MAJOR CONCLUSIONS
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
Empirical research on firearms and violence has resulted in important
findings that can inform policy decisions. In particular, a wealth of descriptive
information exists about the prevalence of firearm-related injuries and
deaths, about firearms markets, and about the relationships between rates of
gun ownership and violence. Research has found, for example, that higher
rates of household firearms ownership are associated with higher rates of gun
suicide, that illegal diversions from legitimate commerce are important sources
of crime guns and guns used in suicide, that firearms are used defensively
many times per day, and that some types of targeted police interventions may
effectively lower gun crime and violence. This information is a vital starting
point for any constructive dialogue about how to address the problem of
firearms and violence.
While much has been learned, much remains to be done, and this report
necessarily focuses on the important unknowns in this field of study. The
committee found that answers to some of the most pressing questions cannot
be addressed with existing data and research methods, however well designed.
For example, despite a large body of research, the committee found no credible
evidence that the passage of right-to-carry laws decreases or increases violent
crime, and there is almost no empirical evidence that the more than 80 prevention
programs focused on gun-related violence have had any effect on children’s
behavior, knowledge, attitudes, or beliefs about firearms. The committee found
that the data available on these questions are too weak to support unambiguous
conclusions or strong policy statements.
Drawing causal inferences is always complicated and, in the behavioral
and social sciences, fraught with uncertainty. Some of the problems that the
committee identifies are common to all social science research. In the case
of firearms research, however, the committee found that even in areas in
which the data are potentially useful, the complex methodological probEXECUTIVE
lems inherent in unraveling causal relationships between firearms policy
and violence have not been fully considered or adequately addressed.
Nevertheless, many of the shortcomings described in this report stem
from the lack of reliable data itself rather than the weakness of methods. In
some instances—firearms violence prevention, for example—there are no
data at all. Even the best methods cannot overcome inadequate data and,
because the lack of relevant data colors much of the literature in this field,
it also colors the committee’s assessment of that literature.