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 Mary Allen, Canadian Centre for Justice and Community Safety Statistics

In 2020, consistent with historical trends, violent Criminal Code offences accounted for about one in every five crimes that came to the attention of police. Firearm-related violent crime typically represents less than 3% of police-reported violent crime in Canada; nevertheless, it has a significant emotional and physical impact on victims, families and communities. Additionally, rates of firearm-related violence have seen a general increase over the past several years.

Concern about gun crime is long standing and a variety of approaches have been used to address it, including changes in legislation (see Text box 1). In April 2020, 22 people were killed in a mass shooting in Nova Scotia, the deadliest mass shooting in Canada in recent years. In particular, the Nova Scotia shooting led to a ban on assault-style firearms and renewed discussions around gun control and access to illegal weapons.

Mayors Against Illegal Guns

This report provides a comprehensive review of Stand Your Ground laws and how they have affected public safety and the criminal justice system. It explains how Stand Your Ground statutes have dramatically expanded the circumstances under which people are permitted to use deadly force and have created legal hurdles that make it more difficult for law enforcement to hold shooters accountable. The report also shows that Stand Your Ground states have on average experienced a 53% increase in homicides deemed justifiable in the years following passage of the law, compared with a 5% decrease in states without Stand Your Ground statutes during the same period — an increase disproportionately borne by the black community. Finally, the report provides a state-by-state analysis of each of the 22 state Stand Your Ground laws.

New York: National Urban League, 2013. 28p.

By Scott R. Kegler; Deborah M. Stone; James A. Mercy and Linda L. Dahlberg

Firearm homicides and suicides represent an ongoing public health concern in the United States. During 2018–2019, a total of 28,372 firearm homicides (including 3,612 [13%] among youths and young adults aged 10–19 years [youths]) and 48,372 firearm suicides (including 2,463 [5%] among youths) occurred among U.S. residents (1). This report is the fourth in a series* that provides statistics on firearm homicides and suicides in major metropolitan areas. As with earlier reports, this report provides a special focus on youth violence, including suicide, recognizing the magnitude of the problem and the importance of early prevention efforts. Firearm homicide and suicide rates were calculated for the 50 most populous U.S. metropolitan statistical areas (MSAs)† for the periods 2015–2016 and 2018–2019, separated by a transition year (2017), using mortality data from the National Vital Statistics System (NVSS) and population data from the U.S. Census Bureau. Following a period of decreased firearm homicide rates among persons of all ages after 2006–2007 in large metropolitan areas collectively and nationally, by 2015–2016 rates had returned to levels comparable to those observed a decade earlier and remained nearly unchanged as of 2018–2019. Firearm suicide rates among persons aged ≥10 years have continued to increase in large MSAs collectively as well as nationally. Although the youth firearm suicide rate remained much lower than the overall rate, the youth rate nationally also continued to increase, most notably outside of large MSAs. The findings in this report underscore a continued and urgent need for a comprehensive approach to prevention. This includes efforts to prevent firearm homicide and suicide in the first place and support individual persons and communities at increased risk, as well as lessening harms after firearm homicide and suicide have occurred.

Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control, 2022. 7p.

By Everytown for Gun Safety

Analysis from 750 cities of data available for the first times reveals that:

The rate of people who died by gun suicide in cities increased 11 percent over the past decade, and now make up an average of over four in 10 city gun deaths.

Cities in states with the strongest gun violence prevention laws have about half the rate of people who die by gun suicide as those in states with the weakest laws, demonstrating the importance of legislative action in preventing gun violence in cities.

Cities with the most gun shops experience nearly four times higher rates of people who die by gun suicide than those with the fewest gun shops, signaling the importance of expanding cities’ focus beyond illegal guns.

Smaller cities and those with fewer walkable neighborhoods (i.e., distance to local resources) experience higher rates of people who die by gun suicide, underscoring the importance of adequate access to resources and networks of social support that reduce risk factors like social isolation.

Cities with the most parks have about half the rate of people who die by gun suicide as those with the least, suggesting that cleaning and greening efforts may offer benefits in reducing both gun homicides and suicides.

New York: Everytown for Gun Safety, 2022. 25p.

By The Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions; Art Davies, et al.

