Search

Black men are disproportionately affected by firearm assaults in the United States, and these disparities are rooted in structural and social inequities. The objective of this scoping review of research was to identify risk and protective factors for firearm assault injuries among Black men at all levels of the social-ecological framework. The search was conducted in 2021. The initial search generated 1,122 articles. Studies were eligible if they (a) included an analysis of modifiable risk or protective factors for firearm assaults among Black men; (b) reported an estimate of correlation, association, or effect between risk or protective factors and firearm assault injuries, firearm violence, and/or firearm homicides; and (c) were published peer-reviewed articles. In all, 19 articles were identified for review. Risk factors identified at each ecological level include the following: (1) Individual: firearm possession/weapon use and criminal legal system interaction; (2) Relationships: gang membership and exposure to other people who have experienced a firearm assault; (3) Community: indicators for socioeconomic status and racial residential segregation; and (4) Societal: historical racist policy. Individual-level substance use had mixed results. Few (26%) studies examined protective factors at any ecological level, but community-level factors like neighborhood tree cover were identified. Future research needs to examine risk and protective factors at the societal level and multiple ecological levels simultaneously leading to more effective multi-level interventions that will guide policy formation. A greater diversity of study designs, research methods, and theoretical frameworks is needed to better understand factors associated with firearm assault among Black men.

The purpose of this study was to examine psychosocial, experiential, and demographic correlates of firearm ownership, carrying, and storage methods. We used a representative survey of 3,510 people living in five US states (Colorado, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Jersey, and Texas) conducted in 2022. Individuals provided information on past experiences with firearms, perceptions of threat and neighborhood safety, discrimination, and tolerance of uncertainty alongside demographic items. The analysis was conducted in November 2022. Past experiences with firearms and prior victimization are associated with increased firearm ownership and carrying practices. Threat sensitivity is associated with owning more guns while poorer perceptions of neighborhood safety correspond with owning fewer guns but greater risk for unsafe storage practices like storing a loaded gun in a closet or drawer. Intolerance of uncertainty is associated with owning fewer guns and lower risk for carrying outside of the home but greater risk for unsafe storage. Prior experience of discrimination is associated with risk for carrying firearms outside of the home. Demographic characteristics related to sex, rurality, military service, and political conservatism predict risky firearm-related behaviors related to firearm ownership, carrying frequency, and unsecure storage. Taken together, we find firearm ownership and risky firearm behaviors (e.g. carrying, unsafe storage) are more prominent among groups such as politically conservative males living in rural areas while also being influenced by threatening experiences, uncertainty, and perceptions of safety.

BackgroundLiving near an incident of firearm violence can negatively impact youth, regardless of whether the violence is experienced firsthand. Inequities in household and neighborhood resources may affect the prevalence and consequences of exposure across racial/ethnic groups.FindingsUsing data from the Future of Families and Child Wellbeing Study and the Gun Violence Archive, we estimate that approximately 1 in 4 adolescents in large US cities lived within 800 m (0.5 miles) of a past-year firearm homicide during 2014-17. Exposure risk decreased as household income and neighborhood collective efficacy increased, though stark racial/ethnic inequities remained. Across racial/ethnic groups, adolescents in poor households in moderate or high collective efficacy neighborhoods had a similar risk of past-year firearm homicide exposure as middle-to-high income adolescents in low collective efficacy neighborhoods.ConclusionsEmpowering communities to build and leverage social ties may be as impactful for reducing firearm violence exposure as income supports. Comprehensive violence prevention efforts should include systems-level strategies that jointly strengthen family and community resources.

