essay about gun violence

Gun Violence - Essay Samples And Topic Ideas For Free

Gun violence refers to acts of violence committed with the use of firearms. Essays might discuss the causes and consequences of gun violence, the debate around gun control policies, the impact of gun violence on communities, and comparisons of gun violence and gun control measures across different countries. A substantial compilation of free essay instances related to Gun Violence you can find at PapersOwl Website. You can use our samples for inspiration to write your own essay, research paper, or just to explore a new topic for yourself.

Solutions to Gun Violence

Firearms are one of the most debated issues in the United States. On the one hand are the people who demand and require more strict control in the possession and distribution of guns, and on the other side are the people who pressure the government to keep the laws as they are. Buying a gun in this country takes less than an hour. It is very sad how an individual can purchase a gun easily. It is unhappy because some […]

Gun Violence and Gun Control

Gun violence in America is a never-ending series of tragedy after tragedy, mass-shooting and the one of the constant social problem in United State. Many innocent lives have been taken to gun violence from Sandy Hook elementary, Pulse nightclub in Orlando, 2017 Las Vegas, Columbine High School, and all of that violence has been increasing. The Second Amendment, the right of the people to bear arms, has given the individual to own a gun, but many have abused the power […]

The Gun Problem in America

Introduction As stated in the Social Problems textbook, “Social problems: Continuity and change”, “A social problem is any condition or behavior that has negative consequences for large numbers of people and that is generally recognized as a condition or behavior that needs to be addressed” (2015). As a result, I decided to discuss the social problem of the second amendment. Since the founding of the United States of America, the right to bear arms has always been a hot button […]

We will write an essay sample crafted to your needs.

Examining the Deep Impact of U.S. Gun Violence on American Society

U.S. gun violence has had put a struggle on american living and the quality of it. Its put America into a spiral of fear, a lot of people don't know the extent of how its effecting are lives and the way we live. Schools have built there security, airports and all other large businesses and or public businesses have also done the same. Laws have been getting stricter and stricter but simply some people just dont listen and obey those […]

The Problem of the Gun Violence

In success central, I attended a small breakout session about gun violence. At first, I thought this breakout session was going to be over gun control and politics but it was more in depth. The session was about how a victim truly feels after being affected by gun violence. Some of the statistics that I learned at the session is, gun-related deaths are now the third leading cause of death for American children. One of the main reasons i enjoyed […]

Should Teachers Carry Guns

Over the past several years there have been mass shootings in America that has struck the feelings of many Americans. Mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, extended family, and strangers have all been affected by the victims of shootings at Aurora, Colorado, Columbine High school, and Sandy Hook Elementary school. Because of these tragedies, U.S. citizens have become more involved and interested in gun control and prevention of gun violence. Gun Control is a controversial issue that many people have different views […]

Why Gun Violence Increasing

Gun violence has had a drastic increase over the years, leaving the United States desperate for laws to be implemented concerning the well-being and safety of citizens. Terrifying events surrounding gun violence have left researchers with no option but to investigate gun laws and regulations. Only some states require permits in order to purchase a firearm and background checks are required by federal law to anyone purchasing a gun as well. A citizen at the age of 21 is legal […]

Mental Health Screenings and the Effect on Gun Violence

Historically speaking, guns were used for hunting and for protection. In the late 1700's, the Revolutionary War began from Britain's pursuit to take away the colonists weaponry and oppress them. Lexington and Concord was the beginning of the fight for freedom. When Britain surrendered at Yorktown in 1781, the colonists had won their independence. The first constitution called the Articles of Confederation was ratified by all thirteen colonies in 1781 and was in place until 1789 when the U.S Constitution […]

Gun Control Vs Gun Rights

In the U.S, there is a lot of controversy about gun control laws. There are protests, arguments, and laws that not many agree with because it does not support their Second Amendment rights. What truly did the Founding Fathers mean by the Second Amendment? Pro-gun supporters believe it was meant for individuals to have access to guns while gun control supporters believe it was for trained officials. Many people are trying to find a solution on how it should be […]

Combating Gun Violence

A school shooting is an attack at an educational institution, such as a school or university, involving the use of firearms. The first recorded school shooting in the United States took place in 1840, when a law student shot and killed his professor at the University of Virginia. Despite that crime rates in the United States are declining, and homicide specifically is especially rare, many people believe that school shootings are becoming epidemic, occurring more frequently than the have in […]

Students Protest and Addresses Gun Violence

A schools' biggest fear is having a shooter come onto campus. There has been so many incidents on the news that people are trying to find solutions for this issue. Students need to feel safe while they are learning. I have found three articles of school shootings that go into detail about what took place on those days. Each author has had an interesting stand-point about what should happen next. In this paper, i will be comparing the authors perspective […]

The Second Amendment – Firearm Legislation

Americans are being murdered at unprecedented rates and little action has been attempted to prevent similar events from reoccurring. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, ninety-six Americans die by firearms every day (The Editorial Board). Ninety-six lives end because of a bullet. It is unethical and immoral for that many people to perish, and for there to be little change made. Unfortunately, legislators can not just simply change firearm laws due to the long-standing and well-respected second […]

The State of Gun Violence in the US

Gun violence in today's America has become routine and common. This violence causes a surprising number of deaths and injuries throughout the United States. The main lethal weapon used to take part in violence is the gun. That's one of the reason why stricter gun control policy is needed to make it impossible to own a gun for those who should not own them in the first place. Taking such action could make our neighborhood is a safer place to […]

Stop Gun Violence

Guns in America are ruining our society. Watch the news any day and you will most likely see either a school shooting ora shooting at some type of gathering. For some children going to school is horrifying because they are extremely disturbed by the school shootings that are going in our society. Children as young as kindergarten are learning how to act in the case of a school shooting. Yet, guns are killing innocent people by being able to have […]

Understanding Gun Violence

Almost each and every other year there gets to be cases and more cases related to gun violence where from one point one gets to hear about some suicide by gun, some forceful assaults, some kind of accidental occurrences with a gun and many more. With the unending rising cases linked to the same, there still is quite a lot to be looked at especially when trying to cover the same situation and be able to make sure that one […]

Gun Violence and the Second Amendment

According the Cornell Law Studies Institute, the second amendment states, "A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." The Second Amendment of the constitution is one of the most misunderstood and confusing sentences in the history of America. The 27-word sentence has a partial collectivist ora while still maintaining the individualistic right to keep and bear arms. Before discussing the reasons behind […]

The Problem of Mass Shootings

Mass shootings are problematic, because they are getting more deadly and more frequent. Mass shootings are defined as a single shooting incident which kills or injures four or more people, including the assailant/shooter ("Guns in the US: The Statistics"). Mass shootings have been shown to be contagious, meaning that a mass shooting one day increases the likelihood of others in the following days (Leatherby). Five of the eighteen most lethal shootings in America since 1949 have occured between 2007 and […]

Gun Violence Prevention

The right to own a gun is established as the Second Amendment in the United States Constitution. Though this right is guaranteed, our country’s relationship with guns is a tumultuous one. Gun laws vary by each state, for instance California gun laws states that, “An application for sale or transfer must be made with a licensed California gun dealer before any firearm may be sold or transferred. The purchaser must present the dealer with a valid California Driver’s License or […]

How the Government Can Decrease Gun Violence

There should be more gun control laws to control gun violence. The debate on gun control in America has been up for deliberation for decades. Almost forty thousand people are killed each year due to homicidal, accidental, and suicidal use of guns (Politics 7). Despite the fact that America has approximately twenty thousand gun laws, there are still often occurring crime due to gun violence. To fix this problem, the government should enforce stricter background checks for all gun sales, […]

Impact of Gun Violence

The constitution of America has various amendments that provide many kinds of leverage to its people, like right to vote, right to speech etc. Among them, one of the most controversial amendment is Second Amendment which gives people right to bear weapons like gun, for their safety. Safety is one of the basic needs of people and they should be provided to the people. However, the word 'safety' is a critical term here; is it really safe to have people […]

How to Change the Gun Violence Situation in the US

In the United States, the number of cases of gun violence have increased tremendously. The reason why these numbers have been so high is because guns have been made easily accessible to the general public. The implications that gun violence has had on the country are so damaging that it is time that the American government come up with ways in which the availability of guns to the American citizens can be restrained. Due to the gun violence situation; people […]

The Las Vegas Shooting, Gun Control and American Violence

The night of October 1, 2017 at the Route 91 Harvest festival in Las Vegas was interrupted by the sound of gun fire that was opened by a gunman from the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino (Time, 2017). As Time reported, in this massive shooting, which went on for 10-15 minutes at about a crowd of 20,000 people, more than 500 people were injured and at least 50 people were killed (Time, 2017). With this tragic […]

The Question of Gun Violence

The first step in solving a problem is recognizing there is one (Mcavoy). America is a country overflowing with individuals holding a great sense of nationalism and pride. Many of these individuals remark that America is the greatest country in the world. This statement is direct, and it takes a stand that no other country is as great as America. Although the United States has many aspects that are great, gun violence is a rising issue holding back the country. […]

Gun Violence in Parkland Florida

There are over thirty thousand deaths a year in the United States related to gun violence with Americans using guns for defensive purposes as many as a million times every year. These deaths are a result of suicides, homicides and accidents. It is evident that gun violence and gun control are issues of serious national importance and are worth debating. The main issues and arguments found in the debate over gun control in the United States have not changed a […]

Public Health Solutions: Gun Violence

Gun violence accounts for approximately 35,000 deaths and 89,600 injuries annually in the United States (Gun Violence in America, 2018). It consists of both intentional and unintentional assault, domestic and family violence, law enforcement intervention, homicide, suicide, self-harm, and undetermined causes (Gun Violence in America, 2018). According to Santhanam (2018), in 2016 the United States ranked second in gun-related deaths, after Brazil and before India. Gun violence is a prominent issue in American society and is certainly a public health […]

Reducing School Gun Violence in New Mexico

School gun violence in the United States is on the rise. Since 2014 there have been an average of five school shootings per month. Since Sandy Hook in 2012, there have been at least 239 school shootings nationwide. In these school shootings 438 were shot, and 138 were killed, and 16 shootings were classified as where 4 or more people were shot. (Preventing School Violence: Assessing Armed Guardians, School Policy, and Context.) More people, including students and teachers, were killed […]

The Problem of Gun Politics in the United States

The Brady campaign to prevent gun violence states every day 8 children and teens die from gun violence, 4 are murdered, 3 die from suicide and 1 killed unintentionally. Every day 39 children and teens are shot and survive, 31 injured in an attack, 1 survives a suicide attempt and 7 shot unintentionally Not only is the 2nd amendment giving access to have a gun to protect ourselves, it is giving others access to commit violent crimes that involve a […]

Gun Violence in America

The issue of gun violence has attracted a heated debate in the US. With time, people have advanced significantly in gun availability and the power to buy military-style firearms, which has led to more likelihood of criminals getting guns that they can use for mass destruction. Yet, burning gun ownership can be a significant issue since most civilians who buy firearms do so to ensure their protection and safety. Many supporters of gun ownership postulate that firearms do not kill, […]

Why does Drug Trafficking Cause Gun Violence

There is a strong relationship between drug trafficking, drug use, and gun violence. The research attempts to come up with a solution for the research question why does drug trafficking cause gun violence. Most youths have been involved in the use of drugs like marijuana, stimulants, hallucinogens, crack cocaine, heroin, and cocaine hence being involved in violence including gun violence (Johnson, Golub, Dunlap, 2000) This research will play a major role in improving academic research, sow the existing causal effect […]

Gun Violence in America: who is to Blame?

Too often, when you raise the issue of guns in this country, it starts a debate with both sides pointing the blame at each other. In the middle, we hear the voices of children who’ve witnessed the killing of their friends and teachers and who are sounding out for action. The question is, will we listen to them? Will we care enough to do something? Horrific tragedies like the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School a little under a […]

Additional Example Essays

• Discrimination in Workplace
• What A Streetcar Named Desire lost in the film
• What is the Importance of Professionalism?
• Catherine Roerva: A Complex Figure in the Narrative of Child Abuse
• A Letter From The Trenches
• Why Abortion Should be Illegal
• Death Penalty Should be Abolished
• Logical Fallacies in Letter From Birmingham Jail
• How the Roles of Women and Men Were Portrayed in "A Doll's House"
• Dogs Are Better Than Cats Essay
• Analysis of Letter from Birmingham Jail
• Med school personal statement

How To Write an Essay About Gun Violence

Introduction to the issue of gun violence.

