Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 1.261
Filtrar
3.
Am J Public Health ; 111(4): e1-e14, 2021 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33621113

RESUMEN

Background. Since 2005, most US states have expanded civilian rights to use deadly force in self-defense outside the home. In most cases, legislation has included removing the duty to retreat anywhere one may legally be, commonly known as stand-your-ground laws. The extent to which these laws affect public health and safety is widely debated in public and policy discourse.Objectives. To synthesize the available evidence on the impacts and social inequities associated with changing civilian rights to use deadly force in self-defense on violence, injury, crime, and firearm-related outcomes.Search Methods. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, Sociological Abstracts, National Criminal Justice Reference Service Abstracts, Education Resources Information Center, International Bibliography of the Social Sciences, ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, Google Scholar, National Bureau of Economic Research working papers, and SocArXiv; harvested references of included studies; and consulted with experts to identify studies until April 2020.Selection Criteria. Eligible studies quantitatively estimated the association between laws that expanded or restricted the right to use deadly force in self-defense and population or subgroup outcomes among civilians with a comparator.Data Collection and Analysis. Two reviewers extracted study data using a common form. We assessed study quality using the Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions tools adapted for (controlled) before-after studies. To account for data dependencies, we conducted graphical syntheses (forest plots and harvest plots) to summarize the evidence on impacts and inequities associated with changing self-defense laws.Main Results. We identified 25 studies that estimated population-level impacts of laws expanding civilian rights to use deadly force in self-defense, all of which focused on stand-your-ground or other expansions to self-defense laws in the United States. Studies were scored as having serious or critical risk of bias attributable to confounding. Risk of bias was low across most other domains (i.e., selection, missing data, outcome, and reporting biases). Stand-your-ground laws were associated with no change to small increases in violent crime (total and firearm homicide, aggravated assault, robbery) on average across states. Florida-based studies showed robust increases (24% to 45%) in firearm and total homicide while self-defense claims under stand-your-ground law were more often denied when victims were White, especially when claimants were racial minorities.Author's Conclusions. The existing evidence contradicts claims that expanding self-defense laws deters violent crime across the United States. In at least some contexts, including Florida, stand-your-ground laws are associated with increases in violence, and there are racial inequities in the application of these laws.Public Health Implications. In some US states, most notably Florida, stand-your-ground laws may have harmed public health and safety and exacerbated social inequities. Our findings highlight the need for scientific evidence on both population and equity impacts of self-defense laws to guide legislative action that promotes public health and safety for all.Trial Registration. Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/uz68e).


Asunto(s)
Armas de Fuego/legislación & jurisprudencia , Homicidio/estadística & datos numéricos , Violencia/estadística & datos numéricos , Florida , Humanos , Racismo , Estados Unidos
4.
J Surg Res ; 263: 24-33, 2021 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33621746

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: This study sought to determine the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 stay-at-home (SAH) and reopening orders on trends and types of firearm violence in California, Ohio, and the United States, hypothesizing increased firearm violence after SAH. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective data (January 1, 2018, to July 31, 2020) on firearm incidents/injuries/deaths and types of firearm violence were obtained from the Gun Violence Archive. The periods for SAH and reopening for the US were based on dates for California. Ohio dates were based on Ohio's timeline. Mann-Whitney U analyses compared trends and types of daily firearm violence per 100,000 legal firearm owners across 2018-2020 periods. RESULTS: In California, SAH and reopening orders had no effect on firearm violence in 2020 compared with 2018 and 2019 periods, respectively. In Ohio, daily median firearm deaths increased during 2020 SAH compared with 2018 and 2019 and firearm incidents and injuries increased during 2020 reopening compared with 2018, 2019 and 2020 SAH. In the United States, during 2020, SAH firearm deaths increased compared with historical controls and firearm incidents, deaths and injuries increased during 2020 reopening compared with 2018, 2019 and 2020 SAH (all P < 0.05). Nationally, when compared with 2018 and 2019, 2020 SAH had increased accidental shootings deaths with a decrease in defensive use, home invasion, and drug-involved incidents. CONCLUSIONS: During 2020 SAH, the rates of firearm violence increased in Ohio and the United States but remained unchanged in California. Nationally, firearm incidents, deaths and injuries also increased during 2020 reopening versus historical and 2020 SAH data. This suggests a secondary "pandemic" as well as a "reopening phenomenon," with increased firearm violence not resulting from self-defense.


