By Mark T. Berg, Ethan M. Rogers and Hannah Rochford

Background

Describe trends in perpetrator characteristics and firearm use in pediatric homicides across the United States.

Methods

Multiply-imputed data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s 1976–2020 Supplementary Homicide Reports were used to estimate perpetrator characteristics (sex, age, and relationship to victim) and firearm use in pediatric homicides. Descriptive analyses were stratified by victim age group, sex, race, and five-year periods.

Results

Family members were the most common perpetrators of infant and toddler (ages 0–4) and child (ages 5–12) homicides, whereas acquaintances accounted for the majority of adolescent (ages 13–19) homicides. Perpetrator characteristics vary across victim sex and race, particularly among adolescents. Despite overall stability, there were changes in perpetrator characteristics from 1976 to 2020. There was a sustained increase in the proportion of homicides committed with a firearm. In 2016–2020, the proportion of firearm-involved homicides was an all-time high for infants and toddlers (14.8%), children (53.1%), and adolescent victims (88.5%).

Conclusions

Policy interventions that improve family stability and well-being may be most effective at preventing infant, toddler, and child homicides, whereas programs that target peer and community relationships, as well as policies that focus on firearm access, maybe more crucial for preventing adolescent homicides.

Injury Epidemiology volume 11, Article number: 37 (2024) 