Gun violence is a pressing issue in today's society, affecting countless lives and communities. When setting out to write an essay on this topic, it's crucial to first establish a comprehensive understanding of what gun violence entails. This involves not just looking at the statistics and incidents of shootings, but also understanding the various forms of gun violence – from mass shootings to domestic incidents and suicides. The introduction of your essay should present the topic's relevance and urgency, outlining the scope of the issue and its impact on society. This stage is about laying the groundwork for your argument, identifying the key aspects of gun violence that you will explore in the rest of your essay.

Developing Your Argument

The body of your essay should be dedicated to developing a well-structured argument. Start by defining your thesis statement clearly. What aspect of gun violence are you focusing on? Are you examining its causes, the effectiveness of gun control laws, or the societal impact of gun-related incidents? Each paragraph should tackle a specific point that supports your thesis, with evidence and examples to back up your claims. This might include data on gun violence rates, analysis of legislation and its effectiveness, or case studies of particular incidents. It's also important to consider and address counterarguments, as this demonstrates a thorough understanding of the topic and strengthens your own position.

Ethical and Societal Implications

An essay on gun violence should also delve into the ethical and societal implications of the issue. This is where you can explore the broader context of gun violence, such as its impact on public health, the ethical debates surrounding gun ownership and rights, and the societal factors that contribute to the prevalence of gun violence. Discuss the balance between individual rights and public safety, the role of mental health, and the impact of cultural and societal norms around guns. This part of the essay challenges readers to think beyond the immediate effects of gun violence and consider the larger societal structures that enable it.

Concluding the Discussion

In your conclusion, bring together all the threads of your argument, reaffirming your thesis and summarizing the key points you've discussed. This is your opportunity to leave a lasting impression on the reader. You might want to reflect on the broader implications of gun violence for future societal and legislative changes. Suggest possible solutions or areas for further research, and encourage your readers to think critically about their stance on gun violence. A strong conclusion will not only wrap up your essay neatly but will also provoke further thought and discussion on this critical issue.

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

• Search Menu
• Case Discussions
• Special Symposiums
• Advance articles
• Author Guidelines
• Submission Site
• Open Access
• Why Publish with Public Health Ethics?
• About Public Health Ethics
• Editorial Board
• Advertising and Corporate Services
• Journals Career Network
• Self-Archiving Policy
• Dispatch Dates
• Terms and Conditions
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

Article Contents

Introduction, the burden of firearm violence, understanding and reducing firearm violence is complex and multi-factorial, interventions and recommendations, conclusions, research ethics.

• < Previous

Firearm Violence in the United States: An Issue of the Highest Moral Order

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data

Chisom N Iwundu, Mary E Homan, Ami R Moore, Pierce Randall, Sajeevika S Daundasekara, Daphne C Hernandez, Firearm Violence in the United States: An Issue of the Highest Moral Order, Public Health Ethics , Volume 15, Issue 3, November 2022, Pages 301–315, https://doi.org/10.1093/phe/phac017

• Permissions Icon Permissions

Firearm violence in the United States produces over 36,000 deaths and 74,000 sustained firearm-related injuries yearly. The paper describes the burden of firearm violence with emphasis on the disproportionate burden on children, racial/ethnic minorities, women and the healthcare system. Second, this paper identifies factors that could mitigate the burden of firearm violence by applying a blend of key ethical theories to support population level interventions and recommendations that may restrict individual rights. Such recommendations can further support targeted research to inform and implement interventions, policies and laws related to firearm access and use, in order to significantly reduce the burden of firearm violence on individuals, health care systems, vulnerable populations and society-at-large. By incorporating a blended public health ethics to address firearm violence, we propose a balance between societal obligations and individual rights and privileges.

Firearm violence poses a pervasive public health burden in the United States. Firearm violence is the third leading cause of injury related deaths, and accounts for over 36,000 deaths and 74,000 firearm-related injuries each year ( Siegel et al. , 2013 ; Resnick et al. , 2017 ; Hargarten et al. , 2018 ). In the past decade, over 300,000 deaths have occurred from the use of firearms in the United States, surpassing rates reported in other industrialized nations ( Iroku-Malize and Grissom, 2019 ). For example, the United Kingdom with a population of 56 million reports about 50–60 deaths per year attributable to firearm violence, whereas the United States with a much larger population, reports more than 160 times as many firearm-related deaths ( Weller, 2018 ).

Given the pervasiveness of firearm violence, and subsequent long-term effects such as trauma, expensive treatment and other burdens to the community ( Lowe and Galea, 2017 ; Hammaker et al. , 2017 ; Jehan et al. , 2018 ), this paper seeks to examine how various evidence-based recommendations might be applied to curb firearm violence, and substantiate those recommendations using a blend of the three major ethics theories which include—rights based theories, consequentialism and common good. To be clear, ours is not a morally neutral paper wherein we weigh the merits of an ethical argument for or against a recommendation nor is it a meta-analysis of the pros and cons to each public health recommendation. We intend to promote evidence-based interventions that are ethically justifiable in the quest to ameliorate firearm violence.

It is estimated that private gun ownership in the United States is 30% and an additional 11% of Americans lived with someone who owed a gun in 2017 ( Gramlich and Schaeffer, 2019 ). Some of the reported motivations for carrying a firearm include protection against people (anticipating future victimization or past victimization experience) and hunting or sport shooting ( Schleimer et al. , 2019 ). A vast majority of firearm-related injuries and death occur from intentional harm (62% from suicides and 35% from homicides) versus 2% of firearm-related injuries and death occurring from unintentional harm or accidents (e.g. unsafe storage) ( Fowler et al. , 2015 ; Lewiecki and Miller, 2013 ; Monuteaux et al. , 2019 ; Swanson et al. , 2015 ).

Rural and urban differences have been noted regarding firearms and its related injuries and deaths. In one study, similar amount of firearm deaths were reported in urban and rural areas ( Herrin et al. , 2018 ). However, the difference was that firearm deaths from homicides were higher in urban areas, and deaths from suicide and unintentional deaths were higher in rural areas ( Herrin et al. , 2018 ). In another study, suicides accounted for about 70% of firearm deaths in both rural and urban areas ( Dresang, 2001 ). Hence, efforts to implement these recommendations have the potential to prevent most firearm deaths in both rural and urban areas.

The burden of firearm injuries on society consists of not only the human and economic costs, but also productivity loss, pain and suffering. Firearm-related injuries affect the health and welfare of all and lead to substantial burden to the healthcare industry and to individuals and families ( Corso et al. , 2006 ; Tasigiorgos et al. , 2015 ). Additionally, there are disparities in firearm injuries, whereby firearm injuries disproportionately affect young people, males and non-White Americans ( Peek-Asa et al. , 2017 ). The burden of firearm also affects the healthcare system, racial/ethnic minorities, women and children.

Burden on Healthcare System

Firearm-related fatalities and injuries are a serious public health problem. On average more than 38 lives were lost every day to gun related violence in 2018 ( The Education Fund to Stop Gun Violence (EFSGV), 2020 ). A significant proportion of Americans suffer from firearm non-fatal injuries that require hospitalization and lead to physical disabilities, mental health challenges such as post-traumatic stress disorder, in addition to substantial healthcare costs ( Rattan et al. , 2018 ). Firearm violence and related injuries cost the U.S. economy about $70 billion annually, exerting a major effect on the health care system ( Tasigiorgos et al. , 2015 ).

Victims of firearm violence are also likely to need medical attention requiring high cost of care and insurance payouts which in turn raises the cost of care for everyone else, and unavoidably becomes a financial liability and source of stress on the society ( Hammaker et al. , 2017 ). Firearm injuries also exert taxing burden on the emergency departments, especially those in big cities. Patients with firearm injuries who came to the emergency departments tend to be overwhelmingly male and younger (20–24 years old) and were injured in an assault or unintentionally ( Gani et al. , 2017 ). Also, Carter et al. , 2015 found that high-risk youth (14–24 years old) who present in urban emergency departments have higher odds of having firearm-related injuries. In fact, estimates for firearm-related hospital admission costs are exorbitant. In 2012, hospital admissions for firearm injuries varied from a low average cost of $16,975 for an unintentional firearm injury to a high average cost of $32,237 for an injury from an assault weapon ( Peek-Asa et al. , 2017 ) compared with an average cost of $10,400 for a general hospital admission ( Moore et al. , 2014 ).

Burden on Racial/Ethnic Minorities, Women and Children

Though firearm violence affects all individuals, racial disparities exist in death and injury and certain groups bear a disproportionate burden of its effects. While 77% of firearm-related deaths among whites are suicides, 82% of firearm-related deaths among blacks are homicides ( Reeves and Holmes, 2015 ). Among black men aged 15–34, firearm-related death was the leading cause of death in 2012 ( Cerdá, 2016 ). The racial disparity in the leading cause of firearm-related homicide among 20- to 29-year-old adults is observed among blacks, followed by Hispanics, then whites. Also, victims of firearms tend to be from lower socioeconomic status ( Reeves and Holmes, 2015 ). Understanding behaviors that underlie violence among young adults is important. Equally important is the fiduciary duty of public health officials in creating public health interventions and policies that would effectively decrease the burden of gun violence among all Americans regardless of social, economic and racial/ethnic backgrounds.

Another population group that bears a significant burden of firearm violence are women. The violence occurs in domestic conflicts ( Sorenson and Vittes, 2003 ; Tjaden et al. , 2000 ). Studies have shown that intimate partner violence is associated with an increased risk of homicide, with firearms as the most commonly used weapon ( Leuenberger et al. , 2021 ; Gollub and Gardner, 2019 ). However, firearm threats among women who experience domestic violence has been understudied ( Sullivan and Weiss, 2017 ; Sorenson, 2017 ). It is estimated that nearly two-thirds of women who experience intimate partner violence and live in households with firearms have been held at gunpoint by intimate partners ( Sorenson and Wiebe, 2004 ). Firearms are used to threaten, coerce and intimidate women. Also, the presence of firearms in a home increases the risk of women being murdered ( Campbell et al. , 2015 ; Bailey et al. , 1997 ). Further, having a firearm in the home is strongly associated with more severe abuse among pregnant women in a study by McFarlane et al. (1998) . About half of female intimate partner homicides are committed with firearms ( Fowler, 2018 ; Díez et al. , 2017 ). Some researchers reported that availability of firearms in areas with fewer firearms restrictions has led to higher intimate partner homicides ( Gollub and Gardner, 2019 ; Díez et al. , 2017 ).

In the United States, children are nine times more likely to die from a firearm than in most other industrialized nations ( Krueger and Mehta, 2015 ). Children here include all individuals under age 18. These statistics highlight the magnitude of firearm injuries as well as firearms as a serious pediatric concern, hence, calls for appropriate interventions to address this issue. Unfortunately, children and adolescents have a substantial level of access to firearms in their homes which contributes to firearm violence and its related injuries ( Johnson et al. , 2004 ; Kim, 2018 ). About half of all U.S. households are believed to have a firearm, making firearms one of the most pervasive products consumed in the United States ( Violano et al. , 2018 ). Consequently, most of the firearms used by children and youth to inflict harm including suicides are obtained in the home ( Johnson et al. , 2008 ). Beyond physical harm, children experience increased stress, fear and anxiety from direct or indirect exposure to firearms and its related injuries. These effects have also been reported as predictors of post-traumatic stress disorders in children and could have long-term consequences that persist from childhood to adulthood ( Holly et al. , 2019 ). Additionally, the American Psychological Association’s study on violence in the media showed that witnessing violence leads to fear and mistrust of others, less sensitivity to pain experienced by others, and increases the tendency of committing violent acts ( Branas et al. , 2009 ; Calvert et al. , 2017 ).

As evidenced from the previous sections, firearm violence is a complex issue. Some argue that poor mental health, violent video games, substance abuse, poverty, a history of violence and access to firearms are some of the reasons for firearm violence ( Iroku-Malize and Grissom, 2019 ). However, the prevalence and incidence of firearm violence supersedes discrete issues and demonstrates a complex interplay among a variety of factors. Therefore, a broader public health analysis to better understand, address and reduce firearm violence is warranted. Some important factors as listed above should be taken into consideration to more fully understand firearm violence which can consequently facilitate processes for mitigation of the frequency and severity of firearm violence.

Lack of Research Prevents Better Understanding of Problem of Firearm Violence

A major stumbling block to understanding the prevalence and incidence of firearm related violence exists from a lack of rigorous scientific study of the problem. Firearm violence research constitutes less than 0.09% of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s annual budget ( Rajan et al. , 2018 ). Further research on firearm violence is greatly limited by the Dickey Amendment, first passed in 1996 and annually thereafter in budget appropriations, which prohibits use of federal funds to advocate or promote firearm control ( Rostron, 2018 ). As such, the Dickey Amendment impedes future federally funded research, even as public health’s interest in firearm violence prevention increased ( Peetz and Haider, 2018 ; Rostron, 2018 ). In the absence of rigorous research, a deeper understanding and development of evidence-based prevention measures continue to be needed.

