Violence: “Shall Issue” Concealed Weapons Carry Laws – Inactive

Inactive Community Guide Review

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 Community Preventive Services Task Force (CPSTF) finds insufficient evidence to determine the effectiveness of “shall issue” concealed weapons carry laws to prevent violence or reduce violent outcomes.

The CPSTF has related findings for the following firearm laws:

Intervention

“Shall issue” concealed-weapon carry laws (“shall issue laws”) require the issuing of a concealed-weapon carry permit to all applicants not disqualified by specified criteria. Shall issue laws are usually implemented in place of “may issue” laws, in which the issuing of a concealed weapon carry permit is discretionary (based on criteria such as the perceived need or moral character of the applicant).

CPSTF Finding and Rationale Statement

Read the CPSTF finding.

About The Systematic Review

The CPSTF finding is based on evidence from a systematic review of 4 studies (search period 1979 – March 2001). The review was conducted on behalf of the CPSTF by a team of specialists in systematic review methods, and in research, practice, and policy related to violence prevention.

Summary of Results

Four studies were included in the systematic review.
  • Two studies suggested a reduction in homicide associated with shall issue laws at the national level.
  • One study suggested mixed effects in five counties with an overall increase in homicide associated with the laws.
  • One study found a nonsignificant decline in police homicides.

Summary of Economic Evidence

An economic review of this intervention was not conducted because CPSTF did not have enough information to determine if the intervention works.

Applicability

Applicability of this intervention across different settings and populations was not assessed because CPSTF did not have enough information to determine if the intervention works.

Evidence Gaps

CPSTF identified several areas that have limited information. Additional research and evaluation could help answer the following questions and fill remaining gaps in the evidence base. (What are evidence gaps?)

Research Issues Specific to “Shall Issue” Carry Laws

  • Focus specifically on crimes outside the home as outcomes.
  • Examine permit status for firearms used in crimes.
  • Examine the effects of differences in state laws on the number of permits issued.
  • Examine the deterrent effects of publicity about the law.

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.

Study Characteristics

Four studies qualified for the review:
  • One study examined national level effects on homicide using Vital Statistics reports (from the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics).
  • One study used both Vital Statistics and UCR data to examine the effects of shall issue and other firearms laws on multiple violent outcomes.
  • One study used Vital Statistics to assess the effects of shall issue laws in five selected counties.
  • One study used state-level UCR data to assess the effects of shall issue laws on homicides in which police are the victims.

Publications

Hahn RA, Bilukha O, Crosby A, et al. Firearms laws and the reduction of violence: a systematic review. American Journal of Preventive Medicine 2005;28(2S1):40-71.

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

The number of studies and publications do not always correspond (e.g., a publication may include several studies or one study may be explained in several publications).

Effectiveness Review

Kleck G, Patterson EB. The impact of gun control and gun ownership levels on violence rates.J Quantitative Criminol 1993;9:249 87.

Ludwig J. Concealed-gun-carrying laws and violent crime: evidence from state panel data.Int Rev Law Econ 1998;18:239 54.

McDowall D, Loftin C, Wiersema B. Easing concealed firearms laws: effects on homicide in three states. J Criminal Law Criminol 1995;86:193 206.

Mustard DB. The impact of gun laws on police deaths. J Law Econ 2001;44:635 58.

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

Review References

Vernick JS, Hepburn LM. State and federal gun laws: trends for 1970 1999. In: Cook PJ, Ludwig J, eds. Evaluating Gun Policy. Washington (DC): Brookings Institution Press, 2003:345 402.

Considerations for Implementation

CPSTF did not have enough evidence to determine whether the intervention is or is not effective. This does not mean that the intervention does not work, but rather that additional research is needed to determine whether or not the intervention is effective.