By Kristen Rand. Additional research was provided by Kaya van der Horst

Fifty caliber sniper rifles are used by militaries around the world and can penetrate armor plating and shoot down aircraft on take-off and landing, but can be purchased under federal law in the U.S. as easily as a single-shot hunting rifle. The study’s release comes the day before the U.S Supreme Court will hear oral arguments by the government of Mexico in its lawsuit against gunmaker Smith & Wesson, another manufacturer of military bred weaponry utilized by the cartels.

VPC Government Affairs Director Kristen Rand states, “Fifty caliber sniper rifles are the guns most coveted by the cartels and most feared by Mexican law enforcement. The VPC has warned for years about the unique threat these anti-materiel guns present. Now they are being used to inflict maximum harm in Mexico. The U.S.-based manufacturers of these weapons must be held accountable.”

The VPC joined other gun violence prevention organizations in an amicus brief in support of the government of Mexico. The VPC has issued a wide range of studies on the threat posed by 50 caliber sniper rifles, including the risk they pose in the U.S. to infrastructure, civil aviation, and national security.

The study details the history of the Barrett, manufactured in Murfreesboro, Tennessee and the original 50 caliber sniper rifle, the gun’s unmatched combination of firepower and range, and the use of it and other 50 caliber rifles in numerous attacks and assassinations by Mexican cartels. Data contained in the study reveal that from 2010 to February 2023, the majority of 50 caliber sniper rifles (519 of 831) recovered by Mexican authorities were Barretts. Barrett and other 50 caliber sniper rifles have also been obtained by terrorists around the world, including Al Qaeda. In addition, the study:

• Cites numerous reports and research warning of the terror threat posed by the easy accessibility of 50 caliber sniper rifles, including: compromising command and control via assassination; the threat to aircraft (including civilian airliners); and, infrastructure.

• Offers numerous examples of terrorist and other criminal acts, including assassination, involving 50 caliber sniper rifles in Mexico, the U.S., and around the world.

• Details how the use of armor-piercing rifle rounds can further magnify the power – and the threat – of these deadly weapons.

• Includes profiles of companies manufacturing 50 caliber sniper rifles.

The study also puts forth policy recommendations including a federal ban in the United States of these uniquely destructive firearms.

Washington, DC: Violence Policy Center, 2025. 34p.

By The Center for Neighborhood Engaged Research & Science (CORNERS) at Northwestern University

Gun violence reduction initiatives that seek to engage individuals involved in violence must effectively identify and manage risk. Risk assessment informs participant recruitment, service provision, and program evaluation. Discussions around risk assessment often center quantitative metrics and researcher-designed assessment tools, deemphasizing the lived and professional experience of frontline professionals who work and often live in the communities they serve. The study outlined here analyzes the perspectives of frontline street outreach and victim services workers in Chicago on how they define, assess, and respond to gun violence risk on the job. The findings are based on a series of semi-structured focus group discussions and a participatory analysis session conducted in early 2021 by researchers at the Center for Neighborhood Engaged Research & Science (CORNERS). These discussions sought to answer the following 1. How do frontline violence prevention workers define risk for gun violence? 2. How do violence prevention workers assess and respond to risk? 3. What role do/should formal assessment tools play in violence prevention? Seasoned staff from both street outreach and victim services programs shared their experience identifying when, where, and who is at risk of shooting or being shot. It also gathers perspectives on strategies to mitigate this risk.

Evanston, IL: The Center for Neighborhood Engaged Research & Science (CORNERS) at Northwestern University, 2022. 28p.

