Gary A. Mauser

Bio: Gary A. Mauser is an academic researcher from Simon Fraser University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Gun control & Poison control. The author has an hindex of 11, co-authored 23 publications receiving 369 citations.

Would banning firearms reduce murder and suicide? A review of international and some domestic evidence

Abstract: This Article has reviewed a significant amount of evidence from a wide variety of international sources. Each individual portion of evidence is subject to cavil—at the very least the general objection that the persuasiveness of social scientific evidence cannot remotely approach the persuasiveness of conclusions in the physical sciences. Nevertheless the burden of proof rests on the proponents of the more guns equal more death, fewer guns equals less death mantra, especially since they argue public policy ought to be based on that mantra. To bear that burden would at the very least require showing that a large number of nations with more guns have more death and that nations that have imposed stringent gun controls have achieved substantial reductions in criminal violence (or suicide). But those correlations are not observed when a large number of nations are compared across the world.

The Politics of Gun Control: Comparing Canadian and American Patterns

Abstract: In this paper two questions are asked: To what extent do the Canadian and US publics differ in their beliefs about firearms-control legislation, and to what extent do these differences help to account for the stricter firearms legislation found in Canada? Surveys indicate that Canadians and Americans have remarkably similar attitudes towards firearms and gun control. Linear regression is used to analyze the factors that underlie the popular support for (or opposition to) stricter gun-control legislation. It is found that, with respect to support for gun control, cultural differences between Canadians and Americans are overshadowed by socioeconomic variables, such as gender and gun ownership.The similarities in public attitudes between Canadians and Americans suggest that the explanation for stricter firearms legislation in Canada lies more with the differences in political elites and institutions than with differences in public opinion. The differences in public attitudes in the two countries are insuffic...

An Evaluation of the 1977 Canadian Firearms Legislation

Abstract: This article uses a pooled cross-section, time-series model to evaluate the effect of the 1977 Canadian firearms legislation on the provincial homicide rate between 1969 and 1989. This type of model was selected because of its ability to capture variation across space as well as time. The indices included in this model, measured at the provincial level, as independent variables are: unemployment rate, percentage Status Indian, percentage immigrant, percentage male youth, the clearance rate. The results are consistent with the findings of most previous studies that the 1977 Canadian firearms legislation did not have a significant effect on homicide rates. The strongest explanatory factors were percentage Status Indian and male youth.

Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis

Abstract: This paper discusses some principles of critical discourse analy- sis, such as the explicit sociopolitical stance of discourse analysts, and a focus on dominance relations by elite groups and institutions as they are being enacted, legitimated or otherwise reproduced by text and talk. One of the crucial elements of this analysis of the relations between power and discourse is the patterns of access to (public) discourse for different social groups. Theoretically it is shown that in order to be able to relate power and discourse in an explicit way, we need the cognitive interface of models. knowledge, attitudes and ideologies and other social represen- tations of the social mind, which also relate the individual and the social, and the micro- and the macro-levels of social structure. Finally, the argu- ment is illustrated with an analysis of parliamentary debates about ethnic affairs.

Issue Ownership in Presidential Elections, with a 1980 Case Study

Abstract: Theory: This paper develops and applies an issue ownership theory of voting that emphasizes the role of campaigns in setting the criteria for voters to choose between candidates. It expects candidates to emphasize issues on which they are advantaged and their opponents are less well regarded. It explains the structural factors and party system variables which lead candidates to differentially emphasize issues. It invokes theories of priming and framing to explain the electorate's response. Hypotheses: Issue emphases are specific to candidates; voters support candidates with a party and performance based reputation for greater competence on handling the issues about which the voter is concerned. Aggregate election outcomes and individual votes follow the problem agenda. Method: Content analysis of news reports, open-ended voter reports of important problems, and the vote are analyzed with graphic displays and logistic regression analysis for presidential elections between 1960 and 1992. Results: Candidates do have distinctive patterns of problem emphases in their campaigns; election outcomes do follow the problem concerns of voters; the individual vote is significantly influenced by these problem concerns above and beyond the effects of the standard predictors.

Cascading Activation: Contesting the White House's Frame After 9/11

Abstract: President Bush's initial frame for the attacks of September 11, 2001, overwhelmingly dominated the news. Using that frame as a springboard, this article advances a coherent conception of framing within a new model of the relationship between government and the media in U.S. foreign policy making. The cascading activation model supplements research using the hegemony or indexing approaches. The model explains how interpretive frames activate and spread from the top level of a stratified system (the White House) to the network of nonadministration elites, and on to news organizations, their texts, and the public--and how interpretations feed back from lower to higher levels. To illustrate the model's potential, the article explores the frame challenge mounted by two journalists, Seymour Hersh and Thomas Friedman, who attempted to shift the focus from Afghanistan to Saudi Arabia. As hegemony theory predicts, 9/11 revealed yet again that media patrol the boundaries of culture and keep discord within conventio...

Public Opinion, Domestic Structure, and Foreign Policy in Liberal Democracies

Abstract: The paper discusses the role of public opinion in the foreign policy-making process of liberal democracies. Contrary to prevailing assumptions, public opinion matters. However, the impact of public opinion is determined not so much by the specific issues involved or by the particular pattern of public attitudes as by the domestic structure and the coalition-building processes among the elites in the respective country. The paper analyzes the public impact on the foreign policy-making process in four liberal democracies with distinct domestic structures: the United States, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, and Japan. Under the same international conditions and despite similar patterns of public attitudes, variances in foreign policy outcomes nevertheless occur; these have to be explained by differences in political institutions, policy networks, and societal structures. Thus, the four countries responded differently to Soviet policies during the 1980s despite more or less comparable trends in mass public opinion.

Media violence and the American public: Scientific facts versus media misinformation.

Abstract: Fifty years of news coverage on the link between media violence and aggression have left the U.S. public confused. Typical news articles pit researchers and child advocates against entertainment industry representatives, frequently giving equal weight to the arguments of both sides. A comparison of news reports and scientific knowledge about media effects reveals a disturbing discontinuity: Over the past 50 years, the average news report has changed from claims of a weak link to a moderate link and then back to a weak link between media violence and aggression. However, since 1975, the scientific confidence and statistical magnitude of this link have been clearly positive and have consistently increased over time. Reasons for this discontinuity between news reports and the actual state of scientific knowledge include the vested interests of the news, a misapplied fairness doctrine in news reporting, and the failure of the research community to effectively argue the scientific case.