry-picking recent data) was with youth unemployment. The point is though that with data that has varied by as much as the US violent crimes figures (see below for US homicides), it is highly unlikely that any single factor will explain variations. Putting the recent decline in the US violent crime rate down to 'concealed carry' is simply untenable, without an explanation for why the rate varied so much before the relevant legislation was introduced. The data is all over the place, and accordingly one has to assume that it wouldn't have stayed steady without the new legislation.

http://i958.photobucket.com/albums/a...ps7beeb644.png

(chart from here http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/...est_media.html Original data from US government figures)

Pictures or it didn't happen.

'Crime in the UK is currently at its lowest level in 30 years, having decreased dramatically from its peak in 1995. For example, 4.2 million violent crimes were counted in 1995 compared to 1.94 million in 2011/2012.'

As we have some of the most stringent gun controls of any nation, one must conclude that strict firearm control and reduced possession leads to a significant reduction in violent crime.

Or could there, as others have pointed out, be other factors involved? Maybe one should seriously doubt US research carried out by a known gun advocate funded by the NRA? A simplistic view of a very complex situation.