Lack of a Public Health Ethical Argument Against Firearm Use Impedes Violence Prevention

We make an argument that gun violence is a public health problem. While some might think that public health is primarily about reducing health-related externalities, it is embedded in key values such as harm reduction, social justice, prevention and protection of health and social justice and equity ( Institute of Medicine, 2003 ). Public health practice is also historically intertwined with politics, power and governance, especially with the influence of the states decision-making and policies on its citizens ( Lee and Zarowsky, 2015 ). According to the World Health Organization, health is a complete physical, mental and social well-being that is not just the absence of injury or disease ( Callahan, 1973 ). Health is fundamental for human flourishing and there is a need for public health systems to protect health and prevent injuries for individuals and communities. Public health ethics, then, is the practical decision making that supports public health’s mandate to promote health and prevent disease, disability and injury in the population. It is imperative for the public health community to ask what ought to be done/can be done to curtail firearm violence and its related burdens. Sound public health ethical reasoning must be employed to support recommendations that can be used to justify various public policy interventions.

The argument that firearm violence is a public health problem could suggest that public health methods (e.g. epidemiological methods) can be used to study gun violence. Epidemiological approaches to gun violence could be applied to study its frequency, pattern, distribution, determinants and measure the effects of interventions. Public health is also an interdisciplinary field often drawing on knowledge and input from social sciences, humanities, etc. Gun violence could be viewed as a crime-related problem rather than public health; however, there are, of course, a lot of ways to study crime, and in this case with public health relevance. One dominant paradigm in criminology is the economic model which often uses natural experiments to isolate causal mechanisms. For example, it might matter whether more stringent background checks reduce the availability of guns for crime, or whether, instead, communities that implement more stringent background checks also tend to have lower rates of gun ownership to begin with, and stronger norms against gun availability. Therefore, public health authorities and criminologists may tend to have overlapping areas of expertise aimed to lead to best practices advice for gun control.

Our paper draws on three major theories: (1) rights-based theories, (2) consequentialism and (3) the common good approach. These theories make a convergent case for firearm violence, and despite their significant divergence, strengthen our public health ethics approach to firearm. The key aspects of these three theories are briefly reviewed with respect to how one might use a theory to justify an intervention or recommendation to reduce firearm injuries.

Rights-Based Theories

The basic idea of the rights framework is that people have certain rights, and that therefore it is impermissible to treat people in certain ways even if doing so would promote the overall good. People have rights to safety, security and an environment generally free from risky pitfalls. Conversely, people also have a right to own a gun especially as emphasized in the U.S.’s second amendment. Another theory embedded within our discussion of rights-based theories is deontology. Deontological approaches to ethics hold that we have moral obligations or duties that are not reducible to the need to promote some end (such as happiness or lives saved). These duties are generally thought to specify what we owe to others as persons ( rights bearers ). There are specific considerations that define moral behaviors and specific ways in which people within different disciplines ought to behave to effectively achieve their goals.

Huemer (2003) argued that the right to own a firearm has both a fundamental (independent of other rights) and derivative justification, insofar as the right is derived from another right - the right to self-defense ( Huemer, 2003 ). Huemer gives two arguments for why we have a right to own a gun:

People place lots of importance on owning a gun. Generally, the state should not restrict things that people enjoy unless doing so imposes substantial risk of harm to others.

People have a right to defend themselves from violent attackers. This entails that they have a right to obtain the means necessary to defend themselves. In a modern society, a gun is a necessary means to defend oneself from a violent attacker. Therefore, people have a right to obtain a gun.

Huemer’s first argument could be explained that it would be permissible to violate someone’s right to own or use a firearm in order to promote some impersonal good (e.g. number of lives saved). Huemer’s second argument also justifies a fundamental right to gun ownership. According to Huemer, gun restrictions violate the right of individual gun owners to defend themselves. Gun control laws will result in coercively stopping people to defend themselves when attacked. To him, the right to self-defense does seem like it would be fundamental. It seems intuitive to argue that, at some level, if someone else attacks a person out of the blue, the person is morally required to defend themselves if they cannot escape. However, having a right to self-defense does not entail that your right to obtain the means necessary to that thing cannot be burdened at all.

While we have a right to own a gun, that right is weaker than other kinds of rights. For example, gun ownership seems in no way tied to citizenship in a democracy or being a member of the community. Also, since other nations/democracies get along fine without a gun illustrates that gun ownership is not important enough to be a fundamental right. Interestingly, the UK enshrines a basic right to self-defense, but explicitly denies any right to possess any particular means of self-defense. This leads to some interesting legal peculiarities where it can be illegal to possess a handgun, but not illegal to use a handgun against an assailant in self-defense.

In the United States, implementing gun control policies to minimize gun related violence triggers the argument that such policies are infringements on the Second Amendment, which states that the rights to bear arms shall not be infringed. The constitution might include a right to gun ownership for a variety of reasons. However, it is not clear from the text itself that the right to bear arms is supposed to be as fundamental as the right to freedom of expression. Further, one could argue, then, that any form of gun regulation is borne from the rationale to retain our autonomy. Protections from gun violence are required to treat others as autonomous agents or as bearers of dignity. We owe others certain protections and affordances at least in part because these are necessary to respect their autonomy (or dignity, etc.). We discuss potential recommendations to minimize gun violence while protecting the rights of individuals to purchase a firearm if they meet the necessary and reasonable regulatory requirements. Most of the gun control regulations discussed in this article could provide an opportunity to ensure the safety of communities without unduly infringing on the right to keep a firearm.

Consequentialism

Consequentialism is the view that we should promote the common good even if doing so infringes upon some people’s (apparent) rights. The case for gun regulation under this theory is made by showing how many lives it would save. Utilitarianism, a part of consequentialist approach proposes actions which maximize happiness and the well-being for the majority while minimizing harm. Utilitarianism is based on the idea that a consequence should be of maximum benefit ( Holland, 2014 ) and that actions are right in proportion as they tend to promote happiness as the ultimate moral norm. If one believes that the moral purpose of public health is to make decisions that will produce maximal benefits for most affected, remove or prevent harm and ensure equitable distribution of burdens and benefits ( Bernheim and Childress, 2013 ), they are engaging in a utilitarian theory. Rights, including the rights to bear arms, are protected so long as they preserve the greater good. However, such rights can be overridden or ignored when they conflict with the principle of utility; that is to say, if greater harm comes from personal possession of a firearm, utilitarianism is often the ethical theory of choice to restrict access to firearms, including interventions that slow down access to firearms such as requiring a gun locker at home. However, it is important to note that utilitarians might also argue that one has to weigh how frustrating a gun locker would be to people who like to go recreationally hunting. Or how much it would diminish the feeling of security for someone who knows that if a burglar breaks in, it might take several minutes to fumble while inputting the combination on their locker to access their gun.

Using a utilitarian approach, current social statistics show that firearm violence affects a great number of people, and firearm-related fatalities and injuries threaten the utility, or functioning of another. Therefore, certain restrictions or prohibitions on firearms can be ethically justifiable to prevent harm to others using a utilitarian approach. Similarly, the infringement of individual freedom could be warranted as it protects others from serious harm. However, one might argue that a major flaw in the utilitarian argument is that it fails to see the benefit of self-defense as a reasonable benefit. Utilitarianism as a moral theory would weigh the benefits of proposed restrictions against its costs, including its possible costs to a felt sense of security on the part of gun owners. A utilitarian argument that neglects some of the costs of regulations wouldn’t be a very good argument.

One might legitimately argue that if an individual is buying a firearm, whether for protection or recreation, they are morally responsible to abide by the laws and regulations regarding purchasing that firearm and ensuring the safety of others in the society. Additionally, vendors and licensing/enforcement authorities would have the responsibility to ensure the safety of the rest of the society by ensuring that the firearm purchase does not compromise the safety of the community. Most people who own firearms would not argue against this position. However, arguments in support of measures that will reduce the availability of firearms center around freedom and liberty and are not as well tolerated by those who argue from a libertarian starting point. Further, this would stipulate that measures against firearm purchase or use impinge upon the rights of individuals who have the freedom to pursue what they perceive as good ( Holland, 2014 ). However, it seems as though the state has a fundamental duty to help ensure an adequate degree of safety for its citizens, and it seems that the best way to do that is to limit gun ownership.

Promoting the Common Good

A well-organized society that promotes the common good of all is to everyone’s advantage ( Ruger, 2015 ). In addition, enabling people to flourish in a society includes their ability to be healthy. The view of common good consists of ensuring the welfare of individuals considered as a group or the public. This group of people are presumed to have a common interest in protection and preservation from harms to the group ( Beauchamp, 1985 ). Health and security are shared by members of a community, and guns are an attempt to privatize public security and safety, and so is antithetical to the common good. Can one really be healthy or safe in a society where one’s neighbors are subject to gun violence? Maybe not, and so then this violence is a threat to one’s life too. If guns really are an effective means of self-defense, they help one defend only oneself while accepting that others in one’s community might be at risk. One might also argue that the more guns there are, the more that society accepts the legitimacy of gun ownership and the more that guns have a significant place in culture etc., and consequently, the more that there is likely to be a problem.

Trivigno (2018) suggests that the willingness to carry a firearm indicates an intention to use it if the need arises and Branas et al (2009) argue that perpetually carrying a firearm might affect how individuals behave ( Trivigno, 2018 ; Branas et al. , 2009 ). When all things are equal, will prudence and a commitment to the flourishing of others prevail? Trivigno (2013) wonders if such behaviors as carrying or having continual access to a firearm generates mistrust or triggers fear of an unknown armed assailant, allowing for aggression or anger to build; the exact opposite of flourishing ( Trivigno, 2013 ). One could suggest, then, that the recreational use of firearms is also commonly vicious. Many people use firearms to engage in blood sport, killing animals for their own amusement. For example, someone who kicks puppies or uses a magnifying glass to fry ants with the sun seems paradigmatically vicious; why not think the same of someone who shoots deer or rabbits for their amusement?. Firearm proponents might suggest that the fidelity (living out one’s commitments) or justice, which Aristotle holds in high regard, could justify carrying a firearm to protect one’s life, livelihood, or loved ones insofar as it would be just of a person to defend and protect the life of another or even one’s own life when under threat by one who means to do harm. Despite an argument justifying the use of a firearm against another for self-defense after the fact, the action might not have been right when evaluated through the previous rationale, or applying the doctrine of double effect as described by Aquinas’ passage in the Summa II-II, which mentions that self-defense is quite different than taking it upon one’s self to mete out justice ( Schlabach, n.d. ). The magistrate is charged with seeing that justice is done for the common good. At best, if guns really are an effective means of self-defense, they help one defend only oneself while accepting that others in one’s community might be at risk. They take a common good, the health and safety of the community, and make it a private one. For Aquinas and many other modern era ethicists, intention plays a critical part in judgment of an action. Accordingly, many who oppose any ownership of firearms do so in both a paternalistic fashion (one cannot intend harm if they don’t have access to firearms) and virtuous fashion (enabling human flourishing).

Classical formulations of the double doctrine effect include necessity and proportionality conditions. So, it’s wrong to kill in self-defense if you could simply run away (without giving up something morally important in doing so), or to use deadly force in self-defense when someone is trying to slap you. One thing the state can do, in its role of promoting the common good, is to reduce when it is necessary to use self-defense. If there were no police at all, then anyone who robs you without consequence will probably be back, so there’s a stronger reason to use deadly force against them to feel secure. That’s bad, because it seems to allow violence that truly isn’t necessary because no one is providing the good of public security. So, one role of the state is to reduce the number of cases in which the use of deadly force is necessary for our safety. Since most homicides in the United State involve a firearm, one way to reduce the frequency of cases in which deadly force is necessary for self-defense is to reduce the instances of gun crime.

We have attempted to lay the empirical and ethical groundwork necessary to support various interventions, and the recommendations aimed at curbing firearm violence that will be discussed in this next section. Specifically, by discussing the burden of the problem in its various forms (healthcare costs, disproportionate violence towards racial/ethnic minority groups, women, children, vulnerable populations and the lack of research) and the ethics theories public health finds most accessible, we can now turn our attention to well-known, evidence-based recommendations that could be supported by the blended ethics approach: rights-based theories, consequentialism and the common-good approach discussed.