Asunto(s)
/epidemiología , Armas de Fuego/estadística & datos numéricos , Violencia/tendencias , Heridas por Arma de Fuego/epidemiología , /prevención & control , California/epidemiología , Armas de Fuego/legislación & jurisprudencia , Humanos , Ohio/epidemiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Heridas por Arma de Fuego/mortalidad
7.
Am J Public Health ; 111(2): 253-258, 2021 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33351655

RESUMEN

Objectives. To determine differences among US states in how driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI) laws activate federal firearm possession and purchase prohibitions.Methods. We performed primary legislative research to characterize DUI laws in each state. The primary outcome was the number of DUI convictions an individual must be convicted of in each state to activate the federal firearm possession and purchase prohibition. We also determined the time interval in which previous DUI convictions count for future proceedings.Results. Forty-seven states had DUI laws that activated the federal prohibition of firearm possession and purchase for a threshold number of repeated DUIs. Variation exists among states in the number of convictions (1-4) and length of liability period (5 years-lifetime) required to prohibit firearm possession and purchase.Conclusions. Variation in state laws on DUI results in differences in determining who is federally prohibited from possessing and purchasing firearms. Future research should explore whether these federal prohibitions arising from DUI convictions are enforced and whether an association exists between stricter DUI policies and reduction in firearm crimes, injuries, and deaths.


Asunto(s)
Conducir bajo la Influencia/legislación & jurisprudencia , Armas de Fuego/legislación & jurisprudencia , Humanos , Gobierno Estatal , Estados Unidos
9.
JAMA Netw Open ; 3(12): e2029571, 2020 12 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33351084

RESUMEN

Importance: Despite broad public support for gun safety policies, minimal policy implementation has occurred. Objective: To investigate factors that encourage greater private support for and public action on gun safety policy. Design, Setting, and Participants: Three studies were conducted: a public opinion survey (Study 1) was conducted from January 8 to 22, 2019, and 2 experiments (Studies 2 and 3) were conducted from August 27 to October 17, 2019, and April 15 to 21, 2020, respectively. Adults living in the US were eligible to participate in Studies 1 and 3. Students 18 years and older participating in a research experience program were eligible to participate in Study 2. Study 1 was administered online by Ipsos, a market research company. A nationally representative sample of 1000 US adults was obtained from Ipsos' online KnowledgePanel, of whom 508 completed the public opinion survey. For Study 2, which was conducted in a university laboratory, 354 participants were recruited from a university research pool, all of whom completed the study. Study 3 was administered online by the market research company YouGov, which identified 727 US gun owners from its opt-in panel, from which it constructed a census-matched sample of 400 participants. Exposures: Participants read a statement about the 2018 Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School shooting. Content was manipulated as a 2 (corrective information vs no corrective information) × 2 (system changeable vs system not changeable) between-subjects factorial design with random assignment. The corrective information included polling data highlighting widespread support among gun owners for several gun safety policies. System changeable described gun safety policies passed by Florida's legislature. Main Outcomes and Measures: Main outcomes were support for gun safety policies and public disclosure of support. Results: The 3 studies included a total of 1262 participants (Study 1: 508 participants; weighted mean [SD] age, 47.7 [17.5] years; 261.9 women [51.6%]; 82.5 Hispanic [16.2%] and 60.3 Black [11.9%]; Study 2: 354 participants; mean [SD] age, 20.0 [2.3] years; 232 women [65.9%]; 100 Asian [28.3%] and 37 Black [10.5%]; Study 3: 400 participants; weighted mean [SD] age, 52.1 [16.4] years; 187.3 women [46.8%]; 295.5 White [73.9%], 44.5 Hispanic [11.1%], and 32.4 Black [8.1%]). Study 1 found that 63% to 91% of gun owners and 83% to 93% of non-gun owners supported key gun safety policies, yet both groups significantly underestimated gun owners' support for these policies by between 12% and 31%. Studies 2 and 3 found that exposure to corrective information was associated with a small increase in support for 2 gun safety policies of between 4% and 15%, both in terms of participants' privately held beliefs and the beliefs they would be willing to share publicly. Conclusions and Relevance: This survey study found that many US adults failed to recognize that most gun owners support key gun safety policies. Correcting this misperception was associated with greater private and public support for gun safety policy.


