Here's my guess as to what will happen: some specifications will show that CCW decreases crime, others will show that it increases it, others will show that it has no effect, and all will be equally plausible.
That's why I think Gary Kleck has the right approach to the gun control debate. Trying to figure out whether gun rights (CCW as well as others) on net increase or decrease crime is a fruitless excercise, so arguments should instead be based on principle.
"Trying to figure out whether gun rights (CCW as well as others) on net increase or decrease crime is a fruitless excercise, so arguments should instead be based on principle."
Precisely. The testimonial of a Social Security recipient or a handicapped person as to their freedom of movement issues positively effected by CCW should be weighed into any equation. These "scientific studies" are highly suspect at best.
I think they are still useful for countering arguments by the gun grabbers that CCW will lead to rampant increases in gun violence. After all, look at the wistful headline for the story from the Slimes:
More Guns in Citizens' Hands Can Worsen Crime, Study Says
They lead off with this aspect of the study, even though it is by far the weakest of Donohue's premises. So we still need factual information to counter the slop spewed out by the Brady Center, because too many swing voters, frankly, don't understand the underlying prinicples of limited government and enumerated rights.