Comprehensive, Universal Background Checks for Firearm Sales

Of the 17 million persons who submitted to a background check to purchase or transfer possession of a firearm in 2010, less than 0.5% were denied approval of purchase ( Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2014 ). At present, a background check is required only when a transfer is made by a licensed retailer, and nearly 40% of firearm transfers in recent years were private party transfers ( Miller et al. , 2017 ). As such, close to one-fourth of individuals who acquired a firearm within the last two years obtained their firearm without a background check ( Miller et al. , 2017 ). Anestis et al. , (2017) and Siegel et al. , (2019) evaluated the relationship between the types of background information required by states prior to firearm purchases and firearm homicide and suicide deaths ( Anestis et al. , 2017 ; Siegel et al. , 2019 ). Firearm homicide deaths appear lower in states checking for restraining orders and fugitive status as opposed to only conducting criminal background checks ( Sen and Panjamapirom, 2012 ). Similarly, suicide involving firearm were lower in states checking for a history of mental illness, fugitive status and misdemeanors ( Sen and Panjamapirom, 2012 ).

Research supports the evidence that comprehensive universal background checks could limit crimes associated with firearms, and enforcement of such laws and policies could prevent firearm violence ( Wintemute, 2019 ; Lee et al. , 2017 ). Comprehensive, universal background check policies that are applicable to all firearm transactions, including private party transfers, sales by firearm dealers and sales at firearm shows are justifiable using a blend of the ethics theories we have previously discussed. With the rights-based approach, one could still honor the right to own a firearm by a competent person while also enforcing the obligation of the firearm vendor to ensure only a qualified individual purchased the firearm. To further reduce gun crime, rather than ensure only the right people own guns, we can just reduce the number of guns owned overall. Consequentialism could be employed to ensure the protection of the most vulnerable such as victims of domestic violence and allowing a firearm vendor to stop a sale to an unqualified individual if they had a history of suspected or proven domestic violence. Also, having universal background checks that go beyond the bare minimum of assessing if a person has a permit, the legally required training, etc., but delving more deeply into a person’s past, such as the inclusion of a red flag ( Honberg, 2020 ), would be promoting the common good approach by creating the conditions for persons to be good and do good while propelling community safety.

Renewable License Before Buying and After Purchase of Firearm and Training Firearm Owners

At present, federal law does not require licensing for firearm owners or purchasers. However, state licensing laws fall into four categories: (1) permits to purchase firearms, (2) licenses to own firearms, (3) firearm safety certificates and (4) registration laws that impose licensing requirements ( Anestis et al. , 2015 ; Giffords Licensing, n.d. ). A study conducted in urban U.S. counties with populations greater than 200,000 indicated that permit-to-purchase laws were associated with 14% reduction in firearm homicides ( Crifasi et al. , 2018 ). In Connecticut, enforcing a mandatory permit-to-purchase law making it illegal to sell a hand firearm to anyone who did not have an eligible certificate to purchase firearms was associated with a reduction in firearm associated homicides ( Rudolph et al. , 2015 ). This also resulted in a significant reduction in the rates of firearm suicide rates in Connecticut ( Crifasi et al. , 2015 ). Conversely, the permit-to-purchase law was repealed in Missouri in 2007, which resulted in an increase of homicides with firearms and firearm suicides ( Crifasi et al. , 2015 ; Webster et al. , 2014 ). Similarly, two large Florida counties indicated that 72% of firearm suicides involved people who were legally permitted to have a firearm ( Swanson et al. , 2016 ). According to the study findings, a majority of those who were eligible to have firearms died from firearm-related suicide, and also had records of previous short-term involuntary holds that were not reportable legal events.

In addition to comprehensive, universal background checks for firearm purchases, licensing with periodic review requires the purchaser to complete an in-person application at a law enforcement agency, which could (1) minimize fraud or inaccuracies and (2) prevent persons at risk of harming themselves or others to purchase firearms ( Crifasi et al. , 2019 ). Subsequent periodic renewal could further reduce crimes and violence associated with firearms by helping law enforcement to confirm that a firearm owner remains eligible to possess firearms. More frequent licensure checks through periodic renewals could also facilitate the removal of firearms from individuals who do not meet renewal rules.

Further, including training on gun safety and shooting with every firearm license request could also be beneficial in reducing gun violence. In Japan, if you are interested in acquiring a gun license, you need to attend a one-day gun training session in addition to mental health evaluation and background check ( Alleman, 2000 ). This training teaches future firearm owners the steps they would need to follow and the responsibilities of owning a gun. The training completes with passing a written test and achieving at least a 95% accuracy during a shooting-range test. Firearm owners need to retake the class and initial exam every three years to continue to have their guns. This training and testing have contributed to the reduction in gun related deaths in Japan. Implementing such requirements could reduce gun misuses. Even though, this is a lengthy process, it could manage and reduce the risks associated with firearm purchases and will support a well-regulated firearm market. While some may argue that other forms of weapons could be used to inflict harm, reduced access to firearms would lead to a significant decrease in the number of firearm-related injuries in the United States.

From an ethics perspective, again, all three theories could be applied to the recommendation for renewable licenses and gun training. From a rights-based perspective, renewable licensure and gun training would still allow for the right to bear arms but would ensure that the right belongs with qualified persons and again would allow the proper state agency to exercise its responsibility to its citizens. Additionally, a temporary removal of firearms or prohibiting firearm purchases by people involuntarily detained in short-term holds might be an opportunity to ensure people’s safety and does so without unduly infringing on the Second Amendment rights. Renewable licenses and gun training create opportunities for law enforcement to step in periodically to ascertain if a licensee remains competent, free from criminal behavior or mental illness, which reduces the harm to the individual and to the community—a tidy application of consequentialism. Again, by creating the conditions for people to be good, we see an exercise of the common good.

Licensing Firearm Dealers and Tracking Firearm Sales

In any firearm transfer or purchase, there are two parties involved: the firearm vendor and the individual purchaser. Federal law states that “it shall be unlawful for any person, except for a licensed importer, licensed manufacturer, or licensed dealer, to engage in the business of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in firearms, or in the course of such business to ship, transport, or receive any firearm in interstate or foreign commerce” (18 U.S.C. 1 922(a)(1)(A)(2007). All firearm sellers must obtain a federal firearm license issued by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). However, ATF does not have the complete authority to inspect firearm dealers for license, revoke firearm license, or take legal actions against sellers providing firearms to criminals ( Vernick and Webster, 2007 ). Depending on individual state laws, typically the firearm purchaser maintains responsibility in obtaining the proper license for each firearm purchase whereas the justice system has the responsibility to enforce laws regulating firearm sales. Firearm manufacturers typically sell their products through licensed distributors and dealers, or a primary market (such as a retail store). Generally, firearms used to conduct a crime (including homicide) or to commit suicide are the product of secondary markets ( Institute of Medicine, 2003 ) such as retail secondhand sales or private citizen transfers/sales. Such secondary firearm transfers are largely unregulated and allow for illegal firearm purchases by persons traditionally prohibited from purchasing in the primary market ( Vernick and Webster, 2007 ; Chesnut et al. , 2017 ).

According to evidence from Irvin et al. (2014) in states that require licensing for firearm dealers and/or allow inspections, the reported rates of homicides were lower ( Irvin et al. , 2014 ). Specifically, after controlling for race, urbanicity, poverty level, sex, age, education level, drug arrest rate, burglary rates and firearm ownership proxy, the states that require licensing for firearm dealers reported ~25% less risk of homicides, and the states that allow inspection reported ~35% less risk of homicides ( Irvin et al. , 2014 ). This protective effect against homicides was stronger in states that require both licensing and inspections compared to states that require either alone. The record keeping of all firearm sales is important as it facilitates police or other authorized inspectors to compare a dealer’s inventory with their records to identify any secondary market transactions or other discrepancies ( Vernick et al. , 2006 ). According to Webster et al. (2006) , a change in firearm sales policy in the firearm store that sold more than half of the firearms recovered from criminals in Milwaukee, resulted in a 96% reduction in the use of recently sold firearms in crime and 44% decrease in the flow of new trafficked firearms in Milwaukee ( Webster et al. , 2006 ).

The licensing of firearm vendors and tracking of firearm sales sits squarely as a typical public health consequentialist argument; in order to protect the community, an individual’s right is only minimally infringed upon. An additional layer, justifiable by consequentialism, includes a national repository of all firearm sales which can be employed to minimize the sale of firearms on the secondary market and dealers could be held accountable for such ‘off-label’ use ( FindLaw Attorney Writers, 2016 ). Enforcing laws, mandating record keeping, retaining the records for a reasonable time and mandating the inspection of dealers could help to control secondary market firearm transfers and minimize firearm-related crimes and injuries.

One could argue from a rights perspective that routine inspections and record keeping are the responsibility of both firearms vendors and law enforcement, and in doing so, still ensure that competent firearm owners can maintain their rights to bear arms. In Hume’s discussion of property rights, he situates his argument in justice; and that actions must be virtuous and the motive virtuous ( Hume, 1978 ). Hume proposes that feelings of benevolence don’t form our motivation to be just. We tend (perhaps rightly) to feel stronger feelings of benevolence to those who deserve praise than to those who have wronged us or who deserve the enmity of humanity. However, justice requires treating the property rights or contracts of one’s enemies, or of a truly loathsome person, as equally binding as the property rights of honest, decent people. Gun violence disproportionately impacts underserved communities, which are same communities impacted by social and economic injustice.

Standardized Policies on Safer Storage for Firearms and Mandatory Education

Results from a cross-sectional study by Johnson and colleagues showed that about 14-30% of parents who have firearms in the home keep them loaded, while about 43% reported an unlocked firearm in the home ( Johnson et al. , 2006 ; Johnson et al. , 2008 ). The risk for unintentional fatalities from firearms can be prevented when all household firearms are locked ( Monuteaux et al. , 2019 ). Negligent storage of a firearm carries various penalties based on the individual state ( RAND, 2018 ). For example, negligent storage in Massachusetts is a felony. Mississippi and Tennessee prohibit reckless or knowingly providing firearms to minors through a misdemeanor charge, whereas Missouri and Kentucky enforce a felony charge. Also, Tennessee makes it a felony for parents to recklessly or knowingly provide firearms to their children ( RAND, 2018 ).

While a competent adult may have a right to bear arms, this right does not extend to minors, even in recreational use. Many states allow for children to participate in hunting. Wisconsin allows for children as young as 12 to purchase a hunting license, and in 2017 then Governor Scott Walker signed into law a no age minimum for a child to participate in a mentored hunt and to carry a firearm in a hunt when accompanied by an adult ( Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 2020 ). The minor’s ‘right’ to use a firearm is due in part to the adult taking responsibility for the minor’s safety. As such, some have argued that children need to know how to be safe around firearms as they continue to be one of the most pervasive consumer products in the United States ( Violano et al. , 2018 ).

In addition to locking firearms, parents are also encouraged to store firearms unloaded in a safe locked box or cabinet to prevent children’s access to firearms ( Johnson et al. , 2008 ). It follows then that reducing children and youth’s access to firearm injuries involves complying with safe firearm storage practices ( McGee et al. , 2003 ). In addition to eliminating sources of threat to the child, it is also important for children to be trained on how to safely respond in case they encounter a firearm in an unsupervised environment. Education is one of the best strategies for firearm control, storage and reduction of firearm-related injuries via development of firearm safety trainings and programs ( Jones, 1993 ; Holly et al. , 2019 ). Adults also need firearm safety education and trainings; as such, inclusion of firearm safety skills and trainings in the university-based curriculum and other avenues were adults who use guns are likely to be, could also mitigate firearm safety issues ( Puttagunta et al. , 2016 ; Damari et al. , 2018 ). Peer tutoring could also be utilized to provide training in non-academic and social settings.

Parents have a duty to protect their children and therefore mandating safe firearm storage, education and training for recreational use and periodic review of those who are within the purview of the law. Given that someone in the U. S. gets shot by a toddler a little more frequently than once a week ( Ingraham, 2017 ), others might use a utilitarian argument that limiting a child’s access to firearms minimizes the possibility of accidental discharge or intentional harm to a child or another. Again, the common good approach could be employed to justify mandatory safe storage and education to create the conditions for the flourishing of all.

Firearm and Ammunition Buy-Back Programs

Firearm and ammunition buy-back programs have been implemented in several cities in the United States to reduce the number of firearms in circulation with the ultimate goal of reducing gun violence. The first launch in Baltimore, Maryland was in 1974. The Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) has conducted a gun buy-back program for nearly eight years to remove more guns off the streets and improve security in communities. Currently there is a plan for a federal gun buy-back program in the United States. The objective of such programs is to reduce gun violence through motivating marginal criminals to sell their firearms to local governments, encourage law-abiding individuals to sell their firearms available for theft by would-be criminals, and to reduce firearm related suicide resulting from easy access to a gun at a time of high emotion ( Barber and Miller, 2014 ).