By The Center for Neighborhood Engaged Research & Science (CORNERS) at Northwestern University

The Peacekeepers Program originally launched in Chicago in the summer of 2018 as the Flatlining Violence Inspires Peace (FLIP) Strategy. FLIP began as a summer-based community violence intervention program and grew to provide services in 16 Chicago community areas (CCAs) that held the lion’s share of violence in the city of Chicago. FLIP combined group violence intervention, violence prevention, and workforce development strategies designed as a street outreach apprenticeship program. Its immediate goal was to reduce gun violence in hotspots—areas with disproportionately high levels of shootings and victimizations. FLIP theorized that if gun violence could be reduced in these spatial pockets within a program community, it would create extended periods of peace across the broader community, ultimately contributing to a citywide decline in gun violence victimizations over time. In January 2023, the Illinois Office of Firearm Violence Prevention (OFVP), housed within the Illinois Department of Human Services (IDHS), supported FLIP’s transition into a year-round initiative, piloting their involvement and investment in the re-branded Peacekeepers Program (the Program). At the conclusion of the pilot period, two critical milestones occurred: the Program was integrated into the Reimagine Public Safety Act (RPSA) portfolio and, for the first time, received public funding to operate year-round. Moreover, with this funding, the Program was required to expand into RPSA priority communities, allowing the intervention to extend beyond Chicago and into surrounding Suburban Cook County  

  The report begins by providing an analysis of the 14 communities that implemented the Program for two consecutive calendar years. This exploration seeks to understand violence trends during the 2023-2024 year-round implementation of the Program compared to 2021-2022 calendar years, when the Program was only implemented during the summer months. Additional analyses will examine violence trends at both the community area and city-wide levels to assess the Program model’s claim that a reduction in hotspots might contribute to broader reductions across Program communities and the City of Chicago. The report also provides a brief overview of the year-over-year violence trends in the 13 Chicago-based Program expansion communities and their respective hotspots, during their launch year, to better understand violence trends following their start dates. This focus on both established and expansion communities highlights the progress made across all program community areas and offers insights into how implementation over consecutive 24-month periods aligns with observed violence trends. This report does not seek to establish causation or correlation between violence trends in program community areas and the implementation of the Program. Instead, it provides an exploratory analysis of gun violence trends in these areas, with a particular focus on program hotspots. Finally, the report concludes with early findings and recommendations on the implementation of the Program.  

Evanston, IL: Center for Neighborhood Engaged Research & Science (CORNERS) at Northwestern University 2025. 34p.

By Naomi Johnson, Austin Segal, Maya Simkin, Stephanie Agnew, Kareem Butler, and Briana Payton

Over the last two decades, the policing, prosecution, incarceration, and surveillance of people who carry guns has increased tremendously. This criminalization has majorly impacted Black communities in the state – especially in Chicago and Cook County – without improving safety. In fact, the criminalization of gun possession and the conflation of gun possession and gun use have made communities less safe by entangling more people in the criminal legal system. Time and time again, Black men, teenagers, and children are targeted, arrested, and criminalized for carrying guns that they feel are necessary for their own protection in areas with high rates of gun violence and low clearance rates by police. The purpose of this report is to analyze the policies, processes, and sociocultural realities that have led to the “War on Guns,” which parallels the historic War on Drugs1 and has similarly devastated Black and Brown communities for decades. In this brief report, we use public information to provide a set of facts that explain how the mounting public pressure to stop gun violence has regressively and ineffectively targeted the victims of violence and their neighbors who carry guns for protection. We detail how this approach has contributed to discriminatory policing, confusing laws, harsh sentencing, over-incarceration, and other unnecessary and long-term entanglements with the criminal legal system.   

Chicago: Chicago Appleseed Center for Fair Courts, 2024. 44p.