Violence is defined as "the intentional use of physical force or power, threatened or actual, against oneself, another person, or against a group or community, that either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury, death, psychological harm, maldevelopment, or deprivation." Encompassed in this definition are multiple, interrelated forms of violence, including interpersonal firearm death and injury, but also the systems, policies, and practices enacted by those with power to advantage some groups while depriving others of meaningful opportunities for meeting their basic needs-known as "structural violence". Yet dominant violence prevention narratives too often ignore or deemphasize the deeply intertwined threads of structural violence with other forms of violence, leading to policies and practices that are frequently insufficient, and often harmful, for reducing interpersonal firearm violence and building community safety, particularly in minoritized and structurally marginalized communities. We highlight ways in which limited scrutiny of structural violence, the omission of its defining characteristics-power and deprivation-from functional characterizations and frameworks of interpersonal firearm violence, and the inadequate distribution of power and resources to those most impacted by violence to self-determine narratives of and solutions to interpersonal firearm violence grossly impacts how interpersonal firearm violence is collectively conceived, discussed, and addressed. Expanding dominant narratives of interpersonal firearm violence, guided by the wisdom and determination of those most impacted, such that the goal of prevention and intervention efforts is not merely the absence of violence but rather the creation of a community safety and health ecosystem is essential to meet this critical moment in firearm violence research and prevention.

Community violence-defined as unsanctioned violence between unrelated individuals in public places-has devastating physical, psychological, and emotional consequences on individuals, families, and communities. Immense investments in policing and incarceration in the United States have neither prevented community violence nor systemically served those who have been impacted by it, instead often inflicting further harm. However, the logics that uphold policing and incarceration as suitable or preventative responses to community violence are deeply ingrained in societal discourse, limiting our ability to respond differently. In this perspective, we draw from interviews with leading voices in the field of outreach-based community violence intervention and prevention to consider alternative ways to address community violence. We begin by demonstrating that policing and incarceration are distinguished by practices of retribution, isolation, and counterinsurgency that are counterproductive to the prevention of community violence. Then, we identify alternative practices of outreach-based community violence intervention and prevention that include (1) fostering safety nets through relationships among individuals, families, and neighborhoods, (2) fighting poverty and increasing access to resources, and (3) building political capacity among organizations to transform the broader systems in which they are embedded. They also include accountability practices that are preventative and responsive to the needs of those who are harmed. We conclude that elevating the language, narratives, and values of outreach-based community violence intervention and prevention can transform our responses to violence, interrupt cycles of harm, and foster safer communities.

The burden of firearm homicide in the United States is not evenly distributed across the population; rather, it disproportionately affects youth in disadvantaged and marginalized communities. Research is limited relevant to the impacts of exposure to firearm violence that occurs near where youth live or attend school - spatially proximate firearm violence - on youths mental health and whether those impacts vary by characteristics that shape youths risk for experiencing that exposure in the first place. Using a dataset linking the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study with the Gun Violence Archive (N = 3086), we employed propensity score matching and multilevel stratification to examine average and heterogeneous associations between spatially proximate firearm homicide exposure and anxiety and depression among all youth and then separately for boys and girls. We found a statistically significant average association between firearm homicide exposure and symptoms of depression among youth. Furthermore, heterogeneous effects analyses yielded evidence that the average association is driven by youth, and particularly boys, who are the most disadvantaged and have the highest risk of firearm homicide exposure. The results of this study suggest that the accumulation of stressors associated with structural disadvantage and neighborhood disorder, coupled with exposure to spatially proximate and deadly firearm violence, may make boys and young men, particularly Black boys and young men, uniquely vulnerable to the mental health impacts of such exposure. Ancillary analyses of potential effect moderators suggest possible future areas of investigation.

