By Rosanna Smart

Background

Despite growing evidence about how state-level firearm regulations affect overall rates of injury and death, little is known about whether potential harms or benefits of firearm laws are evenly distributed across demographic subgroups. In this systematic review, we synthesized available evidence on the extent to which firearm policies produce differential effects by race and ethnicity on injury, recreational or defensive gun use, and gun ownership or purchasing behaviors.

Main body

We searched 13 databases for English-language studies published between 1995 and February 28, 2023 that estimated a relationship between firearm policy in the USA and one of eight outcomes, included a comparison group, evaluated time series data, and provided estimated policy effects differentiated by race or ethnicity. We used pre-specified criteria to evaluate the quality of inference and causal effect identification. By policy and outcome, we compared policy effects across studies and across racial/ethnic groups using two different ways to express effect sizes: incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and rate differences. Of 182 studies that used quasi-experimental methods to evaluate firearm policy effects, only 15 estimated policy effects differentiated by race or ethnicity. These 15 eligible studies provided 57 separate policy effect comparisons across race/ethnicity, 51 of which evaluated interpersonal violence. In IRR terms, there was little consistent evidence that policies produced significantly different effects for different racial/ethnic groups. However, because of different baseline homicide rates, similar relative effects for some policies (e.g., universal background checks) translated into significantly greater absolute differences in homicide rates among Black compared to white victims.

Conclusions

The current literature does not support strong conclusions about whether state firearm policies differentially benefit or harm particular racial/ethnic groups. This largely reflects limited attention to these questions in the literature and challenges with detecting such effects given existing data availability and statistical power. Findings also emphasize the need for additional rigorous research that adopts a more explicit focus on testing for racial differences in firearm policy effects and that assesses the quality of race/ethnicity information in firearm injury and crime datasets.

Inj Epidemiol. 2023; 10: 67.

By Daniel S. Nagin

Do states with more guns have higher rates of fatal police shootings? This article uses a validated measure of firearm availability (the percentage of suicides committed with a firearm) to examine the relationship between gun proliferation and fatal police shootings. It expands on existing research to include (1) measures of access to Level I and II trauma centers, (2) interpretation of the findings from the lenses of “statistical prediction,” and (3) tests for structural differences between models for black descendants versus nonblack decedents. Findings confirm the correlation between statewide prevalence of gun ownership and fatal police shootings for both all decedents and unarmed decedents. It provides partial support for “statistical prediction” by police and finds that greater access to trauma centers is associated with lower rates of citizen deaths. The analysis suggests a far broader range of policy options for saving lives, such as better enforcement of legal restrictions on firearm possession, than focusing solely on policing systems.

The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social ScienceVolume 687, Issue 1, January 2020, Pages 49-57

By Charles C Lanfear , Rebecca Bucci , David S Kirk , Robert J Sampson

Importance: The past quarter-century has seen both sharp declines and increases in firearm violence in the United States. Yet, little is known about the age of first exposure to firearm violence and how it may differ by race, sex, and cohort.

Objective: To examine race, sex, and cohort differences in exposure to firearm violence in a representative longitudinal study of children who grew up in periods with varying rates of firearm violence in the United States and to examine spatial proximity to firearm violence in adulthood.

Design, setting, and participants: This population-based representative cohort study included multiple cohorts of children followed-up from 1995 through 2021 in the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN). Participants included Black, Hispanic, and White respondents from 4 age cohorts of Chicago, Illinois, residents, with modal birth years of 1981, 1984, 1987, and 1996. Data analyses were conducted from May 2022 to March 2023.

Main outcomes and measures: Firearm violence exposure, including age when first shot, age when first saw someone shot, and past-year frequency of fatal and nonfatal shootings within 250 m of residence.

