exploratory essay on gun violence

Gun Control Essay: Important Topics, Examples, and More

Gun Control Definition

Gun control refers to the regulation of firearms to reduce the risk of harm caused by their misuse. It is an important issue that has garnered much attention in recent years due to the increasing number of gun-related incidents, including mass shootings and homicides. Writing an essay about gun control is important because it allows one to explore the various aspects of this complex and controversial topic, including the impact of gun laws on public safety, the constitutional implications of gun control, and the social and cultural factors that contribute to gun violence.

In writing an essay on gun control, conducting thorough research, considering multiple perspectives, and developing a well-informed argument is important. This may involve analyzing existing gun control policies and their effectiveness, exploring the attitudes and beliefs of different groups towards firearms, and examining the historical and cultural context of gun ownership and use. Through this process, one can develop a nuanced understanding of the issue and propose effective solutions to address the problem of gun violence.

Further information on writing essays on gun control can be found in various sources, including academic journals, policy reports, and news articles. In the following paragraphs, our nursing essay writing services will provide tips and resources to help you write an effective and informative guns essay. Contact our custom writer and get your writing request satisfied in a short term.

Gun Control Essay Types

There are various types of essays about gun control, each with its own unique focus and approach. From analyzing the effectiveness of existing gun laws to exploring the cultural and historical context of firearms in society, the possibilities for exploring this topic are virtually endless.

Let's look at the following types and examples from our essay writing service USA :

• Argumentative Essay : This essay clearly argues for or against gun control laws. The writer must use evidence to support their position and refute opposing arguments.
• Descriptive Essay: A descriptive essay on gun control aims to provide a detailed topic analysis. The writer must describe the history and evolution of gun laws, the different types of firearms, and their impact on society.
• Cause and Effect Essay: This type of essay focuses on why gun control laws are necessary, the impact of gun violence on society, and the consequences of not having strict gun control laws.
• Compare and Contrast Essay: In this type of essay, the writer compares and contrasts different countries' gun laws and their effectiveness. They can also compare and contrast different types of guns and their impact on society.
• Expository Essay: This type of essay focuses on presenting facts and data on the topic of gun control. The writer must explain the different types of gun laws, their implementation, and their impact on society.
• Persuasive Essay: The writer of a persuasive essay aims to persuade the reader to support their position on gun control. They use a combination of facts, opinions, and emotional appeals to convince the reader.
• Narrative Essay: A narrative essay on gun control tells a story about an individual's experience with gun violence. It can be a personal story or a fictional one, but it should provide insight into the human impact of gun violence.

In the following paragraphs, we will provide an overview of the most common types of gun control essays and some tips and resources to help you write them effectively. Whether you are a student, a researcher, or simply someone interested in learning more about this important issue, these essays can provide valuable insight and perspective on the complex and often controversial topic of gun control.

Persuasive Essay on Gun Control

A persuasive essay on gun control is designed to convince the reader to support a specific stance on gun control policies. To write an effective persuasive essay, the writer must use a combination of facts, statistics, and emotional appeals to sway the reader's opinion. Here are some tips from our expert custom writer to help you write a persuasive essay on gun control:

• Research : Conduct thorough research on gun control policies, including their history, effectiveness, and societal impact. Use credible sources to back up your argument.
• Develop a thesis statement: In your gun control essay introduction, the thesis statement should clearly state your position on gun control and provide a roadmap for your paper.
• Use emotional appeals: Use emotional appeals to connect with your reader. For example, you could describe the impact of gun violence on families and communities.
• Address opposing viewpoints: Address opposing viewpoints and provide counterarguments to strengthen your position.
• Use statistics: Use statistics to back up your argument. For example, you could use statistics to show the correlation between gun control laws and reduced gun violence.
• Use rhetorical devices: Use rhetorical devices, such as metaphors and analogies, to help the reader understand complex concepts.

Persuasive gun control essay examples include:

• The Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual's right to own any firearm.
• Stricter gun control laws are necessary to reduce gun violence in the United States.
• The proliferation of guns in society leads to more violence and higher crime rates.
• Gun control laws should be designed to protect public safety while respecting individual rights.

Argumentative Essay on Gun Control

A gun control argumentative essay is designed to present a clear argument for or against gun control policies. To write an effective argumentative essay, the writer must present a well-supported argument and refute opposing arguments. Here are some tips to help you write an argumentative essay on gun control:

• Choose a clear stance: Choose a clear stance on gun control policies and develop a thesis statement that reflects your position.
• Research : Conduct extensive research on gun control policies and use credible sources to back up your argument.
• Refute opposing arguments: Anticipate opposing arguments and provide counterarguments to strengthen your position.
• Use evidence: Use evidence to back up your argument. For example, you could use data to show the correlation between gun control laws and reduced gun violence.
• Use logical reasoning: Use logical reasoning to explain why your argument is valid.

Examples of argumentative essay topics on gun control include:

• Gun control laws infringe upon individuals' right to bear arms and protect themselves.
• Gun control laws are ineffective and do not prevent gun violence.

If you'd rather have a professional write you a flawless paper, you can always contact us and buy argumentative essay .

Do You Want to Ease Your Academic Burden?

Order a rhetorical analysis essay from our expert writers today and experience the power of top-notch academic writing.

How to Choose a Good Gun Control Topic: Tips and Examples

Choosing a good gun control topic can be challenging, but with some careful consideration, you can select an interesting and relevant topic. Here are seven tips for choosing a good gun control topic with examples:

• Consider current events: Choose a topic that is current and relevant. For example, the impact of the pandemic on gun control policies.
• Narrow your focus: Choose a specific aspect of gun control to focus on, such as the impact of gun control laws on crime rates.
• Consider your audience: Consider who your audience is and what they are interested in. For example, a topic that appeals to gun enthusiasts might be the ethics of owning firearms.
• Research : Conduct extensive research on gun control policies and current events. For example, the impact of the Second Amendment on gun control laws.
• Choose a controversial topic: Choose a controversial topic that will generate discussion. For example, the impact of the NRA on gun control policies.
• Choose a topic that interests you: You can choose an opinion article on gun control that you are passionate about and interested in. For example, the impact of mass shootings on public opinion of gun control.
• Consider different perspectives: Consider different perspectives on gun control and choose a topic that allows you to explore multiple viewpoints. For example, the effectiveness of background checks in preventing gun violence.

You can also buy an essay online cheap from our professional writers. Knowing that you are getting high-quality, customized work will give you the peace of mind and confidence you need to succeed!

Pro-Gun Control Essay Topics

Here are pro-gun control essay topics that can serve as a starting point for your research and writing, helping you to craft a strong and persuasive argument.

• Stricter gun control laws are necessary to reduce gun violence in America.
• The Second Amendment was written for a different time and should be updated to reflect modern society.
• Gun control and gun safety laws can prevent mass shootings and other forms of gun violence.
• Owning a gun should be a privilege, not a right.
• Universal background checks should be mandatory for all gun purchases.
• The availability of assault weapons should be severely restricted.
• Concealed carry permits should be harder to obtain and require more rigorous training.
• The gun lobby has too much influence on government policy.
• The mental health of gun owners should be considered when purchasing firearms.
• Gun violence has a significant economic impact on communities and the nation as a whole.
• There is a strong correlation between high gun ownership rates and higher gun violence rates.
• Gun control policies can help prevent suicides and accidental shootings.
• Gun control policies should be designed to protect public safety while respecting individual rights.
• More research is needed on the impact of gun control policies on gun violence.
• The impact of gun violence on children and young people is a significant public health issue.
• Gun control policies should be designed to reduce the illegal gun trade and access to firearms by criminals.
• The right to own firearms should not override the right to public safety.
• The government has a responsibility to protect its citizens from gun violence.
• Gun control policies are compatible with the Second Amendment.
• International examples of successful gun control policies can be applied in America.

Anti-Gun Control Essay Topics

These topics against gun control essay can help you develop strong and persuasive arguments based on individual rights and the importance of personal freedom.

• Gun control laws infringe on the Second Amendment and individual rights.
• Stricter gun laws will not prevent criminals from obtaining firearms.
• Gun control laws are unnecessary and will only burden law-abiding citizens.
• Owning a gun is a fundamental right and essential for self-defense.
• Gun-free zones create a false sense of security and leave people vulnerable.
• A Gun control law will not stop mass school shootings, as these are often premeditated and planned.
• The government cannot be trusted to enforce gun control laws fairly and justly.
• Gun control laws unfairly target law-abiding gun owners and punish them for the actions of a few.
• Gun ownership is a part of American culture and heritage and should not be restricted.
• Gun control laws will not stop criminals from using firearms to commit crimes.
• Gun control laws often ignore the root causes of gun violence, such as mental illness and poverty.
• Gun control laws will not stop terrorists from using firearms to carry out attacks.
• Gun control laws will only create a black market for firearms, making it easier for criminals to obtain them.
• Gun control laws will not stop domestic violence, as abusers will find other ways to harm their victims.
• Gun control laws will not stop drug cartels and organized crime from trafficking firearms.
• Gun control laws will not stop gang violence and turf wars.
• Gun control laws are an infringement on personal freedom and individual responsibility.
• Gun control laws are often rooted in emotion rather than reason and evidence.
• Gun control laws ignore the important role that firearms play in hunting and sport shooting.
• More gun control laws will only give the government more power and control over its citizens.

Example Essays

Whether you have been assigned to write a gun control research paper or essay, the tips provided above should help you grasp the general idea of how to cope with this task. Now, to give you an even better understanding of the task and set you on the right track, here are a few excellent examples of well-written papers on this topic:

Don’t forget that you always have a reliable essay writing service USA by your side to which you can entrust writing a brilliant essay for you!

Final Words

In conclusion, writing a sample rhetorical analysis essay requires careful analysis and effective use of persuasive techniques. Whether you are a high school student or a college student, mastering the art of rhetorical analysis can help you become a more effective communicator and critical thinker. With practice and perseverance, anyone can become a skilled writer and excel in their academic pursuits.

And if you're overwhelmed or unsure about writing your next AP lang rhetorical analysis essay, don't worry - we're here to help! Our friendly and experienced research paper writers are ready to guide you through the process, providing expert advice and support every step of the way. So why not take the stress out of writing and let us help you succeed? Buy essay today and take the first step toward academic excellence!

Looking to Take Your Academic Performance to the Next Level?

Say goodbye to stress, endless research, and sleepless nights - and hello to a brighter academic future. Place your order now and watch your grades soar!

Daniel Parker

is a seasoned educational writer focusing on scholarship guidance, research papers, and various forms of academic essays including reflective and narrative essays. His expertise also extends to detailed case studies. A scholar with a background in English Literature and Education, Daniel’s work on EssayPro blog aims to support students in achieving academic excellence and securing scholarships. His hobbies include reading classic literature and participating in academic forums.

is an expert in nursing and healthcare, with a strong background in history, law, and literature. Holding advanced degrees in nursing and public health, his analytical approach and comprehensive knowledge help students navigate complex topics. On EssayPro blog, Adam provides insightful articles on everything from historical analysis to the intricacies of healthcare policies. In his downtime, he enjoys historical documentaries and volunteering at local clinics.

Angela’s Substack

Beyond Gun Violence: Examining Government Oversight and Preventable Deaths in the U.S.

Gun violence is a major topic in the United States, with roughly 48,000 deaths annually, including both homicides and suicides (CDC, 2022). This issue frequently dominates media coverage and political discourse, often leading to calls for stricter gun control measures and raising questions about the protection of Second Amendment rights. However, this intense focus on gun violence, while important, seems disproportionate when compared to the broader and deadlier public health crises caused by preventable deaths from harmful practices in the food, pharmaceutical, and medical industries. The government’s apparent emphasis on restricting firearms, despite the greater harm inflicted by these industries, raises critical concerns about misplaced priorities and the potential erosion of individual rights. This essay aims to shed light on how these industries, bolstered by inadequate government regulation and the corrupting influence of lobbying, contribute to a much higher toll on American lives than gun violence, and questions why the government appears more intent on regulating guns than addressing these more pervasive threats.

Gun Violence in Context Gun-related deaths in the U.S. are significant, with firearms being a leading cause of death among young adults. According to the CDC, involuntary gun deaths, such as homicides and accidental shootings, account for approximately 22,000 deaths annually (CDC, 2021). While this is a critical issue, it represents just a fraction of the broader public health challenges when compared to other preventable causes of death, such as those related to diet, pharmaceuticals, and medical errors.

The Overlooked Killers - Medical Errors, Food-Related Diseases, and Pharmaceutical Misconduct The American healthcare system, often considered one of the most advanced in the world, is not without its flaws. Medical errors are a leading cause of death, responsible for nearly 500,000 deaths annually in the U.S., as highlighted in a Johns Hopkins study (2016). These errors include surgical complications, misdiagnoses, and medication mistakes, underscoring significant systemic issues within the healthcare sector.

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) contribute to about 100,000 deaths per year, according to a study published in the BMJ (2016), while medication errors account for an additional 7,000 to 9,000 deaths annually, based on data from the National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention (NCC MERP). These preventable deaths often result from aggressive pharmaceutical marketing, inadequate testing, and a lack of transparency regarding drug risks.

Diet-related diseases such as heart disease, cancer, and diabetes are closely linked to the consumption of ultra-processed foods, which often contain harmful ingredients like trans fats, excessive sugars, sodium, artificial additives, and preservatives. Studies show that these foods significantly contribute to chronic illnesses, with the overconsumption of processed items associated with obesity, hypertension, and metabolic disorders. Collectively, diet-related conditions are responsible for approximately 678,000 deaths annually in the U.S. alone, surpassing the total combat deaths in all American wars combined. This alarming figure underscores the need for stricter regulation and oversight of the food industry to reduce the public health impact of processed and ultra-processed foods (Harvard Public Health, 2023; NIH, 2017).

New data suggests that Alzheimer's disease is increasingly being referred to as "Type 3 Diabetes" due to its links with insulin resistance in the brain, driven largely by excessive sugar consumption. This connection highlights the broader impacts of dietary choices on cognitive health, signaling the need for further exploration into the role of sugar in neurodegenerative conditions​.

Government Regulation and the Failure to Protect The U.S. government has a responsibility to protect its citizens, but when it comes to regulating the food, pharmaceutical, and medical industries, it falls short. The infamous food pyramid introduced in the 1980s is a prime example of misguided government guidance that has had long-lasting negative impacts on public health. Despite scientific evidence linking certain ingredients to serious health conditions, many harmful substances remain prevalent in American diets, largely due to powerful lobbying efforts by the food and beverage industries. These guidelines prioritized high carbohydrate consumption while minimizing the risks of excessive sugar and processed foods, contributing to the rise in obesity and diet-related diseases.

Similarly, the pharmaceutical industry's influence over regulation extends to the ongoing crisis of drug addictions and overdose deaths. The aggressive marketing of opioid painkillers, facilitated by lax regulatory oversight, has led to widespread addiction and a devastating increase in drug-related deaths. The revolving door between industry and regulatory bodies, along with a prioritization of profits over patient safety, has contributed to a corrupt system that often neglects public health. In the medical field, systemic issues such as understaffing, underfunding, and inadequate training also play a role in exacerbating the rates of preventable drug-related harms, further underscoring the urgent need for stronger oversight and accountability.

It's a matter of record that the U.S. government was the largest purchaser of cigarettes for its troops, particularly during World War I and World War II, when cigarettes were included in soldiers' rations to help manage stress and boredom. This practice entrenched smoking in military culture, and despite growing evidence of its health risks, the distribution of cigarettes continued until the 1980s, reflecting the deep ties between the military and tobacco companies, as well as the challenges of unwinding such government-corporate relationships. This negligence contributed to a surge in lung cancer deaths among veterans, highlighting the long-term consequences of the government’s failure to protect its service members from known health dangers​.

The Role of Media and Public Perception Media coverage plays a significant role in shaping public perception of risk. Gun violence, with its immediate and tragic impact, often dominates headlines and public discourse, while the slower and more pervasive threats of diet-related diseases, pharmaceutical errors, and medical mistakes receive far less attention. This sensational focus on gun violence can be seen as a diversion—a Jedi mind trick—distracting the public from the more insidious failures of industries that profit from harmful practices supported by lobbying. This imbalance in media coverage contributes to a misinformed public, more concerned with high-visibility threats than with the widespread risks quietly undermining public health.

The government's failure to regulate harmful practices in these industries is further exacerbated by a public that often lacks the agency or awareness to challenge these narratives. Many individuals rely solely on government guidance and media representation, failing to question the broader implications of their dietary and health choices. This lack of critical thinking and personal agency not only endangers individuals but also contributes to a societal decline where preventable deaths are overlooked in favor of more sensational issues.

Counterarguments and Broader Perspective on Injuries Critics of gun ownership often cite the high number of gun-related injuries, approximately 80,000 to 100,000 annually, as justification for stricter gun control laws or even measures that could infringe upon Second Amendment rights (CDC, 2022). While the severity of gun injuries should not be downplayed, it is important to put these figures in context. When compared to the roughly 2.3 to 2.5 million people injured in car accidents each year, the number of gun-related injuries is significantly smaller (NHTSA, 2022). Despite the staggering toll of car accidents, including injuries and fatalities, there is no widespread movement to ban cars or impose severe restrictions on their use.

This comparison underscores a critical point: society tends to accept certain risks as part of daily life, especially when they are associated with widely used tools or activities, like driving. The public discourse around gun violence, however, often focuses on the immediate impact and sensational nature of shootings, overshadowing the broader context of injury and risk. The call for stricter gun control based solely on injury statistics, without a comparable response to other common causes of injury, reflects a potential inconsistency in regulatory priorities.

Moreover, firearms are not only associated with harm; they also play a significant role in self-defense and saving lives. Studies suggest that firearms are used defensively by law-abiding citizens between 500,000 and 2.5 million times each year in the United States, often without a single shot being fired (Kleck & Gertz, 1995). These defensive uses can prevent assaults, home invasions, robberies, and other crimes, highlighting a crucial aspect of gun ownership that is frequently overlooked in the debate. When considering regulation, it is important to acknowledge not only the risks but also the protective benefits that firearms can provide.

While it is essential to address gun violence and its impact, a balanced approach that considers all preventable injuries and deaths is necessary. Focusing disproportionately on gun-related injuries without addressing other significant causes, such as car accidents, may suggest that the intent behind such regulation is not purely about public safety but could be influenced by other factors, including political and ideological motivations. A comprehensive public safety strategy should include an evaluation of all significant risks and the positive roles that responsible gun ownership can play in personal protection.

Conclusion and Call to Action The comparison between gun violence and other preventable deaths reveals a critical need for broader public awareness and government accountability. Diet-related diseases, pharmaceutical errors, and medical mistakes claim far more lives than firearms, yet these issues remain underregulated and underreported. While the government focuses on gun control, pushing measures that could infringe on Second Amendment rights, it fails to adequately address the systemic failures within industries that cause far more harm. This suggests a misalignment of priorities, potentially driven by financial interests and lobbying rather than genuine public health concerns. To protect public health, it is essential to demand stronger regulations on food, pharmaceuticals, and healthcare practices, challenge corrupt industry influences, and foster a society where individuals are equipped with the agency to make informed health decisions.

As we call for change, it is vital to recognize that individual action begins at home. There is an old adage: "Remove the plank from your own eye before you remove the speck from your brother’s eye" (Matthew 7:3-5). Before demanding systemic change, we must first address our own habits and choices that contribute to these broader issues. This includes making healthier food choices, critically evaluating the medications we take, and questioning the narratives presented to us. By fixing our own problems, we set a foundation for broader societal change, urging the government to realign its focus on the most significant threats to public health and respect the balance of rights enshrined in the Constitution. By addressing these more pervasive issues, we can better safeguard not only our health but also our freedoms.

Ready for more?

• Search Menu
• Sign in through your institution
• Case Discussions
• Special Symposiums
• Advance articles
• Author Guidelines
• Submission Site
• Open Access
• Why Publish with Public Health Ethics?
• About Public Health Ethics
• Editorial Board
• Advertising and Corporate Services
• Journals Career Network
• Self-Archiving Policy
• Dispatch Dates
• Terms and Conditions
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

Article Contents

Introduction, the burden of firearm violence, understanding and reducing firearm violence is complex and multi-factorial, interventions and recommendations, conclusions, research ethics.

• < Previous

Firearm Violence in the United States: An Issue of the Highest Moral Order

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data

Chisom N Iwundu, Mary E Homan, Ami R Moore, Pierce Randall, Sajeevika S Daundasekara, Daphne C Hernandez, Firearm Violence in the United States: An Issue of the Highest Moral Order, Public Health Ethics , Volume 15, Issue 3, November 2022, Pages 301–315, https://doi.org/10.1093/phe/phac017

• Permissions Icon Permissions

Firearm violence in the United States produces over 36,000 deaths and 74,000 sustained firearm-related injuries yearly. The paper describes the burden of firearm violence with emphasis on the disproportionate burden on children, racial/ethnic minorities, women and the healthcare system. Second, this paper identifies factors that could mitigate the burden of firearm violence by applying a blend of key ethical theories to support population level interventions and recommendations that may restrict individual rights. Such recommendations can further support targeted research to inform and implement interventions, policies and laws related to firearm access and use, in order to significantly reduce the burden of firearm violence on individuals, health care systems, vulnerable populations and society-at-large. By incorporating a blended public health ethics to address firearm violence, we propose a balance between societal obligations and individual rights and privileges.

Firearm violence poses a pervasive public health burden in the United States. Firearm violence is the third leading cause of injury related deaths, and accounts for over 36,000 deaths and 74,000 firearm-related injuries each year ( Siegel et al. , 2013 ; Resnick et al. , 2017 ; Hargarten et al. , 2018 ). In the past decade, over 300,000 deaths have occurred from the use of firearms in the United States, surpassing rates reported in other industrialized nations ( Iroku-Malize and Grissom, 2019 ). For example, the United Kingdom with a population of 56 million reports about 50–60 deaths per year attributable to firearm violence, whereas the United States with a much larger population, reports more than 160 times as many firearm-related deaths ( Weller, 2018 ).

Given the pervasiveness of firearm violence, and subsequent long-term effects such as trauma, expensive treatment and other burdens to the community ( Lowe and Galea, 2017 ; Hammaker et al. , 2017 ; Jehan et al. , 2018 ), this paper seeks to examine how various evidence-based recommendations might be applied to curb firearm violence, and substantiate those recommendations using a blend of the three major ethics theories which include—rights based theories, consequentialism and common good. To be clear, ours is not a morally neutral paper wherein we weigh the merits of an ethical argument for or against a recommendation nor is it a meta-analysis of the pros and cons to each public health recommendation. We intend to promote evidence-based interventions that are ethically justifiable in the quest to ameliorate firearm violence.

It is estimated that private gun ownership in the United States is 30% and an additional 11% of Americans lived with someone who owed a gun in 2017 ( Gramlich and Schaeffer, 2019 ). Some of the reported motivations for carrying a firearm include protection against people (anticipating future victimization or past victimization experience) and hunting or sport shooting ( Schleimer et al. , 2019 ). A vast majority of firearm-related injuries and death occur from intentional harm (62% from suicides and 35% from homicides) versus 2% of firearm-related injuries and death occurring from unintentional harm or accidents (e.g. unsafe storage) ( Fowler et al. , 2015 ; Lewiecki and Miller, 2013 ; Monuteaux et al. , 2019 ; Swanson et al. , 2015 ).

Rural and urban differences have been noted regarding firearms and its related injuries and deaths. In one study, similar amount of firearm deaths were reported in urban and rural areas ( Herrin et al. , 2018 ). However, the difference was that firearm deaths from homicides were higher in urban areas, and deaths from suicide and unintentional deaths were higher in rural areas ( Herrin et al. , 2018 ). In another study, suicides accounted for about 70% of firearm deaths in both rural and urban areas ( Dresang, 2001 ). Hence, efforts to implement these recommendations have the potential to prevent most firearm deaths in both rural and urban areas.

The burden of firearm injuries on society consists of not only the human and economic costs, but also productivity loss, pain and suffering. Firearm-related injuries affect the health and welfare of all and lead to substantial burden to the healthcare industry and to individuals and families ( Corso et al. , 2006 ; Tasigiorgos et al. , 2015 ). Additionally, there are disparities in firearm injuries, whereby firearm injuries disproportionately affect young people, males and non-White Americans ( Peek-Asa et al. , 2017 ). The burden of firearm also affects the healthcare system, racial/ethnic minorities, women and children.

Burden on Healthcare System

Firearm-related fatalities and injuries are a serious public health problem. On average more than 38 lives were lost every day to gun related violence in 2018 ( The Education Fund to Stop Gun Violence (EFSGV), 2020 ). A significant proportion of Americans suffer from firearm non-fatal injuries that require hospitalization and lead to physical disabilities, mental health challenges such as post-traumatic stress disorder, in addition to substantial healthcare costs ( Rattan et al. , 2018 ). Firearm violence and related injuries cost the U.S. economy about $70 billion annually, exerting a major effect on the health care system ( Tasigiorgos et al. , 2015 ).

Victims of firearm violence are also likely to need medical attention requiring high cost of care and insurance payouts which in turn raises the cost of care for everyone else, and unavoidably becomes a financial liability and source of stress on the society ( Hammaker et al. , 2017 ). Firearm injuries also exert taxing burden on the emergency departments, especially those in big cities. Patients with firearm injuries who came to the emergency departments tend to be overwhelmingly male and younger (20–24 years old) and were injured in an assault or unintentionally ( Gani et al. , 2017 ). Also, Carter et al. , 2015 found that high-risk youth (14–24 years old) who present in urban emergency departments have higher odds of having firearm-related injuries. In fact, estimates for firearm-related hospital admission costs are exorbitant. In 2012, hospital admissions for firearm injuries varied from a low average cost of $16,975 for an unintentional firearm injury to a high average cost of $32,237 for an injury from an assault weapon ( Peek-Asa et al. , 2017 ) compared with an average cost of $10,400 for a general hospital admission ( Moore et al. , 2014 ).

Burden on Racial/Ethnic Minorities, Women and Children

Though firearm violence affects all individuals, racial disparities exist in death and injury and certain groups bear a disproportionate burden of its effects. While 77% of firearm-related deaths among whites are suicides, 82% of firearm-related deaths among blacks are homicides ( Reeves and Holmes, 2015 ). Among black men aged 15–34, firearm-related death was the leading cause of death in 2012 ( Cerdá, 2016 ). The racial disparity in the leading cause of firearm-related homicide among 20- to 29-year-old adults is observed among blacks, followed by Hispanics, then whites. Also, victims of firearms tend to be from lower socioeconomic status ( Reeves and Holmes, 2015 ). Understanding behaviors that underlie violence among young adults is important. Equally important is the fiduciary duty of public health officials in creating public health interventions and policies that would effectively decrease the burden of gun violence among all Americans regardless of social, economic and racial/ethnic backgrounds.

Another population group that bears a significant burden of firearm violence are women. The violence occurs in domestic conflicts ( Sorenson and Vittes, 2003 ; Tjaden et al. , 2000 ). Studies have shown that intimate partner violence is associated with an increased risk of homicide, with firearms as the most commonly used weapon ( Leuenberger et al. , 2021 ; Gollub and Gardner, 2019 ). However, firearm threats among women who experience domestic violence has been understudied ( Sullivan and Weiss, 2017 ; Sorenson, 2017 ). It is estimated that nearly two-thirds of women who experience intimate partner violence and live in households with firearms have been held at gunpoint by intimate partners ( Sorenson and Wiebe, 2004 ). Firearms are used to threaten, coerce and intimidate women. Also, the presence of firearms in a home increases the risk of women being murdered ( Campbell et al. , 2015 ; Bailey et al. , 1997 ). Further, having a firearm in the home is strongly associated with more severe abuse among pregnant women in a study by McFarlane et al. (1998) . About half of female intimate partner homicides are committed with firearms ( Fowler, 2018 ; Díez et al. , 2017 ). Some researchers reported that availability of firearms in areas with fewer firearms restrictions has led to higher intimate partner homicides ( Gollub and Gardner, 2019 ; Díez et al. , 2017 ).

In the United States, children are nine times more likely to die from a firearm than in most other industrialized nations ( Krueger and Mehta, 2015 ). Children here include all individuals under age 18. These statistics highlight the magnitude of firearm injuries as well as firearms as a serious pediatric concern, hence, calls for appropriate interventions to address this issue. Unfortunately, children and adolescents have a substantial level of access to firearms in their homes which contributes to firearm violence and its related injuries ( Johnson et al. , 2004 ; Kim, 2018 ). About half of all U.S. households are believed to have a firearm, making firearms one of the most pervasive products consumed in the United States ( Violano et al. , 2018 ). Consequently, most of the firearms used by children and youth to inflict harm including suicides are obtained in the home ( Johnson et al. , 2008 ). Beyond physical harm, children experience increased stress, fear and anxiety from direct or indirect exposure to firearms and its related injuries. These effects have also been reported as predictors of post-traumatic stress disorders in children and could have long-term consequences that persist from childhood to adulthood ( Holly et al. , 2019 ). Additionally, the American Psychological Association’s study on violence in the media showed that witnessing violence leads to fear and mistrust of others, less sensitivity to pain experienced by others, and increases the tendency of committing violent acts ( Branas et al. , 2009 ; Calvert et al. , 2017 ).

As evidenced from the previous sections, firearm violence is a complex issue. Some argue that poor mental health, violent video games, substance abuse, poverty, a history of violence and access to firearms are some of the reasons for firearm violence ( Iroku-Malize and Grissom, 2019 ). However, the prevalence and incidence of firearm violence supersedes discrete issues and demonstrates a complex interplay among a variety of factors. Therefore, a broader public health analysis to better understand, address and reduce firearm violence is warranted. Some important factors as listed above should be taken into consideration to more fully understand firearm violence which can consequently facilitate processes for mitigation of the frequency and severity of firearm violence.

Lack of Research Prevents Better Understanding of Problem of Firearm Violence

A major stumbling block to understanding the prevalence and incidence of firearm related violence exists from a lack of rigorous scientific study of the problem. Firearm violence research constitutes less than 0.09% of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s annual budget ( Rajan et al. , 2018 ). Further research on firearm violence is greatly limited by the Dickey Amendment, first passed in 1996 and annually thereafter in budget appropriations, which prohibits use of federal funds to advocate or promote firearm control ( Rostron, 2018 ). As such, the Dickey Amendment impedes future federally funded research, even as public health’s interest in firearm violence prevention increased ( Peetz and Haider, 2018 ; Rostron, 2018 ). In the absence of rigorous research, a deeper understanding and development of evidence-based prevention measures continue to be needed.

Lack of a Public Health Ethical Argument Against Firearm Use Impedes Violence Prevention

We make an argument that gun violence is a public health problem. While some might think that public health is primarily about reducing health-related externalities, it is embedded in key values such as harm reduction, social justice, prevention and protection of health and social justice and equity ( Institute of Medicine, 2003 ). Public health practice is also historically intertwined with politics, power and governance, especially with the influence of the states decision-making and policies on its citizens ( Lee and Zarowsky, 2015 ). According to the World Health Organization, health is a complete physical, mental and social well-being that is not just the absence of injury or disease ( Callahan, 1973 ). Health is fundamental for human flourishing and there is a need for public health systems to protect health and prevent injuries for individuals and communities. Public health ethics, then, is the practical decision making that supports public health’s mandate to promote health and prevent disease, disability and injury in the population. It is imperative for the public health community to ask what ought to be done/can be done to curtail firearm violence and its related burdens. Sound public health ethical reasoning must be employed to support recommendations that can be used to justify various public policy interventions.

The argument that firearm violence is a public health problem could suggest that public health methods (e.g. epidemiological methods) can be used to study gun violence. Epidemiological approaches to gun violence could be applied to study its frequency, pattern, distribution, determinants and measure the effects of interventions. Public health is also an interdisciplinary field often drawing on knowledge and input from social sciences, humanities, etc. Gun violence could be viewed as a crime-related problem rather than public health; however, there are, of course, a lot of ways to study crime, and in this case with public health relevance. One dominant paradigm in criminology is the economic model which often uses natural experiments to isolate causal mechanisms. For example, it might matter whether more stringent background checks reduce the availability of guns for crime, or whether, instead, communities that implement more stringent background checks also tend to have lower rates of gun ownership to begin with, and stronger norms against gun availability. Therefore, public health authorities and criminologists may tend to have overlapping areas of expertise aimed to lead to best practices advice for gun control.

Our paper draws on three major theories: (1) rights-based theories, (2) consequentialism and (3) the common good approach. These theories make a convergent case for firearm violence, and despite their significant divergence, strengthen our public health ethics approach to firearm. The key aspects of these three theories are briefly reviewed with respect to how one might use a theory to justify an intervention or recommendation to reduce firearm injuries.

Rights-Based Theories

The basic idea of the rights framework is that people have certain rights, and that therefore it is impermissible to treat people in certain ways even if doing so would promote the overall good. People have rights to safety, security and an environment generally free from risky pitfalls. Conversely, people also have a right to own a gun especially as emphasized in the U.S.’s second amendment. Another theory embedded within our discussion of rights-based theories is deontology. Deontological approaches to ethics hold that we have moral obligations or duties that are not reducible to the need to promote some end (such as happiness or lives saved). These duties are generally thought to specify what we owe to others as persons ( rights bearers ). There are specific considerations that define moral behaviors and specific ways in which people within different disciplines ought to behave to effectively achieve their goals.

Huemer (2003) argued that the right to own a firearm has both a fundamental (independent of other rights) and derivative justification, insofar as the right is derived from another right - the right to self-defense ( Huemer, 2003 ). Huemer gives two arguments for why we have a right to own a gun:

People place lots of importance on owning a gun. Generally, the state should not restrict things that people enjoy unless doing so imposes substantial risk of harm to others.

People have a right to defend themselves from violent attackers. This entails that they have a right to obtain the means necessary to defend themselves. In a modern society, a gun is a necessary means to defend oneself from a violent attacker. Therefore, people have a right to obtain a gun.

Huemer’s first argument could be explained that it would be permissible to violate someone’s right to own or use a firearm in order to promote some impersonal good (e.g. number of lives saved). Huemer’s second argument also justifies a fundamental right to gun ownership. According to Huemer, gun restrictions violate the right of individual gun owners to defend themselves. Gun control laws will result in coercively stopping people to defend themselves when attacked. To him, the right to self-defense does seem like it would be fundamental. It seems intuitive to argue that, at some level, if someone else attacks a person out of the blue, the person is morally required to defend themselves if they cannot escape. However, having a right to self-defense does not entail that your right to obtain the means necessary to that thing cannot be burdened at all.

While we have a right to own a gun, that right is weaker than other kinds of rights. For example, gun ownership seems in no way tied to citizenship in a democracy or being a member of the community. Also, since other nations/democracies get along fine without a gun illustrates that gun ownership is not important enough to be a fundamental right. Interestingly, the UK enshrines a basic right to self-defense, but explicitly denies any right to possess any particular means of self-defense. This leads to some interesting legal peculiarities where it can be illegal to possess a handgun, but not illegal to use a handgun against an assailant in self-defense.

In the United States, implementing gun control policies to minimize gun related violence triggers the argument that such policies are infringements on the Second Amendment, which states that the rights to bear arms shall not be infringed. The constitution might include a right to gun ownership for a variety of reasons. However, it is not clear from the text itself that the right to bear arms is supposed to be as fundamental as the right to freedom of expression. Further, one could argue, then, that any form of gun regulation is borne from the rationale to retain our autonomy. Protections from gun violence are required to treat others as autonomous agents or as bearers of dignity. We owe others certain protections and affordances at least in part because these are necessary to respect their autonomy (or dignity, etc.). We discuss potential recommendations to minimize gun violence while protecting the rights of individuals to purchase a firearm if they meet the necessary and reasonable regulatory requirements. Most of the gun control regulations discussed in this article could provide an opportunity to ensure the safety of communities without unduly infringing on the right to keep a firearm.

Consequentialism

Consequentialism is the view that we should promote the common good even if doing so infringes upon some people’s (apparent) rights. The case for gun regulation under this theory is made by showing how many lives it would save. Utilitarianism, a part of consequentialist approach proposes actions which maximize happiness and the well-being for the majority while minimizing harm. Utilitarianism is based on the idea that a consequence should be of maximum benefit ( Holland, 2014 ) and that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness as the ultimate moral norm. If one believes that the moral purpose of public health is to make decisions that will produce maximal benefits for most affected, remove or prevent harm and ensure equitable distribution of burdens and benefits ( Bernheim and Childress, 2013 ), they are engaging in a utilitarian theory. Rights, including the rights to bear arms, are protected so long as they preserve the greater good. However, such rights can be overridden or ignored when they conflict with the principle of utility; that is to say, if greater harm comes from personal possession of a firearm, utilitarianism is often the ethical theory of choice to restrict access to firearms, including interventions that slow down access to firearms such as requiring a gun locker at home. However, it is important to note that utilitarians might also argue that one has to weigh how frustrating a gun locker would be to people who like to go recreationally hunting. Or how much it would diminish the feeling of security for someone who knows that if a burglar breaks in, it might take several minutes to fumble while inputting the combination on their locker to access their gun.

Using a utilitarian approach, current social statistics show that firearm violence affects a great number of people, and firearm-related fatalities and injuries threaten the utility, or functioning of another. Therefore, certain restrictions or prohibitions on firearms can be ethically justifiable to prevent harm to others using a utilitarian approach. Similarly, the infringement of individual freedom could be warranted as it protects others from serious harm. However, one might argue that a major flaw in the utilitarian argument is that it fails to see the benefit of self-defense as a reasonable benefit. Utilitarianism as a moral theory would weigh the benefits of proposed restrictions against its costs, including its possible costs to a felt sense of security on the part of gun owners. A utilitarian argument that neglects some of the costs of regulations wouldn’t be a very good argument.

One might legitimately argue that if an individual is buying a firearm, whether for protection or recreation, they are morally responsible to abide by the laws and regulations regarding purchasing that firearm and ensuring the safety of others in the society. Additionally, vendors and licensing/enforcement authorities would have the responsibility to ensure the safety of the rest of the society by ensuring that the firearm purchase does not compromise the safety of the community. Most people who own firearms would not argue against this position. However, arguments in support of measures that will reduce the availability of firearms center around freedom and liberty and are not as well tolerated by those who argue from a libertarian starting point. Further, this would stipulate that measures against firearm purchase or use impinge upon the rights of individuals who have the freedom to pursue what they perceive as good ( Holland, 2014 ). However, it seems as though the state has a fundamental duty to help ensure an adequate degree of safety for its citizens, and it seems that the best way to do that is to limit gun ownership.

Promoting the Common Good

A well-organized society that promotes the common good of all is to everyone’s advantage ( Ruger, 2015 ). In addition, enabling people to flourish in a society includes their ability to be healthy. The view of common good consists of ensuring the welfare of individuals considered as a group or the public. This group of people are presumed to have a common interest in protection and preservation from harms to the group ( Beauchamp, 1985 ). Health and security are shared by members of a community, and guns are an attempt to privatize public security and safety, and so is antithetical to the common good. Can one really be healthy or safe in a society where one’s neighbors are subject to gun violence? Maybe not, and so then this violence is a threat to one’s life too. If guns really are an effective means of self-defense, they help one defend only oneself while accepting that others in one’s community might be at risk. One might also argue that the more guns there are, the more that society accepts the legitimacy of gun ownership and the more that guns have a significant place in culture etc., and consequently, the more that there is likely to be a problem.

Trivigno (2018) suggests that the willingness to carry a firearm indicates an intention to use it if the need arises and Branas et al (2009) argue that perpetually carrying a firearm might affect how individuals behave ( Trivigno, 2018 ; Branas et al. , 2009 ). When all things are equal, will prudence and a commitment to the flourishing of others prevail? Trivigno (2013) wonders if such behaviors as carrying or having continual access to a firearm generates mistrust or triggers fear of an unknown armed assailant, allowing for aggression or anger to build; the exact opposite of flourishing ( Trivigno, 2013 ). One could suggest, then, that the recreational use of firearms is also commonly vicious. Many people use firearms to engage in blood sport, killing animals for their own amusement. For example, someone who kicks puppies or uses a magnifying glass to fry ants with the sun seems paradigmatically vicious; why not think the same of someone who shoots deer or rabbits for their amusement?. Firearm proponents might suggest that the fidelity (living out one’s commitments) or justice, which Aristotle holds in high regard, could justify carrying a firearm to protect one’s life, livelihood, or loved ones insofar as it would be just of a person to defend and protect the life of another or even one’s own life when under threat by one who means to do harm. Despite an argument justifying the use of a firearm against another for self-defense after the fact, the action might not have been right when evaluated through the previous rationale, or applying the doctrine of double effect as described by Aquinas’ passage in the Summa II-II, which mentions that self-defense is quite different than taking it upon one’s self to mete out justice ( Schlabach, n.d. ). The magistrate is charged with seeing that justice is done for the common good. At best, if guns really are an effective means of self-defense, they help one defend only oneself while accepting that others in one’s community might be at risk. They take a common good, the health and safety of the community, and make it a private one. For Aquinas and many other modern era ethicists, intention plays a critical part in judgment of an action. Accordingly, many who oppose any ownership of firearms do so in both a paternalistic fashion (one cannot intend harm if they don’t have access to firearms) and virtuous fashion (enabling human flourishing).

Classical formulations of the double doctrine effect include necessity and proportionality conditions. So, it’s wrong to kill in self-defense if you could simply run away (without giving up something morally important in doing so), or to use deadly force in self-defense when someone is trying to slap you. One thing the state can do, in its role of promoting the common good, is to reduce when it is necessary to use self-defense. If there were no police at all, then anyone who robs you without consequence will probably be back, so there’s a stronger reason to use deadly force against them to feel secure. That’s bad, because it seems to allow violence that truly isn’t necessary because no one is providing the good of public security. So, one role of the state is to reduce the number of cases in which the use of deadly force is necessary for our safety. Since most homicides in the United State involve a firearm, one way to reduce the frequency of cases in which deadly force is necessary for self-defense is to reduce the instances of gun crime.

We have attempted to lay the empirical and ethical groundwork necessary to support various interventions, and the recommendations aimed at curbing firearm violence that will be discussed in this next section. Specifically, by discussing the burden of the problem in its various forms (healthcare costs, disproportionate violence towards racial/ethnic minority groups, women, children, vulnerable populations and the lack of research) and the ethics theories public health finds most accessible, we can now turn our attention to well-known, evidence-based recommendations that could be supported by the blended ethics approach: rights-based theories, consequentialism and the common-good approach discussed.

Comprehensive, Universal Background Checks for Firearm Sales

Of the 17 million persons who submitted to a background check to purchase or transfer possession of a firearm in 2010, less than 0.5% were denied approval of purchase ( Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2014 ). At present, a background check is required only when a transfer is made by a licensed retailer, and nearly 40% of firearm transfers in recent years were private party transfers ( Miller et al. , 2017 ). As such, close to one-fourth of individuals who acquired a firearm within the last two years obtained their firearm without a background check ( Miller et al. , 2017 ). Anestis et al. , (2017) and Siegel et al. , (2019) evaluated the relationship between the types of background information required by states prior to firearm purchases and firearm homicide and suicide deaths ( Anestis et al. , 2017 ; Siegel et al. , 2019 ). Firearm homicide deaths appear lower in states checking for restraining orders and fugitive status as opposed to only conducting criminal background checks ( Sen and Panjamapirom, 2012 ). Similarly, suicide involving firearm were lower in states checking for a history of mental illness, fugitive status and misdemeanors ( Sen and Panjamapirom, 2012 ).

Research supports the evidence that comprehensive universal background checks could limit crimes associated with firearms, and enforcement of such laws and policies could prevent firearm violence ( Wintemute, 2019 ; Lee et al. , 2017 ). Comprehensive, universal background check policies that are applicable to all firearm transactions, including private party transfers, sales by firearm dealers and sales at firearm shows are justifiable using a blend of the ethics theories we have previously discussed. With the rights-based approach, one could still honor the right to own a firearm by a competent person while also enforcing the obligation of the firearm vendor to ensure only a qualified individual purchased the firearm. To further reduce gun crime, rather than ensure only the right people own guns, we can just reduce the number of guns owned overall. Consequentialism could be employed to ensure the protection of the most vulnerable such as victims of domestic violence and allowing a firearm vendor to stop a sale to an unqualified individual if they had a history of suspected or proven domestic violence. Also, having universal background checks that go beyond the bare minimum of assessing if a person has a permit, the legally required training, etc., but delving more deeply into a person’s past, such as the inclusion of a red flag ( Honberg, 2020 ), would be promoting the common good approach by creating the conditions for persons to be good and do good while propelling community safety.

Renewable License Before Buying and After Purchase of Firearm and Training Firearm Owners

At present, federal law does not require licensing for firearm owners or purchasers. However, state licensing laws fall into four categories: (1) permits to purchase firearms, (2) licenses to own firearms, (3) firearm safety certificates and (4) registration laws that impose licensing requirements ( Anestis et al. , 2015 ; Giffords Licensing, n.d. ). A study conducted in urban U.S. counties with populations greater than 200,000 indicated that permit-to-purchase laws were associated with 14% reduction in firearm homicides ( Crifasi et al. , 2018 ). In Connecticut, enforcing a mandatory permit-to-purchase law making it illegal to sell a hand firearm to anyone who did not have an eligible certificate to purchase firearms was associated with a reduction in firearm associated homicides ( Rudolph et al. , 2015 ). This also resulted in a significant reduction in the rates of firearm suicide rates in Connecticut ( Crifasi et al. , 2015 ). Conversely, the permit-to-purchase law was repealed in Missouri in 2007, which resulted in an increase of homicides with firearms and firearm suicides ( Crifasi et al. , 2015 ; Webster et al. , 2014 ). Similarly, two large Florida counties indicated that 72% of firearm suicides involved people who were legally permitted to have a firearm ( Swanson et al. , 2016 ). According to the study findings, a majority of those who were eligible to have firearms died from firearm-related suicide, and also had records of previous short-term involuntary holds that were not reportable legal events.

In addition to comprehensive, universal background checks for firearm purchases, licensing with periodic review requires the purchaser to complete an in-person application at a law enforcement agency, which could (1) minimize fraud or inaccuracies and (2) prevent persons at risk of harming themselves or others to purchase firearms ( Crifasi et al. , 2019 ). Subsequent periodic renewal could further reduce crimes and violence associated with firearms by helping law enforcement to confirm that a firearm owner remains eligible to possess firearms. More frequent licensure checks through periodic renewals could also facilitate the removal of firearms from individuals who do not meet renewal rules.

Further, including training on gun safety and shooting with every firearm license request could also be beneficial in reducing gun violence. In Japan, if you are interested in acquiring a gun license, you need to attend a one-day gun training session in addition to mental health evaluation and background check ( Alleman, 2000 ). This training teaches future firearm owners the steps they would need to follow and the responsibilities of owning a gun. The training completes with passing a written test and achieving at least a 95% accuracy during a shooting-range test. Firearm owners need to retake the class and initial exam every three years to continue to have their guns. This training and testing have contributed to the reduction in gun related deaths in Japan. Implementing such requirements could reduce gun misuses. Even though, this is a lengthy process, it could manage and reduce the risks associated with firearm purchases and will support a well-regulated firearm market. While some may argue that other forms of weapons could be used to inflict harm, reduced access to firearms would lead to a significant decrease in the number of firearm-related injuries in the United States.

From an ethics perspective, again, all three theories could be applied to the recommendation for renewable licenses and gun training. From a rights-based perspective, renewable licensure and gun training would still allow for the right to bear arms but would ensure that the right belongs with qualified persons and again would allow the proper state agency to exercise its responsibility to its citizens. Additionally, a temporary removal of firearms or prohibiting firearm purchases by people involuntarily detained in short-term holds might be an opportunity to ensure people’s safety and does so without unduly infringing on the Second Amendment rights. Renewable licenses and gun training create opportunities for law enforcement to step in periodically to ascertain if a licensee remains competent, free from criminal behavior or mental illness, which reduces the harm to the individual and to the community—a tidy application of consequentialism. Again, by creating the conditions for people to be good, we see an exercise of the common good.

Licensing Firearm Dealers and Tracking Firearm Sales

In any firearm transfer or purchase, there are two parties involved: the firearm vendor and the individual purchaser. Federal law states that “it shall be unlawful for any person, except for a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer, to engage in the business of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in firearms, or in the course of such business to ship, transport, or receive any firearm in interstate or foreign commerce” (18 U.S.C. 1 922(a)(1)(A)(2007). All firearm sellers must obtain a federal firearm license issued by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). However, ATF does not have the complete authority to inspect firearm dealers for license, revoke firearm license, or take legal actions against sellers providing firearms to criminals ( Vernick and Webster, 2007 ). Depending on individual state laws, typically the firearm purchaser maintains responsibility in obtaining the proper license for each firearm purchase whereas the justice system has the responsibility to enforce laws regulating firearm sales. Firearm manufacturers typically sell their products through licensed distributors and dealers, or a primary market (such as a retail store). Generally, firearms used to conduct a crime (including homicide) or to commit suicide are the product of secondary markets ( Institute of Medicine, 2003 ) such as retail secondhand sales or private citizen transfers/sales. Such secondary firearm transfers are largely unregulated and allow for illegal firearm purchases by persons traditionally prohibited from purchasing in the primary market ( Vernick and Webster, 2007 ; Chesnut et al. , 2017 ).

According to evidence from Irvin et al. (2014) in states that require licensing for firearm dealers and/or allow inspections, the reported rates of homicides were lower ( Irvin et al. , 2014 ). Specifically, after controlling for race, urbanicity, poverty level, sex, age, education level, drug arrest rate, burglary rates and firearm ownership proxy, the states that require licensing for firearm dealers reported ~25% less risk of homicides, and the states that allow inspection reported ~35% less risk of homicides ( Irvin et al. , 2014 ). This protective effect against homicides was stronger in states that require both licensing and inspections compared to states that require either alone. The record keeping of all firearm sales is important as it facilitates police or other authorized inspectors to compare a dealer’s inventory with their records to identify any secondary market transactions or other discrepancies ( Vernick et al. , 2006 ). According to Webster et al. (2006) , a change in firearm sales policy in the firearm store that sold more than half of the firearms recovered from criminals in Milwaukee, resulted in a 96% reduction in the use of recently sold firearms in crime and 44% decrease in the flow of new trafficked firearms in Milwaukee ( Webster et al. , 2006 ).

The licensing of firearm vendors and tracking of firearm sales sits squarely as a typical public health consequentialist argument; in order to protect the community, an individual’s right is only minimally infringed upon. An additional layer, justifiable by consequentialism, includes a national repository of all firearm sales which can be employed to minimize the sale of firearms on the secondary market and dealers could be held accountable for such ‘off-label’ use ( FindLaw Attorney Writers, 2016 ). Enforcing laws, mandating record keeping, retaining the records for a reasonable time and mandating the inspection of dealers could help to control secondary market firearm transfers and minimize firearm-related crimes and injuries.

One could argue from a rights perspective that routine inspections and record keeping are the responsibility of both firearms vendors and law enforcement, and in doing so, still ensure that competent firearm owners can maintain their rights to bear arms. In Hume’s discussion of property rights, he situates his argument in justice; and that actions must be virtuous and the motive virtuous ( Hume, 1978 ). Hume proposes that feelings of benevolence don’t form our motivation to be just. We tend (perhaps rightly) to feel stronger feelings of benevolence to those who deserve praise than to those who have wronged us or who deserve the enmity of humanity. However, justice requires treating the property rights or contracts of one’s enemies, or of a truly loathsome person, as equally binding as the property rights of honest, decent people. Gun violence disproportionately impacts underserved communities, which are same communities impacted by social and economic injustice.

Standardized Policies on Safer Storage for Firearms and Mandatory Education

Results from a cross-sectional study by Johnson and colleagues showed that about 14-30% of parents who have firearms in the home keep them loaded, while about 43% reported an unlocked firearm in the home ( Johnson et al. , 2006 ; Johnson et al. , 2008 ). The risk for unintentional fatalities from firearms can be prevented when all household firearms are locked ( Monuteaux et al. , 2019 ). Negligent storage of a firearm carries various penalties based on the individual state ( RAND, 2018 ). For example, negligent storage in Massachusetts is a felony. Mississippi and Tennessee prohibit reckless or knowingly providing firearms to minors through a misdemeanor charge, whereas Missouri and Kentucky enforce a felony charge. Also, Tennessee makes it a felony for parents to recklessly or knowingly provide firearms to their children ( RAND, 2018 ).

While a competent adult may have a right to bear arms, this right does not extend to minors, even in recreational use. Many states allow for children to participate in hunting. Wisconsin allows for children as young as 12 to purchase a hunting license, and in 2017 then Governor Scott Walker signed into law a no age minimum for a child to participate in a mentored hunt and to carry a firearm in a hunt when accompanied by an adult ( Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 2020 ). The minor’s ‘right’ to use a firearm is due in part to the adult taking responsibility for the minor’s safety. As such, some have argued that children need to know how to be safe around firearms as they continue to be one of the most pervasive consumer products in the United States ( Violano et al. , 2018 ).

In addition to locking firearms, parents are also encouraged to store firearms unloaded in a safe locked box or cabinet to prevent children’s access to firearms ( Johnson et al. , 2008 ). It follows then that reducing children and youth’s access to firearm injuries involves complying with safe firearm storage practices ( McGee et al. , 2003 ). In addition to eliminating sources of threat to the child, it is also important for children to be trained on how to safely respond in case they encounter a firearm in an unsupervised environment. Education is one of the best strategies for firearm control, storage and reduction of firearm-related injuries via development of firearm safety trainings and programs ( Jones, 1993 ; Holly et al. , 2019 ). Adults also need firearm safety education and trainings; as such, inclusion of firearm safety skills and trainings in the university-based curriculum and other avenues were adults who use guns are likely to be, could also mitigate firearm safety issues ( Puttagunta et al. , 2016 ; Damari et al. , 2018 ). Peer tutoring could also be utilized to provide training in non-academic and social settings.

Parents have a duty to protect their children and therefore mandating safe firearm storage, education and training for recreational use and periodic review of those who are within the purview of the law. Given that someone in the U. S. gets shot by a toddler a little more frequently than once a week ( Ingraham, 2017 ), others might use a utilitarian argument that limiting a child’s access to firearms minimizes the possibility of accidental discharge or intentional harm to a child or another. Again, the common good approach could be employed to justify mandatory safe storage and education to create the conditions for the flourishing of all.

Firearm and Ammunition Buy-Back Programs

Firearm and ammunition buy-back programs have been implemented in several cities in the United States to reduce the number of firearms in circulation with the ultimate goal of reducing gun violence. The first launch in Baltimore, Maryland was in 1974. The Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) has conducted a gun buy-back program for nearly eight years to remove more guns off the streets and improve security in communities. Currently there is a plan for a federal gun buy-back program in the United States. The objective of such programs is to reduce gun violence through motivating marginal criminals to sell their firearms to local governments, encourage law-abiding individuals to sell their firearms available for theft by would-be criminals, and to reduce firearm related suicide resulting from easy access to a gun at a time of high emotion ( Barber and Miller, 2014 ).

According to Kuhn et al. (2002) and Callahan et al. (1994) , gun buy-back programs are ineffective in reducing gun violence due to two main facts: 1- the frequently surrendered types of firearms are typically not involved in gun-related violence and 2- the majority of participants in gun buyback programs are typically women and older adults who are not often involved in interpersonal violence ( Kuhn et al. , 2002 ; Callahan et al. , 1994 ). However, as a result of implementation of the ‘‘good for guns’’ program in Worcester, Massachusetts, there has been a decline in firearm related injuries and mortality in Worcester county compared to other counties in Massachusetts ( Tasigiorgos et al. , 2015 ). Even though, there is limited research indicating a direct link between gun buy-back programs and reduction in gun violence in the United States, a gun buy-back program implemented in Australia in combination with other legislations to reduce household ownership of firearms, firearm licenses and licensed shooters was associated with a rapid decline in firearm related deaths in Australia ( Bartos et al. , 2020 ; Ozanne-Smith et al. , 2004 ).

The frequency of disparities in firearm-related violence, injuries and death makes it a central concern for public health. Even though much has been said about firearms and its related injuries, there continues to be an interest towards its use. Some people continue to desire guns due to fear, feeling of protection and safety, recreation and social pressure.

Further progress on reforms can be made through understanding the diversity of firearm owners, and further research is needed on ways to minimize risks while maximizing safety for all. Although studies have provided data on correlation between firearm possession and violence ( Stroebe, 2013 ), further research is needed to evaluate the interventions and policies that could effectively decrease the public health burden of firearm violence. Evidence-based solutions to mitigating firearm violence can be justified using three major public health ethics theories: rights-based theories, consequentialism and common good. The ethical theories discussed in this paper can direct implementation of research, policies, laws and interventions on firearm violence to significantly reduce the burden of firearm violence on individuals, health care systems, vulnerable populations and the society-at-large. We support five major steps to achieve those goals: 1. Universal, comprehensive background checks; 2. Renewable license before and after purchase of firearm; 3. Licensing firearm dealers and tracking firearm sales; 4. Standardized policies on safer storage for firearms and mandatory education; and 5. Firearm buy-back programs. For some of the goals we propose, there might be a substantial risk of non-compliance. However, we hope that through education and sensibilization programs, overtime, these goals are not met with resistance. By acknowledging the proverbial struggle of individual rights and privileges paired against population health, we hope our ethical reasoning can assist policymakers, firearm advocates and public health professionals in coming to shared solutions to eliminate unnecessary, and preventable, injuries and deaths due to firearms.

The conducted research is not related to either human or animal use.

Alleman , M. ( 2000 ). The Japanese Firearm and Sword Possession Control Law: Translator’s Introduction . Washington International Law Journal , 9 , 165 .

Google Scholar

Anestis , M. D. , Khazem , L. R. , Law , K. C. , Houtsma , C. , LeTard , R. , Moberg , F. and Martin , R. ( 2015 ). The Association Between State Laws Regulating Handgun Ownership and Statewide Suicide Rates . American Journal of Public Health , 105 , 2059 – 2067 .

Anestis , M. D. , Anestis , J. C. and Butterworth , S. E. ( 2017 ). Handgun Legislation and Changes in Statewide Overall Suicide Rates . American Journal of Public Health , 107 , 579 – 581 .

Bailey , J. E. , Kellermann , A. L. , Somes , G. W. , Banton , J. G. , Rivara , F. P. and Rushforth , N. P. ( 1997 ). Risk factors for violent death of women in the home . Archives of Internal Medicine , 157 , 777 – 782 .

Barber , C. W. and Miller , M. J. ( 2014 ). Reducing a suicidal person’s access to lethal means of suicide: a research agenda . American Journal of Preventive Medicine , 47 , S264 – S272 .

Bartos , B. J. , McCleary , R. , Mazerolle , L. and Luengen , K. ( 2020 ). Controlling Gun Violence: Assessing the Impact of Australia’s Gun Buyback Program Using a Synthetic Control Group Experiment . Prevention Science: The Official Journal of the Society for Prevention Research , 21 , 131 – 136 .

Beauchamp , D. E. ( 1985 ). Community: the neglected tradition of public health . The Hastings Center Report , 15 , 28 – 36 .

Bernheim , R.G. , Childress , J.F. ( 2013 ). Introduction: A Framework for Public Health Ethics. In Essentials of Public Health Ethics . Burlington, MA : Jones & Bartlett .

Google Preview

Branas , C. C. , Richmond , T. S. , Culhane , D. P. , Ten Have , T. R. and Wiebe , D. J. ( 2009 ). Investigating the Link Between Gun Possession and Gun Assault . American Journal of Public Health , 99 , 2034 – 2040 .

Callahan , D. ( 1973 ). The WHO definition of ‘health’ . Studies - Hastings Center , 1 , 77 – 88 .

Callahan , C. M. , Rivara , F. P. and Koepsell , T. D. ( 1994 ). Money for Guns: Evaluation of the Seattle Gun Buy-Back Program . Public Health Reports , 109 , 472 – 477 .

Calvert , S. L. , Appelbaum , M. , Dodge , K. A. , Graham , S. , Nagayama Hall , G. C. , Hamby , S. , Fasig-Caldwell , L. G. , Citkowicz , M. , Galloway , D. P. and Hedges , L. V. ( 2017 ). The American Psychological Association Task Force Assessment of Violent Video Games: Science in the Service of Public Interest . The American Psychologist , 72 , 126 – 143 .

Campbell , D. J. T. , O’Neill , B. G. , Gibson , K. and Thurston , W. E. ( 2015 ). Primary healthcare needs and barriers to care among Calgary’s homeless populations . BMC Family Practice , 16( 1 ), 139 .

Carter , P. M. , Walton , M. A. , Roehler , D. R. , Goldstick , J. , Zimmerman , M. A. , Blow , F. C. and Cunningham , R. M. ( 2015 ). Firearm Violence Among High-Risk Emergency Department Youth After an Assault Injury . Pediatrics , 135 , 805 – 815 .

Cerdá , M. ( 2016 ). Editorial: Gun Violence—Risk, Consequences, and Prevention . American Journal of Epidemiology , 183 , 516 – 517 .

Chesnut , K. Y. , Barragan , M. , Gravel , J. , Pifer , N. A. , Reiter , K. , Sherman , N. and Tita , G. E. ( 2017 ). Not an ‘iron pipeline’, but many capillaries: regulating passive transactions in Los Angeles’ secondary, illegal gun market . Injury Prevention: Journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention , 23 , 226 – 231 .

Corso , P. , Finkelstein , E. , Miller , T. , Fiebelkorn , I. and Zaloshnja , E. ( 2006 ). Incidence and lifetime costs of injuries in the United States . Injury Prevention: Journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention , 12 , 212 – 218 .

Crifasi , C. K. , Meyers , J. S. , Vernick , J. S. and Webster , D. W. ( 2015 ). Effects of changes in permit-to- purchase handgun laws in Connecticut and Missouri on suicide rates . Preventive Medicine , 79 , 43 – 49 .

Crifasi , C. K. , Merrill-Francis , M. , McCourt , A. , Vernick , J. S. , Wintemute , G. J. and Webster , D. W. ( 2018 ). Association between Firearm Laws and Homicide in Urban Counties . Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine , 95 , 383 – 390 .

Crifasi , C.K. , McCourt , A.D. , Webster , D.W. ( 2019 ). The Impact of Handgun Purchaser Licensing on Gun Violence . Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Center for Gun Policy and Research .

Damari , N. D. , Ahluwalia , K. S. , Viera , A. J. and Goldstein , A. O. ( 2018 ). Continuing Medical Education and Firearm Violence Counseling . AMA Journal of Ethics , 20 , 56 – 68 .

Díez , C. , Kurland , R. P. , Rothman , E. F. , Bair-Merritt , M. , Fleegler , E. , Xuan , Z. , Galea , S. , Ross , C. S. , Kalesan , B. , Goss , K. A. and Siegel , M. ( 2017 ). State Intimate Partner Violence-Related Firearm Laws and Intimate Partner Homicide Rates in the United States, 1991 to 2015 . Annals of Internal Medicine , 167 , 536 – 543 .

Dresang , L. T. ( 2001 ). Gun deaths in rural and urban settings: recommendations for prevention . The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice , 14 , 107 – 115 .

Federal Bureau of Investigation ( 2014 ). National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) Operations 2014 . Washington, DC : U.S. Department of Justice .

FindLaw Attorney Writers ( 2016 ). Responsibility of Firearm Owners and Dealers for Their Second Amendment Right to Bear Arms: A Survey of the Caselaw . Findlaw , available from: https://corporate.findlaw.com/litigation-disputes/responsibility-of-firearm-owners-and-dealers-for-their-second.html [accessed June 23, 2021 ].

Fowler , K. A. ( 2018 ). Surveillance for Violent Deaths — National Violent Death Reporting System, 18 States, 2014 . MMWR. Surveillance Summaries , 67 , 1 – 36 .

Fowler , K. A. , Dahlberg , L. L. , Haileyesus , T. and Annest , J. L. ( 2015 ). Firearm injuries in the United States . Preventive Medicine , 79 , 5 – 14 .

Gani , F. , Sakran , J. V. and Canner , J. K. ( 2017 ). Emergency Department Visits For Firearm-Related Injuries In The United States, 2006–14 . Health Affairs , 36 , 1729 – 1738 .

Giffords Law Center ( n.d .) Licensing. Available from https://giffords.org/lawcenter/gun-laws/policy-areas/owner-responsibilities/licensing/

Gollub , E. L. and Gardner , M. ( 2019 ). Firearm Legislation and Firearm Use in Female Intimate Partner Homicide Using National Violent Death Reporting System Data . Preventive Medicine , 118 , 216 – 219 .

Gramlich , J. , Schaeffer , K. ( 2019 ). 7 Facts About Guns in the U.S . Pew Research Center , available from: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/10/22/facts-about-guns-in-united-states/ [accessed September 23, 2020 ].

Hammaker , D.K. , Knadig , T.M. , Tomlinson , S.J. ( 2017 ). Environmental Safety and Gun Injury Prevention. In Health care ethics and the law . Jones & Bartlett Learning , pp. 319 – 335 .

Hargarten , S. W. , Lerner , E. B. , Gorelick , M. , Brasel , K. , deRoon-Cassini , T. and Kohlbeck , S. ( 2018 ). Gun Violence: A Biopsychosocial Disease . Western Journal of Emergency Medicine , 19 , 1024 – 1027 .

Herrin , B. R. , Gaither , J. R. , Leventhal , J. M. and Dodington , J. ( 2018 ). Rural Versus Urban Hospitalizations for Firearm Injuries in Children and Adolescents . Pediatrics , 142 ( 2 ), e20173318 .

Holland , S. ( 2014 ). Public Health Ethics . 2nd ed. Malden, MA : Polity Press .

Holly , C. , Porter , S. , Kamienski , M. and Lim , A. ( 2019 ). School-Based and Community-Based Gun Safety Educational Strategies for Injury Prevention . Health Promotion Practice , 20 , 38 – 47 .

Honberg , R. S. ( 2020 ). Mental Illness and Gun Violence: Research and Policy Options . The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics , 48 , 137 – 141 .

Huemer , M. ( 2003 ). Is There a Right to Own a Gun? Social Theory and Practice , 29 , 297 – 324 .

Hume , D. ( 1978 ). David Hume: A Treatise of Human Nature . 2nd edn. New York, United States : Oxford University Press .

Ingraham , C. ( 2017 ). Analysis | American Toddlers Are Still Shooting People on a Weekly Basis This Year . Washington Post . https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/09/29/american-toddlers-are-still-shooting-people-on-a-weekly-basis-this-year/

Institute of Medicine ( 2003 ). Who Will Keep the Public Healthy?: Educating Public Health Professionals for the 21st Century .

Iroku-Malize , T. and Grissom , M. ( 2019 ). Violence and Public and Personal Health: Gun Violence . FP Essentials , 480 , 16 – 21 .

Irvin , N. , Rhodes , K. , Cheney , R. and Wiebe , D. ( 2014 ). Evaluating the Effect of State Regulation of Federally Licensed Firearm Dealers on Firearm Homicide . American Journal of Public Health , 104 , 1384 – 1386 .

Jehan , F. , Pandit , V. , O’Keeffe , T. , Azim , A. , Jain , A. , Tai , S. A. , Tang , A. , Khan , M. , Kulvatunyou , N. , Gries , L. and Joseph , B. ( 2018 ). The Burden of Firearm Violence in the United States: Stricter Laws Result in Safer States . Journal of Injury and Violence Research , 10 , 11 – 16 .

Johnson , R. M. , Coyne-Beasley , T. and Runyan , C. W. ( 2004 ). Firearm Ownership and Storage Practices, U.S. Households, 1992-2002. A Systematic Review . American Journal of Preventive Medicine , 27 , 173 – 182 .

Johnson , R. M. , Miller , M. , Vriniotis , M. , Azrael , D. and Hemenway , D. ( 2006 ). Are Household Firearms Stored Less Safely in Homes With Adolescents? Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine , 160 , 788 – 792 .

Johnson , R. M. , Runyan , C. W. , Coyne-Beasley , T. , Lewis , M. A. and Bowling , J. M. ( 2008 ). Storage of Household Firearms: An Examination of the Attitudes and Beliefs of Married Women With Children . Health Education Research , 23 , 592 – 602 .

Jones , J. P. ( 1993 ). Gun Control: Education Is the Best Control . Texas Medicine , 89 , 8 .

Kim , J. ( 2018 ). Beyond the Trigger: The Mental Health Consequences of In-Home Firearm Access Among Children of Gun Owners . Social Science & Medicine (1982) , 203 , 51 – 59 .

Krueger , C. A. and Mehta , S. ( 2015 ). Trends in Firearm Safety—Do They Correlate With Fewer Injuries . Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine , 8 , 272 – 275 .

Kuhn , E. M. , Nie , C. L. , O’Brien , M. E. , Withers , R. L. , Wintemute , G. J. and Hargarten , S. W. ( 2002 ). Missing the Target: A Comparison of Buyback and Fatality Related Guns . Injury Prevention: Journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention , 8 , 143 – 146 .

Lee , L. M. and Zarowsky , C. ( 2015 ). Foundational Values for Public Health . Public Health Reviews , 36 , 2 .

Lee , K. H. , Jun , J. S. , Kim , Y. J. , Roh , S. , Moon , S. S. , Bukonda , N. and Hines , L. ( 2017 ). Mental Health, Substance Abuse, and Suicide Among Homeless Adults . Journal of Evidence-Informed Social Work , 14 , 229 – 242 .

Leuenberger , L. , Lehman , E. and McCall-Hosenfeld , J. ( 2021 ). Perceptions of Firearms in a Cohort of Women Exposed to Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) in Central Pennsylvania . BMC Women’s Health , 21 , 20 .

Lewiecki , E. M. and Miller , S. A. ( 2013 ). Suicide, Guns, and Public Policy . American Journal of Public Health , 103 , 27 – 31 .

Lowe , S. R. and Galea , S. ( 2017 ). The Mental Health Consequences of Mass Shootings . Trauma, Violence & Abuse , 18 , 62 – 82 .

McFarlane , J. , Soeken , K. , Campbell , J. , Parker , B. , Reel , S. and Silva , C. ( 1998 ). Severity of Abuse to Pregnant Women and Associated Gun Access of the Perpetrator . Public Health Nursing , 15 , 201 – 206 .

McGee , K. S. , Coyne-Beasley , T. and Johnson , R. M. ( 2003 ). Review of Evaluations of Educational Approaches to Promote Safe Storage of Firearms . Injury Prevention , 9 , 108 – 111 .

Miller , M. , Hepburn , L. and Azrael , D. ( 2017 ). Firearm Acquisition Without Background Checks: Results of a National Survey . Annals of Internal Medicine , 166 , 233 .

Monuteaux , M. C. , Azrael , D. and Miller , M. ( 2019 ). Association of Increased Safe Household Firearm Storage With Firearm Suicide and Unintentional Death Among US Youths . JAMA Pediatrics , 173 , 657 – 662 .

Moore , B. , Levit , K. , Elixhauser , A. ( 2014 ). Costs for Hospital Stays in the United States, 2012 , available from: https://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/reports/statbriefs/sb181-Hospital-Costs-United-States-2012.jsp [accessed September 23, 2020 ].

Ozanne-Smith , J. , Ashby , K. , Newstead , S. , Stathakis , V. Z. and Clapperton , A. ( 2004 ). Firearm related deaths: the impact of regulatory reform . Injury Prevention: Journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention , 10 , 280 – 286 .

Peek-Asa , C. , Butcher , B. and Cavanaugh , J. E. ( 2017 ). Cost of Hospitalization for Firearm Injuries by Firearm Type, Intent, and Payer in the United States . Injury Epidemiology , 4 ( 1 ), 20 .

Peetz , A. B. and Haider , A. ( 2018 ). Gun Violence Research and the Profession of Trauma Surgery . AMA Journal of Ethics , 20 , 475 – 482 .

Puttagunta , R. , Coverdale , T. R. and Coverdale , J. ( 2016 ). What is Taught on Firearm Safety in Undergraduate, Graduate, and Continuing Medical Education? A Review of Educational Programs . Academic Psychiatry: The Journal of the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training and the Association for Academic Psychiatry , 40 , 821 – 824 .

Rajan , S. , Branas , C. C. , Hargarten , S. and Allegrante , J. P. ( 2018 ). Funding for Gun Violence Research Is Key to the Health and Safety of the Nation . American Journal of Public Health , 108 , 194 – 195 .

RAND Corporation ( 2018 ). The Effects of Child-Access Prevention Laws , available from: https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/child-access-prevention.html [accessed March 6, 2020 ].

Rattan , R. , Parreco , J. , Namias , N. , Pust , G. D. , Yeh , D. D. and Zakrison , T. L. ( 2018 ). Hidden Costs of Hospitalization After Firearm Injury: National Analysis of Different Hospital Readmission . Annals of Surgery , 267 , 810 – 815 .

Reeves , R.V. , Holmes , S. ( 2015 ) Guns and Race: The Different Worlds of Black and White Americans . Brookings . https://www.brookings.edu/blog/social-mobility-memos/2015/12/15/guns-and-race-the-different-worlds-of-black-and-white-americans/

Resnick , S. , Smith , R. N. , Beard , J. H. , Holena , D. , Reilly , P. M. , Schwab , C. W. and Seamon , M. J. ( 2017 ). Firearm Deaths in America: Can We Learn From 462,000 Lives Lost? Annals of Surgery , 266 , 432 – 440 .

Rostron , A. ( 2018 ). The Dickey Amendment on Federal Funding for Research on Gun Violence: A Legal Dissection . American Journal of Public Health , 108 , 865 – 867 .

Rudolph , K. E. , Stuart , E. A. , Vernick , J. S. and Webster , D. W. ( 2015 ). Association Between Connecticut’s Permit-to-Purchase Handgun Law and Homicides . American Journal of Public Health , 105 , e49 – e54 .

Ruger , J. P. ( 2015 ). Governing for the Common Good . Health Care Analysis: HCA: Journal of Health Philosophy and Policy , 23 , 341 – 351 .

Schlabach , G.W. ( n.d .) Aquinas on Warfare and Self-defense , available from: https://www.geraldschlabach.net/misc/aquinas-on-warfare-and-self-defense/ [accessed June 23, 2022 ].

Schleimer , J.P. , Kravitz-Wirtz , N. , Pallin , R. , Charbonneau , A.K. , Buggs , S.A. , and Wintemute , G.J. ( 2019 ). Firearm Ownership in California: A Latent Class Analysis . Injury Prevention , injuryprev-2019-043412.

Sen , B. and Panjamapirom , A. ( 2012 ). State Background Checks for Gun Purchase and Firearm Deaths: An Exploratory Study . Preventive Medicine , 55 , 346 – 350 .

Siegel , M. , Ross , C. S. and King , C. ( 2013 ). The Relationship Between Gun Ownership and Firearm Homicide Rates in the United States, 1981–2010 . American Journal of Public Health , 103 , 2098 – 2105 .

Siegel , M. , Pahn , M. , Xuan , Z. , Fleegler , E. and Hemenway , D. ( 2019 ). The Impact of State Firearm Laws on Homicide and Suicide Deaths in the USA, 1991-2016: A Panel Study . Journal of General Internal Medicine , 34 , 2021 – 2028 .

Sorenson , S. B. ( 2017 ). Guns in Intimate Partner Violence: Comparing Incidents by Type of Weapon . Journal of Women’s Health (2002) , 26 , 249 – 258 .

Sorenson , S. B. and Vittes , K. A. ( 2003 ). Buying a Handgun for Someone Else: Firearm Dealer Willingness to Sell . Injury Prevention , 9 , 147 – 150 .

Sorenson , S. B. and Wiebe , D. J. ( 2004 ). Weapons in the Lives of Battered Women . American Journal of Public Health , 94 , 1412 – 1417 .

Stroebe , W. ( 2013 ). Firearm Possession and Violent Death: A Critical Review . Aggression and Violent Behavior , 18 , 709 – 721 .

Sullivan , T. P. and Weiss , N. H. ( 2017 ). Is Firearm Threat in Intimate Relationships Associated with Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Symptoms Among Women? Violence and Gender , 4 , 31 – 36 .

Swanson , J. W. , McGinty , E. E. , Fazel , S. and Mays , V. M. ( 2015 ). Mental Illness and Reduction of Gun Violence and Suicide: Bringing Epidemiologic Research to Policy . Annals of Epidemiology , 25 , 366 – 376 .

Swanson , J. W. , Easter , M. M. , Robertson , A. G. , Swartz , M. S. , Alanis-Hirsch , K. , Moseley , D. , Dion , C. and Petrila , J. ( 2016 ). Gun Violence, Mental Illness, And Laws That Prohibit Gun Possession: Evidence From Two Florida Counties . Health Affairs (Project Hope) , 35 , 1067 – 1075 .

Tasigiorgos , S. , Economopoulos , K. P. , Winfield , R. D. and Sakran , J. V. ( 2015 ). Firearm Injury in the United States: An Overview of an Evolving Public Health Problem . Journal of the American College of Surgeons , 221 , 1005 – 1014 .

The Education Fund to Stop Gun Violence (EFSGV) ( 2020 ). Gun violence in America an analysis of 2018 CDC data .

Tjaden , P. , Thoennes , N. , US Department of Justice: Office to Justice Programs: National Institute of Justice ( 2000 ). Extent, Nature, and Consequences of Intimate Partner Violence: (300342003-001).

Trivigno , F. V. ( 2013 ). Guns and Virtue: The Virtue Ethical Case Against Gun Carrying . Public Affairs Quarterly , 27 , 289 – 310 .

Trivigno , F.V. ( 2018 ). Plato . The Oxford Handbook of Virtue , available from: https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/28109/chapter-abstract/212218916?redirectedFrom=fulltext [accessed June 23, 2021 ].

Vernick , J. S. and Webster , D. W. ( 2007 ). Policies to Prevent Firearm Trafficking . Injury Prevention , 13 , 78 – 79 .

Vernick , J. S. , Webster , D. W. , Bulzacchelli , M. T. and Mair , J. S. ( 2006 ). Regulation of Firearm Dealers in the United States: An Analysis of State Law and Opportunities for Improvement . The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics: A Journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics , 34 , 765 – 775 .

Violano , P. , Bonne , S. , Duncan , T. , Pappas , P. , Christmas , A. B. , Dennis , A. , Goldberg , S. , Greene , W. , Hirsh , M. , Shillinglaw , W. , Robinson , B. and Crandall , M. ( 2018 ). Prevention of Firearm Injuries With Gun Safety Devices and Safe Storage: An Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma Systematic Review . The Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery , 84 , 1003 – 1011 .

Webster , D. W. , Vernick , J. S. and Bulzacchelli , M. T. ( 2006 ). Effects of a Gun Dealer’s Change in Sales Practices on the Supply of Guns to Criminals . Journal of Urban Health , 83 , 778 – 787 .

Webster , D. W. , Crifasi , C. K. and Vernick , J. S. ( 2014 ). Effects of the Repeal of Missouri’s Handgun Purchaser Licensing Law on Homicides . Journal of Urban Health , 91 , 293 – 302 .

Weller , C. ( 2018 ). These 4 Countries Have Nearly Eliminated Gun Deaths—Here’s What the US Can Learn . The Independfent , available from: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/gun-deaths-eliminated-america-learn-japan-australia-uk-norway-florida-shooting-latest-news-a8216301.html [accessed June 4, 2021 ].

Wintemute , G. J. ( 2019 ). Background Checks For Firearm Purchases: Problem Areas And Recommendations To Improve Effectiveness . Health Affairs (Project Hope) , 38 , 1702 – 1710 .

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources ( 2020 ). Mentored Hunting | Wisconsin DNR , available from: https://dnr.wisconsin.gov/Education/OutdoorSkills/mentor [accessed June 23, 2021 ].

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

• Recommend to your Library

Affiliations

• Online ISSN 1754-9981
• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

• Entertainment
• Environment
• Information Science and Technology
• Social Issues

Home Essay Samples Crime

Essay Samples on Gun Violence

Examining the pros and cons of gun control.

The debate surrounding gun control has been a longstanding and contentious issue, with proponents and opponents presenting valid arguments from their respective standpoints. This essay delves into the multifaceted discussion by exploring the pros and cons of gun control policies, shedding light on the complexities...

• Gun Control
• Gun Violence

The Auckland Mass Shooting: a Tragedy at the Women's World Cup 2023

On the morning of July 20th, 2023, Auckland, New Zealand suffered a devastating mass shooting that left three dead and several others injured. This tragic event occurred just hours before the opening ceremonies of the Women's World Cup, set to be held in Auckland that...

• Mass Shooting

The Shooting of Ralph Yarl: Unraveling the Racial Dynamics and Gun Violence

On April 13, 2023, a tragic incident occurred in Kansas City, Missouri that garnered national attention. 16-year-old Ralph Yarl, an African American teenager, was shot and wounded after mistakenly ringing the doorbell at the wrong house while attempting to pick up his younger twin brothers....

• Racial Profiling

The Gun Control Laws And Gun Violence In America

Have you ever stopped to suppose about how scary it would experience and be like to lose a household members or close friends loss of life innocently, because they had been victims of a gun shooting? Having to never being capable to talk to them...

• American Criminal Justice System

The Link Between Violence In Video Games And Gun Violence In America

Gun violence is something that is taking place every minute that passes by. According to the CDC, Every 17 minutes one person is killed by a firearm which brings to 87 people during an average day, and 609 every week (CDC 2019). Almost 50% of...

Stressed out with your paper?

