Search

Over 45,000 gun deaths occur annually in the United States, a country with more than 100 million gun owners and more than 350 million guns. Nevertheless, passing legislation to reduce gun violence is difficult because the issue is intensely polarized. Polls asking about general gun policies (e.g., AR-15 restrictions) demonstrate that, at least in the abstract, Americans disagree vehemently about whether civilians should be able to keep and bear arms. It is possible, however, that a hidden consensus exists in America, which has thus far escaped attention--specifically, that when the focus is on their immediate environments and daily lives, even traditionally pro-gun groups may exhibit aversion to certain types of gun ownership and storage practices. To test this, we conducted two preregistered survey experiments with a large national sample. The first was a conjoint analysis where respondents chose between neighbors (n = 33,596 choices) who randomly varied on seven attributes, including gun ownership (none, pistol, AR-15). No group of respondents, not even traditionally pro-gun groups (e.g., Republicans), exhibited a significant preference for living near gun owners, and every group was averse to AR-15-owning neighbors. The second experiment, per debates about safe-storage laws, was a picture-based factorial vignette that randomized a neighbor's gun storage practices (n = 2,098). Every group of respondents was averse to interacting with a neighbor who stored guns outside of a locked safe. Our findings demonstrate that there is widespread agreement that certain types of gun ownership and storage practices are undesirable for communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the intersection of gun laws and gun deaths in the U.S. and provides a theological assessment of this issue. It discusses the alarming statistics of gun-related deaths; emphasizes the Catholic Church's commitment to the sanctity of life; examines the empirical insights into how gun policies can affect gun deaths; and impactful gun control policies based on Catholic convictions regarding the common good and the preservation of life.

Background: Firearm-related injuries are the second leading cause of pediatric deaths in the US. We sought to evaluate the effectiveness of both state child access prevention (CAP) laws and gun regulations on pediatric firearm mortality. We hypothesized that states with more stringent firearm legislation had lower pediatric firearm mortality.Study Design: We used 2014-2015 firearm mortality data from the Web-Based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System, 2014 Brady scores (used to quantify stringency of state gun regulations) and CAP laws. State-level covariates were obtained from government sources, including the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Department of Education. Spearman rank correlations and linear regression were used to determine the relationship between overall pediatric firearm mortality and gun regulations. We also examined the relationship between gun regulations and firearm-related homicides and suicides.Results: Annually, there were approximately 2,715 pediatric firearm fatalities among children; 62.1% were homicides and 31.4% suicides. There was a moderate negative correlation between states' firearm legislation stringency and overall pediatric firearm mortality (ρ = -0.66; p < 0.001), and between CAP laws and firearm suicide rates (ρ = -0.56; p < 0.001). After controlling for poverty, unemployment, substance abuse, and the number of registered firearms, the association between firearm legislation stringency and overall pediatric firearm mortality remained significant (p = 0.04). The association between CAP laws and firearm suicide rate remained significant after controlling for socioeconomic factors, registered firearms, and other firearm legislation (p = 0.04).Conclusions: Strict gun legislation and CAP laws are associated with fewer pediatric firearm fatalities and firearm suicides, respectively, though no such association was identified with pediatric firearm homicides. Although more studies are needed to determine causality, state-level legislation could play an important role in reducing pediatric firearm-related deaths. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite a shared understanding across the European Union (EU) that access to firearms by the general public should be restricted, detailed legislation regarding the ownership, use and trade of firearms varies between EU member states. It is unclear, however, how such variations impact on the policing of gun-enabled crime. By using qualitative data generated from interviews with police, policy and decision makers from 13 European countries, we aim to determine how stakeholders perceive that national variations in firearms legislation affect the policing of gun-enabled crime within and across EU countries. Four main themes were identified from the qualitative data: disparities in legislation, disparities in the priority given and the resources allocated to investigations into gun-enabled crime, as well as interventions. Owing to the aforementioned disparities, cross-national investigations into incidents of gun crime are at risk of remaining impaired in their effectiveness. Therefore, more legislative coherency as well as sustainable long-term interventions will be needed to successfully reduce ownership and use of firearms in the criminal world. In this context, a departure from an exclusive use of an economic model of gun crime is recommended to allow for a better understanding of the dynamics of the black gun market. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Non-powder guns (NPG) are viewed as toys for children by the general public. Literature on firearm injuries in the pediatric population is increasing, however there are still large gaps in the published literature regarding NPG. We intended to identify and compare the epidemiology, circumstances of injury and outcomes of children with NPG versus powder-gun injuries (GSW).Patients and Methods: We performed a 6-year retrospective analysis of children 0-14 years old treated for NPG and GSW injuries at our level one pediatric trauma center. Mann-Whitney U test and Pearson's X2 were used to compare continuous and categorical variables, respectively.Results: There were 43 NPG and 112 GSWs. Patients were predominantly male (36 children; 84%) NPG vs. 92 children; 82% GSW) with a median age in both groups of 11 years. Analysis of residential zip codes showed that 74% (32 children) NPG injuries and 85% (95 children) GSW lived in regions with higher poverty than the national level. Children with NPG injuries were more likely to be Caucasian (24 children; 56%) and to have suffered an unintentional injury (36 children; 84%), while children with GSW were African-American (80 children; 71%; p=0.0002) and victims of assault (50 children; 45%; p<0.0001). When compared with NPG, children with GSW had more severe injuries, longer hospital stays, and higher overall mortality. There were no significant differences in rate of emergent OR intervention and ED mortality between the two groups.Conclusion: Our results highlight two important findings. First, NPG injuries were accidental and thus preventable with improved legislation and public education. Second, health disparities related to gun violence among African-Americans are prevalent even in early childhood and prevention efforts should include this younger population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An editorial is presented on lifting the federal restrictions on conducting gun-related deaths in the U.S. It discusses the need to reverse the two decades long neglect of a public-health that injures or kill thousands of people per year. It suggests focus on the protection of children from the potentially preventable harm related to firearms, accidents, and suicides.