According to Kuhn et al. (2002) and Callahan et al. (1994) , gun buy-back programs are ineffective in reducing gun violence due to two main facts: 1- the frequently surrendered types of firearms are typically not involved in gun-related violence and 2- the majority of participants in gun buyback programs are typically women and older adults who are not often involved in interpersonal violence ( Kuhn et al. , 2002 ; Callahan et al. , 1994 ). However, as a result of implementation of the ‘‘good for guns’’ program in Worcester, Massachusetts, there has been a decline in firearm related injuries and mortality in Worcester county compared to other counties in Massachusetts ( Tasigiorgos et al. , 2015 ). Even though, there is limited research indicating a direct link between gun buy-back programs and reduction in gun violence in the United States, a gun buy-back program implemented in Australia in combination with other legislations to reduce household ownership of firearms, firearm licenses and licensed shooters was associated with a rapid decline in firearm related deaths in Australia ( Bartos et al. , 2020 ; Ozanne-Smith et al. , 2004 ).

The frequency of disparities in firearm-related violence, injuries and death makes it a central concern for public health. Even though much has been said about firearms and its related injuries, there continues to be an interest towards its use. Some people continue to desire guns due to fear, feeling of protection and safety, recreation and social pressure.

Further progress on reforms can be made through understanding the diversity of firearm owners, and further research is needed on ways to minimize risks while maximizing safety for all. Although studies have provided data on correlation between firearm possession and violence ( Stroebe, 2013 ), further research is needed to evaluate the interventions and policies that could effectively decrease the public health burden of firearm violence. Evidence-based solutions to mitigating firearm violence can be justified using three major public health ethics theories: rights-based theories, consequentialism and common good. The ethical theories discussed in this paper can direct implementation of research, policies, laws and interventions on firearm violence to significantly reduce the burden of firearm violence on individuals, health care systems, vulnerable populations and the society-at-large. We support five major steps to achieve those goals: 1. Universal, comprehensive background checks; 2. Renewable license before and after purchase of firearm; 3. Licensing firearm dealers and tracking firearm sales; 4. Standardized policies on safer storage for firearms and mandatory education; and 5. Firearm buy-back programs. For some of the goals we propose, there might be a substantial risk of non-compliance. However, we hope that through education and sensibilization programs, overtime, these goals are not met with resistance. By acknowledging the proverbial struggle of individual rights and privileges paired against population health, we hope our ethical reasoning can assist policymakers, firearm advocates and public health professionals in coming to shared solutions to eliminate unnecessary, and preventable, injuries and deaths due to firearms.

The conducted research is not related to either human or animal use.

Alleman , M. ( 2000 ). The Japanese Firearm and Sword Possession Control Law: Translator’s Introduction . Washington International Law Journal , 9 , 165 .

Google Scholar

Anestis , M. D. , Khazem , L. R. , Law , K. C. , Houtsma , C. , LeTard , R. , Moberg , F. and Martin , R. ( 2015 ). The Association Between State Laws Regulating Handgun Ownership and Statewide Suicide Rates . American Journal of Public Health , 105 , 2059 – 2067 .

Anestis , M. D. , Anestis , J. C. and Butterworth , S. E. ( 2017 ). Handgun Legislation and Changes in Statewide Overall Suicide Rates . American Journal of Public Health , 107 , 579 – 581 .

Bailey , J. E. , Kellermann , A. L. , Somes , G. W. , Banton , J. G. , Rivara , F. P. and Rushforth , N. P. ( 1997 ). Risk factors for violent death of women in the home . Archives of Internal Medicine , 157 , 777 – 782 .

Barber , C. W. and Miller , M. J. ( 2014 ). Reducing a suicidal person’s access to lethal means of suicide: a research agenda . American Journal of Preventive Medicine , 47 , S264 – S272 .

Bartos , B. J. , McCleary , R. , Mazerolle , L. and Luengen , K. ( 2020 ). Controlling Gun Violence: Assessing the Impact of Australia’s Gun Buyback Program Using a Synthetic Control Group Experiment . Prevention Science: The Official Journal of the Society for Prevention Research , 21 , 131 – 136 .

Beauchamp , D. E. ( 1985 ). Community: the neglected tradition of public health . The Hastings Center Report , 15 , 28 – 36 .

Bernheim , R.G. , Childress , J.F. ( 2013 ). Introduction: A Framework for Public Health Ethics. In Essentials of Public Health Ethics . Burlington, MA : Jones & Bartlett .

Google Preview

Branas , C. C. , Richmond , T. S. , Culhane , D. P. , Ten Have , T. R. and Wiebe , D. J. ( 2009 ). Investigating the Link Between Gun Possession and Gun Assault . American Journal of Public Health , 99 , 2034 – 2040 .

Callahan , D. ( 1973 ). The WHO definition of ‘health’ . Studies - Hastings Center , 1 , 77 – 88 .

Callahan , C. M. , Rivara , F. P. and Koepsell , T. D. ( 1994 ). Money for Guns: Evaluation of the Seattle Gun Buy-Back Program . Public Health Reports , 109 , 472 – 477 .

Calvert , S. L. , Appelbaum , M. , Dodge , K. A. , Graham , S. , Nagayama Hall , G. C. , Hamby , S. , Fasig-Caldwell , L. G. , Citkowicz , M. , Galloway , D. P. and Hedges , L. V. ( 2017 ). The American Psychological Association Task Force Assessment of Violent Video Games: Science in the Service of Public Interest . The American Psychologist , 72 , 126 – 143 .

Campbell , D. J. T. , O’Neill , B. G. , Gibson , K. and Thurston , W. E. ( 2015 ). Primary healthcare needs and barriers to care among Calgary’s homeless populations . BMC Family Practice , 16( 1 ), 139 .

Carter , P. M. , Walton , M. A. , Roehler , D. R. , Goldstick , J. , Zimmerman , M. A. , Blow , F. C. and Cunningham , R. M. ( 2015 ). Firearm Violence Among High-Risk Emergency Department Youth After an Assault Injury . Pediatrics , 135 , 805 – 815 .

Cerdá , M. ( 2016 ). Editorial: Gun Violence—Risk, Consequences, and Prevention . American Journal of Epidemiology , 183 , 516 – 517 .

Chesnut , K. Y. , Barragan , M. , Gravel , J. , Pifer , N. A. , Reiter , K. , Sherman , N. and Tita , G. E. ( 2017 ). Not an ‘iron pipeline’, but many capillaries: regulating passive transactions in Los Angeles’ secondary, illegal gun market . Injury Prevention: Journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention , 23 , 226 – 231 .

Corso , P. , Finkelstein , E. , Miller , T. , Fiebelkorn , I. and Zaloshnja , E. ( 2006 ). Incidence and lifetime costs of injuries in the United States . Injury Prevention: Journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention , 12 , 212 – 218 .

Crifasi , C. K. , Meyers , J. S. , Vernick , J. S. and Webster , D. W. ( 2015 ). Effects of changes in permit-to- purchase handgun laws in Connecticut and Missouri on suicide rates . Preventive Medicine , 79 , 43 – 49 .

Crifasi , C. K. , Merrill-Francis , M. , McCourt , A. , Vernick , J. S. , Wintemute , G. J. and Webster , D. W. ( 2018 ). Association between Firearm Laws and Homicide in Urban Counties . Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine , 95 , 383 – 390 .

Crifasi , C.K. , McCourt , A.D. , Webster , D.W. ( 2019 ). The Impact of Handgun Purchaser Licensing on Gun Violence . Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Center for Gun Policy and Research .

Damari , N. D. , Ahluwalia , K. S. , Viera , A. J. and Goldstein , A. O. ( 2018 ). Continuing Medical Education and Firearm Violence Counseling . AMA Journal of Ethics , 20 , 56 – 68 .

Díez , C. , Kurland , R. P. , Rothman , E. F. , Bair-Merritt , M. , Fleegler , E. , Xuan , Z. , Galea , S. , Ross , C. S. , Kalesan , B. , Goss , K. A. and Siegel , M. ( 2017 ). State Intimate Partner Violence-Related Firearm Laws and Intimate Partner Homicide Rates in the United States, 1991 to 2015 . Annals of Internal Medicine , 167 , 536 – 543 .

Dresang , L. T. ( 2001 ). Gun deaths in rural and urban settings: recommendations for prevention . The Journal of the American Board of Family Practice , 14 , 107 – 115 .

Federal Bureau of Investigation ( 2014 ). National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) Operations 2014 . Washington, DC : U.S. Department of Justice .

FindLaw Attorney Writers ( 2016 ). Responsibility of Firearm Owners and Dealers for Their Second Amendment Right to Bear Arms: A Survey of the Caselaw . Findlaw , available from: https://corporate.findlaw.com/litigation-disputes/responsibility-of-firearm-owners-and-dealers-for-their-second.html [accessed June 23, 2021 ].

Fowler , K. A. ( 2018 ). Surveillance for Violent Deaths — National Violent Death Reporting System, 18 States, 2014 . MMWR. Surveillance Summaries , 67 , 1 – 36 .

Fowler , K. A. , Dahlberg , L. L. , Haileyesus , T. and Annest , J. L. ( 2015 ). Firearm injuries in the United States . Preventive Medicine , 79 , 5 – 14 .

Gani , F. , Sakran , J. V. and Canner , J. K. ( 2017 ). Emergency Department Visits For Firearm-Related Injuries In The United States, 2006–14 . Health Affairs , 36 , 1729 – 1738 .

Giffords Law Center ( n.d .) Licensing. Available from https://giffords.org/lawcenter/gun-laws/policy-areas/owner-responsibilities/licensing/

Gollub , E. L. and Gardner , M. ( 2019 ). Firearm Legislation and Firearm Use in Female Intimate Partner Homicide Using National Violent Death Reporting System Data . Preventive Medicine , 118 , 216 – 219 .

Gramlich , J. , Schaeffer , K. ( 2019 ). 7 Facts About Guns in the U.S . Pew Research Center , available from: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/10/22/facts-about-guns-in-united-states/ [accessed September 23, 2020 ].

Hammaker , D.K. , Knadig , T.M. , Tomlinson , S.J. ( 2017 ). Environmental Safety and Gun Injury Prevention. In Health care ethics and the law . Jones & Bartlett Learning , pp. 319 – 335 .

Hargarten , S. W. , Lerner , E. B. , Gorelick , M. , Brasel , K. , deRoon-Cassini , T. and Kohlbeck , S. ( 2018 ). Gun Violence: A Biopsychosocial Disease . Western Journal of Emergency Medicine , 19 , 1024 – 1027 .

Herrin , B. R. , Gaither , J. R. , Leventhal , J. M. and Dodington , J. ( 2018 ). Rural Versus Urban Hospitalizations for Firearm Injuries in Children and Adolescents . Pediatrics , 142 ( 2 ), e20173318 .

Holland , S. ( 2014 ). Public Health Ethics . 2nd ed. Malden, MA : Polity Press .

Holly , C. , Porter , S. , Kamienski , M. and Lim , A. ( 2019 ). School-Based and Community-Based Gun Safety Educational Strategies for Injury Prevention . Health Promotion Practice , 20 , 38 – 47 .

Honberg , R. S. ( 2020 ). Mental Illness and Gun Violence: Research and Policy Options . The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics , 48 , 137 – 141 .

Huemer , M. ( 2003 ). Is There a Right to Own a Gun? Social Theory and Practice , 29 , 297 – 324 .

Hume , D. ( 1978 ). David Hume: A Treatise of Human Nature . 2nd edn. New York, United States : Oxford University Press .

Ingraham , C. ( 2017 ). Analysis | American Toddlers Are Still Shooting People on a Weekly Basis This Year . Washington Post . https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/09/29/american-toddlers-are-still-shooting-people-on-a-weekly-basis-this-year/

Institute of Medicine ( 2003 ). Who Will Keep the Public Healthy?: Educating Public Health Professionals for the 21st Century .

Iroku-Malize , T. and Grissom , M. ( 2019 ). Violence and Public and Personal Health: Gun Violence . FP Essentials , 480 , 16 – 21 .

Irvin , N. , Rhodes , K. , Cheney , R. and Wiebe , D. ( 2014 ). Evaluating the Effect of State Regulation of Federally Licensed Firearm Dealers on Firearm Homicide . American Journal of Public Health , 104 , 1384 – 1386 .

Jehan , F. , Pandit , V. , O’Keeffe , T. , Azim , A. , Jain , A. , Tai , S. A. , Tang , A. , Khan , M. , Kulvatunyou , N. , Gries , L. and Joseph , B. ( 2018 ). The Burden of Firearm Violence in the United States: Stricter Laws Result in Safer States . Journal of Injury and Violence Research , 10 , 11 – 16 .

Johnson , R. M. , Coyne-Beasley , T. and Runyan , C. W. ( 2004 ). Firearm Ownership and Storage Practices, U.S. Households, 1992-2002. A Systematic Review . American Journal of Preventive Medicine , 27 , 173 – 182 .

