Showing papers on "Gun control published in 1991"

Firearms, violence and public policy

Abstract: See correction in Scientific American, 1992; 266(3):8 Even though the United States has more gun control laws than any other country in the world, Americans are more likely to be victims of gun-related violence, and social and behavioral scientists have been investigating how violence is related to firearms since the 1960's. Research confirms that, as guns become more available, people are more likely to die during violent crimes. Research also shows that many gun control laws do not significantly diminish the number of guns used in violent crimes. Legislators have agreed to many measures that attempt to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, but these efforts have not reduced violence to a level most Americans can tolerate. The issue of gun control hinges on whether the death rate from violence will subside if people are forced to abandon firearms and choose other weapons. All guns are deadly, but some types of firearms are more harmful than others because they are more likely to be used in crime and violence. In particular, handguns account for one-third of the 120 to 150 million firearms estimated to be owned by civilians. Handguns are used in more than 75 percent of firearm-related homicides and in more than 80 percent of firearm-related robberies. The National Crime Survey indicates that crime victims are less likely to resist robbers who carry guns than those who wield other weapons. In cases where robberies result in injuries, guns are far more deadly than other weapons. The role of firearms in forcible rape, suicide, and accidents is not as clear as the demonstrated role of firearms in homicide and robbery. The effectiveness of gun control legislation is discussed, and dangers associated with widespread access to firearms are examined. KEYWORDS: Criminology ; Homicide ; Robbery ; Violent crimes ; Violent crime statistics ; Weapon offenses ; Handguns ; Citizen gun ownership ; Gun control legislation ; Firearm-crime relationships ; Victims of violence ; Violence prevention Language: en

A preliminary investigation of inner city adolescents' perceptions of guns.

Abstract: Three hundred seventy-seven African-American and 201 white adolescents, primarily of low socioeconomic status, were surveyed on perceptions of guns. Chi-square analyses found significant differences by gender and ethnicity. African-American males were more likely to have a pistol at home (47%); both African-American males and females were more likely to have known someone who took a gun to school (57% and 47%) and to have personally known someone who had been shot (87% and 91%). Differences between African-American and white adolescents and between males and females regarding gun control, gun safety, and consequences of gun use are described. VioLit summary: OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study by Price et al.was to examine the differential perception of guns of African-american and white inner city adolescents. METHODOLOGY: The authors utilized a quasi-experimental cross-sectional design to gather data from five mid-western, inner-city public high schools located in low socioeconomic status districts. Students in required health education classes of the respective schools were given the survey in the spring of 1989. The authors developed a 48-item questionnaire based on a comprehensive review of literature. The instrument was designed to assess perceptions of guns and their effects. Three demographic variables were included, age, gender, and ethnicity. Nine background items were contained in the questionnaire along with 36 items on guns and their effects. A Likert-type scale was used as the format for the 36 items. The internal consistency of the questionnaire was tested using Cronbach's alpha and found to be .79. The authors also tested-retested the questionnaire to estimate stability reliability which was found to be .82. FINDINGS/DISCUSSION: Five hundred and seventy-eight of the 725 questionnaires returned were analyzed. Those students who had not completed a major portion of the questionnaire and Hispanic and Asian students were dropped from this study. An examination of the data revealed several significant differences in background characteristics between African-american males and white males. African-american males were more likely than white males to have a hand gun at home, less likely to have a shot gun at home, more likely to have personally known someone who had been shot, and more likely to have known someone who carried a gun to school. The authors examined background variables of females by ethnicity and discovered five significant differences. African-american females in comparison to white females were less likely to have a rifle at home, less likely to have fired a gun, more likely to have personally known someone who had been shot, more likely to have known someone who took a gun to school. The ANOVA for ethnicity by the 36 gun items was significant. The authors found eight significant items by ethnicity using chi-square testing. African-american teenagers were more likely than white adolescents to believe that guns are easily accessible, that gun detectors should be in every doorway of their school, that banning ownership of hand guns would be more unfair to the poor, that having a gun at home make them feel safe, that most African-americans who are victims of gun inflicted wounds are shot by African-american males, that Americans are more likely to be shot and killed than any other people, that most African-american males who are shot are killed by police officers, and that African-american males are more likely to be shot than any other group of people. The ANOVA by gender for the 36 items was significant. Eleven items were found significant through subsequent chi-square analysis. AUTHORS' RECOMMENDATIONS: The authors suggested that schools and health educators become more aware and involved in the prevention of gun violence. (CSPV Abstract - Copyright © 1992-2007 by the Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence, Institute of Behavioral Science, Regents of the University of Colorado) KW - Firearms Perceptions KW - Urban Youth KW - Juvenile Perceptions KW - Juvenile Attitudes KW - Attitudes Toward Firearms KW - Caucasian Juvenile KW - Caucasian Perceptions KW - African American Perceptions KW - African American Juvenile KW - Black-White Comparison KW - Racial Differences KW - Firearms Ownership KW - Juvenile Firearms Carrying KW - Firearms Violence Language: en