Understanding the burden of gun violence among youth is a public health imperative. While most estimates are based on direct and witnessed victimization, living nearby gun violence incidents may be consequential too. Yet detailed information about these broader experiences of violence is lacking. We use data on a population-based cohort of youth merged with incident-level data on deadly gun violence to assess the prevalence and intensity of community exposure to gun homicides across cross-classified categories of exposure distance and recency, overall and by race/ethnicity, household poverty, and neighborhood disadvantage. In total, 2-18% of youth resided within 600 m of a gun homicide occurring in the past 14-365 days. These percentages were 3-25% for incidents within 800 m and 5-37% for those within a 1300-m radius. Black and Latinx youth were 3-7 times more likely, depending on the exposure radius, to experience a past-year gun homicide than white youth and on average experienced incidents more recently and closer to home. Household poverty contributed to exposure inequities, but disproportionate residence in disadvantaged neighborhoods was especially consequential: for all racial/ethnic groups, the difference in the probability of exposure between youth in low vs high poverty households was approximately 5-10 percentage points, while the difference between youth residing in low vs high disadvantage neighborhoods was approximately 50 percentage points. Given well-documented consequences of gun violence exposure on health, these more comprehensive estimates underscore the importance of supportive strategies not only for individual victims but entire communities in the aftermath of gun violence.

ObjectiveTo estimate the long-term impact of Safe Streets Baltimore, which is based on the Cure Violence outreach and violence interruption model, on firearm violence.MethodsWe used synthetic control methods to estimate programme effects on homicides and incidents of non-fatal penetrating firearm injury (non-fatal shootings) in neighbourhoods that had Safe Streets' sites and model-generated counterfactuals. Synthetic control analyses were conducted for each firearm violence outcome in each of the seven areas where Safe Streets was implemented. The study also investigated variation in programme impact over time by generating effect estimates of varying durations for the longest-running programme sites.ResultsSynthetic control models reduced prediction error relative to regression analyses. Estimates of Safe Streets' effects on firearm violence varied across intervention sites: some positive, some negative and no effect. Beneficial programme effects on firearm violence reported in prior research were found to have attenuated over time.ConclusionsFor highly targeted interventions, synthetic control methods may provide more valid estimates of programme impact than panel regression with data from all city neighbourhoods. This research offers new understanding about the effectiveness of the Cure Violence intervention over extended periods of time in seven neighbourhoods. Combined with existing Cure Violence evaluation literature, it also raises questions about contextual and implementation factors that might influence programme outcomes.

Unemployment and violence both increased during the coronavirus pandemic in the United States (US), but no studies to our knowledge have examined their association. Using data for 16 US cities from January 2018 to July 2020, we estimated the association between acute changes in unemployment during the coronavirus pandemic and violent and acquisitive crime. We used negative binomial regression models and parametric g-computation to estimate average differences in crime incidents if the highest and lowest levels of unemployment observed in each city had been sustained across the exposure period (March-July 2020), compared with observed unemployment in each city-month. During the pandemic, the percentage of the adult population who were unemployed was 8.1 percentage points higher than expected, on average. Increases in unemployment were associated with increases in firearm violence and homicide. For example, we estimated an average increase of 3.3 firearm violence incidents (95% CI: - 0.2, 6.7) and 2.0 homicides (95% CI: - 0.2, 3.9) per city-month from March to July 2020 if all cities experienced their highest versus observed level of unemployment. There was no association between unemployment and aggravated assault or any acquisitive crime. Findings suggest that the sharp rise in unemployment during the pandemic may have contributed to increases in firearm violence and homicide, but not other crime. Additional research is needed on mechanisms of association, generalizability, and modifying factors.

UC Davis Health has a "Blackout Flag" policy (1190) that is used in trauma care settings to restrict visitors from the patient. The policy's intended goal is to protect patients from potential harmful visitors, especially in ongoing investigations. This policy may impair history taking and well-informed treatments because it restricts knowledge provided by visitors and loved ones. Often placed by police, this policy may be disproportionally applied to patients from marginalized backgrounds and may perpetuate medical distrust.

Violent crime increased and most property crime decreased in many United States (US) cities during the coronavirus pandemic. Using negative binomial regressions, we examined the association between physical distancing (a central coronavirus containment strategy) and crime within 16 large cities (in 12 US states and the District of Columbia) through July 2020. Physical distancing was measured with aggregated smartphone data and defined as the average change in the percentage of the population staying completely at home. Outcome data were obtained from the Gun Violence Archive and city open data portals. In multivariable models, increases in the percentage of the population staying home were associated with decreases in reported incidents of aggravated assault, interpersonal firearm violence, theft, rape, and robbery, and increases in arson, burglary, and motor vehicle theft. Results suggest that changes in the frequency of interpersonal interactions affected crime during the coronavirus pandemic. More research is needed on the specificity of these assocations and their underlying mechanisms.