Results: There were 2418 participants in wave 1 (in the mid-1990s), and they were evenly split by sex, with 1209 males (50.00%) and 1209 females (50.00%). There were 890 Black respondents, 1146 Hispanic respondents, and 382 White respondents. Male respondents were much more likely than female respondents to have been shot (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 4.23; 95% CI, 2.28-7.84), but only moderately more likely to have seen someone shot (aHR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.27-1.72). Compared with White individuals, Black individuals experienced higher rates of all 3 forms of exposure (been shot: aHR, 3.05; 95% CI, 1.22-7.60; seen someone shot: aHR, 4.69; 95% CI, 3.41-6.46; nearby shootings: adjusted incidence rate ratio [aIRR], 12.40; 95% CI, 6.88-22.35), and Hispanic respondents experienced higher rates of 2 forms of violence exposure (seen someone shot: aHR, 2.59; 95% CI, 1.85-3.62; nearby shootings: aIRR, 3.77; 95% CI, 2.08-6.84). Respondents born in the mid-1990s who grew up amidst large declines in homicide but reached adulthood during city and national spikes in firearm violence in 2016 were less likely to have seen someone shot than those born in the early 1980s who grew up during the peak of homicide in the early 1990s (aHR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.35-0.69). However, the likelihood of having been shot did not significantly differ between these cohorts (aHR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.40-1.63).

Conclusions and relevance: In this longitudinal multicohort study of exposure to firearm violence, there were stark differences by race and sex, yet the extent of exposure to violence was not simply the product of these characteristics. These findings on cohort differences suggest changing societal conditions were key factors associated with whether and at what life stage individuals from all race and sex groups were exposed to firearm violence.

JAMA Network Open 6(5); 2023

By Ari Davis, Rose Kim, Cassandra Crifasi

Gun violence is an ongoing public health crisis in the United States that impacts the health and wellbeing of all of us. In 2020, during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. experienced an unprecedented spike in gun homicides. Many believed that this spike would be short-lived; levels of gun violence would subside as institutions effectively responded to the pandemic and people returned to their daily routines. This, unfortunately, was not the case. In 2021, for the second straight year, gun deaths reached the highest number ever recorded. Nearly 49,000 people died from gun violence in the U.S. in 2021. Each day, an average of 134 people died from gun violence—one death every 11 minutes. Gun homicides continued to rise in 2021, increasing 7.6% over the previous year. Gun suicides reached record levels, increasing 8.3%, the largest one-year increase recorded in over four decades. Guns, once again, were the leading cause of death among children and teens in 2021 accounting for more deaths than COVID-19, car crashes, or cancers. Coincident with the rise in gun-related deaths were record gun sales. Millions of first-time purchasers, including Black and Hispanic/Latino people, and women of all races and ethnicities, bought guns during the pandemic at unprecedented levels. Many of these purchasers were motivated by gun industry marketing claims that guns make you safer. Yet, this is far from the truth; gun ownership greatly increases the risk of dying by suicide and homicide. While it is too early to tell whether this surge in gun purchases contributed directly to the rise in gun violence the country is experiencing, we know that over the long run this influx of guns will only exacerbate the public health crisis of gun violence and worsen health disparities

Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions. Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health 2023. 45p.

Sarah Moshary, Bradley Shapiro & Sara Drango

This paper estimates consumer demand for firearms with the aim of predicting the likely impacts of firearm regulations on the number and types of guns in circulation. We first conduct a stated-choice-based conjoint analysis and estimate an individual-level demand model for firearms. We validate our estimates using aggregate moments from observational data. Next, we use our estimates to simulate changes in the number and types of guns in circulation under alternative regulations. Importantly, we find that bans or restrictions that specifically target “assault weapons” increase demand for handguns, which are associated with the vast majority of firearm-related violence. We provide distributions of consumer surplus under counterfactuals and discuss how those distributions could be useful for crafting policy.

Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), 2023. 

By Claire Boine , Michael Siegel and Abdine Maiga 

Background: Although gun owners overwhelmingly support violence prevention policies, they are hesitant to speak up publicly to advocate for these policies. We tested a series of communication messages on gun owners’ level of support for various firearm violence prevention policies and on their willingness to engage in gun violence prevention advocacy. Methods: We conducted three consecutive experiments, testing a total of thirteen messages on a sample of gun owners over 18 years old who live in the U.S. The first was a random experiment, the second a quasi-experiment, and the third a randomized control trial. The goal of having these varied methods was to develop messages applicable to different contexts with different levels of information about the audience. Results: The most effective message was a script showing respect for gun owners’ decisions to purchase a firearm and proposing a balanced policy roadmap to end gun violence, which led to an increase in gun owner’s willingness to engage in eight diferent advocacy activities. We also found a value-based message conveying loyalty to increase support for domestic violence related prohibitions and willingness to engage in advocacy for gun violence prevention policies. Conclusions: Public health professionals need to develop communication strategies that are aligned with gun owners’ values and that afrm respect for gun culture and for gun owners’ decisions to own a gun.