Consider using writing assistance:

• 100% unique papers
• 3 hrs deadline option

The Rise Of Gun Violence Because Of Video Game Violence

A constant threat of violence lurked from January 2019 to May 2019. A ridiculous eight school shootings would occur, each varying in intensity. The United States was on edge, looking for a reason why their children had to risk their lives in order to pursue...

• Video Games
• Violence in Video Games

Gun Violence In America: Protection Of Citizen Rights

The United States Constitution promises that the government will protect citizens and their natural-born rights. The second amendment states“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”...

• Violent Crime

Gun Violence In America: The Issue Of Mass Shootings

When you turn on the news, there are frequent reports of mass shootings and gun violence. Families are heart broken after their loved ones have been killed. This is the sad and disturbing reality in our country. Olivia Wesch woke up on February 14 excited...

The Risk Of Increased Homicide Rates Due To Gun Violence In America

Gun violence is a public health tragedy that affects millions of lives in the United States every year (Christensen, Cunningham, Delamater, & Hamilton, 2019). It is a problem because its complex nature and frequency of occurrence have a considerable impact on the health and safety...

On Gun Violence In America: The Need For Action

Guns are violence, these three words usually hear when it comes to weapons. During the last few years and among US history there has been an issue with gun control, causing it to fall in the wrong hands and therefore end in mass shootings or...

The Advertisement Analysis Of The Anti Gun Violence Campaign

Living in a country where assault weapons are so easily accessible is scary. Parents all over America, fear sending their kids places because of this, even places where they should feel most safe, school. On December 14th, 2012, innocent children’s lives were taken at Sandy...

• Advertising Analysis

The Need To Ban Guns To Decrease Gun Violence In America

In the US, what is your biggest concern right now? For me, it's gun violence. Through the Second Amendment of the Constitution, people have a right to own a gun. There was research from Gallup in 2017, there was 43% of people in the United...

Gun Violence And Gun Control: The Influence On America

When thinking of America, many people recall the great things one loves about this country. People can explain the many ways to achieve lifelong dreams and goals. They are able to ramble about the vacation spots, business opportunities, and celebrities who reside in America. What...

Dissecting Obama's Speech On School Shooting And Gun Violence

More than 1,700 children and teenagers die in the U.S every year as a result of gun violence. the deaths are much higher for black children (Every Town, 2020). Many of these children die as a result of school shootings that have become more prevalent...

• Barack Obama
• Public School

Gun Violence In America: Inexcusable Death Rates And Shootings

We are never going to get a serious grip on gun violence in this country until we adopt comprehensive measures to keep guns away from people who should not have them,” (Reno). The United States government has neglected to counteract the issue of the developing...

Gun Control Laws On Gun Violence In America

The swelling number of gun violence in the United States, is an alarming situation faced by this great nation, that has led to many innocent civilian, getting affected by it. According to Amnesty International, every year, nearly 30,000 people are killed due to the escalation...

The Problem of Gun Violence in America

In today’s society, one of the major problems that we face is gun violence. Gun violence is related to violence that can be considered criminal, however, some cases aren’t considered criminal. In data collected by the FBI showed that firearms were used in sixty-eight percent...

Columbine Shooting and Relation to Gun Violence in America in Bowling for Columbine

“It was the morning of April 20th, 1999, and it was pretty much like any other morning in America...And out in Littleton, Colorado, two boys went bowling at six in the morning. Yes, it was a typical day in the United States of America.” (Moore,...

• Bowling For Columbine
• Documentary

Second Amendment: Gun Violence Statistics

Introduction The right to bear arms was inserted into the constitution and has been something that has remained in place today. With all the violence and deaths by guns that has been occurring throughout the United States in the past decade, it has caused law...

• Constitution
• Second Amendment

Gun Violence And Mass Shooting In The United States

The world is being taken over by gun violence, on average 96 people are killed by guns in the United States every day. I will be comparing the number of gun violence and mass shooting in the United States over a long period of time...

Best topics on Gun Violence

1. Examining the Pros and Cons of Gun Control

2. The Auckland Mass Shooting: a Tragedy at the Women’s World Cup 2023

3. The Shooting of Ralph Yarl: Unraveling the Racial Dynamics and Gun Violence

4. The Gun Control Laws And Gun Violence In America

5. The Link Between Violence In Video Games And Gun Violence In America

6. The Rise Of Gun Violence Because Of Video Game Violence

7. Gun Violence In America: Protection Of Citizen Rights

8. Gun Violence In America: The Issue Of Mass Shootings

9. The Risk Of Increased Homicide Rates Due To Gun Violence In America

10. On Gun Violence In America: The Need For Action

11. The Advertisement Analysis Of The Anti Gun Violence Campaign

12. The Need To Ban Guns To Decrease Gun Violence In America

13. Gun Violence And Gun Control: The Influence On America

14. Dissecting Obama’s Speech On School Shooting And Gun Violence

15. Gun Violence In America: Inexcusable Death Rates And Shootings

• Effects of Drinking and Driving
• Jeffrey Dahmer
• Animals Testing
• School Shooting

Need writing help?

You can always rely on us no matter what type of paper you need

*No hidden charges

100% Unique Essays

Absolutely Confidential

Money Back Guarantee

By clicking “Send Essay”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement. We will occasionally send you account related emails

You can also get a UNIQUE essay on this or any other topic

Thank you! We’ll contact you as soon as possible.

Gun Control in the United States: Analysis

This essay about Gun Control in the United States provides a comprehensive analysis of the complex debate surrounding the issue. It discusses the Second Amendment’s role, highlighting its ambiguous wording and the impact of key Supreme Court rulings that support individual gun ownership for self-defense. The essay examines the high rates of gun-related violence in the U.S. and contrasts them with lower rates in countries with stricter gun laws, reflecting on the strong cultural attachment to guns as symbols of independence. It also considers the divide between rural and urban perspectives on gun necessity and safety. Further, it touches on the challenges of passing significant gun control legislation due to political polarization. Ultimately, the essay underscores the need for a balanced approach that respects constitutional rights while addressing public safety concerns in a nation marked by diverse views on gun ownership.

How it works

The discourse surrounding firearm regulation stands as a deeply contentious matter within the United States, where discussions frequently polarize between proponents advocating for more stringent regulations and those defending the constitutional right to possess firearms as enshrined in the Second Amendment. This analysis delves into the intricate fabric of contemporary firearm regulation in the United States, navigating through the legislative, cultural, and statistical dimensions of the issue.

At the core of the firearm regulation debate lies the interpretation of the Second Amendment, which stipulates: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

” The ambiguity inherent in this verbiage—especially concerning the founders’ intent behind “a well regulated Militia”—has engendered myriad legal disputes and scholarly deliberations. Judicial rulings, such as in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), have affirmed an individual’s entitlement to possess firearms irrespective of militia service, and to employ them for traditionally lawful purposes, notably self-defense within the domicile.

Nevertheless, the United States grapples with markedly elevated rates of firearm-related violence compared to other industrialized nations, a correlation that proponents of firearm regulation frequently attribute to the nation’s comparatively lenient firearm statutes vis-à-vis countries like the UK, Australia, or Japan, where rigorous firearm regulations have coincided with a pronounced decline in firearm violence. Advocates for heightened firearm regulation in the U.S. advocate for initiatives such as universal background checks, mandatory waiting periods, constraints on high-capacity magazines, and a prohibition on assault-style weapons—propositions often met with vehement opposition from firearm advocacy groups perceiving such measures as a potential slippery slope towards broader curbs on firearm possession.

Culturally, firearms are deeply interwoven into the fabric of American society, often intertwined with ideals of autonomy and self-sufficiency. This cultural dimension complicates the firearm regulation discourse, transmuting it into a confluence of not merely statistics and statutes but also identity and historical precedent. In numerous rural locales, where law enforcement response times may be prolonged and wildlife hazards are tangible, firearms are deemed indispensable. Conversely, urban centers, which bear the brunt of firearm violence, tend to advocate for more stringent regulations.

Statistically, the U.S. boasts one of the highest firearm ownership rates globally, correlating with commensurately elevated levels of firearm violence. Proponents of heightened firearm regulation point to statistics ostensibly evincing a nexus between firearm availability and firearm violence, encompassing homicides, suicides, and accidental discharges. Conversely, opponents contend that firearm possession can serve as a deterrent to crime, citing studies suggesting that regions with concealed carry provisions have witnessed declines in crime rates.

Despite the protracted debate, significant federal-level firearm regulation legislation has been scant in recent decades, owing to entrenched political polarization. The most notable endeavor for reform ensued following the Sandy Hook Elementary School tragedy in 2012, catalyzing widespread calls for change, including from then-President Obama. However, the majority of proposed initiatives failed to secure passage in Congress.

In summation, firearm regulation in the United States embodies a multifaceted conundrum shaped by legal construals, cultural ethos, and empirical data. The discourse transcends mere deliberations on the impact of firearm possession on crime and safety, encompassing broader inquiries into constitutional prerogatives and American national identity. Consequently, any strides towards substantial modifications in firearm legislation necessitate meticulous scrutiny of all these facets, balancing individual liberties against imperatives for public safety in a heterogeneous and factionalized nation.

Cite this page

Gun Control in the United States: Analysis. (2024, Apr 29). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/gun-control-in-the-united-states-analysis/

"Gun Control in the United States: Analysis." PapersOwl.com , 29 Apr 2024, https://papersowl.com/examples/gun-control-in-the-united-states-analysis/

PapersOwl.com. (2024). Gun Control in the United States: Analysis . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/gun-control-in-the-united-states-analysis/ [Accessed: 2 Sep. 2024]

"Gun Control in the United States: Analysis." PapersOwl.com, Apr 29, 2024. Accessed September 2, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/gun-control-in-the-united-states-analysis/

"Gun Control in the United States: Analysis," PapersOwl.com , 29-Apr-2024. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/gun-control-in-the-united-states-analysis/. [Accessed: 2-Sep-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2024). Gun Control in the United States: Analysis . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/gun-control-in-the-united-states-analysis/ [Accessed: 2-Sep-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

Gun Violence: Prediction, Prevention, and Policy

• Gun Violence and Crime

Gun violence is an urgent, complex, and multifaceted problem. It requires evidence-based, multifaceted solutions. Psychology can make important contributions to policies that prevent gun violence. Toward this end, in February 2013 the American Psychological Association commissioned this report by a panel of experts to convey research-based conclusions and recommendations (and to identify gaps in such knowledge) on how to reduce the incidence of gun violence — whether by homicide, suicide, or mass shootings — nationwide.

Following are chapter-by-chapter highlights and short summaries of conclusions and recommendations of the report’s authors. More information and supporting citations can be found within the chapters themselves.

Antecedents to Gun Violence: Developmental Issues

A complex and variable constellation of risk and protective factors makes persons more or less likely to use a firearm against themselves or others. For this reason, there is no single profile that can reliably predict who will use a gun in a violent act. Instead, gun violence is associated with a confluence of individual, family, school, peer, community, and sociocultural risk factors that interact over time during childhood and adolescence. Although many youths desist in aggressive and antisocial behavior during late adolescence, others are disproportionately at risk for becoming involved in or otherwise affected by gun violence. The most consistent and powerful predictor of future violence is a history of violent behavior.  P revention efforts guided by research on developmental risk can reduce the likelihood that firearms will be introduced into community and family conflicts or criminal activity.  Prevention efforts can also reduce the relatively rare occasions when severe mental illness contributes to homicide or the more common circumstances when depression or other mental illness contributes to suicide. Reducing incidents of gun violence arising from criminal misconduct or suicide is an important goal of broader primary and secondary prevention and intervention strategies. Such strategies must also attend to redirecting developmental antecedents and larger sociocultural processes that contribute to gun violence and gun-related deaths.

Antecedents to Gun Violence: Gender and Culture

Any account of gun violence in the United States must be able to explain both why males are perpetrators of the vast majority of gun violence and why the vast majority of males never perpetrate gun violence. Preliminary evidence suggests that changing perceptions among males of social norms about behaviors and characteristics associated with masculinity may reduce the prevalence of intimate partner and sexual violence. Such interventions need to be further tested for their potential to reduce gun violence. The skills and knowledge of psychologists are needed to develop and evaluate programs and settings in schools, workplaces, prisons, neighborhoods, clinics, and other relevant contexts that aim to change gendered expectations for males that emphasize self-sufficiency, toughness, and violence, including gun violence.

What Works: Gun Violence Prediction and Prevention at the Individual Level

Although it is important to recognize that most people suffering from a mental illness are not dangerous, for those persons at risk for violence due to mental illness, suicidal thoughts, or feelings of desperation, mental health treatment can often prevent gun violence. Policies and programs that identify and provide treatment for all persons suffering from a mental illness should be a national priority. Urgent attention must be paid to the current level of access to mental health services in the United States; such access is woefully insufficient. Additionally, it should be noted that behavioral threat assessment is becoming a standard of care for preventing violence in schools, colleges, and the workplace and against government and other public officials. Threat assessment teams gather and analyze information to assess if a person poses a threat of violence or self-harm, and if so, take steps to intervene.

What Works: Gun Violence Prevention at the Community Level

Prevention of violence occurs along a continuum that begins in early childhood with programs to help parents raise emotionally healthy children and ends with efforts to identify and intervene with troubled individuals who are threatening violence. The mental health community must take the lead in advocating for community-based collaborative problem-solving models to address the prevention of gun violence. Such models should blend prevention strategies in an effort to overcome the tendency within many community service systems to operate in silos. There has been some success with community-based programs involving police training in crisis intervention and with community members trained in mental health first aid. These programs need further piloting and study so they can be expanded to additional communities as appropriate. In addition, public health messaging campaigns on safe gun storage are needed. The practice of keeping all firearms appropriately stored and locked must become the only socially acceptable norm.

What Works: Policies to Reduce Gun Violence

The use of a gun greatly increases the odds that violence will lead to a fatality: This problem calls for urgent action. Firearm prohibitions for high-risk groups — domestic violence offenders, persons convicted of violent misdemeanor crimes, and individuals with mental illness who have been adjudicated as being a threat to themselves or to others — have been shown to reduce violence. The licensing of handgun purchasers, background check requirements for all gun sales, and close oversight of retail gun sellers can reduce the diversion of guns to criminals. Reducing the incidence of gun violence will require interventions through multiple systems, including legal, public health, public safety, community, and health. Increasing the availability of data and funding will help inform and evaluate policies designed to reduce gun violence.

Dewey Cornell, PhD, and Nancy G. Guerra, EdD

Gun violence is an important national problem leading to more than 31,000 deaths and 78,000 nonfatal injuries every year. Although the rate of gun homicides in the United States has declined in recent years, U.S. rates remain substantially higher than those of almost every other nation in the world and are at least seven times higher than those of Australia, Canada, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom, and many others (see Alpers & Wilson).

Guns are not a necessary or sufficient cause of violence and can be used legally for a variety of sanctioned activities. Still, they are especially lethal weapons that are used in approximately two thirds of the homicides and more than half of all suicides in the United States. Every day in the United States, approximately 30 persons die of homicides and 53 persons die of suicides committed by someone using a gun (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2013a). Guns also provide individuals with the capacity to carry out multiple-fatality shootings that inflict great trauma and grief on our society, and the public rightly insists on action to make our communities safer.

Gun violence demands special attention. At the federal level, President Barack Obama announced a new “Now Is the Time” plan (White House, 2013) to address firearm violence to better protect children and communities and issued 23 related executive orders to federal agencies. The importance of continued research to address firearm violence is reflected in the 2013 report of the Institute of Medicine (IOM) and the National Research Council (NRC) "Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence. "  This report calls for a public health approach that emphasizes the importance of accurate information on the number and distribution of guns in the United States, including risk factors and motivations for acquisition and use, the association between exposure to media violence and any subsequent perpetration of gun violence, and how new technology can facilitate prevention. The report also outlines a research agenda to facilitate programs and policies that can reduce the occurrence and impact of firearm-related violence in the United States.

Psychology can make an important contribution to policies that prevent gun violence. Rather than debate whether “people” kill people or “guns” kill people, a reasonable approach to facilitate prevention is that “people with guns kill people.” The problem is more complex than simple slogans and requires careful study and analysis of the different psychological factors, behavioral pathways, social circumstances, and cultural factors that lead to gun violence. Whether prevention efforts should focus on guns because they are such a powerful tool for violence, on other factors that might have equal or greater impact, or on some combination of factors should be a scientific question settled by evidence.

Toward this end, the American Psychological Association (APA) commissioned this report, with three goals. First, this report is intended to focus on gun violence, recognizing that knowledge about gun violence must be related to a broader understanding of violence. Second, the report reviews what is known from the best current science on antecedents to gun violence and effective prevention strategies at the individual, community, and national levels. Finally, the report identifies policy directions, gaps in the literature, and suggestions for continued research that can help address unresolved questions about effective strategies to reduce gun violence. For over a decade, research on gun violence has been stifled by legal restrictions, political pressure applied to agencies not to fund research on certain gun-related topics, and a lack of funding. The authors of this report believe the cost of gun violence to our society is too great to allow these barriers to remain in place.

The Role of Mental Health and Mental Illness

An important focus of this report is the role that mental health and mental illness play in why individuals commit firearm-related violence and how this can inform preventive efforts. This focus undoubtedly brings to mind shootings such as those in Newtown, Conn., Aurora, Colo., and Tucson, Ariz. However, it is important to realize that mass fatality incidents of this type, although highly publicized, are extremely rare, accounting for one tenth of 1 percent of all firearm-related homicides in the United States (CDC, 2013a). Moreover, serious mental illness affects a significant percentage of the U.S. population, with prevalence estimates in the general population as high as 5 percent (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration [SAMHSA], 2012). This is quite significant, given that the term serious mental illness is typically reserved for the most debilitating kinds of mental disorder, such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and the most severe forms of depression, but can include other mental disorders that result in acute functional impairment.

Although many highly publicized shootings have involved persons with serious mental illness, it must be recognized that persons with serious mental illness commit only a small proportion of firearm-related homicides; the problem of gun violence cannot be resolved simply through efforts focused on serious mental illness (Webster & Vernick, 2013a). Furthermore, the overwhelming majority of people with serious mental illness do not engage in violence toward others and should not be stereotyped as dangerous (Sirotich, 2008).

It also is important to recognize that for the small proportion of individuals whose serious mental illness does predispose them to violence, there are significant societal barriers to treatment. Psychiatric hospitalization can be helpful, but treatment can be expensive, and there may not be appropriate follow-up services in the community. Civil commitment laws, which serve to protect individuals from being unreasonably detained or forced into treatment against their will, can also prevent professionals from treating someone who does not recognize his or her need for treatment.

Other kinds of mental disorders that do not rise to the level of serious mental illness also are associated with gun violence and criminal behavior generally. For example, conduct disorder and antisocial personality disorder are associated with increased risk for violence. (This link is not surprising because violent behavior is counted as one of the symptoms that helps qualify someone for the diagnosis.) Nevertheless, there are well-established, scientifically validated mental health treatment programs for individuals with these disorders, such as multisystemic therapy, that can reduce violent recidivism (Henggeler, 2011). Substance abuse is another form of mental disorder that is a risk factor for violence in the general population and also increases the risk for violence among persons with serious mental illness (Van Dorn, Volavka, & Johnson, 2012).

These observations reflect the complexity of relationships among serious mental illness, mental disorders, and violence. In contrast to homicide, suicide accounts for approximately 61 percent of all firearm fatalities in the United States (CDC, 2013a), and more than 90 percent of persons who commit suicide have some combination of depression, symptoms of other mental disorders, and/or substance abuse (Moscicki, 2001). This suggests that mental health and mental illness are especially relevant to understanding and preventing suicide, the leading type of firearm-related death.

Prediction and Prevention

The prediction of an individual’s propensity for violence is a complex and challenging task for mental health professionals, who often are called upon by courts, correctional authorities, schools, and others to assess the risk of an individual’s violence. Mental health professionals are expected to take action to protect potential victims when they judge that their patient or client poses a danger to others. However, decades of research have established that there is only a moderate ability to identify individuals likely to commit serious acts of violence. Much depends on the kind of violence and the time frame for prediction. For example, there are specialized instruments for the assessment of violence risk among sex offenders, civilly committed psychiatric patients, and domestic violence offenders. However, the time frame and focus for these predictions often are broadly concerned with long-term predictions that someone will ever be violent with anyone rather than whether a person will commit a particular act of targeted violence.

Research has moved the field beyond the assessment of “dangerousness” as a simple individual characteristic applicable in all cases to recognize that predictive efforts must consider a range of personal, social, and situational factors that can lead to different forms of violent behavior in different circumstances. Moreover, risk assessment has expanded to include concepts of risk management and interventions aimed at reducing risk.

In making predictions about the risk for mass shootings, there is no consistent psychological profile or set of warning signs that can be used reliably to identify such individuals in the general population. A more promising approach is the strategy of behavioral threat assessment , which is concerned with identifying and intervening with individuals who have communicated threats of violence or engaged in behavior that clearly indicates planning or preparation to commit a violent act. A threat assessment approach recognizes that individuals who threaten targeted violence are usually troubled, depressed, and despondent over their circumstances in life. A threat assessment leads to interventions intended to reduce the risk of violence by taking steps to address the problem that underlies the threatening behavior. Such problems can range from workplace conflicts to schoolyard bullying to serious mental illness. One of the most influential threat assessment models was developed by the U.S. Secret Service (Fein et al., 2002; Vossekuil, Fein, Reddy, Borum, & Modzelski, 2002) and has been adapted for use in schools, colleges, business settings, and the U.S. military.

The limited ability to make accurate predictions of violence has led some to question whether prevention is possible. This is a common misconception, because prevention does not require prediction of a specific individual’s behavior . For example, public health campaigns have reduced problems ranging from lung cancer to motor vehicle accidents by identifying risk factors and promoting safer behaviors even though it is not possible to predict whether a specific individual will develop lung cancer or have a motor vehicle accident (Mozaffarian, Hemenway, & Ludwig, 2013). A substantial body of scientific evidence identifies important developmental, familial, and social risk factors for violence. In addition, an array of rigorously tested psychological and educational interventions facilitate healthy social development and reduce aggressive behavior by teaching social skills and problem-solving strategies. It is important that policymakers and stakeholders recognize the value of prevention.

Prevention measures also should be distinguished from security measures and crisis response plans. Prevention must begin long before a gunman comes into a school or shopping center. Prevention efforts are often conceptualized as taking place on primary, secondary, and tertiary levels:

• Primary prevention (also called universal prevention) consists of efforts to promote healthy development in the general population. An example would be a curriculum to teach all children social skills to resist negative peer influences and resolve conflicts peacefully.
• Secondary prevention (also called selective prevention) involves assistance for individuals who are at increased risk for violence. Mentoring programs and conflict-mediation services are examples of such assistance.
• Tertiary prevention (also called indicated prevention) consists of intensive services for individuals who have engaged in some degree of aggressive behavior and could benefit from efforts to prevent a recurrence or escalation of aggression. Programs to rehabilitate juvenile offenders are examples.

Throughout this report, we discuss evidence-based prevention programs relevant to the issue of firearm-related violence.

Research can help us understand and prevent gun violence. The psychological research summarized in this report can inform public policy and prevention efforts designed to promote public safety and reduce violence. Gun violence is not a simple, discrete category of crime; it shares characteristics with other forms of violence, and it can be a product of an array of cultural, social, psychological, and situational factors. Nevertheless, there is valuable psychological knowledge that can be used to make our communities safer.

Robert Kinscherff, PhD, JD; Nancy G. Guerra, EdD; and Ariel A. Williamson, MA

Youth gun violence is often sensationalized and misunderstood by the general public, in part because of increasingly public acts of violence and related media coverage (Snyder & Sickmund, 2006; Williams, Tuthill, & Lio, 2008). In truth, only a small number of juvenile offenders commit the majority of violent juvenile crimes in the United States (Williams et al., 2008). Most juvenile offenders commit “nonperson” offenses, usually in terms of property and technical (parole) violations (Sickmund, Sladky, Kang, & Puzzanchera, 2011). For example, in 2010, the majority of juvenile offenses were nonperson offenses such as property offenses (27.2 percent), drug offenses (8.4 percent), public order offenses (10.7 percent), technical violations (14.4 percent), and status offenses (4.6 percent) — that is, crimes defined by minor (under age 18) status, such as alcohol consumption, truancy, and running away from home (Sickmund et al., 2011). Additionally, young adults between the ages of 18 and 34 are the most likely to commit violent crimes like homicide and to do so using a gun, compared with individuals under 18 (Cooper & Smith, 2011).

A subgroup of youth is particularly vulnerable to violence and victimization. Minority males constitute a disproportionate number of youths arrested and adjudicated, with 60 percent of all arrested youths identifying as part of a racial/ethnic minority group (Sickmund et al., 2011). Males also outnumber females in arrest rates for every area except status offenses and technical violations. Urban African American males are at substantially greater risk for involvement in gun-related homicides as perpetrators and as victims (CDC, 2013a; Spano, Pridemore, & Bolland, 2012). However, the majority of the infrequent but highly publicized shootings with multiple fatalities, such as those at Sandy Hook Elementary School or the Aurora, Colo., movie theater, have been committed by young White males.

This presents a picture of a small number of youths and young adults who are at an increased risk for involvement in gun violence. In the United States, these youths are somewhat more likely to be males of color growing up in urban areas. But it also is important to understand that most young males of all races and ethnicities — and most people in general — are not involved in serious violence and do not carry or use guns inappropriately.

How did this small subset of youths and young adults come to be involved in serious gun violence? Is there a “cradle-to-prison” pipeline, particularly for youths of color living in poverty and in disadvantaged urban areas, that triggers a cascade of events that increase the likelihood of gun violence (Children’s Defense Fund, 2009)? A developmental perspective on antecedents to youth gun violence can help us design more effective prevention programs and strategies.

This chapter describes the biological and environmental risk factors that begin early in development and continue into adolescence and young adulthood. Developmental studies that link children’s aggressive behavior to more serious involvement in the criminal justice system suggest the accumulation and interaction of many risks in multiple contexts (Dodge, Greenberg, Malone, & Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group, 2008; Dodge & Pettit, 2003). There is no single biological predisposition, individual trait, or life experience that accounts for the development and continuity of violent behavior or the use of guns. Rather, violence is associated with a confluence of individual, family, school, peer, community, and sociocultural risk factors that interact over time during childhood and adolescence (Brennan, Hall, Bor, Najman, & Williams, 2003; Dodge & Pettit, 2003). Risk for gun violence involves similar risk processes, although the complexity and variability of individuals means there is no meaningful profile that allows reliable prediction of who will eventually engage in gun violence. Nevertheless, developmental factors beginning in utero may increase the risk of aggressive behavior and lead to gun violence — especially when guns are readily available and part of an aggressive or delinquent peer culture.

Early-Onset Aggression

Early onset of aggressive behavior significantly increases risk for later antisocial behavior problems. The most consistent and powerful predictor of future violence is a history of violent behavior, and risk increases with earlier and more frequent incidents. Longitudinal work has shown that having a first arrest between 7 and 11 years of age is associated with patterns of long-term adult offending (Loeber, 1982). Children who are highly aggressive throughout childhood and continue to have serious conduct problems during adolescence have been identified as “life-course persistent” (LCP) youths (Moffitt, 1993). Examining longitudinal data from a large birth cohort in New Zealand, Moffitt (1993) created a taxonomy of antisocial behavior that differentiates LCP youths from an “adolescence-limited” subgroup. The latter subgroup characterizes those who engage in antisocial behaviors during adolescence and usually desist by adulthood. By contrast, LCP youths display more severe early aggression in childhood and develop a pattern of chronic violence during adolescence and into adulthood.

Both biological and environmental risks during prenatal development, infancy, and early childhood contribute to the development of early-onset aggression and the LCP developmental trajectory (Brennan et al., 2003; Dodge & Pettit, 2003; Moffitt, 2005). Pre- and postnatal risks associated with early-onset aggression include maternal substance abuse during pregnancy, high levels of prenatal stress, low birth weight, birth complications and injuries (especially those involving anoxia), malnutrition, and exposure to environmental toxins like lead paint (Brennan et al., 2003; Dodge & Pettit, 2003). According to Moffitt (1993), these early developmental risks disrupt neural development and are associated with neuropsychological deficits, particularly in executive functioning and verbal abilities.

Along with neuropsychological deficits, poor behavioral control and a difficult temperament are associated with the development of early-onset aggression (Dodge & Pettit, 2003; Moffitt, 1993). Children with difficult temperaments are typically irritable, difficult to soothe, and highly reactive. These patterns of behavior often trigger negative and ineffective reactions from parents and caregivers that can escalate into early aggressive behavior (Dodge & Pettit, 2003; Wachs, 2006). Family influences, such as familial stress and negative parent–child interactions, can interact with a child’s individual characteristics, leading to increased aggressive behavior during childhood.

Family Influences

Highly aggressive children who engage in serious acts of violence during later childhood and adolescence also are exposed to continued environmental risks throughout development (Dodge et al., 2008). The family context has been found to be quite influential in the development and continuity of antisocial behavior. Particularly for early-onset aggressive youths raised in families that are under a high degree of environmental stress, aggressive child behavior and negative parenting practices interact to amplify early-onset aggression. Examples of family risk factors include low parent–child synchrony and warmth, poor or disrupted attachment, harsh or inconsistent discipline (overly strict or permissive), poor parental monitoring, the modeling of antisocial behavior, pro-violent attitudes and criminal justice involvement, and coercive parent–child interaction patterns (Dodge & Pettit, 2003; Farrington, Jolliffe, Loeber, Stouthamer-Loeber, & Kalb, 2001; Hill, Howel, Hawkins, & Battin-Pearson, 1999; Patterson, Forgatch, & DeGarmo, 2010).

Coercive parent–child interactions have been associated with the emergence of aggressive behavior problems in children (Patterson et al., 2010). In these interactions, children learn to use coercive behaviors such as temper tantrums to escape parental discipline. When parents acquiesce to these negative behaviors, they inadvertently reward children for coercive behaviors, reinforcing the idea that aggression or violence is adaptive and can be used instrumentally to achieve goals. These interaction patterns tend to escalate in their severity (e.g., from whining, to temper tantrums, to hitting, etc.) and frequency, leading to increased aggression and noncompliance (Patterson et al., 2010). Such behaviors also generalize across contexts to children’s interactions with others outside the home, including with teachers, other adults, and peers. Indeed, prevention research has shown that intervening with at-risk families to improve parenting skills can disrupt the pathway from early-onset aggressive behavior to delinquency in adolescence (Patterson et al., 2010).

Other family risk factors for youths with early predispositions to aggression may be especially relevant to increased risk for gun violence. For instance, research has shown that many families with children own firearms and do not keep them safely stored at home (Johnson, Miller, Vriniotis, Azrael, & Hemenway, 2006). Although keeping firearms at home is not a direct cause of youth gun violence, the rates of suicides, homicides, and unintentional firearm fatalities are higher for 5–14-year-olds who live in states or regions in which rates of gun ownership are more prevalent (Miller, Azrael, & Hemenway, 2002). Poor parental monitoring and supervision, which are more general risk factors for involvement in aggression and violent behaviors (Dodge et al., 2008), may be especially salient in risk for gun violence. For example, impulsive or aggressive children who are often unsupervised and live in a home with access to guns may be at risk.

The family also is an important context for socialization and the development of normative beliefs or perceptions about appropriate social behavior that become increasingly stable during early development and are predictive of later behavior over time (Huesmann & Guerra, 1997). These beliefs shape an individual’s social-cognitive understanding about whether and under what circumstances threatened or actual violence is justified. Children who develop beliefs that aggression is a desirable and effective way to interact with others are more likely to use coercion and violence instrumentally to achieve goals or solve problems (Huesmann & Guerra, 1997). Antisocial attitudes and social-cognitive distortions (e.g., problems in generating nonviolent solutions, misperceiving hostile/aggressive intent by others, justifying acts of violence that would be criminal) can also increase risk for violence (Borum & Verhaagen, 2006; Dodge & Pettit, 2003).

Families can play a role in establishing and maintaining normative beliefs about violence and gun usage. For example, pro-violence attitudes and the criminality of parents and siblings during childhood have been found to predict adolescent gang membership and delinquency (Farrington et al., 2001; Hill et al., 1999). Youths from families that encourage the use of guns for solving problems also may be exposed to such attitudes in other contexts (in communities, with peers, and in the media) and may perceive firearms to be an appropriate means to solve problems and protect themselves.

School and Peer Influences

The school setting is another important context for child socialization. Children who enter school with high levels of aggressive behavior, cognitive or neurobiological deficits, and poor emotional regulation may have difficulty adjusting to the school setting and getting along with peers (Dodge et al., 2008; Dodge & Pettit, 2003). Highly aggressive children who have learned to use aggression instrumentally at home will likely use such behavior with teachers, increasing the chances that they will have poor academic experiences and low school engagement (Patterson et al., 2010). Academic failure, low school interest, truancy, and school dropout are all correlated with increased risk for problem behavior and delinquency, including aggression and violence (Dodge & Pettit, 2003). This risk is strongest when poor academic achievement begins in elementary school and contributes to school underachievement and the onset of adolescent problem behaviors, such as substance use and drug trafficking, truancy, unsafe sexual activity, youth violence, and gang involvement (Dodge et al., 2008; Guerra & Bradshaw, 2008).

Involvement in these risk behaviors also is facilitated by affiliation with deviant peers, particularly during adolescence (Dodge et al., 2008). Research has shown that children who are aggressive, victimized, and academically marginalized from the school setting may suffer high levels of peer rejection that amplify preexisting aggressive behaviors (Dodge et al., 2008; Dodge & Pettit, 2003). Longitudinal work indicates that experiences of academic failure, school marginalization, and peer rejection interact to produce affiliations with similarly rejected, deviant, and/or gang-involved peers. Friendships between deviant peers provide youths with “training” in antisocial behaviors that reinforce and exacerbate preexisting aggressive tendencies (Dishion, Véronneau, & Meyers, 2010; Dodge et al., 2008). Peer deviancy training is a primary mechanism in the trajectory from overt, highly aggressive behaviors during childhood to more covert processes during adolescence, such as lying, stealing, substance use, and weapon carrying (Dishion et al., 2010; Patterson et al., 2010).

The larger school context also can interact with youths’ experiences of academic failure, peer rejection, and deviant peer affiliations to influence the continuity of antisocial behavior. Poorly funded schools located in low-income neighborhoods have fewer resources to address the behavioral, academic, mental health, and medical needs of their students. In addition, these schools tend to have stricter policies toward discipline, are less clinically informed about problem behaviors, and have stronger zero tolerance policies that result in more expulsions and suspensions (Edelman, 2007). This contextual factor is important, as youths who are attending and engaged in school are less likely to engage in delinquent or violent behavior, whereas marginalized and rejected youths, particularly in impoverished schools, are at increased risk for aggression and violence at school and in their communities. Schools that provide safe environments that protect students from bullying or criminal victimization support student engagement, reduce incidents of student conflict that could result in volatile or violent behavior, and diminish risks that students will bring weapons to school.

Although few homicides (< 2 percent) and suicides occur at school or during transportation to and from school (Roberts, Zhang, & Truman, 2012) and widely publicized mass school shootings are rare, research indicates that a small number of students do carry guns or other weapons. In 2011, 5.1 percent of high school students in Grades 9–12 reported carrying a gun in the 30 days prior to the survey, and 5.4 percent of students had carried a weapon (gun, knife, or club) on school grounds at least once in the 30 days prior to the survey (Eaton et al., 2012). Studies show that youths who carry guns are more likely to report involvement in multiple problem behaviors, to be affiliated with a gang, to overestimate how many of their peers carry guns, and to have a high need for interpersonal safety. For instance, student reports of involvement in and exposure to risk behaviors at school such as physical fighting, being threatened, using substances, or selling drugs on school grounds have been positively correlated with an increased likelihood of carrying weapons to school (Furlong, Bates, & Smith, 2001).

In another study of high school students, 5.5 percent of urban high school students reported that they carried a gun in the year prior to the study, but students estimated that 32.6 percent of peers in their neighborhoods carried guns, a substantial overestimation of the actual gun-carrying rates. Lawful, supervised gun carrying by juveniles is not the concern of this line of research; however, when unsupervised youths carry guns in high-violence neighborhoods, they may be more likely to use guns to protect themselves and resolve altercations. Gun-carrying youths in this study had higher rates of substance use, violence exposure, gang affiliation, and peer victimization (Hemenway, Vriniotis, Johnson, Miller, & Azrael, 2011). Additionally, many gun-carrying youths had lower levels of perceived interpersonal safety (Hemenway et al., 2011). Research has also revealed that deviant peer group affiliations during specific periods of adolescent development may increase the risk for gun violence. For example, research findings have shown that gang membership in early adolescence is significantly associated with increased gun carrying over time. This changes somewhat in late adolescence and young adulthood, when gun carrying is linked more to involvement in drug dealing and having peers who illegally own guns (Lizotte, Krohn, Howell, Tobin, & Howard, 2000).

Communities Matter

The community context is an additional source of risk for the development and continuity of antisocial behavior. Living in extremely disadvantaged, underresourced communities with high levels of crime and violence creates serious obstacles to healthy development. Recent estimates show that currently in the United States, 16.4 million children live in poverty and 7.4 million of those live in extreme poverty (i.e., an annual income of less than half of the federal poverty level; Children’s Defense Fund, 2012). One in four children under 5 years of age is poor during the formative years of brain development. In addition, 22 percent of children who have lived in poverty do not graduate from high school, compared with 6 percent of children who have never been poor (Children’s Defense Fund, 2012). For families and youths, living in poverty is associated with high levels of familial stress, poor child nutrition, elevated risks of injury, and limited access to adequate health care (Adler & Steward, 2010; Patterson et al., 2010). Ethnic minority youth in the United States are overrepresented in economically struggling communities. These environmental adversities can, in turn, compromise children’s health status and functioning in other environments and increase the risk for involvement in violent behaviors, contributing significantly to ethnic and cultural variations in the rates of violence (Borum & Verhaagen, 2006).

In a community context, the degree to which children have access to adequate positive resources (e.g., in terms of health, finances, nutrition, education, peers, and recreation), have prosocial and connected relationships with others, and feel safe in their environment can significantly affect their risk for involvement in violent behaviors. Aggressive children and adolescents who are living in neighborhoods with high levels of community violence, drug and firearm trafficking, gang presence, and inadequate housing may have increased exposure to violence and opportunities for involvement in deviant behavior. Compared with communities that have better resources, disenfranchised and impoverished communities may also lack social, recreational, and vocational opportunities that contribute to positive youth development. Youths with high levels of preexisting aggressive behavior and emerging involvement with deviant or gang-involved peers may be especially at risk for increased violent behavior and subsequent criminal justice involvement when exposed to impoverished and high-crime communities.

Exposure to violence in one’s community, a low sense of community safety, unsupervised access to guns, and involvement in risky community behaviors such as drug dealing all contribute to youths’ involvement in gun carrying and gun violence. Decreased community perceptions of neighborhood safety and higher levels of social (e.g., loitering, public substance use, street fighting, prostitution, etc.) and physical (e.g., graffiti, gang signs, and discarded needles, cigarettes, and beer bottles) neighborhood disorder have been associated with increased firearm carrying among youths (Molnar, Miller, Azrael, & Buka, 2004). A study of African American youths living in poverty found that those who had been exposed to violence prior to carrying a gun were 2.5 times more likely than nonexposed youths to begin carrying a gun at the next time point, even when controlling for gang involvement (Spano et al., 2012). This study also indicated that after exposure to violence, youths were more likely to start carrying guns in their communities (Spano et al., 2012).

Studies have shown that apart from characteristics like conduct problems and prior delinquency, youths who are involved in gang fighting and selling drugs are also more likely to use a gun to threaten or harm others (e.g., Butters, Sheptycki, Brochu, & Erikson, 2011). Involvement in drug dealing in one’s community appears to be particularly risky for gun carrying during later adolescence and early adulthood, possibly due to an increased need for self-protection (Lizotte et al., 2000). Taken together, these studies show that firearm possession may be due to interactions between the need for self-protection in violent communities and increased involvement in delinquent behaviors.

Sociocultural Context: Exposure to Violent Media

Child and adolescent exposure to violent media, a more distal, sociocultural influence on behavior, is also important when considering developmental risks for gun violence. Decades of experimental, cross-sectional, and longitudinal research have documented that exposure to violent media, in movies and television, is associated with increased aggressive behaviors, aggressive thoughts and feelings, increased physiological arousal, and decreased prosocial behaviors (e.g., Anderson et al., 2003; Anderson & Bushman, 2001; Huesmann, 2010; Huesmann, Moise-Titus, Podolski, & Eron, 2003). In light of ongoing advances in technology, research has been expanded to include violent content in video games, music, social media, and the Internet (Anderson et al., 2010; IOM & NRC, 2013).

Findings on associations between violent media exposure and aggressive behavior outcomes have held across differences in culture, gender, age, socioeconomic status, and intellect (e.g., Anderson et al., 2010; Huesmann et al., 2003). Social-cognitive theory on violent media exposure suggests that these images are part of children’s socialization experiences, similar to violence exposure in interpersonal and community contexts (Huesmann, 2010). The viewing of violent images can serve to desensitize children to violence and normalize violent behavior, particularly when children have previously developed beliefs that aggression and violence are an acceptable means of achieving goals or resolving conflicts.

It is important to note that the link between violent media exposure and subsequent violent behaviors does not demonstrate a direct causal effect but instead shows how some children may be more susceptible to this risk factor than others. For instance, Huesmann et al. (2003) found that identification with aggressive characters on television and the perception that television violence was real were robust predictors of later aggression over time. Additionally, there is no established link between violent media exposure and firearm usage in particular. However, given the substantial proportion of media that includes interactions around firearms (e.g., in video games, movies, and television shows), the IOM and NRC (2013) recently identified a crucial need to examine specific associations between exposure to violent media and use of firearms. Exposure to violent media, especially for youths with preexisting aggressive tendencies and poor parental monitoring, may be an important contextual factor that amplifies risk for violent behavior and gun use.

Summary and Conclusions

The relatively small number of youths most likely to persist in serious acts of aggression (including increased risk of gun violence) have often experienced the following:

• Early childhood onset of persistent rule-breaking and aggression
• Socialization into criminal attitudes and behaviors by parents and caretakers who themselves are involved in criminal activities
• Exposure in childhood to multiple adverse experiences in their families and communities
• Social dislocation and reduced opportunities due to school failure or underachievement
• Persisting affiliation with deviant peers or gangs engaged in delinquent/criminal misconduct and with attitudes and beliefs that support possession and use of guns
• Broad exposure to sociocultural influences such as mass media violence and depictions of gun violence as an effective means of achieving goals or status

Most youths — even those with chronic and violent delinquent misconduct — desist in aggressive and antisocial behavior during late adolescence, and no single risk factor is sufficient to generate persisting violent behavior. Still, many are disproportionately at risk for becoming perpetrators or victims of gun violence. Homicide remains the second leading cause of death for teens and young adults between the ages of 15 and 24. In 2010, there were 2,711 infant, child, and adolescent victims of firearm deaths. In that year, 84 percent of homicide victims between the ages of 10 and 19 were killed with a firearm, and 40 percent of youths who committed suicide between the ages 15 and 19 did so with a gun (CDC, 2013a). 1

There is no one developmental trajectory that specifically leads to gun violence. However, prevention efforts guided by research on developmental risk can reduce the likelihood that firearms will be introduced into community and family conflicts or criminal activity. Prevention efforts can also reduce the relatively rare occasions when severe mental illness contributes to homicide or the more common circumstances when depression or other mental illness contributes to suicide.

Reducing incidents of gun violence arising from criminal misconduct or suicide is an important goal of broader primary and secondary prevention and intervention strategies. Such strategies must also attend to redirecting developmental antecedents and larger sociocultural processes that contribute to gun violence and gun-related deaths.

1 The 2010 data shown here are available online .

Eric Mankowski, PhD

Any account of gun violence in the United States must consider both why males are the perpetrators of the vast majority of gun violence and why the vast majority of males never perpetrate gun violence. An account that explains both phenomena focuses, in part, on how boys and men learn to demonstrate and achieve manhood through violence, as well as the differences in opportunities to demonstrate manhood among diverse groups of males. Although evidence exists for human biological and social-environmental systems interacting and contributing to aggressive and violent behavior, this review focuses on the sociocultural evidence that explains males’ higher rates of gun violence.

Reducing the propensity for some males to engage in violence will involve both social and cultural change. Hence, this section reviews existing research on the relationships between sex, gender (i.e., masculinity), and the perpetration and victimization of gun violence in the United States. The intersection of gender, race/ethnicity, and economic disadvantage is also considered in explaining the rates of gun violence across diverse communities. Finally, the relationships between masculinity, gender socialization, and gun violence are analyzed to identify gender-related risk factors for gun violence that can be targeted for prevention strategies and social policy.

Sex Differences in Gun Violence

Prevalence and Risk Men represent more than 90 percent of the perpetrators of homicide in the United States and are also the victims of the large majority (78 percent) of that violence (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2008; Federal Bureau of Investigation [FBI], 2007). Homicide by gun is the leading cause of death among Black youth, the second leading cause of death among all male youth, and the second or third leading cause of death among female youth (depending on the specific age group) (e.g., Miniño, 2010; Webster, Whitehill, Vernick, & Curriero, 2012). In addition, roughly four times as many youths visit hospitals for gun-induced wounds as are killed each year (CDC, 2013a).

Even more common than homicide, suicide is another leading cause of death in the United States, and most suicides are completed with a firearm. Males complete the large majority of suicides; depending on the age group, roughly four to six times as many males as females kill themselves with firearms (CDC, 2013a). Among youth, suicide ranks especially high as a cause of death. It is the third leading cause of death of 15–24-year-olds and the sixth leading cause of death for 5–14-year-olds. However, the rate of suicide and firearm suicide gradually increases over the lifespan. In addition to gender and age differences in prevalence, sizable differences also exist among ethnic groups. Firearm suicide generally is at least twice as high among Whites than among Blacks and other racial groups from 1980 to 2010 (CDC, 2013a), and White males over the age of 65 have rates that far exceed all other major groups.

Perpetrator–Victim Relationship and Location The prevalence of gun violence strongly depends not only on the sex of the offender but also on the offender’s relationship to the victim and the location of the violence (Sorenson, 2006). Both men and women are more likely to be killed with firearms by someone they know than by a stranger. Specifically, men are most likely to be killed in a public place by an acquaintance, whereas women are most likely to be killed in the home by a current or former spouse or dating partner (i.e., “intimate partner”). Women compared with men are especially likely to be killed by a firearm used by an intimate partner.

Women are killed by current or former intimate partners four to five times more often than men (Campbell, Glass, Sharps, Laughon, & Bloom, 2007), including by firearm. These sex differences in victimization do not appear to hold in the limited data available on same-sex intimate partner homicide; it is more common for men to kill their male partners than for women to kill their female partners (Campbell et al., 2007). Notably, these sex differences in gun violence, as a function of the type of perpetrator–victim relationships, are also found in nonfatal gun violence when emergency room visits are examined (Wiebe, 2003).

A disproportionate number of gun homicides occur in urban areas. Conversely, a disproportionate number of firearm suicides occur in rural (compared with urban) areas (Branas, Nance, Elliott, Richmond, & Schwab, 2004). Although they are highly publicized, less than 2 percent of the homicides of children occur in schools (Borum, Cornell, Modzeleski, & Jimerson, 2010; CDC, 2008, 2013b). There are even fewer “random” or “mass” school shootings in which multiple victims are killed at the same time.

Gun Access and Possession A person must own or obtain a gun to be able to commit gun violence. Research shows that there are sex differences in access to and carrying a gun. Males are roughly two to four times as likely as females to have access to a gun in the home or to possess a gun (Swahn, Hamming, & Ikeda, 2002; Vaughn et al., 2012). In turn, gun carrying is a key risk factor for gun violence perpetration and victimization. For example, gun carrying is associated with dating violence victimization among adolescents, with boys more likely to be victimized than girls (Yan, Howard, Beck, Shattuck, & Hallmark-Kerr, 2010).

Conclusions based on sex differences in access to guns should be drawn with some caution, given that there also appear to be sex differences in the reporting of guns in the home. Men report more guns in the home than do women from the same household (e.g., Ludwig, Cook, & Smith, 1998; Sorenson & Cook, 2008), a sex difference that appears to stem specifically from the substantially higher level of contact with and experience in handling and using guns among boys than girls in the same household (Cook & Sorenson, 2006). Nonetheless, the presence of guns in the home remains predictive of gun violence.

Gender and Gun Violence

Robust sex and race differences in firearm violence have been established. Examined next is how the socialization of men as well as differences in living conditions and opportunities among diverse groups of boys and men help explain why these differences occur.

Making Gender Visible in the Problem of Gun Violence Gender remains largely invisible in research and media accounts of gun violence. In particular, gender is not used to explain the problem of “school shootings,” despite the fact that almost every shooting is perpetrated by a young male. Newspaper headlines and articles describe “school shooters,” “violent adolescents,” and so forth, but rarely call attention to the fact that nearly all such incidents are perpetrated by boys and young men. Studies of risk factors for school shootings may refer accurately to the perpetrators generally as “boys” but largely fail to analyze gender (e.g., Verlinden, Hersen, & Thomas, 2000).

The large sex differences in gun violence should not be overlooked simply because the vast majority of boys and men do not perpetrate gun violence or excused as “boys will be boys.” The size of sex differences in the prevalence of gun violence differs substantially within regions of the United States (Kaplan & Geling, 1998) and across countries (e.g., Ahn, Park, Ha, Choi, & Hong, 2012), which further suggests that gender differences in sociocultural environments are needed to explain sex differences in gun violence.

Masculinity, Power, and Guns Status as a “man” is achieved by the display of stereotypically masculine characteristics, without which one’s manhood is contested. Although the particular characteristics defining manhood and the markers of them can vary across subcultural contexts (Connell, 1995), masculinity has, historically, generally been defined by aggressive and risk-taking behavior, emotional restrictiveness (particularly the vulnerable emotions of fear and sadness, and excepting anger), heterosexuality, and successful competition (Brannon, 1976; Kimmel, 1994; O’Neil, 1981). Such normative characteristics of traditional masculinity are in turn directly related to numerous factors that are associated with gun violence. For example, risk taking is associated with adolescent males’ possession of and access to guns (Vittes & Sorenson, 2006).

Social expectations and norms, supported by social and organizational systems and practices, privilege boys who reject or avoid in themselves anything stereotypically feminine, act tough and aggressive, suppress emotions (other than anger), distance themselves emotionally and physically from other men, and strive competitively for power. Men of color, poor men, gay men, and men from other marginalized groups differ substantially in their access to opportunities to fulfill these manhood ideals and expectations in socially accepted ways. For example, men with less formal educational and economic opportunity, who in the United States are disproportionately Black and Latino, cannot fulfill expectations to be successful breadwinners in socially acceptable ways (e.g., paid, legal employment) as easily as White men, and gay men have less ability to demonstrate normative heterosexual masculinity where they cannot legally marry or have children.

At the same time, higher levels of some forms of violence victimization and perpetration (including suicide) are found among these disadvantaged groups. For example, gay youth are more likely than heterosexual males to commit suicide, and African American male youth are disproportionately the victims of gun violence. Such structural discrimination can be seen reflected in implicit cognitive biases against these group members. Virtual simulations of high-threat incidents, such as those used to train police officers, reliably demonstrate a “shooter bias” in which actors are more likely to shoot Black male targets than those from other race-gender groups (i.e., Black women, White men, and White women) (Plant, Goplen, & Kunstman, 2011).

Even to the extent that it is achieved, manhood status is theorized as precarious, needing to be protected and defended through aggression and violence, including gun violence, in order to avoid victimization from (mostly) male peers (Connell, 1995). Paradoxically, as in all competition, the more convincingly manhood is achieved, the more vulnerable it becomes to challenges or threats and thus requires further defending, often with increasing levels and displays of toughness and violence. The dynamic of these expectations of manhood and their enforcement is like a tight box (Kivel, 1998). Boys and men are either trapped inside this box or, in violating the expectations by stepping out of the box, risk being targeted by threats, bullying, and other forms of violence.

Adherence to stereotypic masculinity, in turn, is commonly associated with stress and conflict, poor health, poor coping and relationship quality, and violence (Courtenay 2000; Hong, 2000). Men’s gender role stress and conflict are directly associated with various forms of interpersonal aggression and violence, including the perpetration of intimate partner violence and suicide (Feder, Levant, & Dean, 2010; Moore & Stuart, 2005; O’Neil, 2008). Men with more restricted emotionality and more restricted affection with other men are more likely to be aggressive, coercive, or violent (O’Neil, 2008). These dimensions of masculinity also are related to a number of other harmful behaviors that are, in turn, associated directly with gun violence and other forms of aggression (see O’Neil, 2008, for a review). For example, the effect of alcohol consumption on intimate partner violence is greater among men than women (Moore, Elkins, McNulty, Kivisto, & Handsel, 2011), and alcohol consumption may be associated with lethal male-to-male violence at least partly because it is associated with carrying a gun (Phillips, Matusko, & Tomasovic, 2007).

In addition, accumulating research evidence indicates a relationship between gender and many of the factors that are associated with suicide (e.g., substance abuse, unemployment; Payne, Swami, & Stanistreet, 2008). Beliefs in traditional masculinity are related to suicidal thoughts, although differently across age cohorts (Hunt, Sweeting, Keoghan, & Platt, 2006). Men’s historic role as economic providers in heterosexual families typically ends with their retirement from the workforce. Suicide rates, including firearm suicide, increase dramatically at precisely this point in the life course (i.e., age 65 and older), whereas they decrease among women this age. The increase in suicide rates among White men at age 65 and older does not occur among Black men, who as a group have much higher levels of unemployment throughout their lives and consequently may not experience the same sense of loss of meaning or entitlement. Male firearm suicide also increases dramatically in adolescence and early adulthood, precisely the years during which young men’s sense of manhood is developing.

Beliefs about gender and sexual orientation also help explain sex differences in fatal hate crimes involving guns. Key themes in male gender role expectations are anti-femininity (Brannon, 1976) and homophobia (Kimmel, 1994). Boys are expected to rid themselves of stereotypically feminine characteristics (e.g., “you throw like a girl,” “big boys don’t cry”). Gun violence against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered persons can be understood in this context. One explanation of these hate crimes is that they are perpetrated to demonstrate heterosexual masculinity to male peer group members. These homicides, compared with violent crimes in which the victim is (or is perceived to be) heterosexual, often are especially brutal and are more commonly perpetrated by groups of men rather than individual men or women. However, such homicides appear to be perpetrated less often using firearms, which suggests motives beyond a desire to kill — for example, expressing intense hatred or transferring negative affect directly onto the victim (Gruenwald, 2012).

Male role expectations for achievement of success and power, combined with restricted emotionality, may have dangerous consequences, particularly for boys who suffer major losses and need help. A majority of the males who have completed homicides at schools had trouble coping with a recent major loss. Many had also experienced bullying or other harassment (Vossekuil et al., 2002). Such characteristics cannot and should not be used to develop risk profiles of attackers because school shootings are such rare events, and so many men who share these same characteristics never will perpetrate gun violence. However, when male gender and characteristics associated with male gender are highly common among attackers, it is responsible to ask how male gender contributes to school shootings and other forms of gun violence.

In their case studies of male-perpetrated homicide-suicides at schools, Kalish and Kimmel (2010) speculated that a sense of “aggrieved entitlement” may be common among the shooters. In this view, the young men see suicide and revenge as appropriate, even expected, responses for men to perceived or actual victimization. Related findings emerged from a similar analysis of all “random” school shootings (those with multiple, nontargeted victims) from 1982 to 2001 (Kimmel & Mahler, 2003). With a small number of exceptions, the vast majority were committed by White boys (26 of 28) in suburban or rural (not urban) areas (27 of 28). Many of these boys also had experienced homophobic bullying.

Masculinity and Beliefs About Guns Sex differences in beliefs about guns may begin at an early age as a function of parental socialization and attitudes. Fathers, particularly White fathers, are more permissive than mothers of their children, particularly sons, playing with toy guns (Cheng et al., 2003). Through the socialization of gender, boys and men may come to believe that displaying a gun will enhance their masculine power. Carrying a weapon is, in fact, instrumental in fulfilling male gender role expectations. Estimates of a person’s physical size and muscularity are greater when they display a gun (or large knife) than other similarly sized and shaped objects (e.g., drill, saw), even when the person is only described and not visible. This perception persists despite no apparent correlation between actual gun ownership and size or muscularity (Fessler, Holbrook, & Snyder, 2012). Guns symbolically represent some key elements of hegemonic masculinity — power, hardness, force, aggressiveness, coldness (Connell, 1995; Stroud, 2012).

Implications for Prevention and Policy

Sex Differences in Attitudes Toward Gun Policies Policies and laws addressing the manufacture, purchase, and storage of guns have been advocated in response to the prevalence of gun violence. Perhaps reflecting their differential access to firearms and differential perpetration and victimization rates, men and women hold different attitudes about such gun control policies. Females are generally much more favorable toward gun restriction and control policies (e.g., Vittes, Sorenson, & Gilbert, 2003).

Prevention Programs Addressing Gender The foregoing analysis of the link between gender and gun violence suggests the potential value of addressing gender in efforts to define the problem of gun violence and develop preventive responses. Preliminary evidence suggests that correcting and changing perceptions among men of social norms regarding beliefs about behaviors and characteristics that are associated with stereotypic masculinity may reduce the prevalence of intimate partner and sexual violence (Fabiano, Perkins, Berkowitz, Linkenbach, & Stark, 2003; Neighbors et al., 2010). However, the effect of such interventions in specifically reducing gun violence remains to be tested. The skills and knowledge of psychologists are needed to develop and evaluate programs and settings in schools, workplaces, prisons, neighborhoods, clinics, and other relevant contexts that aim to change gendered expectations for males that emphasize self-sufficiency, toughness, and violence, including gun violence.

Robert Kinscherff, PhD, JD; Arthur C. Evans Jr., PhD; Marisa R. Randazzo, PhD; and Dewey Cornell, PhD

A natural starting point for the prevention of gun violence is to identify individuals who are at risk for violence and in need of assistance. Efforts focused on at-risk individuals are considered secondary prevention because they are distinguished from primary or universal prevention efforts that address the general population. Secondary prevention strategies for gun violence can include such actions as providing prompt mental health treatment for an acutely depressed and suicidal person or conducting a threat assessment of a person who has threatened gun violence against a spouse or work supervisor.

To be effective, strategies to prevent gun violence should be tailored to different kinds of violence. One example is the distinction between acts of impulsive violence (i.e., violence carried out in the heat of the moment, such as an argument that escalates into an assault) and acts of targeted or predatory violence (i.e., acts of violence that are planned in advance of the attack and directed toward an identified target). The incidents of mass casualty gun violence that have garnered worldwide media attention, such as the shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., at a movie theater Aurora, Colo., at the Fort Hood military base, and at a political rally in a shopping center in Tucson, Ariz., are all examples of targeted or predatory violence. Distinguishing between impulsive violence, targeted/predatory violence, and other types of violence is important because they are associated with different risk factors and require different prevention strategies.

Predicting and Preventing Impulsive Gun Violence

Research on impulsive violence has enabled scientists to develop moderately accurate predictive models that can identify individuals who are more likely than other persons to engage in this form of violence. These models cannot determine with certainty whether a particular person will engage in violence — just whether a person is at greater likelihood of doing so. This approach is known as a violence risk assessment or clinical assessment of dangerousness . A violence risk assessment is conducted by a licensed mental health professional who has specific training in this area. The process generally involves comparing the person in question with known base rates for those of the same age/gender who have committed impulsive violence and then determining whether the person in question has individual risk factors that would increase that person’s likelihood of engaging in impulsive violence. In addition, the process involves examining individual protective factors that would decrease the person’s overall likelihood of engaging in impulsive violence. Research that has identified risk and protective factors for impulsive violence is limited in that more research has been conducted on men than women and on incarcerated or institutionalized individuals than on those in the general population. Nevertheless, this approach can be effective for determining someone’s relative likelihood of engaging in impulsive violence.

Some risk factors for impulsive violence are static — for example, race and age — and cannot be changed. But those factors that are dynamic — for example, unmet mental health needs for conditions linked with violence to self (such as depression) or others (such as paranoia), lack of mental health care, abuse of alcohol — are more amenable to intervention and treatment that can reduce the risk for gun violence. Secondary prevention strategies to prevent impulsive gun violence can include having a trained psychologist or other mental health professional treat the person’s acute mental health needs or substance abuse needs. There must be a vigorous and coordinated response to persons whose histories include acts of violence, threatened or actual use of weapons, and substance abuse, particularly if they have access to a gun. This response should include a violence risk assessment by well-trained professionals and referral for any indicated mental health treatment, counseling and mediation services, or other forms of intervention that can reduce the risk of violence.

Youths and young adults who are experiencing an emerging psychosis should be referred for prompt assessment by mental health professionals with sufficient clinical expertise with psychotic disorders to craft a clinical intervention plan that includes risk management. In some cases, secondary prevention measures may include a court-ordered emergency psychiatric hospitalization where a person can receive a psychiatric evaluation and begin treatment. Criteria for allowing such involuntary evaluations vary by state but typically can occur only when someone is experiencing symptoms of a serious mental illness and, as a result, potentially poses a significant danger to self or others. There is an urgent need to improve the effectiveness of emergency commitment procedures because of concerns that they do not provide sufficient services and follow-up care.

Predicting and Preventing Targeted or Predatory Gun Violence

Acts of targeted or predatory violence directed at multiple victims, including crimes sometimes referred to as rampage shootings and mass shootings, 2 occur far less often in the United States than do acts of impulsive violence (although targeted violence garners far more media attention). Acts of targeted violence have not been subject to study that has developed statistical models like those used for estimating a person’s likelihood of impulsive violence. Although it seems appealing to develop checklists of warning signs to construct a profile of individuals who commit these kinds of crimes, this effort, sometimes described as psychological profiling, has not been successful. Research has not identified an effective or useful psychological profile of those who would engage in multiple casualty gun violence. Moreover, efforts to use a checklist profile to identify these individuals fail in part because the characteristics used in these profiles are too general to be of practical value; such characteristics are also shared by many nonviolent individuals.

Because of the limitations of a profiling approach, practitioners have developed the behavioral threat assessment model as an alternative means of identifying individuals who are threatening, planning, or preparing to commit targeted violence. Behavioral threat assessment also emphasizes the need for interventions to prevent violence or harm when a threat has been identified, so it represents a more comprehensive approach to violence prevention. The behavioral threat assessment model is an empirically based approach that was developed largely by the U.S. Secret Service to evaluate threats to the president and other public figures and has since been adapted by the U.S. Secret Service and U.S. Department of Education (Fein et al., 2002; Vossekuil et al., 2002) and others (Cornell, Allen, & Fan, 2012) for use in schools, colleges and universities, workplaces, and the U.S. military. Threat assessment teams are typically multidisciplinary teams that are trained to identify potentially threatening persons and situations. They gather and analyze additional information, make an informed assessment of whether the person is on a pathway to violence — that is, determine whether the person poses a threat of interpersonal violence or self-harm — and if so, take steps to intervene, address any underlying problem or treatment need, and reduce the risk for violence.

Behavioral threat assessment is seen as the emerging standard of care for preventing targeted violence in schools, colleges, and workplaces, as well as against government officials and other public figures. The behavioral threat assessment approach is the model currently used by the U.S. Secret Service to prevent violence to the U.S. president and other public officials, by the U.S. Capitol Police to prevent violence to members of Congress, by the U.S. State Department to prevent violence to dignitaries visiting the United States, and by the U.S. Marshals Service to prevent violence to federal judges (see Fein & Vossekuil, 1998). The behavioral threat assessment model also is recommended in two American national standards: one for higher education institutions (which recommends that all colleges and universities operate behavioral threat assessment teams; see ASME-Innovative Technologies Institute, 2010) and one for workplaces (which recommend s similar teams to prevent workplace violence; see ASIS International and Society for Human Resource Management, 2011). In addition, a comprehensive review conducted by a U.S. Department of Defense (2010) task force following the Fort Hood shooting concluded that threat assessment teams or threat management units (i.e., teams trained in behavioral threat assessment and management procedures) are the most effective tool currently available to prevent workplace violence or insider threats like the attack at Fort Hood.

Empirical research on acts of targeted violence has shown that many of those attacks were carried out by individuals motivated by personal problems who were at a point of desperation. In their troubled state of mind, these individuals saw no viable solution to their problems and could envision no future. The behavioral threat assessment model is used not only to determine whether a person is planning a violent attack but also to identify personal or situational problems that could be addressed to alleviate desperation and restore hope. In many cases, this includes referring the person to mental health services and other sources of support. In some of these cases, psychiatric hospitalization may be needed to address despondence and suicidality. Nonpsychiatric resources also can help alleviate the individual’s problems or concerns. Resources such as conflict resolution, credit counseling, job placement assistance, academic accommodations, veterans’ services, pastoral counseling, and disability services all can help address personal problems and reduce desperation. When the underlying personal problems are alleviated, people who may have posed a threat of violence to others no longer see violence as their best or only option.

Predicting and Preventing Violence by Those With Acute Mental Illness

When treating a person with acute or severe mental illness, mental health professionals may encounter situations in which they need to determine whether their patient (or client) is at risk for violence. Typically, they would conduct a violence risk assessment if the clinician’s concern is about risk for impulsive violence, as discussed previously. Clinicians also can conduct — or work with a team to help conduct — a threat assessment if their concern involves targeted violence. The available research suggests that mental health professionals should be concerned when a person with acute mental illness makes an explicit threat to harm someone or is troubled by delusions or hallucinations that encourage violence, but even in these situations, violence is far from certain. Although neither a violence risk assessment nor a threat assessment can yield a precise prediction of someone’s likelihood of violence, it can identify high-risk situations and guide efforts to reduce risk. It is important to emphasize that prevention does not require prediction; interventions to reduce risk can be beneficial even if it is not possible to determine who would or would not have committed a violent act.

When their patients (or clients) pose a risk of violence to others, mental health professionals have a legal and ethical obligation to take appropriate action to protect potential victims of violence. This obligation is not easily carried out for several reasons. First, mental health professionals have only a modest ability to predict violence, even when assisted by research-validated instruments. Mental health professionals who are concerned that a patient is at high risk for violence may be unable to convince their patient to accept hospitalization or some other change in treatment. They can seek involuntary hospitalization or treatment, but civil commitment laws (that vary from state to state) generally require convincing evidence that a person is imminently dangerous to self or others. There is considerable debate about the need to reform civil commitment laws in a manner that both protects individual liberties and provides necessary protection for society.

There is no guarantee that voluntary or involuntary treatment of a potentially dangerous individual will be effective in reducing violence risk, especially when the risk for violence does not arise from a mental illness but instead from intense desperation resulting from highly emotionally distressing circumstances or from antisocial orientation and proclivities for criminal misconduct. When individuals with prior histories of violence are released from treatment facilities, they typically need continued treatment and monitoring for potential violence until they stabilize in community settings. Jurisdictions vary widely in the resources available to achieve stability in the community and in the legal ability to impose monitoring or clinical care on persons who decline voluntary services.

Furthermore, if unable to obtain civil commitment to a protective setting, mental health professionals must consider other protective actions permitted in their jurisdictions, which may include warning potential victims that they are in danger or alerting local law enforcement, family members, employers, or others. Whether their particular jurisdiction mandates a response to “warn or protect” potential victims or leaves this decision to the discretion of the clinician, mental health professionals are often reluctant to take such actions because they are concerned that doing so might damage the therapeutic relationship with their patient and drive patients from treatment or otherwise render effective treatment impossible.

Another post-hospitalization strategy is to prohibit persons with mental illness from acquiring a firearm. The Gun Control Act of 1968 prohibited persons from purchasing a firearm if they had been involuntarily committed to a psychiatric inpatient unit. The Brady Handgun Violence Act (1994), known as the Brady Law, began the process of background checks to identify individuals who might attempt to purchase a firearm despite prohibitions. There is some evidence that rates of gun violence are reduced when these procedures are adequately implemented, but research, consistent implementation, and refinement of these procedures are needed (Webster & Vernick, 2013a).

Predicting and Preventing Gun-Based Suicide

Suicide accounts for approximately 61 percent of all firearm fatalities in the United States — 19,393 of the 31,672 firearm deaths reported by the CDC for 2010 (Murphy, Xu, & Kochanek, 2013). When there is concern that a person may be suicidal, mental health professionals can conduct suicide screenings and should rely on structured assessment tools to assess that person’s risk to self. Behavioral threat assessment also may be indicated in such situations if the potentially suicidal individual may also pose a threat to others.

More than half of suicides are accomplished by firearms and most commonly with a firearm from the household (Miller, Azrael, Hepburn, Hemenway, & Lippmann, 2006). More than 90 percent of persons who commit suicide had some combination of symptoms of depression, symptoms of other mental disorders, and/or substance abuse (Moscicki, 2001). Ironically, although depression is the condition most closely associated with attempted or completed suicide, it is also less likely than schizophrenia or other disorders to prompt an involuntary civil commitment or other legal triggers that can prevent some persons with mental illness from possessing firearms. As in behavioral threat assessment, suicide risk may be reduced through identifying and providing support in solving the problems that are driving a person to consider suicide. In many cases the person may need a combination of psychological treatment and psychiatric medication.

Tragic shootings like the ones at Sandy Hook Elementary School and the movie theater in Aurora, Colo., spark intense debate as to whether specific gun control policies would significantly diminish the number of mass shooting incidents. This debate includes whether or how to restrict access to firearms, especially with regard to persons with some mental illnesses. Another line of debate concerns whether to limit access to certain types of firearms (e.g., reducing access to high-capacity magazines). Empirical evidence documents the efficacy of some firearms restrictions, but because the restrictions often are not well implemented and have serious limitations, it is difficult to conduct the kind of rigorous research needed to fairly evaluate their potential for reducing gun violence.

The often-debated Brady Law (1994) does not consistently prevent persons with mental illness from acquiring a firearm. The prohibition applies only to persons with involuntary commitments and omits both persons with voluntary admissions and those with no history of inpatient hospitalization. The law does not prevent a person with a history of involuntary commitment from obtaining a previously owned firearm or one possessed by a friend or relative. Additional problems with implementing the Brady Law include incomplete records of involuntary commitments, background checks limited to purchases from licensed gun dealers, and exceptions from background checks for firearms purchased during gun shows.

Despite these limitations and gaps, there is some scientific evidence that background checks reduce the rate of violent gun crimes by persons whose mental health records disqualify them from legally obtaining a firearm. A study of one state (Connecticut) found that the risk of violent criminal offending among persons with a history of involuntary psychiatric commitment declined significantly after the state began reporting these individuals to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (Swanson et al., 2013). This study supports the value of additional research to investigate strategies for limiting access to firearms by persons with serious mental illness.

In contrast, access to appropriate mental health treatment can work to reduce violence at the individual level. For example, one major finding of the MacArthur Risk Assessment study (Monahan et al., 2001) was that getting continued mental health treatment in the community after release from a psychiatric hospitalization reduced the number of violent acts by those who had been hospitalized. In other studies, outpatient mental health services, including mandated services, have been effective in preventing or reducing violent and harmful behavior (e.g., New York State Office of Mental Health, 2005; N.Y. Mental Hygiene Law [Kendra’s Law], 1999; O’Keefe, Potenza, & Mueser, 1997; Swanson et al., 2000).

There is abundant scientific research demonstrating the effectiveness of treatment for persons with severe mental illness such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. However, there are social, economic, and legal barriers to treatment. First, there is a persistent social stigma associated with mental illness that deters individuals from seeking treatment for themselves or for family members. Public education to increase understanding of and support for persons with serious mental illness and to encourage access to treatment is needed.

Second, mental health treatment, especially inpatient hospitalization, is expensive, and persons with mental illness often cannot access this level of care or afford it. Commercial insurers often have limitations on hospital care or do not cover intensive services that are alternatives to inpatient admission. Public sector facilities such as community mental health centers and state-operated psychiatric hospitals have experienced many years of shrinking government support; demand for their services exceeds their capacity. Many mental health providers limit their services to the most acute cases and cannot extend services after the immediate crisis has resolved.

Third, there are complex legal barriers to the provision of mental health services when an individual does not desire treatment or does not believe he or she is in need of treatment. A severe mental illness can impair an individual’s understanding of his or her condition and need for treatment, but a person with mental illness may make a rational decision to refuse treatment that he or she understandably regards as ineffective, aversive, or undesirable for some reason (e.g., psychiatric medications can produce unpleasant side effects and hospitalization can be a stressful experience).

When an individual refuses to seek treatment, it may be difficult to determine whether this decision is rational or irrational. To protect individual liberties, laws throughout the United States permit involuntary treatment only under stringent conditions, such as when an individual is determined to be imminently dangerous to self or others due to a mental illness. People who refuse treatment but are not judged to be imminently dangerous (a difficult and ambiguous standard) fall into a “gray zone” (Evans, 2013). Some individuals with serious mental illness pose a danger to self or others that is not imminent, and often it is not possible to monitor them adequately or determine precisely when they become dangerous and should be hospitalized on an involuntary basis. In other situations, the primary risk posed by the individual does not arise from mental illness but from his or her willingness to engage in criminal misconduct for personal gain.

Furthermore, when a person is committed to a psychiatric hospital on an involuntary basis, treatment is limited in scope. Once the person is no longer regarded as imminently dangerous (the criteria differ across states), he or she must be released from treatment even if not fully recovered; that person may be vulnerable to relapse into a dangerous state. In some cases of mass shootings, persons who committed the shooting were known to have a serious mental illness, but authorities could not require treatment when it was needed. In other cases, authorities were not aware of an individual’s mental illness before the attempted or actual mass shooting incident.

A related problem is that the onset or recurrence of serious mental illness can be difficult to detect. Symptoms of mental illness may emerge slowly, often in late adolescence or early adulthood, and may not be readily apparent to family members and friends. A person hearing voices or experiencing paranoid delusions may hide these symptoms and simply seem preoccupied or distressed but not seriously ill. A person who has been treated successfully for a serious mental illness may experience a relapse that is not immediately recognized. There is a great need for public education about the onset of serious mental illness, recognition of the symptoms of mental illness, and increased emphasis on the importance of seeking prompt treatment.

_______________

2 The FBI (n.d.) defines mass murder as incidents that occur in one location (or in closely related locations during a single attack) and that result in four or more casualties. Mass murder shootings are much less common than other types of gun homicides. They are also not a new phenomenon. Historically, most mass murder shootings occurred within families or in criminal activities such as gang activity and robberies. Rampage killings is a term used to describe some mass murders that involve attacks on victims in unprotected settings (such as schools and colleges, workplaces, places of worship) and public places (such as theaters, malls, restaurants, public gatherings). However, these shootings are often planned well in advance and carried out in a methodical manner, so the term rampage is a misnomer.

Ellen Scrivner, PhD, ABPP; W. Douglas Tynan, PhD, ABPP; and Dewey Cornell, PhD

Prevention of violence occurs along a continuum that begins in early childhood with programs to help parents raise healthy children and ends with efforts to identify and intervene with troubled individuals who threaten violence. A comprehensive community approach recognizes that no single program is sufficient and there are many opportunities for effective prevention. Discussion of effective prevention from a community perspective should include identification of the community being examined. Within the larger community, many stakeholders are affected by gun violence that results in a homicide, suicide, or mass shooting.

Such stakeholders include community and public safety officials, schools, workplaces, neighborhoods, mental health and public health systems, and faith-based groups. When it comes to perpetrating gun violence, however, a common thread that exists across community groups is the recognition that someone, or possibly several people, may have heard something about an individual’s thoughts and/or plans to use a gun. Where do they go with that information? How do they report it so that innocent people are not targeted or labeled unfairly — and how can their information initiate a comprehensive and effective crisis response that prevents harm to the individual of concern and the community?

To date, there is little research to help frame a comprehensive and effective prevention strategy for gun violence at the community level. One of the most authoritative reviews of the body of gun violence research comes from the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences (see Wellford, Pepper, & Petrie, 2004). In reviewing a range of criminal justice initiatives designed to reduce gun violence, such as gun courts, enhanced sentencing, and problem-based policing, Wellford et al. concluded that problem-oriented policing, also known as place-based initiatives or target policing, holds promise, particularly when applied to “hot spots” — areas in the community that have high crime rates. They included studies on programs such as the Boston Gun Project (see Kennedy, Braga, & Piehl, 2001), more commonly known as Operation Ceasefire, in their review and concluded that although many of these programs may have reduced youth homicides, there is only modest evidence to suggest that they effectively lowered rates of crime and violence, given the confounding factors that influence those rates and are difficult to control. In other words, the variability in the roles of police, prosecutors, and the community creates complex interactions that can confound the levels of intervention and affect sustainability.

Wellford et al.’s (2004) conclusions were supported by the findings of the 2011 Firearms and Violence Research Working Group (National Institute of Justice, 2011), which also questioned whether rigorous evaluations are possible given the reliability and validity of the data. Wellford et al. advocated for continued research and development of models that include collaboration between police and community partners and for examination of different evaluation methodologies.

There are varied prevention models that address community issues. When it comes to exploring models that specifically address preventing the recent episodes of gun violence that have captured the nation’s attention, however, the inevitable conclusion is that there is a need to develop a new model that would bring community stakeholders together in a collaborative, problem-solving mode, with a goal of preventing individuals from engaging in gun violence, whether directed at others or self-inflicted. This model would go beyond a single activity and would blend several strategies as building blocks to form a workable systemic approach. It would require that community service systems break their tendencies to operate in silos and take advantage of the different skill sets already available in the community — for example:

• Police are trained in crisis intervention skills with a primary focus on responding to special populations such as those with mental illness.
• Community members are trained in skilled interventions such as Emotional CPR  and Mental Health First Aid — consumer-based initiatives that use neighbor-to-neighbor approaches that direct people in need of care to appropriate mental health treatment.
• School resource officers are trained to show a proactive presence in schools.

Each group may provide a solution to a piece of the problem, but there is nothing connecting the broad range of activities to the type of collaborative system needed to implement a comprehensive, community-based strategy to prevent gun violence. From a policy and practice perspective, no one skill set or one agency can provide the complete answer when it comes to developing a prevention methodology. However, some models developed through the community policing reform movement may be relevant because they are generally acknowledged to have been useful in reducing violence against women and domestic violence and in responding to children exposed to violence. These community policing models involve collaborative problem solving as a way to safeguard the community as opposed to relying only on arrest procedures. Moreover, they engage the community in organized joint efforts to produce public safety (Peak, 2013).

Another initiative, Project Safe Neighborhoods ( PSN ), is also relevant. PSN, a nationwide program that began in 2001 and was designed specifically to reduce gun violence, has some similarity to the community policing model. PSN involved the 94 U.S. attorneys in cities across the country in a prominent leadership role, ensured flexibility across jurisdictions, and required cross-agency buy-in, though there seems to have been less formalized involvement with mental health services. Nevertheless, it used a problem-solving approach that was aimed at getting guns off the streets, and the results of varied outcome assessments demonstrate that it was successful in reducing gun violence, particularly when the initiatives were tailored to the gun violence needs of specific communities (McGarrell et al., 2009).

A common approach used by PSN involved engaging the community to establish appropriate stakeholder partnerships, formulating strategic planning on the basis of identification and measurement of the community problem, training those involved in PSN, providing outreach through nationwide public service announcements, and ensuring accountability through various reporting mechanisms. The PSN problem-solving steps, with some adaptations, could provide a useful strategy for initiating collaborative problem solving with relevant community stakeholders in the interest of reducing gun violence and victimization through prevention.

The models discussed here illustrate how community engagement and collaboration helped break new ground in response to identified criminal justice problems, but they could be strengthened considerably by incorporating the involvement of professional psychology. The need for collaboration was again highlighted at a Critical Issues in Policing meeting (Police Executive Research Forum, 2012) as part of a discussion on connecting agency silos by building bridges across systems. Because police and mental health workers often respond to the same people, there is a need for collaboration on the best way to do this without compromising their roles. This emphasis takes the discussion beyond the student/school focus and expands it to include the use of crisis intervention teams (CIT) and community advocacy groups as additional resources for achieving the goal of preventing violence in the community.

The CIT model was another result of community policing reform that brought police and mental health services together to provide a more effective response to the needs of special populations, particularly mental health-related cases. Developed in Memphis in 1988 but now deployed in many communities across the country, the CIT model trains CIT officers to deescalate situations involving people in crises and to use jail diversion options, if available, rather than arrests. Although research on the effectiveness of CITs is generally limited to outcome studies in select cities, the model continues to gain prominence. In fact, the National Alliance on Mental Illness ( NAMI ) has established a NAMI CIT Center and is promoting the expansion of CIT nationwide. Studies by Borum (2000), Steadman, Deane, Borum, and Morrissey (2000), and Teller, Munetz, Gil, and Ritter (2006) have illustrated that high-risk encounters between individuals with mental illness and police can be substantially improved through CIT training, particularly when there are options such as drop-off centers, use of diversion techniques, and collaborations between law enforcement, mental health, and family members. Each plays a significant role in ensuring that city or county jails do not become de facto institutions for those in mental health crises.