Two leading organizations dedicated to gun violence prevention—the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Prevention and Policy and the Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence—have merged to form a new center at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions. The Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions combines the expertise of highly respected gun violence researchers with the skills of deeply experienced gun violence prevention advocates. We use a public health approach to conduct rigorous scientific research to identify a range of innovative solutions to gun violence. Because gun violence disproportionately impacts communities of color, we ground our work in equity and seek insights from those most impacted on appropriate solutions. Using the best available science, our Center works toward expanding evidence-based advocacy and policy-making efforts. This combination of expertise creates a unique opportunity to turn public health research into action that reduces deaths and injuries from gun violence.

Baltimore, MD: The John Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions. 2022. 40p.

By Everytown for Gun Safety

In California, a 16-year-old boy shot and killed two of his classmates and shot and wounded three others with a handgun. In Washington D.C., ghost guns were used in four recent fatal shootings. In Arizona, a neo-Nazi sex offender bragged on Facebook about his arsenal of firearms and homemade assault-style rifles. All of these people were legally prohibited from buying guns. But due to a dangerous wrong turn by ATF these individuals were able to access a haunting new source of firepower: ghost guns. Ghost guns are the thread connecting a horrific series of recent shootings. These do-it-yourself (DIY) firearms are made from parts available without a background check and are predictably emerging as a weapon of choice for violent criminals, gun traffickers, dangerous extremists, and, generally, people legally prohibited from buying firearms. Because it has no serial number, a ghost gun cannot be traced back to where it came from, which frustrates police investigations and robs victims and survivors of justice. The rise of ghost guns is the fastest-growing gun safety problem facing our country. But disturbingly little is known about who sells ghost guns, who buys them, and how much they are used in crime. The scant data available is disjointed and barely scratches the surface of the issue. To remedy this problem, Everytown for Gun Safety examined available data, including a sample of 80 online ghost gun part sellers and more than 100 federal prosecutions involving ghost guns, to find out who is selling and using these deadly weapons and what can be done about it.

New York: Everytown for Gun Safety, 2020. 28p.

By Nicholas Simons, Jaclyn Schildkraut and Julianna Caruso. Regional Gun Violence Research Consortium

On April 11, 2022, the Biden administration announced the submission of new rules issued by the United States Department of Justice (DOJ), more specifically the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), addressing the proliferation of ghost guns across the nation….

What exactly are ghost guns, and what challenges do they pose? Moreover, what do these new rules do to contribute to a solution to such challenges? Privately made firearms (PMFs), which have become informally known as “ghost guns” due to their virtually untraceable nature, function similar to firearms wholly constructed by licensed firearm manufacturers but have a fraction of the regulations. In 2021, law enforcement in New York State recovered 637 PMFs (135 percent more than the year prior), reflecting continued annual increases from 44 in 2018 (the first year of reporting), 100 in 2019 (up 117 percent over the year prior), and 2020 (an increase of 171 percent). Other law enforcement agencies across the country, particularly those located in larger cities, have reported similar jumps in recoveries: Law enforcement in Boston has seen a nearly three-fold increase in the city since 2019; Philadelphia reported a five-fold increase since that year. Data from the ATF mirrors these trends: the recorded number of suspected PMF recoveries nationally increased more than 90 percent between 2020 and 2021 and more than ten-fold between 2016 and 2021. Such increases, however, must be interpreted with caution as they may be an artifact of increased reporting by jurisdictions.

While these increases represent a relatively low percentage of total gun recoveries, they illustrate that ghost guns pose a unique and rapidly growing challenge. Law enforcement agencies are unable to trace the origins of ghost guns used in crime and ultimately curb their flow at the source. While the federal government has taken first steps to regulate these weapons, state and local lawmakers have for several years been exploring and enacting policies designed to monitor and prevent ghost guns from falling into the hands of individuals who are prohibited from purchasing or possessing firearms.

Albany, NY: Rockefeller Institute of Government, 2022. 20p.

By Chelsea Parsons and Rukmani Bhatia

The physical damage inflicted by any particular gunshot is the result of a combination of the firearm used and the ammunition fired. Sometimes, bullets travel through a body like a knife, propelled on a linear path, slicing through tissue and organs. In other cases, the bullet’s path is less predictable. It fragments in the body, ripping apart tissue and blood vessels, smashing bone, and shredding organs along its path. The human cost of America’s gun violence epidemic is visible not just in the overwhelming number of firearm fatalities but also in the radically altered lives of shooting survivors. The devastation of a bullet wound to a human body is often irreparable: Spinal injury leaves survivors paralyzed; blood loss and infections can require amputations; intestinal perforations often result in survivors needing colostomy bags to replace their damaged gastrointestinal tracks. Many gunshot survivors are plagued with a lifetime of chronic pain and suffer premature death from ongoing complications. The current national debate about gun violence is largely focused on firearms: Who should have them? What types of firearms should people be allowed to have? Where and how can they be carried? How should they be sold? Certainly, these are all crucial questions that demand a sustained and serious analysis by policymakers at all levels of government. But often missing from the conversation about firearms are questions related to ammunition—namely, the role of easy access to ammunition and ammunition accessories in the epidemic of gun violence in the United States.