By The Violence Policy Center

 Guns are rarely used to kill criminals or stop crimes. In 2019, across the nation there were only 316 justifiable homicides involving a private citizen using a firearm reported to the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program as detailed in its Supplementary Homicide Report (SHR). That same year, there were 9,610 criminal gun homicides tallied in the SHR. In 2019, for every justifiable homicide in the United States involving a gun, guns were used in 30 criminal homicides. And this ratio, of course, does not take into account the tens of thousands of lives ended in gun suicides or unintentional shootings that year. This report analyzes, on both the national and state levels, the use of firearms in justifiable homicides. It also details, using the best data available on the national level, the total number of times guns are used for self-defense by the victims of both attempted and completed violent crimes and property crimes whether or not the use of the gun by the victim resulted in a fatality. Key findings of this report, as detailed in its accompanying tables, include the following. JUSTIFIABLE HOMICIDES WITH A GUN COMPARED TO CRIMINAL GUN HOMICIDES n In 2019, there were only 316 justifiable homicides involving a gun. For the five-year period 2015 through 2019, there were only 1,453 justifiable homicides involving a gun. [For additional information see Table One: Firearm Justifiable Homicides by State, 2015-2019. In In 2019, 17 states reported no justifiable homicides (Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Iowa, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, and Wyoming). [For additional information see Table One: Firearm Justifiable Homicides by State, 2015-2019.] n In 2019 for every justifiable homicide in the United States involving a gun, guns were used in 30 criminal homicides. For the five-year period 2015 through 2019, for every justifiable homicide in the United States involving a gun, guns were used in 34 criminal homicides. [For additional information see Table Two: Circumstances for Homicides by Firearm, 2015-2019.] RELATIONSHIP OF PERSON KILLED TO SHOOTER IN JUSTIFIABLE HOMICIDES BY FIREARM n In 2019, 40.5 percent (128 of 316) of persons killed in a firearm justifiable homicide were known to the shooter, 38.9 percent (123) were strangers, and in 20.6 percent (65) the relationship was unknown. For the five-year period 2015 through 2019, 37.6 percent (546 of 1,453) of persons killed in a firearm justifiable homicide were known to the shooter, 44.0 percent (640) were strangers, and in 18.4 percent (267) the relationship was unknown. [For additional information see Table Three: Relationship of Person Killed to Shooter in Justifiable Homicides by Firearm, 2015-2019.] SEX OF SHOOTER IN JUSTIFIABLE HOMICIDES BY FIREARM n In 2019, of the 316 firearm justifiable homicides, 87.0 percent (275) were committed by men, 10.8 percent (34) were committed by women, and in seven cases (2.2 percent) the sex of the shooter was unknown. For the five-year period 2015 through 2019, of the 1,453 firearm justifiable homicides, 88.2 percent (1,282) were committed by men, 10.0 percent (145) were committed by women, and in 26 cases (1.8 percent) the sex of the shooter was unknown. [For additional information see Table Four: Sex of Shooter in Justifiable Homicides by Firearm, 2015-2019.] SEX OF SHOOTER AND PERSON KILLED IN JUSTIFIABLE HOMICIDES BY FIREARM n In 2019, of the 316 firearm justifiable homicides, 96.8 percent (306) of the persons shot and killed were men and 3.2 percent (10) were women. For the five-year period 2015 through 2019, of the 1,453 firearm justifiable homicides, 97.1 percent (1,411) of the persons shot and killed were men and 2.9 percent (42) were women. [For additional information see Table Five: Sex of Person Killed in Justifiable Homicides by Firearm, 2015-2019.] In 2019, 98.2 percent (270) of the persons killed by a male with a gun in a justifiable homicide were male and 1.8 percent (five) were female. For the five year period 2015 through 2019, 97.4 percent (1,249) of the persons killed by a male with a gun in a justifiable homicide were male and 2.6 percent (33) were female. [For additional information see Table Six: Sex of Shooter and Person Killed in Justifiable Homicides by Firearm, 2015-2019.] n In 2019, 85.3 percent (29) of the persons killed by a female with a gun in a justifiable homicide incident were male and 14.7 percent (five) were female. For the five-year period 2015 through 2019, 94.5 percent (137) of the persons killed by a female with a gun in a justifiable homicide incident were male and 5.5 percent (eight) were female. [For additional information see Table Six: Sex of Shooter and Person Killed in Justifiable Homicides by Firearm, 2015-2019.] RACE OF SHOOTER IN JUSTIFIABLE HOMICIDES BY FIREARM n In 2019, 48.7 percent (154) of the shooters who committed justifiable homicides were white, 47.5 percent (150) were Black, 0.6 percent (two) were Asian, and 3.2 percent (10) were of unknown race.7 For the five-year period 2015 through 2019, 46.5 percent (676) of the shooters who committed justifiable homicides were white, 48.0 percent (697) were Black, 2.5 percent (37) were Asian, 0.5 percent (seven) were American Indian/Alaskan Native, and 2.5 percent (36) were of unknown race. [For additional information see Table Seven: Race of Shooter in Justifiable Homicides by Firearm, 2015-2019.] RACE OF PERSON KILLED IN JUSTIFIABLE HOMICIDES BY FIREARM n In 2019, 41.1 percent (130) of persons killed with a gun in a justifiable homicide were white, 57.6 percent (182) were Black, 0.9 percent (three) were Asian, and 0.3 percent (one) were of unknown race. For the five-year period 2015 through 2019, 37.4 percent (543) of persons killed with a gun in a justifiable homicide were white, 60.8 percent (884) were Black, 1.0 percent (15) were Asian, 0.6 percent (eight) were American Indian/Alaskan Native, and 0.2 percent (three) were of unknown race. [For additional information see Table Eight: Race of Person Killed in Justifiable Homicides by Firearm, 2015-2019.] n In 2019, 70.1 percent (108) of the persons killed with a gun in a justifiable homicide by a white shooter were white, 28.6 percent (44) were Black, 0.6 percent (one) were Asian, and 0.6 percent (one) were of unknown race. For the five-year period 2015 through 2019, 67.0 percent (453) of the persons killed by white shooters were white, 30.3 percent (205) were Black, 1.5 percent (10) were Asian, 0.7 percent (five) were American Indian/Alaskan Native, and 0.4 percent (three) were of unknown race. [For additional information see Table Nine: Race of Shooter and Person Killed in Justifiable Homicides by Firearm, 2015-2019.] n In 2019, 10.7 percent (16) of the persons killed with a gun in a justifiable homicide by a Black shooter were white, 88.7 percent (133) were Black, and 0.7 percent (two) were Asian. For the five-year period 2015 through 2019, 9.0 percent (63) of the persons killed by Black shooters were white, 90.7 percent (632) were Black, and 0.3 percent (two) were Asian. [For additional information see Table Nine: Race of Shooter and Person Killed in Justifiable Homicides by Firearm, 2015-2019.] TYPES OF FIREARMS USED IN JUSTIFIABLE HOMICIDES n In 2019, firearms were used in 86.1 percent of justifiable homicides (316 of 367). Of these: 72.2 percent (228) were handguns; 1.9 percent (six) were shotguns; 4.4 percent (14) were rifles; 21.2 percent (67) were firearms, type not stated; and, 0.3 percent (one) were other gun. For the five-year period 2015 through 2019, firearms were used in 84.2 percent of justifiable homicide incidents (1,453 of 1,725). Of these: 74.4 percent (1,081) were handguns; 3.2 percent (47) were shotguns; 2.9 percent (42) were rifles; 19.1 percent (277) were firearms, type not stated; and, 0.4 percent (six) were other gun. [For additional information see Table Ten: Weapon Used in Justifiable Homicides, 2015-2019 and Table Eleven: Type of Firearms Used in Justifiable Homicides, 2015-2019.]    