Crisis intervention teams were also a major focus of a 2010 policy summit (International Association of Chiefs of Police [IACP], 2012). The summit, hosted by SAMHSA, the Bureau of Justice Assistance, and IACP, produced a 23-item action agenda. Although the summit focused on decriminalizing the response to persons with mental illness and was not directed specifically at dealing with people who perpetrate gun violence, some of their recommendations did apply. The central theme of the agenda encouraged law enforcement and mental health service systems to engage in mutually respectful working relationships, collaborate across partner agencies, and establish local multidisciplinary advisory groups. These partnerships would develop policy, protocols, and guidelines for informing law enforcement encounters with persons with mental illness who are in crisis, including a protocol that would enable agencies to share essential information about those individuals and whether the nature of the crisis could provoke violent behavior. They further recommended that these types of protocols be established and maintained by the multidisciplinary advisory group and that training be provided in the community to sensitize community members to signs of potential danger and how to intervene in a systematic way.

A Police Foundation (2013) roundtable on gun violence and mental health reported that some police departments have reached out to communities and offered safe storage of firearms when community members have concern about a family member’s access to firearms in the home. As a service to the community, the police would offer to keep guns secured in accessible community locations until the threat has subsided and the community member requests the return. The police would also confer with mental health practitioners regarding a designated family or community member on an as-needed basis. This strategy is consistent with a community threat assessment approach in which law enforcement authorities engage proactively with the community to reduce the risk of violence when an individual poses a risk.

Gun Violence in Schools

Gun violence in schools has been a national concern for more than two decades. Although school shootings are highly traumatic events and have brought school safety to the forefront of public attention, schools are very safe environments compared with other community settings (Borum et al., 2010). Less than 2 percent of homicides of school-aged children occur in schools. Over a 20-year period, there have been approximately 16 shooting deaths in U.S. schools each year (Fox & Burstein, 2010), compared with approximately 32,000 shooting deaths annually in the nation as a whole (Hoyert & Xu, 2012).

The Gun-Free Schools Act of 1994 made federal education funding contingent upon states requiring schools to expel for at least one year any student found with a firearm at school. This mandate strengthened the emerging philosophy of zero tolerance as a school disciplinary policy. According to the APA Zero Tolerance Task Force (2008), this policy was predicated on faulty assumptions that removing disobedient students would motivate them to improve their behavior, deter misbehavior by other students, and generate safer school conditions. The task force found no scientific evidence to support these assumptions and, on the contrary, concluded that the practice of school suspension had negative effects on students and a disproportionately negative impact on students of color and students with disabilities.

After the 1999 shooting at Columbine High School, both the FBI (O’Toole, 2000) and the U.S. Secret Service (Vossekuil et al., 2002) conducted studies of school shootings and concluded that schools should not rely on student profiling or checklists of warning signs to identify potentially violent students. They cautioned that school shootings were statistically too rare to predict with accuracy and that the characteristics associated with student shooters lacked specificity, which means that numerous nonviolent students would be misidentified as dangerous. Both law enforcement agencies recommended that schools adopt a behavioral threat assessment approach, which, as noted earlier, involves assessment of students who threaten violence or engage in threatening behavior and then individualized interventions to resolve any problem or conflict that underlies the threat. One of the promising features of threat assessment is that it provides schools with a policy alternative to zero tolerance. Many schools across the nation have adopted threat assessment practices. Controlled studies of the "Virginia Student Threat Assessment Guidelines" have shown that school-based threat assessment teams are able to resolve student threats safely and efficiently and to reduce school suspension rates (Cornell et al., 2012; Cornell, Gregory, & Fan, 2011; Cornell, Sheras, Gregory, & Fan, 2009).

The Role of Health and Mental Health Providers in Gun Violence Prevention

The health care system is an important point of contact for families regarding the issue of gun safety. Physicians’ counseling of individuals and families about firearm safety has in some cases proven to be an effective prevention measure and is consistent with other health counseling about safety. According to the 2012 policy statement of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP):

The AAP supports the education of physicians and other professionals interested in understanding the effects of firearms and how to reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with their use. HHS should establish a program to support gun safety training and counseling programs among physicians and other medical professionals. The program should also provide medical and community resources for families exposed to violence.

The AAP’s Bright Futures practice guide urges pediatricians to counsel parents who possess guns that storing guns safely and preventing access to guns reduce injury by as much as 70 percent and that the presence of a gun in the home increases the risk for suicide among adolescents. A randomized controlled trial indicates that health care provider counseling, when linked with the distribution of cable locks, has been demonstrated to increase safer home storage of firearms (Barkin et al., 2008). The removal of guns or the restriction of access should be reinforced for children and adolescents with mood disorders, substance abuse (including alcohol), or a history of suicide attempts (Grossman et al., 2005). Research is needed to identify the best ways to avoid unintended consequences while achieving intended outcomes.

In recent years, legal and legislative challenges have emerged that test the ability of physicians and other medical professionals to provide guidance on firearms. For example, in 2011 the state of Florida enacted the Firearm Owners’ Privacy Act, which prevented physicians from providing such counsel under threat of financial penalty and potential loss of licensure. The law has been permanently blocked from implementation by a U.S. district court. Similar policies have been introduced in six other states: Alabama, Minnesota, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and West Virginia. The fundamental right of all health and mental health care providers to provide counseling to individuals and families must be protected to mitigate risk of injury to people where they live, work, and play.

It is apparent that long before the events at Sandy Hook Elementary School, many public health and public safety practitioners were seeking strategies to improve responses to violence in their communities and have experienced some success through problem-solving projects such as PSN and CIT. Yet there is still a need to rigorously evaluate and improve these efforts. In the meantime, basic safety precautions must be emphasized to parents by professionals in health, education, and mental health.

Public health messaging campaigns around safe storage of firearms are needed. The practice of keeping firearms stored and locked must be encouraged, and the habit of keeping loaded, unlocked weapons available should be recognized as dangerous and rendered socially unacceptable. To keep children and families safe, good safety habits have to become the only socially acceptable norm.

Susan B. Sorenson, PhD, and Daniel W. Webster, ScD, MPH

The use of a gun greatly increases the odds that violence will result in a fatality. In 2010, the most recent year for which data are available, an estimated 17.1 percent of the interpersonal assaults with a gunshot wound resulted in a homicide, and 80.7 percent of the suicide attempts in which a gun was used resulted in death (CDC, 2013a). By contrast, the most common methods of assault (hands, fists, and feet) and suicide attempt (ingesting pills) in 2010 resulted in death in only 0.009 percent and 2.5 percent of the incidents, respectively (CDC, 2013a). 3

As shown in Figure 1, in the past 30 years, the percentage of deaths caused by gunfire has stabilized to about 68 percent for homicides and, as drug overdoses have increased, dropped to 50 percent for suicide. There are more gun suicides than gun homicides in the United States. In 2010, 61.2 percent (19,392) of the 31,672 gun deaths in the United States were suicides (CDC, 2013a).

Figure 1. Deaths Attributed to Firearms, 1981–2010

Note: Data are from the Web-Based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System (WISQARS™), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, 2013. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/fatal.html.

Much of the public concern about guns and gun violence focuses on interpersonal violence, and public policy mirrors this emphasis. Although there is no standard way to enumerate each discrete gun law, most U.S. gun laws focus on the user of the gun. Relatively few focus on the design, manufacture, distribution, advertising, or sale of firearms (Teret & Wintemute, 1993). Fewer yet address ammunition.

The focus herein is on the lifespan of guns — from design and manufacture to use — and the policies that could address the misuse of guns. It is critical to understand how policies create conditions that affect access to and use of guns. Because they constitute the largest portion of guns used in homicides (FBI, 2012a), handguns are the focus of most laws. Despite the substantial human and economic costs of gun violence in the United States and the ongoing debate about the effectiveness of gun regulations, scientifically rigorous evaluations are not available for many of these policies (Wellford et al., 2004). The dearth of such research on gun policies is due, in part, to the lack of government funding on this topic because of the political influences of the gun lobby (e.g., Kellermann & Rivara, 2013).

Design and Manufacture

The type of handguns manufactured in the United States has changed. Pistols overtook revolvers in manufacturing in the mid-1980s. In addition, the most widely sold pistol went from a .22 caliber in 1985 to a 9 mm or larger (e.g., .45 caliber pistols) by 1994 (Wintemute, 1996), with smaller, more concealable pistols favored by permit holders as well as criminals. This shift has been described as increasing the lethality of handguns, although, according to our review, no research has examined whether the change in weapon design has led to an increased risk of death. Such research may not be feasible given that the aforementioned weapons — that is, small, concealable pistols — still likely constitute a small portion of the estimated 283 million guns in civilian hands in the United States (Hepburn, Miller, Azrael, & Hemenway, 2007). The disproportionate appearance of such pistols among guns that were traced by law enforcement following their use in a crime has been attributed to the ease with which smaller guns can be concealed and their low price point (Koper, 2007; Wright, Wintemute, & Webster, 2010).

Ammunition, by contrast, is directly related to lethality. Hollow-point bullets are used by hunters because, in part, they are considered a more humane way to kill. The physics of hollow-point bullets are such that, upon impact, they will tumble inside the animal and take it down. Some bullets have been designed to be frangible, that is, to break apart upon impact and thus cause substantial internal damage. By contrast, the physics of full metal jacket bullets are such that, unless they hit a bone, they are likely to continue on a straight trajectory and pass through the animal, leaving it wounded and wandering. Hollow-point bullets are used by law enforcement to reduce over-penetration (i.e., when a bullet passes through its intended target and, thus, risks striking others).

Some design features would substantially reduce gun violence. One of the most promising ideas is that of “smart guns” that can be fired only by an authorized user. For example, young people, who are prohibited due to their age from legally purchasing a firearm, typically use a gun from their own home to commit suicide (Johnson, Barber, Azrael, Clark, & Hemenway, 2010; Wright, Wintemute, & Claire, 2008) and to carry out a school shooting (CDC, 2003). If personalized to an authorized adult in the home, the gun could not be operated by the adolescent or others in the home, thus rendering it of little use to the potential suicide victim or school shooter. During the Clinton administration, the federal government made a modest investment in the research and development of personalized firearms. There also was considerable private investment in technologies that would prevent unauthorized users from being able to fire weapons. Efforts to create these “smart guns” have resulted in multiple patent applications. Armatix GmbH, a German company, has designed and produced a personalized pistol that is being sold in several Western European nations and has been approved for importation to the United States. Although the cost of this new personalized gun is very high, it is believed that personalized guns can be produced at a cost that would be affordable by many (Teret & Merritt, 2013).

The assault weapons ban (the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act), enacted for a 10-year period beginning in 1994, provided a good opportunity to assess the effectiveness of restricting the manufacturing, sale, and possession of a certain class of weapons. “Assault weapons,” however, are difficult to conceal and are used rarely in most street crime or domestic violence. Assault weapons are commonly used in mass shootings in which ammunition capacity can determine the number of victims killed or wounded. Because multiple bullets are not an issue in suicide, one would not expect changes in such deaths either. Perhaps not surprisingly, an effect of the ban could not be detected on total gun-related homicides (Koper, 2013; Koper & Roth, 2001).

Unfortunately, prior research on the effects of the federal assault weapons ban did not focus on the law’s effects on mass shootings or the number of persons shot in such shootings. Assault weapons or guns with large-capacity ammunition feeding devices account for half of the weapons used in mass shootings such as at Sandy Hook Elementary School (see Follman & Aronson , 2013). Mass shootings with these types of weapons result in about 1.5 times as many fatalities as those committed with other types of firearms (Roth & Koper, 1997).

Distribution

The distribution of guns is largely the responsibility of a network of middlemen between gun manufacturers and gun dealers. When a gun is recovered following its use (or suspected use) in a crime, law enforcement routinely requests that the gun be traced — that is, the serial number is reported to the manufacturer, who then contacts the distributor and/or dealer who, in turn, reviews records to determine the original purchaser of a specific weapon. The number of gun traces is such that the manufacturers get many calls about their guns each day. One researcher estimated that Smith and Wesson, with about 10 percent of market share, received a call every seven to eight minutes about one of their guns (Kairys, 2008). Thus, one could reasonably expect that manufacturers would have some knowledge of which distributors sell guns that are disproportionately used in crime, and distributors would, in turn, know which retailers disproportionately sell guns used in crime.

Following in the footsteps of cities and states that had successfully sued the tobacco industry under state consumer protection and antitrust laws for costs the public incurred in caring for smokers, beginning in the late 1990s cities and states began to file claims against firearm manufacturers in an attempt to recover the costs of gun violence they incurred. In response, in 2005, Congress enacted and President George W. Bush signed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which prohibits civil liability lawsuits against “manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers of firearms or ammunition for damages, injunctive or other relief resulting from the misuse of their products by others” ( 15 U.S.C. §§ 7901-7903 ). Thus, the option of using litigation, a long-standing and sometimes controversial tool by which to address entrenched public health problems (e.g., Lytton, 2004), was severely restricted.

Advertising

Advertisements for guns have largely disappeared from classified ads in newspapers. By contrast, advertising in magazines, specifically gun magazines, is strong (Saylor, Vittes, & Sorenson, 2004). Such advertising is subject to the same Federal Trade Commission (FTC) regulations as other consumer products. In 1996, several organizations filed a complaint with the FTC after documenting multiple cases of what they asserted to be false and misleading claims about home protection (for specific examples, see Vernick, Teret, & Webster, 1997). As of November 1, 2013, the FTC had not ruled on the complaint. However, the firearm industry changed its practices such that by 2002, self-protection was an infrequent theme in advertisements for guns (Saylor et al., 2004). To our knowledge, current advertising has not been studied. New issues relevant to the advertising of guns include online advertisements by private sellers who are not obligated to verify that purchasers have passed a background check, online ads from prohibited purchasers seeking to buy firearms, the marketing of military-style weapons to civilians, and the marketing of firearms to underage youth (for examples and more information, see Kessler & Trumble, 2013; Mayors Against Illegal Guns, 2013; McIntire, 2013; Violence Policy Center, 2011).

Sales and Purchases

Gun sales have been increasing in the United States. The FBI reported a substantial jump in background checks (a proxy for gun sales) in the days following the Sandy Hook Elementary School shootings. In fact, of the 10 days with the most requests for background checks since the FBI started monitoring such information, 7 of them were within 8 days of Sandy Hook (FBI, 2013). Guns can be purchased from federally licensed firearm dealers or private, unlicensed sellers in a variety of settings, including gun shows, flea markets, and the Internet.

Responsible sales practices (for examples, see Mayors Against Illegal Guns, n.d.) rely heavily on the integrity of the seller. And usually that responsibility is well placed: Over half (57 percent) of the guns traced (i.e., submitted by law enforcement, usually in association with a crime, to determine the original purchaser of the weapon) were originally sold by only 1.2 percent of federally licensed firearm dealers (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms [ATF], 2000). However, there are problems. Sometimes a person who is prohibited from purchasing a gun engages someone else, who is not so prohibited, to purchase a gun for him or her. The person doing the buying is called a “straw purchaser.” Straw purchase attempts are not uncommon; in a random sample of 1,601 licensed dealers and pawnbrokers in 43 states, two thirds reported experiencing straw purchase attempts (Wintemute, 2013b).

Two studies tested the integrity of licensed firearm dealers by calling the dealers and asking whether they could purchase a handgun on behalf of someone else (in the studies, a boyfriend or girlfriend), a straw purchase transaction that is illegal. In the study of a sample of gun dealers listed in telephone directories of the 20 largest U.S. cities, the majority of gun dealers indicated a willingness to sell a handgun under the illegal straw purchase scenario (Sorenson & Vittes, 2003). In a similar study of licensed gun dealers in California, a state with relatively strong regulation and oversight of licensed gun dealers, one in five dealers expressed a willingness to make the illegal sale (Wintemute, 2010). Programs such as the ATF and National Sports Shooting Council’s “Don’t Lie for the Other Guy,” which provides posters and educational materials to display in gun stores as well as tips for gun dealers on how to identify and respond to straw purchase attempts, have not been evaluated.

It is important to be able to identify high-risk dealers because, in 2012, the ATF had insufficient resources to monitor federally licensed gun dealers (Horwitz, 2012); there were 134,997 unlicensed gun dealers in April 2013 (ATF, 2013). Some states have recognized the limited capacity of the ATF and the weaknesses of federal laws regulating gun dealers and enacted their own laws requiring the licensing, regulation, and oversight of gun dealers (Vernick, Webster, & Bulzacchelli, 2006) and, when enforced, these laws appear to reduce the diversion of guns to criminals shortly after a retail sale (Webster, Vernick, & Bulzacchelli, 2009). Undercover stings and lawsuits against gun dealers who facilitate illegal straw sales have also been shown to reduce the diversion of guns to criminals (Webster, Bulzacchelli, Zeoli, & Vernick, 2006; Webster & Vernick, 2013b).

To help ensure that guns are not sold to those who are prohibited from purchasing them, the National Instant Criminal Background Check System ([NICS], part of the Brady Law) was developed so that the status of a potential purchaser could be checked immediately by a federally licensed firearm dealer. Prohibited purchasers include, but are not limited to, convicted felons, persons dishonorably discharged from the military, those under a domestic violence restraining order, and, in the language of the federal law, persons who have been adjudicated as mentally defective or have been committed to any mental institution (see 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) (1)-(9) and (n)). About 0.6% of sales have been denied on the basis of these criteria since NICS was established in 1998 (FBI, 2012b).

A substantial portion of firearm sales and transfers, however, is not required to go through a federally licensed dealer or a background check requirement; this includes, in most U.S. states, private party sales including those that are advertised on the Internet and those that take place at gun shows where licensed gun dealers who could process background checks are steps away. Some evidence suggests that state policies regulating private handgun sales reduce the diversion of guns to criminals (Vittes, Vernick, & Webster, 2013; Webster et al., 2009; Webster, Vernick, McGinty, & Alcorn, 2013).

The ability to check the background of a potential purchaser nearly instantly means that in many states, someone who is not a prohibited purchaser can purchase a gun within a matter of minutes. Ten states and the District of Columbia have a waiting period (sometimes referred to as a “cooling-off” period) for handguns ranging from 3 (Florida and Iowa) to 14 (Hawaii) days (Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, 2012). The efficacy of waiting periods has received little direct research attention.

With the exception of misdemeanor domestic violence assault, federal law and laws in most states prohibit firearm possession of those convicted of a crime only if the convictions are for felony offenses in adult courts. Research has shown that misdemeanants who were legally able to purchase handguns committed crimes involving violence following those purchases at a rate 2–10 times higher than that of handgun purchasers with no prior convictions (Wintemute, Drake, Beaumont, & Wright, 1998). Wintemute and colleagues (Wintemute, Wright, Drake, & Beaumont, 2001) examined the impact of a California law that expanded firearm prohibitions to include persons convicted of misdemeanor crimes of violence. In their study of legal handgun purchasers with criminal histories of misdemeanor violence before and after the law, denial of handgun purchases due to a prior misdemeanor conviction was associated with a significantly lower rate of subsequent violent offending.

Persons who are legally determined to be a danger to others or to themselves as a result of mental illness are prohibited by federal law from purchasing and possessing firearms. A significant impediment to successful implementation of this law is that the firearm disqualifications due to mental illness often are not reported to the FBI’s background check system. As mentioned earlier, in 2007 Connecticut began reporting these disqualifications to the background check system. In a ground-breaking study, Swanson and colleagues (2013) studied the effects of this policy change on individuals who would most likely be affected — that is, those who were legally prohibited from possessing firearms due solely to the danger posed by their mental illnesses. They found that the rate of violent crime offending was about half as high among those whose mental illness disqualification was reported to the background system compared with those whose mental illness disqualification was not reported.

Federal law allows an individual to buy several guns, even hundreds, at once; the only requirement is that a multiple-purchase form be completed (18 U.S.C. § 923(g)(3)(A)(2009)). Large bulk purchases have been linked to gun trafficking (Koper, 2005). Policies such as one-handgun-a-month have rarely been enacted. Evaluations of these laws document mixed findings (Webster et al., 2009, 2013;Weil & Knox, 1996).

The United States was one of the signers of the Geneva Convention, which prohibits the use of hollow-point bullets in war (the goal being to wound but not kill wartime enemies), but hollow-point bullets are available to civilians in the United States. A hunting license is not a prerequisite for the purchase of hollow-point bullets in the United States. California passed a law requiring a thumbprint for ammunition purchases; the law was ruled “unconstitutionally vague” by a Superior Court judge in 2011, but some municipalities (e.g., Los Angeles, Sacramento) have similar local ordinances in effect.

In 2004, a national survey found that 20 percent of the U.S. adult population reported they own one or more long-guns (shotguns or rifles), and 16 percent reported they own a handgun (Hepburn et al., 2007). Self-protection was the primary reason for owning a gun. Most people who have a gun have multiple guns, and half of gun owners reported owning four or more guns. In fact, 4 percent of the population is estimated to own 65 percent of the guns in the nation.

Nationally representative studies suggest that the mental health of gun owners is similar to that of individuals who do not own guns (Miller, Barber, Azrael, Hemenway, & Molnar, 2009; Sorenson & Vittes, 2008). However, gun owners are more likely to binge drink and drink and drive (Wintemute, 2011).

In perhaps the methodologically strongest study to date to examine handgun ownership and mortality, Wintemute and colleagues found a strong association between the purchase of a handgun and suicide: “In the first year after the purchase of a handgun, suicide was the leading cause of death among handgun purchasers, accounting for 24.5 percent of all deaths” (Wintemute, Parham, Beaumont, Wright, & Drake, 1999). The risk of suicide remained elevated (nearly twofold and sevenfold, respectively, for male and female handgun purchasers) at the end of the 6-year study period. Men’s handgun purchase was associated with a reduced risk of becoming a homicide victim (0.69); women’s handgun purchase, by contrast, was associated with a 55 percent increase in risk of becoming a homicide victim. A waiting period may reduce immediate risk but appears not to eliminate short- or long-term risk for suicide.

Risk can extend to others in the home. Efforts to educate children about guns (largely to stay away from them), when tested with field experiments, indicate they are generally ineffective (e.g., Hardy, 2002). Child Access Prevention (CAP) laws focus on the responsibilities of adults; adults are held criminally liable for unsafe storage of firearms around children. CAP laws have been associated with modest decreases in unintentional shootings of children and the suicides of adolescents (Webster & Starnes, 2000; Webster, Vernick, Zeoli, & Manganello, 2004).

Most gun-related laws focus on the user of the gun (e.g., increased penalties for using a gun in the commission of a crime). Some research suggests that having been threatened with a gun, as well as the perpetrator’s having access to a gun and using a gun during the fatal incident, is associated with increased risk of women becoming victims of intimate partner homicide (Campbell et al., 2003). Regarding sales, note that persons with a domestic violence misdemeanor or under a domestic violence restraining order are prohibited by federal law from purchasing and possessing a firearm and ammunition. Research to date indicates that firearm restrictions for persons subject to such laws have reduced intimate partner homicides by 6 percent to 19 percent (Vigdor & Mercy, 2006; Zeoli & Webster, 2010).

As with initial discussions about motor vehicle safety, which focused on what was then referred to as the “nut behind the wheel,” current discussions about gun users sometimes involve terms such as “good guys” and “bad guys.” Although intuitively appealing, such categories seem to assume a static label and do not take into account the fact that “good guys” can become “bad guys” and “bad guys” can become “good guys.” One way an armed “good guy” can become a “bad guy” is to use a gun in a moment of temporary despondence or rage (Bandeira, 2013; Wintemute, 2013a).

Research on near-miss suicide attempts among young adults indicates that impulsivity is of concern. About one fourth of those whose suicide attempt was so severe they most likely would have died reported first thinking about suicide five minutes before attempting it (Simon et al., 2001). Although an estimated 90 percent of those who attempt suicide go on to die of something else (i.e., they do not subsequently kill themselves; for a review, see Bostwick & Pankratz, 2000), for those who use a gun, as noted in opening paragraph of this chapter, there generally is not a second chance.

Given the complexity of the issue, a multifaceted approach will be needed to reduce firearm-related violence (see, for example, Chapman & Alpers, 2013). Not all ideas that on the surface seem to be useful actually are. For example, gun buyback programs may raise awareness of guns and gun violence in a community but have not been shown to reduce mortality (Makarios & Pratt, 2012). Such data can inform policy. President Obama’s January 2013 executive orders about gun violence include directing the CDC to research the causes and prevention of gun violence. The federal government has since announced several funding opportunities for research related to gun violence. And the recent Institute of Medicine and National Research Council (2013) report called for lifting access restrictions on gun-related administrative data (e.g., data related to dealers’ compliance with firearm sales laws, gun trace data) that could be used to identify potential intervention and prevention points and strategies. So perhaps more data will be available to inform and evaluate policies designed to reduce gun violence.

The focus of this section has largely been on mortality. The scope of the problem is far greater, however. For every person who dies of a gunshot wound, there are an estimated 2.25 people who are hospitalized or receive emergency medical treatment for a nonfatal gunshot wound (Gotsch, Annest, Mercy, & Ryan, 2001). And guns are used in the street and in the home to intimidate and coerce (e.g., Sorenson & Wiebe, 2004; Truman, 2011).

Single policies implemented by themselves have been shown to reduce certain forms of gun violence in the United States. Adequate implementation and enforcement as well as addressing multiple intervention points simultaneously may improve the efficacy of these laws even more. After motor vehicle safety efforts expanded to include the vehicle, roadways, and other intervention points (vs. a focus on individual behavior), motor vehicle deaths dropped precipitously and continue to decline (CDC, 1999, 2013a). A multifaceted approach to reducing gun violence will serve the nation well.

3 The 2010 data used to calculate current rates shown here are available at http://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/ .

Adler, N. E., & Steward, J. (2010). Health disparities across the lifespan: Meaning, methods, and mechanisms. In N. E. Adler & J. Steward (Eds.), Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences: Vol. 1186. The biology of disadvantage: Socioeconomic status and health (pp. 5–23). New York, NY: New York Academy of Sciences.

Ahn, M. H., Park, S., Ha, K., Choi, S. H., & Hong, J. P. (2012). Gender ratio comparisons of the suicide rates and methods in Korea, Japan, Australia, and the United States. Journal of Affective Disorders, 142, 161–165. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2012.05.008

Alpers, P., & Wilson, M. (2013, August 14). Global impact of gun violence: Firearms, public health and safety. Retrieved from http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region

American Academy of Pediatrics, Council on Injury, Violence, and Poison Prevention Executive Committee. (2012). Firearm-related injuries affecting the pediatric population. Pediatrics, 130 (5), e1416–e1423. doi:10.1542/peds.2012-2481

American Psychological Association, Zero Tolerance Task Force. (2008). Are zero tolerance policies effective in the schools? An evidentiary review and recommendations. American Psychologist, 63, 852–862. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.63.9.852

Anderson, C. A., Berkowitz, L., Donnerstein, E., Huesmann, L. R., Johnson, J. D., Linz, D., . . . Wartella, E. (2003). The influence of media violence on youth. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 4 (3) , 81–110. doi:10.1111/j.1529-1006.2003.pspi_1433.x

Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2001). Effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition, aggressive affect, physiological arousal, and prosocial behavior: A meta-analytic review of the scientific literature. Psychological Science, 12, 353–359. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00366

Anderson, C. A., Shibuya, A., Ihori, N., Swing, E. L., Bushman, B. J., Sakamoto, A., . . . Saleem, M. (2010). Violent video game effects on aggression, empathy, and prosocial behavior in Eastern and Western countries: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 151–173. doi:10.1037/a0018251

ASIS International and Society for Human Resource Management. (2011). Workplace violence prevention and intervention: An American standard (ASIS/SHRM WVP.1-2011). New York, NY: American National Standards Institute.

ASME-Innovative Technologies Institute. (2010). A risk analysis standard for natural and man-made hazards to higher education: A standard for academia . New York, NY: American National Standards Institute.

Bandeira, A. R. (2013). Brazil: Gun control and homicide reduction. In D. Webster & J. Vernick (Eds.), Reducing gun violence in America: Informing policy with evidence and analysis (pp. 213–223). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Barkin, S. L., Finch, S. A., Ip, E. H., Scheindlin, B., Craig, J. A., Steffes, J., . . . Wasserman, R. C. (2008). Is office-based counseling about media use, timeouts, and firearm storage effective? Results from a cluster-randomized, controlled trial. Pediatrics, 122 (1), e15–e25. Retrieved from http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/122/1/e15.full

Borum, R. (2000). Improving high risk encounters between people with mental illness and police. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 28, 332–337.

Borum, R., Cornell, D., Modzeleski, W., & Jimerson, S. R. (2010). What can be done about school shootings? A review of the evidence. Educational Researcher, 39, 27–37. doi:10.3102/0013189X09357620

Borum, R., & Verhaagen, D. (2006). Assessing and managing violence risk in juveniles. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Bostwick, J. M., & Pankratz, V. S. (2000). Affective disorders and suicide risk: A reexamination. American Journal of Psychiatry, 157 (12), 1925–1932. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.157.12.1925

Brady Handgun Violence Act, 18 U.S.C. § 921 et seq. (1994).

Branas, C. C., Nance, M. L., Elliott, M. R., Richmond, T. S., & Schwab, C. W. (2004). Urban–rural shifts in intentional firearm death: Different causes, same results. American Journal of Public Health, 94, 1750–1755. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1448529/

Brannon, R. (1976). The male sex role: Our culture’s blueprint for manhood, what it’s done for us lately. In D. David & R. Brannon (Eds.), The forty-nine percent majority: The male sex role (pp. 1–48). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Brennan, P. A., Hall, J., Bor, W., Najman, J. M., & Williams, G. (2003). Integrating biological and social processes in relation to early-onset persistent aggression in boys and girls. Developmental Psychology, 39, 309–323. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.39.2.309

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. (2000). Following the gun: Enforcing federal laws against firearms traffickers . Retrieved from http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/downloads/pdf/Following_the_Gun

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. (2013). Report of active firearms licenses – License type by state statistics . Retrieved from https://www.atf.gov/sites/default/files/assets/inside-atf/2013/0413-ffl-type-by-state.pdf

Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2008). National Crime Victimization Survey: Criminal victimization in the United States, 2006 statistical tables (NCJ 223436). Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cvus06.pdf

Butters, J. E., Sheptycki, J., Brochu, S., & Erikson, P. G. (2011). Guns and sublethal violence: A comparative study of at-risk youth in two Canadian cities. International Criminal Justice Review, 4, 402–426.

Campbell, J. C., Glass, N., Sharps, P. W., Laughon, K., & Bloom, T. (2007). Intimate partner homicide: Review and implications of research and policy. Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 8, 246–260. doi:10.1177/1524838007303505

Campbell, J. C., Webster, D., Koziol-McLain, J., Block, C., Campbell, D., Curry, M. A., . . . Laughon, K. (2003). Risk factors for femicide in abusive relationships: Results from a multisite case control study. American Journal of Public Health , 93 (7), 1089–1097. doi:10.2105/AJPH.93.7.1089

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (1999). Motor-vehicle safety: A 20th century public health achievement. MMWR Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 48 (18), 369–374. (Erratum published June 11, 1999, MMWR Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 48 (22), p. 473)

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2003). Source of firearms used by students in school-associated violent deaths — United States, 1992–1999. MMWR Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 52 (9), 169–172.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2008). School-associated student homicides — United States, 1992–2006. MMWR Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 57 (2), 33–36. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5702a1.htm

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2013a, August 23). Injury prevention & control: Data & statistics (WISQARS™). Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/index.html

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2013b, February 22). School violence: Data and statistics. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/youthviolence/schoolviolence/data_stats.html

Chapman, S., & Alpers, P. (2013). Gun-related deaths: How Australia stepped off “The American path.” Annals of Internal Medicine, 158 (10), 770–771. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-158-10-201305210-00624

Cheng, T. L., Brenner, R. A., Wright, J. L., Sachs, H. C., Moyer, P., & Rao, M. (2003). Community norms on toy guns. Pediatrics, 111 (1), 75–79. doi:10.1542/peds.111.1.75

Children’s Defense Fund. (2009, February 19). Cradle to Prison Pipeline Campaign. Retrieved from http://www.childrensdefense.org/child-research-data-publications/data/cradle-prison-pipeline-summary-report.pdf

Children’s Defense Fund. (2012). The state of America’s children handbook . Retrieved from http://www.childrensdefense.org/child-research-data-publications/data/soac-2012-handbook.html

Connell, R. W. (1995). Masculinities. Cambridge, MA: Polity.

Cook, P. J., & Sorenson, S. (2006). The gender gap among teen survey respondents: Why are boys more likely to report a gun in the home than girls? Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 22, 61–76. doi: 10.1007/s10940-005-9002-7

Cooper, A., & Smith, E. L. (2011, November). Homicide trends in the United States, 1980–2008. Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbse&sid=31

Cornell, D., Allen, K., & Fan, X. (2012). A randomized controlled study of the Virginia Student Threat Assessment Guidelines in kindergarten through grade 12. School Psychology Review, 41, 100–115.

Cornell, D., Gregory, A., & Fan, X. (2011). Reductions in long-term suspensions following adoption of the Virginia Student Threat Assessment Guidelines. Bulletin of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, 95, 175–194. doi:0192636511415255v1

Cornell, D., Sheras, P., Gregory, A., & Fan, X. (2009). A retrospective study of school safety conditions in high schools using the Virginia Threat Assessment Guidelines versus alternative approaches. School Psychology Quarterly, 24, 119–129. doi:10.1037/a0016182

Courtenay, W. H. (2000). Constructions of masculinity and their influence on men’s well-being: A theory of gender and health. Social Science & Medicine, 50 , 1385–1401. doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(99)00390-1

Dishion, T. J., Véronneau, M-H., & Myers, M. W. (2010). Cascading peer dynamics underlying the progression from problem behavior to violence in early to late adolescence. Development and Psychopathology, 22 (3), 603–619. doi: 10.1017/S0954579410000313

Dodge, K. A., Greenberg, M. T., Malone, P. S., & Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group. (2008). Testing an idealized dynamic cascade model of the development of serious violence in adolescence. Child Development, 79, 1907–1927. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2008.01233.x

Dodge, K. A., & Pettit, G. S. (2003). A biopsychosocial model of the development of chronic conduct problems in adolescence. Developmental Psychology, 39, 349–371. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.39.2.349

Eaton, D. K., Kann, L., Kinchen, S., Shanklin, S., Flint, K. H., Hawkins, J., . . . Wechsler, H. (2012, June 8). Youth risk behavior surveillance — United States, 2011. MMWR Surveillance Summaries, 61 (4). Retrieved from the CDC website: http://www.cdc.gov/HealthyYouth/yrbs/index.htm

Edelman, M. W. (2007). The cradle to prison pipeline: An American health crisis. Preventing Chronic Disease: Public Health Research, Practice and Policy, 4 (3). Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/pcd/issues/2007/jul/07_0038.htm

Evans, A. C., Jr. (2013, January 11). Mental health’s great gray area . Retrieved from http://articles.philly.com/2013-01-11/news/36281940_1_mental-illness-mental-health-health-issues

Fabiano, P. M., Perkins, H. W., Berkowitz, A., Linkenbach, J., & Stark, C (2003). Engaging men as social justice allies in ending violence against women: Evidence for a social norms approach. Journal of American College Health , 52, 105–108. doi: 10.1080/07448480309595732

Farrington, D. P., Jolliffe, D., Loeber, R., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., & Kalb, L. M. (2001). The concentration of offenders in families and family criminality in the prediction of boys’ delinquency. Journal of Adolescence, 24, 579–596. doi:10.1006/jado.2001.0424

Feder, J., Levant, R. F., & Dean, J. (2010). Boys and violence: A gender-informed analysis. Psychology of Violence, 1, 3–12. doi: 10.1037/2152-0828.1.S.3

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (n.d.). Serial murder: Multi-disciplinary perspectives for investigators. Retrieved from http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/serial-murder

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2007). Crime in the United States, 2007. Retrieved from http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2007

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2012a). Crime in the United States, 2011 . Retrieved from http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-20

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2012b). National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) operations 2012 . Retrieved from http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics/reports/2012-operations-report

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2013). NICS firearm background checks: Top 10 highest days/weeks. Retrieved from http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics/reports/nics-firearm-background-checks-top-10-highest-days-and-weeks-033113.pdf

Fein, R. A., & Vossekuil, F. (1998). Protective intelligence and threat assessment investigations: A guide for state and local law enforcement officials. Washington, DC: U.S. Secret Service.

Fein, R., Vossekuil, B., Pollack, W., Borum, R., Modzeleski, W., & Reddy, M. (2002). Threat assessment in schools: A guide to managing threatening situations and to creating safe school climates. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education and U.S. Secret Service.

Fessler, D. M. T., Holbrook, C., & Snyder, J. K. (2012). Weapons make the man (larger): Formidability is represented as size and strength in humans. PLOS ONE, 7 (4), e32751. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0032751

Follman, M., & Aronson, G. (2013, January 30). “A killing machine”: Half of all mass shooters used high-capacity magazines. Mother Jones. Retrieved from http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/high-capacity-magazines-mass-shootings

Fox, J. A., & Burstein, H. (2010). Violence and security on campus: From preschool through college. Denver, CO: Praeger.

Furlong, M. J., Bates, M. P., & Smith, D. C. (2001). Predicting school weapon possession: A secondary analysis of the Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance Survey. Psychology in the Schools, 38, 127–139. doi:10.1002/pits.1005

Gotsch, K. E., Annest, J. L., Mercy, J. A., & Ryan, G. W. (2001). Surveillance for fatal and nonfatal firearm-related injuries — United States, 1993–1998. MMWR, 50 (SS02), 1–32.

Grossman, D. C., Mueller, B. A., Riedy, C., Dowd, M. D., Villaveces, A., Prodzinski, J., . . . Harruff, R. (2005). Gun storage practices and risk of youth suicide and unintentional firearm injuries. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 293, 707–714. doi:10.1001/jama.293.6.707

Gruenwald, J. (2012). Are anti-LGBT homicides in the United States unique? Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27 (18), 3601–3623.

Guerra, N. G., & Bradshaw, C. P. (2008). Linking the prevention of problem behaviors and positive youth development: Core competencies for positive youth development. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 122, 1–17.

Gun Control Act of 1968, 18 U.S.C., § 44-101 et seq. (1968).

Gun-Free Schools Act of 1994, 20 U.S.C. § 8921-23 (1994).

Hardy, M. S. (2002). Teaching firearm safety to children: Failure of a program. Journal of  Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 23 (2), 71–76.

Hemenway, D., Vriniotis, M., Johnson, R. M., Miller, M., & Azrael, D. (2011). Gun carrying by high school students in Boston, MA: Does overestimation of peer gun carrying matter? Journal of Adolescence, 34, 997–1003. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2010.11.008

Henggeler, S. W. (2011). Efficacy studies to large-scale transport: The development and validation of multisystemic therapy programs. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 7,  351–381. doi:10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032210-104615

Hepburn, L., Miller, M., Azrael, D., & Hemenway, D. (2007). The U.S. gun stock: Results from the 2004 National Firearms Survey. Injury Prevention, 13 (1), 15–19. doi:10.1136/ip.2006.013607

Hill, K. G., Howell, J. C., Hawkins, J. D., & Battin-Pearson, S. R. (1999). Childhood risk factors for adolescent gang membership: Results from the Seattle Social Development Project. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 36 (3), 300–322. doi:10.1177/0022427899036003003

Hong, L. (2000). Toward a transformed approach to prevention: Breaking the link between masculinity and violence. Journal of American College Health, 48 (6), 269–279. doi: 10.1080/07448480009596268

Horwitz, S. (2012, December 17). ATF, charged with regulating guns, lacks resources and leadership. The Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com

Hoyert, D. L., & Xu, J. (2012). Deaths: Preliminary data for 2011. National Vital Statistics Reports, 61 (6). Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_06.pdf

Huesmann, L. R. (2010). Nailing the coffin shut on doubts that violent video games stimulate aggression: Comment on Anderson et al. (2010). Psychological Bulletin, 2, 179–181. doi:10.1037/a0018567

Huesmann, L. R., & Guerra, N. G. (1997). Children’s normative beliefs about aggression and aggressive behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 408–419. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.72.2.408

Huesmann, L. R., Moise-Titus, J., Podolski, C-L., & Eron, L. D. (2003). Longitudinal relations between children’s exposure to TV violence and their aggressive and violent behavior in young adulthood: 1977–1992. Developmental Psychology, 39, 201–221. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.39.2.201

Hunt, K., Sweeting, H., Keoghan, M., & Platt, S. (2006). Sex, gender role orientation, gender role attitudes and suicidal thoughts in three generations: A general population study. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 41 (8), 641–647. doi: 10.1007/s00127-006-0074-y

Institute of Medicine and National Research Council. (2013). Priorities for research to reduce the threat of firearm-related violence. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=18319

International Association of Chiefs of Police. (2012). Building safer communities: Improving police response to persons with mental illness: Recommendations from the IACP National Policy Summit. Retrieved from http://www.theiacp.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=JyoR%2fQBPIxA%3d&tabid=87

Johnson, R. M., Barber, C., Azrael, D., Clark, D. E., & Hemenway, D. (2010). Who are the owners of firearms used in adolescent suicides? Suicide and Life Threatening Behavior, 40 (6), 609–611. doi:10.1521/suli.2010.40.6.609

Johnson, R. M., Miller, M., Vriniotis, M., Azrael, D., & Hemenway, D. (2006). Are household firearms stored less safely in homes with adolescents? Analysis of a national random sample of parents. Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, 160, 788–792. doi:10.1001/archpedi.160.8.788

Kairys, D. (2008). Philadelphia freedom: Memoir of a civil rights lawyer . Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

Kalish, R., & Kimmel, M. (2010). Suicide by mass murder: Masculinity, aggrieved entitlement, and rampage school shootings. Health Sociology Review, 19 (4), 451–464.

Kaplan, M. S., & Geling, O. (1998). Firearm suicides and homicides in the United States: Regional variations and patterns of gun ownership. Social Science & Medicine, 46,  1227–1233. doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(97)10051-X

Kellermann, A. L., & Rivara, R. (2013). Silencing the science on gun research. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 309 (6), 549–550. doi:10.1001/jama.2012.208207

Kennedy, D. M., Braga, A. A., & Piehl, A. M. (2001). Reducing gun violence: The Boston Gun Project’s Operation Ceasefire (NIJ 188741). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/188741.pdf

Kessler, J., & Trumble, S. (2013, August). The virtual loophole: A survey of online gun sales. Retrieved from http://content.thirdway.org/publications/719/Third_Way_Report_-_The_Virtual_Loophole-_A_Survey_of_Online_Gun_Sales.pdf

Kimmel, M. S. (1994). Masculinity as homophobia: Fear, shame, and silence in the construction of gender identity. In H. Brod & M. Kaufman (Eds.), Theorizing masculinities (pp. 119–141). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Kimmel, M. S, & Mahler, M. (2003). Adolescent masculinity, homophobia, and violence: Random school shootings, 1982–2001. American Behavioral Scientist, 46, 1439–1458. doi: 10.1177/0002764203046010010

Kivel, P. (1998). Men’s work: How to stop the violence that tears our lives apart (2nd ed.). City Center, MN: Hazelden.

Koper, C. S. (2005). Purchase of multiple firearms as a risk factor for criminal gun use: Implications for gun policy and enforcement. Criminology and Public Policy, 4 (4), 749–778. doi:10.1111/j.1745-9133.2005.00354.x

Koper, C. S. (2007). Crime gun risk factors: Buyer, seller, firearm, and transaction characteristics associated with criminal gun use and trafficking (Report to the National Institute of Justice). Retrieved from www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/221074.pdf

Koper, C. S. (2013). America’s experience with the federal assault weapons ban, 1994–2004: Key findings and implications. In D. Webster & J. Vernick (Eds.), Reducing gun violence in America: Informing policy with evidence and analysis (pp. 157–171). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Koper, C. S., & Roth, J. A. (2001). The impact of the 1994 federal assault weapons ban on gun violence outcomes: An assessment of multiple outcome measures and some lessons for policy evaluation. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 17 (1), 33–74. doi:10.1023/A:1007522431219

Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence. (2012, May 21). Waiting periods policy summary. Retrieved from http://smartgunlaws.org/waiting-periods-policy-summary

Lizotte, A. J., Krohn, M. D., Howell, J. C., Tobin, K., & Howard, G. J. (2000). Factors influencing gun carrying among young urban males over the adolescent-young adult life course. Criminology, 38, 811–834.

Loeber, R. (1982). The stability of antisocial and delinquent child behavior: A review. Child Development, 53, 1431–1446.

Ludwig, G., Cook, P. J., & Smith, T. W. (1998). The gender gap in reporting household gun ownership. American Journal of Public Health, 88 (11), 1715–1718.

Lytton, T. D. (2004, Winter). Using litigation to make public health policy: Theoretical and empirical challenges in assessing product liability, tobacco, and gun litigation. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics, 556–564.

Makarios, M. D., & Pratt, T. C. (2012). The effectiveness of policies and programs that attempt to reduce firearm violence: A meta-analysis. Crime & Delinquency, 58 (2), 222–244.

Mayors Against Illegal Guns. (n.d.). Responsible firearms retail partnership . Retrieved from http://www.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/html/partnership/partnership.shtml

Mayors Against Illegal Guns. (2013, September). Felon seeks firearm: No strings attached. Retrieved from https://s3.amazonaws.com/s3.mayorsagainstillegalguns.org/images/FINAL_NO_STRINGS_REPORT.pdf

McGarrell, E. F., Hipple, N. K., Corsoro, N., Bynum, T. S., Perez, H., Zimmermann, C. A., & Garmo, M. (2009). Project Safe Neighborhoods: A national program to reduce gun violence (Final rep.). East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/226686.pdf

McIntire, M. (2013, January 26). Selling a new generation on guns. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/27/us/selling-a-new-generation-on-guns.html?pagewanted=all&_r=2&

Miller, M., Azrael, D., & Hemenway, D. (2002). Firearm availability and unintentional firearm death, suicide, and homicide among 5–14 year olds. Journal of Trauma, 52, 267–275.

Miller, M., Azrael, D., Hepburn, L., Hemenway D., & Lippmann, S. J. (2006). The association between changes in household firearm ownership and rates of suicide in the United States, 1981–2002 . Injury Prevention, 12, 178–182. doi:10.1136/ip.2005.010850

Miller, M., Barber, C., Azrael, D., Hemenway, D., & Molnar, B. E. (2009). Recent psychopathology, suicidal thoughts and suicide attempts in households with and without firearms: Findings from the National Comorbidity Study Replication. Injury Prevention, 15 (3), 183–187. doi:10.1136/ip.2008.021352.

Miniño, A. M. (2010). Mortality among teenagers aged 12–19 years: United States, 1999–2006 (NCHS Data Brief No. 37). Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/databriefs/db37.pdf

Moffitt, T. E. (1993). Adolescent-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behavior: A developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review, 100, 674–701. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.100.4.674

Moffitt, T. E. (2005). The new look of behavioral genetics in developmental psychopathology: Gene-environment interplay in antisocial behaviors. Psychological Bulletin, 131 , 533-554. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.131.4.533

Molnar, B. E., Miller, M. J., Azrael, D., & Buka, S. L. (2004). Neighborhood predictors of concealed firearm carrying among children and adolescents: Results from the project on human development in Chicago neighborhoods. Archives of Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine, 158, 657–664.

Monahan, J., Steadman, H., Silver, E., Appelbaum, P. S., Robbins, P. C., Mulvey, E. P., … Banks, S. (2001) . Rethinking risk assessment: The MacArthur Study of Mental Disorder and Violence. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Moore, T. M., Elkins, S. R., McNulty, J. K., Kivisto, A. J., & Handsel, V. A. (2011). Alcohol use and intimate partner violence perpetration among college students: Assessing the temporal association using electronic diary technology. Psychology of Violence, 1 (4), 315–328. doi: 10.1037/a0025077

Moore, T. M., & Stuart, G. L. (2005). A review of the literature on masculinity and partner violence. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 6 (1), 46–61. doi: 10.1037/1524-9220.6.1.46

Moscicki, E. K. (2001). Epidemiology of completed and attempted suicide: Toward a framework for prevention. Clinical Neuroscience Research, 1, 310–323. doi://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1566-2772(01)00032-9

Mozaffarian, D., Hemenway, D., & Ludwig, D. S. (2013). Curbing gun violence: Lessons from public health successes. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 309,  551–552. doi:10.1001/jama.2013.38.

Murphy, S. L., Xu, J., & Kochanek, D. (2013). Deaths: Final data for 2010. National Vital Statistics Reports, 61 (4). Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_04.pdf

National Institute of Justice. (2011). Firearms and Violence Research Working Group meeting summary 2011 . Retrieved from http://www.nij.gov/topics/crime/gun-violence/working-group/2011-summary.htm

Neighbors, C., Walker, D., Mbilinyi, L., O’Rourke, A., Edleson, J. L., Zegree, J., & Roffman, R. A. (2010). Normative misperceptions of abuse among perpetrators of intimate partner violence. Violence Against Women, 16, 370–386. doi: 10.1177/1077801210363608

New York State Office of Mental Health. (2005, March). Kendra’s Law: Final report on the status of assisted outpatient treatment. Retrieved from http://www.omh.ny.gov/omhweb/Kendra_web/KHome.htm

N.Y. Mental Hygiene Law (Kendra’s Law), § 9.60 (McKinney 1999).

O’Keefe, C., Potenza, D. P., & Mueser, K. T. (1997). Treatment outcomes for severely mentally ill patients on conditional discharge to community-based treatment. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 185, 409–411. 

O’Neil, J. M. (1981). Male sex-role conflicts, sexism, and masculinity: Implications for men, women, and the counseling psychologist. The Counseling Psychologist, 9, 61–80. doi: 10.1177/001100008100900213

O’Neil, J. M. (2008). Summarizing 25 years of research on men’s gender role conflict using the Gender Role Conflict Scale: New research paradigms and clinical implications. The Counseling Psychologist, 36, 358-445. doi: 10.1177/0011000008317057

O’Toole, M. E. (2000). The school shooter: A threat assessment perspective. Quantico, VA: FBI Academy, National Center for Analysis of Violent Crime. Retrieved from http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/school-shooter

Patterson, G. R., Forgatch, M. S., & DeGarmo, D. S. (2010). Cascading effects following intervention. Development and Psychopathology, 22, 949–970. doi:10.1017/S0954579410000568

Payne, S., Swami, V., & Stanistreet, D. L. (2008). The social construction of gender and its influence on suicide: A review of the literature . Journal of Men's Health, 5 (1), 23–35.

Peak, K. (Ed.). (2013). Encyclopedia of community policing and problem solving. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Phillips, S., Matusko, J., & Tomasovic, E. (2007). Reconsidering the relationship between alcohol and lethal violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 22 (1), 66–84. doi: 10.1177/0886260506294997

Plant, E. A., Goplen, J., & Kunstman, J. W. (2011). Selective responses to threat: The roles of race and gender in decisions to shoot. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37 (9), 1274–1281. doi: 10.1177/0146167211408617

Police Executive Research Forum. (2012). Critical issues in policing: Vol. 6. An integrated approach to de-escalation and minimizing use of force. Retrieved from http://policeforum.org/library/critical-issues-in-policing-series/De-Escalation_v6.pdf

Police Foundation. (2013). After Newtown: Policing and mental health experts meet to develop prevention model for mental health-related gun violence. Retrieved from http://www.policefoundation.org/content/after-newtown-policing-and-mental-health-experts-meet-develop-prevention-model-mental-health

Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 7901-7903 (2005). Retrieved from http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/109/s397

Roberts, S., Zhang, J., & Truman, J. (2012). Indicators of school crime and safety: 2011 (NCES 2012-002/NCJ 236021). Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/iscs11.pdf

Roth, J. A., & Koper, C. S. (1997). Impact evaluation of the Public Safety and Recreational Firearm Use Protection Act of 1994 (Appendix A). Washington, DC: Urban Institute. Retrieved from http://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/aw_final.pdf

Saylor, E. A., Vittes, K. A., & Sorenson, S. B. (2004). Firearm advertising: Product depiction in consumer gun magazines. Evaluation Review , 28 (5), 420–433. doi:10.1177/0193841X04267389

Sickmund, M., Sladky, T. J., Kang, W., & Puzzanchera, C. (2011). Easy access to the census of juveniles in residential placement. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs. Retrieved from http://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/ezacjrp/

Simon, T. R., Swann, A. C., Powell, K. E., Potter, L. B., Kresnow, M., & O’Carroll, P. W. (2001). Characteristics of impulsive suicide attempts and attempters. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 32 (Suppl. 1), 49–59.

Sirotich, F. (2008). Correlates of crime and violence among persons with mental disorder: An evidence-based review. Brief Treatment and Crisis Intervention, 8 (2), 171–194. doi: 10.1093/brief-treatment/mhn006

Snyder, H., & Sickmund, M. (2006). Juvenile offenders and victims: 2006 National Report. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs. Retrieved from https://ojjdp.ncjrs.gov/ojstatbb/nr2006/downloads/NR2006.pdf

Sorenson, S. B. (2006). Firearm use in intimate partner violence: A brief overview. Evaluation Review, 30 (3), 229–236. doi: 10.1177/0193841X06287220

Sorenson, S. B., & Cook, P. J. (2008). “We’ve got a gun?”: Comparing reports of adolescents and their parents about household firearms. Journal of Community Psychology, 36 (1), 1–19. doi: 10.1002/jcop.20213

Sorenson, S. B., & Vittes, K. A. (2003). Buying a handgun for someone else: Firearm dealer willingness to sell. Injury Prevention, 9 (2), 147–150. doi:10.1136/ip.9.2.147

Sorenson, S. B, & Vittes, K. A. (2008). Mental health and firearms in community-based surveys: Implications for suicide prevention. Evaluation Review, 32 (3), 239–256. doi:10.1177/0193841X08315871

Sorenson, S. B., & Wiebe, D. J. (2004). Weapons in the lives of battered women. American Journal of Public Health, 94 (8), 1412–1417. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.94.8.1412

Spano, R., Pridemore, W. A., & Bolland, J. (2012). Specifying the role of exposure to violence and violent behavior on initiation of gun carrying: A longitudinal test of three models of youth gun carrying. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27, 158–176. doi:10.1177/088620511416471

Steadman, H. J., Deane, M. W., Borum, R., & Morrissey, J. P. (2000). Comparing outcomes of major models of police responses to mental health emergencies. Psychiatric Services, 51 , 645–649. doi:10.1176/appi.ps.51.5.645

Stroud, A. (2012). Good guys with guns: Hegemonic masculinity and concealed handguns. Gender & Society, 26 (2), 216–238. doi: 10.1177/0891243211434612

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. (2012). Mental health, United States, 2010 (HHS Publication No. SMA 12-4681). Retrieved from http://www.samhsa.gov/data/2k12/MHUS2010/index.aspx

Swahn, M. H., Hamming, B. J., & Ikeda, R. M. (2002). Prevalence of youth access to alcohol or a gun in the home. Injury Prevention, 8, 227–230. doi:10.1136/ip.8.3.227

Swanson, J., Robertson, A., Frisman, L., Norko, M., Lin, H., Swartz, M., & Cook, P. (2013). Preventing gun violence involving people with serious mental illness. In D. Webster & J. Vernick (Eds.), Reducing gun violence in America: Informing policy with evidence and analysis (pp. 33–52). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Swanson, J. W., Swartz, M. S., Wagner, H. R., Burns, B. J., Borum, R., & Hiday, VA. (2000). Involuntary out-patient commitment and reduction of violent behavior in persons with severe mental illness. British Journal of Psychiatry, 176, 324–331. doi: 10.1192/bjp.176.4.324

Teller, J. L. S., Munetz, M. R., Gil, K. M., & Ritter, C. (2006). Crisis intervention team training for police officers responding to mental disturbance calls. Psychiatric Services, 57 , 232–237.

Teret, S. P., & Merritt, A. D. (2013). Personalized guns: Using technology to save lives. In D. W. Webster & J. S. Vernick (Eds.), Reducing gun violence in America: Informing policy with evidence and analysis (pp. 172-182). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press.

Teret, S. P., & Wintemute, G. J. (1993). Policies to prevent firearm injuries. Health Affairs , 12 (4), 96–108. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.12.4.96

Truman, J. L. (2011). National Crime Victimization Survey: Criminal victimization, 2010 . Retrieved from http://bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv10.pdf

U.S. Department of Defense. (2010). Protecting the force: Lessons from Fort Hood. Retrieved from http://www.defense.gov/pubs/pdfs/dod-protectingtheforce-web_security_hr_13jan10.pdf

U.S. Department of Education. (2013). Guide for developing high-quality emergency operations plans for institutions of higher education. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oese/oshs/rems-k-12-guide.pdf

Van Dorn, R., Volavka, J., & Johnson, N. (2012). Mental disorder and violence: Is there a relationship beyond substance abuse? Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 47, 487–503. doi:10.1007/s00127-011-0356-x

Vaughn, M. G., Perron, B. E., Abdon, A., Olate, R., Groom, R., & Wu, L. T. (2012). Correlates of handgun carrying among adolescents in the United States. Journal of Interpersonal Violence , 27 , 2003-2021. doi: 10.1177/0886260511432150

Verlinden, S., Hersen, M., & Thomas, J. (2000). Risk factors in school shootings. Clinical Psychology Review, 20 (1), 3–56.

Vernick, J. S., Teret, S. P., & Webster, D. W. (1997). Regulating firearm advertisements that promise home protection: A public health intervention. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 277 (17), 1391–1397. doi:10.1001/jama.1997.03540410069033

Vernick, J. S., Webster, D. W., & Bulzacchelli, M. T. (2006). Regulating firearm dealers in the United States: An analysis of state law and opportunities for improvement. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 34 (4), 765–775. doi:10.1111/j.1748-720X.2006.00097.x

Vigdor, E. R., & Mercy, J. A. (2006). Do laws restricting access to firearms by domestic violence offenders prevent intimate partner homicide? Evaluation Review, 30 (3), 313–346. doi:10.1177/0193841X06287307

Violence Policy Center. (2011). The militarization of the U.S. civilian firearms market. Retrieved from http://www.vpc.org/studies/militarization.pdf

Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, 18 U.S.C. § 1033 et seq. (1994).

Vittes, K. A., & Sorenson, S. B. (2006). Risk-taking among adolescents who say they can get a handgun. Journal of Adolescent Health, 39, 929–932. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2006.05.012

Vittes, K. A., Sorenson, S. B., & Gilbert, D. (2003). High school students’ attitudes about firearms policies. Journal of Adolescent Health, 33, 471–478. doi: 10.1016/S1054-139X(03)00142-3

Vittes, K. A., Vernick, J. S., & Webster, D. W. (2013). Legal status and source of offenders’ firearms in states with the least stringent criteria for gun ownership. Injury Prevention, 19 (1), 26–31. doi:10.1136/injuryprev-2011-040290

Vossekuil, B., Fein, R., Reddy, M., Borum, R., & Modzelski, W. (2002). The final report and findings of the Safe School Initiative: Implications for the prevention of school attacks in the United States. Washington, DC: U.S. Secret Service and U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://www.secretservice.gov/ntac/ssi_final_report.pdf

Wachs, T. D. (2006). The nature, etiology, and consequences of individual differences in temperament. In L. Balter & C. S. Tamis-LeMonda (Eds.), Child psychology (2nd ed., pp. 27–52). New York, NY: Psychology Press.

Webster, D. W., Bulzacchelli, M. T., Zeoli, A. M., & Vernick, J. S. (2006). Effects of undercover police stings of gun dealers on the supply of new guns to criminals. Injury Prevention, 12, 225–230.

Webster, D. W., & Starnes, M. (2000). Reexamining the association between child access prevention gun laws and unintentional shooting deaths of children. Pediatrics, 106 (6), 1466–1469. doi:10.1542/peds.106.6.1466

Webster, D. W., & Vernick, J. S. (Eds.). (2013a). Reducing gun violence in America: Informing policy with evidence and analysis. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. Retrieved from http://jhupress.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/1421411113_updf.pdf

Webster, D. W., & Vernick, J. S. (2013b). Spurring responsible firearms sales practices through litigation: The impact of New York City’s lawsuits against gun dealers on interstate gun trafficking. In D. W. Webster & J. S. Vernick (Eds.), Reducing gun violence in America: Informing policy with evidence and analysis (pp. 123–132) . Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Webster, D. W., Vernick, J. S., & Bulzacchelli, M. T. (2009). Effects of state-level firearm seller accountability policies on firearm trafficking. Journal of Urban Health, 86 (4), 525–537. doi:10.1007/s11524-009-9351-x

Webster, D. W., Vernick, J. S., McGinty, E. E., & Alcorn, T. (2013). Preventing the diversion of guns to criminals through effective firearm sales laws. In D. W. Webster & J. S. Vernick (Eds.), Reducing gun violence in America: Informing policy with evidence and analysis (pp. 109–122) . Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Webster, D. W., Vernick, J. S., Zeoli, A. M., & Manganello, J. A. (2004). Association between youth-focused firearm laws and youth suicides. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 292 (5), 594–601. doi:10.1001/jama.292.5.594

Webster, D. W., Whitehill, J. M., Vernick, J. S., & Curriero, F. C. (2012). Effects of Baltimore’s Safe Streets Program on gun violence: A replication of Chicago’s CeaseFire Program. Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, 90 (1), 27–40. doi:10.1007/s11524-012-9731-5

Weil, D. S., & Knox, R. C. (1996). Effects of limiting handgun purchases on interstate transfer of firearms. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 275 (22), 1759–1761.

Wellford, C. F., Pepper, J. V., & Petrie, C. V. (Eds.). (2004). Firearms and violence: A critical review. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

White House. (2013). Now is the time. Retrieved from http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/preventing-gun-violence

Wiebe, D. J. (2003). Sex differences in the perpetrator-victim relationship among emergency department patients presenting with nonfatal firearm-related injuries. Annals of Emergency Medicine, 42 (3), 405–412. doi:10.1016/S0196-0644(03)00509-2

Williams, K. R., Tuthill, L., & Lio, S. (2008). A portrait of juvenile offending in the United States. In R. D. Hoge, N. G. Guerra, & P. Boxer (Eds.), Treating the juvenile offender  (pp. 15–32). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Wintemute, G. J. (1996). The relationship between firearm design and firearm violence: Handguns in the 1990s. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 275 (22), 1749-1753. doi:10.1001/jama.1996.03530460053031

Wintemute, G. J. (2010). Firearm retailers’ willingness to participate in an illegal gun purchase. Journal of Urban Health, 87, 865–878.

Wintemute, G. J. (2011). Association between firearm ownership, firearm-related risk and risk-reduction behaviors, and alcohol-related risk behaviours. Injury Prevention, 17,  422–427. doi: 10.1136/ip.2010.031443

Wintemute, G. J. (2013a, January 14–15). Broadening denial criteria for the purchase and possession of firearms: Need, feasibility, and effectiveness. Paper presented at the Gun Violence Policy Summit, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD.

Wintemute, G. J. (2013b). Frequency of and response to illegal activity related to commerce in firearms: Findings from the Firearms Licensee Survey . Injury Prevention. Advance online publication. doi:10.1136/injuryprev-2012-040715

Wintemute, G. J., Drake, C. M., Beaumont, J. J., & Wright, M. A. (1998). Prior misdemeanor convictions as a risk factor for later violent and firearm-related criminal activity among authorized purchasers of handguns. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 280, 2083–2087.

Wintemute, G. J., Parham, C. A., Beaumont, J. J., Wright, M., & Drake, C. (1999). Mortality among recent purchasers of handguns. New England Journal of Medicine, 341 (21), 1583–1589. doi:10.1056/NEJM199911183412106

Wintemute, G. J., Wright, M. A., Drake, C. M., & Beaumont, J. J. (2001). Subsequent criminal activity among violent misdemeanants who seek to purchase handguns: Risk factors and effectiveness of denying handgun purchase . JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 285, 1019–1026.

Wright, M. A., Wintemute, G. J., & Claire, B. E. (2008). Gun suicide by young people in California: Descriptive epidemiology and gun ownership. Journal of Adolescent Health, 43 (6), 619–622. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2008.04.009

Wright, M. A., Wintemute, G. J., & Webster, D. W. (2010). Factors affecting a recently purchased handgun’s risk for use in crime under circumstances that suggest gun trafficking. Journal of Urban Health, 87 (3), 352–364. doi:10.1007/s11524-010-9437-5

Yan, F. A., Howard, D. E., Beck, K. H., Shattuck, T., & Hallmark-Kerr, M. (2010). Psychosocial correlates of physical dating violence victimization among Latino early adolescents. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25 (5), 808–831. doi: 10.1177/0886260509336958

Zeoli, A. M., & Webster, D. W. (2010). Effects of domestic violence policies, alcohol taxes and police staffing levels on intimate partner homicide in large U.S. cities. Injury Prevention, 16, 90–95.

APA Panel of Experts

Dewey Cornell, PhD Clinical Psychologist and Professor of Education Curry School of Education University of Virginia

Arthur C. Evans Jr., PhD Commissioner Department of Behavioral Health and Intellectual disAbility Services Philadelphia, Pa.   Nancy G. Guerra, EdD (Coordinating Editor) Professor of Psychology Associate Provost for International Programs Director, Institute for Global Studies University of Delaware   Robert Kinscherff, PhD, JD Associate Vice President for Community Engagement Massachusetts School of Professional Psychology Senior Associate National Center for Mental Health and Juvenile Justice   Eric Mankowski, PhD Professor of Psychology Department of Psychology Portland State University

Marisa R. Randazzo, PhD Managing Partner SIGMA Threat Management Associates Alexandria, Va.   Ellen Scrivner, PhD, ABPP Executive Fellow Police Foundation Washington, D.C.   Susan B. Sorenson, PhD Professor of Social Policy / Health & Societies Senior Fellow in Public Health University of Pennsylvania

W. Douglas Tynan, PhD, ABPP Professor of Pediatrics Jefferson Medical College Thomas Jefferson University   Daniel W. Webster, ScD, MPH Professor and Director Center for Gun Policy and Research Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health

We are grateful to the following individuals for their thoughtful reviews and comments on drafts of this report:   Louise A. Douce, PhD Special Assistant, Office of Student Life Adjunct Faculty, Department of Psychology The Ohio State University   Joel A. Dvoskin, PhD, ABPP Department of Psychiatry University of Arizona   Ellen G. Garrison, PhD Senior Policy Advisor American Psychological Association   Melissa Strompolis, MA Doctoral Candidate University of North Carolina at Charlotte   Mathilde Pelaprat, PsyD , provided writing and research assistance on Chapter 2.

Rhea Farberman, APR Executive Director Public and Member Communications American Psychological Association

Editorial and Design Services Deborah C. Farrell, Editor │ Elizabeth F. Woodcock, Designer

• Download the Full Report (PDF, 1.4MB)

Related reading

Resolution on Firearm Violence Research and Prevention

• Psychology Topics: Gun Violence and Crime  

Violence Prevention

Warning signs of youth violence

Managing your distress in the aftermath of a shooting  

Helping your children manage distress in the aftermath of a shooting

• Skip to page content
• Share on Facebook
• Share on Twitter
• Share on LinkedIn

Mass Shootings in the United States

By Rosanna Smart , Terry L. Schell

Updated April 15, 2021

Summary: There is no standard definition of what constitutes a mass shooting, and different data sources—such as media outlets, academic researchers, and law enforcement agencies—frequently use different definitions when discussing and analyzing mass shootings. For instance, when various organizations measure and report on mass shootings, the criteria they use in counting such events might differ by the minimum threshold for the number of victims, whether the victim count includes those who were not fatally injured, where the shooting occurred, whether the shooting occurred in connection to another crime, and the relationship between the shooter and the victims. These inconsistencies lead to different assessments of how frequently mass shootings occur and whether they are more common now than they were a decade or two ago.

Data show that, regardless of how one defines mass shootings, perpetrators are likely to be men. But several other characteristics that are statistically predictive of perpetration are still uncommon among offenders on an absolute level. The rare nature of mass shootings creates challenges for accurately identifying salient predictors of risk and limits statistical power for detecting which policies may be effective in reducing mass shooting incidence or lethality. Implementing broader violence prevention strategies rather than focusing specifically on the most-extreme forms of such violence may be effective at reducing the occurrence and lethality of mass shootings.

Incidents of mass firearm violence galvanize public attention. There has been extensive media coverage of many incidents in the United States in which individuals have used firearms to kill large numbers of people. These mass public shootings are rare events—they constitute less than 15 percent of all mass killings in the United States and are responsible for less than 0.5 percent of all homicides (Duwe, 2020)—but they have far-reaching impacts on citizens’ mental health, anxiety, and perceptions of safety (Lowe and Galea, 2017). [1] Mass shootings also frequently generate extensive media coverage related to guns, prompt political discussions about legislative initiatives for how better to prevent gun violence, and may lead to substantial state gun policy changes (Schildkraut, Elsass, and Meredith, 2018; Newman and Hartman, 2019; Luca, Malhotra, and Poliquin, 2020).

In this essay, we first describe different approaches for defining a mass shooting and discuss how using different definitions can influence estimates of mass shooting levels and trends. We then summarize findings from the literature regarding the characteristics of mass shootings, including offender characteristics, types of firearm(s) used, and community-level correlates. We conclude with a brief discussion of the substantial methodological challenges for evaluating how gun policies affect mass shootings. Our discussion here is focused on mass shootings in the U.S. context.

What Is a Mass Shooting?

The U.S. government has never defined mass shooting as a separate category of crime, and there is not yet a broadly accepted definition of the term. In the 1980s, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) defined mass murderer as someone who “kills four or more people in a single incident (not including himself), typically in a single location” (Krouse and Richardson, 2015). In 2013, Congress defined mass killing as a single incident that leaves three or more people dead (Pub. L. 112-265, 2013). However, both definitions include many incidents that would not be considered mass shootings. Furthermore, neither definition was established for the purpose of data collection or statistical analyses. The FBI classification of mass murderer was established primarily with the aim of clarifying criminal profiling procedures (Ressler, Burgess, and Douglas, 1988), and the congressional definition was intended to clarify statutory authority for the provision of U.S. Department of Justice investigatory assistance requested by state and local agencies (Pub. L. 112-265, 2013). Thus, various news outlets, researchers, and law enforcement agencies often use different definitions when reporting on mass shootings, which can complicate our understanding of mass shooting trends and their relationship to gun policy. [2] Table 1 provides examples of the variation in the criteria set by some of the existing data sources on mass shootings in the United States. Depending on which data source is referenced, there were somewhere between six and 503 mass shootings and between 60 and 628 mass shooting fatalities in 2019.

Table 1. Variation in How Mass Shootings Are Defined and Counted

a Before January 2013, the casualty threshold for the Mother Jones data was four people fatally injured (excluding the shooter).

b As of this writing, the Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund's Mass Shootings in America website with interactive map was up to date as of April 28, 2020. However, the group's downloadable data included incidents through 2018 only.

c Stanford's Mass Shootings in America database was permanently suspended in mid-2016. In this table, we provide incident and fatality counts for 2015, the last year of complete data collection. For archived data, see Stanford Geospatial Center, 2018.

Although there is no official standard for the casualty threshold that distinguishes a mass shooting from other violent crimes involving a firearm, a common approach in the literature is to set a casualty threshold of four fatalities by firearm, excluding the offender or offenders (Fox and Levin, 1998; Duwe, Kovandzic, and Moody, 2002; Gius, 2015c; Krouse and Richardson, 2015; Fox and Fridel, 2016). Using this criterion helps reduce measurement error in identifying mass shootings because fatalities are captured in administrative data and are frequently included in media reports (Duwe, 2000). However, this categorization is not without controversy. It does not capture incidents in which fewer than four victims were killed but additional victims were nonfatally injured, and it does not include multiple-victim homicides in which fewer than four fatalities resulted from gunshots but additional fatalities occurred by other means. Thus, many have chosen alternative definitions of casualty thresholds for mass shootings. For instance, Lott and Landes (2000) adopted the definition of two or more injured victims, Kleck (2016) used a six-victim casualty threshold, the Gun Violence Archive (undated-a) defined mass shooting as an incident in which four or more victims (excluding the shooter) are injured or killed, and the Mass Shooting Tracker (undated) set a criterion of four or more people injured or killed (including the shooter).

Another definitional disagreement is whether to include multiple-victim shooting incidents that occur in connection with some other crime or domestic dispute. Because mass shootings that stem from domestic and gang violence are contextually distinct from high-fatality indiscriminate killings in public venues, some analysts have argued that they should be treated separately. In their analyses of “mass public shootings,” Lott and Landes (2000) excluded any felony-related shooting, and Duwe, Kovandzic, and Moody (2002) excluded incidents where “both the victims and offender(s) were involved in unlawful activities, such as organized crime, gang activity, and drug deals” (p. 276). Similarly, other researchers (e.g., Gius, 2015c; Luca, Malhotra, and Poliquin, 2020) have restricted analyses to events that occurred in a relatively public area and in which victims appeared to have been selected randomly. However, others have claimed that this narrow definition ignores a substantial proportion of gun-related violence from family- or felony-related murder (Fox and Levin, 2015). Furthermore, determinants of whether victims were selected indiscriminately or whether the incidents were gang- or crime-related are, to some degree, subjective. Accurate information about the shooter’s motivations or connection to gangs may not have been included in police or news reports of the incidents. In contrast, the Mass Shooting Tracker and the Gun Violence Archive count as mass shootings all incidents that meet their designated casualty threshold, regardless of the circumstances that led to the event or the motivation of the shooter.

These definitions make a substantial difference in which incidents are counted. [3] As noted earlier, depending on which data source is used, there were between six and 503 mass shootings in the United States in 2019 (see Table 1); that amounts to a range of incident rates from approximately one incident per 50 million people in the United States to one incident per 1 million people. More-restrictive definitions (e.g., from Mother Jones ) focus on the prevalence of higher-profile events motivated by mass murder, but they omit more-common incidents occurring in connection with domestic violence or criminal activity, which make up about 80 percent of mass shooting incidents with four or more fatally injured victims (Krouse and Richardson, 2015). Broader definitions (e.g., from the Gun Violence Archive) provide a more comprehensive depiction of the prevalence of gun violence, but they obscure the variety of circumstances in which these incidents take place and their associated policy implications. Furthermore, if the effects of a firearm policy are expected to affect only mass public shooting incidents, then analyses that include domestic violence mass shootings could obscure identification of the expected effects of the policy. Thus, there is value in having multiple measurements of mass shootings—but only if their definitions are clearly and precisely explained and they are used by researchers in a manner appropriate to the analysis.

Although researchers, policymakers, and reporters may rightly make different decisions about the criteria they wish to use to define what counts as a mass shooting, these decisions fundamentally shape the scope of incidents considered, as well as the potential for measurement error in their data. Data sets that use definitions based solely on objective criteria that are widely available across multiple sources (e.g., fatality counts) likely offer greater reliability compared with data sets that rely on objective criteria that may not be consistently reported across multiple sources (e.g., nonfatal shooting injury counts) or that may be difficult to operationalize (e.g., public location). [4] Data sets that define mass shootings based on relatively subjective criteria (e.g., whether an incident was related to criminal activity or domestic violence) may be particularly difficult to reconcile because underlying sources may disagree or differently report on these factors. Mother Jones , the Mass Shooter Database, and the Mass Shootings in America database are examples of sources that use some subjective criteria. In the absence of a clear conceptual reason for restricting mass shooting incidents of interest based on subjective criteria, evaluations are likely to produce more-reliable and more-replicable results when using data sources that define mass shootings based only on fatality thresholds (see Table 1).

Another fundamental issue in documenting mass shootings, and in reconciling differences across data sets, is that the methods used to collect information on mass shootings also vary across sources. There is no comprehensive, administrative data source that captures mass shootings; however, data from the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports (SHR) database provide information from 1976 onward on most homicides in the United States, typically including information on the weapon types, number of victims, and number of offenders involved, which can be used to identify which incidents meet specific definitional thresholds of fatalities (Puzzanchera, Chamberlin, and Kang, 2018). [5] When such details are known, the SHR database also provides information on victim-offender relationships (e.g., husband or wife, stranger, neighbor) [6] and incident circumstances (e.g., “gangland killing,” “lovers’ triangle,” “brawl due to influence of alcohol”), which could be used as indicators of familicides and felony-related killings. However, the SHR database relies on voluntary submissions by thousands of separate law enforcement agencies. It does not capture all incidents (about 90 percent completeness), and this missingness is not random. Sometimes, entire states do not submit data for a year or for part of a year, and in most states and years, at least some law enforcement agencies do not submit complete data (Fox, 2004; Fox and Swatt, 2009). In addition to missingness by jurisdiction, there is a high degree of missingness for data elements, particularly in offender characteristics (e.g., the offender may not be known) and incident characteristics (e.g., circumstances or victim-offender relationship). [7] Some analyses have also compared SHR variables with data in police incident reports in specific jurisdictions and found evidence of misclassification regarding victim-offender relationship and incident circumstances (Pizarro and Zeoli, 2013). Others have cross-referenced SHR incidents with historical news records and found issues of coding errors in the SHR database that could affect identification of mass shooting incidents (e.g., double counting of victims or incidents, misclassifying a nonfatal injury as a fatal injury) (Duwe, 2000). Although researchers have noted that these recording errors are relatively uncommon in the SHR, the errors are still important considerations for using the SHR to assess mass shootings (Duwe, 2000; Fox, 2006). Finally, the SHR provides relatively limited detail on offender or victim characteristics, firearm types, and incident setting.

Given these limitations, most data sources for mass shootings do not derive solely from the SHR. Some sources (e.g., the AP/USA TODAY/Northeastern University Mass Killings database) combine information from both news reports and the SHR, others (e.g., Mother Jones ) rely on news reports alone, and some (e.g., the Mass Shooter Database) combine information from law enforcement records, social media, court transcripts, news accounts, and other primary and secondary sources to obtain detailed information on the characteristics of each incident and offender (see Table 2). Differences in data collection strategies, in large part, reflect differences in the mass shooting definitions employed (e.g., sources that count nonfatal shooting injuries in their criteria must rely on sources other than the SHR, which captures only fatal injuries), as well as differences in the proposed purpose of the database.

Table 2. Data Collection Methods and Data Elements Captured Across Mass Shooting Data Sources

a In this column, present means the beginning of 2021.

b This column represents the data elements that the source attempts to capture; in many cases, these fields are missing information.

c For this data set and reporting on it, see Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund, 2019.

However, variation in the sources examined to identify incidents can result in varying degrees of completeness or reliability. Data sets that rely solely on news sources or crowd-sourcing (i.e., Mother Jones , the Mass Shooting Tracker, and the Mass Shootings in America database) may systematically miss lower-profile incidents and those involving fewer injuries or fatalities (Duwe, 2000; Schildkraut, Elsass, and Meredith, 2018). Systemic biases in the types of incidents that receive widespread media coverage affect the number of incidents that are counted but might also misrepresent the relative characteristics of offenders, victims, or communities involved (Silva and Capellan, 2019a, 2019b). For example, news reports may be less likely to include the perpetrator’s race when he or she is White (Park, Holody, and Zhang, 2012) and may be more likely to include speculation about gang involvement when racial and ethnic minorities are involved (Entman and Gross, 2008). Given media sources’ limited capacity to cover all current events, mass shootings that occur during other newsworthy events (e.g., presidential elections) may also be systematically missed, particularly in historical analysis relying on print or television media. Finally, the media landscape has changed dramatically over the past three decades; daily local newspapers have disappeared across much of the United States, and the extent to which news sources are searchable on the internet has also changed (Duwe, 2000).

Thus, any comparison over time in the number or characteristics of mass shootings necessarily involves comparisons across different media sources with different coverage areas, intended audiences, and editorial practices. Data sources that combine information across media reports and law enforcement administrative data—for example, the Gun Violence Archive, the Mass Shooter Database, the Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund mass shootings database, and the AP/USA TODAY/Northeastern University Mass Killings database—are likely to be more complete, particularly in measuring incidents over a longer historical time frame. However, it is a challenging effort to ensure that different sources of information about the same incident are properly linked (i.e., without a unique incident identifier, researchers must make linkages based on similarities in date, location, and incident information, which may not be identical across different reports of the same incident) so that multiple reports are not counted as separate incidents. Thus, data sets that triangulate across multiple underlying sources (e.g., the Mass Shooter Database and the Gun Violence Archive) require additional effort toward de-duplication and validation.

And even when data sources use the same definition of what constitutes a mass shooting, variation in data collection methods can result in different estimates of mass shooting prevalence. As an example of this issue, Duwe (2020) triangulated information from the SHR, online newspaper databases, and unpublished mass shooting data sets and found that the Mother Jones database missed more than 40 percent of mass shootings that met the source’s own criteria between 1982 and 2013. Greater missingness occurred for incidents further back in time, likely because of greater challenges with accessing comprehensive news accounts prior to widespread use of digital media for news reporting. Comparing four data sources for mass shootings (the Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund’s mass shootings database, the Gun Violence Archive, the Mother Jones database, and the FBI’s SHR database), and applying the same definition of mass shooting to each (four or more fatalities, excluding the shooter), Booty et al. (2019) found that estimates of the number of mass shootings in 2017 ranged from five ( Mother Jones ) to 24 (Gun Violence Archive). When triangulating across data sets, the researchers identified 32 unique mass shooting incidents, but only two incidents (6.3 percent) were common to all four data sources. For further discussion, see Booty et al. (2019), Duwe (2000, 2020), and Huff-Corzine and Corzine (2020), which contain a more comprehensive discussion of data collection efforts and their limitations.

Are Mass Shootings on the Rise?