Asunto(s)
Armas de Fuego/legislación & jurisprudencia , Política Pública , Seguridad/legislación & jurisprudencia , Percepción Social/etnología , Censos , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Mercadotecnía/estadística & datos numéricos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Propiedad , Opinión Pública , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Estados Unidos
12.
Am J Public Health ; 110(10): 1546-1552, 2020 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32816544

RESUMEN

Objectives. To estimate and compare the effects of state background check policies on firearm-related mortality in 4 US states.Methods. Annual data from 1985 to 2017 were used to examine Maryland and Pennsylvania, which implemented point-of-sale comprehensive background check (CBC) laws for handgun purchasers; Connecticut, which adopted a handgun purchaser licensing law; and Missouri, which repealed a similar law. Using synthetic control methods, we estimated the effects of these laws on homicide and suicide rates stratified by firearm involvement.Results. There was no consistent relationship between CBC laws and mortality rates. There were estimated decreases in firearm homicide (27.8%) and firearm suicide (23.2%-40.5%) rates associated with Connecticut's law. There were estimated increases in firearm homicide (47.3%), nonfirearm homicide (18.1%), and firearm suicide (23.5%) rates associated with Missouri's repeal.Conclusions. Purchaser licensing laws coupled with CBC requirements were consistently associated with lower firearm homicide and suicide rates, but CBC laws alone were not.Public Health Implications. Our results contribute to a body of research showing that CBC laws are not associated with reductions in firearm-related deaths unless they are coupled with handgun purchaser licensing laws.


Asunto(s)
Armas de Fuego/legislación & jurisprudencia , Homicidio/estadística & datos numéricos , Concesión de Licencias/legislación & jurisprudencia , Suicidio/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto , Comportamiento del Consumidor , Ambiente , Humanos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Mortalidad/tendencias , Estados Unidos
13.
Am J Public Health ; 110(10): e1-e9, 2020 10.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32816550

RESUMEN

Background. There is debate whether policies that reduce firearm suicides or homicides are offset by increases in non-firearm-related deaths.Objectives. To assess the extent to which changes in firearm homicides and suicides following implementation of various gun laws affect nonfirearm homicides and suicides.Search Methods. We performed a literature search on 13 databases for studies published between 1995 and October 31, 2018 (PROSPERO CRD42019120105).Selection Criteria. We included studies if they (1) estimated an effect of 1 of 18 included classes of gun policy on firearm homicides or suicides, (2) included a control group or comparison group and evaluated time series data to establish that policies preceded their purported effects, and (3) provided estimated effects of the policy and inferential statistics for either total or nonfirearm homicides or suicides.Data Collection and Analysis. We extracted data from each study, including study timeframe, population, and statistical methods, as well as point estimates and inferential statistics for the effects of firearm policies on firearm deaths as well as either nonfirearm or overall deaths. We assessed quality at the estimate (study-policy-outcome) level by using prespecified criteria to evaluate the validity of inference and causal identification. For each estimate, we derived the mortality multiplier (i.e., the ratio of the policy's effect on total homicides or suicides; expressed as a change in the number of deaths) as a proportion of its effect on firearm homicides or suicides. Finally, we performed a meta-analysis to estimate overall mortality multipliers for suicide and homicide that account for both within- and between-study heterogeneity.Main Results. We identified 16 eligible studies (study timeframes spanning 1977-2015). All examined state-level policies in the United States, with most estimating effects of multiple policies, yielding 60 separate estimates of the mortality multiplier. From these, we estimated that a firearm law's effect on homicide, expressed as a change in the number of total homicide deaths, is 0.99 (95% confidence interval = 0.76, 1.22) times its effect on the number of firearm homicides. Thus, on average, changes in the number of firearm homicides caused by gun policies are neither offset nor compounded by second-order effects on nonfirearm homicides. There is insufficient evidence in the existing literature on suicide to indicate the extent to which the effects of gun policy changes on firearm suicides are offset or compounded by their effects on nonfirearm suicides.Authors' Conclusions. State gun policies that reduce firearm homicides are likely to reduce overall homicides in the state by approximately the same number. It is currently unknown whether the same holds for state gun policies that significantly reduce firearm suicides. The small number of studies meeting our inclusion criteria, issues of methodological quality within those studies, and the possibility of reporting bias are potential limitations of this review.Public Health Implications. Policies that reduce firearm homicides likely have large benefits for public health as there is little evidence to support a strong substitution effect between firearm and nonfirearm homicides at the population level. Further research is needed to determine whether policies that produce population-level reductions in firearm suicides will translate to overall declines in suicide rates.