Johnson , R. M. , Miller , M. , Vriniotis , M. , Azrael , D. and Hemenway , D. ( 2006 ). Are Household Firearms Stored Less Safely in Homes With Adolescents? Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine , 160 , 788 – 792 .

Johnson , R. M. , Runyan , C. W. , Coyne-Beasley , T. , Lewis , M. A. and Bowling , J. M. ( 2008 ). Storage of Household Firearms: An Examination of the Attitudes and Beliefs of Married Women With Children . Health Education Research , 23 , 592 – 602 .

Jones , J. P. ( 1993 ). Gun Control: Education Is the Best Control . Texas Medicine , 89 , 8 .

Kim , J. ( 2018 ). Beyond the Trigger: The Mental Health Consequences of In-Home Firearm Access Among Children of Gun Owners . Social Science & Medicine (1982) , 203 , 51 – 59 .

Krueger , C. A. and Mehta , S. ( 2015 ). Trends in Firearm Safety—Do They Correlate With Fewer Injuries . Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine , 8 , 272 – 275 .

Kuhn , E. M. , Nie , C. L. , O’Brien , M. E. , Withers , R. L. , Wintemute , G. J. and Hargarten , S. W. ( 2002 ). Missing the Target: A Comparison of Buyback and Fatality Related Guns . Injury Prevention: Journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention , 8 , 143 – 146 .

Lee , L. M. and Zarowsky , C. ( 2015 ). Foundational Values for Public Health . Public Health Reviews , 36 , 2 .

Lee , K. H. , Jun , J. S. , Kim , Y. J. , Roh , S. , Moon , S. S. , Bukonda , N. and Hines , L. ( 2017 ). Mental Health, Substance Abuse, and Suicide Among Homeless Adults . Journal of Evidence-Informed Social Work , 14 , 229 – 242 .

Leuenberger , L. , Lehman , E. and McCall-Hosenfeld , J. ( 2021 ). Perceptions of Firearms in a Cohort of Women Exposed to Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) in Central Pennsylvania . BMC Women’s Health , 21 , 20 .

Lewiecki , E. M. and Miller , S. A. ( 2013 ). Suicide, Guns, and Public Policy . American Journal of Public Health , 103 , 27 – 31 .

Lowe , S. R. and Galea , S. ( 2017 ). The Mental Health Consequences of Mass Shootings . Trauma, Violence & Abuse , 18 , 62 – 82 .

McFarlane , J. , Soeken , K. , Campbell , J. , Parker , B. , Reel , S. and Silva , C. ( 1998 ). Severity of Abuse to Pregnant Women and Associated Gun Access of the Perpetrator . Public Health Nursing , 15 , 201 – 206 .

McGee , K. S. , Coyne-Beasley , T. and Johnson , R. M. ( 2003 ). Review of Evaluations of Educational Approaches to Promote Safe Storage of Firearms . Injury Prevention , 9 , 108 – 111 .

Miller , M. , Hepburn , L. and Azrael , D. ( 2017 ). Firearm Acquisition Without Background Checks: Results of a National Survey . Annals of Internal Medicine , 166 , 233 .

Monuteaux , M. C. , Azrael , D. and Miller , M. ( 2019 ). Association of Increased Safe Household Firearm Storage With Firearm Suicide and Unintentional Death Among US Youths . JAMA Pediatrics , 173 , 657 – 662 .

Moore , B. , Levit , K. , Elixhauser , A. ( 2014 ). Costs for Hospital Stays in the United States, 2012 , available from: https://www.hcup-us.ahrq.gov/reports/statbriefs/sb181-Hospital-Costs-United-States-2012.jsp [accessed September 23, 2020 ].

Ozanne-Smith , J. , Ashby , K. , Newstead , S. , Stathakis , V. Z. and Clapperton , A. ( 2004 ). Firearm related deaths: the impact of regulatory reform . Injury Prevention: Journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention , 10 , 280 – 286 .

Peek-Asa , C. , Butcher , B. and Cavanaugh , J. E. ( 2017 ). Cost of Hospitalization for Firearm Injuries by Firearm Type, Intent, and Payer in the United States . Injury Epidemiology , 4 ( 1 ), 20 .

Peetz , A. B. and Haider , A. ( 2018 ). Gun Violence Research and the Profession of Trauma Surgery . AMA Journal of Ethics , 20 , 475 – 482 .

Puttagunta , R. , Coverdale , T. R. and Coverdale , J. ( 2016 ). What is Taught on Firearm Safety in Undergraduate, Graduate, and Continuing Medical Education? A Review of Educational Programs . Academic Psychiatry: The Journal of the American Association of Directors of Psychiatric Residency Training and the Association for Academic Psychiatry , 40 , 821 – 824 .

Rajan , S. , Branas , C. C. , Hargarten , S. and Allegrante , J. P. ( 2018 ). Funding for Gun Violence Research Is Key to the Health and Safety of the Nation . American Journal of Public Health , 108 , 194 – 195 .

RAND Corporation ( 2018 ). The Effects of Child-Access Prevention Laws , available from: https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/child-access-prevention.html [accessed March 6, 2020 ].

Rattan , R. , Parreco , J. , Namias , N. , Pust , G. D. , Yeh , D. D. and Zakrison , T. L. ( 2018 ). Hidden Costs of Hospitalization After Firearm Injury: National Analysis of Different Hospital Readmission . Annals of Surgery , 267 , 810 – 815 .

Reeves , R.V. , Holmes , S. ( 2015 ) Guns and Race: The Different Worlds of Black and White Americans . Brookings . https://www.brookings.edu/blog/social-mobility-memos/2015/12/15/guns-and-race-the-different-worlds-of-black-and-white-americans/

Resnick , S. , Smith , R. N. , Beard , J. H. , Holena , D. , Reilly , P. M. , Schwab , C. W. and Seamon , M. J. ( 2017 ). Firearm Deaths in America: Can We Learn From 462,000 Lives Lost? Annals of Surgery , 266 , 432 – 440 .

Rostron , A. ( 2018 ). The Dickey Amendment on Federal Funding for Research on Gun Violence: A Legal Dissection . American Journal of Public Health , 108 , 865 – 867 .

Rudolph , K. E. , Stuart , E. A. , Vernick , J. S. and Webster , D. W. ( 2015 ). Association Between Connecticut’s Permit-to-Purchase Handgun Law and Homicides . American Journal of Public Health , 105 , e49 – e54 .

Ruger , J. P. ( 2015 ). Governing for the Common Good . Health Care Analysis: HCA: Journal of Health Philosophy and Policy , 23 , 341 – 351 .

Schlabach , G.W. ( n.d .) Aquinas on Warfare and Self-defense , available from: https://www.geraldschlabach.net/misc/aquinas-on-warfare-and-self-defense/ [accessed June 23, 2022 ].

Schleimer , J.P. , Kravitz-Wirtz , N. , Pallin , R. , Charbonneau , A.K. , Buggs , S.A. , and Wintemute , G.J. ( 2019 ). Firearm Ownership in California: A Latent Class Analysis . Injury Prevention , injuryprev-2019-043412.

Sen , B. and Panjamapirom , A. ( 2012 ). State Background Checks for Gun Purchase and Firearm Deaths: An Exploratory Study . Preventive Medicine , 55 , 346 – 350 .

Siegel , M. , Ross , C. S. and King , C. ( 2013 ). The Relationship Between Gun Ownership and Firearm Homicide Rates in the United States, 1981–2010 . American Journal of Public Health , 103 , 2098 – 2105 .

Siegel , M. , Pahn , M. , Xuan , Z. , Fleegler , E. and Hemenway , D. ( 2019 ). The Impact of State Firearm Laws on Homicide and Suicide Deaths in the USA, 1991-2016: A Panel Study . Journal of General Internal Medicine , 34 , 2021 – 2028 .

Sorenson , S. B. ( 2017 ). Guns in Intimate Partner Violence: Comparing Incidents by Type of Weapon . Journal of Women’s Health (2002) , 26 , 249 – 258 .

Sorenson , S. B. and Vittes , K. A. ( 2003 ). Buying a Handgun for Someone Else: Firearm Dealer Willingness to Sell . Injury Prevention , 9 , 147 – 150 .

Sorenson , S. B. and Wiebe , D. J. ( 2004 ). Weapons in the Lives of Battered Women . American Journal of Public Health , 94 , 1412 – 1417 .

Stroebe , W. ( 2013 ). Firearm Possession and Violent Death: A Critical Review . Aggression and Violent Behavior , 18 , 709 – 721 .

Sullivan , T. P. and Weiss , N. H. ( 2017 ). Is Firearm Threat in Intimate Relationships Associated with Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Symptoms Among Women? Violence and Gender , 4 , 31 – 36 .

Swanson , J. W. , McGinty , E. E. , Fazel , S. and Mays , V. M. ( 2015 ). Mental Illness and Reduction of Gun Violence and Suicide: Bringing Epidemiologic Research to Policy . Annals of Epidemiology , 25 , 366 – 376 .

Swanson , J. W. , Easter , M. M. , Robertson , A. G. , Swartz , M. S. , Alanis-Hirsch , K. , Moseley , D. , Dion , C. and Petrila , J. ( 2016 ). Gun Violence, Mental Illness, And Laws That Prohibit Gun Possession: Evidence From Two Florida Counties . Health Affairs (Project Hope) , 35 , 1067 – 1075 .

Tasigiorgos , S. , Economopoulos , K. P. , Winfield , R. D. and Sakran , J. V. ( 2015 ). Firearm Injury in the United States: An Overview of an Evolving Public Health Problem . Journal of the American College of Surgeons , 221 , 1005 – 1014 .

The Education Fund to Stop Gun Violence (EFSGV) ( 2020 ). Gun violence in America an analysis of 2018 CDC data .

Tjaden , P. , Thoennes , N. , US Department of Justice: Office to Justice Programs: National Institute of Justice ( 2000 ). Extent, Nature, and Consequences of Intimate Partner Violence: (300342003-001).

Trivigno , F. V. ( 2013 ). Guns and Virtue: The Virtue Ethical Case Against Gun Carrying . Public Affairs Quarterly , 27 , 289 – 310 .

Trivigno , F.V. ( 2018 ). Plato . The Oxford Handbook of Virtue , available from: https://academic.oup.com/edited-volume/28109/chapter-abstract/212218916?redirectedFrom=fulltext [accessed June 23, 2021 ].

Vernick , J. S. and Webster , D. W. ( 2007 ). Policies to Prevent Firearm Trafficking . Injury Prevention , 13 , 78 – 79 .

Vernick , J. S. , Webster , D. W. , Bulzacchelli , M. T. and Mair , J. S. ( 2006 ). Regulation of Firearm Dealers in the United States: An Analysis of State Law and Opportunities for Improvement . The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics: A Journal of the American Society of Law, Medicine & Ethics , 34 , 765 – 775 .

Violano , P. , Bonne , S. , Duncan , T. , Pappas , P. , Christmas , A. B. , Dennis , A. , Goldberg , S. , Greene , W. , Hirsh , M. , Shillinglaw , W. , Robinson , B. and Crandall , M. ( 2018 ). Prevention of Firearm Injuries With Gun Safety Devices and Safe Storage: An Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma Systematic Review . The Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery , 84 , 1003 – 1011 .

Webster , D. W. , Vernick , J. S. and Bulzacchelli , M. T. ( 2006 ). Effects of a Gun Dealer’s Change in Sales Practices on the Supply of Guns to Criminals . Journal of Urban Health , 83 , 778 – 787 .

Webster , D. W. , Crifasi , C. K. and Vernick , J. S. ( 2014 ). Effects of the Repeal of Missouri’s Handgun Purchaser Licensing Law on Homicides . Journal of Urban Health , 91 , 293 – 302 .

Weller , C. ( 2018 ). These 4 Countries Have Nearly Eliminated Gun Deaths—Here’s What the US Can Learn . The Independfent , available from: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/gun-deaths-eliminated-america-learn-japan-australia-uk-norway-florida-shooting-latest-news-a8216301.html [accessed June 4, 2021 ].

Wintemute , G. J. ( 2019 ). Background Checks For Firearm Purchases: Problem Areas And Recommendations To Improve Effectiveness . Health Affairs (Project Hope) , 38 , 1702 – 1710 .

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources ( 2020 ). Mentored Hunting | Wisconsin DNR , available from: https://dnr.wisconsin.gov/Education/OutdoorSkills/mentor [accessed June 23, 2021 ].