In 2014, the FBI released a study showing that “active shooting incidents” had increased at an average annual rate of 16 percent between 2000 and 2013 (Blair and Schweit, 2014). [8] In contrast to the varied definitions for mass shootings, there is an agreed-upon definition among government agencies for active shooter : “an individual actively engaged in killing or attempting to kill people in a confined and populated area; in most cases, active shooters use firearm(s) and there is no pattern or method to their selection of victims” (U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 2008, p. 2). Using a modified version of this definition to include incidents that had multiple offenders or occurred in confined spaces, Blair and Schweit (2014) found that active shootings had increased from only one incident in 2000 to 17 in 2013. The FBI active shooting reports, which are now produced annually, identified 20 active shooter incidents in 2016, 30 incidents in 2017, 27 incidents in 2018, and 28 incidents in 2019 (FBI, 2018g, 2019g, 2020).

Although Blair and Schweit (2014) explicitly stated that their original FBI active shooter study was “not a study of mass killings or mass shootings” (p. 5), extensive media coverage cited the study as evidence of a sharp rise in mass shootings and mass shooting fatalities (Lott, 2015). However, Blair and Schweit (2014)’s definition of an active shooter incident includes some incidents that would be excluded under any of the commonly used criteria for mass public shootings (see Table 1) because it does not set any casualty threshold. For example, Blair and Schweit’s definition includes some incidents in which no people were injured or in which one person was killed and no others were wounded. Setting a threshold of zero victims increases the potential for measurement error, because shooting incidents with no casualties are more difficult to identify from police records and are less likely to receive media coverage (Duwe, Kovandzic, and Moody, 2002). Additionally, because it should be relatively easier to identify more-recent shootings with few fatalities, a low casualty threshold will tend to systematically bias estimates of the number of shootings upward over time. [9] Even when using a higher-fatality threshold, mass shooting data sources that rely solely on news reports to identify cases also appear to systematically undercount incidents from earlier periods (see previous section and Duwe, 2020).

Even when a more restrictive casualty threshold of four or more fatally injured victims (excluding the shooter) is imposed, empirical evidence on trends in these incidents varies depending on whether the motivation of the shooter is included as a criterion for considering an event a mass shooting. In their analysis of mass shooting trends from 1999 to 2013, Krouse and Richardson (2015) distinguished among mass shootings occurring in public locations that are indiscriminate in nature (“mass public shootings”), mass shootings in which the majority of victims are members of the offender’s family and that are not attributable to other criminal activity (“familicide mass shootings”), and mass shootings that occur in connection to some other criminal activity (“other felony mass shootings”). Duwe (2020) adopted similar distinctions in his analysis of mass shootings over the longer time frame of 1976 to 2018.

Figures 1 and 2 show trends in mass shooting incidents and mass shooting fatalities, using the data provided by Duwe (2020), who created his own data set aggregating across several of the sources described in this essay. Using Krouse and Richardson (2015)’s definition of “mass public shootings,” Duwe (2020) found that such events constituted about 19 percent of all mass shooting incidents and 27 percent of all mass shooting fatalities from 1976 to 2018. The data from multiple studies suggest a slight increase in the incidence rate of mass public shootings over the past four decades (Cohen, Azrael, and Miller, 2014; Krouse and Richardson, 2015; Duwe, 2020). From 2016 to 2018, the annual rate of mass public shooting incidents was about one incident per 50 million people in the United States (Duwe, 2020). Considering the number of fatalities in these shootings, this corresponds to approximately 0.4 percent of all homicides, or approximately 0.2 percent of all firearm deaths, over that period. However, using an expanded definition of mass shootings that includes domestic- or felony-related killings, there is little evidence to suggest that mass shooting incidents or fatalities have increased (Cohen, Azrael, and Miller, 2014; Krouse and Richardson, 2015; Fox and Fridel, 2016). Adjusted for changes in the size of the U.S. population, the incidence of all mass shootings (four or more fatally injured victims, excluding the offender, regardless of shooter motivation or circumstances) was highest in the late 1980s and early 1990s, averaging one incident per 10 million people from 1989 to 1993 (Duwe, 2020). More recently, between 2016 and 2018, the annual rate of all mass shooting incidents was about one incident per 14 million people (Duwe, 2020). Considering the number of fatalities in these mass shootings, this corresponds to approximately 0.8 percent of all homicides, or approximately 0.4 percent of all firearm deaths, over that period. Thus, different choices about how to define a mass shooting result in different findings for both the prevalence of these events at a given time and whether their frequency has changed over time.

Figure 1. Trends in Mass Shooting Incidents, 1976–2018

SOURCE: Author analysis of data from Duwe, 2020.

Figure 2. Trends in Mass Shooting Fatalities, 1976–2018

Even if we set aside the facts that reliance on different data sources over time complicates measurement and that findings can depend on how mass shootings are defined, the relative rarity of mass shooting events makes analysis of trends particularly difficult. Chance variability in the annual number of mass shooting incidents makes it hard to discern a clear trend in the risk of such incidents, and trend estimates are sensitive to outliers and to the time frame chosen for analysis (Fox and DeLateur, 2014). For example, although Krouse and Richardson (2015) found evidence of an upward trend in mass public shootings from 1999 to 2013, they noted that the increase was driven largely by events in 2012, in which there was an unusually high number of mass public shooting incidents. Additionally, Lott (2015) suggested that the FBI study’s estimate of a dramatic increase in active shooter incidents was largely driven by the choice of 2000 as the starting date, because that year had an unusually low number of shooting incidents. Conducting his own analysis to cover 1977 through 2014, and adjusting the data to exclude events with fewer than two fatalities, Lott (2015) found a much smaller and statistically insignificant increase (less than 1 percent annually) in mass shooting fatalities over time. However, when other researchers extended the time frame to cover more-recent years and used a four-fatality threshold for mass public shootings, their findings suggested a significant increase in the incidence and lethality of these events over time (Sanders and Lei, 2018; Duwe, 2020; Lankford and Silver, 2020).

The leverage of extreme incidents is even clearer when examining trends in the number of casualties from mass public shootings over time (Figure 3). The data on deaths and injuries from 2017 mass public shootings are particularly striking: Just one of the seven incidents that occurred (the Las Vegas shooting in October 2017) accounted for more than half of all mass public shooting fatalities and nonfatal injuries in that year. [10] However, even when we exclude the Las Vegas incident, 2008 through 2018 saw the highest average rate of casualties from mass public shootings since the 1970s. In 2018, mass public shootings were responsible for approximately one death per 4 million people in the United States (Duwe, 2020), representing fewer than one of every 200 homicides in that year.

Although different choices about how to define a mass shooting and the period over which to calculate mass shooting trends have resulted in disagreement about whether the frequency of mass shootings has risen, there is clear evidence that the media’s use of the term mass shooting has increased significantly in recent decades (Roeder, 2016). Unfortunately, the trends one finds in measuring mass shootings over time depend heavily on how the term is defined and the precise period over which the trend is observed, and these trends are likely to be biased by changes in the completeness of the underlying data sources over time. This ambiguity makes it difficult to draw firm conclusions about how these incidents have changed over time or how that information should be used as we try to understand the determinants, costs, and policy implications of mass shootings.

Figure 3. Trends in Mass Public Shooting Casualties, 1976–2018

Characteristics of Mass Public Shootings

Several studies, largely focused on mass public shootings, have sought to describe the characteristics of individuals who perpetrate mass shootings, evaluate characteristics of each mass shooting incident, and identify the behaviors and motivations that preceded each incident. Most of these studies are purely descriptive, not comparative, and thus should not be interpreted as providing evidence of whether specific individual-level or community-level characteristics are predictive of someone perpetrating a mass shooting.

According to this literature (see, for example, Capellan et al., 2019; Duwe, 2020), the perpetrators of mass public shootings in the United States have been overwhelmingly male (98 percent) and are most commonly non-Hispanic White (61 percent). In addition, they are most commonly younger than age 45 (82 percent); more specifically, 26 percent of mass public shooters from 1976 to 2018 were younger than age 25, 27 percent were aged 25 to 34, and 29 percent were aged 35 to 44. Relative to the overall U.S. population, mass public shooting offenders are much more likely to be male and are somewhat younger; relative to other homicide offenders, males and non-Hispanic Whites are overrepresented among mass public shooters, and mass public shooters are older. For comparison, of the overall U.S. population in 2019, approximately 49 percent was male, 60 percent was younger than age 45, and 60 percent was non-Hispanic White (U.S. Census Bureau, 2020). Of murderers in 2018 with known offender characteristics, 88 percent were men, 84 percent were younger than age 45 (38 percent younger than 25, 31 percent aged 25 to 34, and 16 percent aged 35 to 44), and 42 percent were White (Hispanic ethnicity information was not provided) (FBI, 2019f).

Media coverage often links mass public shootings with serious mental illness (McGinty et al., 2014, 2016), but estimates of the prevalence of mental illness among mass public shooting offenders vary widely depending on the types of incidents considered and the methods used to define and identify mental illness. Rates of formal diagnoses of psychotic disorders (including diagnoses made post-incident, which may be affected by the incident itself) among mass public shooters are estimated to be about 15 to 17 percent (Stone, 2015; Fox and Fridel, 2016). [11] Studies that use a broader definition of mental illness and consider informal evidence indicative of mental health problems (e.g., statements by law enforcement or family before or after the incident) have found prevalence rates ranging from 30 to 60 percent (Taylor, 2018; Capellan et al., 2019; Duwe, 2020). This informal evidence, which is often obtained subsequent to the incident, is invariably affected by the act of mass violence itself (Skeem and Mulvey, 2020). It does not suggest that mental illness is useful for predicting a subsequent mass shooting. Of note, a study of 106 perpetrators of mass public shootings in the United States between 1990 and 2014 found that less than 5 percent of offenders ( n = 5) had a history of involuntary commitment or adjudication of dangerousness that would have prohibited them from purchasing a firearm following the federal mental health background check (Silver, Fisher, and Horgan, 2018). Although most research supports that, overall, people with serious mental illness are overrepresented among mass public shooters (Duwe, 2020; Skeem and Mulvey, 2020), this does not imply that serious mental illness causes mass shootings, just as we cannot conclude that being a young man causes mass shootings.

Other researchers and analysts have noted that many mass shooters have a history of domestic violence. Using three mass shooting databases (whose underlying data sources include media reports, court records, and police records) and their own search of criminal records, Zeoli and Paruk (2020) analyzed 89 individuals who perpetrated a mass shooting (involving four or more fatalities, excluding the offender) between 2014 and 2017. Of the 89 individuals, 28 (31 percent) had a history of suspected domestic violence. The authors identified that, of those 28, 17 (61 percent) had prior interaction with the criminal justice system related to domestic violence, and six individuals had a felony or misdemeanor conviction for domestic violence. Using a different definition of mass shooting (involving four or more casualties, including the perpetrator, and excluding felony-related mass shootings), Gu (2020) found that 36 percent of mass shooting incidents from 2014 to 2019 involved an offender with a history of domestic violence or violence against women. Of note, both of these studies included mass shooting familicides, which represent the modal type of mass shooting. Given that intimate partner homicides are commonly preceded by prior incidents of nonfatal domestic violence (Campbell et al., 2007), it may be expected that perpetrators of mass shooting familicides commonly have prior histories of domestic violence. In a study of mass murders from 2006 to 2016 (74 percent of which were shootings), Fridel (2017) found that 30 percent of familicides, 7 percent of mass public killings, and 3 percent of felony-related killings involved an offender with a known history of domestic violence. [12] But because we do not know the rate of domestic violence in the general population based on comparable definitions and data sources, it is not clear the precise extent to which prior domestic violence represents a risk factor for perpetrating a mass shooting.

It is challenging to make broad generalizations about the individual-level motivations of mass shootings. When mass shootings are broadly defined to include familicides, felony-related killings, and mass public shootings, the events include heterogeneous incident types that vary in terms of victim, offender, and incident characteristics (Fridel, 2017; Taylor, 2018). Felony-related killings exhibit particular differences from familicides and mass public shootings. They are, by definition, criminally motivated (in contrast to familicides and mass public shootings, which are more commonly motivated by relationship problems, group grievances, or ideological extremist beliefs); result in significantly fewer deaths; and are significantly less likely to conclude with the death of the perpetrator (Fridel, 2017; Capellan et al., 2019). [13] The etiology of felony-related mass shootings thus, unsurprisingly, bears a stronger resemblance to firearm homicides more broadly. In contrast, familicides and mass public shootings show stronger similarities in terms of offender characteristics and motivations (Fridel, 2017).

Even the subset of mass public shootings seems to encompass a variety of offender types, and some researchers have suggested that the relative prevalence of these offender typologies has changed over time (Capellan et al., 2019). [14] When Capellan and colleagues considered incidents in which an offender used a firearm to kill or “attempt to kill” four or more victims in a public setting, they found that school shootings constituted the majority of mass public shooting incidents in the 1960s and 1970s, and workplace shootings became increasingly prevalent in the 1980s to 2000s (Capellan and Gomez, 2018; Capellan et al., 2019). [15] The past decade has seen an increase in the percentage of mass public shootings that are posited to relate to fame-seeking on behalf of the individual or on behalf of a broader ideology (Capellan et al., 2019; Lankford and Silver, 2020). Some researchers have suggested that this rise in fame‐ and attention‐seeking motivations among mass public shooters has contributed to an escalation in the lethality of these incidents (Langman, 2018; Lankford and Silver, 2020).

Although there are some noted differences across different types of mass public shootings (Capellan and Anisin, 2018; Capellan et al., 2019), an overarching commonality is that most incidents are preceded by some level of planning by the shooter. Among active shooting cases from 2000 to 2013 for which sufficient information was available, 62 percent of offenders planned the attack for more than one month, and 9 percent planned for more than one year (Silver, Simons, and Craun, 2018). Focusing on incidents involving eight or more fatally injured victims, Lankford and Silver (2020) found that at least half of the 18 high-fatality mass public shootings between 2010 and 2019 involved a planning period of one year or longer. About 40 percent of mass public shooters make some form of verbal or written threat (e.g., threats made in front of family or friends or posted to social media) prior to the incident (Duwe, 2020).

Another strand of research has described the types of firearms used in mass shooting incidents and the extent to which variation in weapon choice relates to the lethality of the incident. There are noted challenges to conducting such analyses, partly because of the absence of any official data source that provides complete information on the types of firearms or associated equipment (e.g., ammunition, magazines, scopes) used in shootings (for further discussion, see Koper, 2020). It is common for multiple firearms to be involved in public shootings: Various studies have indicated that multiple firearms were involved in an estimated 34 percent of active shooting incidents across 2000–2017 (de Jager et al., 2018), 42 percent of mass public shooting incidents across 1999–2013 (Krouse and Richardson, 2015), and 79 percent of mass public shooting incidents that resulted in eight or more fatalities across 1966–2019 (Lankford and Silver, 2020). In an analysis of mass public shootings in which shooters attempted to kill at least four individuals, Capellan and Jiao (2019) found that 80 percent of offenders had prior access to a firearm, although 41 percent of those individuals obtained additional firearms for the incident.

As shown in Table 3, handguns are the firearm most commonly involved in active shootings and mass shootings; semiautomatic rifles or “assault-style” weapons are used in an estimated 10 to 36 percent of active shootings and mass shootings. [16] The use of large-capacity magazines (LCMs) is more common in mass public shootings and high-fatality mass shooting incidents than it is in firearm crimes overall. The estimated prevalence of LCM involvement in mass shootings ranges from 20 to 60 percent, or from 45 to 60 percent when restricting the denominator to mass public shootings or high-fatality mass shootings (Table 3). For comparison, LCM-equipped firearms are estimated to constitute 22 to 36 percent of crime guns recovered by police in most urban jurisdictions (Koper et al., 2018). The estimated prevalence of LCM-equipped firearms in the overall stock of civilian-owned firearms is about 15 to 20 percent, although these estimates come from survey data from 1994, and the prevalence has likely increased since then (Cook and Ludwig, 1996; Kleck, 2020).

Table 3. Percentage of Mass Shooting Incidents Involving the Use of a Firearm with a Large-Capacity Magazine or the Use of a Semiautomatic Rifle or Assault Weapon

SOURCE: Information obtained from Blau, Gorry, and Wade (2016), de Jager et al. (2018), Capellan and Jiao (2019), Klarevas (2019), Koper (2020), and Lankford and Silver (2020).

NOTE: NR = not reported.

a An LCM is considered to be an ammunition feeding device capable of holding more than ten rounds of ammunition. Koper et al. (2018) includes incidents that involved gun models commonly sold with an LCM, even if the magazine recovered was not reported.

b There is no agreed-upon definition of assault weapon, and studies differed in how such rifles or weapons were defined. Most studies considered specific firearms based on federal definitions (Krouse and Richardson, 2015) or a combination of state and federal definitions (Klarevas, 2016, 2019; Koper et al., 2018); some studies (de Jager et al., 2018; Koper et al., 2018; Capellan and Jiao, 2019) considered upper bounds based on a broader definition to include all semiautomatic rifles. The exact definition used was unclear in some studies (Blau, Gorry, and Wade, 2016; Lankford and Silver, 2020).

c The criteria for incident inclusion used by Blau, Gorry, and Wade (2016) are somewhat unclear, but the authors appear to consider mass public shootings with four or more fatalities, public spree shootings with two or more fatalities, and active shooter incidents identified by the FBI.

Finally, a few 2018 and 2019 studies have described community-level characteristics associated with mass shooting incidence. County-level analyses of mass shootings (excluding felony-related mass shootings) from 1990 to 2015 show a higher incidence rate of mass shootings occurring in counties with higher levels of or increasing trends in income inequality (Cabrera and Kwon, 2018; Kwon and Cabrera, 2019a, 2019c), higher population density (Cabrera and Kwon, 2018; Kwon and Cabrera, 2019b, 2019c), higher levels of residential instability (Kwon and Cabrera, 2019b), and lower levels of civic engagement (Kwon and Cabrera, 2019b). However, these findings may simply reflect the fact that mass shootings are more likely to occur in more-populous urban areas where larger gatherings of people are likely to be found; these estimated associations do not clearly show a causal effect of economic or sociocultural conditions on mass shootings.

Research on Policies That Might Reduce Mass Shootings

The nature of mass shootings creates serious challenges for developing policies that will effectively prevent their occurrence. For instance, their rarity makes it difficult to extract generalizable information to identify useful predictors of risk. The low base rates of these events also ensure that policies targeting individuals based on risk factors would result in an extremely high rate of false positives; even the best available risk factors can identify only a subpopulation in which the risk of committing a mass shooting is on the order of one in a million. Finally, because individuals who perpetrate mass shootings often die by suicide (or expect to be killed by someone trying to stop the shooting), standard deterrence strategies used in crime prevention are unlikely to work; increasing the certainty or severity of punishments seems unlikely to be effective when the perpetrator already expects to die in the mass shooting. [17]

The relative rarity of mass shooting incidents, and particularly mass public shooting incidents, also makes it challenging to empirically assess whether existing policies are effective in preventing them. Since 2015, there has been an increase in published research that takes causal inference methods commonly used to evaluate policy effects on other forms of gun violence and applies these methods to study the effects of state firearm policies on mass shooting incidence or mass shooting fatalities. [18] However, mass shootings are sufficiently rare that the statistical assumptions of these methods rarely hold, threatening the validity of the effect estimates and statistical inference and potentially resulting in spurious effects (Xue et al., 2017). [19] In some cases, modeling rare outcome data with a large number of covariates can result in quasi- or complete separation, whereby one or more of the covariates perfectly predicts the outcome (Albert and Anderson, 1984). [20] Even if models do converge, the sparseness of these outcome data risk model overfitting and biased estimates. These issues are likely exacerbated in studies that adopt narrower definitions of mass shootings—for example, restricting the definition to mass public shootings or to mass public shootings involving a higher threshold of fatalities.

Even in studies that use models more appropriate for the distributional characteristics of mass shooting outcomes, the high degree of variability in mass shooting prevalence, injuries, and fatalities makes analyses of the effects of state policies on mass shooting outcomes subject to extremely low statistical power. Even if a state passed a policy that had large effects on mass public shootings (e.g., it cut the probability of such incidents in half), it is still unlikely that a study of that policy using appropriate statistical methods would find it to have a statistically significant effect. This occurs because most states already have zero mass public shootings in any given year, and, when the rate in the pre-period was already at, or very close to, zero, it is not possible to detect a decline in the risk of such shootings that is due to the policy—no matter how large that effect may be. This pervasive lack of statistical power can result in a published literature characterized by exaggerated effect sizes for any effects that are found to be statistically significant, and these significant estimates, in many cases, may misidentify the direction of the true effect (Gelman and Carlin, 2014).

Further complicating identification of the causal effects of policies on mass shootings is the potential issue of reciprocal causation ; that is, high-profile mass shooting incidents may themselves prompt legislative changes. Luca, Malhotra, and Poliquin (2020) evaluated the association of mass public shooting occurrence in states with subsequent legislative activity related to firearms. Using data from 1989 to 2014, they found a 15-percent increase in the number of state firearm bills introduced in the year following a mass shooting; states with Democratic-controlled legislatures did not show significant effects of firearm laws enacted, while states with Republican-controlled legislatures were significantly more likely to enact more-permissive gun laws subsequent to a mass public shooting incident in the state. If mass public shootings are a cause rather than (or in addition to) a consequence of firearm policy, models that fail to appropriately account for this reciprocal relationship may produce biased and misleading estimates of the effects of laws on mass shootings.

Given statistical challenges with accurately estimating the causal effects of a policy on mass shootings, we may be able to learn more about the potential for effective prevention strategies through detailed analyses of the characteristics of mass shootings (ideally for both incidents that occurred and incidents that are believed to have been averted) or through detailed review of how specific policies are being implemented in an effort to prevent mass shootings. Descriptive evidence that mass shootings involving firearms equipped with LCMs result in significantly higher injury and fatality rates may suggest potential benefits of restricting access to LCMs (Koper, 2020), although it may be that the choice to use LCMs reflects more-lethal intentions of the shooter (Kleck, 2016). [21] Similarly, evidence that many mass shooters have a history of domestic violence has led some to suggest potential benefits of stronger implementation of firearm prohibitions related to domestic violence (Zeoli and Paruk, 2020). Finally, although extreme-risk protection orders are most commonly requested because of concerns about self-harm (Parker, 2015; Swanson et al., 2017, 2019), a detailed review of case records from 159 such orders issued in California found that 21 (13.2 percent) involved an individual who had access to or was planning to access firearms and expressed or exhibited behavior suggesting intent to perpetrate a mass shooting (Wintemute et al., 2019). These analyses do not directly assess the causal effect of policies on mass shooting outcomes, but they can still provide important insights for crafting and implementing policies.

Conclusions

It is difficult to make accurate generalizations about mass shootings. These challenges occur, in part, because (1) there are many different definitions for mass shootings, each of which may be useful for a somewhat different purpose; (2) we have incomplete data sources that do not track these events in a consistent manner over time, likely include a biased sample of incidents, and lack the full range of individual and incident characteristics researchers are interested in; and (3) there are statistical limitations inherent in trying to draw inferences from rare and idiosyncratic events. Using definitions that differ in their thresholds for the number and type of victims or the circumstances around the incident results in vastly different estimates of how often mass shooting events occur, how the rate has changed over time, and incident characteristics. Even across studies with a similar definition of a mass shooting, the different data sources (or combinations of data sources) used sometimes result in different findings. A comprehensive administrative data source that reliably captures mass shooting incidents with sufficient detail does not exist; relying on news reports alone is problematic because of well-established systemic bias in what gets reported. Although these issues create problems for understanding the prevalence and patterns of mass shootings at a given point in time, they are exacerbated when trying to understand how mass shootings have evolved over time; this is because of temporal variation in the completeness of underlying data sources that could be used to identify and classify incidents. There may be fewer concerns regarding incomplete or biased data when adopting a narrower definition of mass shootings that includes only the highest-profile incidents with multiple fatalities, but movement toward a more restrictive definition results in identifying a set of incidents that are increasingly rare and idiosyncratic. Thus, the researcher makes a trade-off that mitigates the serious problems with the underlying data but creates additional statistical problems resulting from a much smaller sample size that will not support accurate generalizations to a broader population of mass shooters.

Greater consensus about the number of mass shootings and how their prevalence has changed over time could likely be achieved by adopting a mass shooting definition based on objective criteria for which data are widely available. Defining incidents based on a threshold of fatalities rather than of nonfatal injuries is likely to produce more-reliable and more-comparable estimates over time. However, even a definition that includes nonfatal injuries is arguably preferable to one that requires having accurate data on victim-offender relationship, incident circumstances, or perpetrator motivations. These features, though captured in some administrative data sources and potentially identifiable through reviews of news reports or court and police records, are often subjectively determined and are inconsistently available in the underlying data. Relative to the criterion of number of victims, assessment of whether a mass shooting incident was related to criminal activity or whether victims were selected randomly is more likely to be influenced by the perspective of the person reporting or recording the information. Depending on the purpose of the research, it may still be necessary to rely on these more-subjective characteristics. However, researchers may need to consider the extent to which they are studying the characteristics of the events themselves rather than, for instance, how the media covers these incidents.

Even if we did have definitive and complete data sources on the characteristics of all mass shooting incidents, it is still likely to be exceedingly difficult to identify useful predictors of mass shootings. With the exception of male sex, risk factors that appear to be overrepresented among mass shooters relative to the general population are often still uncommon among offenders on an absolute level. Thus, even if one could find a way to prevent individuals with a documented serious mental illness from committing a mass shooting—for example, developing and delivering effective treatments to more than 10 million Americans (Bose et al., 2018) or effectively preventing their access to firearms—most mass shootings would still occur because only a fraction of mass shootings are committed by individuals with a documented history of serious mental illness. Researchers are exploring novel machine learning approaches to using information on domestic violence dispatches or patterns of firearm acquisition for violence risk prediction (Berk and Sorenson, 2020; Laqueur and Wintemute, 2020), although the value of these approaches for predicting mass violence is still unknown. Other approaches focused on reducing the lethality of mass shootings may be effective in mitigating the harms of some incidents, even if the approaches do not prevent the occurrence of such incidents.

Finally, even if states and other jurisdictions developed and implemented policies that prevented mass shootings, there are several statistical challenges that make it unlikely that researchers will be able to demonstrate statistically significant benefits of the effective policies. The assumptions underlying many of the approaches commonly used to evaluate the effects of gun policies are likely not to be met when assessing effects on mass shooting incidence or lethality. The rare nature of mass shootings, and particularly mass public shootings, seriously limits statistical power for detecting policy effects, and studies that find statistically significant associations of policies with mass shootings may greatly overestimate the magnitude of these effects.

However, these difficulties should not impede policymakers from trying to develop and implement better policies. Mass shootings are tragic, traumatic, and shocking events. Because of that, they attract media attention and galvanize public opinion. However, they represent a very small fraction of the homicides in the United States. Precisely because mass shootings are so rare and it is so difficult to predict exactly who will perpetrate them, the overall costs and benefits of any policy to address them are likely to be driven by the policy’s effects on a broader set of far more-common outcomes, such as overall homicide, suicide, domestic violence, and population health. Improved treatment for mental health problems or suicidality might reduce certain types of mass shootings, but such policies may also reduce far more-common forms of homicide, suicide, and crime and may also improve economic productivity and social well-being. Similarly, policies aimed at reducing domestic violence or preventing crime are worth pursuing for those benefits, and they may also reduce the incidence of some types of mass shootings (i.e., familicides, felony-related killings). Focusing efforts on implementing public policies that reduce violence more broadly, rather than making policy decisions based only on the most-extreme forms of such violence, may not eliminate mass shootings but may reduce their occurrence and lethality and ultimately save more lives.

• Various studies adopt different terminology for mass shooting events that occur in public locations and in which victims are selected indiscriminately. Because most of the studies described in this report use the term mass public shooting (as opposed to public mass shooting , for example), when referring to these types of events, we use that term. Return to content ⤴
• Similar definitional issues exist in the study of school shootings . For further discussion specific to school shootings, see Elsass, Schildkraut, and Stafford (2016) and Levine and McKnight (2020). Return to content ⤴
• There are other definitional issues around what constitutes a mass shooting incident that we do not discuss fully here. Namely, a mass shooting incident and its associated casualties are typically delineated as a shooting of multiple victims simultaneously or over a relatively short period of time and in close geographic proximity. However, in most existing data sets (Table 1), there is ambiguity over what constitutes a relatively short period of time or close geographic proximity. Although the FBI has definitions to distinguish mass murder (one event, one location), spree murder (one event, two or more locations, without the offender "cooling off" emotionally between murders), and serial murder (separate events, with the offender "cooling off" emotionally between homicidal events), it is somewhat unclear the extent to which existing mass shooting databases differ in how they classify or count events based on time frame or geographic distance parameters. For further discussion, see Krouse and Richardson (2015). Return to content ⤴
• As noted by Duwe (2020), some mass shooting incidents involve victims shot in both residential and public settings. Return to content ⤴
• The National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS), though not commonly used in mass shooting studies, also contains information that could be used to assess mass shooting incidents. The NIBRS data feed into the SHR data system but contain substantially more information on incident characteristics. However, NIBRS data are only available starting in 1991 and do not currently have complete coverage of the United States. The number of participating jurisdictions also varies greatly over time, from almost all agencies in only three states in 1991 (Reaves, 1993), to 7,283 agencies in 42 states and Washington, D.C., in 2018 (FBI, 2019e). For a comparison of mass murders as captured by SHR and NIBRS data, see Huff-Corzine et al. (2014). Return to content ⤴
• A noted limitation of the victim-offender relationship item in the SHR is that the variable is coded with respect to only the first victim listed, and the same code is applied to all victims (i.e., the victim-offender relationship is linked to the offender data; the same is true of weapon used and circumstance codes) (Fox and Swatt, 2009; Huff-Corzine et al., 2014). Thus, an incident in which an offender killed three members of his or her family and one stranger might be classified as a familicide or a mass public shooting depending on who is listed as the first victim in the SHR. Return to content ⤴
• Missingness by jurisdiction in the SHR is commonly handled through a weighting process using the ratio of homicide counts in the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports to reported homicide counts in the SHR database in order to produce national or state-level estimates (Fox and Swatt, 2009). Several methods for imputing missing item data in the SHR have been developed and are discussed in detail in Wadsworth and Roberts (2008) and Roberts, Roberts, and Wadsworth (2018). Return to content ⤴
• The stated purpose of the FBI active shooter reports is to provide federal, state, and local law enforcement with data to better understand how to prevent, prepare for, respond to, and recover from active shooter incidents; data collection methods used to inform the reports are described in Blair and Schweit (2014). Data cover the United States and come from multiple sources, including FBI reporting, official law enforcement investigative data, publicly available sources (e.g., governmental agency reports, journal articles), a comprehensive list of incidents developed by the New York City Police Department, and a study of shooting incidents in the United States from 2000 to 2010 conducted by the Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training Center. Return to content ⤴
• As an example of this issue, the discontinued Stanford Mass Shootings in America database, which relied solely on online media sources to identify mass shooting events, cautioned its users that information in the database spanned a period in which reporting shifted from traditional media to digital media, and thus annual incident counts partially reflect changes in data collection methodology (see Stanford Geospatial Center, undated). Thus, the more than threefold surge in mass shooting incidents from 2014 to 2015 shown in the Stanford data likely reflects increased online reporting and not necessarily a true increase in the rate of mass shootings. Return to content ⤴
• To illustrate how simple linear trend models of mass shootings are influenced by outliers, the estimated slope from a linear trend model of mass public shooting fatalities from 1999 to 2017 is 2.3 (standard error = 0.93); excluding the Las Vegas shooting, this slope is reduced to 1.3 (standard error = 0.73). Return to content ⤴
• For comparison, general population studies tend to find the prevalence of diagnosable psychotic disorders (including schizophrenia, schizoaffective psychosis, bipolar disorder with accompanying delusion, substance-induced psychotic disorder, and delusional disorders) to be less than 1 percent, although the prevalence varies substantially as a function of the method of measurement and the population studied (see Moreno-Küstner, Martín, and Pastor, 2018). There are no benchmarks for prevalence that use the methods of post-incident diagnosis that are used with mass shooters. Return to content ⤴
• The same study identified romantic or family issues (e.g., divorce, child custody dispute) as a potential contributing stressor or triggering event in 46 percent of familicides, 23 percent of mass public killings, and 4 percent of felony-related mass killings (Fridel, 2017). Return to content ⤴
• Compared with homicides overall and with felony-related mass shootings, familicide mass shootings and mass public shootings are significantly more likely to end with the death of the perpetrator by suicide. Although estimates vary depending on the period of analysis, data source, and definitions applied, approximately 40 to 60 percent of mass public shooters died by suicide (Duwe, 2004, 2020; Lankford, 2015; Fridel, 2017). Estimates are comparable for familicide mass shootings or mass killings but are far lower (less than 5 percent) for felony-related mass shootings or mass killings (Duwe, 2004; Fridel, 2017). Return to content ⤴
• There is no official classification of mass public shooting or shooter typologies, but researchers have often distinguished between workplace violence (disgruntled employee violence), school shootings, ideological extremism, and rampage shootings (i.e., generally, the shootings that do not fall in the other categories) (Duwe, 2004; Lankford, 2013; Capellan et al., 2019). Return to content ⤴
• As discussed previously, different definitions of mass public shootings result in different temporal patterns. If mass public shootings are defined more narrowly as incidents with four or more victims killed, school shootings were very rare prior to the 1990s and constituted 11 percent of all mass public shootings from 1976 to 2018 (Duwe, 2020). Under the broader definition used by Capellan et al. (2019), 25 percent of mass public shootings from 1966 to 2017 occurred in schools. Return to content ⤴
• The identification of "assault weapons" in these incidents is not straightforward, partly because the term assault weapon is controversial. In state and federal gun laws, the term generally refers to specific semiautomatic firearm models that are designed to fire a high volume of ammunition in a controlled way or that have specified design features, such as folding stocks or pistol grips. For further discussion, see Koper (2020) and Klarevas (2019). Return to content ⤴
• This likely does not apply to felony-related mass shootings, in which the death of the perpetrator is uncommon. Return to content ⤴
• For recent examples, see Klarevas, Conner, and Hemenway (2019) and Webster et al. (2020). Return to content ⤴
• The distributional characteristics of mass shooting incidents are such that standard assumptions of asymptotic consistency and normality for the parameter estimates may not hold, thus threating the validity of effect estimates and associated statistical inferences. Return to content ⤴
• For instance, it is common for studies evaluating the effects of gun policies on the likelihood of a mass shooting occurring to use two-way fixed-effects models that control for year and state fixed effects. In conventional estimation of these models, states that do not experience an incident over the study time frame do not enter the log-likelihood. In some studies of high-fatality mass public shootings, this applies to nearly half of the states in the sample. Return to content ⤴
• There has also been some debate about the extent to which rates of gunfire attained in incidents of LCM use could be similarly attained with use of non-LCM weapons. For a summary of this discussion, see Koper (2020), p. 165, note 19. Return to content ⤴