Background: Interpersonal firearm violence among youth is a substantial public health problem, and emergency department (ED) physicians require a clinical screening tool to identify high-risk youth.Objective: To derive a clinically feasible risk index for firearm violence.Design: 24-month prospective cohort study.Setting: Urban, level 1 ED.Participants: Substance-using youths, aged 14 to 24 years, seeking ED care for an assault-related injury and a proportionately sampled group of non-assault-injured youth enrolled from September 2009 through December 2011.Measurements: Firearm violence (victimization/perpetration) and validated questionnaire items.Results: A total of 599 youths were enrolled, and presence/absence of future firearm violence during follow-up could be ascertained in 483 (52.2% were positive). The sample was randomly split into training (75%) and post-score-construction validation (25%) sets. Using elastic-net penalized logistic regression, 118 baseline predictors were jointly analyzed; the most predictive variables fell predominantly into 4 domains: violence victimization, community exposure, peer influences, and fighting. By selection of 1 item from each domain, the 10-point SaFETy (Serious fighting, Friend weapon carrying, community Environment, and firearm Threats) score was derived. SaFETy was associated with firearm violence in the validation set (odds ratio [OR], 1.47 [95% CI, 1.23 to 1.79]); this association remained (OR, 1.44 [CI, 1.20 to 1.76]) after adjustment for reason for ED visit. In 5 risk strata observed in the training data, firearm violence rates in the validation set were 18.2% (2 of 11), 40.0% (18 of 45), 55.8% (24 of 43), 81.3% (13 of 16), and 100.0% (6 of 6), respectively.Limitations: The study was conducted in a single ED and involved substance-using youths. SaFETy was not externally validated.Conclusion: The SaFETy score is a 4-item score based on clinically feasible questionnaire items and is associated with firearm violence. Although broader validation is required, SaFETy shows potential to guide resource allocation for prevention of firearm violence.Primary Funding Source: National Institute on Drug Abuse R01024646. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The American College of Preventive Medicine Policy Committee makes policy guidelines and recommendations on preventive medicine and public health topics for public health decision makers. After a review of the current evidence available in 2016, the College is providing a consensus-based set of policy recommendations designed to reduce firearm-related morbidity and mortality in the U.S. These guidelines address seven general areas pertaining to the public health threat posed by firearms: gun sales and background checks, assault weapons and high-capacity weapons, mental health, research funding, gun storage laws, and physician counseling. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In an effort to reduce firearm mortality rates in the USA, US states have enacted a range of firearm laws to either strengthen or deregulate the existing main federal gun control law, the Brady Law. We set out to determine the independent association of different firearm laws with overall firearm mortality, homicide firearm mortality, and suicide firearm mortality across all US states. We also projected the potential reduction of firearm mortality if the three most strongly associated firearm laws were enacted at the federal level.Methods: We constructed a cross-sectional, state-level dataset from Nov 1, 2014, to May 15, 2015, using counts of firearm-related deaths in each US state for the years 2008-10 (stratified by intent [homicide and suicide]) from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System, data about 25 firearm state laws implemented in 2009, and state-specific characteristics such as firearm ownership for 2013, firearm export rates, and non-firearm homicide rates for 2009, and unemployment rates for 2010. Our primary outcome measure was overall firearm-related mortality per 100,000 people in the USA in 2010. We used Poisson regression with robust variances to derive incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and 95% CIs.Findings: 31,672 firearm-related deaths occurred in 2010 in the USA (10·1 per 100,000 people; mean state-specific count 631·5 [SD 629·1]). Of 25 firearm laws, nine were associated with reduced firearm mortality, nine were associated with increased firearm mortality, and seven had an inconclusive association. After adjustment for relevant covariates, the three state laws most strongly associated with reduced overall firearm mortality were universal background checks for firearm purchase (multivariable IRR 0·39 [95% CI 0·23-0·67]; p=0·001), ammunition background checks (0·18 [0·09-0·36]; p<0·0001), and identification requirement for firearms (0·16 [0·09-0·29]; p<0·0001). Projected federal-level implementation of universal background checks for firearm purchase could reduce national firearm mortality from 10·35 to 4·46 deaths per 100,000 people, background checks for ammunition purchase could reduce it to 1·99 per 100,000, and firearm identification to 1·81 per 100,000.Interpretation: Very few of the existing state-specific firearm laws are associated with reduced firearm mortality, and this evidence underscores the importance of focusing on relevant and effective firearms legislation. Implementation of universal background checks for the purchase of firearms or ammunition, and firearm identification nationally could substantially reduce firearm mortality in the USA.Funding: None. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author discusses freedom and gun violence in the U.S. in his book "Kill It to Save It: How America is Killing Itself." He argues that political culture in the country has been recast by a toxic blend of hyper-individualism and corporate hegemony. He laments about guns that become symbolic of American Freedom.