By Anne K. Mwobobia

This study sought to examine print media framing of gun violence in Kenya with reference to the Nation and Standard newspapers. The objectives of the study are to establish dominant frames in reporting gun violence by the Nation and the Standard newspapers; analyze the diction in framing gun violence by the Nation and the Standard Newspapers; to examine the figures of speech in framing gun violence by the Nation and the Standard Newspapers and; to assess the portrayal of gun violence as a serious societal problem by the Nation and the Standard Newspapers. The study was based on the Framing Theory and Goffman’s Frame Analysis. The study employed the descriptive research design and the mixed methods research approach. Purposive sampling technique was used to select suitable newspaper articles for the study. The study involved the collection of data on gun violence from Nation and Standard Newspapers for the period 1st September 2019 –30th August 2020. Data was collected using a code sheet and interview guide. The target population of the study consisted of 730 articles published by Nation and Standard Newspapers articles on gun violence. Two editors and three reporters experienced in reporting gun violence were also interviewed. Data was collected and analyzed using content analysis. Regarding the dominant frames in reporting gun violence by the Nation and the Standard newspapers, it is evident that most of dominant frame used to portray gun violence in both Nation and the Standard newspapers were fatality, terrorism, crime, citizen participation, cattle rustling, tactical response and accomplice. Cartoons and photos were also used as visual persuasion frames. Diction was also extensively used in the reporting of gun violence stories. In this regard, various catchwords and catchphrases were used in depicting gun violence. These included: silencing the guns, impunity, and proliferation of guns, dead, robbery, shootout and coup attempt. It was also made manifest that various figures of speech were used. These include idioms, similes, metaphors and idiomatic expressions. Lastly, the findings show that some of the major issues of societal concern focused by both newspapers included armed robbery, police brutality, cattle rustling and terrorism. It can thus be concluded that the print media plays a pivotal role in checking gun violence since it is widely viewed as the mirror of society and protective shield against violent gun crimes. The study recommends that the print media should expand the dominant frames used in reporting gun violence so as maximally show the various angles to the deep issue of gun violence. This could be through enhanced research on gun violence in Kenya. The use of diction and figures of speech could also be exploited within the process of enriching the presentation of gun violence stories. The print media should also increase the level to which they offer balanced coverage of gun violence stories in the whole country.

Nairobi: University of Nairobi, 2021. 92p.

By Alex Nowraster

A total of 298 mass shooters were responsible for 1,733 murders and 2,459 people injured in the United States from 1966 through the end of 2024. Over the 59 years studied here, the chance of being murdered by a mass shooter was about 1 in 9.1 million per year, and the annual chance of being injured was about 1 in 6.4 million. The murder victims of mass shooters account for about 0.15 percent of all homicides from 1966 through the end of 2024, but that percentage has risen in recent years. The deadliest year for mass shootings was 2017, when 14 shooters murdered 130 people and injured 959 others, accounting for 0.7 percent of all homicides in that year. Of those 298 shooters, 255 were native-born and 43 were foreign-born. The chance of being murdered in a mass shooting committed by a native-born American was about 1 in 10.5 million per year, about 6.5 times higher than the chance of being killed by a foreign-born mass shooter, which was about 1 in 68.4 million per year. The annual chance of being injured by a foreign-born mass shooter was about 1 in 94.7 million, and the chance of being injured by a native-born shooter was about 1 in 6.9 million per year. About 14.4 percent of mass shooters were foreign born, and they were responsible for 13.3 percent of murders, roughly in line with their share of the population, and 6.8 percent of injuries in mass shootings, roughly half their share of the population.

Washington, DC: Cato Institute, 2025. 10p.

By Jacob D. Charles

Gun violence is a pressing national concern. And it has been for decades. Throughout nearly all that time, the primary tool lawmakers have deployed to stanch the violence has been the machinery of the criminal law. Increased policing, intrusive surveillance, vigorous prosecution, and punitive penalties are showered on gun offenders. This Article spotlights and specifies this approach—what it calls “firearms carceralism”—and details how a decades-long bipartisan consensus generated a set of state-centered solutions to gun violence that has not meaningfully impacted the problem. Instead, those policies have exacerbated racial inequity and compounded civic and community harms. The Article traces the escalating punitive measures imposed on gun offenders over the past half century. It first peers down into one microcosmic exemplar of firearms carceralism etched into federal mandatory minimum provisions and Supreme Court case law magnifying those penalties. It describes how criminal justice reforms have traditionally excluded those whose offenses are categorized as violent, and specifically and emphatically 2812 MINNESOTA LAW REVIEW [108:2811 those who offend with guns by their side. It then draws out promising hints of a path to including gun offenders in efforts to reform or reimagine the criminal legal system. Most fundamentally, however, the Article wages a sustained critique of the system of firearms carceralism that fronts aggressive law enforcement and draconian terms of incarceration. It describes the unjustifiable breadth and depth of these practices and the harmful, racialized, and exclusionary values they simultaneously draw from and reinscribe. Finally, the Article argues in favor of three alternative paths to equitable peace and safety. First, it outlines private sector steps to, for example, dampen illicit firearms supply. Second, it highlights civil legal interventions like red flag laws and tort lawsuits against irresponsible gun sellers. Third, and most prominently, it underscores the promise of community violence intervention and restorative justice programs to bring meaningful safety apart from the carceral tools of coercive control.