Originally published March 2, 2018

• Abadie, Alberto, “Using Synthetic Controls: Feasibility, Data Requirements, and Methodological Aspects,” Journal of Economic Literature , Vol. 59, No. 2, June 2021.
• Abadie, Alberto, Alexis Diamond, and Jens Hainmueller, “Synthetic Control Methods for Comparative Case Studies: Estimating the Effect of California’s Tobacco Control Program,” Journal of the American Statistical Association , Vol. 105, No. 490, 2010.
• Abernathy, Penelope Muse, The Expanding News Desert , University of North Carolina Press, 2018.
• Abutaleb, Yasmeen, and William Wan, “After Trump Blames Mental Illness for Mass Shootings, Health Agencies Ordered to Hold All Posts on Issue,” Washington Post , August 20, 2019.
• Adams, K. Alexander, “No Retreat: The Impact of Stand Your Ground Laws on Violent Crime,” Criminal Justice Review , September 2022, online ahead of print.
• Adhia, Avanti, Vivian H. Lyons, Caitlin A. Moe, Ali Rowhani-Rahbar, and Frederick P. Rivara, “Nonfatal Use of Firearms in Intimate Partner Violence: Results of a National Survey,” Preventive Medicine , Vol. 147, June 2021.
• Adler, W. C., F. M. Bielke, D. J. Doi, and J. F. Kennedy, Cops Under Fire: Law Enforcement Officers Killed with Assault Weapons or Guns with High Capacity , Handgun Control, Inc., 1995.
• Ahmedani, Brian K., Gregory E. Simon, Christine Stewart, Arne Beck, Beth E. Waitzfelder, Rebecca Rossom, Frances Lynch, Ashli Owen-Smith, Enid M. Hunkeler, Ursula Whiteside, Belinda H. Operskalski, M. Justin Coffey, and Leif I. Solberg, “Health Care Contacts in the Year Before Suicide Death,” Journal of General Internal Medicine , Vol. 29, No. 6, 2014.
• Aitken, Mary E., Samantha D. Minster, Samantha H. Mullins, Heather M. Hirsch, Purnima Unni, Kathy Monroe, and Beverly K. Miller, “Parents’ Perspectives on Safe Storage of Firearms,” Journal of Community Health , Vol. 45, No. 3, 2020.
• Albert, Adelin, and John A. Anderson, “On the Existence of Maximum Likelihood Estimates in Logistic Regression Models,” Biometrika , Vol. 71, No. 1, 1984.
• Alcazar, Beth, “Kids and Guns: Simple Steps to a Safer Home,” U.S. Concealed Carry Association, webpage, February 15, 2021. As of December 6, 2021: https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/blog/simple-steps-to-safer-home/
• Alcorn, Ted, “Trends in Research Publications About Gun Violence in the United States, 1960 to 2014,” JAMA Internal Medicine , Vol. 177, No. 1, January 2017.
• Alcorn, Ted, and Scott Burris, “Gun Violence Prevention,” Lancet , Vol. 388, No. 10041, 2016.
• Aldrich, John H., and Forrest D. Nelson, Linear Probability, Logit, and Probit Models , Sage Publications, 1984.
• Alexander, Michelle, The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness , New Press, 2012.
• Allcott, Hunt, Benjamin B. Lockwood, and Dmitry Taubinsky, “Regressive Sin Taxes, with an Application to the Optimal Soda Tax,” Quarterly Journal of Economics , Vol. 134, No. 3, 2019.
• Alper, Mariel, and Lauren Glaze, Source and Use of Firearms Involved in Crimes: Survey of Prison Inmates, 2016 , U.S. Department of Justice, 2019.
• Alpers, Philip, “Mass Gun Killings in Australia, 1971–2019,” GunPolicy.org, October 7, 2019.
• Alpers, Philip, and Michael Picard, “Australia—Gun Facts, Figures and the Law,” GunPolicy.org, 2020.
• American Law Institute, Model Penal Code, Section 2.02 cmt.at 238, 1985.
• American Medical Association, “The Physician’s Role in Promoting Firearm Safety,” webpage, undated. As of December 20, 2021: https://edhub.ama-assn.org/interactive/17579432
• AmmoSpy, “Trending,” webpage, undated. As of June 29, 2017: https://www.ammospy.net/trending
• Andersen, Ronald, Martin R. Frankel, and Judith Kasper, Total Survey Error: Applications to Improve Health Surveys , Jossey-Bass, 1979.
• Anderson, D. Mark, and Joseph J. Sabia, “Child-Access-Prevention Laws, Youths’ Gun Carrying, and School Shootings,” Journal of Law and Economics , Vol. 61, No. 3, August 2018.
• Anderson, D. Mark, Joseph J. Sabia, and Erdal Tekin, Child Access Prevention Laws and Juvenile Firearm-Related Homicides , National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper No. 25209, December 2018.
• Anderson, D. Mark, Joseph J. Sabia, and Erdal Tekin, “Child Access Prevention Laws and Juvenile Firearm-Related Homicides,” Journal of Urban Economics , Vol. 126, November 2021.
• Anderson, Elijah, Code of the Street: Decency, Violence, and the Moral Life of the Inner City , W. W. Norton & Company, 1999.
• Andrés, Antonio Rodríguez, and Katherine Hempstead, “Gun Control and Suicide: The Impact of State Firearm Regulations in the United States, 1995–2004,” Health Policy , Vol. 101, No. 1, 2011.
• Aneja, Abhay, John J. Donohue III, and Alexandria Zhang, “The Impact of Right-to-Carry Laws and the NRC Report: Lessons for the Empirical Evaluation of Law and Policy,” American Law and Economics Review , Vol. 13, No. 2, 2011.
• Aneja, Abhay, John J. Donohue III, and Alexandria Zhang, The Impact of Right to Carry Laws and the NRC Report: Lessons for the Empirical Evaluation of Law and Policy , Stanford Law School, Olin Working Paper No. 461, December 1, 2014.
• Anestis, M. D., “Prior Suicide Attempts Are Less Common in Suicide Decedents Who Died by Firearms Relative to Those Who Died by Other Means,” Journal of Affective Disorders , Vol. 189, No. 1, 2016.
• Anestis, Michael D., and Joye C. Anestis, “Suicide Rates and State Laws Regulating Access and Exposure to Handguns,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 105, No. 10, 2015.
• Anestis, Michael D., Allison E. Bond, AnnaBelle O’Bryan, and Craig J. Bryan, “An Examination of Preferred Messengers on Firearm Safety for Suicide Prevention,” Preventive Medicine , Vol. 145, April 2021.
• Anestis, Michael D., Craig J. Bryan, Daniel W. Capron, and AnnaBelle O’Bryan, “Lethal Means Counseling, Distribution of Cable Locks, and Safe Firearm Storage Practices Among the Mississippi National Guard: A Factorial Randomized Controlled Trial, 2018–2020,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 111, No. 2, February 2021.
• Anwar, Shamena, Patrick Bayer, Randi Hjalmarsson, and Matthew L. Mizel, Racial Disparities in Misdemeanor Speeding Convictions , RAND Corporation, RR-A1317-1, 2021. As of March 11, 2024: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA1317-1.html
• Appleby, Louis, John A. Dennehy, Christopher S. Thomas, E. Brian Faragher, and Glyn Lewis, “Aftercare and Clinical Characteristics of People with Mental Illness Who Commit Suicide: A Case-Control Study,” Lancet , Vol. 353, No. 9162, 1999.
• Arora, Ashna, “Juvenile Crime and Anticipated Punishment,” American Economic Journal: Economic Policy , Vol. 15, No. 4, November 2023.
• Arria, Amelia M., Emily R. Winick, Laura M. Garnier-Dykstra, Kathryn B. Vincent, Kimberly M. Caldeira, Holly C. Wilcox, and Kevin E. O’Grady, “Help Seeking and Mental Health Service Utilization Among College Students with a History of Suicide Ideation,” Psychiatric Services , Vol. 62, No. 12, 2011.
• Asher, Jeff, “Who Reported NIBRS Data in 2022?,” Jeff-alytics Substack blog, August 11, 2023. As of February 9, 2024: https://jasher.substack.com/p/who-reported-nibrs-data-in-2022
• Associated Press, "New York Changes Gun Buyback After Seller Gets $21,000 for 3D-Printed Parts," The Guardian , October 11, 2022.
• Associated Press and USA Today , “Report: 2019 Records 41 Mass Killings in United States,” Tucson.com , December 28, 2019.
• ATF— See Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.
• Athey, Susan, and Guido W. Imbens, “Design-Based Analysis in Difference-in-Differences Settings with Staggered Adoption,” Journal of Econometrics , Vol. 226, No. 1, January 2022.
• Avraham, Jacob B., Spiros G. Frangos, and Charles J. DiMaggio, “The Epidemiology of Firearm Injuries Managed in US Emergency Departments,” Injury Epidemiology , Vol. 5, No. 38, 2018.
• Ayres, Ian, "Outcome Tests of Racial Disparities in Police Practices," Justice Research and Policy , Vol. 4, Nos. 1–2, Fall 2002.
• Ayres, Ian, and John J. Donohue III, “Nondiscretionary Concealed Weapons Laws: A Case Study of Statistics, Standards of Proof, and Public Policy,” American Law and Economics Review , Vol. 1, No. 1–2, January 1999.
• Ayres, Ian, and John J. Donohue III, Shooting Down the More Guns, Less Crime Hypothesis , National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper No. 9336, November 2002.
• Ayres, Ian, and John J. Donohue III, “Shooting Down the More Guns, Less Crime Hypothesis,” Stanford Law Review , Vol. 55, No. 4, 2003a.
• Ayres, Ian, and John J. Donohue III, “The Latest Misfires in Support of the 'More Guns, Less Crime' Hypothesis,” Stanford Law Review , Vol. 55, No. 4, 2003b.
• Ayres, Ian, and John J. Donohue III, “Yet Another Refutation of the More Guns, Less Crime Hypothesis—with Some Help from Moody and Marvell,” Econ Journal Watch , Vol. 6, No. 1, January 2009a.
• Ayres, Ian, and John J. Donohue III, “More Guns, Less Crime Fails Again: The Latest Evidence from 1977–2006,” Econ Journal Watch , Vol. 6, No. 2, May 2009b.
• Azad, Hooman Alexander, Michael C. Monuteaux, Chris A. Rees, Michael Siegel, Rebekah Mannix, Lois K. Lee, Karen M. Sheehan, and Eric W. Fleegler, “Child Access Prevention Firearm Laws and Firearm Fatalities Among Children Aged 0 to 14 Years, 1991–2016,” JAMA Pediatrics , Vol. 174, No. 5, May 2020.
• Azrael, D., A. A. Braga, and M. E. O’Brien, Developing the Capacity to Understand and Prevent Homicide: An Evaluation of the Milwaukee Homicide Review Commission , Harvard School of Public Health, 2013.
• Azrael, Deborah, Joanna Cohen, Carmel Salhi, and Matthew Miller, “Firearm Storage in Gun-Owning Households with Children: Results of a 2015 National Survey,” Journal of Urban Health , Vol. 95, No. 3, 2018.
• Azrael, Deborah, Philip J. Cook, and Matthew Miller, “State and Local Prevalence of Firearms Ownership Measurement, Structure, and Trends,” Journal of Quantitative Criminology , Vol. 20, No. 1, March 2004.
• Azrael, Deborah, Lisa Hepburn, David Hemenway, and Matthew Miller, “The Stock and Flow of U.S. Firearms: Results from the 2015 National Firearms Survey,” Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences , Vol. 3, No. 5, 2017.
• Azrael, Deborah, and Matthew Miller, “Reducing Suicide Without Affecting Underlying Mental Health: Theoretical Underpinnings and a Review of the Evidence Base Lining the Availability of Lethal Means and Suicide,” in Rory C. O’Connor and Jane Pirkis, eds., The International Handbook of Suicide Prevention , 2nd ed., John Wiley and Sons, 2016.
• Ba, Bocar A., Dean Knox, Jonathan Mummolo, and Roman Riversa, "The Role of Officer Race and Gender in Police-Civilian Interactions in Chicago," Science , Vol. 371, No. 6530, 2021.
• Baekgaard, Martin, Julian Christensen, Casper Mondrup Dahlmann, Asbjørn Mathiasen, and Niels Bjørn Grund Petersen, “The Role of Evidence in Politics: Motivated Reasoning and Persuasion Among Politicians,” British Journal of Political Science , Vol. 49, No. 3, July 2019.
• Bailey, J. E., A. L. Kellermann, G. W. Somes, J. G. Banton, F. P. Rivara, and N. P. Rushforth, “Risk Factors for Violent Death of Women in the Home,” Archives of Internal Medicine , Vol. 157, No. 7, 1997.
• Bailey, Zinzi D., Justin M. Feldman, and Mary T. Bassett, “How Structural Racism Works—Racist Policies as a Root Cause of U.S. Racial Health Inequities,” New England Journal of Medicine , Vol. 384, No. 8, 2021.
• Baker, Jeanine, and Samara McPhedran, “Gun Laws and Sudden Death: Did the Australian Firearms Legislation of 1996 Make a Difference?” British Journal of Criminology , Vol. 47, No. 3, 2007.
• Baker, Jeanine, and Samara McPhedran, “Australian Firearm Related Deaths: New Findings and Implications for Crime Prevention and Health Policies Following Revisions to Official Death Count Data,” International Journal of Criminal Justice Sciences , Vol. 10, No. 1, 2015.
• Balakrishna, Meenakshi, and Kenneth C. Wilbur, “Do Firearm Markets Comply with Firearm Restrictions? How the Massachusetts Assault Weapons Ban Enforcement Notice Changed Registered Firearm Sales,” Journal of Empirical Legal Studies , Vol. 19, No. 1, March 2022.
• Banks, Duren, Michael G. Planty, Lance Couzens, Philip Lee, Connor Brooks, Kevin M. Scott, and Anthony Whyde, Arrest-Related Deaths Program: Pilot Study of Redesigned Survey Methodology , U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, July 2019.
• Barati, Mehdi, “New Evidence on the Impact of Concealed Carry Weapon Laws on Crime,” International Review of Law and Economics , Vol. 47, 2016.
• Barber, Catherine, Deborah Azrael, Amy Cohen, Matthew Miller, Deonza Thymes, David Enze Wang, and David Hemenway, “Homicides by Police: Comparing Counts from the National Violent Death Reporting System, Vital Statistics, and Supplementary Homicide Reports,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 106, No. 5, May 2016.
• Barber, Catherine, Deborah Azrael, Matthew Miller, and David Hemenway, “Who Owned the Gun in Firearm Suicides of Men, Women, and Youth in Five US States?” Preventive Medicine , Vol. 164, November 2022.
• Barber, Catherine, Philip J. Cook, and Susan T. Parker, “The Emerging Infrastructure of US Firearms Injury Data,” Preventive Medicine , July 2022.
• Barber, Catherine, Elaine Frank, and Ralph Demicco, “Reducing Suicides Through Partnerships Between Health Professionals and Gun Owner Groups—Beyond Docs vs Glocks,” JAMA Internal Medicine , Vol. 177, No. 1, January 2017.
• Barber, Catherine, and David Hemenway, “Too Many or Too Few Unintentional Firearm Deaths in Official U.S. Mortality Data?” Accident Analysis and Prevention , Vol. 43, No. 3, 2011.
• Barber, C., D. Hemenway, J. Hochstadt, and D. Azrael, “Underestimates of Unintentional Firearm Fatalities: Comparing Supplementary Homicide Report Data with the National Vital Statistics System,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 8, No. 3, 2002.
• Barkin, Shari L., Stacia A. Finch, Edward H. Ip, Benjamin Scheindlin, Joseph A. Craig, Jennifer Steffes, Victoria Weiley, Eric Slora, David Altman, and Richard C. Wasserman, “Is Office-Based Counseling About Media Use, Timeouts, and Firearm Storage Effective? Results from a Cluster-Randomized, Controlled Trial,” Pediatrics , Vol. 122, No. 1, 2008.
• Barnard, Leslie M., Megan McCarthy, Christopher E. Knoepke, Sabrina Kaplan, James Engeln, and Marian E. Betz, “Colorado’s First Year of Extreme Risk Protection Orders,” Injury Epidemiology , Vol. 8, No. 59, 2021.
• Bartley, William Alan, and Mark A. Cohen, “The Effect of Concealed Weapons Laws: An Extreme Bound Analysis,” Economic Inquiry , Vol. 36, No. 2, 1998.
• Barton, M. S., “Gentrification and Violent Crime in New York City,” Crime and Delinquency , Vol. 62, No. 9, 2016.
• Bartos, Bradley J., Richard McCleary, Lorraine Mazerolle, and Kelsy Luengen, “Controlling Gun Violence: Assessing the Impact of Australia’s Gun Buyback Program Using a Synthetic Control Group Experiment,” Prevention Science , Vol. 21, No. 1, 2020.
• Bate, Roger, Cody Kallen, and Aparna Mathur, “The Perverse Effect of Sin Taxes: The Rise of Illicit White Cigarettes,” Applied Economics , Vol. 52, No. 8, 2020.
• Baumann, Laura, Heather Clinton, Rob Berntsson, Susan S. Williams, James C. Rovella, David Shapiro, Shefali Thaker, Kevin Borrup, Garry Lapidus, and Brendan T. Campbell, “Suicide, Guns, and Buyback Programs: An Epidemiologic Analysis of Firearm-Related Deaths in Connecticut,” Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery , Vol. 83, No. 6, December 2017.
• BBC Research & Consulting, The Economic Impacts of Hunting, Fishing and Wildlife Watching in Colorado , September 26, 2008.
• Beard, T. Randolph, Paula A. Gant, and Richard P. Saba, “Border-Crossing Sales, Tax Avoidance, and State Tax Policies: An Application to Alcohol,” Southern Economic Journal , Vol. 64, No. 1, July 1997.
• Beauchamp, Zack, “Australia Confiscated 650,000 Guns. Murders and Suicides Plummeted,” Vox , May 18, 2018.
• Beekman, Daniel, “How Gun-Tax Legislation Would Affect Seattle Firearms Stores,” Seattle Times , July 29, 2015.
• Beekman, Daniel, “Seattle’s Gun Tax Raised $93,000 Last Year,” Seattle Times , March 16, 2018.
• Beidas, Rinad S., Shari Jager-Hyman, Emily M. Becker-Haimes, Courtney Benjamin Wolk, Brian K. Ahmedani, John E. Zeber, Joel A. Fein, Gregory K. Brown, Courtney A. Gregor, Adina Lieberman, and Steven C. Marcus, “Acceptability and Use of Evidence-Based Practices for Firearm Storage in Pediatric Primary Care,” Academic Pediatrics , Vol. 19, No. 6, August 2019.
• Ben-Michael, Eli, David Arbour, Avi Feller, Alexander Franks, and Steven Raphael, “Estimating the Effects of a California Gun Control Program with Multitask Gaussian Processes,” Annals of Applied Statistics , Vol. 17, No. 2, June 2023.
• Ben-Michael, Eli, Avi Feller, and Jesse Rothstein, “The Augmented Synthetic Control Method,” Journal of the American Statistical Association , Vol. 116, No. 536, 2021.
• Benson, Bruce L., and Brent D. Mast, “Privately Produced General Deterrence,” Journal of Law and Economics , Vol. 44, No. S2, 2001.
• Berk, Richard A., and Susan B. Sorenson, “Algorithmic Approach to Forecasting Rare Violent Events: An Illustration Based in Intimate Partner Violence Perpetration,” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 19, No. 1, 2020.
• Berrigan, John, Deborah Azrael, David Hemenway, and Matthew Miller, “Firearms Training and Storage Practices Among US Gun Owners: A Nationally Representative Study,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 25, Supp. 1, 2019.
• Betz, Marian E., Deborah Azrael, Catherine Barber, and Matthew Miller, “Public Opinion Regarding Whether Speaking with Patients About Firearms Is Appropriate: Results of a National Survey,” Annals of Internal Medicine , Vol. 165, No. 8, October 18, 2016.
• Betz, Marian E., Deborah Azrael, Rachel L. Johnson, Christopher E. Knoepke, Megan L. Ranney, Garen J. Wintemute, Daniel Matlock, Krithika Suresh, and Matthew Miller, “Views on Firearm Safety Among Caregivers of People with Alzheimer Disease and Related Dementias,” JAMA Network Open , Vol. 3, No. 7, July 15, 2020, e207756.
• Betz, M. E., C. Barber, and M. Miller, “Suicidal Behavior and Firearm Access: Results from the Second Injury Control and Risk Survey,” Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior , Vol. 41, No. 4, 2011.
• Betz, Marian E., Shannon Frattaroli, Christopher E. Knoepke, Rachel Johnson, Annette Christy, Julia P. Schleimer, Veronica A. Pear, Megan McCarthy, Reena Kapoor, Michael A. Norko, Ali Rowhani-Rahbar, Wenjuan Ma, Garen J. Wintemute, Jeffrey W. Swanson, and April M. Zeoli, “Extreme Risk Protection Orders in Older Adults in Six U.S. States: A Descriptive Study,” Clinical Gerontologist , September 9, 2023.
• Betz, Marian E., Jill Harkavy-Friedman, Fatima Loren Dreier, Rob Pincus, and Megan L. Ranney, “Talking About ‘Firearm Injury’ and ‘Gun Violence’: Words Matter,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 111, No. 12, December 2021.
• Betz, Marian E., Christopher E. Knoepke, Scott Simpson, Bonnie J. Siry, Ashley Clement, Tamara Saunders, Rachel Johnson, Deborah Azrael, Edwin D. Boudreaux, Faris Omeragic, Leah M. Adams, Sydney Almond, Elizabeth Juarez-Colunga, and Daniel D. Matlock, “An Interactive Web-Based Lethal Means Safety Decision Aid for Suicidal Adults (Lock to Live): Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial,” Journal of Medical Internet Research , Vol. 22, No. 1, January 2020, e16253.
• Betz, M. E., M. Miller, C. Barber, B. Beaty, I. Miller, C. A. Camargo, Jr., and E. D. Boudreaux, “Lethal Means Access and Assessment Among Suicidal Emergency Department Patients,” Depression and Anxiety , Vol. 33, No. 6, 2016.
• Bhatt, Apurva, Xi Wang, An-Lin Cheng, Kalee L. Morris, Luke Beyer, Abbie Chestnut, Kristy Steigerwalt, and Jeffrey Metzner, “Association of Changes in Missouri Firearm Laws with Adolescent and Young Adult Suicides by Firearms,” JAMA Network Open , Vol. 3, No. 11, November 2020.
• Bichler, G., A. Norris, J. R. Dmello, and J. Randle, “The Impact of Civil Gang Injunctions on Networked Violence Between the Bloods and the Crips,” Crime and Delinquency , Vol. 65, No. 7, 2019.
• Bichler, Gisela, Karin Schmerler, and Janet Enriquez, “Curbing Nuisance Motels: An Evaluation of Police as Place Regulators,” Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management , Vol. 36, No. 2, 2013.
• Bice, Douglas C., and David D. Hemley, “The Market for New Handguns: An Empirical Investigation,” Journal of Law & Economics , Vol. 45, No. 1, 2002.
• Biden Harris Democrats, "The Biden Plan to End Our Gun Violence Epidemic," webpage, undated. As of October 20, 2022: https://joebiden.com/gunsafety
• Biden, Joseph R., “Remarks by President Biden on Gun Violence in America,” White House, July 2, 2022.
• Billings, Stephen B., Smoking Gun? Linking Gun Ownership to Neighborhood Crime , Social Science Research Network Working Paper, May 31, 2022.
• Billings, Stephen B., “Smoking Gun? Linking Gun Ownership to Crime Victimization,” Journal of Public Economics , Vol. 222, June 2023.
• Birckmayer, J., and D. Hemenway, “Suicide and Firearm Prevalence: Are Youth Disproportionately Affected?” Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior , Vol. 31, No. 3, 2001.
• Black, Dan A., and Daniel S. Nagin, “Do Right-to-Carry Laws Deter Violent Crime?” Journal of Legal Studies , Vol. 27, No. 1, 1998.
• Blair, Janet M., Katherine A. Fowler, Shane P. D. Jack, and Alexander E. Crosby, “The National Violent Death Reporting System: Overview and Future Directions,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 22, Supp. 1, 2016.
• Blair, J. Pete, and Katherine W. Schweit, A Study of Active Shooter Incidents, 2000–2013 , Texas State University and Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Department of Justice, 2014.
• Blattman, C., D. Green, D. Ortega, and S. Tobón, “Place-Based Interventions at Scale: The Direct and Spillover Effects of Policing and City Services on Crime,” BFI Working Paper, 2019.
• Blau, Benjamin M., Devon H. Gorry, and Chip Wade, “Guns, Laws, and Public Shootings in the United States,” Applied Economics , Vol. 48, No. 49, 2016.
• Blosnich, John R., Kirsty A. Clark, Vickie M. Mays, and Susan D. Cochran, “Sexual and Gender Minority Status and Firearms in the Household: Findings from the 2017 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Surveys, California and Texas,” Public Health Reports , Vol. 135, No. 6, 2020.
• Bohnert, A. S., J. F. McCarthy, R. V. Ignacio, M. A. Ilgen, A. Eisenberg, and F. C. Blow, “Misclassification of Suicide Deaths: Examining the Psychiatric History of Overdose Decedents,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 19, No. 6, 2013.
• Bongiorno, Diana M., Eric N. Kramer, Marisa D. Booty, and Cassandra K. Crifasi, “Development of an Online Map of Safe Gun Storage Sites in Maryland for Suicide Prevention,” International Review of Psychiatry , Vol. 33, No. 7, 2021.
• Bonhometre, Jodie, "Cash for Guns: NYPD Announces Gun Buy-Back Program," SILive.com , updated April 8, 2021.
• Bonn, Tess, "Majority of Voters Support Assult Weapons Ban, Buybacks: Poll," The Hill , September 26, 2019.
• Bonne, Stephanie L., Pina Violano, Thomas K. Duncan, Peter A. Pappas, Gerard A. Baltazar, Linda A. Dultz, Mary E. Schroeder, Jeanette Capella, Michael Hirsh, Kristen Conrad-Schnetz, Rishi Rattan, John J. Como, Sarah Jewell, and Marie L. Crandall, "Prevention of Firearm Violence Through Specific Types of Community-Based Programming: An Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma Evidence-Based Review," Annals of Surgery , Vol. 274, No. 2, August 1, 2021.
• Booty, Marisa, Jayne O’Dwyer, Daniel Webster, Alex McCourt, and Cassandra Crifasi, “Describing a ‘Mass Shooting’: The Role of Databases in Understanding Burden,” Injury Epidemiology , Vol. 6, No. 1, 2019, article 47.
• Borowsky, I. W., M. D. Resnick, M. Ireland, and R. W. Blum, “Suicide Attempts Among American Indian and Alaska Native Youth: Risk and Protective Factors,” Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine , Vol. 153, No. 6, 1999.
• Borusyak, Kirill, Xavier Jaravel, and Jann Spiess, Revisiting Event Study Designs: Robust and Efficient Estimation , arXiv, April 2022.
• Bose, Jonaki, Sarra L. Hedden, Rachel N. Lipari, and Eunice Park-Lee, Key Substance Use and Mental Health Indicators in the United States: Results from the 2017 National Survey on Drug Use and Health , Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, September 2018.
• Bossarte, Robert M., Hannah N. Ziobrowski, David M. Benedek, Catherine L. Dempsey, Andrew J. King, Matthew K. Nock, Nancy A. Sampson, Murray B. Stein, Robert J. Ursano, and Ronald C. Kessler, “Mental Disorders, Gun Ownership, and Gun Carrying Among Soldiers After Leaving the Army, 2016–2019,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 111, No. 10, October 2021.
• Bourgois, Philippe, In Search of Respect: Selling Crack in El Barrio , 2nd ed., Cambridge University Press, 2003.
• Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, “About Brady,” webpage, undated. As of January 10, 2016: https://www.bradycampaign.org/about-brady
• Braga, A. A., “Getting Deterrence Right: Evaluation Evidence and Complementary Crime Control Mechanisms,” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 11, 2012.
• Braga, Anthony A., “Guns and Crime,” in F. Parisi, ed., The Oxford Handbook of Law and Economics , Vol. 3: Public Law and Legal Institutions , Oxford University Press, 2017.
• Braga, Anthony A., Elizabeth Griffiths, Keller Sheppard, and Stephen Douglas, “Firearm Instrumentality: Do Guns Make Violent Situations More Lethal?” Annual Review of Criminology , Vol. 4, 2021.
• Braga, A. A., D. Hureau, and L. Grossman, Managing Group Violence Reduction Strategies: The Value of Shooting Scorecards , U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 2014.
• Braga, A. A., D. M. Hureau, and A. V. Papachristos, “An Ex Post Facto Evaluation Framework for Place-Based Police Interventions,” Evaluation Review , Vol. 35, No. 6, 2012.
• Braga, A. A., D. M. Hureau, and A. V. Papachristos, “Deterring Gang-Involved Gun Violence: Measuring the Impact of Boston’s Operation Ceasefire on Street Gang Behavior,” Journal of Quantitative Criminology , Vol. 30, No. 1, 2014.
• Braga, A. A., D. M. Hureau, and C. Winship, “Losing Faith? Police, Black Churches, and the Resurgence of Youth Violence in Boston,” Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law , 2008.
• Braga, A. A., D. M. Kennedy, E. J. Waring, and A. M. Piehl, “Problem-Oriented Policing, Deterrence, and Youth Violence: An Evaluation of Boston’s Operation Ceasefire,” Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency , Vol. 38, No. 3, 2001.
• Braga, Anthony A., Andrew V. Papachristos, and David M. Hureau, “The Effects of Hot Spots Policing on Crime: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis,” Justice Quarterly , Vol. 31, No. 4, 2014.
• Braga, A. A., and G. L. Pierce, “Disrupting Illegal Firearms Markets in Boston: The Effects of Operation Ceasefire on the Supply of New Handguns to Criminals,” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 4, No. 4, 2005.
• Braga, A. A., B. Turchan, and L. Barao, “The Influence of Investigative Resources on Homicide Clearances,” Journal of Quantitative Criminology , Vol. 35, No. 2, 2019.
• Braga, Anthony A., and David L. Weisburd, “The Effects of Focused Deterrence Strategies on Crime: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Empirical Evidence,” Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency , Vol. 49, No. 3, 2012.
• Braga, A. A., and D. L. Weisburd, “Must We Settle for Less Rigorous Evaluations in Large Area-Based Crime Prevention Programs? Lessons from a Campbell Review of Focused Deterrence,” Journal of Experimental Criminology , Vol. 10, No. 4, 2014.
• Braga, Anthony A., David Weisburd, and Brandon Turchan, “Focused Deterrence Strategies and Crime Control: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of the Empirical Evidence,” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 17, No. 1, 2018.
• Braga, Anthony A., and Garen J. Wintemute, "Improving the Potential Effectiveness of Gun Buyback Programs," American Journal of Preventive Medicine , Vol. 45, No. 5, November 2013.
• Braga, Anthony A., Garen J. Wintemute, Glenn L. Pierce, Philip J. Cook, and Greg Ridgeway, “Interpreting the Empirical Evidence on Illegal Gun Market Dynamics,” Journal of Urban Health , Vol. 89, No. 5, 2012.
• Braga, A. A., G. Zimmerman, L. Barao, C. Farrell, R. K. Brunson, and A. V. Papachristos, “Street Gangs, Gun Violence, and Focused Deterrence: Comparing Place-Based and Group-Based Evaluation Methods to Estimate Direct and Spillover Deterrent Effects,” Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency , Vol. 56, No. 4, 2019.
• Branas, Charles, Shani Buggs, Jeffrey A. Butts, Anna Harvey, Erin M. Kerrison, Tracey Meares, Andrew V. Papachristos, John Pfaff, Alex R. Piquero, Joseph Richardson, Jr., Caterina Gouvis Roman, and Daniel W. Webster, Reducing Violence Without Police: A Review of Research Evidence , Research Advisory Group on Preventing and Reducing Community Violence, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York, November 9, 2020.
• Branas, C. C., T. S. Richmond, D. P. Culhane, T. R. Ten Have, and D. J. Wiebe, “Investigating the Link Between Gun Possession and Gun Assault,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 99, No. 11, 2009.
• Brauer, Jurgen, Daniel Montolio, and Elisa Trujillo-Baute, “How Do US State Firearms Laws Affect Firearms Manufacturing Location? An Empirical Investigation, 1986–2010,” Journal of Economic Geography , Vol. 17, No. 4, 2017.
• Brenan, Megan, “Most U.S. Teachers Oppose Carrying Guns in Schools,” Gallup , March 16, 2018.
• Brent, D. A., M. Baugher, J. Bridge, T. H. Chen, and L. Chiappetta, “Suicide in Affectively Ill Adolescents: A Case-Control Study,” Journal of Affective Disorders , Vol. 31, No. 3, 1994.
• Brent, D. A., M. Baugher, J. Bridge, T. H. Chen, and L. Chiappetta, “Age- and Sex-Related Risk Factors for Adolescent Suicide,” Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry , Vol. 38, No. 12, 1999.
• Brent, D. A., J. A. Perper, C. J. Allman, G. M. Moritz, M. E. Wartella, and J. P. Zelenak, “The Presence and Accessibility of Firearms in the Homes of Adolescent Suicides: A Case-Control Study,” JAMA , Vol. 266, No. 21, 1991.
• Brent, D. A., J. Perper, G. Moritz, M. Baugher, and C. Allman, “Suicide in Adolescents with No Apparent Psychopathology,” Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry , Vol. 32, No. 3, 1993a.
• Brent, D. A., J. A. Perper, G. Moritz, M. Baugher, J. Schweers, and C. Roth, “Firearms and Adolescent Suicide—A Community Case-Control Study,” American Journal of Diseases of Children , Vol. 147, No. 10, 1993b.
• Bridges, F. Stephen, Kimberly M. Tatum, and Julie C. Kunselman, “Domestic Violence Statutes and Rates of Intimate Partner and Family Homicide,” Criminal Justice Policy Review , Vol. 19, No. 1, 2008.
• Briggs, J. T., and A. Tabarrok, “Firearms and Suicides in U.S. States,” International Review of Law and Economics , Vol. 37, 2014.
• Britt, Chester L., Gary Kleck, and David J. Bordua, “A Reassessment of the D.C. Gun Law: Some Cautionary Notes on the Use of Interrupted Time Series Designs for Policy Impact Assessment,” Law and Society Review , Vol. 30, No. 2, 1996.
• Bromwich, Jonah E., “New York’s Ban on Guns in Parks and Other ‘Sensitive’ Sites Is Affirmed,” New York Times , December 8, 2023.
• Bronars, Stephen G., and John R. Lott, Jr., “Criminal Deterrence, Geographic Spillovers, and the Right to Carry Concealed Handguns,” American Economic Review , Vol. 88, No. 2, 1998.
• Brucato, Gary, Paul S. Appelbaum, Hannah Hesson, Eileen A. Shea, Gabriella Dishy, Kathryn Lee, Tyler Pia, Faizan Syed, Alexandra Villalobos, and Melanie M. Wall, “Psychotic Symptoms in Mass Shootings v. Mass Murders Not Involving Firearms: Findings from the Columbia Mass Murder Database,” Psychological Medicine , Vol. 52, No. 15, 2021.
• Bruck, Andrew J., “Acting AG Bruck: More Than 300 ‘Extreme Risk Protective Orders’ Issued in New Jersey Since Landmark Gun Safety Law Went into Effect Two Years Ago,” Office of the Attorney General, State of New Jersey, September 1, 2021.
• Brunson, R. K., A. A. Braga, D. M. Hureau, and K. Pegram, “We Trust You, but Not That Much: Examining Police-Black Clergy Partnerships to Reduce Youth Violence,” Justice Quarterly , Vol. 32, No. 6, 2013.
• Bryan, Craig J., AnnaBelle O. Bryan, Michael D. Anestis, Lauren R. Khazem, Julia A. Harris, Alexis M. May, and Cynthia Thomsen, “Firearm Availability and Storage Practices Among Military Personnel Who Have Thought About Suicide,” JAMA Network Open , Vol. 2, No. 8, August 16, 2019, e199160.
• Buchanan, Larry, Josh Keller, Richard A. Oppel, Jr., and Daniel Victor, “How They Got Their Guns,” New York Times , June 12, 2016.
• Buchanan, Larry, Josh Keller, Richard A. Oppel, Jr., and Daniel Victor, “How They Got Their Guns,” New York Times , February 14, 2018.
• Buchanan, Larry, and Lauren Leatherby, “Who Stops a ‘Bad Guy with a Gun’?” New York Times , June 22, 2022.
• Buggs, Shani A., Daniel W. Webster, and Cassandra K. Crifasi, “Using Synthetic Control Methodology to Estimate Effects of a Cure Violence Intervention in Baltimore, Maryland,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 28, No. 1, 2021.
• Buggs, Shani, and April M. Zeoli, “Gun Homicide Research: What We Know and Where We Need to Go,” Homicide Studies , Vol. 26, No. 1, 2022.
• Bui, Quoctrung, and Amanda Cox, "Surprising New Evidence Shows Bias in Police Use of Force but Not in Shootings," New York Times , July 11, 2016.
• Bukstein, O. G., D. A. Brent, J. A. Perper, G. Moritz, M. Baugher, J. Schweers, C. Roth, and L. Balach, “Risk Factors for Completed Suicide Among Adolescents with a Lifetime History of Substance Abuse: A Case-Control Study,” Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica , Vol. 88, No. 6, 1993.
• BulletPoints, “Our Mission,” webpage, last updated October 2020. As of December 6, 2021: https://www.bulletpointsproject.org/our-mission/
• Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, Crime Gun Trace Analysis Reports: The Illegal Youth Firearms Market in Seventeen Communities , U.S. Department of the Treasury, 1997.
• Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, Following the Gun: Enforcing Federal Laws Against Firearms Traffickers , Department of the Treasury, June 2000.
• Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, Crime Gun Trace Reports (2000): Memphis, Tennessee , U.S. Department of the Treasury, July 2002.
• Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, 2012 Summary: Firearms Reported Lost and Stolen , U.S. Department of Justice, 2013.
• Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, FFL Thefts/Losses: January 1, 2015–December 31, 2015 , U.S. Department of Justice, 2016a.
• Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Firearms Commerce in the United States: Annual Statistical Update 2016 , U.S. Department of Justice, 2016b.
• Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Annual Firearms Manufacturing and Export Report , U.S. Department of Justice, January 27, 2017.
• Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Firearms Commerce in the United States: Annual Statistical Update 2018 , U.S. Department of Justice, 2018.
• Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL) Theft/Loss Report: January 1, 2018–December 31, 2018 , U.S. Department of Justice, 2019.
• Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL) Theft/Loss Report: January 1, 2021–December 31, 2021 , U.S. Department of Justice, 2022.
• Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, “Fact Sheet—Facts and Figures for Fiscal Year 2018,” May 2019a. As of March 27, 2020: https://www.atf.gov/resource-center/fact-sheet/fact-sheet-facts-and-figures-fiscal-year-2018
• Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Firearms Commerce in the United States: Annual Statistical Update 2021 , U.S. Department of Justice, 2021.
• Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, National Firearms Commerce and Trafficking Assessment (NFCTA): Firearms in Commerce , U.S. Department of Justice, May 5, 2022a.
• Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Annual Firearms Manufacturers and Export Report (AFMER) Year 2021 , U.S. Department of Justice, January 20, 2023.
• Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL) Theft/Loss Report: January 1, 2022–December 31, 2022 , U.S. Department of Justice, 2023a.
• Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, National Firearms Commerce and Trafficking Assessment (NFCTA): Crime Guns—Volume Two Part V: Firearm Thefts , U.S. Department of Justice, 2023b.
• Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, "Firearms Trace Data—2022," webpage, October 11, 2023c. As of December 1, 2023: https://www.atf.gov/resource-center/firearms-trace-data-2022
• Bureau of Justice Statistics, “National Crime Statistics Exchange: Powering the Transition to NIBRS,” webpage, undated. As of September 6, 2019: https://www.bjs.gov/content/ncsx.cfm
• Bureau of Justice Statistics, “Data Collection: National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS),” webpage, 2017a. As of May 15, 2017: https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=dcdetail&iid=301
• Bureau of Justice Statistics, “NCVS Redesign: Subnational,” webpage, 2017b. As of May 15, 2017: https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=911
• Bureau of Justice Statistics, “LEARCAT: Law Enforcement Agency Reported Crime Analysis Tool,” Federal Bureau of Investigation, National Incident-Based Reporting System, last updated December 12, 2022. As of October 28, 2023: https://learcat.bjs.ojp.gov/AnalyticsOnDemand
• Burnham, Kenneth P., and David R. Anderson, “Multimodel Inference: Understanding AIC and BIC in Model Selection,” Sociological Methods and Research , Vol. 33, No. 2, 2004.
• Butkus, Renee, and Arlene Weissman, “Internists’ Attitudes Toward Prevention of Firearm Injury,” Annals of Internal Medicine , Vol. 160, No. 12, 2014.
• Butts, J. A., C. G. Roman, L. Bostwick, and J. R. Porter, “Cure Violence: A Public Health Model to Reduce Gun Violence,” Annual Review of Public Health , Vol. 36, 2015.
• Cabral, Marika, Bokyung Kim, Maya Rossin-Slater, Molly Schnell, and Hannes Schwandt, “Trauma at School: The Impacts of Shootings on Students' Human Capital and Economic Outcomes,” Working Paper No. 28311, National Bureau of Economic Research, May 2022.
• Cabrera, Joseph F., and Roy Kwon, “Income Inequality, Household Income, and Mass Shooting in the United States,” Frontiers in Public Health , Vol. 6, October 2018, article 294.
• Cai, Weiyi, and Jugal K. Patel, “A Half-Century of School Shootings Like Columbine, Sandy Hook and Parkland,” New York Times , May 11, 2019.
• Cai, Ziyi, Alvin Junus, Qingsong Chang, and Paul S. F. Yip, “The Lethality of Suicide Methods: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis,” Journal of Affective Disorders , Vol. 300, March 2022
• Cagle, M. Christine, and J. Michael Martinez, “Have Gun, Will Travel: The Dispute Between the CDC and the NRA on Firearm Violence as a Public Health Problem,” Politics & Policy , Vol. 32, No. 2, 2004.
• Cahill, Meagan, Melissa M. Labriola, and Jirka Taylor, Police Killings: Road Map of Research Priorities for Change , RAND Corporation, RR-A1525-1, 2021. As of March 11, 2024: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA1525-1.html
• Caldwell, B., “Criminalizing Day-to-Day Life: A Socio-Legal Critique of Gang Injunctions,” American Journal of Criminal Law , Vol. 37, No. 3, 2009.
• California Department of Justice, “General Notice of Firearm Prohibition and Power of Attorney for Firearms Relinquishment, Sale, or Transfer for Storage,” BOF 110, October 2015.
• California Department of Justice, Armed and Prohibited Persons System Report 2022: Annual Report to the Legislature , SB 94 Legislative Report, 2022.
• Callahan, Charles M., Frederick P. Rivara, and Thomas D. Koepsell, “Money for Guns: Evaluation of the Seattle Gun Buy-Back Program,” Public Health Reports , Vol. 109, No. 4, July–August 1994.
• Callahan, Molly, “The Story Behind the Data on Mass Murder in the United States,” Northeastern University, August 13, 2019.
• Callaway, Brantly, and Pedro H. C. Sant’Anna, “Difference-in-Differences with Multiple Time Periods,” Journal of Econometrics , Vol. 225, No. 2, December 2021.
• Cameron, A. Colin, Jonah B. Gelbach, and Douglas L. Miller, “Bootstrap-Based Improvements for Inference with Clustered Errors,” Review of Economics and Statistics , Vol. 90, No. 3, 2008.
• Cameron, A. Colin, and Pravin K. Trivedi, Microeconometrics: Methods and Applications , Cambridge University Press, 2005.
• Campbell Collaboration, Guidelines for Preparation of Review Protocols , Version 1.0, January 1, 2001.
• Campbell, Jacquelyn C., Nancy Glass, Phyllis W. Sharps, Kathryn Laughon, and Tina Bloom, “Intimate Partner Homicide: Review and Implications of Research and Policy,” Trauma, Violence, and Abuse , Vol. 8, No. 3, 2007.
• Campbell, J. C., D. Webster, J. Kozio-McLain, C. Block, D. Campbell, M. A. Curry, F. Gary, N. Glass, J. McFarlane, C. Sachs, P. Sharps, Y. Ulrich, S. A. Wilt, J. Manganello, X. Xu, J. Schollenberger, V. Frye, and K. Laughon, “Risk Factors for Femicide in Abusive Relationships: Results from a Multisite Case Control Study,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 93, No. 7, 2003.
• Campbell, Sean, and Daniel Nass, “The CDC’s Gun Injury Data Is Becoming Even Less Reliable,” FiveThirtyEight , March 11, 2019.
• Campbell, Sean, Daniel Nass, and Mai Nguyen, “The CDC Is Publishing Unreliable Data on Gun Injuries. People Are Using It Anyway,” FiveThirtyEight , October 4, 2018.
• Cantor, D., “Substantive Implications of Longitudinal Design Features: The National Crime Survey as a Case Study,” in D. Kasprzyk, G. Duncan, G. Kalton, and M. P. Singh, eds., Panel Surveys , John Wiley, 1989.
• Capellan, Joel Alfredo, and Alexei Anisin, “A Distinction Without a Difference? Examining the Causal Pathways Behind Ideologically Motivated Mass Public Shootings,” Homicide Studies , Vol. 22, No. 3, 2018.
• Capellan, Joel A., and SimonPeter Gomez, “Change and Stability in Offender, Behaviours, and Incident‐Level Characteristics of Mass Public Shootings in the United States, 1984–2015,” Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling , Vol. 15, No. 1, 2018.
• Capellan, Joel A., and Allan Y. Jiao, Deconstructing Mass Public Shootings: Exploring Opportunities for Intervention , Albany, N.Y.: Rockefeller Institute of Government, October 2019.
• Capellan, Joel A., Joseph Johnson, Jeremy R. Porter, and Christine Martin, “Disaggregating Mass Public Shootings: A Comparative Analysis of Disgruntled Employee, School, Ideologically Motivated, and Rampage Shooters,” Journal of Forensic Sciences , Vol. 64, No. 3, 2019.
• Carbone, Paul S., Conrad J. Clemens, and Thomas M. Ball, “Effectiveness of Gun-Safety Counseling and a Gun Lock Giveaway in a Hispanic Community,” Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine , Vol. 159, No. 11, 2005.
• Carey, Benedict, and Erica Goode, "Police Try to Lower Racial Bias, but Under Pressure, It Isn't So Easy," New York Times , July 11, 2016.
• Carpenter, James R., and Michael G. Kenward, Multiple Imputation and Its Application , John Wiley and Sons, 2012.
• Carpenter, Sandra, Kevin Borrup, and Brendan T. Campbell, “Gun Buyback Programs in the United States,” in Marie Crandall, Stephanie Bonne, Jennifer Bronson, and Woodie Kessel, ed., Why We Are Losing the War on Gun Violence in the United States , Springer, Cham, 2020.
• Carter, David L., Homicide Process Mapping: Best Practices for Increasing Homicide Clearances , Tallahassee, Fla.: Institute for Intergovernmental Research, 2013.
• Castillo-Carniglia, Alvaro, Rose M. C. Kagawa, Magdalena Cerdá, Cassandra K. Crifasi, Jon S. Vernick, Daniel W. Webster, and Garen J. Wintemute, “California’s Comprehensive Background Check and Misdemeanor Violence Prohibition Policies and Firearm Mortality,” Annals of Epidemiology , Vol. 30, February 2019.
• Castillo-Carniglia, Alvaro, Rose M. C. Kagawa, Daniel W. Webster, Jon S. Vernick, Magdalena Cerdá, and Garen J. Wintemute, “Comprehensive Background Check Policy and Firearm Background Checks in Three US States,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 24, No. 6, 2018.
• Castillo-Carniglia, Alvaro, Daniel W. Webster, and Garen J. Wintemute, “Effect on Background Checks of Newly-Enacted Comprehensive Background Check Policies in Oregon and Washington: A Synthetic Control Approach,” Injury Epidemiology , Vol. 6, No. 6, 2019.
• Cavanagh, J. T. O., A. J. Carson, M. Sharpe, and S. M. Lawrie, “Psychological Autopsy Studies of Suicide: A Systematic Review,” Psychological Medicine , Vol. 33, No. 3, 2003.
• Cavanaugh, Joseph E., “Unifying the Derivations for the Akaike and Corrected Akaike Information Criteria,” Statistics and Probability Letters , Vol. 33, No. 2, April 1997.
• Cave, Anthony, “Instead of Buying New Ammunition, These Gun Enthusiasts Recycle,” WAMU: American University Radio , March 5, 2019.
• CDC— See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, WONDER data system, undated. As of March 8, 2017: https://wonder.cdc.gov
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Underlying Cause of Death, 1999–2017,” WONDER data system, undated-a. As of July 6, 2019: https://wonder.cdc.gov/ucd-icd10.html
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Underlying Cause of Death, 1999–2020,” WONDER data system, undated-b. As of August 17, 2022: https://wonder.cdc.gov/ucd-icd10.html
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Underlying Cause of Death, 2018–2020, Single Race,” WONDER data system, undated-c. As of September 18, 2022: https://wonder.cdc.gov/ucd-icd10-expanded.html
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Multiple Cause of Death, 1999–2020,” WONDER data system, undated-d. As of March 12, 2024: https://wonder.cdc.gov/mcd-icd10.html
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Multiple Cause of Death, 2018–2021, Single Race,” WONDER data system, undated-e. As of March 12, 2024: https://wonder.cdc.gov/mcd-icd10-expanded.html
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Injury Counts and Rates,” WISQARS database, undated-f. As of February 9, 2024: https://wisqars.cdc.gov/reports/
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Multiple Cause of Death, 2018–2021, Single Race: Results,” WONDER data system, undated-g. As of December 27, 2023: https://wonder.cdc.gov/mcd-icd10-expanded.html
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “1993 and 2021 Youth Risk Behavior Survey Data,” dataset, undated-h. As of April 9, 2024: https://www.cdc.gov/yrbs
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Source of Firearms Used by Students in School-Associated Violent Deaths—United States, 1992–1999,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report , Vol. 50, No. 31, 2001.
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Nonfatal Injury Reports, 2001–2014,” WISQARS database, March 28, 2013. As of March 9, 2017: https://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/nfirates2001.html
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Fatal Injury Reports, National and Regional, 1999–2015,” WISQARS database, June 24, 2015. As of March 23, 2017: https://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate10_us.html
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Fatal Injury Reports, National, Regional, and State 1981–2015,” WISQARS database, 2017a. As of May 8, 2017: https://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate.html
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Leading Causes of Death Reports, National and Regional, 1999–2015,” WISQARS database, 2017b. As of May 10, 2017: https://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/leadcaus10_us.html
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Nonfatal Injury Reports: 2001–2014,” WISQARS database, 2017c. As of January 15, 2017: https://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/nfirates2001.html
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Fatal Injury Reports, National, Regional, and State, 1981–2017,” WISQARS database, 2019a. As of July 9, 2019: https://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/mortrate.html
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Nonfatal Injury Reports, 2000–2017,” WISQARS database, Atlanta, Ga., January 18, 2019b. As of July 26, 2019: https://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/nfirates.html
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “WISQARS: Web-Based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System,” web tool, last updated July 1, 2020. As of December 11, 2020: https://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Trends in the Prevalence of Suicide-Related Behaviors National YRBS: 1991–2019,” webpage, August 20, 2020a. As of February 16, 2024: https://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/data/yrbs/factsheets/2019_suicide_trend_yrbs.htm
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Funded Research [Violence Prevention],” webpage, last reviewed May 4, 2021. As of December 6, 2021: https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/firearms/funded-research.html
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Assault or Homicide,” webpage, January 5, 2022a. As of June 16, 2022: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/homicide.htm
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Fatal Injury Reports, National, Regional, and State, 1981–2020,” WISQARS database, 2022b. As of June 16, 2022: https://wisqars.cdc.gov/fatal-reports
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Nonfatal Injury Reports, 2000–2020,” WISQARS database, 2022c. As of June 16, 2022: https://wisqars.cdc.gov/nonfatal-reports
• Cesario, Joseph, David J. Johnson, and William Terrill, "Is There Evidence of Racial Disparity in Police Use of Deadly Force? Analyses of Officer-Involved Shootings in 2015–2016," Social Psychological and Personality Science , Vol. 10, No. 5, 2019.
• Chaloupka, Frank J., Lisa M. Powell, and Kenneth E. Warner, “The Use of Excise Taxes to Reduce Tobacco, Alcohol, and Sugary Beverage Consumption,” Annual Review of Public Health , Vol. 40, April 2019.
• Chaloupka, Frank J., Ayda Yurekli, and Geoffrey T. Fong, “Tobacco Taxes as a Tobacco Control Strategy,” Tobacco Control , Vol. 21, No. 2, 2012.
• Chang, Ailsa, “Why the AR-15 Is More Than Just a Gun,” NPR, June 24, 2013.
• Chapman, S., P. Alpers, K. Agho, and M. Jones, “Australia’s 1996 Gun Law Reforms: Faster Falls in Firearm Deaths, Firearm Suicides, and a Decade Without Mass Shootings,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 12, No. 6, 2006.
• Chapman, Simon, Philip Alpers, and Michael Jones, “Association Between Gun Law Reforms and Intentional Firearm Deaths in Australia, 1979–2013,” JAMA , Vol. 316, No. 3, 2016.
• Chapman, S., M. Stewart, P. Alpers, and M. Jones, “Fatal Firearm Incidents Before and After Australia’s 1996 National Firearms Agreement Banning Semiautomatic Rifles,” Annals of Internal Medicine , Vol. 169, No. 1, 2018.
• Charles, Camille Zubrinsky, "The Dynamics of Racial Residential Segregation," Annual Review of Sociology , Vol. 29, No. 1, 2003.
• Chaudri, V., and J. Geanakoplos, “A Note on the Economic Rationalization of Gun Control,” Economics Letters , Vol. 58, No. 1, 1998.
• Chauhan, P., M. Cerda, S. F. Messner, M. Tracy, K. Tardiff, and S. Galea, “Race/Ethnic-Specific Homicide Rates in New York City: Evaluating the Impact of Broken Windows Policing and Crack Cocaine Markets,” Homicide Studies , Vol. 15, No. 3, 2011.
• Cheng, Cheng, and Mark Hoekstra, “Does Strengthening Self-Defense Law Deter Crime or Escalate Violence? Evidence from Expansions to Castle Doctrine,” Journal of Human Resources , Vol. 48, No. 3, 2013.
• Cherney, Samantha, Andrew R. Morral, and Terry L. Schell, RAND State Firearm Law Database , RAND Corporation, TL-283-RC, 2018. As of March 2, 2018: https://www.rand.org/pubs/tools/TL283.html
• Cherney, Samantha, Andrew R. Morral, Terry L. Schell, and Sierra Smucker, RAND State Firearm Law Database , RAND Corporation, TL-283-1-RC, 2019. As of October 14, 2019: https://www.rand.org/pubs/tools/TL283-1.html
• Cherney, Samantha, Andrew R. Morral, Terry L. Schell, Sierra Smucker, and Emily Hoch, Development of the RAND State Firearm Law Database and Supporting Materials, RAND Corporation, TL-A243-2-v2, 2022. As of October 1, 2022: https://www.rand.org/pubs/tools/TLA243-2-v2.html
• Chernozhukov, Victor, Kaspar Wuthrich, and Yinchu Zhu, “A T-Test for Synthetic Controls,” arXiv, arXiv:1812.10820, version 7, July 6, 2022. As of January 8, 2024: https://arxiv.org/abs/1812.10820
• Chesney, Edward, Guy M. Goodwin, and Seena Fazel, “Risks of All‐Cause and Suicide Mortality in Mental Disorders: A Meta‐Review,” World Psychiatry , Vol. 13, No. 2, 2014.
• Chesnut, Kelsie Y., Melissa Barragan, Jason Gravel, Natalie A. Pifer, Keramet Reiter, Nicole Sherman, and George E. Tita, “Not an ‘Iron Pipeline,’ but Many Capillaries: Regulating Passive Transactions in Los Angeles’ Secondary, Illegal Gun Market,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 23, No. 4, 2017.
• Chetty, Raj, Adam Looney, and Kory Kroft, “Salience and Taxation: Theory and Evidence,” American Economic Review , Vol. 99, No. 4, 2009.
• Chien, L-C., and M. Gakh, “The Lagged Effect of State Gun Laws on the Reduction of State-Level Firearm Homicide Mortality in the United States from 1999 to 2017,” Public Health , Vol. 189, December 2020.
• Choe, J. Y., L. A. Teplin, and K. M. Abram, “Perpetration of Violence, Violent Victimization, and Severe Mental Illness: Balancing Public Health Outcomes,” Psychiatric Services , Vol. 59, No. 2, 2008.
• Clark, Tom S., Elisha Cohen, Adam N. Glynn, Michael Leo Owens, Anna Gunderson, and Kaylyn Jackson Schiff, "Are Policy Racially Biased in the Decision to Shoot?" Journal of Politics , Vol. 85, No. 3, July 2023.
• CNN, “Gun Buybacks Take Weapons Out of Circulation, But Experts Say There’s No Evidence the Programs Reduce Violence,” WTTW, April 18, 2022.
• Coben, J. H., C. A. Steiner, M. Barrett, C. T. Merrill, and D. Adamson, “Completeness of Cause of Injury Coding in Healthcare Administrative Databases in the United States,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 12, No. 3, 2001.
• Code of Federal Regulations, Title 27, Section 478.11, Meaning of Terms.
• Code of Federal Regulations, Title 27, Section 478.126a, Reporting Multiple Sales or Other Disposition of Pistols and Revolvers.
• Code of Federal Regulations, Title 28, Section 25.9, Retention and Destruction of Records in the System.
• Code of Federal Regulations, Title 38, Section 1.218, Security and Law Enforcement at VA Facilities.
• Code of Federal Regulations, Title 39, Section 232.1, Conduct on Postal Property.
• Cohen, Amy P., Deborah Azrael, and Matthew Miller, “Rate of Mass Shootings Has Tripled Since 2011, Harvard Research Shows,” Mother Jones , October 15, 2014.
• Cohn, D’Vera, Anna Brown, and Scott Keeter, “Most Adults Aware of 2020 Census and Ready to Respond, but Don’t Know Key Details,” blog post, Pew Research Center, February 20, 2020. As of December 7, 2022: https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2020/02/20/most-adults-aware-of-2020-census-and-ready-to-respond-but-dont-know-key-details/
• Cohn, Scott, “Remington Rifle Settlement, Including Free Trigger Replacement, Is Official,” CNBC, October 24, 2018.
• Cole, David, “Mandatory Firearms Training? What If We Had Mandatory Free Speech Training,” Ammoland: Shooting Sports News , June 13, 2014.
• Collazos, D., E. García, D. Mejía, D. Ortega, and S. Tobón, “Hot Spots Policing in a High Crime Environment: An Experimental Evaluation in Medellín,” Journal of Experimental Criminology , February 2020.
• Collins, T., R. Greenberg, M. Siegel, Z. Xuan, E. F. Rothman, S. W. Cronin, and D. Hemenway, “State Firearm Laws and Interstate Transfer of Guns in the USA, 2006–2016,” Journal of Urban Health , Vol. 95, No. 3, June 2018.
• Colorado Firearm Safety Coalition, “Gun Storage Map,” webpage, undated. As of December 7, 2021: https://coloradofirearmsafetycoalition.org/gun-storage-map/
• Colquhoun, D., “An Investigation of the False Discovery Rate and the Misinterpretation of p-Values,” Royal Society Open Science , Vol. 1, No. 3, 2014.
• Comer, Benjamin P., Eric J. Connolly, and Matthew B. Fuller, “An Examination of Texas K-12 Teachers’ Opinions on Teacher and Staff Gun Carrying,” Journal of School Violence , November 2023.
• Conley, Timothy G., and Christopher R. Taber, “Inference with ‘Difference in Differences’ with a Small Number of Policy Changes,” Review of Economics and Statistics , Vol. 93, No. 1, 2011.
• Conner, Andrew, Deborah Azrael, Vivian H. Lyons, Catherine Barber, and Matthew Miller, “Validating the National Violent Death Reporting System as a Source of Data on Fatal Shootings of Civilians by Law Enforcement Officers,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 109, No. 4, 2019.
• Conner, Andrew, Deborah Azrael, and Matthew Miller, “Suicide Case-Fatality Rates in the United States, 2007 to 2014: A Nationwide Population-Based Study,” Annals of Internal Medicine , Vol. 171, No. 12, 2019.
• Conner, Andrew, Deborah Azrael, and Matthew Miller, “Firearm Safety Discussions Between Clinicians and U.S. Adults Living in Households with Firearms: Results From a 2019 National Survey,” Annals of Internal Medicine , Vol. 174, No. 5, May 2021.
• Contorno, Steve, Leyla Santiago, and Denise Royal, “Florida’s Red Flag Law, Championed by Republicans, Is Taking Guns from Thousands of People,” CNN Politics, June 1, 2022.
• Conwell, Y., P. R. Duberstein, K. Connor, S. Eberly, C. Cox, and E. D. Caine, “Access to Firearms and Risk for Suicide in Middle-Aged and Older Adults,” American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry , Vol. 10, No. 4, 2002.
• Cook, Philip J., “The Saturday Night Special: An Assessment of Alternative Definitions from a Policy Perspective,” Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology , Vol. 72, No. 4, 1981.
• Cook, Philip J., “The Influence of Gun Availability on Violent Crime Patterns,” Crime and Justice , Vol. 4, 1983.
• Cook, Philip J., “The Case of the Missing Victims: Gunshot Woundings in the National Crime Survey,” Journal of Quantitative Criminology , Vol. 1, No. 1, March 1985.
• Cook, Philip J., “The Great American Gun War: Notes from Four Decades in the Trenches,” Crime and Justice , Vol. 42, No. 1, 2013.
• Cook, Philip J., “Gun Theft and Crime,” Journal of Urban Health , Vol. 95, No. 3, June 2018.
• Cook, Philip J., and Anthony A. Braga, “Comprehensive Firearms Tracing: Strategic and Investigative Uses of New Data on Firearms Markets,” Arizona Law Review , Vol. 43, No. 2, 2001.
• Cook, P. J., A. A. Braga, B. S. Turchan, and L. M. Barao, “Why Do Gun Murders Have a Higher Clearance Rate Than Gunshot Assaults?” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 18, No. 3, 2019.
• Cook, Philip J., and Kristin A. Goss, The Gun Debate: What Everyone Needs to Know , Oxford University Press, 2014.
• Cook, P. J., and J. A. Leitzel, “‘Perversity, Futility, Jeopardy’: An Economic Analysis of the Attack on Gun Control,” Law and Contemporary Problems , Vol. 59, No. 1, 1996.
• Cook, Philip J., and Jens Ludwig, Guns in America: Results of a Comprehensive National Survey on Firearms Ownership and Use , Police Foundation, 1996.
• Cook, Philip J., and Jens Ludwig, Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms: Research in Brief , National Institute of Justice, 1997.
• Cook, Philip J., and Jens Ludwig, “Defensive Gun Uses: New Evidence from a National Survey,” Journal of Quantitative Criminology , Vol. 14, No. 2, 1998.
• Cook, Philip J., and Jens Ludwig, “The Effect of the Brady Act on Gun Violence,” in B. Harcourt, ed., Guns, Crime, and Punishment in America , New York University Press, 2003.
• Cook, Philip J., and Jens Ludwig, “The Social Costs of Gun Ownership,” Journal of Public Economics , Vol. 90, No. 1–2, 2006.
• Cook, Philip J., and Jens Ludwig, “Aiming for Evidence-Based Gun Policy,” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management , Vol. 25, No. 3, 2006a.
• Cook, P. J., and J. Ludwig, “Policing Guns: Why Gun Violence Is Not (Just) a Public Health Problem,” Items: Insights from the Social Sciences , November 6, 2018.
• Cook, Philip J., J. Ludwig, and A. A. Braga, “Criminal Records of Homicide Offenders,” JAMA , Vol. 294, No. 5, 2005.
• Cook, Philip J., Jens Ludwig, and David Hemenway, “The Gun Debate’s New Mythical Number: How Many Defensive Uses Per Year?” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management , Vol. 16, No. 3, 1997.
• Cook, P. J., J. Ludwig, S. Venkatesh, and A. A. Braga, “Underground Gun Markets,” Economic Journal , Vol. 117, 2007.
• Cook, Philip J., Stephanie Molliconi, and Thomas B. Cole, “Regulating Gun Markets,” Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology , Vol. 86, No. 1, 1995.
• Cook, Philip J., Susan T. Parker, and Harold A. Pollack, “Sources of Guns to Dangerous People: What We Learn by Asking Them,” Preventive Medicine , Vol. 79, 2015.
• Cook, P. J., and H. A. Pollack, “Reducing Access to Guns by Violent Offenders,” presented at RSF Journal Conference: The Underground Gun Market, April 2016.
• Cook, Philip J., and Harold A. Pollack, “Reducing Access to Guns by Violent Offenders,” Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences , Vol. 3, No. 5, October 2017.
• Cook, Philip J., Harold A. Pollack, and Kailey White, Results of the Chicago Inmate Survey of Gun Access and Use , University of Chicago Crime Lab, January 2018.
• Cook, P. J., H. A. Pollack, and K. White, “The Last Link: From Gun Acquisition to Criminal Use,” Journal of Urban Health , Vol. 96, No. 5, 2019.
• Cook, Philip J., Ariadne E. Rivera-Aguirre, Magdalena Cerdá, and Garen Wintemute, “Constant Lethality of Gunshot Injuries from Firearm Assault: United States, 2003–2012,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 107, No. 8, 2017.
• Cooper, Alexia, and Erica L. Smith, Homicide Trends in the United States 1980–2008 , U.S. Department of Justice, November 2011.
• Cordner, G., and E. P. Biebel, “Problem‐Oriented Policing in Practice,” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 4, No. 2, 2005.
• Correll, Joshua, Sean M. Hudson, Steffanie Guillermo, and Debbie S. Ma, "The Police Officer's Dilemma: A Decade of Research on Racial Bias in the Decision to Shoot," Social and Personality Psychology Compass , Vol. 8, No. 5, 2014.
• Correll, Joshua, Bernadette Park, Charles M. Judd, and Bernd Wittenbrink, "The Police Officer's Dilemma: Using Ethnicity to Disambiguate Potentially Threatening Individuals," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , Vol. 83, No. 6, 2002.
• Corrigan, P. W., and A. C. Watson, “Findings from the National Comorbidity Survey on the Frequency of Violent Behavior in Individuals with Psychiatric Disorders,” Psychiatry Research , Vol. 136, 2005.
• Corsaro, N., “More Than Lightning in a Bottle and Far from Ready-Made,” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 17, No. 1, 2018.
• Cox, D. R., and E. J. Snell, Analysis of Binary Data , 2nd ed., Chapman and Hall, 1989.
• Cox, Georgina R., Christabel Owens, Jo Robinson, Angela Nicholas, Anne Lockley, Michelle Williamson, Yee Tak Derek Cheung, and Jane Pirkis, “Interventions to Reduce Suicides at Suicide Hotspots: A Systematic Review,” BMC Public Health , Vol. 13, 2013.
• Cox, William T. L., Patricia G. Devine, E. Ashby Plant, and Lauri L. Schwartz, "Toward a Comprehensive Understanding of Officers' Shooting Decisions: No Simple Answers to This Complex Problem," Basic and Applied Social Psychology , Vol. 36, No. 4, 2014.
• Crafton, R. Eliot, Jane G. Gravelle, and William J. Krouse, Guns, Excise Taxes, Wildlife Restoration, and the National Firearms Act , Congressional Research Service, R45123, March 5, 2018.
• Cramer, Clayton E., “Why the FBI’s Justifiable Homicide Statistics Are a Misleading Measure of Defensive Gun Use,” University of Florida Journal of Law and Public Policy , Vol. 27, 2016.
• Cramer, Clayton E., and David B. Kopel, “‘Shall Issue’: The New Wave of Concealed Handgun Permit Laws,” Tennessee Law Review , Vol. 62, No. 3, 2005.
• Crifasi, Cassandra K., Shani A. L. Buggs, Seema Choksy, and Daniel W. Webster, “The Initial Impact of Maryland’s Firearm Safety Act of 2013 on the Supply of Crime Handguns in Baltimore,” Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences , Vol. 3, No. 5, 2017.
• Crifasi, Cassandra K., Mitchell L. Doucette, Emma E. McGinty, Daniel W. Webster, and Colleen L. Barry, “Storage Practices of US Gun Owners in 2016,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 108, No. 4, 2018a.
• Crifasi, Cassandra K., Alexander D. McCourt, Marisa D. Booty, and Daniel W. Webster, “Policies to Prevent Illegal Acquisition of Firearms: Impacts on Diversions of Guns for Criminal Use, Violence, and Suicide,” Current Epidemiology Reports , Vol. 6, No. 2, 2019.
• Crifasi, Cassandra K., Molly Merrill-Francis, Alex McCourt, Jon S. Vernick, Garen J. Wintemute, and Daniel W. Webster, “Association Between Firearm Laws and Homicide in Urban Counties,” Journal of Urban Health , Vol. 95, No. 3, 2018b.
• Crifasi, C. K., J. S. Meyers, J. S. Vernick, and D. W. Webster, “Effects of Changes in Permit-to-Purchase Handgun Laws in Connecticut and Missouri on Suicide Rates,” Preventive Medicine , Vol. 79, 2015.
• Crifasi, Cassandra K., Keshia M. Pollack, and Daniel W. Webster, “Effects of State-Level Policy Changes on Homicide and Nonfatal Shootings of Law Enforcement Officers,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 22, No. 4, 2016.
• Crifasi, Cassandra K., Elizabeth M. Stone, Beth McGinty, Jon S. Vernick, Colleen L. Barry, and Daniel W. Webster, “Differences in Public Support for Handgun Purchaser Licensing,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 26, No. 1, 2020.
• Crifasi, Cassandra K., Julie A. Ward, Emma E. McGinty, Colleen L. Barry, and Daniel W. Webster, “Public Opinion on Laws Regulating Public Gun Carrying,” Preventive Medicine , Vol. 159, June 2022.
• Crime Prevention Research Center, “Updated: More Misleading Information from Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety on Guns: ‘Analysis of Recent Mass Shootings,’ Showing How Mass Public Shootings Keep Occurring in Gun-Free Zones,” September 1, 2014.
• Crime Prevention Research Center, “Updated: Mass Public Shootings Keep Occurring in Gun-Free Zones: 94% of Attacks Since 1950,” June 15, 2018a.
• Crime Prevention Research Center, “States That Allow Teachers and School Staff to Carry Guns,” October 9, 2018b.
• Criminal Justice Information Services Division, National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) Operations 2013 , U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2014.
• Criminal Justice Information Services Division, National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) Operations 2014 , U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2015.
• Criminal Justice Information Services Division, “National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) Section Active Records in the NICS Indices,” U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, December 31, 2016.
• Criminal Justice Information Services Division, “National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) Section: Active Records in the NICS Indices as of December 31, 2018,” U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, December 31, 2018.
• Criminal Justice Information Services Division, National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) Section: 2018 Operations Report , U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2019.
• Criminal Justice Information Services Division, National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) Section: 2019 Operations Report , U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2020.
• Criminal Justice Information Services Division, “National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) Section: Active Records in the NICS Indices as of December 31, 2021,” U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, December 31, 2021.
• Criminal Justice Information Services Division, National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) Section: 2020–2021 Operations Report , U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2022.
• Criminal Justice Information Services Division, National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) System 2022 Operational Report , U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2023.
• Criminal Justice Information Services Division, 2023.0 National Incident-Based Reporting System Technical Specification , U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, June 30, 2023a. As of March 15, 2024: https://le.fbi.gov/file-repository/nibrs-technical-specification-063023.pdf/view
• Criminal Justice Information Services Division, “Active Records in the NICS Indices as of January 3, 2023,” U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2023b.
• Croft, Michelle, Raeal Moore, and Gretchen Guffy, Creating Safe Schools: Examining Student Perceptions of Their Physical Safety at School , ACT Center for Equity in Learning, August 2019.
• Crosse, Marcia, Personal Firearms: Programs That Promote Safe Storage and Research on Their Effectiveness , U.S. Government Accountability Office, GAO-17-665, September 2017.
• Csere, M., State Comparison of Gun Permit Fees , Connecticut General Assembly, Office of Legislative Research, OLR Research Report 2013-R-0048, 2013.
• Cummings, P., D. C. Grossman, F. P. Rivara, and T. D. Koepsell, “State Gun Safe Storage Laws and Child Mortality Due to Firearms,” JAMA , Vol. 278, No. 13, 1997a.
• Cummings, P., T. D. Koepsell, D. C. Grossman, J. Savarino, and R. S. Thompson, “The Association Between the Purchase of a Handgun and Homicide or Suicide,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 87, No. 6, 1997b.
• Cumpston, Miranda, Toby Lasserson, Jacqueline Chandler, and Matthew J. Page, “Chapter III: Reporting the Review,” in Julian P. T. Higgins, James Thomas, Jacqueline Chandler, Miranda Cumpston, Tianjing Li, Matthew Page, and Vivian Welch, eds., Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions , Version 6.3, Cochrane Collaboration, February 2022.
• Cunningham, Scott, “Callaway and Sant’Anna DD Estimator: A Story of Differential Timing and Heterogeneity,” Scott’s Substack, March 8, 2021. As of August 21, 2022: https://causalinf.substack.com/p/callaway-and-santanna-dd-estimator
• Curtin, Sally C., Margaret Warner, and Holly Hedegaard, Suicide Rates for Females and Males by Race and Ethnicity: United States, 1999 and 2014 , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2016.
• Czyz, Ewa K., Adam G. Horwitz, Daniel Eisenberg, Anne Kramer, and Cheryl A. King, “Self-Reported Barriers to Professional Help Seeking Among College Students at Elevated Risk for Suicide,” Journal of American College Health , Vol. 61, No. 7, 2013.
• Dahlberg, L. L., R. M. Ikeda, and M. J. Kresnow, “Guns in the Home and Risk of a Violent Death in the Home: Findings from a National Study,” American Journal of Epidemiology , Vol. 160, No. 10, 2004.
• Daigle, M. S., “Suicide Prevention Through Means Restriction: Assessing the Risk of Substitution—A Critical Review,” Accident Analysis and Prevention , Vol. 37, 2005.
• Dalafave, Rachel, “An Empirical Assessment of Homicide and Suicide Outcomes with Red Flag Laws,” Loyola University Chicago Law Journal , Vol. 52, No. 3, 2021.
• D’Alessio, Stewart J., Lisa Stolzenberg, Rob T. Guerette, and Kristen M. Zgoba, “The Effect of Self-Defense Laws on Firearm Use Among Criminal Offenders,” Crime and Delinquency , Vol. 69, Nos. 13–14, December 2022.
• Dandekar, Anika, and Tenneth Fairclough II, “Voters Want Increased Gun Safety and Community Violence Intervention,” blog post, Data for Progress, August 8, 2022. As of December 7, 2022: https://www.dataforprogress.org/blog/2022/8/8/voters-want-increased-gun-safety-and-community-violence-intervention
• DeAngelis, Reed R., "Systemic Racism in Police Killings: New Evidence from the Mapping Police Violence Database, 2013–2021," Race and Justice , 2021.
• de Chaisemartin, Clément, and Xavier D’Haultfoeuille, “Two-Way Fixed Effects Estimators with Heterogeneous Treatment Effects,” American Economic Review , Vol. 110, No. 9, September 2020.
• de Jager, Elzerie, Eric Goralnick, Justin C. McCarty, Zain G. Hashmi, Molly P. Jarman, and Adil H. Haider, “Lethality of Civilian Active Shooter Incidents With and Without Semiautomatic Rifles in the United States,” JAMA , Vol. 320, No. 10, 2018.
• DeCicca, Philip, Donald Kenkel, and Feng Liu, “Excise Tax Avoidance: The Case of State Cigarette Taxes,” Journal of Health Economics , Vol. 32, No. 6, 2013.
• Degeling, M., and B. Berendt, “What Is Wrong About Robocops as Consultants? A Technology-Centric Critique of Predictive Policing,” AI and Society , Vol. 33, No. 3, 2018.
• Degli Esposti, Michelle, Douglas J. Wiebe, Antonio Gasparrini, and David K. Humphreys, “Analysis of ‘Stand Your Ground’ Self-Defense Laws and Statewide Rates of Homicides and Firearm Homicides,” JAMA Network Open , Vol. 5, No. 2, 2022.
• Degli Esposti, Michelle, Douglas Wiebe, Elinore Kaufman, and Carl Bonander, “Synthetic Control Methodology for Examining Firearm Policy,” Current Epidemiology Reports , Vol. 9, No. 3, 2022a.
• Deitsch, Matt, and Andrew Mangan, Gun Violence , Data for Progress, undated.
• Depew, Briggs, and Isaac Swensen, “The Decision to Carry: The Effect of Crime on Concealed-Carry Applications,” Journal of Human Resources , Vol. 54, No. 4, Fall 2019.
• Depew, Briggs, and Isaac Swensen, “The Effect of Concealed-Carry and Handgun Restrictions on Gun-Related Deaths: Evidence from the Sullivan Act of 1911,” Economic Journal , Vol. 132, No. 646, August 2022.
• Desai, R. A., D. Dausey, and R. A. Rosenheck, “Suicide Among Discharged Psychiatric Inpatients in the Department of Veterans Affairs,” Military Medicine , Vol. 173, No. 8, 2008.
• DeSimone, Jeff, and Sara Markowitz, The Effect of Child Access Prevention Laws on Non-Fatal Gun Injuries , National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper No. 11613, September 2005.
• DeSimone, J., S. Markowitz, and J. Xu, “Child Access Prevention Laws and Nonfatal Gun Injuries,” Southern Economic Journal , Vol. 80, No. 1, 2013.
• Desmarais, S. L., R. A. Van Dorn, K. L. Johnson, K. J. Grimm, K. S. Douglas, and M. S. Swartz, “Community Violence Perpetration and Victimization Among Adults with Mental Illness,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 104, 2014.
• Deverell, Erin, Misidentification of the Predominant Aggressor in Tasmania: Practitioner Perspectives from Engender Equality , Engender Equality, December 2022.
• Dezhbakhsh, Hashem, and Paul H. Rubin, “Lives Saved or Lives Lost? The Effects of Concealed-Handgun Laws on Crime,” American Economic Review , Vol. 88, No. 2, 1998.
• Diamond, Peter A., “Consumption Externalities and Imperfect Corrective Pricing,” Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science , Vol. 4, No. 2, 1973.
• Dickey, Jay, and Mark Rosenberg, “How to Protect Gun Rights While Reducing the Toll of Gun Violence,” Washington Post , December 25, 2015.
• Díez, Carolina, Rachel P. Kurland, Emily F. Rothman, Megan Bair-Merritt, Eric Fleegler, Ziming Xuan, Sandro Galea, Craig S. Ross, Bindu Kalesan, Kristin A. Goss, and Michael Siegel, “State Intimate Partner Violence–Related Firearm Laws and Intimate Partner Homicide Rates in the United States, 1991 to 2015,” Annals of Internal Medicine , Vol. 167, No. 8, 2017.
• DiMaggio, Charles, Jacob Avraham, Cherisse Berry, Marko Bukur, Justin Feldman, Michael Klein, Noor Shah, Manish Tandon, and Spiros Frangos, “Changes in US Mass Shooting Deaths Associated with the 1994–2004 Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Analysis of Open-Source Data,” Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery , Vol. 86, No. 1, January 2019.
• Diurba, Sofiya, Rachel L. Johnson, Bonnie J. Siry, Christopher E. Knoepke, Krithika Suresh, Scott A. Simpson, Deborah Azrael, Megan L. Ranney, Garen J. Wintemute, and Marian E. Betz, “Lethal Means Assessment and Counseling in the Emergency Department: Differences by Provider Type and Personal Home Firearms,” Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior , Vol. 50, No. 5, October 2020.
• Dixon, L., “Dual Diagnosis of Substance Use in Schizophrenia: Prevalence and Impact on Outcomes,” Schizophrenia Research , Vol. 35, Supp. 1, 1999.
• Donohue, John J., “The Impact of Concealed Carry Laws,” in Jens Ludwig and Philip J. Cook, eds., Evaluating Gun Policy: Effects on Crime and Violence , Brookings Institution Press, 2003.
• Donohue, John J., “Guns, Crime, and the Impact of State Right-to-Carry Laws,” Fordham Law Review , Vol. 73, No. 2, 2004.
• Donohue, John J., “Laws Facilitating Gun Carrying and Homicide,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 107, No. 12, 2017.
• Donohue, John J., “More Gun Carrying, More Violent Crime,” Econ Journal Watch , Vol. 15, No. 1, January 2018.
• Donohue, John J., Abhay Aneja, and Kyle D. Weber, Right-to-Carry Laws and Violent Crime: A Comprehensive Assessment Using Panel Data, the LASSO, and a State-Level Synthetic Controls Analysis , forthcoming.
• Donohue, John J., Abhay Aneja, and Kyle D. Weber, Right-to-Carry Laws and Violent Crime: A Comprehensive Assessment Using Panel Data and a State-Level Synthetic Control Analysis , Cambridge, Mass.: National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper No. 23510, November 2018.
• Donohue, John J., Abhay Aneja, and Kyle D. Weber, “Right-to-Carry Laws and Violent Crime: A Comprehensive Assessment Using Panel Data and a State-Level Synthetic Control Analysis,” Journal of Empirical Legal Studies , Vol. 16, No. 2, 2019.
• Donohue, John J., Samuel V. Cai, Matthew V. Bondy, and Philip J. Cook, More Guns, More Unintended Consequences: The Effects of Right-to-Carry on Criminal Behavior and Policing in US Cities , National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper No. 30190, June 2022.
• Donohue, John J., Samuel V. Cai, Matthew V. Bondy, and Philip J. Cook, Why Does Right-to-Carry Cause Violent Crime to Increase? National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper No. 30190, revised June 2023.
• Donohue, John J., Samuel V. Cai, and Arjun Ravi, "Age and Suicide Impulsivity: Evidence from Handgun Purchase Delay Laws," Working Paper No. 31917, National Bureau of Economic Research, November 2023.
• Donohue, John J., and Steven D. Levitt, “The Impact of Legalized Abortion on Crime,” Quarterly Journal of Economics , Vol. 116, No. 2, 2001.
• Doob, A. N., and C. M. Webster, “Sentence Severity and Crime: Accepting the Null Hypothesis,” Crime and Justice , Vol. 30, 2003.
• Donohue, John J., Alex Oktay, Amy L. Zhang, and Matthew Benavides, Does Defensive Gun Use Deter Crime? National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper No. 32108, February 2024.
• Doucette, Mitchell L., Cassandra K. Crifasi, and Shannon Frattaroli, “Right-to-Carry Laws and Firearm Workplace Homicides: A Longitudinal Analysis (1992–2017),” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 109, No. 12, 2019.
• Doucette, Mitchell L., Cassandra K. Crifasi, Alex D. McCourt, Julie A. Ward, Rebecca L. Fix, and Daniel W. Webster, “Deregulation of Public Civilian Gun Carrying and Violent Crimes: A Longitudinal Analysis 1981–2019,” Criminology and Public Policy , 2023.
• Doucette, Mitchell L., Christa Green, Jennifer Necci Dineen, David Shapiro, and Kerri M. Raissian, “Impact of ShotSpotter Technology on Firearm Homicides and Arrests Among Large Metropolitan Counties: A Longitudinal Analysis, 1999–2016,” Journal of Urban Health , Vol. 98, No. 5, October 2021.
• Doucette, Mitchell L., Alexander D. McCourt, Cassandra K. Crifasi, and Daniel W. Webster, “Impact of Changes to Concealed-Carry Weapons Laws on Fatal and Nonfatal Violent Crime, 1980–2019,” American Journal of Epidemiology , Vol. 192, No. 3, February 24, 2023a.
• Doucette, Mitchell L., Julie A. Ward, Alex D. McCourt, Daniel Webster, and Cassandra K. Crifasi, “Officer-Involved Shootings and Concealed Carry Weapons Permitting Laws: Analysis of Gun Violence Archive Data, 2014–2020,” Journal of Urban Health , Vol. 99, No. 3, 2022.
• Dow, Dawn Marie, "The Deadly Challenges of Raising African American Boys: Navigating the Controlling Images of the 'Thug,'" Gender and Society , Vol. 20, No. 2, 2016.
• Draper, Norman R., and Harry Smith, Applied Regression Analysis , 3rd ed., John Wiley and Sons, 1998.
• Duda, M. D., and K. C. Young, Factors Related to Hunting and Fishing Participation in the United States , Responsive Management, report for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Grant #14-48-0009-92-1252, 1993.
• Duggan, Mark, “More Guns, More Crime,” Journal of Political Economy , Vol. 109, No. 5, 2001.
• Duggan, Mark, “Guns and Suicide,” in Jens Ludwig and Philip J. Cook, eds., Evaluating Gun Policy: Effects on Crime and Violence , Brookings Institution Press, 2003.
• Duggan, Mark, Randi Hjalmarsson, and Brian A. Jacob, “The Short-Term and Localized Effect of Gun Shows: Evidence from California and Texas,” Review of Economics and Statistics , Vol. 93, No. 3, 2011.
• Duke, Aaron A., Kathryn M. Z. Smith, Lindsay M. S. Oberleitner, Alexander Westphal, and Sherry A. McKee, “Alcohol, Drugs, and Violence: A Meta-Meta-Analysis,” Psychology of Violence , Vol. 8, No. 2, 2018.
• Duncan, O. D., As Compared to What? Offensive and Defensive Gun Use Surveys, 1973–1994 , Rockville, Md.: National Institute of Justice, working paper 185056, 2000a.
• Duncan, O. D., “Gun Use Surveys: In Numbers We Trust?” Criminologist , Vol. 25, No. 1, 2000b.
• Durlauf, Steven N., and James J. Heckman, "An Empirical Analysis of Racial Differences in Police Use of Force: A Comment," Journal of Political Economy , Vol. 128, No. 10, October 2020.
• Durlauf, S. N., and D. S. Nagin, “Imprisonment and Crime: Can Both Be Reduced?” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 10, No. 1, 2011.
• Durlauf, Steven, Salvador Navarro, and David Rivers, “Model Uncertainty and the Effect of Shall-Issue Right-to-Carry Laws on Crime,” European Economic Review , Vol. 81, 2016.
• Duwe, Grant, “Body-Count Journalism: The Presentation of Mass Murder in the News Media,” Homicide Studies , Vol. 4, No. 4, 2000.
• Duwe, Grant, “The Patterns and Prevalence of Mass Murder in Twentieth-Century America,” Justice Quarterly , Vol. 21, No. 4, 2004.
• Duwe, Grant, “The Patterns and Prevalence of Mass Public Shootings in the United States, 1915–2013,” in Laura C. Wilson, ed., The Wiley Handbook of the Psychology of Mass Shootings , John Wiley and Sons, 2017.
• Duwe, Grant, “Patterns and Prevalence of Lethal Mass Violence,” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 19, No. 1, 2020.
• Duwe, Grant, Tomislav Kovandzic, and Carlisle E. Moody, “The Impact of Right-to-Carry Concealed Firearm Laws on Mass Public Shootings,” Homicide Studies , Vol. 6, No. 4, 2002.
• Eberhardt, Jennifer L., Valerie J. Purdie, Phillip Atiba Goff, and Paul G. Davies, "Seeing Black: Race, Crime, and Visual Processing," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , Vol. 87, No. 6, 2004.
• Eck, J. E., and W. Spelman, “Who Ya Gonna Call? The Police as Problem-Busters,” Crime and Delinquency , Vol. 33, No. 1, 1987.
• Edwards, Frank, Michael H. Esposito, and Hedwig Lee, "Risk of Police-Involved Death by Race/Ethnicity and Place, United States, 2012–2018," American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 108, No. 9, September 2018.
• Edwards, Griffin, Erik Nesson, Joshua J. Robinson, and Fredrick Vars, “Looking Down the Barrel of a Loaded Gun: The Effect of Mandatory Handgun Purchase Delays on Homicide and Suicide,” Economic Journal , Vol. 128, No. 616, 2018.
• Ehrlich, Isaac, and Tetsuya Saito, “Taxing Guns vs. Taxing Crime: An Application of the ‘Market for Offenses Model,’” Journal of Policy Modeling , Vol. 32, No. 5, 2010.
• Eitle, David, Stewart J. D'Alessio, and Lisa Stolzenberg, “The Effect of Organizational and Environmental Factors on Police Misconduct,” Police Quarterly , Vol. 17, No. 2, 2014.
• Elbogen, Eric B., and Sally C. Johnson, “The Intricate Link Between Violence and Mental Disorder: Results from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions,” Archives of General Psychiatry , Vol. 66, No. 2, February 2009.
• Elder, Randy W., Briana Lawrence, Aneeqah Ferguson, Timothy S. Naimi, Robert D. Brewer, Sajal K. Chattopadhyay, Traci L. Toomey, Jonathan E. Fielding, and Task Force on Community Preventive Services, “The Effectiveness of Tax Policy Interventions for Reducing Excessive Alcohol Consumption and Related Harms,” American Journal of Preventive Medicine , Vol. 38, No. 2, 2010.
• Elsass, H. Jaymi, Jaclyn Schildkraut, and Mark C. Stafford, “Studying School Shootings: Challenges and Considerations for Research,” American Journal of Criminal Justice , Vol. 41, No. 3, 2016.
• Engel, Amanda, “Just Under 50% of Emergency Risk Protection Order Requests Are Granted: Digging into Maryland Gun Protection Laws,” ABC Baltimore, May 26, 2022.
• Entman, Robert M., and Kimberly A. Gross, “Race to Judgment: Stereotyping Media and Criminal Defendants,” Law and Contemporary Problems , Vol. 71, No. 4, 2008.
• Epp, Charles R., Steven Maynard-Moody, and Donald Haider-Markel, Pulled Over: How Police Stops Define Race and Citizenship , University of Chicago Press, 2014.
• Ertl, Allison, Kameron J. Sheats, Emiko Petrosky, Carter J. Betz, Keming Yuan, and Katherine A. Fowler, “Surveillance for Violent Deaths—National Violent Death Reporting System, 32 States, 2016,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report Surveillance Summaries , Vol. 68, No. 9, 2019.
• Evans, William N., and Maciej H. Kotowski, “The Demand for Protection and the Persistently High Rates of Gun Violence Among Young Black Males,” National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper No. 29969, April 2022.
• Everett, Sherry A., James H. Price, Archie W. Bedell, and Susan K. Telljohann, “Family Practice Physicians’ Firearm Safety Counseling Beliefs and Behaviors,” Journal of Community Health , Vol. 22, No. 5, October 1997.
• Everytown for Gun Safety Action Fund, “Solutions: Secure Gun Storage,” webpage, undated. As of December 6, 2021: https://www.everytown.org/solutions/responsible-gun-storage/
• Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund, Shoot First: "Stand Your Ground" Laws and Their Effect on Violent Crime and the Criminal Justice System , 2013.
• Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund, Innocents Lost: A Year of Unintentional Child Gun Deaths , June 2014.
• Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund, Strategies for Reducing Gun Violence in American Cities , June 2016.
• Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund, “Be SMART,” webpage, 2017a. As of May 7, 2017: https://besmartforkids.org/
• Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund, “Mass Shootings in the United States: 2009–2016,” April 11, 2017b.
• Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund, “Mass Shootings in the United States: 2009–2017,” December 6, 2018. As of May 15, 2019: https://everytownresearch.org/reports/mass-shootings-analysis/
• Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund, "Ten Years of Mass Shootings in the United States: An Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund Analysis," November 21, 2019. As of June 22, 2020: https://everytownresearch.org/massshootingsreports/mass-shootings-in-america-2009-2019/
• Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund, Domestic Violence and Firearm Surrender in Rhode Island , November 2019a.
• Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund, “Mass Shootings in America,” webpage, November 21, 2020. As of August 31, 2022: https://everytownresearch.org/maps/mass-shootings-in-america/
• Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund, “Mass Shootings in the United States: 2009–2020,” webpage, June 4, 2021. As of August 18, 2022: https://everytownresearch.org/reports/mass-shootings-analysis/
• Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund, “Mass Shootings in the United States,” webpage, March 2023. As of October 22, 2023: https://everytownresearch.org/mass-shootings-in-america/
• Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund, Mayors Against Illegal Guns, and the National Urban League, Strategies for Reducing Gun Violence in American Cities , June 2016.
• Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund, National Education Association, and American Federation of Teachers, Keeping Our Schools Safe: A Plan to Stop Mass Shootings and End Gun Violence in American Schools , February 11, 2019.
• Families Afield, An Initiative for the Future of Hunting , 2010.
• Fay, Robert E., and Mamadou S. Diallo, Developmental Estimates of Subnational Crime Rates Based on the National Crime Victimization Survey , Westat, 2015.
• Fazel, Seena, Gautam G. Gulati, Louise Linsell, John R. Geddes, and Martin Grann, “Schizophrenia and Violence: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis,” PLoS Med , Vol. 6, No. 8, August 2009.
• FBI— See Federal Bureau of Investigation.
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “UCR Summary of Crime in the Nation, 2022,” Uniform Crime Reporting Program, undated.
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Arrests Table 41: Persons Under 15, 18, 21, and 25 Years of Age, 2022,” webpage, Crime Data Explorer: National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) tables, undated-a. As of October 28, 2023: https://cde.ucr.cjis.gov/LATEST/webapp/#/pages/downloads#nibrs-downloads
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Clearances," webpage, Crime in the United States 2013, 2012. As of April 2, 2020: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/clearances/clearancetopic_final
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, Crime in the United States: 2015 , Uniform Crime Reporting Program, 2016a. As of March 8, 2017: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2015/crime-in-the-u.s.-2015
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Crime in the United States 2015: Expanded Homicide Data Table 8,” webpage, 2016b. As of May 9, 2017: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2015/crime-in-the-u.s.-2015/tables/expanded_homicide_data_table_8_murder_victims_by_weapon_2011-2015.xls
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Crime in the United States 2015: Expanded Homicide Data Table 15,” webpage, 2016c. As of May 9, 2017: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2015/crime-in-the-u.s.-2015/tables/expanded_homicide_data_table_15_justifiable_homicide_by_weapon_private_citizen_2011-2015.xls
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Crime in the United States 2015: Expanded Homicide Data Table 28,” webpage, 2016d. As of May 9, 2017: https://ucr.fbi.gov/leoka/2015/tables/table_28_leos_fk_type_of_weapon_2006-2015.xls
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Crime in the United States 2015: Violent Crime,” U.S. Department of Justice, 2016e. As of May 8, 2017: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2015/crime-in-the-u.s.-2015/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/violent-crime/violentcrimemain_final.pdf
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Active Records in the NICS Index,” April 30, 2017. As of May 8, 2017: https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/active_records_in_the_nics-index.pdf/view
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Expanded Homicide,” webpage, Crime in the United States 2017, 2018a. As of August 1, 2019: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/topic-pages/expanded-homicide
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Expanded Homicide Data Table 8: Murder Victims, by Weapon, 2013–2017,” webpage, Crime in the United States 2017, 2018b. As of May 13, 2019: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8.xls
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Expanded Homicide Data Table 15: Justifiable Homicide, by Weapon, Private Citizen, 2013–2017,” webpage, Crime in the United States 2017, 2018c. As of May 13, 2019: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-15.xls
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Table 1: Crime in the United States, by Volume and Rate per 100,000 Inhabitants, 1998–2017,” webpage, Crime in the United States 2017, 2018d. As of August 1, 2019: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/tables/table-1
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Table 16: Rate: Number of Crimes Per 100,000 Inhabitants, by Population Group, 2017,” webpage, Crime in the United States 2017, 2018e. As of August 1, 2019: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2017/crime-in-the-u.s.-2017/tables/table-16
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, 30 Questions and Answers About NIBRS Transition , October 2018f.
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, Active Shooter Incidents in the United States in 2016 and 2017 , U.S. Department of Justice, April 2018g.
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Expanded Homicide Data Table 3: Murder Offenders, by Age, Sex, Race, and Ethnicity, 2018,” webpage, Crime in the United States 2018, 2019a. As of November 18, 2019: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2018/crime-in-the-u.s.-2018/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-3.xls
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Expanded Homicide Data Table 14: Justifiable Homicide, by Weapon, Law Enforcement, 2014–2018,” webpage, Crime in the United States 2018, 2019b. As of November 18, 2019: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2018/crime-in-the-u.s.-2018/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-14.xls
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Federal Denials: Reasons Why the NICS Section Denies,” webpage, 2019c. As of May 9, 2019: https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/federal_denials.pdf/view
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Table 28: Law Enforcement Officers Feloniously Killed, Type of Weapon, 2009–2018,” webpage, Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted, 2019d. As of May 13, 2019: https://ucr.fbi.gov/leoka/2018/tables/table-28.xls
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “2018 National Incident-Based Reporting System: Data Tables,” webpage, 2019e. As of June 19, 2020: https://ucr.fbi.gov/nibrs/2018/tables/data-tables
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Expanded Homicide,” webpage, Crime in the United States 2018, 2019f. As of June 19, 2020: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2018/crime-in-the-u.s.-2018/topic-pages/expanded-homicide
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, Active Shooter Incidents in the United States in 2018 , U.S. Department of Justice, April 2019g.
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, Active Shooter Incidents in the United States in 2019 , U.S. Department of Justice, April 2020.
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Expanded Homicide Data Table 10: Murder Circumstances, by Relationship, 2019,” webpage, Crime in the United States 2019, 2020a. As of August 17, 2022: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-10.xls
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Expanded Homicide Data Table 8: Murder Victims, by Weapon, 2015–2019,” webpage, Crime in the United States 2019, 2020b. As of August 31, 2022: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8.xls
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Expanded Homicide Data Table 15: Justifiable Homicide, by Weapon, Private Citizen, 2015–2019,” webpage, Crime in the United States 2019, 2020c. As of August 31, 2022: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-15.xls
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Table 28: Law Enforcement Officers Feloniously Killed, Type of Weapon, 2010–2019,” webpage, Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted, 2020d. As of August 31, 2022: https://ucr.fbi.gov/leoka/2019/tables/table-28.xls
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, "FBI Releases 2019 Participation Data for the National Use-of-Force Data Collection," press release, July 27, 2020e.
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Crime Data Explorer: Use-of-Force,” webpage, 2022a. As of August 18, 2022: https://crime-data-explorer.app.cloud.gov/pages/le/uof
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Table 1: Crime in the United States, by Volume and Rate per 100,000 Inhabitants, 2000–2019,” webpage, Crime in the United States 2019, 2022b. As of June 16, 2022: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/tables/table-1
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Federal Denials: Reasons Why the NICS Section Denies,” webpage, August 31, 2022c. As of August 17, 2022: https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/federal_denials.pdf/view
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Crime Data Explorer,” homepage, 2022d. As of September 7, 2022: https://cde.ucr.cjis.gov/LATEST/webapp/#/pages/home
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “UCR Program Quarterly: March 2022 (22-1),” March 2022e. As of March 15, 2024: https://le.fbi.gov/file-repository/ucr-program-quarterly-march-2022.pdf/view
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Expanded Homicide Data Table 8: Murder Victims, by Weapon, 2018–2022,” webpage, Crime in the United States 2022, 2023a. As of October 22, 2023: https://cde.ucr.cjis.gov/LATEST/webapp/#/pages/downloads
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Expanded Homicide Data Table 15: Justifiable Homicide, by Weapon, Private Citizen, 2018–2022,” webpage, Crime in the United States 2022, 2023b. As of October 22, 2022: https://cde.ucr.cjis.gov/LATEST/webapp/#/pages/downloads
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Expanded Homicide Data Table 3: Murder Offenders, by Age, Sex, Race, and Ethnicity, 2022,” webpage, Crime Data Explorer, Crime in the United States Annual Reports, Expanded Homicide Tables, 2023c.
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Table 28: Law Enforcement Officers Feloniously Killed, Type of Weapon, 2013–2022,” webpage, Law Enforcement Officers Killed and Assaulted, 2022, 2023d. As of October 22, 2023: https://cde.ucr.cjis.gov/LATEST/webapp/#/pages/downloads
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “FBI Releases 2022 Crime in the Nation Statistics,” press release, October 16, 2023e.
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Federal Denials: Reasons Why the NICS Section Denies,” webpage, August 31, 2023f. As of August 29, 2023: https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/federal_denials.pdf/view
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Expanded Homicide Data, Table 14: Justifiable Homicide, by Weapon, Law Enforcement, 2018–2022,” webpage, April 24, 2024a.
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Crime Data Explorer: NIBRS Estimates,” webpage, April 24, 2024b.
• Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Crime Data Explorer: National Use-of-Force Data Collection,” webpage, April 24, 2024c.
• Federal Commission on School Safety, Final Report of the Federal Commission on School Safety , U.S. Department of Education, U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and U.S. Department of Homeland Security, December 18, 2018.
• Ferguson, Monika, Kate Rhodes, Mark Loughhead, Heather McIntyre, and Nicholas Procter, “The Effectiveness of the Safety Planning Intervention for Adults Experiencing Suicide-Related Distress: A Systematic Review,” Archives of Suicide Research , April 29, 2021.
• Ferrazares, Toshio, Joseph J. Sabia, and D. Mark Anderson, “Have U.S. Gun Buyback Programs Misfired?” National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper No. 28763, July 2021.
• Finkelstein, Amy, “E-ZTAX: Tax Salience and Tax Rates,” Quarterly Journal of Economics , Vol. 124, No. 3, 2009.
• Firearms News, homepage, undated. As of January 13, 2021: https://www.firearmsnews.com
• Fjestad, S. P., Blue Book of Gun Values , 38th ed., Blue Book Publications, 2017.
• Flannery, Daniel J., James Alan Fox, Lacey Wallace, Edward Mulvey, and William Modzeleski, “Guns, School Shooters, and School Safety: What We Know and Directions for Change,” School Psychology Review , Vol. 50, Nos. 2–3, 2021.
• Fleischer, Victor, “Curb Your Enthusiasm for Pigovian Taxes,” Vanderbilt Law Review , Vol. 68, No. 6, 2015.
