Violence: Combinations of Firearms Laws – Inactive
The reviews and findings listed on this page are inactive. Inactive reviews and findings are not scheduled for an update at this time, though they may be updated in the future. Findings become inactive when reviewed interventions are no longer commonly used, when other organizations begin systematically reviewing the interventions, or as a result of conflicting priorities within a topic area.
Summary of CPSTF Finding
The CPSTF has related findings for the following firearm laws:
- Bans on Specified Firearms or Ammunition (insufficient evidence)
- Restrictions on firearm acquisition (insufficient evidence)
- Waiting periods for firearm acquisition (insufficient evidence)
- Firearm registration and licensing of firearm owners (insufficient evidence)
- “Shall issue” concealed weapons carry laws (insufficient evidence)
- Child access prevention (CAP) laws (insufficient evidence)
- Zero tolerance laws for firearms in schools (insufficient evidence)
Intervention
CPSTF Finding and Rationale Statement
About The Systematic Review
Summary of Results
- Studies assessed comprehensive laws within nations (2 studies); compared laws between nations (3 studies); and evaluated the association between the number of laws and the extent of violent outcomes within nations (6 studies).
- Studies were methodologically inadequate and reported inconsistent results.
Summary of Economic Evidence
Applicability
Evidence Gaps
Research Issues Specific to Multiple Laws and Systems of Laws
- Assess the effects of combinations of specific laws on specific forms of violence. Studies should allow the determination of which laws are critical to effective combinations and which are not.
General Research Issues
The following outlines evidence gaps for these reviews of firearm laws: Bans on Specified Firearms or Ammunition; Restrictions on Firearm Acquisition; Waiting Periods for Firearm Acquisition; Firearm Registration and Licensing of Firearm Owners; “Shall issue” Concealed Weapons Carry Laws; Child Access Prevention (CAP) Laws; Zero Tolerance of Firearms in Schools; Combinations of Firearms Laws
Additional high-quality research is required to determine whether a relationship exists between firearms laws and violent outcomes. Below are areas for further potential study.
Violent Outcome Data Sources
It was noted at the outset of this article and in the assessments of specific laws that multiple problems exist with the available data on outcomes used in studies of firearms laws. Much remains to be done to improve the recording of events and accessibility of the relevant data. Improvements would allow better evaluation of the effects of firearms laws as well as improvements in understanding of other aspects of violence and injury. These include:
- Reporting systems for individual criminal and violent events and details of their circumstances
- More detailed data on the location and perpetration of the crime;
- More detailed data on agents in unintentional firearm-related injuries, linked to information on both the victim and the storage conditions of firearms involved;
- More detailed information on firearms used in crimes (e.g., type of firearm used, whether the firearm was carried legally, was registered, how it was acquired, and whether the owner was licensed)
- More statistics relevant to changes in behaviors that can be attributed to laws (e.g., the numbers of concealed carry permits issued, or changes in safe storage practices).
Measurement of Exposure: What Laws are in Place, and Where?
- Classification: There have been disputes about which states have which types of laws. Misclassification of state laws and their dates of implementation hinders firearms law research. Some differences among states in the effects of laws may be attributable to differences among states in provisions of the law, for example, their requirements, penalties, or the presence of other laws. A recent analysis of firearms laws (Vernick & Hepburn, 2003) may help to resolve some of these issues for researchers by providing a recent, systematic, and detailed analysis of major federal, state, and local firearms laws.
- Implementation and enforcement: As with any intervention, the degree of implementation may affect the intervention’s effectiveness. Data on implementation have typically not been included in the evaluation of firearms laws. How do the intensity and visibility of law enforcement differ among jurisdictions, and how do they affect the law’s effectiveness?
- Publicity and awareness of laws: Knowledge about laws may be one means by which they become effective. If deterrence is a factor in the effectiveness of a law, then public (and criminal) awareness is of particular importance. Awareness can mitigate a law’s potential effects, as when firearms are purchased at increased rates prior to the implementation of a ban.
- Duration of exposure and follow-up: Follow-up periods of less than 2 years may be inadequate to assess the long-term societal effects of a law. It will be useful to determine whether specific laws have immediate or gradual impact, and how effects change over time.
Measurement of Violent Outcomes
- Specific measures: Studies should measure outcomes directly associated with the law being evaluated (e.g., violence outside the home for laws about firearm carrying outside the home, and child violence perpetration for laws about child access to and use of firearms in the home). Failure to do so may result from a lack of information on direct measures of the outcome of interest.
- Intermediate outcomes: Even when outcomes of interest are directly assessed, it may be useful to have information on intermediate outcomes in order to understand the way in which the outcome of interest is achieved (e.g., decreasing violence by changing firearm storage or carrying behavior).
- Population-specific effects: The measurement of the effects of laws (e.g., acquisition restrictions) on violence perpetrated by criminals is important. It is also important to measure or estimate overall population effects of the same laws, for example, whether felony conviction restrictions for firearm purchase affect not only rates of violence among people with felony convictions, but also rates of violence in the general population.
- Substitution of weapons: If the goal of a firearms law is the reduction of harm, it is essential to determine whether, given that one weapon may become less available because of the law, that weapon is not readily replaced by another that causes the same (or more or less) harm.
- Substitution of place: Similarly, given that many firearms laws are local, it is important to determine whether enacting a law in one location displaces harm from that setting to another (e.g., affecting crime in neighboring jurisdictions that do not have such a law).