Washington, DC: Center for American Progress, 2019. 37p.

By Chelsea Parsons and Eugenio Weigend

From the earliest days of his presidential campaign, a constant refrain from Donald Trump has been the need to protect the United States from foreign threats, particularly violent crime that he falsely asserts is committed at high rates by immigrants to this country. The Trump administration’s protectionist, isolationist, nativist, and racist immigration policy is founded on the scurrilous notion that the United States needs to close the borders and restrict immigration to the country as a way to protect against the entry of violent crime. However, often overlooked in this debate is the degree to which exportation of violence goes in the other direction—that is to say, from the United States to other countries—and, in particular, the substantial U.S. role in providing guns that are used in lethal violence in other nations. From 2014 to 2016, across 15 countries in North America, Central America, and the Caribbean, 50,133 guns that originated in the United States were recovered as part of criminal investigations. Put another way, during this span, U.S.- sourced guns were used to commit crimes in nearby countries approximately once every 31 minutes. Certainly, many of these U.S.-sourced crime guns were legally exported and were not diverted for criminal use until they crossed the border. The United States is a major manufacturer and a leading exporter of firearms, legally exporting an average of 298,000 guns each year. However, many of the same gaps and weaknesses in U.S. gun laws that contribute to illegal gun trafficking domestically likewise contribute to the illegal trafficking of guns from the United States to nearby nations. This report discusses the scope of the problem of U.S. guns being trafficked abroad and used in the commission of violent crimes in other nations. For example, in 2015, a trafficking ring bought more than 100 guns via straw purchases in the Rio Grande Valley of the United States and smuggled them to Mexico. At least 14 of these firearms were recovered in Mexico.

Washington, DC: Center for American Progress, 2018. 24p.

By Chelsea Parsons, Eugenio Weigend Vargas and Rukmani Bhatia

The national conversation about gun violence in the United States focuses primarily on the harms caused by the misuse of firearms—the details of the incidents that take the lives of 40,000 people every year and grievously injure tens of thousands more. This debate often occurs in the aftermath of specific gun-related tragedies and tends to focus on the individual who pulled the trigger and what could have been done to intervene with that person to prevent the tragedy. But largely absent from the national conversation about gun violence is any mention of the industry responsible for putting guns into our communities in the first place. The gun industry in the United States is effectively unregulated. The laws governing the operation of these businesses are porous and weak. The federal agency charged with oversight of the industry—the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)—has been historically underfunded and politically vulnerable, making it nearly impossible for the agency to conduct consistent, effective regulatory oversight activities. Adding insult to injury, Congress has also imposed restrictions on how ATF can perform this regulatory work through restrictive policy riders on the agency’s budget. Congress has also eliminated some of the most useful tools for ensuring that gun industry actors operate their businesses in the best interests of consumers and are held accountable for harm caused by their products. The result of this constellation of weak laws, lack of resources, and dearth of political will to support gun industry regulation is that the industry that produces and sells deadly weapons to civilian consumers has operated for decades with minimal oversight from the federal government and almost no accountability in the U.S. legal system. This is not an idle concern. The United States experiences rates of gun violence that no other high-income nation comes even close to matching. This violence persists, even as the number of Americans who choose to own guns has steadily declined.

Washington, DC: Center for American Progress, 2020. 68p.