MINNESOTA LAW REVIEW [108:2811), 2024.

By Paul M. Reeping, Hannah S. Laqueur & Rose M. C. Kagawa

To date, there have been no peer-reviewed studies in the United States estimating the impact of gun-free zone policies in alcohol-serving establishments on rates of firearm violence in and around such establishments. In this study, we utilized a cross-sectional design to estimate the impact of Texas’s 51% alcohol law, which prohibits the carrying of firearms in establishments that generate over half of their revenue from alcohol sales. The analysis focused on the difference in shooting incidents in and around establishments with and without firearm carrying prohibitions in 2021 and 2022. After adjusting for establishment type (bar/restaurant), alcohol sales volume, census tract level demographic factors, and the number of nearby restaurants and bars, results indicated that gun-prohibiting bars experienced significantly fewer shootings compared to those that allowed guns. Specifically, establishments that were gun-prohibited had 37% fewer shootings within 50 m than those that were gun-allowing, with a 95% confidence interval ranging from 60% fewer to 0.2% fewer. This association was more prominent in bars than in restaurants. The protective association with gun-prohibited status diminished with increased distance from the establishments; results were not significant at 100 m. Our study findings align with research suggesting that gun-free zones can reduce firearm violence. However, future studies using quasi-experimental designs that can better support causal inference are needed to support such a conclusion, as are studies exploring the efficacy of such policies in various settings and over longer periods.

Texas. J Urban Health, 2024, 9p.

By Dru Stevenson

Firearm policy in the United States is subject to longstanding political gridlock. Up to now, most of the legal academic literature has focused on the constitutionality of various—or any—regulations regarding firearm possession, sales, or usage. This article inverts the problem and proposes a system for voluntary registration and certification of nonowners, those who want to waive or renounce their Second Amendment rights as a matter of personal conviction. The proposed system is analogous to both the registration of conscientious objectors during wartime conscriptions, and the newer suicide prevention laws whereby individuals can add their names to a do-not-sell list for firearm dealers—though the proposal made here is broader and more permanent. Voluntary registration, with official certification, would serve three important purposes. First, this would help create social identification markers for the gunless-by-choice movement, something that historically has been missing; formal signals and labels of identification with a movement are necessary for a movement’s success, especially with prohibition or abstinence movements. Second, registration and certification as gunless would be a personal moral commitment marker; all societies provide ways for solemnizing one’s vows and solidifying one’s resolve on serious, lifelong moral decisions. Third, certification allows for a market signaling effect, providing useful information that can trigger a beneficial response from the private sector; market responses, in turn, provide useful information about otherwise hotly-debated beliefs, such as whether guns in fact enhance or reduce safety for individuals and public places. This article develops each of these points and offers a unique and simple regulatory and statutory alternative for a new system of registration and certification.

86 Brook. L. Rev. (2021).

By C4ADS

Executive Summary

Gun violence in Guatemala is fueled by the licit import of handguns. Once weapons have entered Guatemala, illicit actors have greater opportunity to divert these firearms from their intended use and users, instead wielding them to pursue crime and perpetrate violence.

This report uses seizure data and supply chain analysis to assess how the international flow of weapons into Guatemala is vulnerable to diversion, or the rerouting of licitly transferred conventional arms from their intended recipient or use.

This analysis reveals:

Handguns are the predominant weapon type used in violent crime in Guatemala. Many of the seized handguns are produced by major international weapons manufacturers such as Glock, Israeli Weapons Industries (IWI), Taurus, and Beretta.