An editorial is presented on evidence-based policies for reducing death by guns. Topics include chronic epidemic of mass shootings plus death by suicide with guns resulting in the kabuki response and thoughts and prayers from too many politicians unwilling to regulate guns; and no additional funds allocated for better care of the severely mentally ill.

Abstract  This study reviews firearm-related deaths (homicidal, suicidal and accidental) from 1994 to 2003 in the Western Sidney area, Australia, serviced by the Westmead Department of Forensic Medicine, in order to document the features of the cases and to assess the effect of the introduction of the NSW Firearms Act in 1996. There were 211 fatalities involving firearms (1.8% of all of the Coroner’s cases for the period); firearm deaths were classified as homicide (75), suicide (134) or accidental (2). There was a clear peak of homicide deaths by firearm in the 20–29 age group, whereas the suicide peak was broad, spanning the ages 20–69 years. More suicides occurred at home than homicides and a higher proportion of suicides were by rifle than homicides, which favoured hand guns. Entry wounds in suicides mostly involved the head, with the chest being the commonest entry site in homicides. The only statistically significant trend was for an increase in the number of firearm-related suicides in males, comparing the number of deaths pre- and post-firearm law introduction. The study includes reports of two suicides by unusual weapons: a home-made pipe gun and a spear gun. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Laws requiring universal background checks prior to firearm purchase and laws restricting firearm ownership among people with violent misdemeanor convictions were associated with lower homicide rates. If it is accurate that the number of people who own firearms is not associated with homicide and suicide rates, we may want to focus instead on the policies that do seem to have a significant impact by controlling who, not necessarily how many, people own firearms. [Extracted from the article]

The article presents a study which reveals that U.S. states that regulate and have strict gun laws have reduced number of gun deaths.

The authors discuss how health care professionals can help in fighting against the threat posed by firearms to health in the U.S. Topics covered include why firearm-related injury and death can be considered a public health crisis following the 2017 mass murder in Las Vegas, Nevada, the need for health care professionals to educate themselves on firearms legislation and gun safety, and communicating gun safety information to patients.

The author discusses the association between gun-control laws and firearm-related deaths in the U.S. Topics include higher rates of handgun ownership in the country, the antigun-control law was correlated with higher rates of firearm death, and the benefits of universal background checks and state policies in reducing gun deaths across the country.