|
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 |