Measurement of Potential Confounders and Effect Modifiers
- Measuring and adjusting for confounders: In the analysis of firearms laws, important confounders (e.g., gang activity, drug-related issues, crime cycles, law enforcement practices) are often difficult to measure. Better measures should be developed and used.
- Effect modification: It is critical to assess the conditions under which laws may work, may work best, and may not work (e.g., alone or in combination with other laws, or in some settings but not in others). Many laws have multiple provisions, and it is important to determine which combinations of laws or provisions are most effective.
Methods
- Appropriate design and analytic techniques: Where possible, the data should be collected as prospective time-series measurements; analyses of trends are preferable to analyses of before-and-after changes. Analytic techniques should include appropriate adjustment for autocorrelation of data in time-series and in adjacent geographical locations.
- Assumptions and validation: Analytic techniques commonly rest on assumptions about the study design or the characteristics of the study data. Assumptions should be validated and, to the extent that they are violated, the consequences of violation considered and addressed.
Other Effects
The reviews also identified potential research questions related to outcomes in addition to violence. These include:
- Property crime
- Assess the effects of firearms laws on property crime.
- Self-defense
- Assess the effects of firearms laws on people’s capacity to defend themselves legally.
- Determine whether all demographic population segments are similarly affected.
- Legal rights
- Assess the effects of firearms laws on legal rights. For example, expulsion under the Gun-Free Schools Act to keep schools safe may conflict with the rights of students to an education.
- Justice
- Assess the effects of firearms laws (such as licensing, registration, background checks of applicants) on the apprehension of “wanted persons,” such as fugitives from justice.
- Cost
- Assess the costs and benefits associated with implementing and enforcing firearms laws.
- Self-defense
- Assess the effects of firearms laws on property crime.
Study Characteristics
- Studies of the effects of comprehensive national laws within nations
- Cross-national studies of firearms law systems
- “Index” studies in which law types within jurisdictions (i.e., regulation of specific, defined aspects of firearms acquisition and use) are categorized and counted, and the counts correlated with rates of specific forms of violence within the same jurisdictions
Publications
Task Force on Community Services. Recommendations to reduce violence through early childhood home visitation, therapeutic foster care, and firearms laws. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 2005;28(2S1):6-10.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. First reports evaluating the effectiveness of strategies for preventing violence: firearms laws: findings from the Task Force on Community Preventive Services. MMWR 2003;52(RR-14):11-20. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm.
Lipsey MW. The challenges of interpreting research for use by practitioners: comments on the latest products from the Task Force on Community Preventive Services. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 2005;28(2 Suppl 1):6-10.
Calonge N. Community interventions to prevent violence: translation into public health practice. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 2005;28(2 Suppl 1):4-5.
Task Force on Community Services, Zaza S, Briss PA, Harris KW. Violence. In: The Guide to Community Preventive Services: What Works to Promote Health? Atlanta (GA): Oxford University Press; 2005:329-84.
Analytic Framework
Effectiveness Review
Analytic Framework see Figure 2 on page 43
When starting an effectiveness review, the systematic review team develops an analytic framework. The analytic framework illustrates how the intervention approach is thought to affect public health. It guides the search for evidence and may be used to summarize the evidence collected. The analytic framework often includes intermediate outcomes, potential effect modifiers, potential harms, and potential additional benefits.
Summary Evidence Table
Effectiveness Review
No content is available for this section.
Included Studies
Effectiveness Review
Boor M, Blair JH. Suicide rates, handgun control laws, and sociodemographic variables.Psychol Rep 1990;66:923 30.
Canadian Department of Justice. A statistical analysis of the impacts of the 1977 firearms control legislation. Ottawa: Department of Justice, Programme Evaluation Section, 1996.
DeZee MR. Gun control legislation: impact and ideology. Law Policy Q 1983;5:367 79.
Geisel M, Roll R, Wettick R. The effectiveness of state and local regulation of handguns. Duke Law J 1969;43:647 73.
Kleck G, Patterson EB. The impact of gun control and gun ownership levels on violence rates.J Quantitative Criminol 1993;9:249 87.
Lester D, Murrell ME. The preventive effect of strict gun control laws on suicide and homicide.Suicide Life Threat Behav 1982;12:131 40.
Magaddino JP, Medoff MH. An empirical analysis of federal and state firearm control laws. In: Kates DB, ed. Firearms and violence. Cambridge MA: Ballinger, 1984:225 58.
Medoff MH, Magaddino JP. Suicides and firearm control laws. Evaluation Rev 1983;7:357 72.
Murray D. Handguns, gun control laws and firearm violence. Social Problems 1975;23:81 92.
Search Strategies
Effectiveness Review
Electronic searches for literature were conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, ERIC, NTIS (National Technical Information Service), PSYCHLIT, PAIS (Public Affairs Information Service), Sociological Abstracts, NCJRS (National Criminal Justice Reference Service), CJPI (Criminal Justice Periodicals Index), Gale Group Legal Research Index, and ECONLIT. We also reviewed the references listed in all retrieved articles, and consulted with experts on the systematic review development team and elsewhere to find additional published reports of studies.
We included journal articles, governmental reports, books, and book chapters. We also reviewed several papers that were in press at the time, identified in web searches and by consultants.
Articles were considered for inclusion in the systematic review if they did the following:
- Evaluated the specified law
- Assessed at least one of the violent outcomes specified
- Were conducted in an established market economy
- Reported on a primary study rather than, for example, a guideline or review
- Compared a group of people who had been exposed to the intervention with a group of people who had not been exposed or who had been less exposed (the comparisons could be concurrent or in the same group over a period of time)
- Published between 1979 and March 2001