Injury Prevention. 9(30): 2022

By Michael Siegel

In 2017, there were 14,542 firearm-related homicide deaths in the United States. Despite constituting only 13% of the U.S. population, Black persons made up 59% of these victims. Many states have addressed the problem of firearm-related homicide by enacting stronger firearm laws. While many studies have already been conducted on the effectiveness of various firearm laws in reducing overall population homicide rates, the vast majority of these studies do not distinguish between victims of different races/ethnicity. In failing to do so, these studies assume that state-level firearm laws produce homogeneous effects, even while Black communities continue to bear the undue burden of firearm violence. The purpose of this research was to fill this critical gap by rigorously evaluating the differential impact of state-level firearm laws on homicide rates among White, Black, and Hispanic populations. This project sought to answer two major research questions: (1) Is there heterogeneity in the effect of different state firearm laws on homicide rates by race/ethnicity? (2) To what extent are any differences in the impact of firearm laws by race/ethnicity explained by contextual differences in homicide victimization across urban vs. non-urban settings, as opposed to differences among racial groups per se?

Report to the U.S. National Institute of Justice, 2020. 13p.

By Megan. E. Collins; Susa T. Parker; Thomas L. Scott; Charles F. Wellford

Information is limited on how firearms move from legal possession to illegal possession and use in criminal activities, largely because of data collection capacity and a lack of recent, exhaustive recovery data across jurisdictions. This article includes both an analysis of firearms trace data and prisoner interviews across multiple jurisdictions: New Orleans, Louisiana, Prince George’s County, Maryland, and Chicago, Illinois. Findings indicate that recoveries and trace successes vary across jurisdictions and by type of crime. Jurisdiction regulations were associated with the proportion of guns purchased in state and time to recovery but not with purchaser characteristics. Interviews from imprisoned offenders in two jurisdictions revealed the most common method of obtaining a crime gun was to steal it or buy it off the street.

New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 2017. 32p.

By David E. Olson, Don Stemen, Kaitlyn Foust, Cynthia Guzman, Lisa Jacobs, Sophia Juarez, Holly Michalak, Avery Pankratz, and Amanda Ward

Loyola University Chicago’s Center for Criminal Justice Research, Policy and Practice, through the support of the Joyce Foundation, completed the most comprehensive, detailed analysis of the sentencing of those convicted of firearm possession offenses in Illinois to date. These offenses do not involve the use of a firearm in the commission of a violent crime or the unlawful discharge of a firearm. Rather, these convictions are for the possession of a firearm by individuals not legally authorized to possess or carry a firearm because of their age, having a prior felony conviction, or not applying for and receiving a license to carry a concealed handgun. Depending on the factor(s) that make the possession of a firearm illegal, the legal classifications and possible sentences range from Class 4 felonies (the least serious felony) to Class X felonies (the most serious felonies other than first degree murder), and carry sentences ranging from probation for up to 30 months to 30 years in prison. Out of all the arrests and convictions in Illinois for firearm-related offenses over the past decade, 72% have been for firearm possession offenses while 28% have been for the use of a firearm in the commission of a violent crime or illegal discharge of a firearm. Despite the concern over firearm violence, and increasingly punitive laws surrounding illegal firearm possession offenses implemented over the past 15 years, the lack of objective, detailed research limits the ability of practitioners and policy makers to assess the efficacy and impact of these approaches.

Chicago: Loyola University Chicago, Center for Criminal Justice Research, Policy and Practice, 2021. 33p.

By John J. Donohue, Abhay Aneja and Kyle D. Weber

This paper uses more complete state panel data (through 2014) and new statistical techniques to estimate the impact on violent crime when states adopt right-to-carry (RTC) concealed handgun laws. Our preferred panel data regression specification, unlike the statistical model of Lott and Mustard that had previously been offered as evidence of crime-reducing RTC laws, both satisfies the parallel trends assumption and generates statistically significant estimates showing RTC laws increase overall violent crime. Our synthetic control approach also strongly confirms that RTC laws are associated with 13-15 percent higher aggregate violent crime rates ten years after adoption. Using a consensus estimate of the elasticity of crime with respect to incarceration of 0.15, the average RTC state would need to roughly double its prison population to offset the increase in violent crime caused by RTC adoption.