Diversion pathways in-country appear among private citizens, commercial, andgovernment actors, presenting opportunities for illicit actors to acquire licit firearms.

Handguns, predominantly those made by top manufacturers, continue to flow into Guatemala.

These weapons are most often manufactured in the U.S., Brazil, and Turkey.

Manufacturers or entities within the manufacturer’s corporate network account for most handgun exports to Guatemala.

Handguns entering Guatemala primarily do so via air. They often transit through third countries and/or third parties, complicating due diligence and creating greater opportunity for diversion.

The U.S., Canada, and Germany are the most common transit countries for Guatemalan handgun imports.

U.S. gun stores are the most common non-manufacturer exporters of handguns to Guatemala.

The majority of Guatemalan importers are not end-users, but retailers that sell to both government and civilian consumers.

This report uses cases of weapons seizure and diversion to explore each of these findings. Using new data, we re-examine a case of Israeli arms that were sold in Guatemala in exchange for weapons later diverted to paramilitary forces in Colombia.

These findings illuminate areas where Guatemalan and international stakeholders can do more to counter the diversion of firearms in Guatemala. To this end, the report makes targeted recommendations for closing gaps in current legislation and enforcement.

Washington, DC: C4ADS2025. 24p.

By Richard Stansfield, Daniel Semenza, Jie Xu, Elizabeth Griffiths

This study uses a combination of tract-level and street network-level analyses to exam-ine: (1) the overall association between federally licensed firearm dealers (FFLs) and homicides, (2) the relation-ship between dealers with serious violations (such as selling to prohibited buyers or failing to record sales)and homicide, and (3) whether the dealer–homicideassociation is moderated by community disadvantage.Results replicate and confirm a relationship between dealers and homicides in disadvantaged neighborhoods.Importantly, however, we also find that proximity to non compliant dealers specifically elevates the risk of lethal violence.Policy implications: We detail how a coordinated effort between federal, state, and local agencies to reg-ulate firearm dealers and ensure that legal compliance can be instrumental in reducing gun violence. There Is a clear need for increased oversight of gun dealers and more robust policies that hold negligent dealers accountable, including the necessary funding and regu-latory manpower to enable regular auditing and support consistent follow-up for noncompliant dealers. A com-prehensive policy framework that supports supply-side gun violence reduction should include additions to state-level laws that require record keeping, videotap-ing and store security, and regular inspection for firearm dealers.

Criminology & Public Policy, 22, 323–345.

By Rocco Pallin, Amanda J. Aubel, Christopher E. Knoepke, Veronica A. Pear, Garen J. Wintemute & Nicole Kravitz-Wirtz

Background

Following the 2018 mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, there was a dramatic increase in media coverage of extreme risk protection orders (ERPOs) and in state policy proposals for ERPO laws. This study documents the frequency of news coverage of ERPOs throughout 2018 and examines the narratives used by media outlets to describe this risk-based firearm policy.

Methods

Using a mixed-method descriptive design, we examine the frequency of national news media coverage of ERPO legislation in 2018, before and after the Parkland shooting, and analyze the content of news articles related to a sample of states that considered ERPO legislation after the shooting.

Results

We find a sharp increase in the frequency of articles related to ERPOs following the Parkland shooting and smaller increases in coverage surrounding ERPO policy proposals and other public mass shootings that year. Nearly three-quarters of articles in our content analysis mentioned the Parkland shooting. The news media often mentioned or quoted politicians compared to other stakeholders, infrequently specified uses for ERPOs (e.g., prevention of mass violence, suicide, or other violence), and rarely included evidence on effectiveness of such policies. More than one-quarter of articles mentioned a mass shooting perpetrator by name, and one-third of articles used the term “gun control.”

Conclusions

This study describes the emerging public discourse, as informed by media messaging and framing, on ERPOs as states continue to debate and implement these risk-based firearm violence prevention policies.

BMC Public Health 21, 1986 (2021), 13p.