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

• Recommend to your Library

Affiliations

• Online ISSN 1754-9981
• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

5 Essays about Gun Violence

Gun violence impacts every part of society. There are certain places in the world where it’s more prevalent. According to a 2018 report, the United States had the 28th highest rate of gun violence deaths in the world. That puts the US above other wealthy countries. Gun violence is also a major issue in places like the Caribbean, Central America, and Venezuela. Here are five essays that address the financial and emotional impact of gun violence, how people use art to cope, and how the problem can be addressed.

“What Does Gun Violence Really Cost?”

Mark Follman, Julia Lurie, Jaeah Lee, and James West

This article opens with the story of a woman and her fiance shot on their way to dinner. After being close to death and staying in a hospital for five months, Jennifer Longdon couldn’t move her body from the chest down. After more hospitalizations, the bills got close to $1 million in just the first year, forcing her to file for personal bankruptcy. More expensive hospital stays followed for problems like sepsis, while wheelchair modifications for her house added up, as well.

For many people, their knowledge of gun violence comes from the news or movies. These venues tend to focus on the moment the violence occurs or the emotional impact. The long-term financial consequences as a result of health issues are less known. This article examines the existing data while telling a personal story.

“I Think of People Who Died At Sandy Hook Every Day”

Mary Ann Jacob

In this essay from 2016, Mary Ann Jacob remembers the horrific elementary school shooting from 2012. She worked at the library at the time and recalls hearing shouting from the intercom on the morning of December 14. Believing someone had pushed it by mistake, she called in, only to have the secretary answer the phone and shout, “There’s a shooter!” Mary Ann Jacob lived through one of the deadliest school shootings in US history. The essay goes on to describe what happened after and the steps survivors took to advocate for better gun control.

“You May Not See Me On TV, But Parkland Is My Story, Too”

Kyrah Simon

In 2018, a gunman at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School killed 17 students and wounded 17 others. Several students became vocal afterwards, challenging the lack of gun control in the face of such violence. They founded an advocacy group and many of the young people became household names. Kyrah Simon, a senior at the school, lost one of her best friends. She also wanted to speak up and share her story but realized that the media wanted certain speeches, certain faces. She writes, “I was just a girl that lost her friend. And it wasn’t enough.” Raw, honest, and enlightening, this personal essay is a must-read.

“Mexican Artist Transforms 1,527 Deadly Guns Into Life-Giving Shovels To Plant Trees”

In Culiacan, Mexico, the city with the highest rate of deaths by gun violence in the country, an artist and activist began a special project. Pedro Reyes used local media and TV ads paid for by the city’s botanical garden to advertise his gun-trading project. In exchange for bringing their weapons, people received electronics and appliances coupons. Reyes made over 1,500 trades. What came next? The guns were crushed by a steamroller and melted down. Reyes used the material to create shovels. He made the same number of shovels as guns, so each gun was represented as something new.

Turning guns into art is not an uncommon action. Reyes has also made instruments while other artists make sculptures. The transformation of an object of death into something that plays a part in fostering life – like planting trees – sends a powerful message.

“Forum: Doing Less Harm”

David Hemenway

What is the best approach to gun violence? David Hemenway, a professor of health policy and director of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center and Harvard Youth Violence Prevention Center, advocates for a public-health approach. He believes gun violence is a public-safety problem and a problem-health problem, but gun lobbyists dismiss both claims. The gun lobby focuses on the shooter – the individual – so attention is diverted from the firearms industry. In focusing so much on who to blame, prevention is left out of the equation.

A public-health approach returns the attention to prevention and asks everyone to work together on the issue. Hemenway uses motor-vehicle injury prevention as a blueprint for why gun violence prevention can work. Not sure what prevention could look like? Hemenway provides examples of how actors like healthcare workers, consumers, and the federal government can work together.

Learn about the consequences of gun violence in America and which interventions are most effective to reduce gun violence in homes, schools and communities!

You may also like

16 Inspiring Civil Rights Leaders You Should Know

15 Trusted Charities Fighting for Housing Rights

15 Examples of Gender Inequality in Everyday Life

11 Approaches to Alleviate World Hunger 

15 Facts About Malala Yousafzai

12 Ways Poverty Affects Society

15 Great Charities to Donate to in 2024

15 Quotes Exposing Injustice in Society

14 Trusted Charities Helping Civilians in Palestine

The Great Migration: History, Causes and Facts

Social Change 101: Meaning, Examples, Learning Opportunities

Rosa Parks: Biography, Quotes, Impact

About the author, emmaline soken-huberty.

Emmaline Soken-Huberty is a freelance writer based in Portland, Oregon. She started to become interested in human rights while attending college, eventually getting a concentration in human rights and humanitarianism. LGBTQ+ rights, women’s rights, and climate change are of special concern to her. In her spare time, she can be found reading or enjoying Oregon’s natural beauty with her husband and dog.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 10 December 2019

The psychology of guns: risk, fear, and motivated reasoning

• Joseph M. Pierre 1  

Palgrave Communications volume  5 , Article number:  159 ( 2019 ) Cite this article

253k Accesses

26 Citations

423 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Politics and international relations
• Social policy

The gun debate in America is often framed as a stand-off between two immutable positions with little potential to move ahead with meaningful legislative reform. Attempts to resolve this impasse have been thwarted by thinking about gun ownership attitudes as based on rational choice economics instead of considering the broader socio-cultural meanings of guns. In this essay, an additional psychological perspective is offered that highlights how concerns about victimization and mass shootings within a shared culture of fear can drive cognitive bias and motivated reasoning on both sides of the gun debate. Despite common fears, differences in attitudes and feelings about guns themselves manifest in variable degrees of support for or opposition to gun control legislation that are often exaggerated within caricatured depictions of polarization. A psychological perspective suggests that consensus on gun legislation reform can be achieved through understanding differences and diversity on both sides of the debate, working within a common middle ground, and more research to resolve ambiguities about how best to minimize fear while maximizing personal and public safety.

Discounting risk

Do guns kill people or do people kill people? Answers to that riddle draw a bright line between two sides of a caricatured debate about guns in polarized America. One side believes that guns are a menace to public safety, while the other believes that they are an essential tool of self-preservation. One side cannot fathom why more gun control legislation has not been passed in the wake of a disturbing rise in mass shootings in the US and eyes Australia’s 1996 sweeping gun reform and New Zealand’s more recent restrictions with envy. The other, backed by the Constitutional right to bear arms and the powerful lobby of the National Rifle Association (NRA), fears the slippery slope of legislative change and refuses to yield an inch while threatening, “I’ll give you my gun when you pry it from my cold, dead hands”. With the nation at an impasse, meaningful federal gun legislation aimed at reducing firearm violence remains elusive.

Despite the 1996 Dickey Amendment’s restriction of federal funding for research on gun violence by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Rostron, 2018 ), more than 30 years of public health research supports thinking of guns as statistically more of a personal hazard than a benefit. Case-control studies have repeatedly found that gun ownership is associated with an increased risk of gun-related homicide or suicide occurring in the home (Kellermann and Reay, 1986 ; Kellermann et al., 1993 ; Cummings and Koepsell, 1998 ; Wiebe, 2003 ; Dahlberg et al., 2004 ; Hemenway, 2011 ; Anglemeyer et al., 2014 ). For homicides, the association is largely driven by gun-related violence committed by family members and other acquaintances, not strangers (Kellermann et al., 1993 , 1998 ; Wiebe, 2003 ).

If having a gun increases the risk of gun-related violent death in the home, why do people choose to own guns? To date, the prevailing answer from the public health literature has been seemingly based on a knowledge deficit model that assumes that gun owners are unaware of risks and that repeated warnings about “overwhelming evidence” of “the health risk of a gun in the home [being] greater than the benefit” (Hemenway, 2011 ) should therefore decrease gun ownership and increase support for gun legislation reform. And yet, the rate of US households with guns has held steady for two decades (Smith and Son, 2015 ) with owners amassing an increasing number of guns such that the total civilian stock has risen to some 265 million firearms (Azrael et al., 2017 ). This disparity suggests that the knowledge deficit model is inadequate to explain or modify gun ownership.

In contrast to the premise that people weigh the risks and benefits of their behavior based on “rational choice economics” (Kahan and Braman, 2003 ), nearly 50 years of psychology and behavioral economics research has instead painted a picture of human decision-making as a less than rational process based on cognitive short-cuts (“availability heuristics”) and other error-prone cognitive biases (Tversky and Kahneman, 1974 ; Kunda, 1990 ; Haselton and Nettle, 2006 ; Hibert, 2012 ). As a result, “consequentialist” approaches to promoting healthier choices are often ineffective. Following this perspective, recent public health efforts have moved beyond educational campaigns to apply an understanding of the psychology of risky behavior to strike a balance between regulation and behavioral “nudges” aimed at reducing harmful practices like smoking, unhealthy eating, texting while driving, and vaccine refusal (Atchley et al., 2011 ; Hansen et al., 2016 ; Matjasko et al., 2016 ; Pluviano et al., 2017 ).

A similar public health approach aimed at reducing gun violence should take into account how gun owners discount the risks of ownership according to cognitive biases and motivated reasoning. For example, cognitive dissonance may lead those who already own guns to turn a blind eye to research findings about the dangers of ownership. Optimism bias, the general tendency of individuals to overestimate good outcomes and underestimate bad outcomes, can likewise make it easy to disregard dangers by externalizing them to others. The risk of suicide can therefore be dismissed out of hand based on the rationale that “it will never happen to me,” while the risk of homicide can be discounted based on demographic factors. Kleck and Gertz ( 1998 ) noted that membership in street gangs and drug dealing might be important confounds of risk in case control studies, just as unsafe storage practices such as keeping a firearm loaded and unlocked may be another (Kellerman et al., 1993 ). Other studies have found that the homicide risk associated with guns in the home is greater for women compared to men and for non-whites compared to whites (Wiebe, 2003 ). Consequently, white men—by far the largest demographic that owns guns—might be especially likely to think of themselves as immune to the risks of gun ownership and, through confirmation bias, cherry-pick the data to support pre-existing intuitions and fuel motivated disbelief about guns. These testable hypotheses warrant examination in future research aimed at understanding the psychology of gun ownership and crafting public health approaches to curbing gun violence.

Still, while the role of cognitive biases should be integrated into a psychological understanding of attitudes towards gun ownership, cognitive biases are universal liabilities that fall short of explaining why some people might “employ” them as a part of motivated reasoning to support ownership or to oppose gun reform. To understand the underlying motivation that drives cognitive bias, a deeper analysis of why people own guns is required. In the introductory essay to this journal’s series on “What Guns Mean,” Metzl ( 2019 ) noted that public health efforts to reduce firearm ownership have failed to “address beliefs about guns among people who own them”. In a follow-up piece, Galea and Abdalla ( 2019 ) likewise suggested that the gun debate is complicated by the fact that “knowledge and values do not align” and that “these values create an impasse, one where knowing is not enough” (Galea and Abdalla, 2019 ). Indeed, these and other authors (Kahan and Braman, 2003 ; Braman and Kahan, 2006 ; Pierre, 2015 ; Kalesan et al., 2016 ) have enumerated myriad beliefs and values, related to the different “symbolic lives” and “social meanings” of firearms both within and outside of “gun culture” that drive polarized attitudes towards gun ownership in the US. This essay attempts to further explore the meaning of guns from a psychological perspective.

Fear and gun ownership

Modern psychological understanding of human decision-making has moved beyond availability heuristics and cognitive biases to integrate the role of emotion and affect. Several related models including the “risk-as-feelings hypothesis” (Loewenstein et al., 2001 ), the “affect heuristic” (Slovic et al., 2007 ); and the “appraisal-tendency framework” (Lerner et al., 2015 ) illustrate how emotions can hijack rational-decision-making processes to the point of being the dominant influence on risk assessments. Research has shown that “perceived risk judgments”—estimates of the likelihood that something bad will happen—are especially hampered by emotion (Pachur et al., 2012 ) and that different types of affect can bias such judgments in different ways (Lerner et al., 2015 ). For example, fear can in particular bias assessments away from rational analysis to overestimate risks, as well as to perceive negative events as unpredictable (Lerner et al., 2015 ).

Although gun ownership is associated with positive feelings about firearms within “gun culture” (Pierre, 2015 ; Kalesan et al., 2016 ; Metzl, 2019 ), most research comparing gun owners to non-gun owners suggests that ownership is rooted in fear. While long guns have historically been owned primarily for hunting and other recreational purposes, US surveys dating back to the 1990s have revealed that the most frequent reason for gun ownership and more specifically handgun ownership is self-protection (Cook and Ludwig, 1997 ; Azrael et al., 2017 ; Pew Research Center, 2017 ). Research has likewise shown that the decision to obtain a firearm is largely motivated by past victimization and/or fears of future victimization (Kleck et al., 2011 ; Hauser and Kleck, 2013 ).