• Foley, Ryan J., and Larry Fenn, “Correction: Guns in School-Accidents Story,” Associated Press, May 7, 2018.
• Follman, Mark, Gavin Aronsen, and Deanna Pan, “U.S. Mass Shootings, 1982–2017: Data from Mother Jones ’ Investigation,” Mother Jones , June 14, 2017.
• Follman, Mark, Gavin Aronsen, and Deanna Pan, “US Mass Shootings, 1982–2019: Data from Mother Jones ’ Investigation,” Mother Jones , August 31, 2019.
• Follman, Mark, Gavin Aronsen, and Deanna Pan, “US Mass Shootings, 1982–2020: Data from Mother Jones’ Investigation,” Mother Jones , February 26, 2020.
• Follman, Mark, Gavin Aronsen, and Deanna Pan, “US Mass Shootings, 1982–2022: Data from Mother Jones’ Investigation,” Mother Jones , July 17, 2022.
• Fortunato, David, “Can Easing Concealed Carry Deter Crime?” Social Science Quarterly , Vol. 96, No. 4, December 2015.
• Fowler, Katherine A., Linda L. Dahlberg, Tadesse Haileyesus, Carmen Gutierrez, and Sarah Bacon, “Childhood Firearm Injuries in the United States,” Pediatrics , Vol. 140, No. 1, 2017.
• Fox, A. M., and K. J. Novak, “Collaborating to Reduce Violence: The Impact of Focused Deterrence in Kansas City,” Police Quarterly , Vol. 21, No. 3, 2018.
• Fox, James Alan, “Missing Data Problems in the SHR: Imputing Offender and Relationship Characteristics,” Homicide Studies , Vol. 8, No. 3, 2004.
• Fox, James Alan, Uniform Crime Reports (United States): Supplementary Homicide Reports, 1976–1994 , Northeastern University, College of Criminal Justice, January 18, 2006.
• Fox, James Alan, and Monica J. DeLateur, “Mass Shootings in America: Moving Beyond Newtown,” Homicide Studies , Vol. 18, No. 1, 2014.
• Fox, James A., and Emma E. Fridel, “The Tenuous Connections Involving Mass Shootings, Mental Illness, and Gun Laws,” Violence and Gender , Vol. 3, No. 1, 2016.
• Fox, James Alan, and Jack Levin, “Multiple Homicide: Patterns of Serial and Mass Murder,” Crime and Justice , Vol. 23, 1998.
• Fox, James A., and Jack Levin, Extreme Killing: Understanding Serial and Mass Murder , 3rd ed., Sage Publications, 2015.
• Fox, James Alan, and Marc L. Swatt, “Multiple Imputation of the Supplementary Homicide Reports, 1976–2005,” Journal of Quantitative Criminology , Vol. 25, No. 1, 2009.
• Frankel, Todd C., “One Roadblock to Arming Teachers: Insurance Companies,” Washington Post , May 26, 2018.
• Franklin, Joseph C., Jessica D. Ribeiro, Kathryn R. Fox, Kate H. Bentley, Evan M. Kleiman, Xieyining Huang, Katherine M. Musacchio, Adam C. Jaroszweski, Bernard P. Chang, and Matthew K. Nock, “Risk Factors for Suicidal Thoughts and Behaviors: A Meta-Analysis of 50 Years of Research,” Psychological Bulletin , Vol. 143, No. 2, 2017.
• Frattaroli, Shannon, Elise Omaki, Amy Molocznik, Adelyn Allchin, Renee Hopkins, Sandra Shanahan, and Anne Levinson, “Extreme Risk Protection Orders in King County, Washington: The Epidemiology of Dangerous Behaviors and an Intervention Response,” Injury Epidemiology , Vol. 7, No. 44, 2020.
• Frattaroli, Shannon, April M. Zeoli, and Daniel W. Webster, “Armed, Prohibited and Violent at Home: Implementation and Enforcement of Restrictions on Gun Possession by Domestic Violence Offenders in Four U.S. Localities,” Journal of Family Violence , Vol. 36, No. 5, 2021.
• Freed, L. H., D. W. Webster, J. J. Longwell, J. Carrese, and M. H. Wilson, “Factors Preventing Gun Acquisition and Carrying Among Incarcerated Adolescent Males,” JAMA Pediatrics , Vol. 155, 2001.
• Freedman, David A., “On the So-Called ‘Huber Sandwich Estimator’ and ‘Robust Standard Errors,’” American Statistician , Vol. 60, No. 4, 2006.
• French, B., and P. J. Heagerty, “Analysis of Longitudinal Data to Evaluate a Policy Change,” Statistics in Medicine , Vol. 27, No. 24, 2008.
• Fridel, Emma E., “A Multivariate Comparison of Family, Felony, and Public Mass Murders in the United States,” Journal of Interpersonal Violence , Vol. 36, No. 3–4, 2017.
• Fridel, Emma E., “Comparing the Impact of Household Gun Ownership and Concealed Carry Legislation on the Frequency of Mass Shootings and Firearms Homicide,” Justice Quarterly , Vol. 38, No. 5, 2021.
• Fridel, Emma E., “The Futility of Shooting Down Strawmen: A Response to Kleck (2020),” Justice Quarterly , Vol. 38, No. 5, 2021a.
• Fridel, Emma E., and James Alan Fox, “Gender Differences in Patterns and Trends in U.S. Homicide, 1976–2017,” Violence and Gender , Vol. 6, No. 1, 2019.
• Fryer, Roland G., Jr., “Reconciling Results on Racial Differences in Police Shootings,” AEA Papers and Proceedings , Vol. 108, May 2018.
• Fryer, Roland G., Jr., “An Empirical Analysis of Racial Differences in Police Use of Force,” Journal of Political Economy , Vol. 127, No. 3, June 2019.
• Funk, T. Markus, “Gun Control and Economic Discrimination: The Melting-Point Case-in-Point,” Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology , Vol. 85, No. 3, 1995.
• Gehrsitz, Markus, Henry Saffer, and Michael Grossman, The Effect of Changes in Alcohol Tax Differentials on Alcohol Consumption , National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper No. 27117, May 2020.
• Geller, Lisa B., Marisa Booty, and Cassandra K. Crifasi, “The Role of Domestic Violence in Fatal Mass Shootings in the United States, 2014–2019,” Injury Epidemiology , Vol. 8, No. 1, May 31, 2021.
• Gelman, Andrew, and John Carlin, “Beyond Power Calculations: Assessing Type S (Sign) and Type M (Magnitude) Errors,” Perspectives on Psychological Science , Vol. 9, No. 6, 2014.
• Gelman, Andrew, Jeffrey Fagan, and Alex Kiss, “An Analysis of the New York City Police Department's ‘Stop-and-Frisk’ Policy in the Context of Claims of Racial Bias,” Journal of the American Statistical Association , Vol. 102, No. 479, 2007.
• Gibbons, Charles E., Juan Carlos Suárez Serrato, and Michael B. Urbancic, “Broken or Fixed Effects?” Journal of Econometric Methods , Vol. 8, No. 1, 2019.
• Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, “Assault Weapons,” webpage, undated-a. As of October 18, 2017: https://lawcenter.giffords.org/gun-laws/policy-areas/hardware-ammunition/assault-weapons/
• Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, “Browse Gun Laws by State,” webpage, undated-b. As of November 10, 2017: https://lawcenter.giffords.org/search-gun-law-by-state/
• Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, “Categories of Prohibited People,” webpage, undated-c. As of October 18, 2017: https://lawcenter.giffords.org/gun-laws/policy-areas/who-can-have-a-gun/categories-of-prohibited-people/
• Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, “Guns in Schools,” webpage, undated-d. As of October 18, 2017: https://lawcenter.giffords.org/gun-laws/policy-areas/guns-in-public/guns-in-schools/
• Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, “Maintaining Records of Gun Sales,” webpage, undated-e. As of October 18, 2017: https://lawcenter.giffords.org/gun-laws/policy-areas/gun-sales/maintaining-records-of-gun-sales/
• Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, “‘Stand Your Ground’ Laws,” webpage, undated-f. As of October 18, 2017: https://lawcenter.giffords.org/gun-laws/policy-areas/guns-in-public/stand-your-ground-laws/
• Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, “Universal Background Checks,” webpage, undated-g. As of October 18, 2017: https://lawcenter.giffords.org/gun-laws/policy-areas/background-checks/universal-background-checks/
• Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, “Waiting Periods,” webpage, undated-h. As of October 18, 2017: https://lawcenter.giffords.org/gun-laws/policy-areas/gun-sales/waiting-periods/
• Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, "Location Restrictions," webpage, undated-i. As of January 27, 2020: https://lawcenter.giffords.org/gun-laws/policy-areas/guns-in-public/location-restrictions
• Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, “Child and Consumer Safety: Safe Storage,” webpage, undated-j. As of December 7, 2021: https://giffords.org/lawcenter/gun-laws/policy-areas/child-consumer-safety/safe-storage/
• Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, “Who Can Have a Gun: Firearm Relinquishment,” webpage, undated-k. As of November 16, 2023: https://giffords.org/lawcenter/gun-laws/policy-areas/who-can-have-a-gun/firearm-relinquishment/
• Gill, J. R., and M. Pasquale-Styles, “Firearm Deaths by Law Enforcement,” Journal of Forensic Science , Vol. 54, No. 1, 2009.
• Gilmour, Stuart, Kittima Wattanakamolkul, and Maaya Kita Sugai, “The Effect of the Australian National Firearms Agreement on Suicide and Homicide Mortality, 1978–2015,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 108, No. 11, November 2018.
• Ginwalla, Rashna, Peter Rhee, Randall Friese, Donald J. Green, Lynn Gries, Bellal Joseph, Narong Kulvatunyou, Dafney Lubin, Terence O’Keeffe, Gary Vercruysse, Julie Wynne, and Andrew Tang, “Repeal of the Concealed Weapons Law and Its Impact on Gun-Related Injuries and Deaths,” Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery , Vol. 76, No. 3, 2014.
• Gius, Mark, “An Examination of the Effects of Concealed Weapons Laws and Assault Weapons Bans on State-Level Murder Rates,” Applied Economics Letters , Vol. 21, No. 4, 2014.
• Gius, Mark, “The Effects of State and Federal Background Checks on State-Level Gun-Related Murder Rates,” Applied Economics , Vol. 47, No. 38, 2015a.
• Gius, Mark, “The Impact of Minimum Age and Child Access Prevention Laws on Firearm-Related Youth Suicides and Unintentional Deaths,” Social Science Journal , Vol. 52, No. 2, 2015b.
• Gius, Mark, “The Impact of State and Federal Assault Weapons Bans on Public Mass Shootings,” Applied Economics Letters , Vol. 22, No. 4, 2015c.
• Gius, Mark, “The Relationship Between Stand-Your-Ground Laws and Crime: A State-Level Analysis,” Social Science Journal , Vol. 53, No. 3, 2016.
• Gius, Mark, “Effects of Permit-to-Purchase Laws on State-Level Firearm Murder Rates,” Atlantic Economic Journal , Vol. 45, No. 1, 2017.
• Gius, Mark, “The Effects of State and Federal Gun Control Laws on School Shootings,” Applied Economics Letters , Vol. 25, No. 5, 2018.
• Gius, Mark, “Campus Crime and Concealed Carry Laws: Is Arming Students the Answer?” Social Science Journal , Vol. 56, No. 1, March 2019a.
• Gius, Mark, “Using the Synthetic Control Method to Determine the Effects of Concealed Carry Laws on State-Level Murder Rates,” International Review of Law and Economics , Vol. 57, March 2019b.
• Gius, Mark, “Examining the Impact of Child Access Prevention Laws on Youth Firearm Suicides Using the Synthetic Control Method,” International Review of Law and Economics , Vol. 63, September 2020a.
• Gius, Mark, “Using the Synthetic Control Method to Determine the Effects of Firearm Seizure Laws on State-Level Murder Rates,” Applied Economics Letters , Vol. 27, No. 21, 2020b.
• Glaeser, Edward L., and Spencer Glendon, “Who Owns Guns? Criminals, Victims, and the Culture of Violence,” American Economic Review , Vol. 88, No. 2, May 1998.
• Glatt, K. M., “Helpline: Suicide Prevention at a Suicide Site,” Suicide and Life Threatening Behavior , Vol. 17, 1987.
• Gleser, Leon J., and Ingram Olkin, “Stochastically Dependent Effect Sizes,” in Harris Cooper, Larry V. Hedges, and Jeffrey C. Valentine, eds., The Handbook of Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis , 2nd ed., Russell Sage Foundation, 2009.
• Gobaud, Ariana N., Ahuva L. Jacobowitz, Christina A. Mehranbod, Nadav L. Sprague, Charles C. Branas, and Christopher N. Morrison, “Place-Based Interventions and the Epidemiology of Violence Prevention,” Current Epidemiology Reports , Vol. 9, No. 4, December 2022a.
• Gobaud, Ariana N., Christina A. Mehranbod, Paul M. Reeping, Brady R. Bushover, and Christopher N. Morrison, “Firearm Assaults Against US Law Enforcement Officers in the Line-of-Duty: Associations with Firearm Ownership and State Firearm Laws,” Preventive Medicine Reports , Vol. 30, December 2022b.
• Gobaud, Ariana N., Christopher N. Morrison, Christina A. Mehranbod, and Mark H. Hoofnagle, “Gun Shows and Universal Background Check Laws Across State Lines,” Preventive Medicine , Vol. 165, Pt. A, December 2022c.
• Goel, Sharad, Justin M. Rao, and Ravi Shroff, “Precinct or Prejudice? Understanding Racial Disparities in New York City’s Stop-and-Frisk Policy,” Annals of Applied Statistics , Vol. 10, No. 1, March 2016.
• Goggins, Becki, and Anne Gallegos, State Progress in Record Reporting for Firearm-Related Background Checks: Mental Health Submissions , U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, February 2016.
• Gold, Sharon L., “Why Are Victims of Domestic Violence Still Dying at the Hands of Their Abusers? Filling the Gap in State Domestic Violence Gun Laws,” Kentucky Law Journal , Vol. 91, No. 4, 2003.
• Good, Phillip I., and James W. Hardin, Common Errors in Statistics (And How to Avoid Them) , 4th ed., John Wiley and Sons, 2012.
• Goodman-Bacon, Andrew, “Difference-in-Differences with Variation in Treatment Timing,” Journal of Econometrics , Vol. 225, No. 2, December 2021.
• Goolsbee, Austan, Michael F. Lovenheim, and Joel Slemrod, “Playing with Fire: Cigarettes, Taxes, and Competition from the Internet,” American Economic Journal: Economic Policy , Vol. 2, No. 1, 2010.
• Grambsch, P., “Regression to the Mean, Murder Rates, and Shall-Issue Laws,” American Statistician , Vol. 62, No. 4, 2008.
• Grant, Bridget F., Frederick S. Stinson, Deborah A. Dawson, S. Patricia Chou, Mary C. Dufour, Wilson Compton, Roger P. Pickering, and Kenneth Kaplan, “Prevalence and Co-Occurrence of Substance Use Disorders and Independent Mood and Anxiety Disorders: Results from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions,” Archives of General Psychiatry , Vol. 61, No. 8, 2004.
• Grassel, K. M., G. J. Wintemute, M. A. Wright, and M. P. Romero, “Association Between Handgun Purchase and Mortality from Firearm Injury,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 9, No. 1, 2003.
• Green, Jonathan, Rachelle N. Damle, Rebecca E. Kasper, Pina Violano, Mariann Manno, Pradeep P. Nazarey, Jeremy T. Aidlen, and Michael P. Hirsh, “Are ‘Goods for Guns’ Good for the Community? An Update of a Community Gun Buyback Program,” Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery , Vol. 83, No. 2, August 2017.
• Green, Maggie, “‘It’s a Pretty Small Effect’: Experts Say Gun Buyback Programs Don’t Reduce Violent Crime,” ABC11 Eyewitness News , September 22, 2022.
• Greenland, Sander, Mohammad Ali Mansournia, and Douglas G. Altman, “Sparse Data Bias: A Problem Hiding in Plain Sight,” BMJ , Vol. 353, 2016.
• Grene, Kathleen, Amani Dharani, and Michael Siegel, “Gun Owners’ Assessment of Gun Safety Policy: Their Underlying Principles and Detailed Opinions,” Injury Epidemiology , Vol. 10, 2023.
• Grinshteyn, Erin, and David Hemenway, “Violent Death Rates: The US Compared with Other High-Income OECD Countries, 2010,” American Journal of Medicine , Vol. 129, No. 3, March 2016.
• Grinshteyn, Erin, and David Hemenway, "Violent Death Rates in the U.S. Compared to Those of the Other High-Income Countries, 2015," Preventive Medicine , Vol. 123, June 2019.
• Groff, E. R., J. H. Ratcliffe, C. P. Haberman, E. T. Sorg, N. M. Joyce, and R. B. Taylor, “Does What Police Do at Hot Spots Matter? The Philadelphia Policing Tactics Experiment,” Criminology , Vol. 53, No. 1, 2015.
• Grogger, J., “The Effects of Civil Gang Injunctions on Reported Violent Crime: Evidence from Los Angeles County,” Journal of Law and Economics , Vol. 45, No. 1, 2002.
• Grogger, Jeffrey, and Greg Ridgeway, “Testing for Racial Profiling in Traffic Stops from Behind a Veil of Darkness,” Journal of the American Statistical Association , Vol. 101, No. 475, September 2006.
• Grossman, David C., Peter Cummings, Thomas D. Koepsell, Jean Marshall, Luann D’Ambrosio, Robert S. Thompson, and Chris Mack, “Firearm Safety Counseling in Primary Care Pediatrics: A Randomized, Controlled Trial,” Pediatrics , Vol. 106, No. 1, 2000.
• Grossman, D. C., B. A. Mueller, C. Riedy, M. D. Dowd, A. Villaveces, J. Prodzinski, J. Nakagawara, J. Howard, N. Thiersch, and R. Harruff, “Gun Storage Practices and Risk of Youth Suicide and Unintentional Firearm Injuries,” JAMA , Vol. 293, No. 6, 2005.
• Grossman, D. C., D. T. Reay, and S. A. Baker, “Self-Inflicted and Unintentional Firearm Injuries Among Children and Adolescents,” JAMA Pediatrics , Vol. 153, No. 8, 1999.
• Grossman, David C., Helen A. Stafford, Thomas D. Koepsell, Ryan Hill, Kyla D. Retzer, and Ward Jones, “Improving Firearm Storage in Alaska Native Villages: A Randomized Trial of Household Gun Cabinets,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 102, No. S2, 2012.
• Grossman, Richard S., and Stephen A. Lee, “May Issue Versus Shall Issue: Explaining the Pattern of Concealed-Carry Handgun Laws, 1960–2001,” Contemporary Economic Policy , Vol. 26, No. 2, 2008.
• Grunwald, B., and A. V. Papachristos, “Project Safe Neighborhoods in Chicago: Looking Back a Decade Later,” Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology , Vol. 107, No. 1, 2017.
• GSS Data Explorer, “General Social Survey, 1972–2024,” dataset, undated. As of April 24, 2024: https://gssdataexplorer.norc.org/
• Gu, Jackie, “Deadliest Mass Shootings Are Often Preceded by Violence at Home,” Bloomberg News , June 30, 2020.
• Guettabi, Mouhcine, and Abdul Munasib, “Stand Your Ground Laws, Homicides and Gun Deaths,” Regional Studies , Vol. 52, No. 9, 2018.
• Gun Violence Archive, homepage, undated-a. As of June 26, 2020: https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/
• Gun Violence Archive, “Mass Shootings,” webpage, undated-b. As of October 25, 2017: https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/reports/mass-shooting
• Gun Violence Archive, “Past Summary Ledgers,” webpage, updated August 18, 2022. As of August 18, 2022: https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/past-tolls/
• Hahn, Robert A., Oleg Bilukha, Alex Crosby, Mindy T. Fullilove, Akiva Liberman, Eve Moscicki, Susan Snyder, Farris Tuma, and Peter A. Briss, “Firearms Laws and the Reduction of Violence: A Systematic Review,” American Journal of Preventive Medicine , Vol. 28, No. 2, 2005.
• Halsey, Lewis G., Douglas Curran-Everett, Sarah L. Vowler, and Gordon B. Drummond, “The Fickle P Value Generates Irreproducible Results,” Nature Methods , Vol. 12, No. 3, March 2015.
• Hamill, Mark E., Matthew C. Hernandez, Kent R. Bailey, Martin D. Zielinski, Miguel A. Matos, and Henry J. Schiller, “State Level Firearm Concealed-Carry Legislation and Rates of Homicide and Other Violent Crime,” Journal of the American College of Surgeons , Vol. 228, No. 1, 2019.
• Hamlin, Daniel, “Are Gun Ownership Rates and Regulations Associated with Firearm Incidents in American Schools? A Forty-Year Analysis (1980–2019),” Journal of Criminal Justice , Vol. 76, September–October 2021.
• Hanlon, Thomas J., Catherine Barber, Deborah Azrael, and Matthew Miller, “Type of Firearm Used in Suicides: Findings from 13 States in the National Violent Death Reporting System, 2005–2015,” Journal of Adolescent Health , Vol. 65, No. 3, 2019.
• Hanson, Emily J., NIBRS Participation Rates and Federal Crime Data Quality , Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service, May 24, 2022.
• Harlow, Caroline Wolf, Survey of Inmates in State and Federal Correctional Facilities: Firearm Use by Offenders , U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, NCJ 189369, November 2001.
• Harrell, Erika, Crime Against Persons with Disabilities, 2009–2015—Statistical Tables , U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, NCJ 250632, 2017.
• Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Means Matter, “Gun Shop Project,” webpage, undated. As of December 6, 2021: https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/means-matter/gun-shop-project/
• Hasegawa, Raiden B., Daniel W. Webster, and Dylan S. Small, “Evaluating Missouri’s Handgun Purchaser Law: A Bracketing Method for Addressing Concerns About History Interacting with Group,” Epidemiology , Vol. 30, No. 3, May 2019.
• Hazeltine, Max D., Jonathan Green, Muriel A. Cleary, Jeremy T. Aidlen, and Michael P. Hirsh, “A Review of Gun Buybacks,” Current Trauma Reports , Vol. 5, No. 4, December 1, 2019.
• HCUPnet: Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project, web tool, undated. As of October 18, 2019: https://hcupnet.ahrq.gov
• Healey, Jon, “California Opens the Door to Suing Gun Makers. Here’s What the New Law Does,” Los Angeles Times , July 13, 2022.
• Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project, “Why the NIS Should Not Be Used to Make State-Level Estimates,” webpage, January 5, 2016. As of August 2, 2023: https://hcup-us.ahrq.gov/db/nation/nis/nis_statelevelestimates.jsp
• Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Fast Stats, “Opioid-Related Hospital Use,” web tool, April 2019. As of November 14, 2019: https://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/faststats/OpioidUseServlet
• Hedegaard, Holly, Sally C. Curtin, and Margaret Warner, “Suicide Mortality in the United States, 1999–2017,” National Center for Health Statistics Data Brief, No. 330, November 2018.
• Hedegaard, Holly, Michael Schoenbaum, Cynthia Claassen, Alex Crosby, Kristin Holland, and Scott Proescholdbell, “Issues in Developing a Surveillance Case Definition for Nonfatal Suicide Attempt and Intentional Self-Harm Using International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) Coded Data,” National Health Statistics Reports , Vol. 108, February 2018.
• Helland, E., and A. Tabarrok, “Using Placebo Laws to Test ‘More Guns, Less Crime,’” Advances in Economic Analysis and Policy , Vol. 4, No. 1, 2004.
• Hemenway, David, “Survey Research and Self-Defense Gun Use: An Explanation of Extreme Overestimates,” Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology , Vol. 87, No. 4, 1997.
• Hemenway, David, and Deborah Azrael, “The Relative Frequency of Offensive and Defensive Gun Uses: Results from a National Survey,” Violence and Victims , Vol. 15, No. 3, 2000.
• Hemenway, David, Deborah Azrael, Andrew Conner, and Matthew Miller, “Variation in Rates of Fatal Police Shootings Across U.S. States: The Role of Firearm Availability,” Journal of Urban Health , Vol. 96, No. 1, 2019a.
• Hemenway, David, Deborah Azrael, and Matthew Miller, “Gun Use in the United States: Results from Two National Surveys,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 6, No. 4, 2000.
• Hemenway, David, Deborah Azrael, and Matthew Miller, “Whose Guns Are Stolen? The Epidemiology of Gun Theft Victims,” Injury Epidemiology , Vol. 4, No. 1, 2017.
• Hemenway, David, Steven Rausher, Pina Violano, Toby A. Raybould, and Catherine W. Barber, “Firearms Training: What Is Actually Taught?” Injury Prevention , Vol. 25, No. 2, 2019b.
• Hemenway, David, Chloe Shawah, and Elizabeth Lites, “Defensive Gun Use: What Can We Learn from News Reports?” Injury Epidemiology , Vol. 9, No. 19, 2022.
• Hemenway, David, and Sara J. Solnick, “Children and Unintentional Firearm Death,” Injury Epidemiology , Vol. 2, No. 26, 2015a.
• Hemenway, David, and Sara J. Solnick, “The Epidemiology of Self-Defense Gun Use: Evidence from the National Crime Victimization Surveys 2007–2011,” Preventive Medicine, Vol. 79, 2015b.
• Hemenway, David, Sara J. Solnick, and Deborah R. Azrael, “Firearm Training and Storage,” JAMA , Vol. 273, No. 1, 1995.
• Hempstead, Katherine, and Antonio Rodríguez Andrés, Gun Control and Suicide: The Impact of State Firearm Regulations, 1995–2004 , Institute for Advanced Development Studies, Development Research Working Paper No. 17/2009, December 2009.
• Hennigan, K. M., and D. Sloane, “Improving Civil Gang Injunctions: How Implementation Can Affect Gang Dynamics, Crime, and Violence,” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 12, No. 1, 2013.
• Hepburn, Lisa, Deborah Azrael, and Matthew Miller, “Firearm Background Checks in States With and Without Background Check Laws,” American Journal of Preventive Medicine , Vol. 62, No. 2, 2022.
• Hepburn, L., D. Azrael, M. Miller, and D. Hemenway, “The Effect of Child Access Prevention Laws on Unintentional Child Firearm Fatalities, 1979–2000,” Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care , Vol. 61, No. 2, 2006.
• Hepburn, Lisa, Matthew Miller, Deborah Azrael, and David Hemenway, “The Effect of Nondiscretionary Concealed Weapon Carrying Laws on Homicide,” Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care , Vol. 56, No. 3, 2004.
• Hernandez, Elizabeth, “At Least 30 Colorado School Districts and Charter Schools Allow Teachers to Carry Guns, but No Statewide Training Standards Regulate Them,” Denver Post , July 8, 2018.
• Higgins, Julian P. T., and Sally Green, eds., Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions , Version 5.1.0, Cochrane Collaboration, March 2011.
• Hines, James R., Jr., “Taxing Consumption and Other Sins,” Journal of Economic Perspectives , Vol. 21, No. 1, 2007.
• Hipple, N. K., E. F. McGarrell, M. O’Brien, and B. M. Huebner, “Gun Crime Incident Reviews as a Strategy for Enhancing Problem Solving and Information Sharing,” Journal of Crime and Justice , Vol. 40, No. 1, 2017.
• Hodur, Nancy M., F. Larry Leistritz, and Kara L. Wolfe, “Developing the Nature-Based Tourism Sector in Southwestern North Dakota,” Great Plains Research: A Journal of Natural and Social Sciences , Vol. 18, Spring 2008.
• Hoekstra, Mark, and CarlyWill Sloan, “Does Race Matter for Police Use of Force? Evidence from 911 Calls,” American Economic Review , Vol. 112, No. 3, March 2022.
• Hoffman, Steven J., and Charlie Tan, “Overview of Systematic Reviews on the Health-Related Effects of Government Tobacco Control Policies,” BMC Public Health , Vol. 15, No. 1, 2015.
• Hoke, Janna, “GRPD Shares Photos of Nearly 300 Guns Collected at Gun Buyback Event,” WGRD 97.9, September 20, 2022.
• Hollo, Ashley, Amy VanderStoep, and Shannon Frattaroli, “Physicians’ Perspectives on Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs) in the Clinical Setting: Challenges and Opportunities for Gun Violence Prevention,” PLoS One , Vol. 17, No. 9, September 13, 2022.
• Homer, Michelle, and Gerald Harris, “Houston Will Host Another Gun Buyback Event Next Month with Some Changes,” KHOU11 , September 26, 2022.
• Hoops, Katherine E. M., Emily Hernandez, Susan Ziegfeld, Isam Nasr, and Cassandra Crifasi, “Evaluating the Use of a Pamphlet as an Educational Tool to Improve Safe Firearm Storage in the Home,” Clinical Pediatrics , Vol. 60, No. 1, January 2021.
• Horman, B. Gil, “6 Ways to Safely Store Your Firearms,” NRA Family, webpage, October 13, 2021. As of December 6, 2021: https://www.nrafamily.org/articles/2021/10/13/6-ways-to-safely-store-your-firearms
• Horn, Dara L., Elissa K. Butler, Jessica L. Stahl, Ali Rowhani-Rahbar, and Alyson J. Littman, “A Multi-State Evaluation of the Association Between Mental Health and Firearm Storage Practices,” Preventive Medicine , Vol. 145, April 2021.
• Horowitz, Juliana Menasce, Anna Brown, and Kiana Cox, Race in America 2019 , Pew Research Center, April 9, 2019.
• Hoskin, Anthony, “Household Gun Prevalence and Rates of Violent Crime: A Test of Competing Gun Theories,” Criminal Justice Studies , Vol. 24, No. 1, 2011.
• Houtsma, Claire, Jeffrey Powers, Amanda M. Raines, Matthew Bailey, Catherine Barber, and Gala True, “Engaging Stakeholders to Develop a Suicide Prevention Learning Module for Louisiana Firearm Training Courses,” Injury Epidemiology , Vol. 10, 2023.
• Hoyt, L., and D. Gopal‐Agge, “The Business Improvement District Model: A Balanced Review of Contemporary Debates,” Geography Compass , Vol. 1, No. 4, 2007.
• Hudak, Lauren, Henry Schwimmer, Wiliam Warnock, Sarah Kilborn, Tim Moran, Jeremy Ackerman, and Jonathan Rupp, “Patient Characteristics and Perspectives of Firearm Safety Discussions in the Emergency Department,” Western Journal of Emergency Medicine , Vol. 22, No. 3, May 19, 2021.
• Huff‐Corzine, Lin, and Jay Corzine, “The Devil’s in the Details: Measuring Mass Violence,” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 19, No. 1, 2020.
• Huff-Corzine, Lin, James C. McCutcheon, Jay Corzine, John P. Jarvis, Melissa J. Tetzlaff-Bemiller, Mindy Weller, and Matt Landon, “Shooting for Accuracy: Comparing Data Sources on Mass Murder,” Homicide Studies , Vol. 18, No. 1, 2014.
• Hughes, Karen, Mark A. Bellis, Lisa Jones, Sara Wood, Geoff Bates, Lindsay Eckley, Ellie McCoy, Christopher Mikton, Tom Shakespeare, and Alana Officer, “Prevalence and Risk of Violence Against Adults with Disabilities: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies,” Lancet , Vol. 379, 2012.
• Hullenaar, Keith L., Ali Rowhani-Rahbar, Erin R. Morgan, Chelsea D. Hicks, and Frederick P. Rivara, “Mental Health Comorbidities, Household Firearm Ownership, and Firearm Access Among Children,” Pediatrics , Vol. 151, No. 6, June 1, 2023.
• Humphreys, David K., Antonio Gasparrini, and Douglas J. Wiebe, “Evaluating the Impact of Florida’s ‘Stand Your Ground’ Self-Defense Law on Homicide and Suicide by Firearm: An Interrupted Time Series Study,” JAMA Internal Medicine , Vol. 177, No. 1, 2017.
• Hünermund, Paul, and Beyers Louw, “On the Nuisance of Control Variables in Regression Analysis,” Organizational Research Methods , December 25, 2023, online ahead of print.
• Hunter Ed, “Storing Your Firearm,” webpage, undated. As of December 6, 2021: https://www.hunter-ed.com/national/studyGuide/Storing-Your-Firearm/201099_92868
• Hureau, David M., and Anthony A. Braga, “The Trade in Tools: The Market for Illicit Guns in High-Risk Networks,” Criminology , Vol. 56, No. 3, 2018.
• Hurst, Kiley, "About a Third of K–12 Parents Are Very or Extremely Worried a Shooting Could Happen at Their Children's School," Pew Research Center, October 18, 2022.
• IBISWorld, Guns and Ammunition Manufacturing in the U.S.: Market Research Report , August 2016.
• Ilgen, M. A., K. Zivin, R. J. McCammon, and M. Valenstein, “Mental Illness, Previous Suicidality, and Access to Guns in the United States,” Psychiatric Services , Vol. 59, No. 2, 2008.
• Imai, Kosuke, and In Song Kim, “On the Use of Two-Way Fixed Effects Regression Models for Causal Inference with Panel Data,” Political Analysis , Vol. 29, No. 3, July 2021.
• Imbens, Guido W., and Donald B. Rubin, Causal Inference in Statistics, Social, and Biomedical Sciences: An Introduction , Cambridge University Press, 2015.
• Institute of Medicine, Finding What Works in Health Care: Standards for Systematic Reviews , National Academies Press, 2011.
• Ivey, Kay, Governor, “Memorandum: Implementation of the Alabama Sentry Program and the School Safety Training and Compliance Teams,” State of Alabama, May 30, 2018.
• Ivey-Stephenson, Asha Z., Alex E. Crosby, Jennifer M. Hoenig, Shiromani Gyawali, Eunice Park-Lee, and Sarra L. Hedden, “Suicidal Thoughts and Behaviors Among Adults Aged ≥18 Years—United States, 2015–2019,” MMWR Surveillance Summary , Vol. 71, No. 1, 2022.
• Jackman, Tom, “FBI May Shut Down Police Use-of-Force Database Due to Lack of Police Participation,” Washington Post , December 9, 2021.
• Jackson, Brian A., Melissa Kay Diliberti, Pauline Moore, and Heather L. Schwartz, Teachers' Views on School Safety: Consensus on Many Security Measures, But Stark Division About Arming Teachers , RAND Corporation, RR-A2641-1, 2023. As of April 3, 2024: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA2641-1.html
• Jagodič, Helena Korošec, Tatjana Rokavec, Mark Agius, and Peter Pregelj, “Availability of Mental Health Service Providers and Suicide Rates in Slovenia: A Nationwide Ecological Study,” Croatian Medical Journal , Vol. 54, No. 5, 2013.
• Jahn, Jaquelyn L., Dougie Zubizarreta, Jarvis T. Chen, Belinda L. Needham, Goleen Samari, Alecia J. McGregor, Megan Daugherty Douglas, S. Bryn Austin, and Madina Agénor, “Legislating Inequity: Structural Racism in Groups of State Laws and Associations with Premature Mortality Rates,” Health Affairs , Vol. 42, No. 10, October 2023.
• James, Lois, “The Stability of Implicit Racial Bias in Police Officers,” Police Quarterly , Vol. 21, No. 1, March 2018.
• James, Lois, Stephen M. James, and Bryan J. Vila, “The Reverse Racism Effect: Are Cops More Hesitant to Shoot Black Than White Suspects?” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 15, No. 2, May 2016.
• James, N., Recent Violent Crime Trends in the United States , Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service, R45236, 2018.
• Jenkins, Jennifer, Monika Mathur, John Muyskens, Razzan Nakhlawi, Steven Rich, and Andrew Ba Tran, “Fatal Force,” Washington Post , updated February 9, 2024.
• Jennissen, Charles A., Kristel M. Wetjen, Cole C. Wymore, Nicholas R. Stange, Gerene M. Denning, Junlin Liao, and Kelly E. Wood, “Firearm Exposure and Storage Practices in the Homes of Rural Adolescents,” Western Journal of Emergency Medicine , Vol. 22, No. 3, May 19, 2021.
• Jeyaraman, Maya M., Rasheda Rabbani, Leslie Copstein, Reid C. Robson, Nameer Al-Yousif, Michelle Pollock, Jun Xia, Chakrapani Balijepali, Kimberly Hofer, Samer Mansour, Mir S. Fazeli, Mohammed T. Ansari, Andrea C. Tricco, and Ahmed M. Abou-Setta, “Methodologically Rigorous Risk of Bias Tools for Nonrandomized Studies Had Low Reliability and High Evaluator Burden,” Journal of Clinical Epidemiology , Vol. 128, December 2020.
• Joe, S., S. C. Marcus, and M. S. Kaplan, “Racial Differences in the Characteristics of Firearm Suicide Decedents in the United States,” American Journal of Orthopsychiatry , Vol. 77, No. 1, 2007.
• John Jay College Research Advisory Group on Preventing and Reducing Community Violence, Reducing Violence Without Police: A Review of Research Evidence , Research and Evaluation Center, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, City University of New York, November 2020.
• Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions, A Year in Review: 2020 Gun Deaths in the U.S. , Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, April 28, 2022.
• Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions, “Extreme Risk Protection Orders: State Laws at a Glance,” Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, August 1, 2023.
• Johnson, R. M., C. Barber, D. Azrael, D. E. Clark, and D. Hemenway, “Who Are the Owners of Firearms Used in Adolescent Suicides?” Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior , Vol. 40, No. 6, 2010.
• Johnson, Renee M., Tamera Coyne-Beasley, and Carol W. Runyan, “Firearm Ownership and Storage Practices, U.S. Households, 1992–2002. A Systematic Review,” American Journal of Preventive Medicine , Vol. 27, No. 2, August 2004.
• Johnson, Renee M., Elaine M. Frank, Mark Ciocca, and Catherine W. Barber, “Training Mental Healthcare Providers to Reduce At-Risk Patients’ Access to Lethal Means of Suicide: Evaluation of the CALM Project,” Archives of Suicide Research , Vol. 15, No. 3, 2011.
• Johnston, Jeff, “Can Ammunition ‘Go Bad’?” NRA Family, October 28, 2019.
• Jones, Edward D., III, “The District of Columbia’s ‘Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975’: The Toughest Handgun Control Law in the United States—or Is It?” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science , Vol. 455, 1981.
• Jones, Wehmah, Jennifer Sable, and Jiayi Li, State Report on the Implementation of the Gun-Free Schools Act: U.S. States and Other Jurisdictions, 2020–21 School Year , National Center on Safe Supportive Learning Environments, U.S. Department of Education, March 2023.
• Jonson, Cheryl Lero, Alexander L. Burton, Francis T. Cullen, Justin T. Pickett, and Velmer S. Burton, Jr., “An Apple in One Hand, a Gun in the Other: Public Support for Arming Our Nation’s Schools,” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 20, No. 2, May 2021.
• Joossens, Luk, and Martin Raw, “From Cigarette Smuggling to Illicit Tobacco Trade,” Tobacco Control , Vol. 21, No. 2, 2012.
• Joshi, M., and S. B. Sorenson, “Intimate Partner Violence at the Scene: Incident Characteristics and Implications for Public Health Surveillance,” Evaluation Review , Vol. 34, No. 2, 2010.
• Juodis, Marcus, Andrew Starzomski, Stephen Porter, and Michael Woodworth, “A Comparison of Domestic and Non-Domestic Homicides: Further Evidence for Distinct Dynamics and Heterogeneity of Domestic Homicide Perpetrators,” Journal of Family Violence , Vol. 29, No. 3, 2014.
• Kafka, Julie M., Kathryn E. Moracco, Deanna S. Williams, and Claire G. Hoffman, “What Is the Role of Firearms in Nonfatal Intimate Partner Violence? Findings from Civil Protective Order Case Data," Social Science and Medicine , Vol. 283, August 2021.
• Kafka, Julie M., Kathryn E. Moracco, Deanna S. Williams, and Claire G. Hoffman, “Disarming Abusers: Domestic Violence Protective Order (DVPO) Firearm Restriction Processes and Dispositions,” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 21, No. 2, May 2022.
• Kagawa, Rose M. C., Alvaro Castillo-Carniglia, Jon S. Vernick, Daniel Webster, Cassandra Crifasi, Kara E. Rudolph, Magdalena Cerdá, Aaron Shev, and Garen J. Wintemute, “Repeal of Comprehensive Background Check Policies and Firearm Homicide and Suicide,” Epidemiology , Vol. 29, No. 4, 2018.
• Kagawa, Rose M. C., Dahsan S. Gary, Garen J. Wintemute, Kara E. Rudolph, Veronica A. Pear, Katherine Keyes, and Magdalena Cerdá, “Psychiatric Disorders and Gun Carrying Among Adolescents in the United States,” Journal of Pediatrics , Vol. 209, June 2019.
• Kagawa, Rose, Amanda Charbonneau, Christopher McCort, Alexander McCourt, Jon Vernick, Daniel Webster, and Garen Wintemute, “Effects of Comprehensive Background-Check Policies on Firearm Fatalities in 4 States,” American Journal of Epidemiology , Vol. 192, No. 4, April 2023.
• Kahan, Dan M., “The Politically Motivated Reasoning Paradigm, Part 2: Unanswered Questions,” in Robert Scott and Stephen Kosslyn, eds., Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences , New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 2016.
• Kahan, Dan M., “On the Sources of Ordinary Science Knowledge and Extraordinary Science Ignorance,” in Kathleen Hall Jamieson, Dan M. Kahan, and Dietram A. Scheufele, eds., Oxford Handbook of the Science of Science Communication , Oxford University Press, 2017.
• Kahan, Dan M., E. Peters, E. Dawson, and P. Slovic, “Motivated Numeracy and Enlightened Self-Government,” Behavioural Public Policy , Vol. 1, No. 1, 2017.
• Kahane, Leo H., “Understanding the Interstate Export of Crime Guns: A Gravity Model Approach,” Contemporary Economic Policy , Vol. 31, No. 3, 2013.
• Kahane, Leo H., “State Gun Laws and the Movement of Crime Guns Between States,” International Review of Law and Economics , Vol. 61, 2020.
• Kalesan, Bindu, Kinan Lagast, Marcos Villarreal, Elizabeth Pino, Jeffrey Fagan, and Sandro Galea, “School Shootings During 2013–2015 in the USA,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 23, No. 5, 2017.
• Kalesan, Bindu, Matthew E. Mobily, Olivia Keiser, Jeffrey A. Fagan, and Sandro Galea, “Firearm Legislation and Firearm Mortality in the USA: A Cross-Sectional, State-Level Study,” Lancet , Vol. 387, No. 10030, April 30, 2016.
• Kann, L., T. McManus, W. A. Harris, S. L. Shanklin, K. H. Flint, J. Hawkins, B. Queen, R. Lowry, E. O. Olsen, D. Chyen, L. Whittle, J. Thornton, C. Lim, Y. Yamakawa, N. Brener, and S. Zaza, “Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance—United States, 2015,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report , Vol. 65, No. 6, 2016.
• Kann, Laura, Tim McManus, William A. Harris, Shari L. Shanklin, Katherine H. Flint, Barbara Queen, Richard Lowry, David Chyen, Lisa Whittle, Jemekia Thornton, Connie Lim, Denise Bradford, Yoshimi Yamakawa, Michelle Leon, Nancy Brener, and Kathleen A. Ethier, “Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance—United States, 2017,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report , Vol. 67, No. 8, 2018.
• Kaplan, Jacob, National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) Data: A Practitioner’s Guide , March 28, 2023.
• Kaplan, M. S., N. Huguet, B. H. McFarland, and J. A. Mandle, “Factors Associated with Suicide by Firearm Among U.S. Older Adult Men,” Psychology of Men and Masculinity , Vol. 13, No. 1, 2012.
• Kaplan, M. S., B. H. McFarland, and N. Huguet, “Characteristics of Adult Male and Female Firearm Suicide Decedents: Findings from the National Violent Death Reporting System,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 15, No. 5, 2009.
• Kapoor, Reena, Elissa Benedek, Richard J. Bonnie, Tanuja Gandhi, Liza Gold, Seth Judd, and Debra A. Pinals, “APA Resource Document on Risk-Based Gun Removal Laws,” Developments in Mental Health Law , Vol. 37, No. 2, 2018.
• Kappelman, Jack, and Richard C. Fording, “The Effect of State Gun Laws on Youth Suicide by Firearm: 1981–2017,” Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior , Vol. 51, No. 2, April 2021.
• Kapusta, Nestor D., Thomas Niederkrotenthaler, Elmar Etzersdorfer, Martin Voracek, Kanita Dervic, Elisabeth Jandl-Jager, and Gernot Sonneck, “Influence of Psychotherapist Density and Antidepressant Sales on Suicide Rates,” Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica , Vol. 119, No. 3, 2009.
• Kapusta, Nestor D., Martin Posch, Thomas Niederkrotenthaler, Melitta Fischer-Kern, Elmar Etzersdorfer, and Gernot Sonneck, “Availability of Mental Health Service Providers and Suicide Rates in Austria: A Nationwide Study,” Psychiatric Services , Vol. 61, No. 12, 2010.
• Kapusta, N. D., U. S. Tran, I. R. Rockett, D. DeLeo, C. P. Naylor, T. Niederkrotenthaler, M. Voracek, E. Etzersdorfer, and G. Sonneck, “Declining Autopsy Rates and Suicide Misclassification: A Cross-National Analysis of 35 Countries,” Archives of General Psychiatry , Vol. 68, No. 10, 2011.
• Karp, Aaron, Estimating Global Civilian-Held Firearms Numbers , Geneva: Small Arms Survey, June 2018.
• Karras, Elizabeth, Cara M. Stokes, Sara C. Warfield, Shannon K. Barth, and Robert M. Bossarte, “A Randomized Controlled Trial of Public Messaging to Promote Safe Firearm Storage Among U.S. Military Veterans,” Social Science and Medicine , Vol. 241, November 2019.
• Kasper, Rebecca E., Jonathan Green, Rachelle N. Damle, Jeremy Aidlen, Pradeep Nazarey, Mariann Manno, Esther Borer, and Michael P. Hirsh, “And the Survey Said. . . . Evaluating Rationale for Participation in Gun Buybacks as a Tool to Encourage Higher Yields,” Journal of Pediatric Surgery , Vol. 52, No. 2, February 2017.
• Kaufman, Elinore J., Christopher N. Morrison, Erik J. Olson, David K. Humphreys, Douglas J. Wiebe, Niels D. Martin, Carrie A. Sims, Mark H. Hoofnagle, C. William Schwab, Patrick M. Reilly, and Mark J. Seamon, “Universal Background Checks for Handgun Purchases Can Reduce Homicide Rates of African Americans,” Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery , Vol. 88, No. 6, June 2020.
• Kaufman, Elinore J., Douglas J. Wiebe, Ruiying Aria Xiong, Christopher N. Morrison, Mark J. Seamon, and M. Kit Delgado, “Epidemiologic Trends in Fatal and Nonfatal Firearm Injuries in the US, 2009–2017,” JAMA Internal Medicine , Vol. 181, No. 2, 2021.
• Kawaguchi, Hideaki, and Soichi Koike, “Association Between the Density of Physicians and Suicide Rates in Japan: Nationwide Ecological Study Using a Spatial Bayesian Model,” PLoS One , Vol. 11, No. 2, 2016.
• Kegler, Scott R., Thomas R. Simon, Marissa L. Zwald, May S. Chen, James A. Mercy, Christopher M. Jones, Melissa C. Mercado-Crespo, Janet M. Blair, Deborah M. Stone, and Phyllis G. Ottley, “Vital Signs: Changes in Firearm Homicide and Suicide Rates—United States, 2019–2020,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report , Vol. 71, No. 19, May 13, 2022.
• Keller, Thomas Christoph, “ABC’s and AR-15’s: Arming Arkansas’s Teachers,” Arkansas Law Review , Vol. 67, No. 3, 2014.
• Kellermann, Arthur L., and Frederick P. Rivara, “Silencing the Science on Gun Policy,” JAMA , Vol. 309, No. 6, 2013.
• Kellermann, A. L., F. P. Rivara, G. Somes, D. T. Reay, J. Francisco, J. G. Banton, J. Prodzinski, C. Fligner, and B. B. Hackman, “Suicide in the Home in Relation to Gun Ownership,” New England Journal of Medicine , Vol. 327, No. 7, 1992.
• Kelling, G. L., T. Pate, D. Dieckman, and C. E. Brown, The Kansas City Preventive Patrol Experiment , Washington, D.C.: Police Foundation, 1974.
• Kelly, Timothy, Sara Brandspigel, Evan Polzer, and Marian E. Betz, “Firearm Storage Maps: A Pragmatic Approach to Reduce Firearm Suicide During Times of Risk,” Annals of Internal Medicine , Vol. 172, No. 5, March 3, 2020.
• Kena, Grace, and Rachel E. Morgan, Criminal Victimization in the 22 Largest U.S. States, 2017–2019 , U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, NCJ 305402, March 2023.
• Kendall, Todd D., and Robert Tamura, “Unmarried Fertility, Crime, and Social Stigma,” Journal of Law and Economics , Vol. 53, No. 1, 2010.
• Kenne Pagui, Euloge Clovis, Alessandra Salvan, and Nicola Sartori, “Improved Estimation in Negative Binomial Regression,” Statistics in Medicine , Vol. 41, No. 13, 2022.
• Kennedy, D. M., “Pulling Levers: Chronic Offenders, High-Crime Settings, and a Theory of Prevention,” Valparaiso University Law Review , Vol. 31, No. 2, 1996.
• Kennedy, D. M., “Whither Streetwork: The Place of Outreach Workers in Community Violence Prevention,” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 10, No. 4, 2011.
• Kennedy, D. M., A. M. Piehl, and A. A. Braga, “Youth Violence in Boston: Gun Markets, Serious Youth Offenders, and a Use-Reduction Strategy,” Law and Contemporary Problems , Vol. 59, No. 1, 1996.
• Kennedy, D. M., A. M. Piehl, and A. A. Braga, “Gun Buy-Backs: Where Do We Stand and Where Do We Go?” in Martha R. Plotkin, ed., Under Fire: Gun Buybacks, Exchanges, and Amnesty Programs , Washington, D.C.: Police Executive Research Forum, 1996a.
• Kercher, Cassandra, David I. Swedler, Keshia M. Pollack, and Daniel W. Webster, “Homicides of Law Enforcement Officers Responding to Domestic Disturbance Calls,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 19, No. 5, 2013.
• Kessler, Ronald C., Howard Birnbaum, Olga Demler, Ian R. H. Falloon, Elizabeth Gagnon, Margaret Guyer, Mary J. Howes, Kenneth S. Kendler, Lizheng Shi, Ellen Walters, and Eric Q. Wu, “The Prevalence and Correlates of Nonaffective Psychosis in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication (NCS-R),” Biological Psychiatry , Vol. 58, No. 8, 2005.
• Kester, Louis, Daniel N. Holena, Allyson M. Hynes, Elinore J. Kaufman, Tejal Brahmbhatt, Sabrina Sanchez, James P. Byrne, Tracey Dechert, Mark Seamon, and Dane R. Scantling, “Preventing the Most Common Firearm Deaths: Modifiable Factors Related to Firearm Suicide,” Surgery , Vol. 173, No. 2, February 2023.
• Keyes, Katherine M., Ava Hamilton, Jeffrey Swanson, Melissa Tracy, and Magdalena Cerdá, “Simulating the Suicide Prevention Effects of Firearms Restrictions Based on Psychiatric Hospitalization and Treatment Records: Social Benefits and Unintended Adverse Consequences,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 109, No. 3, 2019.
• Khan, Khalid S., Regina Kunz, Jos Kleijnen, and Gerd Antes, “Five Steps to Conducting a Systematic Review,” Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine , Vol. 96, No. 3, 2003.
• Khantzian, E. J., “The Self-Medication Hypothesis of Substance Use Disorders: A Reconsideration and Recent Applications,” Harvard Review of Psychiatry , Vol. 4, No. 5, 1997.
• Kindy, Kimberly, “FBI to Sharply Expand System for Tracking Fatal Police Shootings,” Washington Post , December 8, 2015.
• King, Aisha, Joseph Simonetti, Elizabeth Bennett, Cassie Simeona, Lauren Stanek, Alison C. Roxby, and Ali Rowhani-Rahbar, “Firearm Storage Practices in Households with Children: A Survey of Community-Based Firearm Safety Event Participants,” Preventive Medicine , Vol. 131, February 2019.
• Kivisto, Aaron J., Katherine L. Kivisto, Erica Gurnell, Peter Phalen, and Bradley Ray, “Adolescent Suicide, Household Firearm Ownership, and the Effects of Child Access Prevention Laws,” Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry , Vol. 60, No. 9, September 2021.
• Kivisto, Aaron J., and Peter L. Phalen, “Effects of Risk-Based Firearm Seizure Laws in Connecticut and Indiana on Suicide Rates, 1981–2015,” Psychiatric Services , Vol. 69, No. 8, 2018.
• Kivisto, Aaron J., Bradley Ray, and Peter L. Phalen, “Firearm Legislation and Fatal Police Shootings in the United States,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 107, No. 7, 2017.
• Klarevas, Louis, Rampage Nation: Securing America from Mass Shootings , Prometheus Books, 2016.
• Klarevas, Louis, “Letter to the Editor Re: DiMaggio, C. et al. ‘Changes in US Mass Shooting Deaths Associated with the 1994–2004 Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Analysis of Open-Source Data,’” Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery , Vol. 86, No. 5, 2019.
• Klarevas, Louis, Andrew Conner, and David Hemenway, “The Effect of Large-Capacity Magazine Bans on High-Fatality Mass Shootings, 1990–2017,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 109, No. 12, 2019.
• Kleck, Gary, “Crime Control Through the Private Use of Armed Force,” Social Problems , Vol. 35, No. 1, 1988.
• Kleck, Gary, Targeting Guns: Firearms and Their Control , Aldine de Gruyter, 1997.
• Kleck, Gary, “Degrading Scientific Standards to Get the Defensive Gun Use Estimate Down,” Journal on Firearms and Public Policy , Vol. 11, 1999.
• Kleck, Gary, “The Nature and Effectiveness of Owning, Carrying and Using Guns for Self-Protection,” in G. Kleck and D. B. Kates, eds., Armed: New Perspectives on Gun Control , Prometheus Books, 2001.
• Kleck, Gary, “Measures of Gun Ownership Levels for Macro-Level Crime and Violence Research,” Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency , Vol. 41, No. 1, 2004.
• Kleck, Gary, Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America , AldineTransaction, 2009.
• Kleck, Gary, “The Impact of Gun Ownership Rates on Crime Rates: A Methodological Review of the Evidence,” Journal of Criminal Justice , Vol. 43, No. 1, 2015.
• Kleck, Gary, “Large-Capacity Magazines and the Casualty Counts in Mass Shootings: The Plausibility of Linkages,” Justice Research and Policy , Vol. 17, No. 1, 2016.
• Kleck, Gary, “Response Errors in Surveys of Defensive Gun Use: A National Internet Survey Experiment,” Crime and Delinquency , Vol. 64, No. 9, 2018.
• Kleck, Gary, Did Australia’s Ban on Semiauto Firearms Really Reduce Violence? A Critique of Chapman et al (2016) Study , Florida State University, working paper, January 12, 2018a.
• Kleck, Gary, Do Mass Shooters Favor Using High-Capacity Magazines , Florida State University, working paper, March 10, 2020.
• Kleck, Gary, "What Do CDC’s Surveys Say About the Prevalence of Defensive Gun Use?" American Journal of Criminal Justice , Vol. 46, No. 3, June 2021.
• Kleck, G., and D. J. Bordua, “The Factual Foundation for Certain Key Assumptions of Gun Control,” Law and Policy , Vol. 5, No. 3, 1983.
• Kleck, G., and M. A. DeLone, “Victim Resistance and Offender Weapon Effects in Robbery,” Journal of Quantitative Criminology , Vol. 9, No. 1, 1993.
• Kleck, Gary, and Marc G. Gertz, “Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun,” Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology , Vol. 86, No. 1, 1995.
• Kleck, Gary, Tomislav Kovandzic, and Mark E. Schaffer, Gun Prevalence, Homicide Rates and Causality: A GMM Approach to Endogeneity Bias , Centre for Economic Policy Research, Discussion Paper No. 5357, 2005.
• Kleck, G., and E. B. Patterson, “The Impact of Gun Control and Gun Ownership Levels on Violence Rates,” Journal of Quantitative Criminology , Vol. 9, No. 3, 1993.
• Klein, Jessie, The Bully Society: School Shootings and the Crisis of Bullying in America’s Schools , New York University Press, 2012.
• Klieve, Helen, Michael Barnes, and Diego De Leo, “Controlling Firearms Use in Australia: Has the 1996 Gun Law Reform Produced the Decrease in Rates of Suicide with This Method?” Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology , Vol. 44, No. 4, 2009.
• Klieve, H., J. Sveticic, and D. De Leo, “Who Uses Firearms as a Means of Suicide? A Population Study Exploring Firearm Accessibility and Method Choice,” BMC Medicine , Vol. 7, 2009.
• Klinger, D., R. Rosenfeld, D. Isom, and M. Deckard, “Race, Crime, and the Micro-Ecology of Deadly Force,” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 15, No. 1, February 2016.
• Knicely, John, “One Washington School District Already Has Staff Armed with Guns,” KIRO 7, February 23, 2018.
• Knight, Brian, “State Gun Policy and Cross-State Externalities: Evidence from Crime Gun Tracing,” American Economic Journal: Economic Policy , Vol. 5, No. 4, 2013.
• Knittel, Christopher R., and Ryan Sandler, “The Welfare Impact of Second-Best Uniform-Pigouvian Taxation: Evidence from Transportation,” American Economic Journal: Economic Policy , Vol. 10, No. 4, 2018.
• Knopov, Anita, Michael Siegel, Ziming Xuan, Emily F. Rothman, Shea W. Cronin, and David Hemenway, “The Impact of State Firearm Laws on Homicide Rates Among Black and White Populations in the United States, 1991–2016,” Health and Social Work , Vol. 44, No. 4, 2019.
• Knox, Dean, Will Lowe, and Jonathan Mummolo, “Administrative Records Mask Racially Biased Policing,” American Political Science Review , Vol. 114, No. 3, 2020.
• Knox, Dean, and Jonathan Mummolo, “Toward a General Causal Framework for the Study of Racial Bias in Policing,” Journal of Political Institutions and Political Economy , Vol. 1, No. 3, 2020.
• Kochanek, Kenneth D., Sherry L. Murphy, Jiaquan Xu, and Elizabeth Arias, “Deaths: Final Data for 2017,” National Vital Statistics Reports , Vol. 68, No. 9, June 24, 2019.
• Kochanek, Kenneth D., Sherry L. Murphy, Jiaquan Xu, and Elizabeth Arias, “Deaths: Final Data for 2020,” National Vital Statistics Reports , Vol. 72, No. 10, September 22, 2023.
• Kohler-Hausmann, Issa, “Eddie Murphy and the Dangers of Counterfactual Causal Thinking About Detecting Racial Discrimination,” Northwestern University Law Review , Vol. 113, No. 5, 2019.
• Koehler, J. J., “The Influence of Prior Beliefs on Scientific Judgments of Evidence Quality,” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes , Vol. 56, No. 1, 1993.
• Koenig, Christoph, and David Schindler, “Impulse Purchases, Gun Ownership, and Homicides: Evidence from a Firearm Demand Shock,” Review of Economics and Statistics , Vol. 105, No. 5, September 2023.
• Kolla, B. P., S. S. O’Connor, and T. W. Lineberry, “The Base Rates and Factors Associated with Reported Access to Firearms in Psychiatric Inpatients,” General Hospital Psychiatry , Vol. 33, No. 2, 2011.
• Kondo, Michelle C., Elena Andreyeva, Eugenia C. South, John M. MacDonald, and Charles C. Branas, “Neighborhood Interventions to Reduce Violence,” Annual Review of Public Health , Vol. 39, April 2018.
• Koo, Denise, and Guthrie S. Birkhead, “Prospects and Challenges in Implementing Firearm-Related Injury Surveillance in the United States: Not a Flash in the Pan,” American Journal of Preventive Medicine , Vol. 15, No. 3, Supp. 1, 1998.
• Kopel, D. B., “Background Checks for Firearms Sales and Loans: Law, History, and Policy,” Harvard Journal on Legislation , Vol. 53, 2016.
• Kopel, David B., “Red Flag Laws: Examining Guidelines for State Action,” testimony before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, March 26, 2019.
• Koper, C. S., “Just Enough Police Presence: Reducing Crime and Disorderly Behavior by Optimizing Patrol Time in Crime Hot Spots,” Justice Quarterly , Vol. 12, No. 4, 1995.
• Koper, Christopher S., “Federal Legislation and Gun Markets: How Much Have Recent Reforms of the Federal Firearms Licensing System Reduced Criminal Gun Suppliers?” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 1, No. 2, 2002.
• Koper, Christopher S., Crime Gun Risk Factors: Buyer, Seller, Firearm, and Transaction Characteristics Associated with Gun Trafficking and Criminal Gun Use , National Institute of Justice, 2003.
• Koper, Christopher S., Updated Assessment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Impacts on Gun Markets and Gun Violence 1994–2003 , National Institute of Justice, 2004.
• Koper, Christopher S., “Crime Gun Risk Factors: Buyer, Seller, Firearm, and Transaction Characteristics Associated with Gun Trafficking and Criminal Gun Use,” Journal of Quantitative Criminology , Vol. 30, No. 2, 2014.
• Koper, Christopher S., “Assessing the Potential to Reduce Deaths and Injuries from Mass Shootings Through Restrictions on Assault Weapons and Other High‐Capacity Semiautomatic Firearms,” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 19, No. 1, 2020.
• Koper, Christopher S., William D. Johnson, Jordan L. Nichols, Ambrozine Ayers, and Natalie Mullins, “Criminal Use of Assault Weapons and High-Capacity Semiautomatic Firearms: An Updated Examination of Local and National Sources,” Journal of Urban Health , Vol. 95, No. 3, 2018.
• Koper, C. S., and E. Mayo-Wilson, “Police Crackdowns on Illegal Gun Carrying: A Systematic Review of Their Impact on Gun Crime,” Journal of Experimental Criminology , Vol. 2, No. 2, 2006.
• Koper, C. S., E. Mayo-Wilson, and J. Smith, “Police Strategies to Reduce Illegal Possession and Carrying of Firearms: Effects on Gun Crime,” Campbell Systematic Reviews , Vol. 11, 2012.
• Koper, Christopher S., and Jeffrey A. Roth, “The Impact of the 1994 Federal Assault Weapon Ban on Gun Violence Outcomes: An Assessment of Multiple Outcome Measures and Some Lessons for Policy Evaluation,” Journal of Quantitative Criminology , Vol. 17, No. 1, 2001.
• Koper, Christopher S., and Jeffrey A. Roth, “Impact of the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban on Gun Markets: An Assessment of Short-Term Primary and Secondary Market Effects,” Journal of Quantitative Criminology , Vol. 18, No. 3, 2002.
• Koper, C. S., D. J. Woods, and B. E. Kubu, “Gun Violence Prevention Practices Among Local Police in the United States,” Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management , Vol. 36, No. 3, 2013.
• Koseff, Alexei, “See Where California Is Taking Guns with Restraining Orders,” Sacramento Bee , August 1, 2017.
• Kovandzic, Tomislav V., and Thomas B. Marvell, “Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns and Violent Crime: Crime Control Through Gun Control?” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 2, No. 3, 2003.
• Kovandzic, T. V., T. B. Marvell, and L. M. Vieraitis, “The Impact of ‘Shall-Issue’ Concealed Handgun Laws on Violent Crime Rates—Evidence from Panel Data for Large Urban Cities,” Homicide Studies , Vol. 9, No. 4, 2005.
• Kovandzic, Tomislav, Mark E. Schaffer, and Gary Kleck, “Estimating the Causal Effect of Gun Prevalence on Homicide Rates: A Local Average Treatment Effect Approach,” Journal of Quantitative Criminology , Vol. 29, No. 4, 2013.
• Kposowa, A. J., “Association of Suicide Rates, Gun Ownership, Conservatism and Individual Suicide Risk,” Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology , Vol. 48, No. 9, 2013.
• Kposowa, A., D. Hamilton, and K. Wang, “Impact of Firearm Availability and Gun Regulation on State Suicide Rates,” Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior , Vol. 46, No. 6, 2016.
• Kravitz-Wirtz, Nicole, Rocco Pallin, Rose M. C. Kagawa, Matthew Miller, Deborah Azrael, and Garen J. Wintemute, “Firearm Purchases Without Background Checks in California,” Preventive Medicine , Vol. 145, April 2021.
• Kremer, Michael, and Jack Willis, “Guns, Latrines, and Land Reform: Dynamic Pigouvian Taxation,” American Economic Review , Vol. 106, No. 5, 2016.
• Krouse, W. J., Gun Control: Statutory Disclosure Limitations on ATF Firearms Trace Data and Multiple Handgun Sales Reports , Congressional Research Service, 7–5700, 2009.
• Krouse, William J., and Daniel J. Richardson, Mass Murder with Firearms: Incidents and Victims, 1999–2013 , Congressional Research Service, R44126, 2015.
• Kubrin, Charis E., and Tim Wadsworth, “Explaining Suicide Among Blacks and Whites: How Socioeconomic Factors and Gun Availability Affect Race-Specific Suicide Rates,” Social Science Quarterly , Vol. 90, No. 5, 2009.
• Kuhn, Evelyn M., C. L. Nie, M. E. O’Brien, Richard L. Withers, Garen J. Wintemute, and Stephen W. Hargarten, “Missing the Target: A Comparison of Buyback and Fatality Related Guns,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 8, No. 2, June 2002.
• Kung, H. C., J. L. Pearson, and X. Liu, “Risk Factors for Male and Female Suicide Decedents Ages 15–64 in the United States—Results from the 1993 National Mortality Followback Survey,” Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology , Vol. 38, No. 8, 2003.
• Kung, H. C., J. L. Pearson, and R. Wei, “Substance Use, Firearm Availability, Depressive Symptoms, and Mental Health Service Utilization Among White and African American Suicide Decedents Aged 15 to 64 Years,” Annals of Epidemiology , Vol. 15, No. 8, 2005.
• Kurtzleben, Danielle, “Fact Check: Are Gun-Makers ‘Totally Free of Liability for Their Behavior’?” NPR, October 6, 2015.
• Kwon, Roy, and Joseph F. Cabrera, “Income Inequality and Mass Shootings in the United States,” BMC Public Health , Vol. 19, No. 1, 2019a.
• Kwon, Roy, and Joseph F. Cabrera, “Social Integration and Mass Shootings in US Counties,” Journal of Crime and Justice , Vol. 42, No. 2, 2019b.
• Kwon, Roy, and Joseph F. Cabrera, “Socioeconomic Factors and Mass Shootings in the United States,” Critical Public Health , Vol. 29, No. 2, 2019c.
• La Valle, James M., “Rebuilding at Gunpoint: A City-Level Re-Estimation of the Brady Law and RTC Laws in the Wake of Hurricane Katrina,” Criminal Justice Policy Review , Vol. 18, No. 4, 2007.
• La Valle, James M., “Re-Estimating Gun-Policy Effects According to a National Science Academy Report: Were Previous Reports of Failure Premature?” Journal of Crime and Justice , Vol. 33, No. 1, 2010.
• La Valle, James M., “‘Gun Control’ vs. ‘Self-Protection’: A Case Against the Ideological Divide,” Justice Policy Journal , Vol. 10, No. 1, 2013.
• La Valle, James M., and Thomas C. Glover, “Revisiting Licensed Handgun Carrying: Personal Protection or Interpersonal Liability?” American Journal of Criminal Justice , Vol. 37, No. 4, 2012.
• LaFree, G., and C. Birbeck, Controlling New Mexico Juveniles’ Possession of Firearms , New Mexico Criminal Justice Statistical Analysis Center, Working Paper 27, 1998.
• Lang, Matthew, “The Impact of Mental Health Insurance Laws on State Suicide Rates,” Health Economics , Vol. 22, No. 1, 2013.
• Langford, Linda, Nancy Isaac, and Stacey Kabat, “Homicides Related to Intimate Partner Violence in Massachusetts: Examining Case Ascertainment and Validity of the SHR,” Homicide Studies , Vol. 2, No. 4, 1998.
• Langhinrichsen-Rohling, Jennifer, “Top 10 Greatest ‘Hits’: Important Findings and Future Directions for Intimate Partner Violence Research,” Journal of Interpersonal Violence , Vol. 20, No. 1, 2005.
• Langhinrichsen-Rohling, Jennifer, Russell E. Palarea, Jennifer Cohen, and Martin L. Rohling, “Breaking Up Is Hard to Do: Unwanted Pursuit Behaviors Following the Dissolution of a Romantic Relationship,” in K. E. Davis, I. H. Frieze, and R. D. Maiuro, eds., Stalking: Perspectives on Victims and Perpetrators , Springer, 2002.
• Langman, Peter, “Different Types of Role Model Influence and Fame Seeking Among Mass Killers and Copycat Offenders,” American Behavioral Scientist , Vol. 62, No. 2, 2018.
• Langton, L., Firearms Stolen During Household Burglaries and Other Property Crimes, 2005–2010 , U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, NCJ 239436, 2012.
• Lankford, Adam, “A Comparative Analysis of Suicide Terrorists and Rampage, Workplace, and School Shooters in the United States from 1990 to 2010,” Homicide Studies , Vol. 17, No. 3, 2013.
• Lankford, Adam, “Mass Murderers in the United States: Predictors of Offender Deaths,” Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology , Vol. 26, No. 5, 2015.
• Lankford, Adam, and James Silver, “Why Have Public Mass Shootings Become More Deadly? Assessing How Perpetrators’ Motives and Methods Have Changed over Time,” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 19, No. 1, 2020.
• Lantz, Brendan, “Why More Agencies and Researchers Should Embrace the Upcoming NIBRS Transition: Contributions and Promise of the NIBRS Data,” American Journal of Criminal Justice , Vol. 47, No. 3, June 2022.
• Laqueur, Hannah S., Christopher McCort, Colette Smirniotis, Sonia Robinson, and Garen J. Wintemute, “Trends and Sources of Crime Guns in California: 2010–2021,” Journal of Urban Health , Vol. 100, No. 5, October 2023.
• Laqueur, Hannah S., Colette Smirniotis, Christopher McCort, and Garen J. Wintemute, “Machine Learning Analysis of Handgun Transactions to Predict Firearm Suicide Risk,” JAMA Network Open , Vol. 5, No. 7, July 2022.
• Laqueur, Hannah S., and Garen J. Wintemute, “Identifying High‐Risk Firearm Owners to Prevent Mass Violence,” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 19, No. 1, 2020.
• Lasley, James R., Using Traffic Barriers to “Design Out” Crime: A Program Evaluation of LAPD’s Operation Cul-de-Sac , California State University, Division of Political Science and Criminal Justice, 1996.
• Leask, Anna, “Raurimu 20 Years On: The Madman, the Massacre and the Memories,” New Zealand Herald , February 4, 2017.
• Lee, Lois K., Katherine Douglas, and David Hemenway, “Crossing Lines—A Change in the Leading Cause of Death Among U.S. Children,” New England Journal of Medicine , Vol. 386, No. 16, April 16, 2022.
• Lee, Wang-Sheng, and Sandy Suardi, “The Australian Firearms Buyback and Its Effect on Gun Deaths,” Contemporary Economic Policy , Vol. 28, No. 1, 2010.
• Lee, Y. Y., “Gentrification and Crime: Identification Using the 1994 Northridge Earthquake in Los Angeles,” Journal of Urban Affairs , Vol. 32, No. 5, 2010.
• Legewie, Joscha, “Racial Profiling and Use of Force in Police Stops: How Local Events Trigger Periods of Increased Discrimination,” American Journal of Sociology , Vol. 122, No. 2, September 2016.
• Lehnen, R., and W. Skogan, The National Crime Survey: Working Papers , Vol. 2: Methodological Studies , U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1984.
• Leigh, Andrew, and Christine Neill, “Do Gun Buybacks Save Lives? Evidence from Panel Data,” American Law and Economics Review , Vol. 12, No. 2, 2010.
• Leventhal, John M., Julie R. Gaither, and Robert Sege, “Hospitalizations Due to Firearm Injuries in Children and Adolescents,” Pediatrics , Vol. 133, No. 2, February 2014.
• Levine, Phillip B., and Robin McKnight, “Firearms and Accidental Deaths: Evidence from the Aftermath of the Sandy Hook School Shooting,” Science , Vol. 358, No. 6368, 2017.
• Levine, Phillip B., and Robin McKnight, Not All School Shootings Are the Same and the Differences Matter , National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper No. 26728, February 2020.
• Levine, Phillip B., and Robin McKnight, “Exposure to a School Shooting and Subsequent Well-Being,” Working Paper No. 28307, National Bureau of Economic Research, December 2020a.
• Levitt, Steven D., “Understanding Why Crime Fell in the 1990s: Four Factors That Explain the Decline and Six That Do Not,” Journal of Economic Perspectives , Vol. 18, No. 1, Winter 2004.
• Lewiecki, E. M., and S. A. Miller, “Suicide, Guns, and Public Policy,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 103, No. 1, 2013.
• Lexington, “Why the NRA Keeps Talking About Mental Illness, Rather Than Guns,” Economist , March 13, 2013.
• Levy, Marc, Wilmer Alvarez, Lauren Vagelakos, Michelle Yore, and Bertha Ben Khallouq, “Stand Your Ground: Policy and Trends in Firearm-Related Justifiable Homicide and Homicide in the US,” Journal of the American College of Surgeons , Vol. 230, No. 1, January 2020.
• Li, Guohua, Susan P. Baker, Carla DiScala, Carolyn Fowler, Jean Ling, and Gabor D. Kelen, “Factors Associated with the Intent of Firearm-Related Injuries in Pediatric Trauma Patients,” Archives of Pediatric Adolescent Medicine , Vol. 15, No. 11, 1996.
• Li, Michelle, Dylan Small, Ting Ye, Yuzhou Lin, and Daniel Webster, “Examining a Hypothesized Causal Chain for the Effects of the 2007 Repeal of the Permit-to-Purchase Licensing Law in Missouri: Homicide Guns Recovered in State and Within a Year of Purchase,” Journal of Urban Health , Vol. 100, No. 3, June 2023.
• Li, Shanjun, Joshua Linn, and Erich Muehlegger, “Gasoline Taxes and Consumer Behavior,” American Economic Journal: Economic Policy , Vol. 6, No. 4, 2014.
• Li, Z., A. Page, G. Martin, and R. Taylor, “Attributable Risk of Psychiatric and Socio-Economic Factors for Suicide from Individual-Level, Population-Based Studies: A Systematic Review,” Social Science and Medicine , Vol. 72, No. 4, 2011.
• Light, Caroline, Janae Thomas, and Alexa Yakubovich, “Gender and Stand Your Ground Laws: A Critical Appraisal of Existing Research,” Journal of Law, Medicine, and Ethics , Vol. 51, No. 1, Spring 2023.
• Lin, John C., Christopher Chang, Madison S. McCarthy, Abe Baker-Butler, Guangyu Tong, and Megan L. Ranney, “Trends in Firearm Injury Prevention Research Funding, Clinical Trials, and Publications in the US, 1985–2022,” JAMA Surgery , February 7, 2024.
• Linden, Ariel, and Paul R. Yarnold, “The Australian Gun Buyback Program and Rate of Suicide by Firearm,” Optimal Data Analysis , Vol. 7, March 25, 2018.
• Lipari, Rachel N., and Eunice Park-Lee, Key Substance Use and Mental Health Indicators in the United States: Results from the 2018 National Survey on Drug Use and Health , Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, August 2019.
• Liu, E. C., E. Bagalman, V. S. Chu, and C. S. Redhead, Submission of Mental Health Records to the NICS and the HIPAA Privacy Rule , Congressional Research Service, R43040, 2013.
• Liu, Gina, and Douglas J. Wiebe, “A Time-Series Analysis of Firearm Purchasing After Mass Shooting Events in the United States,” JAMA Network Open , Vol. 2, No. 4, 2019.
• Liu, Ye, Michael Siegel, and Bisakha Sen, “Association of State-Level Firearm-Related Deaths with Firearm Laws in Neighboring States,” JAMA Network Open , Vol. 5, No. 11, November 2022.
• Loeber, R., and R. Stallings, “Modeling the Impact of Interventions on Local Indicators of Offending, Victimization, and Incarceration,” in R. Loeber and D. P. Farrington, eds., Young Homicide Offenders and Victims: Risk Factors, Prediction, and Prevention from Childhood , Springer, 2011.
• Loftin, Colin, and Ellen J. MacKenzie, “Building National Estimates of Violent Victimization,” paper presented at the National Research Council Symposium on the Understanding and Control of Violent Behavior, Destin, Fla., April 1–6, 1990.
• Loftin, Colin, David McDowall, and Matthew D. Fetzer, “A Comparison of SHR and Vital Statistics Homicide Estimates for U.S. Cities,” Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice , Vol. 24, No. 1, 2008.
• Loftin, C., D. McDowall, B. Wiersema, and T. J. Cottey, “Effects of Restrictive Licensing of Handguns on Homicide and Suicide in the District of Columbia,” New England Journal of Medicine , Vol. 325, No. 23, 1991.
• Logan, J., Holly A. Hill, Michele Lynberg Black, Alex E. Crosby, Debra L. Karch, Jamar D. Barnes, and Keri M. Lubell, “Characteristics of Perpetrators in Homicide-Followed-by-Suicide Incidents: National Violent Death Reporting System—17 U.S. States, 2003–2005,” American Journal of Epidemiology , Vol. 168, No. 9, 2008.
• Longo, Daniel, Lock and Load: After Recent Sales Surge, Demand Normalizes as Fears of Gun Control Subside , IBISWorld Industry Report 33299a: Guns and Ammunition Manufacturing in the U.S., June 2017.
• Lott, John R., Jr., “The Concealed-Handgun Debate,” Journal of Legal Studies , Vol. 27, No. 1, January 1998a.
• Lott, John R., Jr., More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun-Control Laws , 1st ed., University of Chicago Press, 1998b.
• Lott, John R., Jr., More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun-Control Laws , 2nd ed., University of Chicago Press, 2000.
• Lott, John R., Jr., The Bias Against Guns: Why Almost Everything You’ve Heard About Gun Control Is Wrong , Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2003.
• Lott, John R., Jr., More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun-Control Laws , 3rd ed., University of Chicago Press, 2010.
• Lott, John R., Jr., “The FBI’s Misinterpretation of the Change in Mass Public Shootings,” ACJS Today , Vol. 40, No. 2, 2015.
• Lott, John R., Jr., Concealed Carry Permit Holders Across the United States: 2018 , Crime Prevention Research Center, August 14, 2018.
• Lott, John R., Jr., “Schools That Allow Teachers to Carry Guns Are Extremely Safe: Data on the Rate of Shootings and Accidents in Schools That Allow Teachers to Carry,” Crime Prevention Research Center, April 25, 2019.
• Lott, John R., Jr., and William M. Landes, Multiple Victim Public Shootings, Bombings, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handgun Laws: Contrasting Private and Public Law Enforcement , University of Chicago Law School, John M. Olin Law and Economics Working Paper No. 73, 1999.
• Lott, John R., Jr., and William Landes, “Multiple Victim Public Shootings,” 2000 (unpublished). As of June 29, 2017: http://www.shack.co.nz/pistoltaupo/SSRN_ID272929_code010610560.pdf
• Lott, John R., Jr., Carlisle E. Moody, and Rujun Wang, Concealed Carry Permit Holders Across the United States: 2021 , Crime Prevention Research Center, October 11, 2021.
• Lott, John R., Jr., Carlisle E. Moody, and Rujun Wang, Concealed Carry Permit Holders Across the United States: 2023 , Crime Prevention Research Center, November 29, 2023.
• Lott, John R., Jr., Carlisle E. Moody, and John E. Whitley, “Re: ‘What Do We Know About the Association Between Firearm Legislation and Firearm-Related Injuries?’” American Journal of Epidemiology , Vol. 184, No. 1, 2016.
• Lott, John R., Jr., and D. B. Mustard, “Crime, Deterrence, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns,” Journal of Legal Studies , Vol. 26, No. 1, 1997.
• Lott, John R., Florenz Plassmann, and John E. Whitley, “Confirming More Guns, Less Crime,” December 9, 2002.
• Lott, John R., Jr., and John E. Whitley, “Safe-Storage Gun Laws: Accidental Deaths, Suicides, and Crime,” Journal of Law and Economics , Vol. 44, No. 2, 2001.
• Lott, John R., Jr., and John E. Whitley, “Measurement Error in County-Level UCR Data,” Journal of Quantitative Criminology , Vol. 19, No. 2, June 2003.
• Lott, John R., Jr., and John E. Whitley, “Abortion and Crime: Unwanted Children and Out-of-Wedlock Births,” Economic Inquiry , Vol. 45, No. 2, 2007.
• Lott, John R., Jr., John E. Whitley, and Rebekah C. Riley, Concealed Carry Permit Holders Across the United States , Crime Prevention Research Center, 2016.
• Lowe, Sarah R., and Sandro Galea, “The Mental Health Consequences of Mass Shootings,” Trauma, Violence, and Abuse , Vol. 18, No. 1, 2017.
• Lubin, G., N. Werbeloff, D. Halperin, M. Shmushkevitch, M. Weiser, and H. Y. Knobler, “Decrease in Suicide Rates After a Change of Policy Reducing Access to Firearms in Adolescents: A Naturalistic Epidemiological Study,” Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior , Vol. 40, No. 5, 2010.
• Luca, Michael, Deepak Malhotra, and Christopher Poliquin, The Impact of Mass Shootings on Gun Policy , working paper, Harvard Business School, 2016.
• Luca, Michael, Deepak Malhotra, and Christopher Poliquin, “Handgun Waiting Periods Reduce Gun Deaths,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , Vol. 114, No. 46, 2017.
• Luca, Michael, Deepak Malhotra, and Christopher Poliquin, “The Impact of Mass Shootings on Gun Policy,” Journal of Public Economics , Vol. 181, January 2020.
• Ludwig, Jens, “Concealed-Gun-Carrying Laws and Violent Crime: Evidence from State Panel Data,” International Review of Law and Economics , Vol. 18, No. 3, 1998.
• Ludwig, Jens, “Gun Self-Defense and Deterrence,” Crime and Justice: A Review of Research , Vol. 27, 2000.
• Ludwig, J., and P. J. Cook, “Homicide and Suicide Rates Associated with Implementation of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act,” JAMA , Vol. 284, No. 5, 2000.
• Lum, Hillary D., Hanna K. Flaten, and Marian E. Betz, “Gun Access and Safety Practices Among Older Adults,” Current Gerontology and Geriatrics Research , Vol. 2016, 2016.
• Lundberg, Ian, Rebecca Johnson, and Brandon M. Stewart, “What Is Your Estimand? Defining the Target Quantity Connects Statistical Evidence to Theory,” American Sociological Review , Vol. 86, No. 3, 2021.
• Luo, Michael, and Mike McIntire, “Children and Guns: The Hidden Toll,” New York Times , September 28, 2013.
• Luoma, Jason B., Catherine E. Martin, and Jane L. Pearson, “Contact with Mental Health and Primary Care Providers Before Suicide: A Review of the Evidence,” American Journal of Psychiatry , Vol. 159, No. 6, 2002.
• Lyons, Vivian H., Miriam J. Haviland, Deborah Azrael, Avanti Adhia, M. Alex Bellenger, Alice Ellyson, Ali Rowhani-Rahbar, and Frederick P. Rivara, “Firearm Purchasing and Storage During the COVID-19 Pandemic,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 27, No. 1, 2021.
• Lyons, Vivian H., Frederick P. Rivara, Alice Ning-Xue Yan, Cara Currier, Erin Ballsmith, Kevin P. Haggerty, Lauren Whiteside, Anthony S. Floyd, Anjum Hajat, and Ali Rowhani-Rahbar, “Firearm-Related Behaviors Following Firearm Injury: Changes in Ownership, Carrying and Storage,” Journal of Behavioral Medicine , Vol. 42, No. 4, August 2019.
• MacDonald, J., D. Golinelli, R. J. Stokes, and R. Bluthenthal, “The Effect of Business Improvement Districts on the Incidence of Violent Crimes,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 16, No. 5, 2010.
• MacDonald, J., R. J. Stokes, B. Grunwald, and R. Bluthenthal, “The Privatization of Public Safety in Urban Neighborhoods: Do Business Improvement Districts Reduce Violent Crime Among Adolescents?” Law and Society Review , Vol. 47, No. 3, 2013.
• MacFarlane, Scott, “Red Flag Laws Found in Florida Work When Used Correctly, Data Show,” Wink, June 7, 2022.
• MacKinnon, James G., and Matthew D. Webb, “Wild Bootstrap Inference for Wildly Different Cluster Sizes,” Journal of Applied Econometrics , Vol. 32, No. 2, 2017.
• Madensen, T. D., and J. E. Eck, “Violence in Bars: Exploring the Impact of Place Manager Decision-Making,” Crime Prevention and Community Safety , Vol. 10, No. 2, 2008.
• Maguire, E. R., C. W. Telep, and T. Abt, “The Effectiveness of Street Outreach Worker Programs for Reducing Violence: A Systematic Review,” Campbell Collaboration, 2018.
• Maguire, E. R., C. D. Uchida, and K. D. Hassell, “Problem-Oriented Policing in Colorado Springs: A Content Analysis of 753 Cases,” Crime and Delinquency , Vol. 61, No. 1, 2015.
• Makarios, Matthew D., and Travis C. Pratt, “The Effectiveness of Policies and Programs That Attempt to Reduce Firearm Violence: A Meta-Analysis,” Crime and Delinquency , Vol. 58, No. 2, 2012.
• Maltz, M. D., and J. Targonski, “A Note on the Use of County-Level UCR Data,” Journal of Quantitative Criminology , Vol. 18, No. 2, 2002.
• Manning, Willard, “Comment: The Impact of Concealed-Carry Laws,” in Jens Ludwig and Philip J. Cook, eds., Evaluating Gun Policy: Effects on Crime and Violence , Brookings Institution Press, 2003.
• Manski, Charles F., and John V. Pepper, How Do Right-to-Carry Laws Affect Crime Rates? Coping with Ambiguity Using Bounded-Variation Assumptions , Cambridge, Mass.: National Bureau for Economic Research, NBER Working Paper 21701, November 2015.
• Manski, Charles F., and John V. Pepper, “How Do Right-to-Carry Laws Affect Crime Rates? Coping with Ambiguity Using Bounded-Variation Assumptions,” Review of Economics and Statistics , Vol. 100, No. 2, 2018.
• Mapping Police Violence, homepage, last updated January 14, 2024. As of February 1, 2024: https://mappingpoliceviolence.org
• Mares, D., and E. Blackburn, “Evaluating the Effectiveness of an Acoustic Gunshot Location System in St. Louis, MO,” Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice , Vol. 6, No. 1, 2012.
• Marinelli, Laura W., Shefali Thaker, Kevin Borrup, David S. Shapiro, George C. Bentley, Hassan Saleheen, Garry Lapidus, and Brendan T. Campbell, “Hartford’s Gun Buy-Back Program: Are We on Target?” Connecticut Medicine , Vol. 77, No. 8, September 2013.
• Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Commission, Initial Report Submitted to the Governor, Speaker of the House of Representatives and Senate President , January 2, 2019.
• Marron, Donald B., and Adele C. Morris, How Should Governments Use Revenue from Corrective Taxes? Tax Policy Center, Urban Institute and Brookings Institution, January 2016.
• Martin, Robert A., and Richard L. Legault, “Systematic Measurement Error with State-Level Crime Data: Evidence from the ‘More Guns, Less Crime’ Debate,” Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency , Vol. 42, No. 2, May 2005.
• Marvell, Thomas B., “The Impact of Banning Juvenile Gun Possession,” Journal of Law and Economics , Vol. 44, No. S2, 2001.
• Maryland State Police, “Wear and Carry Permit Training,” webpage, undated. As of September 12, 2022: https://mdsp.maryland.gov/Organization/Pages/CriminalInvestigationBureau/LicensingDivision/Training/WearandCarryPermit.aspx
• Marylanders to Prevent Gun Violence, “Maryland Safe Storage Map,” webpage, undated. As of December 7, 2021: https://mdpgv.org/safestoragemap/
• Massey, Douglas S., and Nancy A. Denton, American Apartheid : Segregation and the Making of the Underclass , Harvard University Press, 1993.
• Mass Shooting Tracker, homepage, undated. As of June 3, 2020: https://www.massshootingtracker.org
• Masters, Kate, “Fear of Other People Is Now the Primary Motivation for American Gun Ownership, a Landmark Survey Finds,” The Trace , September 19, 2016.
• Matejkowski, J., J. Fairfax-Columbo, S. W. Cullen, S. C. Marcus, and P. L. Solomon, “Exploring the Potential of Stricter Gun Restrictions for People with Serious Mental Illness to Reduce Homicide in the United States,” Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology , Vol. 25, No. 3, 2014.
• Matthay, Ellicott C., Jessica Galin, Kara E. Rudolph, Kriszta Farkas, Garen J. Wintemute, and Jennifer Ahern, “In-State and Interstate Associations Between Gun Shows and Firearm Deaths and Injuries: A Quasi-Experimental Study,” Annals of Internal Medicine , Vol. 167, No. 12, 2017.
• Mauri, Amanda I., Julia A. Wolfson, Deborah Azrael, and Matthew Miller, “Firearm Storage Practices and Risk Perceptions,” American Journal of Preventive Medicine , Vol. 57, No. 6, December 2019.
• Maxson, C. L., K. M. Hennigan, and D. C. Sloane, “‘It's Getting Crazy Out There’: Can a Civil Gang Injunction Change a Community?” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 4, No. 3, 2005.
• Mayors Against Illegal Guns, “Access Denied: How the Gun Lobby Is Depriving Police, Policy Makers, and the Public of the Data We Need to Prevent Gun Violence,” Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund, 2013.
• Mazerolle, L. G., C. Watkins, D. Rogan, and J. Frank, “Using Gunshot Detection Systems in Police Departments: The Impact on Police Response Times and Officer Workloads,” Police Quarterly , Vol. 1, No. 2, 1998.
• McCarthy, John F., Frederic C. Blow, Rosalinda V. Ignacio, Mark A. Ilgen, Karen L. Austin, and Marcia Valenstein, “Suicide Among Patients in the Veterans Affairs Health System: Rural-Urban Differences in Rates, Risks, and Methods,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 102, No. S1, March 2012.
• McClellan, Chandler, and Erdal Tekin, “Stand Your Ground Laws, Homicides, and Injuries,” Journal of Human Resources , Vol. 52, No. 3, 2017.
• McClelland, Robert, “New Gun and Ammo Taxes Sound Like Promising Ways to Reduce Gun Violence. But There Are Problems,” Tax Policy Center, Urban Institute and Brookings Institution, May 24, 2018.
• McClelland, Robert, and Sarah Gault, The Synthetic Control Method as a Tool to Understand State Policy , Urban Institute, 2017.
• McCormack, Phillip D., April Pattavina, and Paul E. Tracy, “Assessing the Coverage and Representativeness of the National Incident-Based Reporting System,” Crime and Delinquency , Vol. 63, No. 4, 2017.
• McCourt, Alexander D., Cassandra K. Crifasi, Elizabeth A. Stuart, Jon S. Vernick, Rose M. C. Kagawa, Garen J. Wintemute, and Daniel W. Webster, “Purchaser Licensing, Point-of-Sale Background Check Laws, and Firearm Homicide and Suicide in 4 US States, 1985–2017,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 110, No. 10, October 2020.
• McDonald, J. F., “An Economic Analysis of Guns, Crime, and Gun Control,” Journal of Criminal Justice , Vol. 27, No. 1, 1999.
• McDougal, Topher L., Daniel Montolio, and Jurgen Brauer, "Modeling the U.S. Firearms Market," International Social Science Journal , Vol. 73, No. 248, June 2023.
• McDowall, D., C. Loftin, and S. Presser, “Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment,” Journal of Quantitative Criminology , Vol. 16, No. 1, 2000.
• McDowall, D., C. Loftin, and B. Wiersema, “Estimates of the Frequency of Firearm Self Defense from the National Crime Victimization Survey,” State University of New York, School of Criminal Justice, Violence Research Group Discussion Paper 20, 1998 (unpublished).
• McDowall, D., and B. Wiersema, “The Incidence of Defensive Firearm Use by U.S. Crime Victims, 1987 Through 1990,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 84, No. 12, 1994.
• McFarlane, J., J. C. Campbell, S. Wilt, C. Sachs, Y. Ulrich, and X. Xu, “Stalking and Intimate Partner Femicide,” Homicide Studies , Vol. 3, 1999.
• McGarrell, E. F., “Research Foundations and Implications for Practice,” Department of Justice Journal of Federal Law and Practice , Vol. 66, No. 6, 2018.
• McGarrell, E. F., N. Corsaro, N. K. Hipple, and T. S. Bynum, “Project Safe Neighborhoods and Violent Crime Trends in US Cities: Assessing Violent Crime Impact,” Journal of Quantitative Criminology , Vol. 26, No. 2, 2010.
• McGee, K. S., T. Coyne-Beasley, and R. M. Johnson, “Review of Evaluations of Educational Approaches to Promote Safe Storage of Firearms,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 9, No. 2, 2003.
• McGinty, Emma E., Alene Kennedy-Hendricks, Seema Choksy, and Colleen L. Barry, “Trends in News Media Coverage of Mental Illness in the United States: 1995–2014,” Health Affairs , Vol. 35, No. 6, 2016.
• McGinty, E. E., D. W. Webster, M. Jarlenski, and C. L. Barry, “News Media Framing of Serious Mental Illness and Gun Violence in the United States,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 104, No. 3, 2014.
• McGirr, A., J. Renaud, A. Bureau, M. Seguin, A. Lesage, and G. Turecki, “Impulsive-Aggressive Behaviours and Completed Suicide Across the Life Cycle: A Predisposition for Younger Age of Suicide,” Psychological Medicine , Vol. 38, No. 3, 2007.
• McGuire, Margaret, Mariann Manno, Allison Rook, Louise Maranda, Elizabeth Renaud, Anthony DeRoss, and Michael Hirsh, “Goods for Guns—The Use of a Gun Buyback as an Injury Prevention/Community Education Tool,” Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery , Vol. 71, No. 5, Supp. 2, November 2011.
• McPhedran, Samara, “A Systematic Review of Quantitative Evidence About the Impacts of Australian Legislative Reform on Firearm Homicide,” Aggression and Violent Behavior , Vol. 28, 2016.
• McPhedran, Samara, “An Evaluation of the Impacts of Changing Firearms Legislation on Australian Female Firearm Homicide Victimization Rates,” Violence Against Women , Vol. 24, No. 7, May 2018.
• McPhedran, Samara, and Jeanine Baker, “Mass Shootings in Australia and New Zealand: A Descriptive Study of Incidence,” Justice Policy Journal , Vol. 8, No. 1, 2011.
• McPhedran, Samara, and Jeanine Baker, “Lethal and Non-Lethal Violence Against Women in Australia: Measurement Challenges, Conceptual Frameworks, and Limitations in Knowledge,” Violence Against Women , Vol. 18, No. 8, 2012.
• Medina, Richard M., Simon Brewer, Andrew M. Linke, Emily A. Nicolosi, Marco Allain, and Douglas Tharp, “The Sociospatial Ecology of Deaths During Police Interactions in the United States, 2016–2020,” Political Geography , Vol. 98, 2022.
• Mentch, Lucas, “On Racial Disparities in Recent Fatal Police Shootings,” Statistics and Public Policy , Vol. 7, No. 1, 2020.
• Mercy, James A., Robin Ikeda, and Kenneth E. Powell, “Firearm-Related Injury Surveillance: An Overview of Progress and the Challenges Ahead,” American Journal of Preventive Medicine , Vol. 15, No. 3, Supp. 1, 1998.
• Merrefield, Clark “Gun Buybacks: What the Research Says,” blog post, Journalist’s Resource, last updated October 21, 2022. As of December 7, 2022: https://journalistsresource.org/health/gun-buybacks-what-the-research-says/
• Merrill-Francis, Molly, Emma E. McGinty, Colleen L. Barry, Daniel W. Webster, and Cassandra K. Crifasi, “Association Between Gun Owner Attitudes and Their Behavior in Private Firearm Sales,” Preventive Medicine , Vol. 147, June 2021.
• Mesic, Aldina, Lydia Franklin, Alev Cansever, Fiona Potter, Anika Sharma, Anita Knopov, and Michael Siegel, "The Relationship Between Structural Racism and Black-White Disparities in Fatal Police Shootings at the State Level," Journal of the National Medical Association , Vol. 110, No. 2, 2018.
• Messing, Jill Theresa, Millan AbiNader, Tricia Bent-Goodley, and Jacquelyn Campbell, “Preventing Intimate Partner Homicide: The Long Road Ahead,” Homicide Studies , Vol. 26, No. 1, 2022.
• Metinko, Chris, and Paul Burgarino, “Perata Launches Gun Buyback Program at Scene of Oakland Shooting,” East Bay Times , January 18, 2008.
• Metzl, J. M., and K. T. MacLeish, “Mental Illness, Mass Shootings, and the Politics of American Firearms,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 105, No. 2, 2015.
• Miletich, Steve, “‘Extreme Risk’: Seattle Police Have Seized 43 Guns from People Deemed to Be a Danger Under Year-Old Law,” Seattle Times , May 24, 2018.
• Mill, John Stuart, A System of Logic , Parker, 1843.
• Miller, Gabrielle F., Sarah Beth L. Barnett, Curtis S. Florence, Kathleen McDavid Harrison, Linda L. Dahlberg, and James A. Mercy, “Costs of Fatal and Nonfatal Firearm Injuries in the US, 2019 and 2020,” American Journal of Preventive Medicine , Vol. 66, No. 2, February 2024.
• Miller, Matthew, and Deborah Azrael, “Firearm Storage in US Households with Children: Findings from the 2021 National Firearm Survey,” JAMA Network Open , Vol. 5, No. 2, 2022.
• Miller, M., D. Azrael, and C. Barber, “Suicide Mortality in the United States: The Importance of Attending to Method in Understanding Population-Level Disparities in the Burden of Suicide,” Annual Review of Public Health , Vol. 33, 2012.
• Miller, M., D. Azrael, and D. Hemenway, “Household Firearm Ownership and Suicide Rates in the United States,” Epidemiology , Vol. 13, No. 5, 2002.
• Miller, M., D. Azrael, and D. Hemenway, “The Epidemiology of Case Fatality Rates for Suicide in the Northeast,” Annals of Emergency Medicine , Vol. 43, No. 6, 2004.
• Miller, M., D. Azrael, D. Hemenway, and M. Vriniotis, “Firearm Storage Practices and Rates of Unintentional Firearm Deaths in the United States,” Accident Analysis and Prevention , Vol. 37, No. 4, 2005.
• Miller, M., D. Azrael, L. Hepburn, D. Hemenway, and S. J. Lippmann, “The Association Between Changes in Household Firearm Ownership and Rates of Suicide in the United States, 1981–2002,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 12, No. 3, 2006.
• Miller, M., C. Barber, D. Azrael, D. Hemenway, and B. E. Molnar, “Recent Psychopathology, Suicidal Thoughts and Suicide Attempts in Households With and Without Firearms: Findings from the National Comorbidity Study Replication,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 15, No. 3, 2009.
• Miller, M., C. Barber, R. A. White, and D. Azrael, “Firearms and Suicide in the United States: Is Risk Independent of Underlying Suicidal Behavior?” American Journal of Epidemiology , Vol. 178, No. 6, 2013.
• Miller, M., and D. Hemenway, “The Relationship Between Firearms and Suicide: A Review of the Literature,” Aggression and Violent Behavior , Vol. 4, No. 1, 1999.
• Miller, M., D. Hemenway, and D. Azrael, “Firearms and Suicide in the Northeast,” Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery , Vol. 57, No. 3, 2004.
• Miller, Matthew, Katherine Hempstead, Tuan Nguyen, Catherine Barber, Sarah Rosenberg-Wohl, and Deborah Azrael, “Method Choice in Nonfatal Self-Harm as a Predictor of Subsequent Episodes of Self-Harm and Suicide: Implications for Clinical Practice,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 103, No. 6, 2013a.
• Miller, M., L. Hepburn, and D. Azrael, “Firearm Acquisition Without Background Checks: Results of a National Survey,” Annals of Internal Medicine , Vol. 166, 2017.
• Miller, Matthew, Carmel Salhi, Catherine Barber, Deborah Azrael, Elizabeth Beatriz, John Berrigan, Sara Brandspigel, Marian E. Betz, and Carol Runyan, “Changes in Firearm and Medication Storage Practices in Homes of Youths at Risk for Suicide: Results of the SAFETY Study, a Clustered, Emergency Department–Based, Multisite, Stepped-Wedge Trial,” Annals of Emergency Medicine , Vol. 76, No. 2, August 2020.
• Miller, M., S. A. Swanson, and D. Azrael, “Are We Missing Something Pertinent? A Bias Analysis of Unmeasured Confounding in the Firearm-Suicide Literature,” Epidemiologic Reviews , Vol. 38, No. 1, 2016.
• Miller, M., M. Warren, D. Hemenway, and D. Azrael, “Firearms and Suicide in U.S. Cities,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 21, No. E1, 2015.
• Miller, Matthew, Yifan Zhang, Lea Prince, Sonja A. Swanson, Garen J. Wintemute, Erin E. Holsinger, and David M. Studdert, “Suicide Deaths Among Women in California Living with Handgun Owners vs Those Living with Other Adults in Handgun-Free Homes, 2004–2016,” JAMA Psychiatry , Vol. 79, No. 6, 2022.
• Miller, Matthew, W. Zhang, Ali Rowhani-Rahbar, and Deborah Azrael, “Child Access Prevention Laws and Firearm Storage: Results from a National Survey,” American Journal of Preventive Medicine , forthcoming.
• Miller, Matthew, Wilson Zhang, Ali Rowhani-Rahbar, and Deborah Azrael, “Child Access Prevention Laws and Firearm Storage: Results from a National Survey,” American Journal of Preventive Medicine , Vol. 62, No. 3, 2022.
• Miller, Megan, and John Pepper, “Assessing the Effect of Firearms Regulations Using Partial Identification Methods: A Case Study of the Impact of Stand Your Ground Laws on Violent Crime,” Law and Contemporary Problems , Vol. 83, 2020.
• Mills, Emily, “'Take Dangerous Firearms Off the Streets’: Summit County Planning Gun Buyback Event,” Akron Beacon Journal , September 19, 2022.
• Milne, John S., Stephen W. Hargarten, Arthur L. Kellermann, and Garen J. Wintemute, “Effect of Current Federal Regulations on Handgun Safety Features,” Annals of Emergency Medicine , Vol. 41, No. 1, 2003.
• Minnesota Department of Public Safety, “BCA Releases 2021 Permit to Carry Annual Report,” March 1, 2022.
• Minozzi, Silvia, Michela Cinquini, Silvia Gianola, Greta Castellini, Chiara Gerardi, and Rita Banzi, “Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions Showed Low Inter-Rater Reliability and Challenges in Its Application,” Journal of Clinical Epidemiology , Vol. 112, August 2019.
• Mitchell, R. J., “Frequency Versus Duration of Police Patrol Visits for Reducing Crime in Hot Spots: Non-Experimental Findings from the Sacramento Hot Spots Experiment,” Cambridge Journal of Evidence-Based Policing , Vol. 1, No. 1, 2017.
• Moe, Caitlin A., Miriam J. Haviland, Andrew G. Bowen, Ali Rowhani-Rahbar, and Frederick P. Rivara, “Association of Minimum Age Laws for Handgun Purchase and Possession with Homicides Perpetrated by Young Adults Aged 18 to 20 Years,” JAMA Pediatrics , Vol. 174, No. 11, 2020.
• Molina, J. A., and R. Duarte, “Risk Determinants of Suicide Attempts Among Adolescents,” American Journal of Economics and Sociology , Vol. 65, No. 2, 2006.
• Monk, Ellis P., “The Color of Punishment: African Americans, Skin Tone, and the Criminal Justice System,” Ethnic and Racial Studies , Vol. 42, No. 10, 2019.
• Monroe, Jeffrey D., Homicide and Gun Control: The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act and Homicide Rates , LFB Scholarly Publishing, 2008.
• Montanaro, Domenico, “Poll: Most Americans Want to See Congress Pass Gun Restrictions,” NPR, September 10, 2019.
• Monuteaux, M. C., D. Azrael, and M. Miller, “Association of Increased Safe Household Firearm Storage with Firearm Suicide and Unintentional Death Among US Youths,” JAMA Pediatrics , Vol. 173, No. 7, 2019.
• Monuteaux, M. C., L. K. Lee, D. Hemenway, R. Mannix, and E. W. Fleegler, “Firearm Ownership and Violent Crime in the U.S.: An Ecologic Study,” American Journal of Preventive Medicine , Vol. 49, No. 2, 2015.
• Moody, Carlisle E., “Testing for the Effects of Concealed Weapons Laws: Specification Errors and Robustness,” Journal of Law and Economics , Vol. 44, No. S2, 2001.
• Moody, Carlisle E., and Thomas B. Marvell, “The Debate on Shall-Issue Laws,” Econ Journal Watch , Vol. 5, No. 3, 2008.
• Moody, Carlisle E., and Thomas B. Marvell, “The Debate on Shall-Issue Laws, Continued,” Econ Journal Watch , Vol. 6, No. 2, 2009.
• Moody, Carlisle E., and Thomas B. Marvell, “On the Choice of Control Variables in the Crime Equation,” Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics , Vol. 72, No. 5, 2010.
• Moody, Carlisle E., and Thomas B. Marvell, “The Impact of Right-to-Carry Laws: A Critique of the 2014 Version of Aneja, Donohue, and Zhang,” Econ Journal Watch , Vol. 15, No. 1, January 2018a.
• Moody, Carlisle E., and Thomas B. Marvell, “Clustering and Standard Error Bias in Fixed Effects Panel Data Regressions,” Journal of Quantitative Criminology , May 2018b.
• Moody, Carlisle E., and Thomas B. Marvell, “Clustering and Standard Error Bias in Fixed Effects Panel Data Regressions,” Journal of Quantitative Criminology , Vol. 36, No. 4, June 2020.
• Moody, Carlisle E., Thomas B. Marvell, Paul R. Zimmerman, and Fasil Alemante, “The Impact of Right-to-Carry Laws on Crime: An Exercise in Replication,” Review of Economics and Finance , Vol. 4, 2014.
• Moreno-Küstner, Berta, Carlos Martín, and Loly Pastor, “Prevalence of Psychotic Disorders and Its Association with Methodological Issues: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses,” PLoS One , Vol. 13, No. 4, 2018.
• Morgan, Erin R., Anthony Gomez, Frederick P. Rivara, and Ali Rowhani-Rahbar, “Firearm Storage and Adult Alcohol Misuse Among Washington State Households with Children,” JAMA Pediatrics , Vol. 173, No. 1, January 2019a.
• Morgan, Erin R., Anthony Gomez, Frederick P. Rivara, and Ali Rowhani-Rahbar, “Household Firearm Ownership and Storage, Suicide Risk Factors, and Memory Loss Among Older Adults: Results from a Statewide Survey,” Annals of Internal Medicine , Vol. 171, No. 3, August 6, 2019b.
• Morgan, Erin Renee, Anthony Gomez, and Ali Rowhani-Rahbar, “Firearm Ownership, Storage Practices, and Suicide Risk Factors in Washington State, 2013–2016,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 108, No. 7, July 2018.
• Morning Consult and Politico, National Tracking Poll , No. 2205143, May 25, 2022.
• Morral, Andrew R., Terry L. Schell, and Margaret Tankard, The Magnitude and Sources of Disagreement Among Gun Policy Experts , RAND Corporation, RR-2088/1-RC, 2018. As of March 2, 2018: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2088z1.html
• Morral, Andrew R., Rosanna Smart, Terry L. Schell, Brian Vegetabile, and Emma Thomas, "Geographic and Demographic Differences in the Proportion of Individuals Living in Households with a Firearm, 1990–2018," JAMA Network Open , Vol. 7, No. 2, 2024.
• Moskos, Michelle A., Lenora Olson, Sarah R. Halbern, and Doug Gray, “Utah Youth Suicide Study: Barriers to Mental Health Treatment for Adolescents,” Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior , Vol. 37, No. 2, 2007.
• Moyer, R., J. M. MacDonald, G. Ridgeway, and C. C. Branas, “Effect of Remediating Blighted Vacant Land on Shootings: A Citywide Cluster Randomized Trial,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 109, No. 1, 2019.
• Mueller, Kristen L., Sonya Naganathan, and Richard T. Griffey, “Counseling on Access to Lethal Means-Emergency Department (CALM-ED): A Quality Improvement Program for Firearm Injury Prevention,” Western Journal of Emergency Medicine , Vol. 21, No. 5, August 20, 2020.
• Mullahy, John, and Edward C. Norton, Why Transform Y? A Critical Assessment of Dependent-Variable Transformations in Regression Models for Skewed and Sometimes-Zero Outcomes , National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper No. 30735, December 2022.
• Mullainathan, Sendhil, “Police Killings of Blacks: Here Is What the Data Say,” New York Times , October 16, 2015.
• Munasib, Abdul, Genti Kostandini, and Jeffrey L. Jordan, “Impact of the Stand Your Ground Law on Gun Deaths: Evidence of a Rural Urban Dichotomy,” European Journal of Law and Economics , Vol. 45, No. 3, 2018.
• Murder Accountability Project, “Clearance Rates: Uniform Crime Report for Homicides: 1965–2018,” 2019. As of January 24, 2020: https://www.murderdata.org/p/blog-page.html
