Preface
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33
34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50
51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67
68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84
85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101
102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115
Few topics engender more controversy than “gun control.” Large segments
of the population express contradictory opinions and assert contradictory
facts when they discuss the role of firearms in violence and
especially how to reduce violent injuries and deaths that involve firearms.
The report of the Committee on Improving Research Information and Data
on Firearms was not intended to, nor does it reach any conclusions about
the issue of gun control. Rather, we have addressed what empirical research
tells about the role of firearms in violence. Our recommendations address
how to improve the empirical foundation for discussions about firearms
policy. Until that foundation is better established, little progress is likely in
the ongoing public debate over firearms.
One theme that runs throughout our report is the relative absence of
credible data central to addressing even the most basic questions about
firearms and violence. As we often state in the report, without much better
data, important questions will continue to be unanswerable. This is unacceptable
when we see the impact that firearm-related violent injury and
death have on American society and especially some of the most vulnerable
segments of that population. The fact that little can be said about the
prevention and control of these levels of death and injury—when for some
segments of the population they are the leading causes of death and injury—
is of concern to us as citizens and scientists.
Reaching consensus on a controversial topic for which research is limited
and in conflict requires an exceptional committee and staff. The committee
has spent the past two years learning about research and data on
firearms and seeking to learn from each other how our disciplines evaluate
and use this knowledge. It is only because committee members had diverse
backgrounds, uncommon respect for each other, and a willingness to apply
common scientific standards to our deliberations that we were able to
complete our work in what I think is an exceptional manner. Some may
disagree with our analysis, but none can question our effort to raise the
science of firearms research so that it can begin to inform public policy. I
thank committee members for their work and patience.
Needless to say, the staff for the committee carried a very heavy load.
Without them we would have not been able to complete our work. John
Pepper in particular deserves special recognition as the study director. John
not only provided outstanding staff support but he also helped form the
structure of our report, edited and contributed to many of the chapters, was
the primary drafter of one chapter, and always managed to see a way
forward when we seemed stymied. Carol Petrie, staff director of the Committee
on Law and Justice, provided invaluable insight into the way we
could deal with controversial topics, helped keep us on track, and edited
every chapter. Brenda McLaughlin, research associate, provided valuable
assistance, and Michelle McGuire, program assistant, and Ralph Patterson,
senior project assistant, performed superbly.
The committee is grateful to Anthony Braga, Harvard University, whose
work as a consultant to the committee throughout its period of operation
was invaluable. And the committee wants to thank Christine McShane, of
the Division on Social and Behavioral Sciences and Education, for her
invaluable assistance in preparing the manuscript for review and publication.
She provided clear and sensible guidance on chapter and appendix
organization, and she did an outstanding job of editing the entire report,
several times.
The committee could not have completed its work without the assistance
of many scholars and policy officials who gave unstintingly of their
time and shared their resources, their work, and their thinking. To gather
information on a variety of subjects from a diversity of perspectives, we
held four public workshops: the Workshop on Firearms Research and Data,
August 30-31, 2001; the Workshop on Intentional Injuries and Firearms,
November 15-16, 2001; the Workshop on Self-Defense, Deterrence and
Firearm Markets, January 16-17, 2002; and the Workshop on Firearm
Injury Prevention and Intervention, May 28-29, 2002. We thank all of the
individuals who served as presenters and discussants at these meetings.
They are listed here alphabetically, and with their affiliations at the time of
each workshop: Roseanna Ander, Joyce Foundation; J. Lee Annest, Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention; Arthur Berg, Harvard University; Paul
Blackman, National Rifle Association; Alfred Blumstein, Carnegie Mellon
University; David Bordua, University of Illinois-Urbana/Champaign; Anthony
Braga, Harvard University; David Brent, University of Pittsburgh;
Stephen Bronars, University of Texas, Austin; Philip Cook, Duke University;
Patti Culross, David and Lucile Packard Foundation; Peter Cummings,
University of Washington; Mike Dowden, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
and Firearms; Jeffrey Fagan, Columbia University; Scott Gast, University of
Virginia; Susan Ginsburg, Independent Consultant; Robert Hahn, Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention; Marjorie Hardy, Eckerd College;
Stephen Hargarten, Medical College of Wisconsin; David Hemenway,
Harvard University; Sally Hillsman, Office of Research and Evaluation,
National Institutes of Justice; David Kennedy, Harvard University; Gary
Kleck, Florida State University; Christopher Koper, University of Pennsylvania;
Colin Loftin, State University of New York-Albany; John Lott Jr.,
American Enterprise Institute; Jens Ludwig, Georgetown University; John
Malone, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms; Michael Maltz, University
of Illinois, Chicago; David McDowall, State University of New
York-Albany; James Mercy, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention;
Victoria Ozonoff, Massachusetts Department of Public Health; Glenn
Pierce, Northeastern University; Jeffrey Roth, University of Pennsylvania;
Eric Sevigny, Carnegie Mellon University; Lawrence Sherman, University of
Pennsylvania; Kevin Strom, Research Triangle Institute; Stephen Teret,
Johns Hopkins University; Robyn Thiemann, U.S. Department of Justice;
Douglas Weil, The Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence; Timothy
Wheeler, Claremont Institute; Brian Wiersema, University of Maryland;
Deanna Wilkinson, Temple University; James Wright, University of Central
Florida; and Franklin Zimring, University of California.
This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for
their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures
approved by the Report Review Committee of the National Research
Council (NRC). The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid
and critical comments that will assist the institution in making the
published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets
institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the
study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential
to protect the integrity of the deliberative process.
We thank the following individuals for their participation in the review
of this report: Esther Duflo, Department of Economics, Massachusetts
Institute of Technology; John A. Ferejohn, Hoover Institution,
Stanford University; Arthur S. Goldberger, Department of Economics,
University of Wisconsin; Lawrence Gostin, Georgetown University Law
Center; Ken Land, Department of Sociology, Duke University; Steven
Messner, Department of Sociology, University of Albany, State University
of New York; Jeffrey Miron, Department of Economics, Boston University;
Lee N. Robins, Department of Psychiatry, Washington University
School of Medicine; Paul Rosenbaum, Department of Statistics, Wharton
School, University of Pennsylvania; Arlene Rubin Stiffman, School of Social
Work, Washington University; and Michael Tonry, Institute of Criminology,
University of Cambridge.
Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive
comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions
or recommendations nor did they see the final draft of the report before its
release. The review of this report was overseen by Elaine Larson, School of
Nursing, Columbia University, and Christopher Sims, Department of Economics,
Princeton University. Appointed by the National Research Council,
they were responsible for making certain that an independent examination
of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional
procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility
for the final content of this report rests entirely with the
authoring committee and the institution.
Charles F. Wellford, Chair
Committee on Improving Research
Information and Data on Firearms