By Marissa Edmund

Gun violence in the United States is a public health crisis. Every day, more than 100 people are killed with a firearm, more than 200 are non-fatally injured, and more than 1,000 are threatened with a gun. There are many forms of gun violence, each affecting communities differently, and women in particular are uniquely affected. More than 11,000 women in the United States were killed with a gun between 2015 and 2019, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. While men suffer even higher rates of gun violence, women are often targeted for violence because of their sex and are frequently victims of people they know well. Every month, an average of 57 women are killed with a firearm by an intimate partner. The impact of gun violence against women goes beyond fatal encounters. A 2016 study found that nearly 1 million women alive at that time had been shot by an intimate partner, and 4.5 million women had been threatened with a firearm. Firearms have long been used as a tool of power and control to instill fear and inflict abuse on women—with women of color, people in the LGBTQ community, and women with disabilities being disproportionately affected. In 2019, the Center for American Progress released “Transforming the Culture of Power: An Examination of Gender-Based Violence in the United States,” a report that focuses on the different forms gender-based violence can take across various settings and experiences as well as the policy and legislative reforms needed to address it. In this report, the author expands on one aspect discussed in that analysis: gender-based gun violence

Washington, DC: Center for American Progress, 2022. 19p.

By Rukmani Bhatia

The National Rifle Association (NRA), an organization originally established in 1871 to train hunters and marksmen on gun use and safety, has transformed into one of the most effective political lobbies in modern American history. The group advocates for gun rights, resisting any encroachment on what it deems to be an inalienable right to unhindered, unregulated gun ownership. To advance its mission, the NRA deploys a disinformation campaign reliant on fear-mongering and the systematic discreditation of opposition voices in order to secure its position as a powerful lobbyist for the gun industry. The NRA has masterfully constructed a narrative based on gun rights propaganda, evoking images of a society devoid of rule of law and under constant threat of attack from an unidentified but ever-present enemy. Due to the insidious nature of this messaging approach, the NRA has successfully embedded its false narrative throughout much of the country. By deploying a carefully crafted campaign of misinformation, deception, and confusion, the NRA has both undermined legitimate arguments for common-sense gun law reform and made it substantially more difficult for its emotive, provocative propaganda to be countered with fact and reason. In this way, the NRA’s tactics are deceitful not only because they falsely allege to protect American freedoms but also because they mirror fundamentally un-American sources. The propaganda machine of the NRA is similar to that of authoritarian and undemocratic political regimes around the world that deploy disinformation campaigns to secure control over public discourse in their nations, enabling autocrats to maintain a vice grip over information and ensure their power is unchecked and unquestioned.

Washington, DC: Center for American Progress, 2019. 40p.

By Elizabeth S. Haile

As ATF developed its database of more than two million crime guns, it released to law enforcement agencies, scholars, the press, local and state governments, and the public, numerous reports analyzing the patterns of crime gun sales, as well as portions of the trace database itself. Reports on crime gun trace data revolutionized our understanding of the illegal gun market and how it is supplied – establishing that strong gun laws have a profound impact on access to guns by criminals in the illegal market, and identifying the gun manufacturers, distributors, and dealers most responsible for supplying crime guns. Crime gun trace data has provided powerful evidence of the gun industry’s complicity in fueling the illegal market, showing that thousands of guns move quickly from a relatively small number of licensed gun dealers into the illegal market. Indeed, almost 60% of the crime guns traced in a given year were sold by only 1% of the licensed firearms dealers, while about 85% of gun dealers had no traces at all. The gun industry knows who the high-trace dealers are, but has refused to stop selling them guns or force them to reform. As a result, felons and other prohibited purchasers have been supplied the tools of violence – aided and abetted by careless or corrupt dealers. Our nation suffers from the violent gun crime that ensues. The gun industry has argued that ATF trace data is meaningless or insignificant. For example, gun industry spokespeople continuously claim that the concentration of crime guns originating from a relatively few dealers may indicate only that they sell a lot of guns. ATF’s own investigations have disproved this argument, however, as have academic studies.

Washington, DC: Brady Center for Prevent Gun Violence, 2006. 56p.

By Garen Wintemute

Firearm-related criminal violence remains an important threat to the nation’s health and safety. To help prevent firearm violence, federal statute prohibits felons, those convicted of domestic violence misdemeanors, and certain others from acquiring or possessing firearms. Persons who acquire firearms from licensed gun dealers and pawnbrokers must provide identification and undergo a background check to verify that they are not prohibited persons. A permanent record is kept, in case the firearm is later used in a crime. But perhaps 40% of all firearm acquisitions, and at least 80% of those made with criminal intent, are made from private parties. No identification need be shown; no background check is conducted; no record is kept. Identifying prohibited persons through background checks and denying their firearm acquisitions has been shown to reduce their risk of committing new firearm-related or violent crimes by approximately 25%. Policies that require all firearm transfers to be routed through licensed retailers, so that background checks are completed and records are kept, are in effect in six states. Their feasibility is proved. At gun shows in states where such policies are in effect, direct private-party firearm transfers rarely occur. Comprehensive background check policies have been shown to disrupt firearm trafficking and to yield more accurate, up-to-date firearm tracing information for law enforcement. The impact of state-level policies, however, is blunted by firearm trafficking from states where such policies are not in effect.