• Murphy, Justin, “Are ‘Stand Your Ground’ Laws Racist and Sexist? A Statistical Analysis of Cases in Florida, 2005–2013*,” Social Science Quarterly , Vol. 99, No. 1, March 2018.
• Murphy v. Guerrero , 2016 U.S. Dist. Northern Mariana Islands, 9th Circuit, September 28, 2016.
• Mustard, David B., “The Impact of Gun Laws on Police Deaths,” Journal of Law and Economics , Vol. 44, No. S2, 2001.
• Musu, Lauren, Anlan Zhang, Ke Wang, Jizhi Zhang, and Barbara A. Oudekerk, Indicators of School Crime and Safety: 2018 , National Center for Education Statistics, NCES 2019-047, NCJ 252571, April 2019.
• Nagin, D. S., “Deterrence in the Twenty-First Century,” Crime and Justice , Vol. 42, No. 1, 2013.
• Nagin, Daniel S., "Firearm Availability and Fatal Police Shootings," Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science , Vol. 687, No. 1, 2020.
• Nagle, Megan E., Kaustubh G. Joshi, Richard L. Frierson, Martin W. Durkin, and Alexandra Karydi, “Knowledge and Attitudes of Psychiatrists About the Gun Rights of Persons with Mental Illness,” Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law , Vol. 49, No. 1, March 2021.
• National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Proactive Policing: Effects on Crime and Communities , National Academies Press, 2018.
• National Archive of Criminal Justice Data, “Resource Guide: Uniform Crime Reporting Program,” webpage, undated. As of October 20, 2019: https://www.icpsr.umich.edu/icpsrweb/content/NACJD/guides/ucr.html
• National Cancer Institute, The Role of the Media in Promoting and Reducing Tobacco Use , U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, No. 07–6242, 2008.
• National Conference of State Legislatures, Fiscal Affairs Program, Tax Policy Handbook for State Legislators , 3rd ed., February 2010.
• National Institute of Mental Health, “NIMH Awards Funding for Research on Preventing Firearm Injury and Mortality,” webpage, October 23, 2020. As of December 7, 2021: https://www.nimh.nih.gov/news/research-highlights/2020/nimh-awards-funding-for-research-on-preventing-firearm-injury-and-mortality
• National Network for Safe Communities, Group Violence Intervention: An Implementation Guide , Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, 2016.
• National Research Council, Understanding and Preventing Violence , A. J. Reiss and J. Roth, eds., National Academies Press, 1993.
• National Research Council, Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review , National Academies Press, 2004.
• National Research Council, Fairness and Effectiveness in Policing: The Evidence, National Academies Press, 2004a.
• National Research Council, Estimating the Incidence of Rape and Sexual Assault , National Academies Press, 2014.
• National Rifle Association, Institute for Legislative Action, “State Gun Laws,” webpage, undated. As of January 11, 2018: https://www.nraila.org/gun-laws/state-gun-laws
• National Rifle Association, Institute for Legislative Action, “Bloomberg Course Continues Bloomberging Rights Away,” May 24, 2019a.
• National Rifle Association, Institute for Legislative Action, “New Zealand Experience Further Proves Registration Facilitates Confiscations,” July 8, 2019b.
• National Shooting Sports Foundation, “Modern Sporting Rifle: Introduction,” webpage, undated. As of October 14, 2019: https://www.nssf.org/msr/
• National Shooting Sports Foundation, "Gun Storage for Your Lifestyle," fact sheet, undated-a. As of December 6, 2021: https://projectchildsafe.org/wp-content/uploads/files/PCS_SafeStorage_19.pdf
• National Shooting Sports Foundation, Firearms Production in the United States , 2015.
• National Shooting Sports Foundation, “Project ChildSafe,” webpage, 2016. As of January 10, 2022: https://www.projectchildsafe.org/
• National Shooting Sports Foundation, Firearms and Ammunition Industry Economic Impact Report , 2017.
• National Shooting Sports Foundation, Firearms and Ammunition Industry Economic Impact Report , 2019.
• National Shooting Sports Foundation, A Guide to Responsible Gun Ownership, Safe Handling and Secure Storage , Project ChildSafe, 2020.
• National Shooting Sports Foundation, “NSSF Releases Most Recent Firearm Production Figures,” webpage, November 16, 2020a. As of August 31, 2022: https://www.nssf.org/articles/nssf-releases-most-recent-firearm-production-figures/
• National Shooting Sports Foundation, Firearms and Ammunition Industry Economic Impact Report , 2022.
• National Shooting Sports Foundation, “Commonly Owned: NSSF Announces over 24 Million MSRS in Circulation,” webpage, July 20, 2022a. As of December 7, 2022: https://www.nssf.org/articles/commonly-owned-nssf-announces-over-24-million-msrs-in-circulation/
• National Shooting Sports Foundation, Firearms and Ammunition Industry Economic Impact Report 2022 , 2023.
• Nazarov, Oybek, Joseph Guan, Stanford Chihuri, and Guohua Li, “Research Utility of the National Violent Death Reporting System: A Scoping Review,” Injury Epidemiology , Vol. 6, No. 18, 2019.
• Neil, Roland, and Christopher Winship, “Methodological Challenges and Opportunities in Testing for Racial Discrimination in Policing,” Annual Review of Criminology , Vol. 2, 2019.
• Nelson, Charles M., Economic Implications of Land Use Patterns for Natural Resource Recreation and Tourism , Michigan Land Resource Project, Public Sector Consultants, 2001.
• Nelson, Jodi L., “The Lautenberg Amendment: An Essential Tool for Combatting Domestic Violence,” North Dakota Law Review , Vol. 75, No. 2, 1999.
• Nelson, Jon P., “Gender Differences in Alcohol Demand: A Systematic Review of the Role of Prices and Taxes,” Health Economics , Vol. 23, No. 10, 2014.
• Neufeld, Miriam Y., Michael Poulson, Sabrina E. Sanchez, and Michael B. Siegel, “State Firearm Laws and Nonfatal Firearm Injury-Related Inpatient Hospitalizations: A Nationwide Panel Study,” Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery , Vol. 92, No. 3, March 1, 2022.
• New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen , 597 U.S. ___, 2022.
• Newell, Summer, Emily Kenyon, Khaya D. Clark, Victoria Elliott, Annabelle Rynerson, Martha S. Gerrity, Elizabeth Karras, Joseph A. Simonetti, and Steven K. Dobscha, “Veterans Are Agreeable to Discussions About Firearms Safety in Primary Care,” Journal of the American Board of Family Medicine , Vol. 34, No. 2, March 2021.
• Newman, Benjamin J., and Todd K. Hartman, “Mass Shootings and Public Support for Gun Control,” British Journal of Political Science , Vol. 49, No. 4, 2019.
• Niederkrotenthaler, Thomas, Joseph E. Logan, Debra L. Karch, and Alex Crosby, “Characteristics of U.S. Suicide Decedents in 2005–2010 Who Had Received Mental Health Treatment,” Psychiatric Services , Vol. 65, No. 3, 2014.
• Niforatos, Joshua D., Alexander R. Zheutlin, and Richard M. Pescatore, “Public Interest in Gun Control in the USA,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 25, Supp. 1, 2019.
• Nix, Justin, “On the Challenges Associated with the Study of Police Use of Deadly Force in the United States: A Response to Schwartz and Jahn,” PLoS One , Vol. 15, No. 7, 2020.
• Nix, Justin, Bradley A. Campbell, Edward H. Byers, and Geoffrey P. Alpert, “A Bird's Eye View of Civilians Killed by Police in 2015: Further Evidence of Implicit Bias,” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 16, No. 1, February 2017.
• Nix, Justin, and John A. Shjarback, “Factors Associated with Police Shooting Mortality: A Focus on Race and a Plea for More Comprehensive Data,” PloS One , Vol. 16, No. 11, 2021.
• Noar, Seth M., Christina N. Benac, and Melissa S. Harris, “Does Tailoring Matter? Meta-Analytic Review of Tailored Print Health Behavior Change Interventions,” Psychological Bulletin , Vol. 133, No. 4, 2007.
• Nordentoft, Merete, Preben Bo Mortensen, and Carsten Bøcker Pedersen, “Absolute Risk of Suicide After First Hospital Contact in Mental Disorder,” Archives of General Psychiatry , Vol. 68, No. 10, October 2011.
• NRC— See National Research Council.
• NSSF— See National Shooting Sports Foundation.
• Office of the Inspector General, U.S. Department of Justice, Audit of the Handling of Firearms Purchase Denials Through the National Instant Criminal Background Check System , September 2016.
• Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, OJJDP Statistical Briefing Book , U.S. Department of Justice, May 25, 2016.
• Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, “Offending by Juveniles,” OJJDP Statistical Briefing Book , September 21, 2020. As of August 23, 2022: https://www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/offenders/qa03505.asp?qaDate=2019&text=yes&print=yes&maplink=link2
• Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, OJJDP Statistical Briefing Book , U.S. Department of Justice, October 29, 2021.
• Office of Public and Indian Housing, “Stop the Violence,” pamphlet, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, April 18, 2000. As of November 7, 2022: https://archives.hud.gov/initiatives/buyback/buyback.pdf
• Office of the Surgeon General and National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention, National Strategy for Suicide Prevention: Goals and Objectives for Action: A Report of the U.S. Surgeon General and of the National Action Alliance for Suicide Prevention , U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2012.
• Oliphant, Stephen N., “Effects of Wisconsin’s Handgun Waiting Period Repeal on Suicide Rates,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 28, No. 6, 2022.
• Olson, David E., and Michael D. Maltz, “Right-to-Carry Concealed Weapon Laws and Homicide in Large U.S. Counties: The Effect on Weapon Types, Victim Characteristics, and Victim-Offender Relationships,” Journal of Law and Economics , Vol. 44, No. S2, 2001.
• Oslin, D. W., C. Zubritsky, G. Brown, M. Mullahy, A. Puliafico, and T. Ten Have, “Managing Suicide Risk in Late Life: Access to Firearms as a Public Health Risk,” American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry , Vol. 12, No. 1, 2004.
• O’Sullivan, A., “Gentrification and Crime,” Journal of Urban Economics , Vol. 57, No. 1, 2005.
• O’Toole, Megan J., Jay Szkola, and Sarah Burd-Sharps, Gun Thefts from Cars: The Largest Source of Stolen Guns , Everytown Research and Policy, May 2022.
• Outdoor Foundation, 2022 Outdoor Participation Trends Report , undated.
• Owens, David, Judith Horrocks, and Allan House, “Fatal and Non-Fatal Repetition of Self-Harm,” British Journal of Psychiatry , Vol. 181, No. 3, 2002.
• Ozanne-Smith, J., K. Ashby, S. Newstead, V. Z. Stathakis, and A. Clapperton, “Firearm Related Deaths: The Impact of Regulatory Reform,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 10, No. 5, 2004.
• Pallin, Rocco, Amanda J. Aubel, Christopher E. Knoepke, Veronica A. Pear, Garen J. Wintemute, and Nicole Kravitz-Wirtz, “News Media Coverage of Extreme Risk Protection Order Policies Surrounding the Parkland Shooting: A Mixed-Methods Analysis,” BMC Public Health , Vol. 21, No. 1, 2021.
• Pallin, Rocco, Julia P. Schleimer, Veronica A. Pear, and Garen J. Wintemute, “Assessment of Extreme Risk Protection Order Use in California from 2016 to 2019,” JAMA Network Open , Vol. 3, No. 6, 2020.
• Pallin, Rocco, Sarabeth A. Spitzer, Megan L. Ranney, Marian E. Betz, and Garen J. Wintemute, “Preventing Firearm-Related Death and Injury,” Annals of Internal Medicine , Vol. 170, No. 11, June 4, 2019.
• Pallin, Rocco, Garen J. Wintemute, and Nicole Kravitz-Wirtz, “Firearm Practices, Perceptions of Safety, and Opinions on Injury Prevention Strategies Among California Adults With vs Without Children,” JAMA Network Open , Vol. 4, No. 8, August 2021.
• Palmer, Brian A., V. Shane Pankratz, and John Michael Bostwick, “The Lifetime Risk of Suicide in Schizophrenia: A Reexamination,” Archives of General Psychiatry , Vol. 62, No. 3, 2005.
• Papachristos, A. V., T. L. Meares, and J. Fagan, “Attention Felons: Evaluating Project Safe Neighborhoods in Chicago,” Journal of Empirical Legal Studies , Vol. 4, No. 2, 2007.
• Papachristos, A. V., C. M. Smith, M. L. Scherer, and M. A. Fugiero, “More Coffee, Less Crime? The Relationship Between Gentrification and Neighborhood Crime Rates in Chicago, 1991 to 2005,” City and Community , Vol. 10, No. 3, 2011.
• Papachristos, A. V., C. Wildeman, and E. Roberto, “Tragic, but Not Random: The Social Contagion of Nonfatal Gunshot Injuries,” Social Science and Medicine , Vol. 125, 2015.
• Parikh, Kavita, Alyssa Silver, Shilpa J. Patel, Sabah F. Iqbal, and Monika Goyal, “Pediatric Firearm-Related Injuries in the United States,” Hospital Pediatrics , Vol. 7, No. 6, June 2017.
• Park, Sung-Yeon, Kyle J. Holody, and Xiaoqun Zhang, “Race in Media Coverage of School Shootings: A Parallel Application of Framing Theory and Attribute Agenda Setting,” Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly , Vol. 89, No. 3, 2012.
• Parker, George F., “Circumstances and Outcomes of a Firearm Seizure Law: Marion County, Indiana, 2006–2013,” Behavioral Sciences and the Law , Vol. 33, Nos. 2–3, 2015.
• Parker, Kim, Juliana Menasce Horowitz, Ruth Igielnik, Baxter Oliphant, and Anna Brown, America’s Complex Relationship with Guns , Pew Research Center, June 22, 2017.
• Parker, R. N., K. R. Williams, K. J. McCaffree, E. K. Acensio, A. Browne, K. J. Strom, and K. Barrick, “Alcohol Availability and Youth Homicide in the 91 Largest U.S. Cities, 1984–2006,” Drug and Alcohol Review , Vol. 30, No. 5, 2011.
• Parker, Susan T., “Measuring Gun Violence in Police Data Sources: Transitioning to NIBRS,” Injury Epidemiology , Vol. 9, No. 15, 2022.
• Paternoster, R., “The Deterrent Effect of the Perceived Certainty and Severity of Punishment: A Review of the Evidence and Issues,” Justice Quarterly , Vol. 4, No. 2, 1987.
• Pear, Veronica A., Christopher D. McCort, Yueju Li, Laurel Beckett, Daniel Tancredi, David M. Studdert, Philip H. Kass, Glenn L. Pierce, Anthony A. Braga, Mona A. Wright, Hannah S. Laqueur, Nicole Kravitz-Wirtz, and Garen J. Wintemute, “Armed and Prohibited: Characteristics of Unlawful Owners of Legally Purchased Firearms,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 27, No. 2, 2021.
• Pear, Veronica A., Rocco Pallin, Julia P. Schleimer, Elizabeth Tomsich, Nicole Kravitz-Wirtz, Aaron B. Shev, Christopher E. Knoepke, and Garen J. Wintemute, “Gun Violence Restraining Orders in California, 2016–2018: Case Details and Respondent Mortality,” Injury Prevention , 2022.
• Pear, Veronica A., Garen J. Wintemute, Nicholas P. Jewell, and Jennifer Ahern, “Firearm Violence Following the Implementation of California’s Gun Violence Restraining Order Law,” JAMA Network Open , Vol. 5, No. 4, 2022a.
• Peduzzi, Peter, John Concato, Alvan R. Feinstein, and Theodore R. Holford, “Importance of Events per Independent Variable in Proportional Hazards Regression Analysis II. Accuracy and Precision of Regression Estimates,” Journal of Clinical Epidemiology , Vol. 4, No. 12, December 1995.
• Peek-Asa, Corinne, Brandon Butcher, and Joseph E. Cavanaugh, “Cost of Hospitalization for Firearm Injuries by Firearm Type, Intent, and Payer in the United States,” Injury Epidemiology , Vol. 4, No. 1, December 2017.
• Penzenstadler, Nick, Ryan J. Foley, and Larry Fenn, “Accidental Shootings Involving Kids Often Go Unpunished,” Associated Press, May 24, 2017.
• Pérez Esparza, David, Eugenio Weigend Vargas, Tony Payan, and Carlos Pérez Ricart, “Examining a Dataset on Gun Shows in the US, 2011–2019,” Journal of Illicit Economies and Development , Vol. 4, No. 1, 2022.
• Pérez-Peña, Richard, “Two New Zealand Mosques, a Hate-Filled Massacre Designed for Its Time,” New York Times , March 15, 2019.
• Perlis, Roy H., Matthew D. Simonson, Jon Green, Jennifer Lin, Alauna Safarpour, Kristin Lunz Trujillo, Alexi Quintana, Hanyi Chwe, John Della Volpe, Katherine Ognyanova, Mauricio Santillana, James Druckman, David Lazer, and Matthew A. Baum, “Prevalence of Firearm Ownership Among Individuals with Major Depressive Symptoms,” JAMA Network Open , Vol. 5, No. 3, March 2022.
• Pescosolido, Bernice A., Bianca Manago, and John Monahan, “Evolving Public Views on the Likelihood of Violence from People with Mental Illness: Stigma and Its Consequences,” Health Affairs , Vol. 38, No. 10, October 2019.
• Peterson, Jillian, and James Densley, The Violence Project: How to Stop a Mass Shooting Epidemic , Abrams, 2021.
• Peterson, Jillian, and James Densley, Public Mass Shootings: Database Amasses Details of a Half Century of U.S. Mass Shootings with Firearms, Generating Psychosocial Histories , National Institute of Justice, February 3, 2022.
• Petrosky, Emiko, Janet M. Blair, Carter J. Betz, Katherine A. Fowler, Shane P. D. Jack, and Bridget H. Lyons, “Racial and Ethnic Differences in Homicides of Adult Women and the Role of Intimate Partner Violence—United States, 2003–2014,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report , Vol. 66, No. 28, 2017.
• Pew Research Center, “For Most U.S. Gun Owners, Protection Is the Main Reason They Own a Gun,” August 16, 2023.
• Pfleger, Michael, Cierra Bates-Chamberlain, Ottis Moss III, and Seth Limmer, “The Rev. Michael Pfleger, et al.: Buyback Programs Are a Key Tool for Removing Guns from the Streets,” Chicago Tribune , August 11, 2022.
• Philadelphia City Council, “Gun Buyback Events: Save a Life, Turn in a Gun,” event promotion, June 25, 2022.
• Phillips, C. D., O. Nwaiwu, D. K. McMaughan Moudouni, R. Edwards, and S. Lin, “When Concealed Handgun Licensees Break Bad: Criminal Convictions of Concealed Handgun Licensees in Texas, 2001–2009,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 103, No. 1, 2013.
• Phillips, J. A., and C. N. Nugent, “Antidepressant Use and Method of Suicide in the United States: Variation by Age and Sex, 1998–2007,” Archives of Suicide Research , Vol. 17, No. 4, 2013.
• Phillips, Scott W., Dae-Young Kim, and James J. Sobol, “An Evaluation of a Multiyear Gun Buy-Back Programme: Re-Examining the Impact on Violent Crimes,” International Journal of Police Science and Management , Vol. 15, No. 3, 2013.
• Phipson, Belinda, and Gordon K. Smyth, “Permutation P-Values Should Never Be Zero: Calculating Exact P-Values When Permutations Are Randomly Drawn,” Statistical Applications in Genetics and Molecular Biology , Vol. 9, No. 1, 2010.
• Pierce, Glenn L., Anthony A. Braga, Christopher Koper, Jack McDevitt, David Carlson, Jeffrey Roth, Alan Saiz, Raymond Hyatt, and Roberta E. Griffith, The Characteristics and Dynamics of Crime Gun Markets: Implications for Supply-Side Focused Enforcement Strategies , National Institute of Justice, 2003.
• Pierre, Joseph M., “The Psychology of Guns: Risk, Fear, and Motivated Reasoning,” Palgrave Communications , Vol. 5, No. 1, 2019, article 159.
• Pierson, Emma, Camelia Simoiu, Jan Overgoor, Sam Corbett-Davies, Daniel Jenson, Amy Shoemaker, Vignesh Ramachandran, Phoebe Barghouty, Cheryl Phillips, Ravi Shroff, and Sharad Goel, “A Large-Scale Analysis of Racial Disparities in Police Stops Across the United States,” Nature Human Behaviour , Vol. 4, No. 7, July 2020.
• Pinho, R., and J. Rappa, Special Taxes on Guns, Ammunition, and Gun Shows , Connecticut General Assembly, Office of Legislative Research, OLR Research Report 2013-r-0034, January 10, 2013.
• Pirkola, Sami, Reijo Sund, Eila Sailas, and Kristian Wahlbeck, “Community Mental-Health Services and Suicide Rate in Finland: A Nationwide Small-Area Analysis,” Lancet , Vol. 373, No. 9658, 2009.
• Piscopo, Kathryn, Rachel N. Lipari, Jennifer Cooney, and Christie Galsheen, Suicidal Thoughts and Behavior Among Adults: Results from the 2015 National Survey on Drug Use and Health , NSDUH Data Review, September 2016.
• Piza, E. L., J. M. Caplan, L. W. Kennedy, and A. M. Gilchrist, “The Effects of Merging Proactive CCTV Monitoring with Directed Police Patrol: A Randomized Controlled Trial,” Journal of Experimental Criminology , Vol. 11, No. 1, 2015.
• Pizarro, Jesenia M., and April M. Zeoli, “An Assessment of the Quality of Homicide Data in the Supplementary Homicide Reports: A Research Note,” Justice Quarterly , Vol. 30, No. 4, 2013.
• Plant, E. Ashby, and B. Michelle Peruche, “The Consequences of Race for Police Officers,” Psychological Science , Vol. 16, No. 3, March 2005.
• Planty, Michael, and Jennifer L. Truman, Firearm Violence, 1993–2011 , U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, NCJ 2411730, May 2013.
• Plassmann, Florenz, and T. Nicolaus Tideman, “Does the Right to Carry Concealed Handguns Deter Countable Crimes? Only a Count Analysis Can Say,” Journal of Law and Economics , Vol. 44, No. S2, 2001.
• Plassmann, F., and J. E. Whitley, “Comments: Confirming ‘More Guns, Less Crime,’” Stanford Law Review , Vol. 55, No. 4, 2003.
• Plumer, Brad, “Everything You Need to Know About the Assault Weapons Ban, in One Post,” Washington Post , December 17, 2012.
• Police Data Initiative, homepage, undated. As of February 4, 2024: https://www.policedatainitiative.org
• Poudyal, N., S. H. Cho, and J. M. Bowker, “Demand for Resident Hunting in the Southeastern United States,” Human Dimensions of Wildlife , Vol. 13, No. 3, 2008.
• Prater, Laura, Lauren Rooney, Andrew G. Bowen, Kelsey Conrick, Ayah Mustafa, Megan Moore, Frederick P. Rivara, and Ali Rowhani-Rahbar, “Civilian Petitioners and Extreme Risk Protection Orders in the State of Washington,” Psychiatric Services , Vol. 73, No. 11, November 1, 2022.
• Price, James H., Adam J. Mrdjenovich, and Joseph A. Dake, “Prevalence of State Firearm Mortality and Mental Health Care Resources,” Journal of Community Health , Vol. 34, No. 5, 2009.
• Price, James H., Amy J. Thompson, and Joseph A. Dake, “Factors Associated with State Variations in Homicide, Suicide, and Unintentional Firearm Deaths,” Journal of Community Health , Vol. 29, No. 4, 2004.
• Prickett, Kate C., Alexa Martin-Storey, and Robert Crosnoe, “State Firearm Laws, Firearm Ownership, and Safety Practices Among Families of Preschool-Aged Children,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 104, No. 6, 2014.
• Public Law 90-618, Gun Control Act of 1968, October 22, 1968.
• Public Law 103-322, Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, 1994.
• Public Law 104-208, Section 658, Gun Ban for Individuals Convicted of a Misdemeanor Crime of Domestic Violence, 1996.
• Public Law 112-74, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012, December 23, 2011.
• Public Law 112-265, Investigative Assistance for Violent Crimes Act of 2012, January 14, 2013.
• Public Law 116-94, Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020, December 23, 2019.
• Public Law 117-159, Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, June 25, 2022.
• Puzzanchera, C., G. Chamberlin, and W. Kang, “Easy Access to the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports: 1980–2014,” Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 2017.
• Puzzanchera, C., G. Chamberlin, and W. Kang, “Easy Access to the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports: 1980–2016,” Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 2018.
• Puzzanchera, C., G. Chamberlin, and W. Kang, “Easy Access to the FBI’s Supplementary Homicide Reports: 1980–2020,” Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 2021.
• Raifman, Julia, Elysia Larson, Colleen L. Barry, Michael Siegel, Michael Ulrich, Anita Knopov, and Sandro Galea, “State Handgun Purchase Age Minimums in the US and Adolescent Suicide Rates: Regression Discontinuity and Difference-in-Differences Analyses,” BMJ , Vol. 370, 2020.
• Raissian, Kerri M., “Hold Your Fire: Did the 1996 Federal Gun Control Act Expansion Reduce Domestic Homicides?” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management , Vol. 35, No. 1, Winter 2016.
• Rajkumar, A. P., E. M. Brinda, A. S. Duba, P. Thangadurai, and K. S. Jacob, “National Suicide Rates and Mental Health System Indicators: An Ecological Study of 191 Countries,” International Journal of Law and Psychiatry , Vol. 36, No. 5, 2013.
• Ramchand, Rajeev, Personal Firearm Storage in the United States: Recent Estimates, Patterns, and Effectiveness of Interventions , RAND Corporation, RR-A243-5, 2022. As of February 7, 2024: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA243-5.html
• Ramchand, Rajeev, and Jessica Saunders, “The Effects of the 1996 National Firearms Agreement in Australia on Suicide, Homicide, and Mass Shootings,” in Rajeev Ramchand and Jessica Saunders, eds., Contemporary Issues in Gun Policy: Essays from the RAND Gun Policy in America Project , RAND Corporation, RR-A243-2, 2021. As of August 31, 2022: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA243-2.html
• RAND Corporation, The Science of Gun Policy: A Critical Synthesis of Research Evidence on the Effects of Gun Policies in the United States , RR-2088-RC, 2018. As of March 2, 2018: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2088.html
• RAND Corporation, Education Campaigns and Clinical Interventions for Promoting Safe Storage , March 2, 2018b. As of December 6, 2021: https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/essays/safe-storage.html
• RAND Corporation, The Effects of Child-Access Prevention Laws , April 22, 2020a. As of June 15, 2022: https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/child-access-prevention.html
• RAND Corporation, The Effects of Firearm Safety Training Requirements , April 22, 2020b. As of December 6, 2021: https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/firearm-safety-training-requirements.html
• Rangappa, Asha, “The Cost of Freedom: Using the Tax Power to Limit Personal Arsenals,” Yale Law and Policy Review Inter Alia , Vol. 32, No. 1, 2013.
• Raphael, S., and J. Ludwig, “Prison Sentence Enhancements: The Case of Project Exile,” in S. Raphael and J. Ludwig, eds., Evaluating Gun Policy: Effects on Crime and Violence , Brookings Institution, 2003.
• Ratcliffe, J. H., M. Lattanzio, G. Kikuchi, and K. Thomas, “A Partially Randomized Field Experiment on the Effect of an Acoustic Gunshot Detection System on Police Incident Reports,” Journal of Experimental Criminology , Vol. 15, No. 1, 2019.
• Reaves, Brian A., Using NIBRS Data to Analyze Violent Crime , Bureau of Justice Statistics, October 1993.
• Reeping, Paul M., Ariana N. Gobaud, Charles C. Branas, and Sonali Rajan, “K-12 School Shootings: Implications for Policy, Prevention, and Child Well-Being,” Pediatric Clinics of North America , Vol. 68, No. 2, April 2021.
• Reeves, Ellen, “A Culture of Consent: Legal Practitioners’ Experiences of Representing Women Who Have Been Misidentified as Predominant Aggressors on Family Violence Intervention Orders in Victoria, Australia,” Feminist Legal Studies , Vol. 31, Vol. 3, November 2023.
• Reisch, T., T. Steffen, A. Habenstein, and W. Tschacher, “Change in Suicide Rates in Switzerland Before and After Firearm Restriction Resulting from the 2003 ‘Army XXI’ Reform,” American Journal of Psychiatry , Vol. 170, No. 9, 2013.
• Ressler, Robert K., Ann W. Burgess, and John E. Douglas, Sexual Homicide: Patterns and Motives , Simon and Schuster, 1988.
• Reuter, Peter, and Jenny Mouzos, “Australia: A Massive Buyback of Low-Risk Guns,” in Jens Ludwig and Philip J. Cook, eds., Evaluating Gun Policy: Effects on Crime and Violence , Brookings Institution Press, 2003.
• Ribeiro, J. D., J. C. Franklin, K. R. Fox, K. H. Bentley, E. M. Kleiman, B. P. Chang, and M. K. Nock, “Self-Injurious Thoughts and Behaviors as Risk Factors for Future Suicide Ideation, Attempts, and Death: A Meta-Analysis of Longitudinal Studies,” Psychological Medicine , Vol. 46, No. 2, January 2016.
• Richards, Julie E., Elena Kuo, Christine Stewart, Jennifer F. Bobb, Kayne D. Mattert, Ali Rowhani-Rahbar, Marian E. Betz, Rebecca Parrish, Ursula Whiteside, Jennifer M. Boggs, and Gregory E. Simon, “Self-Reported Access to Firearms Among Patients Receiving Care for Mental Health and Substance Use,” JAMA Health Forum , Vol. 2, No. 8, 2021.
• Richardson, John R., “Red Flag Laws and Procedural Due Process: Analyzing Proposed Utah Legislation,” Utah Law Review , Vol. 2021, No. 3, 2021.
• Richeson, Jennifer A, and Samuel R. Sommers, "Toward a Social Psychology of Race and Race Relations for the Twenty-First Century," Annual Review of Psychology , Vol. 67, 2016.
• Richmond, Matthew, “With No National Standards, Policies for Arming Teachers Are Often Left to Local School Districts,” Guns & America, March 22, 2019.
• Ridgeway, Greg, Analysis of Racial Disparities in the New York Police Department's Stop, Question, and Frisk Practices , RAND Corporation, TR-534-NYCPF, 2007. As of September 5, 2023: https://www.rand.org/pubs/technical_reports/TR534.html
• Ridgeway, Greg, Anthony A. Braga, George Tita, and Glenn L. Pierce, “Intervening in Gun Markets: An Experiment to Assess the Impact of Targeted Gun-Law Messaging,” Journal of Experimental Criminology , Vol. 7, No. 1, March 2011.
• Ridgeway, Greg, and John MacDonald, “Methods for Assessing Racially Biased Policing,” in Stephen K. Rice and Michael D. White, eds., Race, Ethnicity, and Policing: New and Essential Readings , New York University Press, 2010.
• Riley, Richard D., Kym I. E. Snell, Joie Ensor, Danielle L. Burke, Frank E. Harrell, Jr., Karel G. M. Moons, and Gary S. Collins, “Minimum Sample Size for Developing a Multivariable Prediction Model: Part I–Continuous Outcomes,” Statistics in Medicine , Vol. 38, No. 7, March 30, 2019.
• Rios, Victor M., Punished: Policing the Lives of Black and Latino Boys , New York University Press, 2011.
• Robbins, Mel, “The Real Gun Problem Is Mental Health, Not the NRA,” CNN, 2014.
• Roberts, Darryl W., “Intimate Partner Homicide: Relationships to Alcohol and Firearms,” Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice , Vol. 25, No. 1, 2009.
• Roberts, John M., Jr., Aki Roberts, and Tim Wadsworth, “Multiple Imputation for Missing Values in Homicide Incident Data: An Evaluation Using Unique Test Data,” Homicide Studies , Vol. 22, No. 4, 2018.
• Robinson, Jo, Lay San Too, Jane Pirkis, and Matthew J. Spittal, “Spatial Suicide Clusters in Australia Between 2010 and 2012: A Comparison of Cluster and Non-Cluster Among Young People and Adults,” BMC Psychiatry , Vol. 16, 2016, article 417.
• Robinson, Lucas, “Watch Now: Gun Buyback Was ‘Virtue Signaling,’ GOP Dane County Sheriff Candidate Says,” Madison.com , August 17, 2022.
• Robinson, Sonia L., Christopher D. McCort, Colette Smirniotis, Garen J. Wintemute, and Hannah S. Laqueur, "Purchaser, Firearm, and Retailer Characteristics Associated with Crime Gun Recovery: A Longitudinal Analysis of Firearms Sold in California from 1996 to 2021," Injury Epidemiology , Vol. 11, February 26, 2024.
• Rochford, Hannah I., Mark Berg, and Corinne Peek-Asa, “The ‘Boyfriend Loophole’ and Intimate Partner Homicides: A Longitudinal Analysis Using the National Violent Death Reporting System,” Journal of Prevention , Vol. 43, No. 6, December 2022.
• Rockett, Ian R. H., Eric D. Caine, Steven Stack, Hilary S. Connery, Kurt B. Nolte, Christa L. Lilly, Ted R. Miller, Lewis S. Nelson, Sandra L. Putnam, Paul S. Nestadt, and Haomiao Jia, “Method Overtness, Forensic Autopsy, and the Evidentiary Suicide Note: A Multilevel National Violent Death Reporting System Analysis,” PLoS One , Vol. 13, No. 5, May 2018.
• Rockett, Ian R. H., Nestor D. Kapusta, and Jeffrey H. Coben, “Beyond Suicide: Action Needed to Improve Self-Injury Mortality Accounting,” JAMA Psychiatry , Vol. 71, No. 3, 2014.
• Rodway, Cathryn, Sandra Flynn, David While, Mohammed S. Rahman, Navneet Kapur, Louis Appleby, and Jenny Shaw, “Patients with Mental Illness as Victims of Homicide: A National Consecutive Case Series,” Lancet Psychiatry , Vol. 1, No. 2, 2014.
• Roeder, Oliver, “The Phrase ‘Mass Shooting’ Belongs to the 21st Century,” FiveThirtyEight , January 21, 2016.
• Rogers, William H., “Regression Standard Errors in Clustered Samples,” Stata Technical Bulletin , Vol. 13, 1993.
• Rogna, Marco, and Bich Diep Nguyen, “Firearms Law and Fatal Police Shootings: A Panel Data Analysis,” Applied Economics , Vol. 54, No. 27, 2022.
• Roman, C. G., N. W. Link, J. M. Hyatt, A. Bhati, and M. Forney, “Assessing the Gang-Level and Community-Level Effects of the Philadelphia Focused Deterrence Strategy,” Journal of Experimental Criminology , 2018.
• Roman, John, “Do Stand Your Ground Laws Worsen Racial Disparities?” Urban Wire , Urban Institute blog, August 8, 2012. As of September 15, 2022: https://www.urban.org/urban-wire/do-stand-your-ground-laws-worsen-racial-disparities
• Roman, John K., and Philip Cook, Final Report: Improving Data Infrastructure to Reduce Firearms Violence , NORC at the University of Chicago, October 2021.
• Romero, Michael P., Garen J. Wintemute, and Jon S. Vernick, “Characteristics of a Gun Exchange Program, and an Assessment of Potential Benefits,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 4, No. 3, September 1998.
• Roncek, D. W., and P. A. Maier, “Bars, Blocks, and Crimes Revisited: Linking the Theory of Routine Activities to the Empiricism of ‘Hot Spots,’” Criminology , Vol. 29, No. 4, 1991.
• Rooney, Lauren, Kelsey M. Conrick, M. Alex Bellenger, Megan Moore, Miriam J. Haviland, Emma Gause, Frederick P. Rivara, and Ali Rowhani-Rahba, “Understanding the Process, Context, and Characteristics of Extreme Risk Protection Orders: A Statewide Study,” Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved , Vol. 32, No. 4, 2021.
• Rosenfeld, Richard, “Gun Buy-Backs: Crime Control or Community Mobilization,” in Martha R. Plotkin, ed., Under Fire: Gun Buy-Backs, Exchanges and Amnesty Programs , Police Executive Research Forum, 1996.
• Rosenfeld, R., and R. Fornango, “The Impact of Police Stops on Precinct Robbery and Burglary Rates in New York City, 2003–2010,” Justice Quarterly , Vol. 1, 2014.
• Rosenfeld, R., R. Fornango, and E. Baumer, “Did Ceasefire, Compstat, and Exile Reduce Homicide?” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 4, No. 3, 2005.
• Rosengart, M., P. Cummings, A. Nathens, P. Heagerty, R. Maier, and F. Rivara, “An Evaluation of State Firearm Regulations and Homicide and Suicide Death Rates,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 11, No. 2, 2005.
• Roskam, Kelly, and Vicka Chaplin, “The Gun Violence Restraining Order: An Opportunity for Common Ground in the Gun Violence Debate,” Developments in Mental Health Law , Vol. 36, No. 2, 2017.
• Ross, Cody T., “A Multi-Level Bayesian Analysis of Racial Bias in Police Shootings at the County-Level in the United States, 2011–2014,” PloS One , Vol. 10, No. 11, 2015.
• Ross, Cody T., Bruce Winterhalder, and Richard McElreath, “Racial Disparities in Police Use of Deadly Force Against Unarmed Individuals Persist After Appropriately Benchmarking Shooting Data on Violent Crime Rates,” Social Psychological and Personality Science , Vol. 12, No. 3, 2021.
• Rossin-Slater, Maya, Molly Schnell, Hannes Schwandt, Sam Trejo, and Lindsey Uniat, “Local Exposure to School Shootings and Youth Antidepressant Use,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , Vol. 117, No. 38, September 22, 2020.
• Rostker, Bernard D., Lawrence M. Hanser, William M. Hix, Carl Jensen, Andrew R. Morral, Greg Ridgeway, and Terry L. Schell, Evaluation of the New York City Police Department Firearm Training and Firearm-Discharge Review Process , RAND Corporation, MG-717-NYPD, 2008. As of October 6, 2019: https://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/MG717.html
• Roszko, Paul J. D., Jonathan Ameli, Patrick M. Carter, Rebecca M. Cunningham, and Megan L. Ranney, “Clinician Attitudes, Screening Practices, and Interventions to Reduce Firearm-Related Injury,” Epidemiologic Reviews , Vol. 38, No. 1, 2016.
• Roth, Jeffrey A., and Christopher S. Koper, Impact Evaluation of the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act of 1994: Final Report , Urban Institute, 1997.
• Roth, Jeffrey A., and Christopher S. Koper, Impacts of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban: 1994–96 , National Institute of Justice, March 1999.
• Roussell, Aaron, Kathryn Henne, Karen S. Glover, and Dale Willits, “Impossibility of a ‘Reverse Racism’ Effect: A Rejoinder to James, James, and Vila,” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 18, No. 1, February 2019.
• Rowhani-Rahbar, Ali, Deborah Azrael, Vivian H. Lyons, Joseph A. Simonetti, and Matthew Miller, “Loaded Handgun Carrying Among US Adults, 2015,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 107, No. 12, 2017.
• Rowhani-Rahbar, Ali, M. Alex Bellenger, Lauren Gibb, Heather Chesnut, Madison Lowry-Schiller, Emma Gause, Miriam J. Haviland, and Frederick P. Rivara, “Extreme Risk Protection Orders in Washington: A Statewide Descriptive Study,” Annals of Internal Medicine , Vol. 173, No. 5, September 2020.
• Rowhani-Rahbar, Ali, Amy Gallagher, Deborah Azrael, and Matthew Miller, “Trend in Loaded Handgun Carrying Among Adult Handgun Owners in the United States, 2015‒2019,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 112, No. 12, December 2022.
• Rowhani-Rahbar, Ali, Vivian H. Lyons, Joseph A. Simonetti, Deborah Azrael, and Matthew Miller, “Formal Firearm Training Among Adults in the USA: Results of a National Survey,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 24, No. 2, 2018.
• Rowhani-Rahbar, Ali, Joseph A. Simonetti, and Frederick P. Rivara, “Effectiveness of Interventions to Promote Safe Firearm Storage,” Epidemiologic Reviews , Vol. 38, No. 1, 2016.
• Ruback, R. B., J. N. Shaffer, and V. A. Clark, “Easy Access to Firearms: Juveniles’ Risks for Violent Offender and Violent Victimization,” Journal of Interpersonal Violence , Vol. 26, No. 10, 2011.
• Rubin, Donald B., Multiple Imputation for Nonresponse in Surveys , John Wiley and Sons, 1987.
• Rubin, Paul H., and Hashem Dezhbakhsh, “The Effect of Concealed Handgun Laws on Crime: Beyond the Dummy Variables,” International Review of Law and Economics , Vol. 23, No. 2, 2003.
• Rubinstein, Dana, Jeffery C. Mays, and Jonah E. Bromwich, “How Would the Mayoral Candidates Get Guns off New York Streets?” New York Times , May 12, 2021.
• Ruddell, R., and G. L. Mays, “State Background Checks and Firearms Homicides,” Journal of Criminal Justice , Vol. 33, No. 2, 2005.
• Rudolph, K. E., E. A. Stuart, J. S. Vernick, and D. W. Webster, “Association Between Connecticut’s Permit-to-Purchase Handgun Law and Homicides,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 105, No. 8, 2015.
• Runyan, Carol W., Amy Becker, Sara Brandspigel, Catherine Barber, Aimee Trudeau, and Douglas Novins, “Lethal Means Counseling for Parents of Youth Seeking Emergency Care for Suicidality,” Western Journal of Emergency Medicine , Vol. 17, No. 1, January 2016.
• Ruggles, K. V., and S. Rajan, “Gun Possession Among American Youth: A Discovery-Based Approach to Understand Gun Violence,” PLoS One , Vol. 9, No. 11, 2014.
• Ryan, R., A. Synnot, and S. Hill, Describing Results , Melbourne: Cochrane Consumers and Communication Group, December 1, 2016.
• Saadi, Altaf, Kristen R. Choi, Sae Takada, and Fred J. Zimmerman, “The Impact of Gun Violence Restraining Order Laws in the U.S. and Firearm Suicide Among Older Adults: A Longitudinal State-Level Analysis, 2012–2016,” BMC Public Health , Vol. 20, No. 334, 2020.
• Sabbath, Erika L., Summer Sherburne Hawkins, and Christopher F. Baum, “State-Level Changes in Firearm Laws and Workplace Homicide Rates: United States, 2011 to 2017,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 110, No. 2, 2020.
• Sabri, Bushra, Jacquelyn C. Campbell, and Jill T. Messing, “Intimate Partner Homicides in the United States, 2003–2013: A Comparison of Immigrants and Nonimmigrant Victims,” Journal of Interpersonal Violence , Vol. 36, Nos. 9–10, May 2021.
• Sakinofsky, Isaac, “Repetition of Suicidal Behavior,” in K. Hawton and K. P. van Heeringen, eds., The International Handbook of Suicide and Attempted Suicide , John Wiley and Sons, 2000.
• Sale, Elizabeth, Michelle Hendricks, Virginia Weil, Collin Miller, Scott Perkins, and Suzanne McCudden, “Counseling on Access to Lethal Means (CALM): An Evaluation of a Suicide Prevention Means Restriction Training Program for Mental Health Providers,” Community Mental Health Journal , Vol. 54, No. 3, April 2018.
• Salhi, Carmel, Deborah Azrael, and Matthew Miller, “Patterns of Gun Owner Beliefs About Firearm Risk in Relation to Firearm Storage: A Latent Class Analysis Using the 2019 National Firearms Survey,” Injury Prevention , July 14, 2020, online ahead of print.
• Salhi, Carmel, Deborah Azrael, and Matthew Miller, “Parent and Adolescent Reports of Adolescent Access to Household Firearms in the United States,” JAMA Network Open , Vol. 4, No. 3, March 9, 2021.
• Saltzman, Linda E., and Robin M. Ikeda, “Recommended Data Elements for Firearm-Related Injury Surveillance,” American Journal of Preventive Medicine , Vol. 15, No. 3, Supp. 1, 1998.
• Saltzman, Linda E., James A. Mercy, Patrick W. O’Carroll, Mark L. Rosenberg, and Philip H. Rhodes, “Weapon Involvement and Injury Outcomes in Family and Intimate Assaults,” JAMA , Vol. 267, No. 22, 1992.
• Sampson, Robert J., and Roland Neil, “The Social Foundations of Racial Inequalities in Arrest over the Life Course and in Changing Times,” draft ahead of publication, 2023.
• Sanders, Nathan E., and Victor Lei, “The Role of Prior Information in Inference on the Annualized Rates of Mass Shootings in the United States,” Statistics and Public Policy , Vol. 5, No. 1, 2018.
• Santaella-Tenorio, J., M. Cerdá, A. Villaveces, and S. Galea, “What Do We Know About the Association Between Firearm Legislation and Firearm-Related Injuries?” Epidemiologic Reviews , Vol. 38, No. 1, 2016.
• Santhanam, Laura, “Two-Thirds of Black Americans Don’t Trust the Police to Treat Them Equally. Most White Americans Do,” PBS NewsHour , June 5, 2020.
• Sarani, Babak, Cheralyn Hendrix, Mary Matecki, Jordan Estroff, Richard L. Amdur, Bryce R. H. Robinson, Geoff Shapiro, Stephen Gondek, Roger Mitchell, and E. Reed Smith, “Wounding Patterns Based on Firearm Type in Civilian Public Mass Shootings in the United States,” Journal of the American College of Surgeons , Vol. 228, No. 3, 2019.
• Saunders, J., P. Hunt, and J. S. Hollywood, “Predictions Put into Practice: A Quasi-Experimental Evaluation of Chicago’s Predictive Policing Pilot,” Journal of Experimental Criminology , Vol. 12, No. 3, 2016.
• Saunders, J., A. Ober, D. Barnes-Proby, and R. K. Brunson, “Police Legitimacy and Disrupting Overt Drug Markets,” Policing: An International Journal , Vol. 30, No. 4, 2016.
• Scalia, John, Federal Firearm Offenders, 1992–98: With Preliminary Data for 1999 , Bureau of Justice Statistics, June 2000.
• Scantling, Dane R., Daniel N. Holena, Elinore J. Kaufman, Allyson M. Hynes, Justin Hatchimonji, James P. Byrne, Douglas Wiebe, and Mark J. Seamon, “Modifiable Factors Related to Firearm Homicides: A Broader View of Our Lane,” Annals of Surgery , 2022, online ahead of print.
• Schaechter, Judy, “Guns in the Home,” HealthyChildren.org, last updated June 2, 2021. As of December 6, 2021: https://www.healthychildren.org/English/safety-prevention/at-home/Pages/Handguns-in-the-Home.aspx
• Schaechter, Judy, Isis Duran, Jacqueline De Marchena, Glendene Lemard, and Maria Elena Villar, “Are ‘Accidental’ Gun Deaths as Rare as They Seem? A Comparison of Medical Examiner Manner of Death Coding with an Intent-Based Classification Approach,” Pediatrics , Vol. 111, No. 4, 2003.
• Schaeffer, Katherine, “Key Facts About Americans and Guns,” Pew Research Center, September 13, 2023.
• Schell, Terry L., Matthew Cefalu, Beth Ann Griffin, Rosanna Smart, and Andrew R. Morral, “Changes in Firearm Mortality Following the Implementation of State Laws Regulating Firearm Access and Use,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , Vol. 117, No. 26, 2020.
• Schell, Terry L., Beth Ann Griffin, and Andrew R. Morral, Evaluating Methods to Estimate the Effect of State Laws on Firearm Deaths: A Simulation Study , RAND Corporation, RR-2685-RC, 2018. As of October 1, 2019: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2685.html
• Schell, Terry L., and Andrew R. Morral, Evaluating Methods and Findings from a Study of State Gun Policies , RAND Corporation, RR-1642-RC, 2016. As of January 13, 2017: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1642.html
• Schell, Terry L., Samuel Peterson, Brian G. Vegetabile, Adam Scherling, Rosanna Smart, and Andrew R. Morral, State-Level Estimates of Household Firearm Ownership , RAND Corporation, TL-354-LJAF, 2020. As of December 7, 2022: https://www.rand.org/pubs/tools/TL354.html
• Schell, Terry L., Rosanna Smart, and Andrew R. Morral, Suggestions for Estimating the Effects of State Gun Policies: Commentary on Four Methodological Problems in the Current Literature , RAND Corporation, RR-A243-1, 2022. As of August 9, 2022: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA243-1.html
• Schildkraut, Jaclyn, H. Jaymi Elsass, and Kimberly Meredith, “Mass Shootings and the Media: Why All Events Are Not Created Equal,” Journal of Crime and Justice , Vol. 41, No. 3, 2018.
• Schiller, Wendy J., and Kaitlin N. Sidorsky, “Federalism, Policy Diffusion, and Gender Equality: Explaining Variation in State Domestic Violence Firearm Laws 1990–2017,” State Politics & Policy Quarterly , Vol. 22, No. 3, 2022.
• Schleimer, Julia P., Christopher D. McCort, Aaron B. Shev, Veronica A. Pear, Elizabeth Tomsich, Alaina De Biasi, Shani Buggs, Hannah S. Laqueur, and Garen J. Wintemute, “Firearm Purchasing and Firearm Violence During the Coronavirus Pandemic in the United States: A Cross-Sectional Study,” Injury Epidemiology , Vol. 8, No. 1, 2021.
• Schleimer, Julia P., Mona A. Wright, Aaron B. Shev, Christopher D. McCort, Rameesha Asif-Sattar, Sydney Sohl, Susan L. Stewart, Garen J. Wintemute, and Rose M. C. Kagawa, “Alcohol and Drug Offenses and Suicide Risk Among Men Who Purchased a Handgun in California: A Cohort Study,” Preventive Medicine , Vol. 153, 2021a.
• Schmitt, Eric, “President Unveils Gun Buyback Plan,” New York Times , September 10, 1999.
• Schnebly, Stephen M., “An Examination of the Impact of Victim, Offender, and Situational Attributes on the Deterrent Effect of Defensive Gun Use: A Research Note,” Justice Quarterly , Vol. 19, No. 2, 2002.
• Schnippel, Kathryn, Sarah Burd-Sharps, Ted R. Miller, Bruce A. Lawrence, and David I. Swedler, “Nonfatal Firearm Injuries by Intent in the United States: 2016–2018 Hospital Discharge Records from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project,” Western Journal of Emergency Medicine , Vol. 22, No. 3, 2021.
• Schnitzer, Patricia G., Heather K. Dykstra, Theodore E. Trigylidas, and Richard Lichenstein, “Firearm Suicide Among Youth in the United States, 2004–2015,” Journal of Behavioral Medicine , Vol. 42, No. 4, 2019.
• Schnobrich-Davis, J., S. Block, and J. Lupacchino, “Analysis of Herman Goldstein Problem-Oriented Policing Awards from 1993–2017,” Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice , 2018.
• Schorr, Robert A., Paul M. Lukacs, and Justin A. Gude, “The Montana Deer and Elk Hunting Population: The Importance of Cohort Group, License Price, and Population Demographics on Hunter Retention, Recruitment, and Population Change,” Journal of Wildlife Management , Vol. 78, No. 5, 2014.
• Schroedel, Jean Reith, and Roger J. Chin, “Whose Lives Matter: The Media’s Failure to Cover Police Use of Lethal Force Against Native Americans,” Race and Justice , Vol. 10, No. 2, April 2020.
• Schwartz, Gabriel L., and Jaquelyn L. Jahn, “Mapping Fatal Police Violence Across U.S. Metropolitan Areas: Overall Rates and Racial/Ethnic Inequities, 2013–2017,” PloS One , Vol. 15, No. 6, 2020.
• Scott, John, Deborah Azrael, and Matthew Miller, “Firearm Storage in Homes with Children with Self-Harm Risk Factors,” Pediatrics , Vol. 141, No. 3, March 2018.
• Sehgal, Ashwini R., “Lifetime Risk of Death from Firearm Injuries, Drug Overdoses, and Motor Vehicle Accidents in the United States,” American Journal of Medicine , Vol. 133, No. 10, October 2020.
• Sen, B., and A. Panjamapirom, “State Background Checks for Gun Purchase and Firearm Deaths: An Exploratory Study,” Preventive Medicine , Vol. 55, No. 4, 2012.
• Shaffer, J. P., “Multiple Hypothesis Testing,” Annual Review of Psychology , Vol. 46, 1995.
• Shah, S., R. E. Hoffman, L. Wake, and W. M. Marine, “Adolescent Suicide and Household Access to Firearms in Colorado: Results of a Case-Control Study,” Journal of Adolescent Health , Vol. 26, No. 3, 2000.
• Sharara, Fablina, Eve E. Wool, Gregory J. Bertolacci, Nicole Davis Weaver, Shelly Balassyano, Alexandrea Warson, Ilse N. Dippenaar, Matthew Cunningham, John E. Fuller, Laure B. Marczak, et al., “Fatal Police Violence by Race and State in the USA, 1980–2019: A Network Meta-Regression,” The Lancet , Vol. 398, No. 10307, October 2, 2021.
• Sharkey, Patrick, Stuck in Place: Urban Neighborhoods and the End of Progress Toward Racial Equality , University of Chicago Press, 2013.
• Sharkey, P., Uneasy Peace: The Great Crime Decline, the Renewal of City Life, and the Next War on Violence , W. W. Norton, 2018.
• Sharkey, P., G. Torrats-Espinosa, and D. Takyar, “Community and the Crime Decline: The Causal Effect of Local Nonprofits on Violent Crime,” American Sociological Review , Vol. 82, No. 6, 2017.
• Shearer, Hannah E., and Allison S. Anderman, “Analyzing Gun-Violence-Prevention Taxes Under Emerging Firearm Fee Jurisprudence,” Southern Illinois University Law Journal , Vol. 43, 2018.
• Sheley, J. F., and J. D. Wright, Gun Acquisition and Possession in Selected Juvenile Samples , National Institute of Justice, 1993.
• Sheley, J. F., and J. D. Wright, High School Youths, Weapons, and Violence: A National Survey , National Institute of Justice, 1998.
• Shenassa, E. D., S. N. Catlin, and S. L. Buka, “Gun Availability, Psychopathology, and Risk of Death from Suicide Attempt by Gun,” Annals of Epidemiology , Vol. 10, No. 7, October 2000.
• Shenassa, E. D., C. Daskalakis, and S. L. Buka, “Utility of Indices of Gun Availability in the Community,” Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health , Vol. 60, No. 1, 2006.
• Shenassa, E. D., M. L. Rogers, K. L. Spalding, and M. B. Roberts, “Safer Storage of Firearms at Home and Risk of Suicide: A Study of Protective Factors in a Nationally Representative Sample,” Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health , Vol. 58, No. 10, 2004.
• Sherman, L. W., “Police Crackdowns: Initial and Residual Deterrence,” Crime and Justice , Vol. 12, 1990.
• Sherman, Lawrence W., “Reducing Fatal Police Shootings as System Crashes: Research, Theory, and Practice,” Annual Review of Criminology , Vol. 1, January 2018.
• Sherman, L. W., P. R. Gartin, and M. E. Buerger, “Hot Spots of Predatory Crime: Routine Activities and the Criminology of Place,” Criminology , Vol. 27, No. 1, 1989.
• Shi, Wei, and Lung-Fei Lee, “The Effects of Gun Control on Crimes: A Spatial Interactive Fixed Effects Approach,” Empirical Economics , Vol. 55, No. 1, 2018.
• Shumway, Martha, Jennifer Alvidrez, Mark Leary, Deborah Sherwood, Eric Woodard, Emily K. Lee, Heather Hall, Ralph A. Catalano, and James W. Dilley, “Impact of Capacity Reductions in Acute Public-Sector Inpatient Psychiatric Services,” Psychiatric Services , Vol. 63, No. 2, 2012.
• Sidebottom, A., and N. Tilley, “Improving Problem-Oriented Policing: The Need for a New Model?” Crime Prevention and Community Safety , Vol. 13, No. 2, 2011.
• Sidman, Elanor A., David C. Grossman, Thomas D. Koepsell, Luann D’Ambrosio, John Britt, Evan S. Simpson, Frederick P. Rivara, and Abraham B. Bergman, “Evaluation of a Community-Based Handgun Safe-Storage Campaign,” Pediatrics , Vol. 115, No. 6, 2005.
• Siegel, Michael, “New Evidence for State-Specific Heterogeneity in the Association of Stand Your Ground Laws With Firearm Violence,” JAMA Network Open , Vol. 5, No. 2, 2022.
• Siegel, Michael, Max Goder-Reiser, Grant Duwe, Michael Rocque, James Alan Fox, and Emma E. Fridel, “The Relation Between State Gun Laws and the Incidence and Severity of Mass Public Shootings in the United States, 1976–2018,” Law and Human Behavior , Vol. 44, No. 5, 2020a.
• Siegel, Michael, Molly Pahn, Ziming Xuan, Eric Fleegler, and David Hemenway, “The Impact of State Firearm Laws on Homicide and Suicide Deaths in the USA, 1991–2016: A Panel Study,” Journal of General Internal Medicine , Vol. 34, No. 10, 2019.
• Siegel, Michael, Molly Pahn, Ziming Xuan, Craig S. Ross, Sandro Galea, Bindu Kalesan, Eric Fleegler, and Kristin A. Goss, “Firearm-Related Laws in All 50 US States, 1991–2016,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 107, No. 7, 2017a.
• Siegel, Michael, Craig S. Ross, and Charles King, “Examining the Relationship Between the Prevalence of Guns and Homicide Rates in the USA Using a New and Improved State-Level Gun Ownership Proxy,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 20, No. 6, 2014.
• Siegel, Michael, Benjamin Solomon, Anita Knopov, Emily F. Rothman, Shea W. Cronin, Ziming Xuan, and David Hemenway, “The Impact of State Firearm Laws on Homicide Rates in Suburban and Rural Areas Compared to Large Cities in the United States, 1991–2016,” Journal of Rural Health , Vol. 36, No. 2, March 2020b.
• Siegel, Michael, Ziming Xuan, Craig S. Ross, Sandro Galea, Bindu Kalesan, Eric Fleegler, and Kristin A. Goss, “Easiness of Legal Access to Concealed Firearm Permits and Homicide Rates in the United States,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 107, No. 12, 2017b.
• Silva, Jason R., and Joel A. Capellan, “A Comparative Analysis of Media Coverage of Mass Public Shootings: Examining Rampage, Disgruntled Employee, School, and Lone-Wolf Terrorist Shootings in the United States,” Criminal Justice Policy Review , Vol. 30, No. 9, 2019a.
• Silva, Jason R., and Joel A. Capellan, “The Media’s Coverage of Mass Public Shootings in America: Fifty Years of Newsworthiness,” International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice , Vol. 43, No. 1, 2019b.
• Silver, James, William Fisher, and John Horgan, “Public Mass Murderers and Federal Mental Health Background Checks,” Law and Policy , Vol. 40, No. 2, 2018.
• Silver, James, Andre Simons, and Sarah Craun, A Study of the Pre-Attack Behaviors of Active Shooters in the United States Between 2000 and 2013 , Federal Bureau of Investigation, June 2018.
• Simoiu, Camelia, Sam Corbett-Davies, and Sharad Goel, “The Problem of Infra-Marginality in Outcome Tests for Discrimination,” Annals of Applied Statistics , Vol. 11, No. 3, 2017.
• Simon, Thomas R., Heather B. Clayton, Linda L. Dahlberg, Corinne David-Ferdon, Greta Kilmer, and Colleen Barbero, “Gun Carrying Among Youths, by Demographic Characteristics, Associated Violence Experiences, and Risk Behaviors—United States, 2017–2019,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report , Vol. 71, No. 30, 2022.
• Simon, Robert I., and Liza H. Gold, “Decreasing Suicide Mortality: Clinical Risk Assessment and Firearm Management,” in Liza H. Gold and Robert I. Simon, eds., Gun Violence and Mental Illness , Arlington, Va.: American Psychiatric Association Publishing, 2016.
• Simon, T. R., A. C. Swann, K. E. Powell, L. B. Potter, M. Kresnow, and P. W. O’Carroll, “Characteristics of Impulsive Suicide Attempts and Attempters,” Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior , Vol. 32, Supp. 1, 2002.
• Simonetti, Joseph A., Deborah Azrael, and Matthew Miller, “Firearm Storage Practices and Risk Perceptions Among a Nationally Representative Sample of U.S. Veterans With and Without Self‐Harm Risk Factors,” Suicide and Life‐Threatening Behavior , Vol. 49, No. 3, 2019.
• Simonetti, Joseph A., Deborah Azrael, Ali Rowhani-Rahbar, and Matthew Miller, “Firearm Storage Practices Among American Veterans,” American Journal of Preventive Medicine , Vol. 55, No. 4, October 2018.
• Simonetti, Joseph A., Jessica L. Mackelprang, Ali Rowhani-Rahbar, Douglas Zatzick, and Frederick P. Rivara, “Psychiatric Comorbidity, Suicidality, and in-Home Firearm Access Among a Nationally Representative Sample of Adolescents,” JAMA Psychiatry , Vol. 72, No. 2, 2015.
• Simonetti, Joseph A., Ali Rowhani-Rahbar, Cassie King, Elizabeth Bennett, and Frederick P. Rivara, “Evaluation of a Community-Based Safe Firearm and Ammunition Storage Intervention,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 24, No. 3, 2018.
• Simonetti, Joseph A., Mary Kay Theis, Ali Rowhani-Rahbar, Evette J. Ludman, and David C. Grossman, “Firearm Storage Practices in Households of Adolescents With and Without Mental Illness,” Journal of Adolescent Health , Vol. 61, No. 5, 2017.
• Skeem, Jennifer, and Edward Mulvey, “What Role Does Serious Mental Illness Play in Mass Shootings, and How Should We Address It?” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 19, No. 1, 2020.
• Slutkin, G., C. Ransford, and R. B. Decker, “Cure Violence: Treating Violence as a Contagious Disease,” in M. D. Maltz and S. K. Rice, Envisioning Criminology , Springer, 2015.
• Small Arms Survey, “Annexe 4. The Largest Civilian Firearms Arsenals for 178 Countries,” in Small Arms Survey 2007: Guns and the City , Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, August 2007.
• Small, Mario L., and Devah Pager, “Sociological Perspectives on Racial Discrimination,” Journal of Economic Perspectives , Vol. 34, No. 2, Spring 2020.
• Smart, Rosanna, Dionne Barnes-Proby, Pierrce Holmes, Terry L. Schell, and Andrew R. Morral, “Racial and Ethnic Differences in the Effects of State Firearm Laws: A Systematic Review Subgroup Analysis,” Injury Epidemiology , Vol. 10, 2023.
• Smart, Rosanna, Andrew R. Morral, Rajeev Ramchand, Amanda Charbonneau, Jhacova Williams, Sierra Smucker, Samantha Cherney, and Lea Xenakis, The Science of Gun Policy: A Critical Synthesis of Research Evidence on the Effects of Gun Policies in the United States, Third Edition , RAND Corporation, RR-A243-4, 2023. As of January 10, 2023: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA243-4.html
• Smart, Rosanna, Andrew R. Morral, Sierra Smucker, Samantha Cherney, Terry L. Schell, Samuel Peterson, Sangeeta C. Ahluwalia, Matthew Cefalu, Lea Xenakis, Rajeev Ramchand, and Carole Roan Gresenz, The Science of Gun Policy: A Critical Synthesis of Research Evidence on the Effects of Gun Policies in the United States , 2nd ed., RAND Corporation, RR-2088-1-RC/AV, 2020. As of March 30, 2020: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2088-1.html
• Smart, Rosanna, Andrew R. Morral, and Terry L. Schell, The Magnitude and Sources of Disagreement Among Gun Policy Experts , 2nd ed., RAND Corporation, RR-A243-3, 2021. As of November 29, 2021: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA243-3.html
• Rosanna Smart, Samuel Peterson, Terry L. Schell, Rose Kerber, and Andrew R. Morral, "Firearm Injury Hospitalizations in America," RAND Corporation, April 27, 2021. As of December 29, 2022: https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/firearm-injury.html
• Smart, Rosanna, Samuel Peterson, Terry L. Schell, Rose Kerber, and Andrew R. Morral, Inpatient Hospitalizations for Firearm Injury: Estimating State-Level Rates from 2000 to 2016 , RAND Corporation, TL-A243-3, 2021a. As of January 31, 2024: https://www.rand.org/pubs/tools/TLA243-3.html
• Smart, Rosanna, and Terry L. Schell, “Mass Shootings in the United States,” in Rajeev Ramchand and Jessica Saunders, eds., Contemporary Issues in Gun Policy: Essays from the RAND Gun Policy in America Project , RAND Corporation, RR-A243-2, 2021. As of August 31, 2022: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA243-2.html
• Smart, Rosanna, Terry L. Schell, Matthew Cefalu, and Andrew R. Morral, “Impact on Nonfirearm Deaths of Firearm Laws Affecting Firearm Deaths: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 110, No. 10, October 2020a.
• Smiley, Calvin John, and David Fakunle, “From ‘Brute’ to ‘Thug’: The Demonization and Criminalization of Unarmed Black Male Victims in America,” Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment , Vol. 26, Nos. 3–4, 2016.
• Smith, Michael R., and Matthew Petrocelli, “The Effect of Concealed Handgun Carry Deregulation in Arizona on Crime in Tucson,” Criminal Justice Policy Review , Vol. 30, No. 8, 2019.
• Smith, N. D., and I. Kawachi, “State-Level Social Capital and Suicide Mortality in the 50 U.S. States,” Social Science and Medicine , Vol. 120, 2014.
• Smith, P. N., J. Currier, and K. Drescher, “Firearm Ownership in Veterans Entering Residential PTSD Treatment: Associations with Suicide Ideation, Attempts, and Combat Exposure,” Psychiatry Research , Vol. 229, No. 1–2, 2015.
• Smith, Sharon G., Jieru Chen, Kathleen C. Basile, Leah K. Gilbert, Melissa T. Merrick, Nimesh Patel, Margie Walling, and Anurag Jain, The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey: 2010–2012 State Report , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2017.
• Smith, Sharon G., Katherine A. Fowler, and Phyllis H. Niolon, “Intimate Partner Homicide and Corollary Victims in 16 States: National Violent Death Reporting System, 2003–2009,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 104, No. 3, 2014.
• Smith, T. W., and J. Son, Trends in Gun Ownership in the United States, 1972–2014 , NORC at the University of Chicago, March 2015.
• Smucker, Sierra, Max Griswold, Amanda Charbonneau, Rose Kerber, Terry L. Schell, and Andrew R. Morral, Using National Instant Criminal Background Check Data for Gun Policy Analysis: A Discussion of Available Data and Their Limitations , RAND Corporation, TL-A243-4, 2022. As of October 1, 2022: https://www.rand.org/pubs/tools/TLA243-4.html
• Smucker, Sierra, Rose E. Kerber, and Philip J. Cook, “Suicide and Additional Homicides Associated with Intimate Partner Homicide: North Carolina 2004–2013,” Journal of Urban Health , Vol. 95, No. 3, 2018.
• Snowdon, John, "Hidden Suicides: Their Misclassification as Accidental, 'Undetermined' or Unknown Cause Deaths," Journal of Suicidology , Vol. 18, No. 2, 2023.
• Snyder, L. B., and M. A. Hamilton, “A Meta-Analysis of U.S. Health Campaign Effects on Behavior: Emphasize Enforcement, Exposure, and New Information, and Beware the Secular Trend,” in R. C. Hornik, ed., Public Health Communication: Evidence for Behavior Change , Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., 2002.
• Sokol, Rebeccah Lyn, Carissa Schmidt, Alison L. Miller, Maureen A. Walton, Marc Zimmerman, Kenneth Resnicow, Rebecca M. Cunningham, and Patrick M. Carter, “Motivations for Firearm Possession and Storage Practices Among Urban Young Adults: Differences Between Parents and Non-Parents,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 27, No. 5, 2021.
• Solnick, Sara J., and David Hemenway, “Unintentional Firearm Deaths in the United States 2005–2015,” Injury Epidemiology , Vol. 6, October 2019.
• Sorenson, Susan B., “Guns in Intimate Partner Violence: Comparing Incidents by Type of Weapon,” Journal of Women’s Health , Vol. 26, No. 3, 2017.
• Sorenson, Susan B., and Rebecca A. Schut, “Nonfatal Gun Use in Intimate Partner Violence: A Systematic Review of the Literature,” Trauma, Violence, and Abuse , Vol. 19, No. 4, 2018.
• Southwick Associates, Target Shooting in America , National Shooting Sports Foundation, 2013.
• Spencer, Katherine B., Amanda K. Charbonneau, and Jack Glaser, “Implicit Bias and Policing,” Social and Personality Psychology Compass , Vol. 10, No. 1, 2016.
• Spicer, R. S., and T. R. Miller, “Suicide Acts in 8 States: Incidence and Case Fatality Rates by Demographics and Method,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 90, No. 12, 2000.
• Spitzer, Robert J., “Gun Law History in the United States and Second Amendment Rights,” Law and Contemporary Problems , Vol. 80, No. 2, 2017.
• Stallworth, Leo, “LAPD Launches Buyback Program Aimed at Getting ‘Ghost Guns’ off Streets,” Eyewitness News 7 , March 24, 2022.
• Stander, V. A., S. M. Hilton, A. P. Doran, A. D. Werbel, and C. J. Thomsen, Department of the Navy Suicide Incident Report (DONSIR): Summary of 1999–2004 Findings , Naval Health Research Center, 2006.
• Stanford Geospatial Center, “Mass Shootings in America,” Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Libraries, undated. As of June 3, 2020: https://library.stanford.edu/projects/mass-shootings-america
• Stanford Geospatial Center, “MSA,” GitHub data repository, March 26, 2018. As of December 11, 2020: https://github.com/StanfordGeospatialCenter/MSA
• Stanley, Ian H., and Michael D. Anestis, “The Intersection of PTSD Symptoms and Firearm Storage Practices Within a Suicide Prevention Framework: Findings from a U.S. Army National Guard Sample,” Psychological Services , Vol. 18, No. 3, August 2021.
• Stanley, Ian H., Melanie A. Hom, Natalie J. Sachs-Ericsson, Austin J. Gallyer, and Thomas E. Joiner, “A Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial of a Lethal Means Safety Intervention for Young Adults with Firearm Familiarity at Risk for Suicide,” Journal of Consulting Clinical Psychology , Vol. 88, No. 4, April 2020.
• Stansfield, Richard, Daniel Semenza, and Ian Silver, "The Relationship Between Concealed Carry Licenses and Firearm Homicide in the US: A Reciprocal County-Level Analysis," Journal of Urban Health , Vol. 100, No. 4, August 2023.
• Stark, David E., "Methods and Annotated Code Pertaining to Funding and Publication of Research on Gun Violence and Other Leading Causes of Death," GitHub, January 4, 2017. As of February 1, 2018: https://github.com/davidestark/gun-violence-research
• Stark, David E., and Nigam H. Shah, “Funding and Publication of Research on Gun Violence and Other Leading Causes of Death,” JAMA , Vol. 317, No. 1, January 3, 2017.
• Steadman, Henry J., John Monahan, Debra A. Pinals, Roumen Vesselinov, and Pamela Clark Robbins, “Gun Violence and Victimization of Strangers by Persons with a Mental Illness: Data from the MacArthur Violence Risk Assessment Study,” Psychiatric Services , Vol. 66, No. 11, 2015.
• Steadman, Henry J., Edward P. Mulvey, John Monahan, Pamela Clark Robbins, Paul S. Appelbaum, Thomas Grisso, Loren H. Roth, and Eric Silver, “Violence by People Discharged from Acute Psychiatric Inpatient Facilities and by Others in the Same Neighborhoods,” Archives of General Psychiatry , Vol. 55, No. 5, 1998.
• Stehr, Mark, “Cigarette Tax Avoidance and Evasion,” Journal of Health Economics , Vol. 24, No. 2, 2005.
• Stehr, Mark, “The Effect of Sunday Sales Bans and Excise Taxes on Drinking and Cross-Border Shopping for Alcoholic Beverages,” National Tax Journal , Vol. 60, No. 1, 2007.
• Steidley, Trent, “The Effect of Concealed Carry Weapons Laws on Firearm Sales,” Social Science Research , Vol. 78, February 2019.
• Steidley, Trent Taylor, Movements, Malefactions, and Munitions: Determinants and Effects of Concealed Carry Laws in the United States , dissertation, Ohio State University, 2016.
• Steidley, Trent, and Martin T. Kosla, “Toward a Status Anxiety Theory of Macro-Level Firearm Demand,” Social Currents , Vol. 5, No. 1, 2018.
• Sterne, Jonathan A. C., Julian P. T. Higgins, Roy G. Elbers, and Barney C. Reeves, Risk of Bias in Non-Randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I): Detailed Guidance , updated October 20, 2016.
• Stevens, Marguerite M., Ardis L. Olson, Cecelia A. Gaffney, Tor D. Tosteson, Leila A. Mott, and Pamela Starr, “A Pediatric, Practice-Based, Randomized Trial of Drinking and Smoking Prevention and Bicycle Helmet, Gun, and Seatbelt Safety Promotion,” Pediatrics , Vol. 109, No. 3, 2002.
• Stevenson, Dru, “The Urgent Need for Legal Scholarship on Firearm Policy,” Buffalo Law Review , Vol. 67, No. 5, 2019.
• Stolberg, Sheryl Gay, “Domestic Abusers Are Barred from Gun Ownership, but Often Escape the Law,” New York Times , November 6, 2017.
• Stone, Deborah M., Kristin M. Holland, Lara B. Schiff, and Wendy LiKamWa McIntosh, “Mixed Methods Analysis of Sex Differences in Life Stressors of Middle-Aged Suicides,” American Journal of Preventive Medicine , Vol. 51, No. 5, Supp. 3, 2016.
• Stone, Deborah M., Christopher M. Jones, and Karin A. Mack, “Changes in Suicide Rates—United States, 2018–2019,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report , Vol. 70, No. 8, 2021.
• Stone, Michael H., “Mass Murder, Mental Illness, and Men,” Violence and Gender , Vol. 2, No. 1, 2015.
• Stovold, Elizabeth, Deirdre Beecher, Ruth Foxlee, and Anna Noel-Storr, “Study Flow Diagrams in Cochrane Systematic Review Updates: An Adapted PRISMA Flow Diagram,” Systematic Reviews , Vol. 3, No. 54, May 2014.
• Strnad, Jeff, “Should Legal Empiricists Go Bayesian?” American Law and Economics Review , Vol. 9, No. 1, Spring 2007.
• Studdert, David M., Yifan Zhang, Erin E. Holsinger, Lea Prince, Alexander F. Holsinger, Jonathan A. Rodden, Garen J. Wintemute, and Matthew Miller, “Homicide Deaths Among Adult Cohabitants of Handgun Owners in California, 2004 to 2016: A Cohort Study,” Annals of Internal Medicine , Vol. 175, No. 6, June 2022.
• Studdert, David M., Yifan Zhang, Jonathan A. Rodden, Rob J. Hyndman, and Garen J. Wintemute, “Handgun Acquisitions in California After Two Mass Shootings,” Annals of Internal Medicine , Vol. 166, No. 10, 2017.
• Studdert, David M., Yifan Zhang, Sonja A. Swanson, Lea Prince, Jonathan A. Rodden, Erin E. Holsinger, Matthew J. Spittal, Garen J. Wintemute, and Matthew Miller, “Handgun Ownership and Suicide in California,” New England Journal of Medicine , Vol. 382, No. 23, 2020.
• Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Results from the 2013 National Survey on Drug Use and Mental Health: Mental Health Detailed Tables , 2016.
• Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Results from the 2017 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: Detailed Tables , 2018.
• Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, Results from the 2020 National Survey on Drug Use and Health: Detailed Tables , 2022.
• Suicide and Emotion Dysregulation Lab, “Mississippi Gun Storage Map,” webpage, undated. As of December 7, 2021: http://mikeanestis.weebly.com/ms-gun-storage-map.html
• Suicide Prevention Resource Center, “CALM: Counseling on Access to Lethal Means,” webpage, 2018. As of December 6, 2021: https://www.sprc.org/resources-programs/calm-counseling-access-lethal-means
• Sullum, Jacob, “Colorado’s New ‘Red Flag’ Law Illustrates the Pitfalls of Disarming People Based on Their Future Behaviors,” Reason Foundation, April 29, 2019.
• Sumner, S. A., P. M. Layde, and C. E. Guse, “Firearm Death Rates and Association with Level of Firearm Purchase Background Check,” American Journal of Preventive Medicine , Vol. 35, No. 1, 2008.
• Sun, L., G. C. van Kooten, and G. M. Voss, “Demand for Wildlife Hunting in British Columbia,” Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics , Vol. 53, No. 1, March 2005.
• Swahn, M. H., B. Ali, R. M. Bossarte, M. van Dulmen, A. Crosby, A. C. Jones, and K. C. Schinka, “Self-Harm and Suicide Attempts Among High-Risk, Urban Youth in the U.S.: Shared and Unique Risk and Protective Factors,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health , Vol. 9, No. 1, 2012.
• Swaner, Rachel, Elise White, Andrew Martinez, Anjelica Camacho, Basaime Spate, Javonte Alexander, Lysondra Webb, and Kevin Evans, “Gotta Make Your Own Heaven”: Guns, Safety, and the Edge of Adulthood in New York City , Center for Court Innovation, August 2020.
• Swanson, Jeffrey W., “Mental Disorder, Substance Abuse, and Community Violence: An Epidemiological Approach,” in J. Monahan and H. Steadman, eds., Violence and Mental Disorder , University of Chicago Press, 1994.
• Swanson, Jeffrey W., Michele M. Easter, Kelly Alanis-Hirsch, Charles M. Belden, Michael A. Norko, Allison G. Robertson, Linda K. Frisman, Hsiu-Ju Lin, Marvin S. Swartz, and George F. Parker, “Criminal Justice and Suicide Outcomes with Indiana's Risk-Based Gun Seizure Law,” Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law , Vol. 47, No. 2, 2019.
• Swanson, Jeffrey W., Michele M. Easter, Allison G. Robertson, Marvin S. Swartz, Kelly Alanis-Hirsch, Daniel Moseley, Charles Dion, and John Petrila, “Gun Violence, Mental Illness, and Laws That Prohibit Gun Possession: Evidence from Two Florida Counties,” Health Affairs , Vol. 35, No. 6, 2016.
• Swanson, J. W., C. E. Holzer III, V. K. Ganju, and R. T. Jono, “Violence and Psychiatric Disorder in the Community: Evidence from the Epidemiologic Catchment Area Surveys,” Psychiatric Services , Vol. 41, No. 7, 1990.
• Swanson, J. W., E. E. McGinty, S. Fazel, and V. M. Mays, “Mental Illness and Reduction of Gun Violence and Suicide: Bringing Epidemiologic Research to Policy,” Annals of Epidemiology , Vol. 25, No. 5, 2015.
• Swanson, Jeffrey W., Michael A. Norko, Hsiu-Ju Lin, Kelly Alanis-Hirsch, Linda K. Frisman, Madelon V. Baranoski, Michele M. Easter, Allison G. Robertson, Marvin S. Swartz, and Richard J. Bonnie, “Implementation and Effectiveness of Connecticut's Risk-Based Gun Removal Law: Does It Prevent Suicides?” Law and Contemporary Problems , Vol. 80, No. 2, 2017.
• Swanson, J. W., A. G. Robertson, L. K. Frisman, M. A. Norko, H. Lin, M. S. Swartz, and P. J. Cook, “Preventing Gun Violence Involving People with Serious Mental Illness,” in D. W. Webster and J. S. Vernick, eds., Reducing Gun Violence in America: Informing Policy with Evidence and Analysis , Johns Hopkins University Press, 2013.
• Swedler, D. I., M. M. Simmons, F. Dominici, and D. Hemenway, “Firearm Prevalence and Homicides of Law Enforcement Officers in the United States,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 105, No. 10, 2015.
• Tamer, Elie, “Partial Identification in Econometrics,” Annual Review of Economics , Vol. 2, No. 1, 2010.
• Tark, Jongyeon, and Gary Kleck, “Resisting Crime: The Effects of Victim Action on the Outcomes of Crimes,” Criminology , Vol. 42, No. 4, 2004.
• Tate, Julie, Jennifer Jenkins, and Steven Rich, “Fatal Force,” Washington Post , March 31, 2019. As of November 18, 2019: https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/national/police-shootings-2018/
• Tate, Julie, Jennifer Jenkins, and Steven Rich, “Fatal Force,” Washington Post , June 21, 2022. As of June 21, 2022: https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/investigations/police-shootings-database/
• Taylor, Melanie A., “A Comprehensive Study of Mass Murder Precipitants and Motivations of Offenders,” International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology , Vol. 62, No. 2, 2018.
• Teisl, M. F., K. J. Boyle, and R. E. Record, Jr., “License-Sales Revenues: Understanding Angler and Hunter Reaction to Changes in License Prices,” Human Dimensions of Wildlife , Vol. 4, No. 4, 1999.
• Teplin, L. A., G. M. McClelland, K. M. Abram, and D. A. Weiner, “Crime Victimization in Adults with Severe Mental Illness: Comparison with the National Crime Victimization Survey,” Archives of General Psychiatry , Vol. 62, No. 8, 2005.
• Terrill, William, “Deadly Force: To Shoot or Not to Shoot,” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 15, No. 2, May 2016.
• Texas Department of Public Safety, Conviction Rates for Handgun License Holders Reporting Period: 01/01/2021–12/31/2021 , March 18, 2022.
• Texas House of Representatives, Investigative Committee on the Robb Elementary Shooting: Texas House of Representatives Interim Report 2022 , July 17, 2022.
• Thompson, Martie P., Linda E. Saltzman, and Daniel Bibel, “Applying NIBRS Data to the Study of Intimate Partner Violence: Massachusetts as a Case Study,” Journal of Quantitative Criminology , Vol. 15, No. 2, June 1999.
• Thompson, R., V. Kane, J. M. Cook, R. Greenstein, P. Walker, and G. Woody, “Suicidal Ideation in Veterans Receiving Treatment for Opiate Dependence,” Journal of Psychoactive Drugs , Vol. 38, No. 2, 2006.
• Thomson Healthcare, Ranking America’s Mental Health: An Analysis of Depression Across the States , Mental Health America, 2007.
• Tillyer, M. S., R. S. Engel, and B. Lovins, “Beyond Boston: Applying Theory to Understand and Address Sustainability Issues in Focused Deterrence Initiatives for Violence Reduction,” Crime and Delinquency , Vol. 58, No. 6, 2012.
• Tillyer, M. S., and D. M. Kennedy, “Locating Focused Deterrence Approaches Within a Situational Crime Prevention Framework,” Crime Prevention and Community Safety , Vol. 10, No. 2, 2008.
• Tilstra, Andrea M., Iliya Gutin, Nathan T. Dollar, Richard G. Rogers, and Robert A. Hummer, “‘Outside the Skin’: The Persistence of Black-White Disparities in U.S. Early-Life Mortality,” Demography , Vol. 59, No. 6, December 2022.
• Tita, G. E., A. A. Braga, G. Ridgeway, and G. L. Pierce, “The Criminal Purchase of Firearm Ammunition,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 12, No. 5, 2006.
• Tondo, Leonardo, Matthew J. Albert, and Ross J. Baldessarini, “Suicide Rates in Relation to Health Care Access in the United States: An Ecological Study,” Journal of Clinical Psychiatry , Vol. 67, No. 4, 2006.
• Tregle, Brandon, Justin Nix, and Geoffrey P. Alpert, “Disparity Does Not Mean Bias: Making Sense of Observed Racial Disparities in Fatal Officer-Involved Shootings with Multiple Benchmarks,” Journal of Crime and Justice , Vol. 42, No. 1, 2019.
• Tritch, Teresa, “Keep Handguns Away from Teenagers,” New York Times , May 30, 2014.
• Tyler, T. R., J. Fagan, and A. Geller, “Street Stops and Police Legitimacy: Teachable Moments in Young Urban Men’s Legal Socialization,” Journal of Empirical Legal Studies , Vol. 11, No. 4, 2014.
• Uggen, C., and S. McElrath, “Six Social Sources of the U.S. Crime Drop,” Society Pages , February 4, 2013.
• Ukert, Benjamin, Elena Andreyeva, and Charles C. Branas, “Time Series Robustness Checks to Test the Effects of the 1996 Australian Firearm Law on Cause-Specific Mortality,” Journal of Experimental Criminology , Vol. 14, No. 2, 2018.
• United States Code, Title 18, Chapter 44, Firearms.
• United States Code, Title 18, Section 921, Definitions.
• United States Code, Title 18, Section 922, Unlawful Acts.
• United States Code, Title 18, Section 923, Licensing.
• United States Code, Title 18, Section 926, Rules and Regulations.
• United States Code, Title 18, Section 930, Possession of Firearms and Dangerous Weapons in Federal Facilities.
• United States Code, Title 20, Section 7961, Gun-Free Schools Act.
• United States Code, Title 26, Section 5801, Imposition of Tax.
• United States Code, Title 26, Section 5841, Registration of Firearms.
• United States Concealed Carry Association, “Traveling? Know Concealed Carry Permit Info by State,” August 7, 2013.
• United States v. Lopez , 514 U.S. 549, 1995.
• University of Washington, Harborview Injury Prevention and Research Center, “Washington Firearm Safe Storage Map,” webpage, undated. As of December 7, 2021: https://hiprc.org/firearm/firearm-storage-wa/
• U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, “Current Employment Statistics (National),” 2017. As of May 15, 2017: https://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/ceseeb1a.htm
• U.S. Census Bureau, Number of Firms, Number of Establishments, Employment, and Annual Payroll by Enterprise Employment Size for the United States, All Industries: 2014 , December 2016.
• U.S. Census Bureau, “U.S. and World Population Clock,” 2017. As of March 22, 2017: https://www.census.gov/popclock/
• U.S. Census Bureau, Number of Firms, Number of Establishments, Employment, and Annual Payroll by Enterprise Employment Size for the United States, All Industries: 2017 , December 2019.
• U.S. Census Bureau, “National Population by Characteristics: 2010–2019,” web tool, June 17, 2020. As of June 20, 2020: https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/popest/2010s-national-detail.html
• U.S. Census Bureau, “Census Bureau Releases New Estimates on America’s Families and Living Arrangements,” press release, November 29, 2021.
• U.S. Census Bureau, “U.S. and World Population Clock,” 2022. As of August 17, 2022: https://www.census.gov/popclock/
• U.S. Census Bureau, Annual Survey of Manufacturers: Summary Statistics for Industry Groups and Industries in the U.S.: 2018–2021 , Table AM1831BASIC01, December 2022a.
• U.S. Census Bureau, Number of Firms, Number of Establishments, Employment, and Annual Payroll by Enterprise Employment Size for the United States, All Industries: 2021 , December 2023.
• U.S. Census Bureau, “Three-Quarters of Children Younger Than 6 Years Old Live with Two Parents,” press release, November 21, 2023a.
• U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Active Shooter: How to Respond , October 2008.
• U.S. Department of Justice, “Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 Fact Sheet,” October 24, 1994. As of May 30, 2017: https://www.ncjrs.gov/txtfiles/billfs.txt
• U.S. Department of Justice, The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives’ Investigative Operations at Gun Shows , Office of the Inspector General, Evaluation and Inspections Report I-2007-007, June 2007.
• U.S. Department of Justice, “Department of Justice Awards $1 Million to the National Crime Prevention Council to Support Gun Safety Campaign,” press release, March 7, 2013.
• U.S. Department of Justice, “Commentary for Extreme Risk Protection Order Model Legislation,” June 7, 2021.
• U.S. Department of Labor, Fact Sheet: The Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 (MHPAEA) , January 29, 2010. As of October 18, 2017: https://www.dol.gov/sites/default/files/ebsa/about-ebsa/our-activities/resource-center/fact-sheets/mhpaea.pdf
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Hunting License Report , U.S. Department of the Interior, May 5, 2015.
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2016 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation , FHW/16-NAT, April 2018.
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2022 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation , September 2023.
• U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, and U.S. Department of Commerce, 2011 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation , FH2/11-NAT, 2012.
• U.S. General Accounting Office, Firearms Purchased from Federal Firearm Licensees Using Bogus Identification , GAO-01-427NI, 2001.
• U.S. House of Representatives, Gun Violence Prevention and Community Safety Act of 2020, Bill 5717, January 30, 2020.
• U.S. House of Representatives, Making Appropriations for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies for the Fiscal Year Ending September 30, 2024, and for Other Purposes, Bill 5894, October 6, 2023.
• USA Carry, “Concealed Carry Permit Reciprocity Maps,” webpage, April 20, 2017. As of June 29, 2017: https://www.usacarry.com/concealed_carry_permit_reciprocity_maps.html
• Van den Noortgate, Wim, José Antonio López-López, Fulgencio Marín-Martínez, and Julio Sánchez-Meca, “Three-Level Meta-Analysis of Dependent Effect Sizes,” Behavior Research Methods , Vol. 45, No. 2, June 2013.
• Van Der Wal, Willem M., “Marginal Structural Models to Estimate Causal Effects of Right-to-Carry Laws on Crime,” Statistics and Public Policy , Vol. 9, No. 1, 2022.
• van Dijk, Jan, John van Kesteren, and Paul Smit, Criminal Victimisation in International Perspective: Key Findings from the 2004–2005 ICVS and EU ICS , United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, 2007.
• Van Green, Ted, “Wide Differences on Most Gun Policies Between Gun Owners and Non-Owners, but Also Some Agreement,” Pew Research Center, August 4, 2021.
• Vernick, Jon S., Ted Alcorn, and Joshua Horwitz, “Background Checks for All Gun Buyers and Gun Violence Restraining Orders: State Efforts to Keep Guns from High-Risk Persons,” Journal of Law, Medicine, and Ethics , Vol. 45, Supp. 1, 2017.
• Vernick, J. S., and L. M. Hepburn, “State and Federal Gun Laws: Trends for 1970–1999,” in Jens Ludwig and Philip J. Cook, eds., Evaluating Gun Policy: Effects on Crime and Violence , Brookings Institution Press, 2003.
• Vernick, Jon S., Daniel W. Webster, and Lisa M. Hepburn, “Effects of Maryland's Law Banning Saturday Night Special Handguns on Crime Guns,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 5, No. 4, 1999.
• Vespa, Jonathan, Jamie M. Lewis, and Rose M. Kreider, America’s Families and Living Arrangements: 2012, Current Population Reports , U.S. Census Bureau, P20–570, 2013.
• Vigdor, E. R., and J. A. Mercy, “Disarming Batterers: The Impact of Domestic Violence Firearms Laws,” in Jens Ludwig and Philip J. Cook, eds., Evaluating Gun Policy: Effects on Crime and Violence , Brookings Institution Press, 2003.
• Vigdor, E. R., and J. A. Mercy, “Do Laws Restricting Access to Firearms by Domestic Violence Offenders Prevent Intimate Partner Homicide?” Evaluation Review , Vol. 30, No. 3, 2006.
• Vince, Joseph J., Timothy Wolfe, and Layton Field, Firearms Training and Self-Defense: Does the Quality and Frequency of Training Determine the Realistic Use of Firearms by Citizens for Self-Defense? National Gun Victims Action Council, 2015.
• Violano, Pina, Cassandra Driscoll, Neil K. Chaudhary, Kevin M. Schuster, Kimberly A. Davis, Esther Borer, Jane K. Winters, and Michael P. Hirsh, “Gun Buyback Programs: A Venue to Eliminate Unwanted Guns in the Community,” Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery , Vol. 77, No. 3, Supp. 1, September 2014.
• Violence Policy Center, “Concealed Carry Killers,” webpage, 2017. As of March 23, 2017: https://concealedcarrykillers.org/
• Violence Policy Center, Firearm Justifiable Homicides and Non-Fatal Self-Defense Gun Use: An Analysis of Federal Bureau of Investigation and National Crime Victimization Survey Data , September 2018.
• The Violence Project, “Mass Shooter Database,” web tool, undated. As of June 8, 2020: https://www.theviolenceproject.org/mass-shooter-database/
• The Violence Project, homepage, undated-a. As of April 23, 2024: https://www.theviolenceproject.org
• Vittes, K. A., and S. B. Sorenson, “Recreational Gun Use by California Adolescents,” Health Education and Behavior , Vol. 32, No. 6, 2005.
• Vittes, K. A., J. S. Vernick, and D. W. Webster, “Legal Status and Source of Offenders’ Firearms in States with the Least Stringent Criteria for Gun Ownership,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 19, No. 1, June 23, 2012.
• Vittes, Katherine A., Daniel W. Webster, Shannon Frattaroli, Barbara E. Claire, and Garen J. Wintemute, “Removing Guns from Batterers: Findings from a Pilot Survey of Domestic Violence Restraining Order Recipients in California,” Violence Against Women , Vol. 19, No. 5, 2013.
• Vyrostek, S. B., J. L. Annest, and G. W. Ryan, “Surveillance for Fatal and Nonfatal Injuries—United States, 2001,” MMWR Surveillance Summary , Vol. 53, 2004.
• Wadsworth, T., C. E. Kubrin, and J. R. Herting, “Investigating the Rise (and Fall) of Young Black Male Suicide in the United States, 1982–2001,” Journal of African American Studies , Vol. 18, No. 1, 2014.
• Wadsworth, Tim, and John M. Roberts, Jr., “When Missing Data Are Not Missing: A New Approach to Evaluating Supplemental Homicide Report Imputation Strategies,” Criminology , Vol. 46, No. 4, 2008.
• Wagenaar, Alexander C., Matthew J. Salois, and Kelli A. Komro, “Effects of Beverage Alcohol Price and Tax Levels on Drinking: A Meta‐Analysis of 1003 Estimates from 112 Studies,” Addiction , Vol. 104, No. 2, 2009.
• Wallace, Lacey N., “Castle Doctrine Legislation: Unintended Effects for Gun Ownership?” Justice Policy Journal , Vol. 11, No. 2, Fall 2014.
• Wallace, Maeve E., Dovile Vilda, Katherine P. Theall, and Charles Stoecker, “Firearm Relinquishment Laws Associated with Substantial Reduction in Homicide of Pregnant and Postpartum Women,” Health Affairs , Vol. 40, No. 10, September 22, 2021.
• Wallin, Mikaela A., Charvonne N. Holliday, and April M. Zeoli, “The Association of Federal and State-Level Firearm Restriction Policies with Intimate Partner Homicide: A Re-Analysis by Race of the Victim,” Journal of Interpersonal Violence , Vol. 37, Nos. 17–18, September 2022.
• Wang, N., L. Liu, and J. E. Eck, “Analyzing Crime Displacement with a Simulation Approach,” Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design , Vol. 41, No. 2, 2014.
• Warburton, A. L., and J. P. Shepherd, “Tackling Alcohol Related Violence in City Centres: Effect of Emergency Medicine and Police Intervention,” Emergency Medicine Journal , Vol. 23, No. 1, 2006.
• Ward, Julia A., Javier Cepeda, Dylan B. Jackson, Odis Johnson Jr., Daniel W. Webster, and Cassandra K. Crifasi, “National Burden of Injury and Deaths from Shootings by Police in the United States, 2015–2020,” American Journal of Public Health , forthcoming.
• Ward, Julie A., Emma E. McGinty, Talib Hudson, Elizabeth M. Stone, Colleen L. Barry, Daniel W. Webster, and Cassandra K. Crifasi, “Reimagining Public Safety: Public Opinion on Police Reform and Gun Violence Prevention by Race and Gun Ownership in the United States,” Preventive Medicine , Vol. 165, Pt. A, December 2022, article 107180.
• Watkins, Adam M., Beth M. Huebner, and Scott H. Decker, “Patterns of Gun Acquisition, Carrying, and Use Among Juvenile and Adult Arrestees: Evidence from a High‐Crime City,” Justice Quarterly , Vol. 25, No. 4, 2008.
• Watkins, Adam M., and Alan J. Lizotte, “Does Household Gun Access Increase the Risk of Attempted Suicide? Evidence from a National Sample of Adolescents,” Youth and Society , Vol. 45, No. 3, 2013.
• Webster, D., C. K. Crifasi, and J. S. Vernick, “Effects of the Repeal of Missouri’s Handgun Purchaser Licensing Law on Homicides,” Journal of Urban Health , Vol. 91, No. 2, 2014.
• Webster, D. W., L. H. Freed, S. Frattaroli, and M. H. Wilson, “How Delinquent Youths Acquire Guns: Initial Versus Most Recent Gun Acquisitions,” Journal of Urban Health , Vol. 79, No. 1, 2002.
• Webster, Daniel W., Alexander D. McCourt, Cassandra K. Crifasi, Marisa D. Booty, and Elizabeth A. Stuart, “Evidence Concerning the Regulation of Firearms Design, Sale, and Carrying on Fatal Mass Shootings in the United States,” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 19, No. 1, 2020.
• Webster, Daniel W., and Marc Starnes, “Reexamining the Association Between Child Access Prevention Gun Laws and Unintentional Shooting Deaths of Children,” Pediatrics , Vol. 106, No. 6, 2000.
• Webster, Daniel W., Jon S. Vernick, and Maria T. Bulzacchelli, “Effects of State-Level Firearm Seller Accountability Policies on Firearm Trafficking,” Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine , Vol. 86, No. 4, 2009.
• Webster, Daniel W., Jon S. Vernick, and Lisa M. Hepburn, “Relationship Between Licensing, Registration, and Other Gun Sales Laws and the Source State of Crime Guns,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 7, 2001.
• Webster, Daniel W., Jon S. Vernick, and Lisa M. Hepburn, “Effects of Maryland's Law Banning ‘Saturday Night Special’ Handguns on Homicides,” American Journal of Epidemiology , Vol. 155, No. 5, 2002.
• Webster, Daniel W., Jon S. Vernick, Emma E. McGinty, and Ted Alcorn, “Preventing the Diversion of Guns to Criminals Through Effective Firearm Sales Laws,” in Daniel W. Webster and Jon S. Vernick, eds., Reducing Gun Violence in America: Informing Policy with Evidence and Analysis , Johns Hopkins University Press, 2013.
• Webster, D. W., J. S. Vernick, A. M. Zeoli, and J. A. Manganello, “Association Between Youth-Focused Firearm Laws and Youth Suicides,” JAMA , Vol. 292, No. 5, 2004.
• Webster, D. W., and G. J. Wintemute, “Effects of Policies Designed to Keep Firearms from High-Risk Individuals,” Annual Review of Public Health , Vol. 36, 2015.
• Weil, Douglas S., and Rebecca C. Knox, “Effects of Limiting Handgun Purchase on Interstate Transfer of Firearms,” JAMA , Vol. 275, No. 22, 1996.
• Weisburd, D., S. Bushway, C. Lum, and S.-M. Yang, “Trajectories of Crime at Places: A Longitudinal Study of Street Segments in the City of Seattle,” Criminology , Vol. 42, No. 2, 2004.
• Weisburd, D., and J. E. Eck, “What Can Police Do to Reduce Crime, Disorder, and Fear?” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science , Vol. 593, No. 1, 2004.
• Wellford, Charles F., John V. Pepper, and Carol V. Petrie, eds., Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review , National Research Council, 2005.
• Welsh, B. C., and D. P. Farrington, “Public Area CCTV and Crime Prevention: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis,” Justice Quarterly , Vol. 26, 2009.
• Westreich, Daniel, and Sander Greenland, “The Table 2 Fallacy: Presenting and Interpreting Confounder and Modifier Coefficients,” American Journal of Epidemiology , Vol. 177, No. 4, February 15, 2013.
• Wheeler, Andrew P., Scott W. Phillips, John L. Worrall, and Stephen A. Bishopp, “What Factors Influence an Officer’s Decision to Shoot? The Promise and Limitations of Using Public Data,” Justice Research and Policy , Vol. 18, No. 1, 2017.
• Whiting, Daniel, Paul Lichtenstein, and Seena Fazel, “Violence and Mental Disorders: A Structured Review of Associations by Individual Diagnoses, Risk Factors, and Risk Assessment,” Lancet Psychiatry , Vol. 8, No. 2, February 2021.
• Wiebe, Douglas J., “Homicide and Suicide Risks Associated with Firearms in the Home: A National Case-Control Study,” Annals of Emergency Medicine , Vol. 41, No. 6, 2003.
• WikiArms, homepage, undated. As of December 11, 2020: https://www.wikiarms.com
• Wilcox, P., and J. E. Eck, “Criminology of the Unpopular: Implications for Policy Aimed at Payday Lending Facilities,” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 10, No. 2, 2011.
• Willinger, Andrew, “New York’s Response to Bruen: The Outer Limits of the ‘Sensitive Places’ Doctrine,” Duke Center for Firearms Law, blog, July 13, 2022. As of August 23, 2022: https://firearmslaw.duke.edu/2022/07/new-yorks-response-to-bruen-the-outer-limits-of-the-sensitive-places-doctrine/
• Wilson, Jonathan, Jr., and Kyle Sammin, “Should Philadelphia Continue Gun Buybacks? Pro/Con,” Philadelphia Enquirer , updated October 21, 2022.
• Wilson, William Julius, The Truly Disadvantaged: The Inner City, the Underclass, and Public Policy , 1st ed., University of Chicago Press, 1987.
• Wilson, William Julius, When Work Disappears: The World of the New Urban Poor , Alfred A. Knopf, 1996.
• Wintemute, Garen J., Ring of Fire: The Handgun Makers of Southern California , Violence Prevention Research Program, 1994.
• Wintemute, Garen J., “Ghost Guns: Spookier Than You Think They Are,” Injury Epidemiology , Vol. 8, No. 13, 2021.
• Wintemute, Garen J., Marian E. Betz, and Megan L. Ranney, “Yes, You Can: Physicians, Patients, and Firearms,” Annals of Internal Medicine , Vol. 165, No. 3, 2016.
• Wintemute, G. J., D. Hemenway, D. Webster, G. Pierce, and A. A. Braga, “Gun Shows and Gun Violence: Fatally Flawed Study Yields Misleading Results,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 100, No. 10, 2010.
• Wintemute, G. J., C. A. Parham, J. J. Beaumont, M. Wright, and C. Drake, “Mortality Among Recent Purchasers of Handguns,” New England Journal of Medicine , Vol. 341, No. 21, 1999.
• Wintemute, Garen J., Carrie A. Parham, Mona A. Wright, James J. Beaumont, and Christiana M. Drake, “Weapons of Choice: Previous Criminal History, Later Criminal Activity, and Firearm Preference Among Legally Authorized Young Adult Purchasers of Handguns,” Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care , Vol. 44, No. 1, 1998.
• Wintemute, Garen J., Veronica A. Pear, Julia P. Schleimer, Rocco Pallin, Sydney Sohl, Nicole Kravitz-Wirtz, and Elizabeth A. Tomsich, “Extreme Risk Protection Orders Intended to Prevent Mass Shootings: A Case Series,” Annals of Internal Medicine , August 2019.
• Wooldridge, J. M., Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data , MIT Press, 2002.
• World Health Organization, Preventing Suicide: A Global Imperative , 2014.
• World Health Organization, World Health Organization Mortality Database, 2017. As of October 13, 2017: https://apps.who.int/healthinfo/statistics/mortality/causeofdeath_query/start.php
• Worrall, John L., Stephen A. Bishopp, Scott C. Zinser, Andrew P. Wheeler, and Scott W. Phillips, “Exploring Bias in Police Shooting Decisions with Real Shoot/Don’t Shoot Cases,” Crime and Delinquency , Vol. 64, No. 9, 2018.
• Wright, Alexandra, Katherine E. Smith, and Mark Hellowell, “Policy Lessons from Health Taxes: A Systematic Review of Empirical Studies,” BMC Public Health , Vol. 17, No. 1, 2017.
• Wright, James D., and Peter H. Rossi, Armed and Considered Dangerous: A Survey of Felons and Their Firearms , Aldine de Gruyter, 1986.
• Wright, M. A., and G. J. Wintemute, “Felonious or Violent Criminal Activity That Prohibits Gun Ownership Among Prior Purchasers of Handguns: Incidence and Risk Factors,” Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery , Vol. 69, No. 4, 2010.
• Wright, M. A., G. J. Wintemute, and B. E. Claire, “People and Guns Involved in Denied and Completed Handgun Sales,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 11, No. 4, 2005.
• Wright, M. A., G. J. Wintemute, and B. E. Claire, “Gun Suicide by Young People in California: Descriptive Epidemiology and Gun Ownership,” Journal of Adolescent Health , Vol. 43, No. 6, 2008.
• Wright, Mona A., Garen J. Wintemute, and Frederick P. Rivara, “Effectiveness of Denial of Handgun Purchase to Persons Believed to Be at High Risk for Firearm Violence,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 89, No. 1, 1999.
• Wu, Eric Q., Lizheng Shi, Howard Birnbaum, Teresa Hudson, and Ronald Kessler, “Annual Prevalence of Diagnosed Schizophrenia in the USA: A Claims Data Analysis Approach,” Psychological Medicine , Vol. 36, No. 11, 2006.
• Xue, Xiaonan, Mimi Y. Kim, Tao Wang, Mark H. Kuniholm, and Howard D. Strickler, “A Statistical Method for Studying Correlated Rare Events and Their Risk Factors,” Statistical Methods in Medical Research , Vol. 26, No. 3, 2017.
• Yablon, Alex, “Use of Red Flag Laws Varies Widely Among Local Police,” The Trace , April 23, 2019.
• Yakubovich, Alexa R., Michelle Degli Esposti, Brittany C. L. Lange, G. J. Melendez-Torres, Alpa Parmar, Douglas J. Wiebe, and David K. Humphreys, “Effects of Laws Expanding Civilian Rights to Use Deadly Force in Self-Defense on Violence and Crime: A Systematic Review,” American Journal of Public Health , Vol. 111, No. 4, 2021.
• Yurk, Robin, Linda Jaramillo, Linda L. Erwin, and Neal J. Rendleman, “Educating the Community About Violence Through a Gun Turn-In Program,” Journal of Community Health , Vol. 26, No. 5, October 2001.
• Zavala, Ashley, “California’s Armed and Prohibited Persons List Sees Slight Decrease in Backlog,” KCRA, April 3, 2023.
• Zawitz, Marianne W., Guns Used in Crime , U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, NCJ-148201, 1995.
• Zeoli, April M., Domestic Violence and Firearms: Research on Statutory Interventions , Battered Women’s Justice Project, 2018.
• Zeoli, April M., Shannon Frattaroli, Leslie Barnard, Andrew Bowen, Annette Christy, Michele Easter, Reena Kapoor, Christopher Knoepke, Wenjuan Ma, Amy Molocznik, Michael Norko, Elise Omaki, Jennifer K. Paruk, Veronica A. Pear, Ali Rowhani-Rahbar, Julia P. Schleimer, Jeffrey W. Swanson, and Garen J. Wintemute, “Extreme Risk Protection Orders in Response to Threats of Multiple Victim/Mass Shooting in Six U.S. States: A Descriptive Study,” Preventive Medicine , Vol. 165, Pt. A, December 2022.
• Zeoli, April M., Shannon Frattaroli, Kelly Roskam, and Anastasia K. Herrera, “Removing Firearms from Those Prohibited from Possession by Domestic Violence Restraining Orders: A Survey and Analysis of State Laws,” Trauma, Violence, and Abuse , Vol. 20, No. 1, 2019.
• Zeoli, April M., Alexander McCourt, Shani Buggs, Shannon Frattaroli, David Lilley, and Daniel W. Webster, “Analysis of the Strength of Legal Firearms Restrictions for Perpetrators of Domestic Violence and Their Associations with Intimate Partner Homicide,” American Journal of Epidemiology , Vol. 187, No. 11, 2018.
• Zeoli, April M., and Jennifer K. Paruk, “Potential to Prevent Mass Shootings Through Domestic Violence Firearm Restrictions,” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 19, No. 1, 2020.
• Zeoli, April M., Jennifer Paruk, Charles C. Branas, Patrick M. Carter, Rebecca Cunningham, Justin Heinze, and Daniel W. Webster, “Use of Extreme Risk Protection Orders to Reduce Gun Violence in Oregon,” Criminology and Public Policy , Vol. 20, No. 2, May 2021.
• Zeoli, A. M., and D. W. Webster, “Effects of Domestic Violence Policies, Alcohol Taxes and Police Staffing Levels on Intimate Partner Homicide in Large U.S. Cities,” Injury Prevention , Vol. 16, No. 2, 2010.
• Zimmerman, Paul R., “The Deterrence of Crime Through Private Security Efforts: Theory and Evidence,” International Review of Law and Economics , Vol. 37, 2014.
• Zimring, Franklin E., “Firearms and Federal Law: The Gun Control Act of 1968,” Journal of Legal Studies , Vol. 4, No. 1, 1975.
• Zimring, Franklin E., When Police Kill , Harvard University Press, 2017.
• Zuckerman, Ethan, J. Nathan Matias, Rahul Bhargava, Fernando Bermejo, and Allan Ko, “Whose Death Matters? A Quantitative Analysis of Media Attention to Deaths of Black Americans in Police Confrontations, 2013–2016,” International Journal of Communication , Vol. 13, 2019.

