scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question

Showing papers by "Daniel W. Webster published in 2010"


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Reducing access to firearms for DVRO defendants, increasing police staffing levels and allowing the warrantless arrest of DVROs violators may reduce the city-level risk of IPH.
Abstract: Objective To assess the relationships between intimate partner homicide (IPH) and public policies including police staffing levels in large US cities. Design The research uses a multiple time-series design to examine the effects of statutes aimed at restricting access to firearms for perpetrators of domestic violence, allowing or mandating arrest for violators of domestic violence restraining orders (DVROs), beer excise taxes, and police staffing levels on IPH in 46 of the largest US cities from 1979 to 2003. Both total IPH and IPH committed with a firearm are analysed. Generalised estimating equations using a Poisson distribution are used to regress IPH on the policies and potential confounders. Results State statutes restricting those under DVROs from accessing firearms, and laws allowing the warrantless arrest of DVRO violators, are associated with reductions in total and firearm IPH. Police staffing levels are also negatively associated with total and firearm IPH. There was no evidence that other policies to restrict firearm access to domestic violence offenders or alcohol taxes had a significant impact on IPH. Conclusions Reducing access to firearms for DVRO defendants, increasing police staffing levels and allowing the warrantless arrest of DVRO violators may reduce the city-level risk of IPH. Future research should evaluate factors that may mediate the effects of these laws and increased police staffing levels on IPH to determine whether there are opportunities to increase their protective effects. Further research is needed on firearm law implementation to determine why the other tested laws were not found effective.

114 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Based on the perceptions of the IPV victims in this study, laws designed to disarm domestic violence offenders were either poorly implemented or failed to inform victims when their abuser's firearms were surrendered or confiscated.
Abstract: Aims: The purpose of this study was to describe the perceptions of women who sought court protection orders for domestic violence (PODV) about actions to implement laws intended to disarm their abusers. Methods: We identified female victims of intimate partner violence (IPV) in New York and Los Angeles primarily through family courts and records of police calls for domestic violence. Of these, 782 were surveyed and asked about their experiences seeking PODV from courts, judges ordering the removal of firearms from defendants, and if firearms were actually surrendered or confiscated. Results: Of the 542 victims who had obtained a PODV and knew whether their abuser owned a firearm, 82 (15%) reported that their abuser owned a firearm. Although state law either allowed or mandated judges issuing PODVs to require abusers to surrender their firearms, 21 victims (26%) reported that judges used this authority. Ten victims (12% of victims with armed abusers) reported that their abuser had either surrender...

37 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This study identified factors present at the time of a handgun’s most recent retail sale that were associated with its subsequent use in crime under circumstances suggesting that the handgun had been trafficked—purchased with the intent of diverting it to criminal use.
Abstract: While many handguns are used in crime each year in the USA, most are not. We conducted this study to identify factors present at the time of a handgun’s most recent retail sale that were associated with its subsequent use in crime under circumstances suggesting that the handgun had been trafficked—purchased with the intent of diverting it to criminal use. Handguns acquired in multiple-gun purchases were of particular interest. Using data for 180,321 handguns purchased from federally licensed retailers in California in 1996, we studied attributes of the handguns, the retailers selling them, the purchasers, and the sales transactions. Our outcome measure was a handgun’s recovery by a police agency, followed by a gun ownership trace, conducted by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, that determined (a) that the recovery had occurred within 3 years of the handgun’s most recent purchase from a licensed retailer and (b) that the person who possessed the gun when it was recovered by police was not its most recent purchaser. Altogether, 722 handguns were recovered and had trace results that met the additional criteria. Handguns acquired in multiple-gun, same-day transactions were more likely to be traced than were single-purchase handguns (odds ratio [OR] 1.33, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 1.08 to 1.63). This was not the case for multiple-purchase handguns defined more broadly as multiple handguns purchased by one individual over any 30-day period as used in “one-gun-a-month” laws. Bivariate regressions indicated increased risk of a handgun being traced when it sold new for $150 or less (OR 4.28, 95% CI 3.59 to 5.11) or had been purchased by a woman (OR 2.02, 95% CI 1.62 to 2.52). Handguns sold by retailers who also had a relatively high proportion (≥2%) of purchases denied because the prospective purchasers were prohibited from owning firearms were more likely to be traced than were those sold by other retailers (OR 4.09, 95% CI 3.39 to 4.94). These findings persisted in multivariate analyses. Our findings suggest specific strategies for intervention to prevent gun violence.

26 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This study found no association between gun shows and gun-related deaths, and is not statistically powered to detect even an implausibly large effect of gun shows on gun violence.
Abstract: A widely publicized but unpublished study of the relationship between gun shows and gun violence is being cited in debates about the regulation of gun shows and gun commerce. We believe the study is fatally flawed. A working paper entitled "The Effect of Gun Shows on Gun-Related Deaths: Evidence from California and Texas" outlined this study, which found no association between gun shows and gun-related deaths. We believe the study reflects a limited understanding of gun shows and gun markets and is not statistically powered to detect even an implausibly large effect of gun shows on gun violence. In addition, the research contains serious ascertainment and classification errors, produces results that are sensitive to minor specification changes in key variables and in some cases have no face validity, and is contradicted by 1 of its own authors' prior research. The study should not be used as evidence in formulating gun policy.

6 citations