Research summary: This study estimates disparities in driving under the influence (DUI) convictions relative to the frequency with which racial/ethnic groups engage in alcohol-impaired driving. We use had-been-drinking crashes and self-reported alcohol-impaired driving to approximate alcohol-impaired driving frequency for racial/ethnic groups in California from 2001 to 2016. DUI conviction and had-been-drinking crash data are from a sample of 72,368 California men aged 21–49 in 2001. Self-reported alcohol-impaired driving rates are from male Californians who responded to the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. Relative to race/ethnicity-specific estimated rates of engaging in alcohol-impaired driving, Latino/Hispanic men had higher rates of DUI conviction than White men. This suggests racial bias plays a role in DUI convictions, with White men experiencing a lower probability of conviction than Latino/Hispanic men who engage in similar behavior. Policy implications: These findings suggest actions aimed at reducing individual and structural biases could lead to more equitable DUI conviction rates. Such actions could include limiting discretion at each level of the criminal justice system, for example, by providing prescriptive guidance to officers on when to stop drivers or using local had-been-drinking crash rates to determine sobriety checkpoint and saturation patrol locations.

BackgroundFirearm violence is a significant public health problem in the United States. A surge in firearm purchasing following the onset of the coronavirus pandemic may have contributed to an increase in firearm violence. We sought to estimate the state-level association between firearm purchasing and interpersonal firearm violence during the pandemic.MethodsCross-sectional study of the 48 contiguous states and the District of Columbia from January 2018 through July 2020. Data were obtained from the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (a proxy for firearm purchasing) and the Gun Violence Archive. Using negative binomial regression models, we estimated the association between cumulative excess firearm purchases in March through July 2020 (measured as the difference between observed rates and those expected from autoregressive integrated moving average models) and injuries (including nonfatal and fatal) from intentional, interpersonal firearm violence (non-domestic and domestic violence).ResultsWe estimated that there were 4.3 million excess firearm purchases nationally from March through July 2020 and a total of 4075 more firearm injuries than expected from April through July. We found no relationship between state-level excess purchasing and non-domestic firearm violence, e.g., each excess purchase per 100 population was associated with a rate ratio (RR) of firearm injury from non-domestic violence of 0.76 (95% CI: 0.50-1.02) in April; 0.99 (95% CI: 0.72-1.25) in May; 1.10 (95% CI: 0.93-1.32) in June; and 0.98 (95% CI: 0.85-1.12) in July. Excess firearm purchasing within states was associated with an increase in firearm injuries from domestic violence in April (RR: 2.60; 95% CI: 1.32-5.93) and May (RR: 1.79; 95% CI: 1.19-2.91), though estimates were sensitive to model specification.ConclusionsNationwide, firearm purchasing and firearm violence increased substantially during the first months of the coronavirus pandemic. At the state level, the magnitude of the increase in purchasing was not associated with the magnitude of the increase in firearm violence. Increases in purchasing may have contributed to additional firearm injuries from domestic violence in April and May. Results suggest much of the rise in firearm violence during our study period was attributable to other factors, indicating a need for additional research.