View the Full Project Bibliography

Rosanna Smart and Terry L. Schell, "Mass Shootings in the United States," in Rajeev Ramchand and Jessica Saunders, eds., Contemporary Issues in Gun Policy: Essays from the RAND Gun Policy in America Project , Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND Corporation, RR-A243-2, 2021, pp. 1–25. As of April 15, 2021: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA243-2.html

Explore Related Content

Gun Policy Expert-Opinion Tool

Research Review Methodology

Gun Violence Essays

Reasons why gun safety is important 🔥 trending.

Gun safety ensures that gun holders handle them with care to prevent violence involving firearms, such as mass shootings. In the past, gun violence has been…

Effectiveness of Gun Control in Combating Crime 🔥 trending

Crime is perceived as one of the most significant challenges facing our contemporary society, especially violent crime, which is often regarded as one of the most…

Gun Control Laws: Why they Should be Abolished 🔥 trending

There is an extensive debate in the United States, on whether to allow gun control laws to thrive in the country. The Democrats and the Republicans…

Is gun control an effective way to control crime 🔥 trending

Gun control is the legal measure intended to restrict or prevent the use or possession of firearms. Gun control is a more sensitive and controversial issue…

Joe Biden’s position on gun control 🔥 trending

The presence of gun violence in the US has increased significantly in recent years. However, gun reform remains a highly partisan topic as Republicans and Democrats…

Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting 🔥 trending

Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting is one of the deadliest school shootings in U.S. history. The shooting that happened on December 14, 2012, took twenty-eight lives…

Analysis essay on Texas school shooting 🔥 trending

IntroductionOn 24th May 2022, a young man named Salvador Ramos invaded Texas School and fatally shot 19 students and two teachers. The tragedy left 17 others…

The Media’s Shape of Society on Mass Violence

Sometimes the media is driven be the urge to get more readership and views. The media does not necessarily aim at telling or relaying stories to…

Lyrics Analysis of the Song Hit EmUp by Tupac Shakur

Hit Em Up by Tupac Shakur is a song with many dimensions that warrants a lyrical analysis. The song is set on a sad mood and…

California Assault Weapon Ban

IntroductionAfter the 1989 California shooting that killed a teacher and 34 children, followed by the 1993 killing of 8 people, there were proposals of legislation to…

Gun Control and Mental Illness

The United States has reported substantially massive levels of gun violence compared to other countries. However, despite the popular misconceptions in the wake of gun violence…

Pros and cons of gun control

Gun control entails the enforcement of laws or measures for restricting access, possession, or use of firearms. However, with a significant uptick in gun-related crimes such…

Teachers Should Not Carry Guns

The debate on arming teachers, or allowing for legislation that allows teachers to carry concealed weapons on school grounds, always comes to life after a mass…

Gun control debate

The aspect of gun control has, for years, formed the basis for debate in many countries worldwide as it has become the most controversial and emotional…

Charleston Loophole in Gun Control

The United States has always been a country of individuals who are free to be themselves. This freedom was only obtained after numerous battles by those…

The Impact of Media Violence on Children and Young Adults

IntroductionViolence is not a new phenomenon for the humanity, considering the fact that the history of humanity has been marred by different kinds of violence, for…

Why gun control does not work

Most individuals view guns as sources of violence and crime unless they are being used by individuals who are part of law enforcement. The majority believe…

There has been a surge in the cases of school shootings in recent times. The increases in school shooting cases have attracted attention of international media…

Gun violence proposal essay

AbstractGun violence has become one of the hot topics in many avenues of discussion across the rest of the US in the recent times. Such developments…

🔎 Where to find quality Gun Violence paper examples?

Essays of the highest quality and a wide range of topics are available on EssayWriter.

📝 How do you use the Gun Violence essay examples?

Students may use our samples for information, formatting emulation, source of inspiration, and as a self-education tool.

📥 Can I download a Gun Violence sample?

You may download our samples to emulate them and use them as a template.

✍ Are all the presented Gun Violence essay examples free to use?

Yes, we give free access to our essays, so you do not have to pay to download them. However, do not submit them as your papers.

Essays on gun violence became one of the major writing assignments in the United States since, in this country, the problem is very current. When writing your paper on using weapons as a protection or violence tool, you may apply to our database and find answers to any troubling question connected with gun control, reasons for crimes, and laws regulating all these issues.

Gun Violence Essay Examples: Expert Answer to Debatable Questions

America is the number one country that suffers the most from the mass shootings of its citizens. We can often hear in the news about terrorist attacks by armed criminals against civil people or even children at school. It is rather controversial to know that the country where the people have the right to possess guns may die from such a loyal attitude toward the weapon.

So, teachers often assign essays about gun violence to raise the problem and make students realize all the dangers of weapons in the hands of mentally ill people. Moreover, it immerses learners into the issue before they have a legal right to buy it and become potential criminals. Or evoke responsibility for their actions and make them become law-abiding citizens who never solve any disputes using guns.

Use Sample when Writing Essay on Gun Violence Finding Yourself Deadlocked

If you need to write a gun violence argumentative essay but feel that you are not an expert in this question or have scant writing experience, apply our samples as guidance for perfect writing.

Grasp Valuable Ideas for Your Essay

Writing a gun violence argumentative essay without enough facts or engaging information to launch the writing process is hard. So, you just need to skim some professionally written samples to tune in the creative mood and produce papers that deserve the highest grades. We have such examples in our directory, and any user may look through any free templates to draw inspiration.

Perfect Formatting: Problem Solution

It is a well-known fact that teachers pay attention to context and essay structure. You may find such perfectly-formatted samples to follow in our database. Moreover, all of them are written in compliance with academic writing standards. In addition, in the list, you may also meet topics related to gun control and violence to be emulated.

Trustworthy Resources: All in One

Credible data is essential when writing on sensitive and vital topics connected with the law and justice. Our authors rely on gun violence essay samples’ latest information and law amendments. So, when looking for resources for informative and reliable papers, you may save time sticking to the thoroughly selected data in our samples. Moreover, in each essay, you may find a bibliography and apply it as well.

Experts’ Helping Hand

The top quality of our authors ensures academic standards. Each writer in our team is an experienced degree-holder with deep knowledge of the subject he works on. So, as you may see, all the samples respond to the highest writing requirements and are unique.

Turnkey Gun Violence Paper: Professional Writing Assistance

If you need assistance writing an argumentative essay about gun violence but can not find a suitable sample to stick to, place your order with precise instructions, and get a ready-made paper in the shortest time. In addition, our team is ready to provide any law assignment writing help for a fair price.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection

An Examination of US School Mass Shootings, 2017–2022: Findings and Implications

Antonis katsiyannis.

1 Department of Education and Human Development, College of Education, Clemson University, 101 Gantt Circle, Room 407 C, Clemson, SC 29634 USA

Luke J. Rapa

2 Department of Education and Human Development, College of Education, Clemson University, 101 Gantt Circle, Room 409 F, Clemson, SC 29634 USA

Denise K. Whitford

3 Steven C. Beering Hall of Liberal Arts and Education, Purdue University, 100 N. University Street, BRNG 5154, West Lafayette, IN 47907-2098 USA

Samantha N. Scott

4 Department of Education and Human Development, College of Education, Clemson University, 101 Gantt Circle, Room G01A, Clemson, SC 29634 USA

Gun violence in the USA is a pressing social and public health issue. As rates of gun violence continue to rise, deaths resulting from such violence rise as well. School shootings, in particular, are at their highest recorded levels. In this study, we examined rates of intentional firearm deaths, mass shootings, and school mass shootings in the USA using data from the past 5 years, 2017–2022, to assess trends and reappraise prior examination of this issue.

Extant data regarding shooting deaths from 2017 through 2020 were obtained from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, the web-based injury statistics query and reporting system (WISQARS), and, for school shootings in particular (2017–2022), from Everytown Research & Policy.

The number of intentional firearm deaths and the crude death rates increased from 2017 to 2020 in all age categories; crude death rates rose from 4.47 in 2017 to 5.88 in 2020. School shootings made a sharp decline in 2020—understandably so, given the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent government or locally mandated school shutdowns—but rose again sharply in 2021.

Conclusions

Recent data suggest continued upward trends in school shootings, school mass shootings, and related deaths over the past 5 years. Notably, gun violence disproportionately affects boys, especially Black boys, with much higher gun deaths per capita for this group than for any other group of youth. Implications for policy and practice are provided.

On May 24, 2022, an 18-year-old man killed 19 students and two teachers and wounded 17 individuals at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, TX, using an AR-15-style rifle. Outside the school, he fired shots for about 5 min before entering the school through an unlocked side door and locked himself inside two adjoining classrooms killing 19 students and two teachers. He was in the school for over an hour (78 min) before being shot dead by the US Border Patrol Tactical Unit, though police officers were on the school premises (Sandoval, 2022 ).

The Robb Elementary School mass shooting, the second deadliest school mass shooting in American history, is the latest calamity in a long list of tragedies occurring on public school campuses in the USA. Regrettably, these tragedies are both a reflection and an outgrowth of the broader reality of gun violence in this country. In 2021, gun violence claimed 45,027 lives (including 20,937 suicides), with 313 children aged 0–11 killed and 750 injured, along with 1247 youth aged 12–17 killed and 3385 injured (Gun Violence Archive, 2022a ). Mass shootings in the USA have steadily increased in recent years, rising from 269 in 2013 to 611 in 2020. Mass shootings are typically defined as incidents in which four or more people are killed (Katsiyannis et al., 2018a ). However, the Gun Violence Archive considers mass shootings to be incidents in which four or more people are injured (Gun Violence Archive, 2022b ). Regardless of these distinctions in definition, in 2020, there were 19,384 gun murders, representing a 34% increase from the year before, a 49% increase over a 5-year period, and a 75% increase over a 10-year period (Pew Research Center, 2022 ). Regarding school-based shootings, to date in 2022, there have been at least 95 incidents of gunfire on school premises, resulting in 40 deaths and 76 injuries (Everytown Research & Policy, 2022b ). Over the past few decades, school shootings in the USA have become relatively commonplace: there were more in 2021 than in any year since 1999, with the median age of perpetrators being 16 (Washington Post, 2022 ; see also, Katsiyannis et al., 2018a ). Additionally, analysis of Everytown’s Gunfire on School Grounds dataset and related studies point to several key observations to be considered in addressing this challenge. For example, 58% of perpetrators had a connection to the school, 70% were White males, 73 to 80% obtained guns from home or relatives or friends, and 100% exhibited warning signs or showed behavior that was of cause for concern; also, in 77% of school shootings, at least one person knew about the shooter’s plan before the shooting events occurred (Everytown Research & Policy, 2021a ).

The USA has had 57 times as many school shootings as all other major industrialized nations combined (Rowhani-Rahbar & Moe, 2019 ). Guns are the leading cause of death for children and teens in the USA, with children ages 5–14 being 21 times and adolescents and young adults ages 15–24 being 23 times more likely to be killed with guns compared to other high-income countries. Furthermore, Black children and teens are 14 times and Latinx children and teens are three times more likely than White children to die by guns (Everytown Research & Policy, 2021b ). Children exposed to violence, crime, and abuse face a host of adverse challenges, including abuse of drugs and alcohol, depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, school failure, and involvement in criminal activity (Cabral et al., 2021 ; Everytown Research and Policy, 2022b ; Finkelhor et al., 2013 ).

Yet, despite gun violence being considered a pressing social and public health issue, federal legislation passed in 1996 has resulted in restricting funding for the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The law stated that no funding earmarked for injury prevention and control may be used to advocate or promote firearm control (Kellermann & Rivara, 2013 ). More recently, in June 2022, the US Supreme Court struck down legislation restricting gun possession and open carry rights (New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen, 2021 ), broadening gun rights and increasing the risk of gun violence in public spaces. Nonetheless, according to Everytown Research & Policy ( 2022a ), states with strong gun laws experience fewer deaths per capita. In the aggregate, states with weaker gun laws (i.e., laws that are more permissive) experience 20.0 gun deaths per 100,000 residents versus 7.4 per 100,000 in states with stronger laws. The association between gun law strength and per capita death is stark (see Table ​ Table1 1 ).

Gun law strength and gun law deaths per 100,000 residents

Accounting for the top eight and the bottom eight states in gun law strength, gun law strength and gun deaths per 100,000 are correlated at r  =  − 0.85. Stronger gun laws are thus meaningfully linked with fewer deaths per capita. Data obtained from Everytown Research & Policy ( 2022a )

Notwithstanding the publicity involving gun shootings in schools, particularly mass shootings, violence in schools has been steadily declining. For example, in 2020, students aged 12–18 experienced 285,400 victimizations at school and 380,900 victimizations away from school; an annual decrease of 60% for school victimizations (from 2019 to 2020) (Irwin et al., 2022 ). Similarly, youth arrests in general in 2019 were at their lowest level since at least 1980; between 2010 and 2019, the number of juvenile arrests fell by 58%. Yet, arrests for murder increased by 10% (Puzzanchera, 2021 ).

In response to school violence in general, and school shootings in particular, schools have increasingly relied on increased security measures, school resource officers (SROs), and zero tolerance policies (including exclusionary and aversive measures) in their attempts to curb violence and enhance school safety. In 2019–2020, public schools reported controlled access (97%), the use of security cameras (91%), and badges or picture IDs (77%) to promote safety. In addition, high schools (84%), middle schools (81%), and elementary schools (55%) reported the presence of SROs (Irwin et al., 2022 ). Research, however, has indicated that the presence of SROs has not resulted in a reduction of school shooting severity, despite their increased prevalence. Rather, the type of firearm utilized in school shootings has been closely associated with the number of deaths and injuries (Lemieux, 2014 ; Livingston et al., 2019 ), suggesting implications for reconsideration of the kinds of firearms to which individuals have access.

Zero tolerance policies, though originally intended to curtail gun violence in schools, have expanded to cover a host of incidents (e.g., threats, bullying). Notwithstanding these intentions, these policies are generally ineffective in preventing school violence, including school shootings (American Psychological Association Zero Tolerance Task Force, 2008 ; Losinski et al., 2014 ), and have exacerbated the prevalence of youths’ interactions with law enforcement in schools. From the 2015–2016 to the 2017–2018 school years, there was a 5% increase in school-related arrests and a 12% increase in referrals to law enforcement (U.S. Department of Education, 2021 ); in 2017–18, about 230,000 students were referred to law enforcement and over 50,000 were arrested (The Center for Public Integrity, 2021 ). Law enforcement referrals have been a persistent concern aiding the school-to-prison pipeline, often involving non-criminal offenses and disproportionally affecting students from non-White backgrounds as well as students with disabilities (Chan et al., 2021 ; The Center for Public Integrity, 2021 ).

The consequences of these policies are thus far-reaching, with not only legal ramifications, but social-emotional and academic ones as well. For example, in 2017–2018, students missed 11,205,797 school days due to out-of-school suspensions during that school year (U.S. Department of Education, 2021 ), there were 96,492 corporal punishment incidents, and 101,990 students were physically restrained, mechanically restrained, or secluded (U.S. Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights, 2020 ). Such exclusionary and punitive measures have long-lasting consequences for the involved students, including academic underachievement, dropout, delinquency, and post-traumatic stress (e.g., Cholewa et al., 2018 ). Moreover, these consequences disproportionally affect culturally and linguistically diverse students and students with disabilities (Skiba et al., 2014 ; U.S. General Accountability Office, 2018 ), often resulting in great societal costs (Rumberger & Losen, 2017 ).

In the USA, mass killings involving guns occur approximately every 2 weeks, while school shootings occur every 4 weeks (Towers et al., 2015 ). Given the apparent and continued rise in gun violence, mass shootings, and school mass shootings, we aimed in this paper to reexamine rates of intentional firearm deaths, mass shootings, and school mass shootings in the USA using data from the past 5 years, 2017–2022, reappraising our analyses given the time that had passed since our earlier examination of the issue (Katsiyannis et al., 2018a , b ).

As noted in Katsiyannis et al., ( 2018a , b ), gun violence, mass shootings, and school shootings have been a part of the American way of life for generations. Such shootings have grown exponentially in both frequency and mortality rate since the 1980s. Using the same criteria applied in our previous work (Katsiyannis et al., 2018a , b ), we evaluated the frequency of shootings, mass shootings, and school mass school shootings from January 2017 through mid-July 2022. Extant data regarding shooting deaths from 2017 through 2020 were obtained from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, utilizing the web-based injury statistics query and reporting system (WISQARS), and for school shootings from 2017 to 2022 from Everytown Research & Policy ( https://everytownresearch.org ), an independent non-profit organization that researches and communicates with policymakers and the public about gun violence in the USA. Intentional firearm death data were classified by age, as outlined in Katsiyannis et al., ( 2018a , b ), and the crude rate was calculated by dividing the number of deaths times 100,000, by the total population for each individual category.

The number of intentional firearm deaths and the crude death rates increased from 2017 to 2020 in all age categories. In absolute terms, the number of deaths rose from 14,496 in 2017 to 19,308 in 2020. In accord with this rise in the absolute number of deaths, crude death rates rose from 4.47 in 2017 to 5.88 in 2020. Table ​ Table2 2 provides the crude death rate in 2017, 2018, 2019, and 2020, the most current years with data available. Figure  1 provides the raw number of deaths across the same time period.

Intentional firearm deaths across the USA (2017–2020)

Data obtained from WISQARS (2022)

Intentional firearm deaths across the USA (2017–2020). Note. Data obtained from WISQARS (2022)

As expected, in 2020, the number of fatal firearm injuries increased sharply from age 0–11 years, roughly elementary school age, to age 12–18 years, roughly middle school and high school age. Table ​ Table3 3 provides the crude death rates of children in 2020 who die from firearms. Males outnumbered females in every category of firearm deaths, including homicide, police violence, suicide, and accidental shootings, as well as for undetermined reasons for firearm discharge. Black males drastically surpassed all other children in the number of firearm deaths (2.91 per 100,000 0–11-year-olds; 57.10 per 100,000 12–18-year-olds). Also, notable is the high number of Black children 12–18 years killed by guns (32.37 per 100,000), followed by American Indian and Alaska Native children (18.87 per 100,000), in comparison to White children (12.40 per 100,000 children), Hispanic/Latinx children (8.16 per 100,000), and Asian and Pacific Islander children (2.95 per 100,000). A disproportionate number of gun deaths were also seen for Black girls relative to other girls (1.52 per 100,000 0–11-year-olds; 7.01 per 100,000 12–18-year-olds).

Fatal firearm injuries for children age 0–18 across the USA in 2020

  AN Alaska Native; – indicates 20 or fewer cases

Mass shootings and mass shooting deaths increased from 2017 to 2019, decreased in 2020, and then increased again in 2021. School shootings made a sharp decline in 2020—understandably so, given the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent government or locally mandated school shutdowns—but rose again sharply in 2021. Current rates reveal a continued increase, with numbers at the beginning of 2022 already exceeding those of 2017. School mass shooting counts were relatively low between 2017 through 2022, with four total during that time frame. Figure  2 provides raw numbers for mass shootings, school shootings, and school mass shootings from 2017 through 2022. Importantly, figures from the recent Uvalde, TX, school mass shooting at Robb Elementary School had not yet been recorded in the relevant databases at the time of this writing. With those deaths accounted for, 2022 is already the deadliest year for school mass shootings in the past 5 years.

Mass shootings, school shootings, and mass school shootings across the USA (2017–2022). Note. Data obtained from Everytown Research and Policy. Overlap present between all three categories

Gun violence in the USA, particularly mass shootings on the grounds of public schools, continues to be a pressing social and public health issue. Recent data suggest continued upward trends in school shootings, school mass shootings, and related deaths over the past 5 years—patterns that disturbingly mirror general gun violence and intentional shooting deaths in the USA across the same time period. The impacts on our nation’s youth are profound. Notably, gun violence disproportionately affects boys, especially Black boys, with much higher gun deaths per capita for this group than for any other group of youth. Likewise, Black girls are disproportionately affected compared to girls from other ethnic/racial groups. Moreover, while the COVID-19 pandemic and school shutdowns tempered gun violence in schools at least somewhat during the 2020 school year—including school shootings and school mass shootings—trend data show that gun violence rates are still continuing to rise. Indeed, gun violence deaths resulting from school shootings are at their highest recorded levels ever (Irwin et al., 2022 ).

Implications for Schools: Curbing School Violence

In recent years, the implementation of Multi-Tier Systems and Supports (MTSS), including Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) and Response to Intervention (RTI), has resulted in improved school climate and student engagement as well as improved academic and behavioral outcomes (Elrod et al., 2022 ; Santiago-Rosario et al., 2022 ; National Center for Learning Disabilities, n.d.). Such approaches have implications for reducing school violence as well. PBIS uses a tiered framework intended to improve student behavioral and academic outcomes; it creates positive learning environments through the implementation of evidence-based instructional and behavioral interventions, guided by data-based decision-making and allocation of students across three tiers. In Tier 1, schools provide universal supports to all students in a proactive manner; in Tier 2, supports are aimed to students who need additional academic, behavioral, or social-emotional intervention; and in Tier 3, supports are provided in an intensive and individualized manner (Lewis et al., 2010 ). The implementation of PBIS has resulted in an improved school climate, fewer office referrals, and reductions in out-of-school suspensions (Bradshaw et al., 2010 ; Elrod et al.,  2010 , 2022 ; Gage et al., 2018a , 2018b ; Horner et al., 2010 ; Noltemeyer et al., 2019 ). Likewise, RTI aims to improve instructional outcomes through high-quality instruction and universal screening for students to identify learning challenges and similarly allocates students across three tiers. In Tier 1, schools implement high-quality classroom instruction, screening, and group interventions; in Tier 2, schools implement targeted interventions; and in Tier 3, schools implement intensive interventions and comprehensive evaluation (National Center for Learning Disabilities, n.d ). RTI implementation has resulted in improved academic outcomes (e.g., reading, writing) (Arrimada et al., 2022 ; Balu et al., 2015 ; Siegel, 2020 ) and enhanced school climate and student behavior.

In order to support students’ well-being, enhance school climate, and support reductions in behavioral issues and school violence, schools should consider the implementation of MTSS, reducing reliance on exclusionary and aversive measures such as zero tolerance policies, seclusion and restraints, corporal punishment, or school-based law enforcement referrals and arrests (see Gage et al., in press ). Such approaches and policies are less effective than the use of MTSS, exacerbate inequities and enhance disproportionality (particularly for youth of color and students with disabilities), and have not been shown to reduce violence in schools.

Implications for Students: Ensuring Physical Safety and Supporting Mental Health

Students should not have to attend school and fear becoming victims of violence in general, no less gun violence in particular. Schools must ensure the physical safety of their students. Yet, as the substantial number of school shootings continues to rise in the USA, so too does concern about the adverse impacts of violence and gun violence on students’ mental health and well-being. Students are frequently exposed to unavoidable and frightening images and stories of school violence (Child Development Institute, n.d. ) and are subject to active shooter drills that may not actually be effective and, in some cases, may actually induce trauma (Jetelina, 2022 ; National Association of School Psychologists & National Association of School Resources Officers, 2021 ; Wang et al., 2020 ). In turn, students struggle to process and understand why these events happen and, more importantly, how they can be prevented (National Association of School Psychologists, 2015 ). School personnel should be prepared to support the mental health needs of students, both in light of the prevalence of school gun violence and in the aftermath of school mass shootings.

Research provides evidence that traumatic events, such as school mass shootings, can and do have mental health consequences for victims and members of affected communities, leading to an increase in post-traumatic stress syndrome, depression, and other psychological systems (Lowe & Galea, 2017 ). At the same time, high media attention to such events indirectly exposes and heightens feelings of fear, anxiety, and vulnerability in students—even if they did not attend the school where the shooting occurred (Schonfeld & Demaria, 2020 ). Students of all ages may experience adjustment difficulties and engage in avoidance behaviors (Schonfeld & Demaria, 2020 ). As a result, school personnel may underestimate a student’s distress after a shooting and overestimate their resilience. In addition, an adult’s difficulty adjusting in the wake of trauma may also threaten a student’s sense of well-being because they may believe their teachers cannot provide them with the protection they need to remain safe in school (Schonfeld & Demaria, 2020 ).

These traumatic events have resounding consequences for youth development and well-being. However, schools continue to struggle to meet the demands of student mental health needs as they lack adequate funding for resources, student support services, and staff to provide the level of support needed for many students (Katsiyannis et al., 2018a ). Despite these limiting factors, children and youth continue to look to adults for information and guidance on how to react to adverse events. An effective response can significantly decrease the likelihood of further trauma; therefore, all school personnel must be prepared to talk with students about their fears, to help them feel safe and establish a sense of normalcy and security in the wake of tragedy (National Association of School Psychologists, 2016 ). Research suggests a number of strategies can be utilized by educators, school leaders, counselors, and other mental health professionals to support the students and staff they serve.

Recommendations for Educators

The National Association of School Psychologists ( 2016 ) recommends the following practices for educators to follow in response to school mass shootings. Although a complex topic to address, the issue needs to be acknowledged. In particular, educators should designate time to talk with their students about the event, and should reassure students that they are safe while validating their fears, feelings, and concerns. Recognizing and stressing to students that all feelings are okay when a tragedy occurs is essential. It is important to note that some students do not wish to express their emotions verbally. Other developmentally appropriate outlets, such as drawing, writing, reading books, and imaginative play, can be utilized. Educators should also provide developmentally appropriate explanations of the issue and events throughout their conversations. At the elementary level, students need brief, simple answers that are balanced with reassurances that schools are safe and that adults are there to protect them. In the secondary grades, students may be more vocal in asking questions about whether they are truly safe and what protocols are in place to protect them at school. To address these questions, educators can provide information related to the efforts of school and community leaders to ensure school safety. Educators should also review safety procedures and help students to identify at least one adult in the building to whom they can go if they feel threatened or at risk. Limiting exposure to media and social media is also important, as developmentally inappropriate information can cause anxiety or confusion. Educators should also maintain a normal routine by keeping a regular school schedule.

Recommendations for School Leaders

Superintendents, principals, and other school administrative personnel are looked upon to provide leadership and comfort to staff, students, and parents during a tragedy. Reassurance can be provided by reiterating safety measures and student supports that are in place in their district and school (The National Association of School Psychologists, 2015 ). The NASP recommends the following practices for school leaders regarding addressing student mental health needs directly. First, school leaders should be a visible, welcoming presence by greeting students and visiting classrooms. School leaders should also communicate with the school community, including parents and students, about their efforts to maintain safe and caring schools through clear behavioral expectations, positive behavior interventions and supports, and crisis planning preparedness. This can include the development of press releases for broad dissemination within the school community. School leaders should also provide crisis training and professional development for staff, based upon assessments of needs and targeted toward identified knowledge or skill gaps. They should also ensure the implementation of violence prevention programs and curricula in school and review school safety policies and procedures to ensure that all safety issues are adequately covered in current school crisis plans and emergency response procedures.

Recommendations for Counselors and Mental Health Professionals

School counselors offer critical assistance to their buildings’ populations as they experience crises or respond to emergencies (American School Counselor Association, 2019 ; Brown, 2020 ). Two models that stand out in the literature utilized by counselors in the wake of violent events are the Preparation, Action, Recovery (PAR) model and the Prevent and prepare; Reaffirm; Evaluate; provide interventions and Respond (PREPaRE) model. PREPaRE is the only comprehensive, nationally available training curriculum created by educators for educators (The National Association of School Psychologists, n.d. ). Although beneficial, neither the PAR nor PREPaRE model directly addresses school counselors’ responses to school shootings when their school is directly affected (Brown, 2020 ). This led to the development of the School Counselor’s Response to School Shootings-Framework of Recommendations (SCRSS-FR) model, which includes six stages, each of which has corresponding components for school counselors who have lived through a school mass shooting. Each of these models provides the necessary training to school-employed mental health professionals on how to best fill the roles and responsibilities generated by their membership on school crisis response teams (The National Association of School Psychologists, n.d. ).

Other Implications: Federal and State Policy

Recent events at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, TX, prompted the US Congress to pass landmark legislation intended to curb gun violence, enhancing background checks for prospective gun buyers who are under 21 years of age as well as allowing examination of juvenile records beginning at age 16, including health records related to prospective gun buyers’ mental health. Additionally, this legislation provides funding that will allow states to implement “red flag laws” and other intervention programs while also strengthening laws related to the purchase and trafficking of guns (Cochrane, 2022 ). Yet, additional legislation reducing or eliminating access to assault rifles and other guns with large capacity magazines, weapons that might easily be deemed “weapons of mass destruction,” is still needed (Interdisciplinary Group on Preventing School & Community Violence, 2022 ; see also Flannery et al., 2021 ). In 2019, the US Congress started to appropriate research funding to support research on gun violence, with $25 million in equal shares provided on an annual basis from both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institutes of Health (Roubein, 2022 ; Wan, 2019 ). Additional research is, of course, still needed.

Despite legislative progress, and while advancements in gun legislation are meaningful and have the potential to aid in the reduction of gun violence in the USA, school shootings and school mass shootings are something schools and students will contend with in the months and years ahead. This reality has serious implications for schools and for students, points that need serious consideration. Therefore, it is imperative that gun violence is framed as a pressing national public health issue deserving attention, with drastic steps needed to curb access to assault rifles and guns with high-capacity magazines, based on extensive and targeted research. As noted, Congress, after many years of inaction, has started to appropriate funds to address this issue. However, the level of funding is still minimal in light of the pressing challenge that gun violence presents. Furthermore, the messaging of conservative media, the National Rifle Association (NRA) and republican legislators framing access to all and any weapons—including assault rifles—as a constitutional right under the second amendment bears scrutiny. Indeed, the second amendment denotes that “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Security of the nation is arguably the intent of the amendment, an intent that is clearly violated as evidenced in the ever-increasing death toll associated with gun violence in the USA.

Whereas federal legislation would be preferable, the possibility of banning assault weapons is remote (in light of recent Congressional action). Similarly, state action has been severely curtailed in light of the US Supreme Court’s decision regarding New York state law. However, data on gun fatalities and injuries, the correspondence of gun violence to laws regulating access across the world and states, and failed security measures such as armed guards posted in schools (e.g., Robb Elementary School) must be consistently emphasized. Additionally, the widespread sense of immunity for gun manufacturers should be tested in the same manner that tobacco manufacturers and opioid pharmaceuticals have been. The success against such tobacco and opioid manufacturers, once unthinkable, is a powerful precedent to consider for how the threat of gun violence against public health might be addressed.

Author Contribution

AK conceived of and designed the study and led the writing of the manuscript. LJR collaborated on the study design, contributed to the writing of the study, and contributed to the editing of the final manuscript. DKW analyzed the data and wrote up the results. SNS contributed to the writing of the study.

Declarations

The authors declare no competing interests.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

• American Psychological Association Zero Tolerance Task Force Are zero tolerance policies effective in the schools? An evidentiary review and recommendations. The American Psychologist. 2008; 63 (9):852–862. doi: 10.1037/0003-066x.63.9.852. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• American School Counselor Association (2019). ASCA national model: A framework for school counseling programs (4th edn.). Alexandria, VA: Author.
• Arrimada M, Torrance M, Fidalgo R. Response to intervention in first-grade writing instruction: A large-scale feasibility study. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal. 2022; 35 (4):943–969. doi: 10.1007/s11145-021-10211-z. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Balu, R., Zhu, P., Doolittle, F., Schiller, E., Jenkins, J., & Gersten, R. (2015). Evaluation of response to intervention practices for elementary school reading (NCEE 2016–4000). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
• Bradshaw CP, Mitchell MM, Leaf PJ. Examining the effects of schoolwide positive behavioral interventions and supports on student outcomes: Results from a randomized controlled effectiveness trial in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions. 2010; 12 (3):133–148. doi: 10.1177/1098300709334798. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brown CH. School counselors’ response to school shootings: Framework of recommendations. Journal of Educational Research and Practice. 2020; 10 (1):18. doi: 10.5590/jerap.2020.10.1.18. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cabral, M., Kim, B., Rossin-Slater, M., Schnell, M., & Schwandt, H. (2021). Trauma at school: The impacts of shootings on students’ human capital and economic outcomes. A working paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved June 21, 2022, from  https://www.nber.org/papers/w28311
• Chan P, Katsiyannis A, Yell M. Handcuffed in school: Legal and practice considerations. Advances in Neurodevelopmental Disorders. 2021; 5 (3):339–350. doi: 10.1007/s41252-021-00213-x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Child Development Institute. (n.d.). How to talk to kids about violence. Retrieved July 22, 2022, from  https://childdevelopmentinfo.com/how-to-be-a-parent/communication/talk-to-kids-violence/
• Cholewa B, Hull MF, Babcock CR, Smith AD. Predictors and academic outcomes associated with in-school suspension. School Psychology Quarterly. 2018; 33 (2):191–199. doi: 10.1037/spq0000213. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cochrane, E. (2022). Congress passes bipartisan gun legislation, clearing it for Biden. The New York Times. Retrieved July 27, 2022 from https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/24/us/politics/gun-control-bill-congress.html
• Elrod BG, Rice KG, Bradshaw CP, Mitchell MM, Leaf PJ. Examining the effects of schoolwide positive behavioral interventions and supports on student outcomes: Results from a randomized controlled effectiveness trial in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions. 2010; 12 (3):133–148. doi: 10.1177/1098300709334798. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Elrod BG, Rice KG, Meyers J. PBIS fidelity, school climate, and student discipline: A longitudinal study of secondary schools. Psychology in the Schools. 2022; 59 (2):376–397. doi: 10.1002/pits.22614. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Everytown Research & Policy. (2021a). Keeping our schools safe: A plan for preventing mass shootings and ending all gun violence in American schools. Retrieved July 17, 2022, from https://everytownresearch.org/report/preventing-gun-violence-in-american-schools/
• Everytown Research & Policy. (2021b). The impact of gun violence on children and teens. Retrieved, June 21, 2022, from https://everytownresearch.org/report/the-impact-of-gun-violence-on-children-and-teens/
• Everytown Research & Policy. (2022a). Gun law rankings. Retrieved July 19, 2022, from https://everytownresearch.org/rankings/
• Everytown Research & Policy. (2022b). Gunfire on school grounds in the United States. Retrieved July 19, 2022, from https://everytownresearch.org/maps/gunfire-on-school-grounds/
• Finkelhor D, Turner HA, Shattuck AM, Hamby SL. Violence, crime, and abuse exposure in a national sample of children and youth: An update. JAMA Pediatrics. 2013; 167 (7):614–621. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2013.42. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Flannery, D. J., Fox, J. A., Wallace, L., Mulvey, E., & Modzeleski, W. (2021). Guns, school shooters, and school safety: What we know and directions for change. School Psychology Review, 50 (2-3), 237–253.
• Gage NA, Lee A, Grasley-Boy N, Peshak GH. The impact of school-wide positive behavior interventions and supports on school suspensions: A statewide quasi-experimental analysis. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions. 2018; 20 (4):217–226. doi: 10.1177/1098300718768204. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gage, N. A., Rapa, L. J., Whitford, D. K., & Katsiyannis, A. (Eds.) (in press). Disproportionality and social justice in education . Springer
• Gage N, Whitford DK, Katsiyannis A. A review of schoolwide positive behavior interventions and supports as a framework for reducing disciplinary exclusions. The Journal of Special Education. 2018; 52 :142–151. doi: 10.1272/74060629214686796178874678. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gun Violence Archive. (2022a). Gun violence archives 2021. Retrieved June 23, 2022, from https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/past-tolls
• Gun Violence Archive. (2022b). Charts and maps. Retrieved June 23, 2022, from  https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/
• Horner RH, Sugai G, Anderson CM. Examining the evidence base for schoolwide positive behavior support. Focus on Exceptional Children. 2010; 42 (8):1–14. doi: 10.17161/fec.v42i18.6906. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Interdisciplinary Group on Preventing School and Community Violence. (2022). Call for action to prevent gun violence in the United States of America. Retrieved July 15, 2022, from https://www.dropbox.com/s/006naaah5be23qk/2022%20Call%20To%20Action%20Press%20Release%20and%20Statement%20COMBINED%205-27-22.pdf?dl=0
• Irwin, V., Wang, K., Cui, J., & Thompson, A. (2022). Report on indicators of school crime and safety: 2021 (NCES 2022–092/NCJ 304625). National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education, and Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Washington, DC. Retrieved July 21, 2022 from https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2022092
• Jetelina, K. (2022). Firearms: What you can do right now. Retrieved July 15, 2022, from https://yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com/p/firearms-what-you-can-do-right-now
• Katsiyannis A, Whitford D, Ennis R. Historical examination of United States school mass shootings in the 20 th and 21 st centuries: Implications for students, schools, and society. Journal of Child and Family Studies. 2018; 27 :2562–2573. doi: 10.1007/s10826-018-1096-2. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Katsiyannis A, Whitford D, Ennis R. Firearm violence across the lifespan: Relevance and theoretical impact on child and adolescent educational prospects. Journal of Child and Family Studies. 2018; 27 :1748–1762. doi: 10.1007/s10826-018-1035-2. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kellermann AL, Rivara FP. Silencing the science on gun research. Journal of the American Medical Association. 2013; 309 (6):549–550. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.208207. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lemieux F. Effect of gun culture and firearm laws on firearm violence and mass shootings in the United States: A multi-level quantitative analysis. International Journal of Criminal Justice Sciences. 2014; 9 (1):74–93. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lewis T, Jones S, Horner R, Sugai G. School-wide positive behavior support and students with emotional/behavioral disorders: Implications for prevention, identification and intervention. Exceptionality. 2010; 18 :82–93. doi: 10.1080/09362831003673168. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Livingston MD, Rossheim ME, Stidham-Hall K. A descriptive analysis of school and school shooter characteristics and the severity of school shootings in the United States, 1999–2018. Journal of Adolescent Health. 2019; 64 (6):797–799. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2018.12.006. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Losinski M, Katsiyannis A, Ryan J, Baughan C. Weapons in schools and zero-tolerance policies. NASSP Bulletin. 2014; 98 (2):126–141. doi: 10.1177/0192636514528747. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lowe SR, Galea S. The mental health consequences of mass shootings. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse. 2017; 18 (1):62–82. doi: 10.1177/1524838015591572. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• National Association of School Psychologists. (n.d.). About PREPaRE. Retrieved July 22, 2022, from https://www.nasponline.org/professional-development/prepare-training-curriculum/aboutprepare#:~:text=Specifically%2C%20the%20PREPaRE,E%E2%80%94Evaluate%20psychological%20trauma%20risk
• National Association of School Psychologists. (2015). Responding to school violence: Tips for administrators. Retrieved July 22, 2022, from https://www.nasponline.org/resources-and-publications/resources-and-podcasts/school-safety-and-crisis/school-violence-resources/school-violence-prevention/responding-to-school-violence-tips-for-administrators
• National Association of School Psychologists. (2016). Talking to children about violence: Tips for parents and teachers. Retrieved July 22, 2022, from https://www.nasponline.org/resources-and-publications/resources-and-podcasts/school-safety-and-crisis/school-violence-resources/talking-to-children-about-violence-tips-for-parents-and-teachers
• National Association of School Psychologists & National Association of School Resource Officers (2021). Best practice considerations for armed assailant drills in schools. Bethesda, MD: Author. Retrieved July 22, 2022, from https://www.nasponline.org/resources-and-publications/resources-and-podcasts/school-safety-and-crisis/systems-level-prevention/best-practice-considerations-for-armed-assailant-drills-in-schools
• National Center for Learning Disabilities. (n.d.). What is RTI? Retrieved July 21, 2022 from http://www.rtinetwork.org/learn/what/whatisrti
• New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen, 20–843. (United States Supreme Court, 2021). Retrieved July 27, 2022, from https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-843_7j80.pdf
• Noltemeyer A, Palmer K, James AG, Wiechman S. School-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports (SWPBIS): A synthesis of existing research. International Journal of School & Educational Psychology. 2019; 7 :253–262. doi: 10.1080/21683603.2018.1425169. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pew Research Center. (2022). What the data says about gun deaths in the U.S. Retrieved June 21, 2022 from https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/02/03/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/
• Puzzanchera, C. (2021). Juvenile arrests, 2019 . U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs. Juvenile Justice Statistics National Report Series Bulletin. Retrieved July 27, 2022, from https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/publications/juvenile-arrests-2019.pdf
• Roubein, R. (2022). Now the government is funding gun violence research, but it’s years behind. The Washington Post. Retrieved July 17, 2022 from https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/05/26/now-government-is-funding-gun-violence-research-it-years-behind/
• Rowhani-Rahbar A, Moe C. School shootings in the U.S.: What is the state of evidence? Journal of Adolescent Health. 2019; 64 (6):683–684. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2019.03.016. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rumberger, R. W., & Losen, D. J. (2017). The hidden costs of California’s harsh school discipline: And the localized economic benefits from suspending fewer high school students . California Dropout Research Project : The Civil Rights Project. Retrieved July 27, 2022, from https://www.civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/resources/projects/center-for-civil-rights-remedies/school-to-prison-folder/summary-reports/the-hidden-cost-of-californias-harsh-discipline/CostofSuspensionReportFinal-corrected-030917.pdf
• Sandoval, E. (2022). Inside a Uvalde classroom: A taunting gunman and 78 minutes of terror. The New York Times. Retrieved July 27, 2022, from https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/10/us/uvalde-injured-teacher-reyes.html
• Santiago-Rosario, M. R., McIntosh, K., & Payno-Simmons, R. (2022). Centering equity within the PBIS framework: Overview and evidence of effectiveness. Center on PBIS, University of Oregon. Retrieved July 27, 2022 from www.pbis.org
• Schonfeld DJ, Demaria T. Supporting children after school shootings. Pediatric Clinics. 2020; 67 (2):397–411. doi: 10.1016/j.pcl.2019.12.006. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Skiba RJ, Arredondo MI, Williams NT. More than a metaphor: The contribution of exclusionary discipline to a school-to-prison pipeline. Equity & Excellence in Education. 2014; 47 (4):546–564. doi: 10.1080/10665684.2014.958965. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Siegel LS. Early identification and intervention to prevent reading failure: A response to Intervention (RTI) initiative. Educational and Developmental Psychologist. 2020; 37 (2):140–146. doi: 10.1017/edp.2020.21. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• The Center for Public Integrity. (2021). When schools call police on kids. Retrieved June 21, 2022 from https://publicintegrity.org/education/criminalizing-kids/police-in-schools-disparities/
• Towers S, Gomez-Lievano A, Khan M, Mubayi A, Castillo-Chavez C. Contagion in mass killings and school shootings. PLoS One. 2015; 10 (7):e0117259. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0117259. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• U. S. Department of Education. (2021). An overview of exclusionary discipline practices in public schools for the 2017–18 school year . Civil Rights Data Collection. Retrieved June 21, 2022, from https://ocrdata.ed.gov/estimations/2017-2018
• U.S. Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights. (2020). 2017–18 civil rights data collection: The use of restraint and seclusion in children with disabilities in K-12 schools. Retrieved July 27, 2022 from https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/restraint-and-seclusion.pdf
• U.S. General Accountability Office (2018). K-12 education: Discipline disparities for Black students, boys, and students with disabilities (GAO-18–258). Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved July 27, 2022, from https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-18-258
• Wan, W. (2019). Congressional deal could fund gun violence research for first time since 1990s. The Washington Post. Retrieved July 17, 2022 from https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2019/12/16/congressional-deal-could-fund-gun-violence-research-first-time-since-s/
• Wang, K., Chen, Y., Zhang, J., & Oudekerk, B. A. (2020). Indicators of school crime and safety: 2019 (NCES 2020–063/NCJ 254485). National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education, and Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved July 27, 2022, from https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2020/2020063-temp.pdf
• Washington Post. (2022). The Washington Post’s database of school shootings. Retrieved June 21, 2022 from https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/local/school-shootings-database/

🔫 Gun Violence Essays

Argument essay against gun control 🔥 trending.

Gun Control Debate Gun control issues remain among the most significant and controversial in the United States. Gun control policies are a subject that sometimes…

Gun control debate 🔥 trending

Introduction The gun control debate has been ongoing for many years, with no end in sight. The issue is complex, and there are valid arguments…

Should teachers carry guns 🔥 trending

Introduction Protecting students in school is paramount and left to the school administration. After instances of shootings in several schools, there have been propositions to…

Gun Violence in Schools 🔥 trending

Gun violence in schools is a serious issue that has to be addressed right now by policymakers and educators. Since 2013, there have been 11…

Solving the Problem of Gun Violence 🔥 trending

Gun violence has been an issue of concern facing countries in the world where citizens have easy access to guns. The United States is a…

Pros and cons of gun control 🔥 trending

Introduction The United States is experiencing the highest rate of gun deaths in the world. According to Gramlich (2022), there were approximately 45,222 deaths caused…

Gun Control Policies 🔥 trending

Since the Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting in 2012, the United States has experienced more than 316 school-related mass shootings and other firearm-related deaths. Recent…

Sandy Hook Elementary school shooting 🔥 trending

Shootings have become increasingly common, varying in nature, from terrorist attacks to robberies. Since 1853 when the first incident of a school shooting was experienced,…

Analyzing the Texas school shooting 🔥 trending

Introduction A gun control element depicts the need for domestic regulation of firearms: production, trading, possession, usage, and transportation within a state, country, or continent…

Advantages and Disadvantages of Gun Control

In the United States, guns are almost a basic necessity. According to ProCon.org (2020), there are 120.5 guns in the U.S. per 100 people. Besides,…

Gun Control Influence on Crime Control

Introduction The prevention of gun violence and associated crime is paramount for the government and the criminal justice system. Gun control laws aimed at alleviating…

California Assault Weapon Ban

The California assault weapon ban was a law that was first passed in 1990 in an effort to reduce gun violence. The ban prohibited the…

Gun Control Process Analysis Essay

Introduction Gun control entails the most emotional, debatable and contentious issues in several nations, with the argument repeatedly addressing whether rules on the rights of…

Is gun control an effective way to control crime?

Over the years, gun control has become a polarizing and controversial issue worldwide. In the United States, high-profile mass shootings have been linked to the…

Why is America so violent?

In order to adequately address America’s emerging meanness/insensitivity we must also have a look at the trends of the past thirty years of our main…

What are Red Flag laws: pros and cons

The Second Amendment of the constitution presents a dilemma. It gives and protects citizens’ right to own guns for personal protection (LII, 2022). The recent…

Crime data comparison

According to researchers, crime is committed every day around the world. Although societies view crime as an undesirable and unnecessary stressor, many persons of lower-class…

Cycle of violence

The 4 stages of the cycle of violence The cycle of violence as developed by Lenore Walker comprises of four stages that may occur in…

Should more gun control laws be enacted

Introduction Yes, I support the idea that there should be more stringent measures on gun control. America’s pervasive gun culture has made it possible for…

Interview analysis

The terror attacks in September 11, 2001 famously the 9/11 prompted the ‘War on Terror’ under George Bush’s administration. Four airlines that were hijacked by…

What is the best site to search for quality Gun Violence paper samples?

Since 2009, GradeMiners has been providing writing services to thousands of students from the United States of America and worldwide. Therefore, the database contains many high-quality examples of the best work, including essays on violence.

How to use Gun Violence essay samples to create my paper?

A ready-made example can not only show the correct design of this type of essay but also help with several other issues. For example, to inspire further discussion on a topic or submit a new idea, suggest an interesting list of primary sources, and expand your knowledge of violence and laws to protect the masses.

Is it allowed to submit your samples as mine?

All examples of essays about gun violence on our website are freely available and free of charge. Therefore, there is a risk that one of your colleagues will use the same sample. Use the finished essay only as a source of inspiration and references to avoid trouble.

Is it possible to find college papers on different topics at GradeMiners?

In addition to violence, safety, justice, and other related topics, you can find thousands of papers in different formats in our database.

You are on the right page if you need a high-quality sample essay about gun violence that you can use as a reference for your paper. Here you will find examples of the best writing assignments on this topic. Each paper complies with generally accepted requirements.

Importance of Gun Violence Essay Examples

According to the second amendment to the Constitution, US citizens have the right to bear and keep guns. However, some laws control this right and how it can be used. For example, in Texas, a landlord has the right to use a gun to protect their property. Due to the increase in accidents and, improper storage and use, shooting in schools, this issue has caused a lot of publicity. And to this day, it is relevant.

Since this is a highly controversial topic, students have difficulty writing essays on gun violence. The most common is the non-disclosure topic. For example, the study area is too wide, or there is a lot of water and no specifics. Therefore, before you start, it is worth looking at a few successful samples, which will help you avoid this and other mistakes.

Check Samples on Gun Violence Essays – Get Helpful Tips

When students receive some assignments, practically each googles how to do it and ready-made samples. If you are asked to write an argumentative essay about gun violence, immediately go to the GradeMiners website and use a simple navigator to the page with the necessary examples.

Inspiration for New Ideas

If you have no writing idea, some papers may give you a new idea you want to develop. For example, to consider the moral aspect of some issue, or vice versa, its practical side. Or you do not agree with the argument and want to prove the opposite.

Proper Topic and Format

Topic lists for gun violence argumentative essays don’t always help you make the final choice. However, the sample database can tell you which topic to choose and what you can write about in general. It is not plagiarism if you only take the topic and repeat the essay format according to generally accepted requirements.

Writers’ Professional Skills

If you have doubts about who to order a written assignment from, look at the examples of ready-made papers on the site. Our authors write each sample, and you can evaluate their skills and knowledge of the subject.

Get Your Essay on Gun Violence by Professionals

If you don’t get inspired by gun violence essay samples, don’t have time, or don’t want to write about the protection of rights from any crime and justice in general, there is an easy way out. Use the services of GradeMiners and get an academic paper according to all the requirements and within the agreed time frame.

• Bill of Rights
• Civil Disobedience
• Drunk Driving
• First Amendment
• Forensic Science
• Gang Violence
• Human Rights
• Identity Theft

Home — Essay Samples — Social Issues — Gun Control — Gun Control in the United States

Gun Control in The United States

• Categories: Gun Control

About this sample

Words: 1222 |

Published: Jul 17, 2018

Words: 1222 | Pages: 3 | 7 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Verified writer

• Expert in: Social Issues

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

1 pages / 621 words

3 pages / 1298 words

4 pages / 1796 words

1 pages / 1198 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Gun Control

In the absence of effective gun control measures, Americans citizens have access to very deadly weapons that are a threat to the society. Simple weapons such as the pistol are enough for self-protection. Moreover, simple [...]

On numerous occasions, we are devastated by the news of another mass shooting. Some part of our mending must be the conviction that we will do our absolute best to shield these tragedies from occurring in a country that keeps on [...]

The United States is the country with the largest number of guns in the world, and the per capita gun ratio is increasing. Despite the public’s concern about the threat of gun violence, many people have purchased guns for [...]

Police brutality is a complex phenomenon, which has widespread effects on today's society. In recent years, the police have come under serious scrutiny for police brutality, and this has been underscored by the presence of video [...]

The debate between those for and against gun control is becoming more and more prominent in the United States. Several gun control activists have problems with the possibility of owning weapons. The solution is simple. The [...]

On September 17th, 1787 after four long months of conflict and painstaking work 39 men signed the US Constitution, which from that point forward would be the supreme law of the land. The Constitution became the ultimate doctrine [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free