By Elizabeth B. Klerman, Mahmoud Affouf, Rebecca Robbins, Jay M. Iyer|| , Cornelia Griggs, Peter T. Masiakos, Chana A. Sacks

Developing interventions to prevent firearm-related violence and to address its consequences requires an improved understanding of when these violent events are most likely to occur. We explored gunshot events in 6 of the most populated cities in the United States by time of day, day of week, holiday/ non-holiday, and month using publicly available datasets. In some of these cities, gunshot events occurred most often at nighttime, on holidays and weekends, and during summer months, with significant interaction effects. There were also time-related changes in characteristics of the victims. Primary prevention efforts aimed at curbing firearm-related violence should consider these differential risks.

J Biol Rhythms. 2024 February ; 39(1): 100–108.

By Jason R. Silva

This study examines the reality and news media coverage of all mass shootings in the United States from 1966 to 2016. It employs agenda-setting and framing theoretical frameworks to determine the social construction of mass shootings via the mass media. The project uses open-source data to create a comprehensive list of mass shooting incidents. It then identifies all published New York Times articles on each incident. The study summarizes both the reality of the social problem (i.e. incidents) and the news mediated reality (i.e. New York Times). Next, this dissertation conducts a media distortion analysis to determine the perpetrator, motivation, and incident characteristics influencing media selection, prominence, and framing. The purpose is to illustrate the media’s social construction of mass shootings that in turn shapes public perceptions, political discourse, and public policies. The study concludes by highlighting the findings and implications for scholars, practitioners, policy-makers, media outlets, and the general public.

New York: City University of New York (CUNY), 2019. 164p

By Center for Neighborhood Engaged Research & Science (Corners)

Gun violence is an urgent, but often overlooked, issue in Latino1 communities. With hundreds of Latinos shot and killed every year2, it is important to understand the unique forces that drive violence in Latino communities. This brief provides a descriptive overview of Latino gun violence victimization in Chicago. While most analysis in this brief is done at the city scale, we acknowledge that Latino communities in Chicago are diverse and that community violence intervention organizations who work in these communities employ different approaches that are responsive to their hyper-local context. We examine definitions, demographics, and gun violence networks before concluding with a summary of a convening of practitioners, leaders, and researchers in December 2022.

Chicago: CORNERS, 2022. 9p.'

by Kelly Drane

In many communities across the country, gun violence has been an unrelenting drumbeat. In a single deadly day, gun violence claimed the lives of a 31-year-old father in Port Allen, Louisiana; a 43-year-old in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, who was known as a stylish dresser with a great sense of humor; an 11-year-old in Columbia, Missouri, who loved to dance and play with her cousins; and a 17-year-old in Columbus, Ohio, who was a gifted boxer.

Each day, hundreds of lives like these are lost or irrevocably changed as this crisis rages on.

But in the last two years, the tempo of this beat has gotten faster. Gun violence has skyrocketed in cities and towns across the country, leaving more devastation and more trauma in its wake.

More than 45,000 Americans were killed in acts of gun violence in 2020—a 15% increase over the previous year. This increase was primarily driven by an unprecedented 35% rise in gun homicides. In fact, more people were lost to gun violence in 2020 than any other year on record, and although final data is not yet available, the gun death total in 2021 is likely to surpass these records.

This drumbeat is ever-present, but one to which too many have become numb. For too long, this epidemic has gone unchecked, and even as it has spiraled out of control, too many leaders are choosing to do nothing. This moment demands attention, and we must do more to mitigate these increases and protect communities in crisis.

This report provides data describing how gun violence has skyrocketed in 2020 and 2021, showing that this historic rise in gun violence has primarily served to intensify this crisis in communities that already suffered the greatest burden. Additionally, this report describes and considers the factors that most likely contributed to these increases, based on available evidence, and makes suggestions for how policymakers can best respond to this unprecedented challenge.

San Francisco: Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence., 2022, 3p.