Asunto(s)
Causas de Muerte , Armas de Fuego/legislación & jurisprudencia , Homicidio/estadística & datos numéricos , Suicidio/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Estados Unidos
16.
BMJ ; 370: m2436, 2020 07 22.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32699008

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between US state policies that establish age 18 or 21 years as the minimum purchaser age for the sale of handguns and adolescent suicide rate. DESIGN: Regression discontinuity and difference-in-differences analyses. SETTING: 46 US states without policy changes between 2001 and 2017; Missouri and South Carolina, which lowered the age for handgun sales in 2007 and 2008, respectively; and West Virginia and Wyoming, which increased the age for handgun sales in 2010. PARTICIPANTS: Adolescents aged 13 to 20 years(554 461 961 from 2001 to 2017) in the regression discontinuity analysis, and adolescents aged 18 to 20 years (168 934 041 from 2002 to 2014) in the main difference-in-differences analysis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Suicide rate per 100 000 adolescents. RESULTS: In the regression discontinuity analysis, state policies that limited the sale of handguns to those aged 18 or older (relative to 21 or older) were associated with an increase in suicide rate among adolescents aged 18 to 20 years equivalent to 344 additional suicides in each state where they were in place between 2001 and 2017. In the difference-in-differences analysis, state policies that limited the sale of handguns to those aged 21 or older were associated with 1.91 fewer suicides per 100 000 adolescents aged 18 to 20 years (95% confidence interval -3.13 to -0.70, permutation adjusted P=0.025). In the difference-in-differences analysis, there were 1.83 fewer firearm related suicides per 100 000 adolescents (-2.66 to -1.00, permutation adjusted P=0.002), with no association between age 21 handgun sales policies and non-firearm related suicides. Separate event study estimates indicated increases in suicide rates in states that lowered the age of handgun sales, with no association in states that increased the age of handgun sales. CONCLUSIONS: A clear discontinuity was shown in the suicide rate by age at age 18 in states that limited the sale of handguns to individuals aged 18 or older. State policies to limit the sale of handguns to individuals aged 21 or older were associated with a reduction in suicide rates among adolescents. Increases in suicide rates were observed after states lowered the age of handgun sales, but no effect was found in states that increased the age of handgun sales.


Asunto(s)
Comercio/legislación & jurisprudencia , Comportamiento del Consumidor/economía , Armas de Fuego/legislación & jurisprudencia , Suicidio/estadística & datos numéricos , Adolescente , Factores de Edad , Comercio/tendencias , Comportamiento del Consumidor/estadística & datos numéricos , Estudios de Evaluación como Asunto , Armas de Fuego/economía , Humanos , Missouri/epidemiología , Políticas , Análisis de Regresión , South Carolina/epidemiología , Suicidio/etnología , West Virginia/epidemiología , Wyoming/epidemiología , Adulto Joven
17.
Am J Psychiatry ; 177(9): 827-833, 2020 09 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32539529

