Citation

Schutten NM, Pickett JT, Burton AL, Jonson CL, Cullen FT, Burton VSJ. Criminology 2022; 60(1): 90-123.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2022, American Society of Criminology)

DOI

10.1111/1745-9125.12292

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Two principal movers of American politics appear increasingly to be connected: racism and guns. The racial content underlying gun rights rhetoric, however, is rarely made explicit during political campaigns. As such, it is possible that espousing pro-gun messages may be an effective way to surreptitiously court prejudiced voters without transgressing popular egalitarian norms. In other words, gun rights rhetoric may function as a racial dog whistle. In the present study, we test this theory using data from a survey experiment conducted with a national sample of registered voters. The findings from our experiment show that election candidates' National Rifle Association (NRA)-funding status and position on gun control impact voters' evaluations, and racial resentment moderates these effects. Racially resentful voters are more likely than low-resentment voters to say they would vote for a candidate when the candidate is funded by the NRA and does not support gun control. This is true among voters who own guns and among those who do not, and it is true regardless of the candidate's political party. The findings also show that there is a backlash effect among low-resentment voters--such individuals are aversive to NRA-funded candidates but strongly supportive of pro-gun control candidates.

Language: en

Keywords

dog whistle; gun control; National Rifle Association (NRA); politics; racism