Guns and Gun Violence: What's the Relationship?

By Miles Williams

B.A. (History & Political Science; Philosophy), Greenville College

Political Science Graduate Student, Eastern Illinois University 

At the time of this writing, CNN is on in my living room airing coverage of the latest mass shooting in the U.S.  Such tragedies are heartbreaking, and the families of those who lost their lives want more than answers, they want solutions.  They want to know how such abhorrent acts can be prevented in the future.  Of course, before one can even begin to think about what can be done, an examination of what actually is going on is in order.  As I listen to the news, I hear all kinds of claims about the relationship between guns/gun laws and gun related violence.  What’s the relationship between the two?  This question has been debated by pundits, policymakers, and academics for quite some time.  I doubt, therefore, that I’ll find anything definitive with my research, but I do hope that I’ll at least bring some clarity to this issue.

What the Research Says

Anglemyer, Horvath, and Rutherford (2014) in an effort to make sense of current estimates of the relationship between the availability of firearms and suicide or homicide, examined data from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science.  They concluded that access to firearms had an association with increased risk for completed suicide and being the victim of homicide.  However, the authors note that much of their data included survey interviews, which may mean that some “misclassification of accessibility may have occurred.”  To their credit, misclassification and misreporting are always concerns worth raising for surveys.  If I start disregarding studies that use self-reporting to gather their data, I’d have to disregard an awful lot of research!

              Regarding the relationship between right-to-carry (RTC) laws and crime, a working paper by Aneja, Donohue III, and Zhang (2012) finds a statistically significant relationship between RTC and increased murder rates while only a moderately significant (though perhaps still suggestive) relationship between RTC and aggravated assault, rape, and robbery.  These findings certainly make questionable the claims that RTC would effectively reduce gun-related crimes; however, as the authors of this paper note, “Researchers and policymakers should keep an open mind about controversial policy topics in light of new and better empirical evidence or methodologies.”  In other words, RTC should not be written off as an ineffective policy at all times and in all circumstances; conditions may change and future research may bring to light new evidence and utilize better methods.

              While it seems there may be a relationship between RTC and certain kinds of crime, a 2013 report from the Pew Research Center indicates that since a peak in gun-related homicide in 1993, rates have since decline by 49%.  However, while homicides due to firearms seem to have declined, the FBI reports that active shooter incidents (an active shooter incident refers to situations where both law enforcement and citizens have the potential to affect the outcome) have increased since 2000, with only one such event occurring in 2000, 17 occurring in 2013, and a peak of 26 occurring in 2010 (2013).  Moreover, in a comparative analysis among various nations, research by Richardson and Hemenway (2011) indicates,

“U.S. homicide rates were 6.9 times higher than rates in other high-income countries, driven by firearm homicide rates that were 19.5 times higher…The U.S. firearm suicide rates were 5.8 times higher than in the other countries, though overall suicide rates were 30% lower.  The U.S. unintentional firearm deaths were 5.2 times higher than in other countries.  Among these 23 countries, 80% of all firearm deaths occurred in the United States, 86% of women killed by firearms were U.S. women, and 87% of all children aged 0 to 14 killed by firearms were U.S. children.”

Are There Any Solutions?

The argument that more guns in the hands of “the good guys” would deter would-be assailants makes sense; however, this argument doesn’t have much empirical support.  In fact, research by Chapman, Alpers, Agho, and Jones (2006) on the effects of 1996 gun law reforms in Australia indicates that the removal of semi-automatic and pump-action shotguns and rifles from civilian possession was “followed by more than a decade free of fatal mass shootings, and accidental declines in firearm deaths, particularly suicides.”  The authors also found homicide rates similarly declined, thus leading them to conclude that “Removing large numbers of rapid-firing firearms from civilians may be an effective way of reducing mass shootings, firearm homicides, and firearm suicides.”

              Some also suggest that mental-health background checks could be used to prevent mentally ill people from obtaining firearms.  However, such background checks may be problematic.  Swanson et al. (2015) highlight the fact that many who report having patterns of impulsive angry behavior—a no doubt troublesome characteristic for a gun owner—are not subject to existing mental health-related legal restrictions on purchasing firearms because they have never been involuntarily hospitalized for mental health issues.  The authors of this study thus suggest that expanding the definition of people prohibited from possessing guns to those convicted of violent misdemeanors and multiple DUIs could be effective.