Washington, DC: Violence Policy Center, 2023. 29p.

By Everytown Research and Policy

On average, more than once per day in the United States, a tragedy occurs where a perpetrator kills an intimate partner, and then dies by suicide themself. Of these incidents, 93 percent involved a gun, and 95 percent had women killed by their male partners. To document the circumstances and bring attention to the effects of these incidents, in 2024, Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund conducted focus groups with 43 survivors of intimate partner homicide-suicide. The focus group participants were people who survived an attempted intimate partner homicide-suicide, family members, and individuals closely involved with the incident. Through these survivor interviews, we show the importance of understanding the risk factors for intimate partner homicide-suicide and ensuring effective implementation of laws that disarm domestic abusers. The focus groups were approved by the Pearl IRB Institutional Review Board (IRB) to protect the rights, welfare, and confidentiality of participants. Participants in this study were recruited from Everytown for Gun Safety’s database of volunteers and through partner organizations that support survivors of gun violence. Participants received IRB-approved recruitment materials, such as the flyer with the study information, through email and text message. All participants signed a consent form, which included their rights, such as the ability to withdraw from the study at any time. In addition, the researchers provided mental health resources and a licensed clinician on staff with Everytown was on the call to provide emotional support for participants. Following the focus group, every participant received a $25 prepaid Mastercard gift card for their participation in the study. Before the focus groups, participants were asked to complete a survey with demographic and experience questions regarding their race, gender, sexuality, and geographic location in the United States. Participants then attended one of the five focus groups conducted by the researchers. Previous studies have shown that three focus groups are sufficient to capture nearly all themes. Thus, five focus groups provided an adequate sample size to identify a range of themes, and researchers documented theoretical saturation5 at this stage. A focus group methodology was chosen as the most appropriate means to explore gun violence survivors’ experiences and thoughts on trauma. This methodology involves asking a group of participants open-ended questions in a supportive environment that encourages people to share their experiences and views. There are many advantages to focus group research. The method can yield detailed, in-depth information to study social processes, provide insights into complex social phenomena, and facilitate openness among participants as they provide their language to describe their experiences—this is particularly relevant for survivors who share experiences of gun violence. Thus, the focus group approach was used to gain a deeper understanding of the intersections of gun violence and trauma. All focus groups were conducted by a trained researcher and a trauma-informed expert who has some training and experience in running focus groups. The focus groups were conducted and recorded on Zoom. Each participant was asked to rename themselves to protect their anonymity. Each session was also attended by an assistant who observed the focus group to aid in subsequent analysis. Focus groups lasted approximately one hour to one hour and 15 minutes. Data collected from the focus groups were professionally transcribed and then professionally analyzed using Nvivo qualitative coding software. A line-by-line analysis was completed to develop theoretical codes, and three to four focus groups were analyzed at a time to determine themes, categories, and connections across categories and themes. Following the approach of researchers Tiggemann, Gardiner, and Slater, each theme from the focus groups was rated on frequency, intensity, extensiveness, specificity, and level of agreement. These approaches subjected the data to a systematic analysis of themes and concepts.