Gun control and racism

Abstract: The first gun control laws were enacted in the ante-bellum South forbidding blacks, whether free or slave, to possess arms, in order to maintain blacks in their servile status. After the Civil War, the South continued to pass restrictive firearms laws in order to deprive the newly freed blacks from exercising their rights of citizenship. During the later part of the 19th century and the early part of the 20th century, gun control laws were passed in the South in order to disarm agrarian reformers and in the North to disarm union organizers. In the North, a strong xenophobic reaction to recent waves of immigrants added further fuel for gun control laws which were used to disarm such persons. Other firearms ownership restrictions were adopted in order to repress the incipient black civil rights movement.

Reducing firearm injuries

Abstract: VioLit summary: OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study by Webster et al. was to consider firearm injuries as a public health crisis and the subsequent need for firearms to be regulated and limited. METHODOLOGY: A non-experimental review of the literature was conducted to examine the issue of firearm injuries across the United States. The authors presented data from various sources including the FBI, Western Psychiatric Institute and Clinic in Pittsburgh, U.S. Department of Justice, and studies from several academic institutions. Firearm injuries and deaths and gun regulation were the focus of this review. FINDINGS/DISCUSSION: It was reported that assaults with guns were three times more likely to result in a fatality than were assaults occurring with knives. The lethality of the weapon available during heated moments was an important determinant of the severity of injuries and potential for death. With the increased availability of semi- and fully-automatic guns, homicides were found to increase. Rapid firing motion of such guns made attacks less risky for the assailant and accuracy of the aim less important for serious injury to the victim. Suicide was another kind of injury from firearms that the authors discussed. Suicides were found to be greater among adolescents and young adults when guns are present. A study done by Western Psychiatric Institute in Pittsburgh showed that the probability of an adolescent taking his or her own life was 2.7 times greater in homes in which a gun was kept. Suicide rates were found to be significantly lower in Vancouver, British Columbia, than in Seattle, Washington; Vancouver is subject to more handgun restrictions than Seattle. The authors argued that the evidence did not support the idea that guns are an advantage for protection. Studies showed that the risks of keeping a gun in the home outweighed the protection benefits. Unintentional gun deaths were six times more frequent than the shooting deaths of home intruders. The authors criticized current legislative approaches to gun control policy as inconsistent across jurisdictions. The range between states was great; some states employed a self-reporting screening mechanism for gun purchases, while other states conducted a criminal background check of the potential buyer through a licensing agent. Many states only searched state and local records, foregoing a search of FBI records because of expense. This selective search was seen to contribute to a lack of efficiency in the background check process. It was also argued that laws that only focus on high risk groups ignore the fact that most gun homicides were not committed by individuals within those groups. U.S. Department of Justice data from the 75 largest counties in the country indicated that just 29% of the people arrested for murder had previously been convicted of a felony. Almost every other industrialized country other than the U.S. was found to either prohibit or severely restrict private ownership of handguns. The firearm homicide rate for young males in the United States was 12 - 273 times higher than in other industrialized countries. The data suggested that even though social and cultural factors may make violence more common in the U.S., the wide availability of guns have only aggravated the problem. There was some evidence that gun regulation decreases gun violence. Legislation increasing penalties for carrying a gun without a license were found to decrease gun homicides by 56%, homicides with other weapons by 20%, and gun assaults producing injuries by 37% within a two year period. Increases of assaults not involving a gun suggested a substitution pattern. It was found that many cities experienced reductions in gun homicides following mandatory sentences for crimes committed with guns, though not all the evidence was conclusive. The author concluded that the only way to limit the threat to public health posed by firearm injuries was to control the distribution of guns. AUTHORS' RECOMMENDATIONS: The authors suggested three modifications to the design of guns to prevent firearm injuries: 1) built-in safeties and locks, 2) loaded chamber indicators, and 3) create guns designed to shoot electricity, tranquilizers, or anesthetics rather than bullets. It was also argued that the Department of Justice take over the regulation of gun control from the Treasury Department and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms. The authors believed that manufacturers should be held liable for gun injuries. Additional recommendations were as follows. First, substantial restrictions were strongly advocated on the manufacture, sale, and possession of handguns. Second, it was recommended that semiautomatic weapons should be banned for sale to private citizens. Third, it was recommended that permits for possession of handguns for sporting events be left on the premises of the range. Fourth, the authors advocated that handgun possession be limited to police officers and licensed security guards, and fifth, the authors stated that guns should be built that are less likely to injure or kill when misused. Additionally, health professionals and law-enforcement officials were seen to be crucial in educating the public to increase support for gun control. (CSPV Abstract - Copyright © 1992-2007 by the Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence, Institute of Behavioral Science, Regents of the University of Colorado) KW - Adult Victim KW - Adult Violence KW - Adult Firearms Use KW - Juvenile Violence KW - Juvenile Firearms Use KW - Juvenile Victim KW - Policy Recommendations KW - Firearms Injury KW - Firearms Control KW - Firearms Ownership KW - Injury Prevention KW - Firearms Violence KW - Violence Prevention KW - Legislation KW - Firearms Suicide KW - Suicide Prevention KW - Firearms Homicide KW - Homicide Prevention KW - Prevention Recommendations