Cambridge, MA; National Bureau of Economic Research, 2018. 126p.

By Philip J. Cook and Jens Ludwig

The National Survey of Private Ownership of Firearms took place during November and December 1994 to gather information on the size, composition, and ownership of the gun stock in the United States; how and why guns are acquired; gun storage and carrying; and the defensive use of firearms against criminal attackers.

This national telephone survey used a list-assisted random-digit-dialing sampling method and produced a response rate of 44 percent or 59 percent, depending on the definition used. Results revealed that an estimated 192 working firearms are in private possession; about one-third of these are handguns. At least 40 percent of all handguns are semi-automatics. Only about 1 in 6 handguns have barrel lengths shorter than 3 inches. About one-fourth of adults personally own a firearm; this finding includes 42 percent of men and 9 percent of women. Gun ownership may be less popular among younger adults than among those ages 51 or older. Gun ownership is also most prevalent among middle-aged, middle-class white people from rural areas. Adults who have been arrested for a non-traffic offense are more likely to own a firearm than are other adults. In addition, about 10 percent of the adults own about 77 percent of the total stock of firearms. Overall, 46 percent of gun owners own some kind of gun primarily for protection against crime. Almost all owners report receiving some kind of instruction in the use of their firearms. About one in five of all gun-owning households keep a loaded and unlocked gun in the home. About one in six handguns are kept on the owner's person or in a motor vehicle. Estimates of defensive use of guns are similar to those of Kleck and Gertz, but survey-based estimates appear to be grossly in error for several reasons.

Washington, DC: Police Foundation, 1996. 112p.

By Abhay Aneja, John J. Donohue III and Alexandria Zhang

For over a decade, there has been a spirited academic debate over the impact on crime of laws that grant citizens the presumptive right to carry concealed handguns in public – so-called right-to-carry (RTC) laws. In 2004, the National Research Council (NRC) offered a critical evaluation of the “More Guns, Less Crime” hypothesis using county-level crime data for the period 1977-2000. 15 of the 16 academic members of the NRC panel essentially concluded that the existing research was inadequate to conclude that RTC laws increased or decreased crime. One member of the panel thought the NRC's panel data regressions showed that RTC laws decreased murder, but the other 15 responded by saying that “the scientific evidence does not support” that position.

We evaluate the NRC evidence, and improve and expand on the report’s county data analysis by analyzing an additional six years of county data as well as state panel data for the period 1979-2010. We also present evidence using both a more plausible version of the Lott and Mustard specification, as well as our own preferred specification (which, unlike the Lott and Mustard model presented in the NRC report, does control for rates of incarceration and police).

• More.....

  While we have considerable sympathy with the NRC’s majority view about the difficulty of drawing conclusions from simple panel data models and re-affirm its finding that the conclusion of the dissenting panel member that RTC laws reduce murder has no statistical support, we disagree with the NRC report’s judgment on one methodological point: the NRC report states that cluster adjustments to correct for serial correlation are not needed in these panel data regressions, but our randomization tests show that without such adjustments the Type 1 error soars to 22 - 73 percent.

  Our paper highlights some important questions to consider when using panel data methods to resolve questions of law and policy effectiveness. We buttress the NRC’s cautious conclusion regarding the effects of RTC laws by showing how sensitive the estimated impact of RTC laws is to different data periods, the use of state versus county data, particular specifications (especially the Lott-Mustard inclusion of 36 highly collinear demographic variables), and the decision to control for state trends.

Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2012. 109p.