Washington, DC: Everytown for Gun Safety, 2024.

By Brittni Lambing, Ron Frandsen, Jennifer Karberg, and Joseph Durso

The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (Brady Act) requires a background check on an applicant for a firearm purchase from a dealer who is a Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL). During the permanent Brady Act period, from 1999 through 2018, background checks were conducted on over 237 million applicants for firearm transfers or permits. During this period, nearly 3.5 million applications for firearm transfers or permits were denied by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) or by state and local agencies. This report summarizes the number of applications for firearm transfers and permits, denials that resulted from background checks, reasons for denial, rates of denial, appeals of denials, and arrests of denied persons during the permanent Brady Act period. Statistics are presented at the FBI, state, and local levels. The report also provides a summary of significant changes in federal and state laws and regulations related to firearm sales. Statistical highlights are presented in the body of the report, and complete details are included in an appendix.

St. Louis, MO: Regional Justice Information Service (REJIS), 2024. 29p.

By Alysson Gatens

Illinois’ firearm restraining orders, known in other states as “red flag laws” or “extreme risk protection orders,” are civil orders that temporarily remove firearms from individuals who are a potential danger to themselves or others. These laws aim to prevent firearm injury through a removal of means from persons experiencing a temporary crisis. Data suggest firearm restraining orders have been infrequently employed in Illinois since the law’s enactment in 2019. Nationally, initial research suggests that these types of laws are associated with reductions in firearm suicide. However, national findings have not conclusively shown a significant reduction in firearm assaults attributable to these laws. As the majority of these laws have been passed relatively recently, more research is needed as data become available on their usage and outcomes.

Chicago: Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority, 2022. 14p.

By Julien Joly and Aline Shaban

The sources of illicit small arms in West Africa are multiple and evolving, and not limited to the diversion of international transfers. In terms of local sources, the unlicensed artisanal production of firearms has been a recurrent challenge for member states of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). To support governments in addressing this challenge, the Survey conducted a general assessment of artisanal arms production in the ECOWAS region and the main regulatory approaches adopted by states to address their proliferation. This paper aims to stimulate discussion and the exchange of information on good practices among stakeholders to counter the proliferation and illicit use of small arms in West Africa. Key findings - Craft firearm production has deep cultural and economic roots in West Africa and serves different societal needs— and different uses—than industrial firearm production. Demand for craft-produced weapons is dependent on local dynamics. Craft firearms are no longer exclusively rudimentary items. In some instances, their sophistication is comparable to industrially made weapons equipped with automatic and semi-automatic mechanisms. The current regulatory framework for firearm production in West Africa, mandated by the ECOWAS Convention on Small Arms and Light Weapons, Their Ammunition and Other Related Materials, does not distinguish between industrial and craft production, contributing to poor enforcement by the authorities, as well as low awareness and regulation avoidance among craft producers. In addition, the legal provisions often fail to take into account the firing mechanism, which is essential for determining a firearm’s lethality and type of use. Despite the unclear regulatory environment, artisanal producers in West Africa have shown a willingness to professionalize and regularize their work. If national authorities can refine legislative frameworks to reflect actual craft production practices and products, this willingness could serve as a basis for improved cooperation, record-keeping, and marking practices that closely resemble factory-made firearms. Today, craft weapons in the region range from rudimentary hunting weapons to sophisticated copies of self-loading rifles (Assanvo, 2017; Nowak and Gsell, 2018, p. 3). In light of this, craft firearms can offer criminals, insurgent groups, and private citizens a viable alternative to industrial weapons (Hays and Jenzen-Jones, 2018, p. 36). Due to the clandestine—and lucrative—nature of their production, however, regulating the sector presents considerable challenges. Although the ECOWAS Convention provides a basis for the control of local firearm production in West Africa, it does not determine whether the manufacture of craft firearms should be considered separately or together with the manufacture of indus trial weapons. In practice, most national legislation suggests that legal provisions relating to licensing, marking, and record-keeping apply to all manufacturers indiscriminately. Nevertheless, due to technical and financial limitations, craft producers often fail to comply with these provisions, and may be pushed further into the covert side of the arms trade. With a view to informing artisanal firearms control policy, this Briefing Paper provides an overview of craft production dynamics in West Africa and explores the different approaches taken by ECOWAS member states to regulate their production

