|
Abstract
|
Social scientists have started to find answers to some of the questions raised in the ongoing debate over gun control. The basic factual issue in this debate concerns the effect of gun availability on the distribution, seriousness, and number of violent crimes. Some evidence is available on each of these dimensions of the violent crime problem. The distribution of violent crimes among different types of victims is governed in part by the "vulnerability pattern" in weapon choice. The seriousness of robbery and assault incidents is influenced by weapon type, as indicated by the objective dangerousness and instrumental violence pattern. A reduction in gun availability would cause some weapon substitution and probably little change in overall robbery and assault rates-but the homicide rate would be reduced.
VioLit summary:
OBJECTIVE:
The purpose of this paper by Cook was to describe the relationships between gun use and vulnerability of victim and vulnerability of offender. It is argued that the effect of gun availability on distribution, seriousness, and number of violent crimes is governed in part by the "vulnerability pattern" in weapon choice.
METHODOLOGY:
This study was an non-experimental, preliminary look at the relationship between vulnerability and gun use patterns using the Uniform Crime Reports Supplementary Homicide Reports for 1976 and 1977. These data were submitted by police departments in 50 large cities and included the demographic characteristics of the victim and, where known, the offender, as well as the murder weapon, immediate circumstances, and apparent motive of the crime. The data were analyzed with bivariate descriptive statistics (percentage tables) and review of other findings in the area.
FINDINGS/DISCUSSION:
Women were found to use more lethal weapons, in general, to kill their spouses or partners than did men--97% versus 78%. A percentage table for gun use in murders and nonnegligent homicides resulting from arguments or brawls by age group (18-39, 40-59, 60+ for both victims and offenders) was presented. All data presented were for males. It was found that the highest gun fraction involved elderly killers and youthful victims, and the lowest gun fraction involved youthful killers and elderly victims. The author argued that this led credence to the "vulnerability pattern" which can be explained as resulting from some combination of three mechanisms. First, there is a greater likelihood of failure for attacks on strong victims without guns. Second, a person will be more likely to act on a homicidal impulse if there is a greater probability of success--for example, if the deterrent of a strong victim is weakened by the offender's possession of a gun. Thirdly, in the case of a planned murder, the killer would have the opportunity to acquire a weapon that is adequate for the task...usually a gun. Robbery was described as a crime that uses power against the best targets--young, elder, disabled individuals who are alone. The least vulnerable targets were described as commercial places--stores, banks, and the like. The role the gun was said to play in the robbery was as a tool to enhance the robber's power and increase likelihood of success against well-defended targets. The author cited another study which found that there was little relationship between robbery success rates and weapon type in personal robbery but a strong relationship for commercial robbery. The economic value of the gun (defined as the increase in success probability multiplied by the amount of stolen goods if the robbery is successful) is said to be greatest against these commercial targets. In a distribution of robberies (by percentage) for weapon types (gun, knife or other weapon, and unarmed), it was found that guns were used most often in commercial robberies; knives and other weapons and unarmed robberies were most common in street, vehicle, and other non-commercial or residence robberies. In a distribution for weapon types by victim types, male victims between 16 and 54 were most often robbed with guns and with knives or other weapons. The more vulnerable populations--women, elderly, and so forth--were most often robbed unarmed. The connection between guns and robbery was described as a situation which either l) involves a robber who aspires to well-defended and lucrative targets and who arms him/herself with a gun or 2) robbers who happen to have a gun are more tempted to rob these more defended and lucrative targets. Increased availability of guns, as cited from another study, was found to increase the fraction of noncommercial robberies committed with a gun. The author also examined the seriousness dimension; seriousness was defined as the degree of injury to the victim. The fraction of serious gun assaults that resulted in the victim's death was higher than for assaults with other weapons, the argument being that use of a gun reflected more intent and preparation. In situations of unclear intent to kill which happens more frequently with impulsive action, the immediate availability of guns was argued to make the situation more dangerous and serious/lethal injury more likely. In summary, the author stated that the likelihood of death from a serious assault was determined by the assailant's intent and the lethality of the weapon, particularly important when intent is unclear. In the case of lethality and robbery, it was found that gun robberies were less likely than other armed robberies to involve physical violence and less likely to injure the victim. The "instrumental violence" pattern could account for only a fraction of injuries and death that result from robbery--over two thirds of victims injured in noncommercial gun robberies did not resist, less resistance was given to gangs of three or more but the victims of gang robbery were more likely to be injured, and robbers who injured their victims tended to be more violence prone than other robbers. Robbery was found to be differentiated by intent to injure or kill in which resistance proved to be a factor in instigating violence only if there was no original intent to injure. Having a gun present increased the victim's chances of dying.
AUTHOR'S RECOMMENDATIONS:
The author concluded that effective gun control would decrease the robbery murder rate, increase injury, and redistribute robberies. Assaultive murder, it is argued, would decrease while the assault rate might increase. Gun control measures which would increase cost and decrease availability would delay acquisition long enough to have an effect on the gun crime rate.
EVALUATION:
The instrumental use of guns in crimes is an important discrimination in assault and robbery rates. The findings that link gun use to threat of resistance have implications for victim behavior. This author presents evidence that death from assault or robbery is directly linked to the threat the victim poses when there was no intent to injure in the beginning. Those victims who attempt to fight back when a gun is present would be more likely to be killed. While victims do not cause their own deaths, those who are may be able to increase their chance of survival. This study raised some important gun control issues as well. The findings, however, are very preliminary and primarily descriptive. Analyses which included controls would have backed the points the author made more forcefully. For example, how does geographical location of the cities impact these relationships? An equation which would simultaneously control for effects of age, gender, location of the crime, and other variables discussed would help to establish the relative effects of each. Further research should explore these issues with more advanced methodology and analysis. (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 Availability
KW - Firearms Violence
KW - Crime Causes
KW - Firearms Ownership
KW - Firearms Control
KW - Robbery Offender
KW - Robbery Victim
KW - Homicide Causes
KW - Homicide Offender
KW - Homicide Victim
KW - Firearms Homicide
KW - Violence Causes
KW - Adult Victim
KW - Adult Offender
KW - Adult Violence
KW - Policy
KW - Legislation |