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: With the addition of the "with limited prosocial emotions" specifier within the diagnosis of conduct disorder (DSM-5) and of conduct-dissocial disorder (ICD-11) to designate those with elevated callous-unemotional traits, the authors examined the role that callous-unemotional traits play in the risk for gun carrying and gun use during a crime in a sample at high risk for gun violence. METHODS: Male juvenile offenders (N=1,215) from three regions of the United States were assessed after their first arrest and then reassessed every 6 months for 36 months and again at 48 months. Callous-unemotional traits and peer gun carrying and ownership were measured via self-report after the first arrest (i.e., baseline). Gun carrying and use of a gun during a crime were self-reported at all follow-up points. RESULTS: Callous-unemotional traits at baseline increased the frequency of gun carrying and the likelihood of using a gun during a crime across the subsequent 4 years after accounting for other risk factors. Furthermore, callous-unemotional traits moderated the relationship between peer gun carrying and ownership and participant gun carrying, such that only participants low on callous-unemotional traits demonstrated increased gun carrying as a function of their peers' gun carrying and ownership. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the importance of considering callous-unemotional traits in gun violence research both because callous-unemotional traits increase gun carrying and use in adolescents and because the traits may moderate other key risk factors. Notably, the influence of peer gun carrying and ownership may have been underestimated in past research for the majority of adolescents by not considering the moderating influence of callous-unemotional traits.


Asunto(s)
Trastorno de Personalidad Antisocial , Trastorno de la Conducta , Emociones , Armas de Fuego , Violencia con Armas , Influencia de los Compañeros , Adolescente , Agresión , Trastorno de Personalidad Antisocial/diagnóstico , Trastorno de Personalidad Antisocial/etiología , Trastorno de Personalidad Antisocial/psicología , Trastorno de la Conducta/diagnóstico , Trastorno de la Conducta/epidemiología , Trastorno de la Conducta/psicología , Criminales/psicología , Armas de Fuego/legislación & jurisprudencia , Armas de Fuego/estadística & datos numéricos , Psiquiatría Forense/métodos , Violencia con Armas/etnología , Violencia con Armas/prevención & control , Violencia con Armas/psicología , Violencia con Armas/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Propiedad , Inventario de Personalidad , Medición de Riesgo/métodos , Factores de Riesgo , Estados Unidos
18.
PLoS One ; 15(6): e0234457, 2020.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32555647

RESUMEN

Canada implemented a series of laws regulating firearms including background and psychological screening, licensing, and training in the years 1991, 1994, and 2001. The effects of this legislation on suicide and homicide rates were examined over the years 1981 to 2016. Models were constructed using difference-in-difference analysis of firearms and non firearms death rates from 1981 to 2016. In addition, negative binomial regression was used to test for an association between rates of suicide by Canadian Province and firearms prevalence, using licensing rates as a proxy for prevalence. No associated benefit from firearms legislation on aggregate rates of male suicide was found. In men aged 45 to 59 an associated shift from firearms suicide after 1991 and 1994 to an increase in hanging resulted in overall rate ratios of 0.994 (95%CI, 0.978,1.010) and 0.993 (95%CI, 0.980,1.005) respectively. In men 60 and older a similar effect was seen after 1991, 1994, and 2001, that resulted in rate ratios of 0.989 (95%CI, 0.971,1.008), 0.994 (95%CI, 0.979,1.010), and 1.010 (95%CI, 0.998,1.022) respectively. In females a similar effect was only seen after 1991, rate ratio 0.983 (95%CI, 0.956,1.010). No beneficial association was found between legislation and female or male homicide rates. There was no association found with firearm prevalence rates per province and provincial suicide rates, but an increased association with suicide rates was found with rates of low income, increased unemployment, and the percentage of aboriginals in the population. In conclusion, firearms legislation had no associated beneficial effect on overall suicide and homicide rates. Prevalence of firearms ownership was not associated with suicide rates. Multifaceted strategies to reduce mortality associated with firearms may be required such as steps to reduce youth gang membership and violence, community-based suicide prevention programs, and outreach to groups for which access to care may be a particular issue, such as Aboriginals.