Geneva, SWIT: Small Arms Survey, 2023. 16p.

By : Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

* Suicide was identified using ICD-10 underlying cause-of-death codes U03, X60–X84, and Y87.0. Firearm-involved suicide was identified using ICD-10 underlying cause-of-death codes X72–X74.† Homicide was identified using ICD-10 underlying cause-of-death codes U01–U02, X85–Y09, and Y87.1. Firearm-involved homicide was identified using ICD-10 underlying cause-of-death codes U01.4 and X93–X95.

Top

In 2022, among persons aged ≥10 years, the percentage of suicide deaths involving a firearm was lowest among persons aged 25–44 years (47.4%) and highest among persons aged ≥65 years (70.6%). The percentage of homicide deaths that involved a firearm was highest among persons aged 10–24 years and then decreased with age, from 92.2% among those aged 10–24 years to 44.5% among those aged ≥65 years.

MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2024;73:828. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm7337a3

By Jason Theis,  Katherine Hoops, Marisa Booty,  Paul Nestadt, Cassandra Crifasi

Introduction: In the United States, firearm suicide represents a major cause of preventable, premature death among veterans. The purpose of this systematic review was to characterize the body of literature on veteran firearm suicide and identify areas for future research, which may facilitate the development of firearm suicide interventions in Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and non–Veterans Health Administration clinical settings.

Materials and Methods: All randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental, naturalistic, observational, and case study designs published between January 1, 1990, and February 21, 2019, were included in our review. Following title and abstract review, 65 papers were included in our full-text review and 37 studies were included in our analysis. We based our approach on a modification of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Studies were grouped into broad, non-mutually exclusive categories: (1) heterogeneity of datasets and veteran status determination for inclusion, (2) service histories, (3) firearm ownership, storage, behaviors, and risk perceptions, (4) patient and clinician attitudes toward firearm restriction interventions, (5) firearm suicide risk factors by study population, and (6) assessments of clinical firearm interventions.

Results: This body of literature consists predominately of cross-sectional studies with mixed definitions and validation of veteran status, which revealed a high concordance of increased risk of firearm suicide compared with nonveterans. Veterans have higher rates of firearm ownership than the general population, primarily citing personal protection as the reason for gun ownership. Veterans often exhibit risky firearm usage and storage behaviors but tend to favor measures that limit access to firearms by at-risk individuals. Despite this, there remains persistent hesitation among clinicians to screen and counsel veterans on firearm safety.

Conclusions: This systematic review highlights an urgent need to produce higher quality evidence and new data with standard definitions that are critical to inform clinical practice and enhance public health measures to reduce firearm suicide among veterans

Military Medicine, Volume 186, Issue 5-6, May-June 2021, Pages e525–e536,

By Jessica H. Beard , Shannon Trombley, Tia Walker, Leah Roberts3, Laura Partain4, Jim MacMillan5 and Jennifer Midberry

Background: Firearm violence is an intensifying public health problem in the United States. News reports shape the way the public and policymakers understand and respond to health threats, including firearm violence. To better understand how firearm violence is communicated to the public, we aimed to determine the extent to which firearm violence is framed as a public health problem on television news and to measure harmful news content as identified by firearm-injured people.