Among youth 15 to 24 years of age, homicide and nonfatal shootings are the leading causes of mortality and morbidity. Urban youth's attitudes and perceptions about the use of gun violence to resolve conflict present a major barrier to efforts to reduce gun homicides and nonfatal shootings. The current investigation extends the existing literature on attitudes toward guns and shootings among high-risk youth ages 18 to 24 by measuring perceived norms and viewpoints regarding gun violence in two analogous Baltimore City neighborhoods pre-implementation and 1-year post-implementation of the Safe Streets intervention (adapted from the CeaseFire/Cure Violence intervention). The Safe Streets intervention is designed for communities with high rates of gun violence and utilizes outreach workers to identify and build trusting relationships with youth ages 15 to 24 who are at greatest risk of being involved in gun violence. The outreach workers also position themselves in the community so that they can rapidly intervene in disputes that have the potential to lead to gun violence. Chi-squared tests and exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) were used to examine changes in attitudes toward gun violence 1 year after the implementation of the Safe Streets intervention. There was a statistically significantly improvement in 43 % of the attitudes assessed in the intervention community post-intervention compared to 13 % of the attitudes in the control community. There was a statistically significant improvement in the violent attitudes toward personal conflict resolution scale after implementation of the intervention in both the intervention (b = -0.522, p

The adverse impacts of community firearm violence in the U.S. are unequally felt across geographic and various sociodemographic segments of our population. Researchers, government leaders, and the general public need to contend with the various ways in which unjust socioeconomic and political forces and systems of power and privilege lead to differences in risk exposure among population groups, as well as differences in the extent to which various segments of the population are protected from the adverse effects of firearm violence. We highlight dozens of studies to illustrate how firearm violence and community trauma in the U.S. can be more effectively addressed when a "social and structural determinants" perspective is used to understand and respond to this public health problem. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Guns are used in the majority of homicides in the United States, making the problem of homicide largely a problem of gun violence. This article presents three types of gun homicide (mass shootings, intimate partner homicide, and community gun violence), and briefly discusses the state of knowledge on their risk factors and promising interventions. Future directions for research are presented, focusing on examining differential implementation and impacts of interventions by racialized groups and communities, as well as interrogating conventional approaches and methodologies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this research, we estimate the association of firearm restrictions for domestic violence offenders with intimate partner homicides (IPHs) on the basis of the strength of the policies. We posit that the association of firearm laws with IPHs depends on the following characteristics of the laws: 1) breadth of coverage of high-risk individuals and situations restricted; 2) power to compel firearm surrender or removal from persons prohibited from having firearms; and 3) systems of accountability that prevent those prohibited from doing so from obtaining guns. We conducted a quantitative policy evaluation using annual state-level data from 1980 through 2013 for 45 US states. Based on the results of a series of robust, negative binomial regression models with state fixed effects, domestic violence restraining order firearm-prohibition laws are associated with 10% reductions in IPH. Statistically significant protective associations were evident only when restraining order prohibitions covered dating partners (-11%) and ex parte orders (-12%). Laws prohibiting access to those convicted of nonspecific violent misdemeanors were associated with a 24% reduction in IPH rates; there was no association when prohibitions were limited to domestic violence. Permit-to-purchase laws were associated with 10% reductions in IPHs. These findings should inform policymakers considering laws to maximize protections against IPH. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Competing Interests: Conflict-of-Interest Disclosures: None to disclose.

Objective: To examine whether firearm ownership and ownership-related motivations and practices can be classified into reasonably distinct types., Methods: Cross-sectional data on firearm owners (n=429) were obtained from the 2018 California Safety and Well-Being Survey, a state-representative web-based survey. We conducted a latent class analysis using six self-reported indicators of firearm ownership: (1) number of firearms owned, (2) types of firearms owned, (3) primary reason for firearm ownership, (4) firearm storage, (5) loaded handgun carrying and (6) high-capacity magazine ownership., Results: We identified five markedly different classes of firearm ownership. There were two classes of single-firearm owners and three classes of multiple-firearm owners. Only members of one class (9% of owners) were likely to have carried a loaded handgun and to own high-capacity magazines or assault-type weapons. Members of this class were also likely to own 5+ firearms, own for protection against people, and store a firearm in the least secure manner (loaded and unlocked)., Conclusion: There were distinct classes of firearm ownership in California, and all higher-risk behaviours studied were exhibited disproportionately by members of a single class. This latent class structure, which may help identify higher-risk groups of firearm owners, could inform future research on risk assessment and on focused interventions to reduce firearm injury and death., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)