Davis, CA: Violence Prevention Research Program, University of California, Davis. 2013. 58p.

By Philip J. Cook, and Jens Ludwig

The evidence base for the study of guns and violence begins with data on such fundamental issues as the number and distribution of guns, the number of people shot each year in criminal assaults, and the frequency of gun use in self-defense. It seems that these simple descriptive statistics should be readily available, and in fact the rhetoric of the debate over gun control in the United States routinely includes reference to 300 million guns, or 100,000 people who are shot each year, or 2.5 million defensive gun uses. But it turns out that such statistics should be viewed with considerable skepticism. Developing reliable estimates of basic facts in this arena is surprisingly difficult, even with the best of intentions. Even surveys that meet the highest standards of current practice may produce heavily biased estimates. The results discussed here should encourage skepticism and engender what might be called “plausibility tests” – common-sense comparisons of the resulting estimates with other sources of information. Too often the review of scientific contributions is like appellate review of a criminal conviction – the court focuses on just the process rather than the outcome. For policy-relevant work it is important to test the conclusions against what else we know about the reality of the situation.

San Diego: Small Arms Data Observatory, 2014. 14p.

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 Topher L. McDougal, Athena Kolbe, Robert Muggah and Nicholas Marsh

The rapid increase in the accessibility of firearms and ammunition represents a key factor in the destabilization of many countries. It is also commonly associated with an escalation in the intensity and organization of collective and interpersonal violence. In some cases, arms are illegally transferred from one state to another, while in others weapons are diverted from existing stores. In this article the authors consider the leakage from military and civilian markets as an important source of ammunition available to civilians in Haiti. We employ a unique section-quarterly panel of ammunition prices over the period July 2004-July 2012. This data is combined with publicly available monthly data on authorized ammunition shipments to the country registered by the United Nations (UN) and Haitian National Police (HNP). We also consider annual data on homicide rates and UN resolutions related to Haitian military personnel and civilian police. We use a standard time-series OLS model to show that the exogenous shocks of UN- and HNP-ordered ammunition exert measurable downward pressure on civilian ammunition markets, which we calculate in terms of adjusted predictions and partial elasticities of demand. These effects constitute solid econometric evidence that the firewall that should in theory separate military and civilian markets in Haiti has partially broken down. We conclude with a suggestion for using this model to help estimate the specific size of the leakage

San Diego: Small Arms Data Observatory, 2014. 21p.

By Philip J. Cook and Jens Ludwig

The proposition that widespread gun ownership serves as a deterrent to residential burglary is widely touted by advocates, but the evidence is weak, consisting of anecdotes, interviews with burglars, casual comparisons with other countries, and the like. A more systematic exploration requires data on local rates of gun ownership and of residential burglary, and such data have only recently become available. In this paper we exploit a new well-validated proxy for local gun-ownership prevalence -- the proportion of suicides that involve firearms -- together with newly available geo-coded data from the National Crime Victimization Survey, to produce the first systematic estimates of the net effects of gun prevalence on residential burglary patterns. The importance of such empirical work stems in part from the fact that theoretical considerations do not provide much guidance in predicting the net effects of widespread gun ownership. Guns in the home may pose a threat to burglars, but also serve as an inducement, since guns are particularly valuable loot. Other things equal, a gun-rich community provides more lucrative burglary opportunities than one where guns are more sparse. The new empirical results reported here provide no support for a net deterrent effect from widespread gun ownership. Rather, our analysis concludes that residential burglary rates tend to increase with community gun prevalence.

Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research, 2002. 98p.

This guide addresses serious youth gun violence, describing the problem and reviewing factors that increase the risks of it. It then identifies a series of questions that might help you analyze your local problem. Finally, it reviews responses to the problem, and what is known about them from evaluative research and police practice. Criminal misuse of guns kills or injures tens of thousands of Americans every year. In 2000, more than 10,000 Americans were killed with guns, and guns are much more likely to be used in homicides of teens and young adults than in homicides of people of other ages.

Read more at the Center for Problem Oriented Policing