Asunto(s)
Armas de Fuego/legislación & jurisprudencia , Violencia con Armas/tendencias , Homicidio/tendencias , Suicidio/tendencias , Heridas por Arma de Fuego/mortalidad , Adolescente , Adulto , Canadá/epidemiología , Femenino , Armas de Fuego/estadística & datos numéricos , Violencia con Armas/prevención & control , Violencia con Armas/estadística & datos numéricos , Homicidio/prevención & control , Homicidio/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Suicidio/prevención & control , Suicidio/estadística & datos numéricos , Heridas por Arma de Fuego/prevención & control , Adulto Joven
19.
JAMA Netw Open ; 3(6): e207735, 2020 06 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32556258

RESUMEN

Importance: A total of 19 states and the District of Columbia now have extreme risk protection order (ERPO) or similar policies, and others are considering them; however, little research exists describing their use. Objective: To characterize early use of California's ERPO policy by providing the first aggregate, statewide description of ERPOs, individuals subject to them, and petitioners. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study analyzed 1076 respondents to ERPOs recorded in the California Department of Justice California Restraining and Protective Order System from 2016 to 2019. Descriptive analyses of orders issued between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2019 in California were performed, and univariate Moran I was calculated to examine county-level spatial autocorrelation of the policy's use. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary study outcomes included the characteristics of ERPO respondents (demographic characteristics), petitioners (law enforcement vs family or household members), and orders (type and service) as well as temporal and spatial variation in policy use during the first 4 years of implementation. Results: Of 1076 respondents during the study period, most were men (985 [91.5%]) and white individuals (637 [59.2%]), with a mean age of 41.8 years (range, 14 to 98 years). A law enforcement officer was the petitioner in 1038 cases (96.5%). The number of respondents increased during the study period from 70 in 2016 to 700 in 2019, and there was substantial county-level variation in ERPO use (ranging from 0 to 354 respondents), with significant spatial clustering in counts of ERPO respondents among neighboring counties (observed Moran I, 0.18, mean [SD] Moran I from reference distribution, -0.01 (0.05); z value, 3.58; P = .004). Conclusions and Relevance: This study, among the first to describe the early utilization of an ERPO or similar policy, found a substantial increase in the use of ERPOs in California from 2016 to 2019. These results could inform policy makers and other stakeholders involved in policy implementation and outreach in California and elsewhere. Similar studies in other states would be useful to understand variation.


Asunto(s)
Armas de Fuego/legislación & jurisprudencia , Violencia con Armas , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , California , Estudios Transversales , Femenino , Violencia con Armas/legislación & jurisprudencia , Violencia con Armas/prevención & control , Violencia con Armas/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Aplicación de la Ley , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Evaluación de Programas y Proyectos de Salud , Adulto Joven
20.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A ; 117(26): 14906-14910, 2020 06 30.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32541042

RESUMEN

Although 39,000 individuals die annually from gunshots in the US, research examining the effects of laws designed to reduce these deaths has sometimes produced inconclusive or contradictory findings. We evaluated the effects on total firearm-related deaths of three classes of gun laws: child access prevention (CAP), right-to-carry (RTC), and stand your ground (SYG) laws. The analyses exploit changes in these state-level policies from 1970 to 2016, using Bayesian methods and a modeling approach that addresses several methodological limitations of prior gun policy evaluations. CAP laws showed the strongest evidence of an association with firearm-related death rate, with a probability of 0.97 that the death rate declined at 6 y after implementation. In contrast, the probability of being associated with an increase in firearm-related deaths was 0.87 for RTC laws and 0.77 for SYG laws. The joint effects of these laws indicate that the restrictive gun policy regime (having a CAP law without an RTC or SYG law) has a 0.98 probability of being associated with a reduction in firearm-related deaths relative to the permissive policy regime. This estimated effect corresponds to an 11% reduction in firearm-related deaths relative to the permissive legal regime. Our findings suggest that a small but meaningful decrease in firearm-related deaths may be associated with the implementation of more restrictive gun policies.


Asunto(s)
Armas de Fuego/legislación & jurisprudencia , Heridas por Arma de Fuego/mortalidad , Teorema de Bayes , Humanos , Modelos Estadísticos , Estados Unidos
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...