Weapons and minority youth violence.

Abstract: Weapons violence is a major public health problem that especially impacts minority youth. Interventions designed to reduce weapon use by youth are categorized as educational/behavioral change, legal, and technological/environmental. Few educational programs currently exist, but those that do largely concern firearm safety courses, public information campaigns, counseling, classroom education, peer education and mentoring, and crisis intervention. Given that legal snd technological countermeasures have difficulty in controlling weapons violence, education seems a critical first step toward a comprehensive approach to preventing weapons-related violence. Potential educational interventions include educating students and their communities about the dangers inherent in carrying or possessing firearms. Potential legal interventions include firearm legislation assessment, taxation, stricter licensing and registration policies, and bans on selected types of firearms. Potential technological/environment interventions include designing safer weapons, eliminating ammunition types, and modifying the adverse environment in which weapons are used or carried. A combination of strategies should be used, but before interventions are discussed, professionals must address the inadequacy of current information on which to base firearm policy, ethical and philosophical issues involving metal detector use, and the community's role. The appendix contains a list of 16 associations to contact for additional

The Second Amendment: Toward an Afro-Americanist Reconsideration

Abstract: The often strident debate over the Second Amendment is like few others in American constitutional discourse and historiography. It is a constitutional debate that has taken place largely in the absence of Supreme Court opinion. It is a historical controversy where the framers' intentions have best been gleaned from indirect rather than direct evidence. It is a scholarly debate that members of the academy have been until recently somewhat reluctant to join, leaving the field to independent scholars primarily concerned with the modern gun control controversy. In short, the Second Amendment is an arena of constitutional jurisprudence that still awaits its philosopher. The debate over the Second Amendment is ultimately part of the larger debate over gun control, a debate about the extent to which the Amendment was either meant to be or should be interpreted as limiting the ability of government to prohibit or limit private ownership of firearms. Waged in the popular press, in the halls of Congress, and increasingly in historical and legal journals, two dominant interpretations have emerged. Advocates of stricter gun controls have tended to stress the Amendment's Militia Clause, arguing that the purpose of the Amendment was to ensure that state militias would be maintained against potential federal encroachment. This argument, embodying the collective rights theory, sees the framers' primary, indeed sole, concern as one with the concentration of military power in the hands of the federal government, and the corresponding need to ensure a decentralized military establishment largely under state control.

The Value of Civilian Arms Possession as a Deterrent to Crime or Defense Against Crime

Abstract: This article presents evidence that affirms the utility of guns against crime. Widespread defensive gun ownership benefits society as a whole by deterring burglars from entering occupied premises and by deterring confrontation offenses altogether by an unknown proportion of criminals who might otherwise be attracted by the immediate profitability of robbery. Even when criminals are not so deterred, widespread gun ownership may frighten them sufficiently to reduce the overall number of such offenses. This evidence disposes of the claim that banning handguns produces few social benefits, though it does not undercut the case for controls tailored to denying firearms to felons, juveniles and the mentally impaired.

Is Gun Control Legislation a Solution for Protecting Victims

Abstract: We are living in an age in which there is a record national crime rate, and acts of random violence are so commonplace that violence is now considered as American as apple pie. It is an age in which one of every four households is touched by violent crime. It is an age in which, according to Kenneth Lipper (1989), “Women and children in Harlem and Bed-Stuy are shut-ins behind barred windows and locked doors, afraid of the streets and hallways that neighborhood junkies, dealers, prostitutes and pimps have captured as their own territory” (p. 28). It is an age in which we hesitate to use subways because of the increase in violent crime. It is an age in which coexistence with fear is a way of life. It is an age in which, according to 1987 federal statistics, 3,236,200 burglaries were committed, averaging one every ninety-seven seconds (Source Book of Criminal Justice, 1988). It is an age of terrorism on both a national and an international level. It is an age in which there is a desperate need for drugs that leads to violent crimes (Lipper, 1989, p. 46). In short, we are living in a violent age.