              A 2012 meta-analysis looked at the effects of various sorts of gun policies on gun violence (Makarios and Pratt).  The authors report that of the types of intervention policies implemented, law enforcement seems to be the most effective, followed by gun laws in general, while gun buy-backs have no statistically significant effect.  Regarding types of laws, weapons bans had the greatest effect on reducing gun violence, followed by enhanced prison terms and waiting periods/background checks.  Of the types of law enforcement intervention, policing strategy, probation strategy, and community programs had statistically significant effects while prosecutorial strategy did not approach significance.  Of the three effective strategies, probation strategy was the most effective.

The Biggest Challenge Facing Policymaking

While conclusions gleaned from extant empirical evidence remain tentative, it seems clear that gun restrictions may be the most effective means for reducing gun violence.  This finding, of course, does not speak to arguments surrounding Second Amendment Rights (this is an entirely different, and more ideological debate for another time and place).  Moreover, in an American Political Science Association Meeting Paper, Haider-Markel and Joslyn (2011) indicate that there is a strong partisan divide on the causes of mass-shootings (namely at Virginia Tech, Fort Hood, and Tucson, AZ).  Further evidence suggests that the partisan divide over gun rights has grown substantially, with 25% of Democrats and 45% of Republicans supporting gun rights in 1993, and 27% of Democrats and 72% of Republicans supporting gun rights in 2012 (Pew Research Center 2012).  This divide comes at time in U.S. politics when hyper-partisanship and an unwillingness to compromise are at a high, the results of which are legislative gridlock.

              I won’t speak to the claims surrounding the legality of gun restrictions, save that the Second Amendment complicates matters by introducing constitutionality into the debate.  I will further state that, if one wants to restrict guns in the civilian population in order to reduce gun violence, one must consider how to do so in a way that is both “legal” and “constitutional.”

The Takeaway

I will readily admit that I want to maintain the right to bear arms just as much as the next conservative (yes, I admit to having conservative leanings); however, as a political scientist, I cannot ignore the empirical evidence, which clearly indicates that RTC laws are associated with increases in gun-related violence.  I moreover cannot ignore the evidence that restrictions on gun possession result in declines in gun-related violence, nor can I skim over the fact the U.S. has some of the highest rates of firearm homicides and suicides among high-income nations.  From a purely pragmatic perspective, if one wants to reduce gun-related violence, gun restrictions are the way to go.  Now, this does not mean taking guns away from all citizens.  It does mean, however, that certain restrictions such as background checks, an expansion of the definition of people who should be restricted from obtaining firearms, and perhaps a restriction on certain types of firearms might be worth considering.

Resources Cited

Aneja, Abhay, John J. Donohue III, and Alexandria Zhang.  2012.  “The Impact of Right to Carry Laws and the NRC Report:  The Latest Lessons for the Empirical Evaluation of Law and Policy.”  NBER Working Paper No. 18294 (November).

Anglemyer, Andrew, Tara Horvath, and George Rutherford.  2014.  “The Accessibility of Firearms and Risk for Suicide and Homicide Victimization Among Household Members:  A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.”  Annals of International Medicine (January):  101-110.

2013.  “A Study of Active Shooter Incidents in the united States Between 2000 and 2013.”  U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation (September).

Chapman, S., P. Alpers, K. Agho, and M. Jones.  2006.  “Australia’s 1996 gun law reforms:  faster falls in firearms deaths, firearm suicides, and a decade without mass shootings.”  Injury Prevention (November):  365-372.

Cohn, D’Vera et al.  2013.  “Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware:  Pace of Decline Slows in Past Decade.”  Pew Research Center (May).

Haider-Markel, Donald P. and Mark R. Joslyn.  2011.  “Attributing Blame in Tragedy:  Understanding Attitudes About the Causes of Three Mass Shootings.”  APSA 2011 Annual Meeting Paper.

Makarios, Matthew D. and Travis C. Pratt.  2012.  “The Effectiveness of Policies and Programs that Attempt to Reduce Firearm Violence:  A Meta-Analysis.”  Crime & Delinquency (March):  222-244.

2012.  “More Support for Gun Rights, Gay Marriage than in 2008 or 2004.”  Pew Research Center (April).

Richardson, E.G. and D. Hemenway.  2007.  “Homicide, suicide, and unintentional firearm fatality:  comparing the United States with other high-income countries, 2003.”  The Journal of Trauma (January):  238-243.

Swanson et al.  2015.  “Guns, Impulsive Angry Behavior, and Mental Disorders:  Results from the National Comorbidity Survey Replication (NCS-R).”  Behavior Sciences & the Law (June):  199-212.