Methods: This is a quantitative content analysis of Philadelphia local television news stories about firearm violence using a database of 7,497 clips. We compiled a stratified sample of clips aired on two randomly selected days/months from January to June 2021 from the database (n = 192 clips). We created a codebook to measure public health frame elements and to assign a harmful content score for each story and then coded the clips. Characteristics of stories containing episodic frames that focus on single shooting events were compared to clips with thematic frames that include a broader social context for violence.

Results: Most clips employed episodic frames (79.2%), presented law enforcement officials as primary narrators (50.5%), and included police imagery (79.2%). A total of 433 firearm-injured people were mentioned, with a mean of 2.8 individuals shot included in each story. Most of the firearm-injured people featured in the clips (67.4%) had no personal information presented apart from age and/or gender. The majority of clips (84.4%) contained at least one harmful content element. The mean harmful content score/clip was 2.6. Public health frame elements, including epidemiologic context, root causes, public health narrators and visuals, and solutions were missing from most clips. Thematic stories contained significantly more public health frame elements and less harmful content compared to episodic stories.

Conclusions: Local television news produces limited public health coverage of firearm violence, and harmful content is common. This reporting likely compounds trauma experienced by firearm-injured people and could impede support for effective public health responses to firearm violence. Journalists should work to minimize harmful news content and adopt a public health approach to reporting on firearm violence.

Beard et al. BMC Public Health, 2024.     

By Alex R. Piquero, John K. Roman

In 2020, the US experienced the largest 1-year increase in homicide since 1960. The spike began in the first few months of the year, accelerating during the COVID-19 pandemic, emergency measures, the murder of George Floyd, and social protests.1 Three additional observations are relevant. First, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported that the homicide increase in 2020 was due to firearm injuries. While the overall homicide rate increased 28.4%, the firearm homicide rate increased 34.6%.2 Second, the spike in violence was concentrated within certain demographic groups. CDC researchers found 19 384 victims of firearms homicide in 2020.3 Of those victims, 61% were Black individuals, and they experienced firearm homicide at 14 times the rate of White indviduals in 2020. This racial disparity does not exist for other types of violence.4 Third, the largest increases in death by firearm homicide were for Black men aged between 10 and 44 years old

JAMA Network Open. 2024;7(5):e2412946. doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.12946

By Rebecca F. Wilson, Sasha Mintz, Janet M. Blair, Carter J. Betz, Abby Collier, and Katherine A. Fowler

In the United States, unintentional injury is the fourth leading cause of death among infants (i.e., children aged <1 year) and is the top cause of death among children and adolescents aged 1–17 years; firearms are a leading injury method. Unsecured firearms (e.g., unlocked and loaded) are associated with risk for unintentional childhood firearm injury death. Data recorded during 2003–2021 by the National Violent Death Reporting System (NVDRS) from 49 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico were used to characterize unintentional firearm injury deaths of U.S. infants, children, and adolescents aged 0–17 years (referred to as children in this report). NVDRS identified 1,262 unintentional firearm injury deaths among children aged 0–17 years: the largest percentage (33%) of these deaths were among children aged 11–15 years, followed by 29% among those aged 0–5 years, 24% among those aged 16–17 years, and 14% among persons aged 6–10 years. Overall, 83% of unintentional firearm injury deaths occurred among boys. The majority (85%) of victims were fatally injured at a house or apartment, including 56% in their own home. Approximately one half (53%) of fatal unintentional firearm injuries to children were inflicted by others; 38% were self-inflicted. In 9% of incidents, it was unknown whether the injury was self- or other-inflicted. Approximately two thirds (67%) of shooters were playing with or showing the firearm to others when it discharged. Overall, firearms used in unintentional injury deaths were often stored loaded (74%) and unlocked (76%) and were most commonly accessed from nightstands and other sleeping areas (30%). Unintentional firearm injury deaths of children are preventable. Secured firearm storage practices (e.g., storing firearms locked, unloaded, and separate from ammunition) have been identified as protective factors against child firearm injuries and deaths, underscoring the importance of policymakers, health care professionals (e.g., pediatricians), and others partnering with parents, caregivers, and firearm owners to promote secure firearm storage.  

United States, Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 2023, 8pg