By Megan Donnelly, Catherine Kuza, Brynn Sargent, Lourdes Swentek, Christian de Virgilio, Areg Grigorian, Sebastian Schubl, and Jeffry Nahmias

Introduction: Past research has demonstrated a “reopening phenomenon” of increased firearm violence associated with the initial lifting of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic-related restrictions after the first wave. Now, with widespread societal reemergence from stay-at-home measures, we hypothesize another spike in firearm violence in the United States (US). Thus, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the trends in firearm violence before and after extensive community reopenings during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: The Gun Violence Archive was utilized to collect data on daily firearm violence incidents, injuries, and deaths as well as on types of firearm violence. ManneWhitney U-tests were performed for trends and types of firearm violence “before” (12/14/20-4/9/ 21) versus “after” (4/10/21-7/31/21) widespread societal reopening in the US. Additional analyses also sought to compare the after reopening time-period to historical data (2017- 2020) of similar calendar dates, to better control for possible annual/seasonal variation. Results: Median daily firearm violence incidents (153 versus 176, P < 0.001), injuries (89 versus 121, P < 0.001) and deaths (54 versus 58, P < 0.001) increased from before versus after reopening. Compared to all historical years, in the after reopening time-period there were consistent increases in total as well as mass shooting incidents/injuries/deaths (all P < 0.05). Conclusions: Firearm violence incidents, injuries, and deaths increased after societal reemergence from the COVID-19 pandemic. In addition, there has been an increase in mass shootings despite a relative lull initially brought on by the pandemic. This suggests the “reopening phenomenon” has worsened an already substantial national firearm epidemic

J Surg Res. 2023 Jan 3;285:168–175. pages

By  APRIL M. ZEOLI, ALEXANDER D. McCOURT, and JENNIFER K. PARUK 

We present the rationale behind four types of laws that restrict access to firearms for those who are deemed to be a high risk for future gun violence and two types of laws that implement firearm purchase prohibitions. We also present evidence on the effectiveness of these laws. Broadly, these are laws that restrict access for domestic violence abusers, individuals convicted of misdemeanor violence, and individuals at high risk of violence against themselves or others. We briefly discuss relinquishment of firearms by those who are newly restricted, but we focus mainly on how purchase restrictions are implemented by the federal government and across states. Extant research shows that well-implemented firearm policy that is based on evidence-based risk factors can be effective in reducing firearm injury 

  ANNALS, AAPSS, 704, November 2022  

By Amnesty International

A wide variety of electric shock devices are specifically designed for and marketed to law enforcement. These range from electric shock stun guns, batons and shields, and body-worn electric shock devices which deliver electric shocks through direct contact with the body; to projectile electric shock weapons (PESWs) which can be fired from a distance. Despite the clear human rights risks associated with this equipment, there are no global regulations controlling what type of electric shock law enforcement equipment is permitted to be manufactured and used, or where equipment which can have a legitimate role in law enforcement can be traded. There is an urgent need for legally-binding, global regulations – a Torture-Free Trade Treaty - which prohibits the production of and trade in inherently cruel, inhuman and degrading devices, such as direct contact electric shock equipment, and strictly controls the trade in PESWs to law enforcement agencies to ensure

London: Amnesty International, 2025. 72p..  

By ENACT Africa

  Summary Armed groups’ involvement in illegal mining in Nigeria has exacerbated arms smuggling, consequently increasing insecurity and violent conflict in the country and across the Sahel. It’s also seen a rise in the kidnapping of women and girls for forced labour in the mines. Governments must deal with the socio-economic and political factors that sustain banditry in Nigeria’s North West Region, the involvement of armed groups in illegal mining and the transnational dimensions of the crime. Key points • Armed groups engage in illegal mining due to corruption by state actors and community members, as well as poverty and a lack of opportunities. • Inconsistencies in Nigeria’s mining sector regulations, specifically between the Nigerian Minerals and Mining Act, 2007, and the Land Use Act, 2004, exacerbate the problem. • Armed groups’ control of mining areas undermines government legitimacy and stability. • Militarisation has been unproductive and security forces are compromised by corruption. • Illegal mining fuels security problems and the proliferation of small arms and light weapons. • The transnational criminal market for illegally mined gold extends to Chad, India, Lebanon, Niger and the United Arab Emirates. • The use of girls in mining violates international labour laws.

ENACT Africa, 2024. 24p.