By Topher L. McDougal, Daniel Montolio and Jurgen Brauer

This study represents an attempt to understand the U.S. firearms market – the largest in the world – in economic terms. A model of the underlying interplay of legal firearms supply and demand is a prerequisite for reliably evaluating the effectiveness of pertinent existing state and federal firearms policies, and to amend them as necessary. The stakes are high: compared to other nation-states, per capita firearms-related harm in the United States (including suicides and homicides) is exceptionally high and, within constitutional strictures, state and federal firearms policymakers increasingly view it as a major and pressing society-wide problem. Virtually all firearms in the U.S. are initially manufactured and sold legally. Solving a simultaneous equation model using the instrumental variable of natural disasters and employing a unique dataset of U.S. firearms prices and quantities, this paper models – we believe for the first time in the literature – the U.S. market supply of, and demand for, firearms. Encouragingly, we find that this market operates as any other would be expected to, with the notable exception that lagged nonmilitary firearms stocks generate new market demand in a positive feedback loop. We test as predictors of market performance federal firearms legislation as instances of policy, as well as of extraterritorial armed conflict, firearms industry concentration, crime, and technology gaps between U.S. and imported firearms. Except for the time-limited Federal Assault Weapons Ban (1994-2004), we find (restrictive) firearms legislation not to influence sales. We also find that acute external violent conflict and certain levels of violent crime, including homicides and mass shootings, drive up unit sales, and that higher industry concentrations in certain submarkets boost quantity supplied, suggesting economies of scale. Taken together, this study’s findings may provide some empirical support for firearms stock reduction programs to reduce the total volumes of civilian arms.

San Diego: Small Arms Data Observatory, 2020. 35p

By Yvon Dandurand

This literature review focuses on the role that firearms have in injuries, unintentional deaths, suicides, and violent crimes, especially in Canada; the report also examines role of firearm regulation in reducing such incidents and addresses other ways to promote the responsible use of guns. Survey research indicates that Canada's household rate of gun ownership is about 26 percent. Canada's rate is in the middle range of the countries studied.

Ottawa: Canadian Firearms Centre, Department of Justice Canada, 1998. 108p.

By Nils Duquet and Maarten Van Alstein

The Small Arms Survey … estimated civilian firearms ownership in Belgium as between 1.500.000 and 2.100.000 arms (of which 870.000 were said to be registered), an average of 17,2 firearms per 100 people. These estimates were based on a press communiqué of the Council of Ministers of Belgium (December 2005) and on articles in the Belgian press.1 Similar numbers also figured in the explanatory notes attached to the draft of a new Weapons Act which was tabled in the Belgian Federal Parliament in February 2006,2 and in a note published by the Groupe de Recherche et d’Information sur la Paix et la Sécurité (GRIP) in Brussels in June 2006, in the wake of the introduction of the new Belgian Weapons Act.3 However, although the estimate of 1.500.000 to 2.000.000 weapons became commonly used and widely quoted4 , it is not without its problems. Not least, the source and the method applied to arrive at this estimate remain unclear. Moreover, policy makers, stakeholders and the media do not consistently use this figure of 1.5 to 2 million guns. In some cases the figure is used to indicate the total number of guns (both legal and illegal), while in others it is quoted to refer to the number of illegal guns in circulation. Of course, because of their illegal nature, estimating the number of illegally held guns will always be a complicated exercise. In the course of a major research project undertaken by the Flemish Peace Institute on the trade, possession and use of firearms in Belgium, we were not able to find a satisfactory method, based on the available evidence, to calculate an estimate of the total number of privately owned guns in Belgium (legally plus illegally held firearms, the latter including firearms owned by criminals and guns irregularly held by citizens). The statistical information on which to base an adequate estimate is simply not available. For the moment, the reality is that nobody knows how many firearms are privately owned in Belgium.

Brussels: Flemish Peace Institute, 2019. 23p.

By Quitterie de Labbey, Nils Duquet and Lore Smets

Project DIVERT is an international research project to contribute to the fight against illegal firearms markets in Europe. To this end, the project has investigated various methods by which legal firearms are diverted and become illegal. Because most illicitly held firearms in the European Union have a legal history, generating a better intelligence picture on firearms diversion is critical. It can help better understand the original transition of weapons into the illegal cycle and develop effective tools to stop such spillovers. This report examines firearms diversion through theft. It is part of a three-part series exploring previously under-researched diversion methods in the EU. Two additional studies deal with firearms diversion through fraud and non-regularization. We define the theft of firearms or ammunition as the deliberate act to take and remove firearms and/or ammunition of personal property with intent to deprive the legal owner from it.

Brussels: Flemish Peace Institute, 2021. 132p.