A few studies have reported that handgun ownership is associated with past victimization, perceived risk of crime, and perceived ineffectiveness of police protection within low-income communities where these concerns may be congruent with real risks (Vacha and McLaughlin, 2000 , 2004 ). However, gun ownership tends to be lower in urban settings and in low-income families where there might be higher rates of violence and crime (Vacha and McLaughlin, 2000 ). Instead, the largest demographic of gun owners in the US are white men living in rural communities who are earning more than $100K/year (Azrael et al., 2017 ). Mencken and Froese ( 2019 ) likewise reported that gun owners tend to have higher incomes and greater ratings of life happiness than non-owners. These findings suggest a mismatch between subjective fear and objective reality.

Stroebe and colleagues ( 2017 ) reported that the specific perceived risk of victimization and more “diffuse” fears that the world is a dangerous place are both independent predictors of handgun ownership, with perceived risk of assault associated with having been or knowing a victim of violent crime and belief in a dangerous world associated with political conservatism. These findings hint at the likelihood that perceived risk of victimization can be based on vicarious sources with a potential for bias, whether through actual known acquaintances or watching the nightly news, conducting a Google search or scanning one’s social media feed, or reading “The Armed Citizen” column in the NRA newsletter The American Rifleman . It also suggests that a general fear of crime, independent of actual or even perceived individual risk, may be a powerful motivator for gun ownership for some that might track with race and political ideology.

Several authors have drawn a connection between gun ownership and racial tensions by examining the cultural symbolism and socio-political meaning of guns. Bhatia ( 2019 ) detailed how the NRA’s “disinformation campaign reliant on fearmongering” is constructed around a narrative of “fear and identity politics” that exploits current xenophobic sentiments related to immigrants. Metzl ( 2019 ) noted that during the 1960s, conservatives were uncharacteristically in favor of gun control when armed resistance was promoted by Malcolm X, the Black Panther Party, and others involved in the Black Power Movement. Today, Metzl argues, “mainstream society reflexively codes white men carrying weapons in public as patriots, while marking armed black men as threats or criminals.” In support of this view, a 2013 study found that having a gun in the home was significantly associated with racism against black people as measured by the Symbolic Racism Scale, noting that “for each 1 point increase in symbolic racism, there was a 50% greater odds of having a gun in the home and a 28% increase in the odds of supporting permits to carry concealed handguns” (O’Brien et al., 2013 ). Hypothesizing that guns are a symbol of hegemonic masculinity that serves to “shore up white male privilege in society,” Stroud ( 2012 ) interviewed a non-random sample of 20 predominantly white men in Texas who had licenses for concealed handgun carry. The men described how guns help to fulfill their identities as protectors of their families, while characterizing imagined dangers with rhetoric suggesting specific fears about black criminals. These findings suggest that gun ownership among white men may be related to a collective identity as “good guys” protecting themselves against “bad guys” who are people of color, a premise echoed in the lay press with headlines like, “Why Are White Men Stockpiling Guns?” (Smith, 2018 ), “Report: White Men Stockpile Guns Because They’re Afraid of Black People” (Harriott, 2018 ), and “Gun Rights Are About Keeping White Men on Top” (Wuertenberg, 2018 ).

Connecting the dots, the available evidence therefore suggests that for many gun owners, fears about victimization can result in confirmation, myside, and optimism biases that not only discount the risks of ownership, but also elevate the salience of perceived benefit, however remote, as it does when one buys a lottery ticket (Rogers and Webley, 2001 ). Indeed, among gun owners there is widespread belief that having a gun makes one safer, supported by published claims that where there are “more guns”, there is “less crime” (Lott, 1998 , 1999 ) as well as statistics and anecdotes about successful defensive gun use (DGU) (Kleck and Gertz, 1995 , 1998 ; Tark and Kleck, 2004 ; Cramer and Burnett, 2012 ). Suffice it to say that there have been numerous debates about how to best interpret this body of evidence, with critics claiming that “more guns, less crime” is a myth (Ayres and Donohue, 2003 ; Moyer, 2017 ) that has been “discredited” (Wintemute, 2008 ) and that the incidence of DGU has been grossly overestimated and pales in comparison to the risk of being threatened or harmed by a gun in the home (Hemenway, 1997 , 2011 ; Cook and Ludwig, 1998 ; Azrael and Hemenway, 2000 ; Hemenway et al., 2000 ). Attempts at objective analysis have concluded that surveys to date have defined and measured DGU inconsistently with unclear numbers of false positives and false negatives (Smith, 1997 ; McDowall et al., 2000 ; National Research Council, 2005 ; RAND, 2018 ), that the causal effects of DGU on reducing injury are “inconclusive” (RAND, 2018 ), and that “neither side seems to be willing to give ground or see their opponent’s point of view” (Smith, 1997 ). With the scientific debate about DGU mirrored in the lay press (Defilippis and Hughes, 2015 ; Kleck, 2015 ; Doherty, 2015 ), a rational assessment of whether guns make owners safer is hampered by a lack of “settled science”. With no apparent consensus, motivated reasoning can pave the way to the nullification of opposing arguments in favor of personal opinions and ideological stances.

For gun owners, even if it is acknowledged that on average successful DGU is much less likely than a homicide or suicide in the home, not having a gun at all translates to zero chance of self-preservation, which are intolerable odds. The bottom line is that when gun owners believe that owning a gun will make them feel safer, little else may matter. Curiously however, there is conflicting evidence that gun ownership actually decreases fears of victimization (Hauser and Kleck, 2013 ; Dowd-Arrow et al., 2019 ). That gun ownership may not mitigate such fears could help to account for why some individuals go on to acquire multiple guns beyond their initial purchase with US gun owners possessing an average of 5 firearms and 8% of owners having 10 or more (Azrael et al., 2017 ).

Gun owner diversity

A psychological model of the polarized gun debate in America would ideally compare those for or against gun control legislation. However, research to date has instead focused mainly on differences between gun owners and non-gun owners, which has several limitations. For example, of the nearly 70% of Americans who do not own a gun, 36% report that they can see themselves owning one in the future (Pew Research Center, 2017 ) with 11.5% of all gun owners in 2015 having newly acquired one in the previous 5 years (Wertz et al., 2018 ). Gun ownership and non-ownership are therefore dynamic states that may not reflect static ideology. Personal accounts such as Willis’ ( 2010 ) article, “I Was Anti-gun, Until I Got Stalked,” illustrate this point well.

With existing research heavily reliant on comparing gun owners to non-gun owners, a psychological model of gun attitudes in the US will have limited utility if it relies solely on gun owner stereotypes based on their most frequent demographic characteristics. On the contrary, Hauser and Kleck ( 2013 ) have argued that “a more complete understanding of the relationship between fear of crime and gun ownership at the individual level is crucial”. Just so, looking more closely at the diversity of gun owners can reveal important details beyond the kinds of stereotypes that are often used to frame political debates.

Foremost, it must be recognized that not all gun owners are conservative white men with racist attitudes. Over the past several decades, women have comprised 9–14% of US gun owners with the “gender gap” narrowing due to decreasing male ownership (Smith and Son, 2015 ). A 2017 Pew Survey reported that 22% of women in the US own a gun and that female gun owners are just as likely as men to belong to the NRA (Pew Research Center, 2017 ). Although the 36% rate of gun ownership among US whites is the highest for any racial demographic, 25% of blacks and 15% of Hispanics report owning guns with these racial groups being significantly more concerned than whites about gun violence in their communities and the US as a whole (Pew Research Center, 2017 ). Providing a striking counterpoint to Stroud’s ( 2012 ) interviews of white gun owners in Texas, Craven ( 2017 ) interviewed 11 black gun owners across the country who offered diverse views on guns and the question of whether owning them makes them feel safer, including if confronted by police during a traffic stop. Kelly ( 2019 ) has similarly offered a self-portrait as a female “left-wing anarchist” against the stereotype of guns owners as “Republicans, racist libertarians, and other generally Constitution-obsessed weirdos”. She reminds us that, “there is also a long history of armed community self-defense among the radical left that is often glossed over or forgotten entirely in favor of the Fox News-friendly narrative that all liberals hate guns… when the cops and other fascists see that they’re not the only ones packing, the balance of power shifts, and they tend to reconsider their tactics”.

Although Mencken and Froese ( 2019 ) concluded that “white men in economic distress find comfort in guns as a means to reestablish a sense of individual power and moral certitude,” their study results actually demonstrated that gun owners fall into distinguishable groups based on different levels of “moral and emotional empowerment” imparted by guns. For example, those with low levels of gun empowerment were more likely to be female and to own long guns for recreational purposes such as hunting and collecting. Other research has shown that the motivations to own a gun, and the degree to which gun ownership is related to fear and the desire for self-protection, also varies according to the type of gun (Stroebe et al., 2017 ). Owning guns, owning specific types of guns (e.g. handguns, long guns, and so-called “military style” semi-automatic rifles like AR-15s), carrying a gun in public, and keeping a loaded gun on one’s nightstand all have different psychological implications. A 2015 study reported that new gun owners were younger and more likely to identify as liberal than long-standing gun owners (Wertz et al., 2018 ). Although Kalesan et al. ( 2016 ) found that gun ownership is more likely among those living within a “gun culture” where ownership is prevalent, encouraged, and part of social life, it would therefore be a mistake to characterize gun culture as a monolith.

It would also be a mistake to equate gun ownership with opposition to gun legislation reform or vice-versa. Although some evidence supports a strong association (Wolpert and Gimpel, 1998 ), more recent studies suggest important exceptions to the rule. While only about 30% of the US population owns a gun, over 70% believes that most citizens should be able to legally own them (Pew Research Center, 2017 ). Women tend to be more likely than men to support gun control, even when they are gun owners themselves (Kahan and Braman, 2003 ; Mencken and Froese, 2019 ). Older (age 70–79) Americans likewise have some of the highest rates of gun ownership, but also the highest rates of support for gun control (Pederson et al., 2015 ). In Mencken and Froese’s study ( 2019 ), most gun owners reporting lower levels of gun empowerment favored bans on semi-automatic weapons and high-capacity magazines and opposed arming teachers in schools. Kahan and Braman ( 2003 ) theorized that attitudes towards gun control are best understood according to a “cultural theory of risk”. In their study sample, those with “hierarchical” and “individualist” cultural orientations were more likely than those with “egalitarian” views to oppose gun control and these perspectives were more predictive than other variables including political affiliation and fear of crime.

In fact, both gun owners and non-owners report high degrees of support for universal background checks; laws mandating safe gun storage in households with children; and “red flag” laws restricting access to firearms for those hospitalized for mental illness or those otherwise at risk of harming themselves or others, those convicted of certain crimes including public display of a gun in a threatening manner, those subject to temporary domestic violence restraining orders, and those on “no-fly” or other watch lists (Pew Research Center, 2017 ; Barry et al., 2018 ). According to a 2015 survey, the majority of the US public also opposes carrying firearms in public spaces with most gun owners opposing public carry in schools, college campuses, places of worship, bars, and sports stadiums (Wolfson et al., 2017 ). Despite broad public support for gun legislation reform however, it is important to recognize that the threat of gun restrictions is an important driver of gun acquisition (Wallace, 2015 ; Aisch and Keller, 2016 ). As a result, proposals to restrict gun ownership boosted gun sales considerably under the Obama administration (Depetris-Chauvin, 2015 ), whereas gun companies like Remington and United Sporting Companies have since filed for bankruptcy under the Trump administration.

A shared culture of fear

Developing a psychological understanding of attitudes towards guns and gun control legislation in the US that accounts for underlying emotions, motivated reasoning, and individual variation must avoid the easy trap of pathologizing gun owners and dismissing their fears as irrational. Instead, it should consider the likelihood that motivated reasoning underlies opinion on both sides of the gun debate, with good reason to conclude that fear is a prominent source of both “pro-gun” and “anti-gun” attitudes. Although the research on fear and gun ownership summarized above implies that non-gun owners are unconcerned about victimization, a closer look at individual study data reveals both small between-group differences and significant within-group heterogeneity. For example, Stroebe et al.’s ( 2017 ) findings that gun owners had greater mean ratings of belief in a dangerous world, perceived risk of victimization, and the perceived effectiveness of owning a gun for self-defense were based on inter-group differences of <1 point on a 7-point Likert scale. Fear of victimization is therefore a universal fear for gun owners and non-gun owners alike, with important differences in both quantitative and qualitative aspects of those fears. Kahan and Braham ( 2003 ) noted that the gun debate is not so much a debate about the personal risks of gun ownership, as it is a one about which of two potential fears is most salient—that of “firearm casualties in a world with insufficient gun control or that of personal defenselessness in a world with excessive control”.

Although this “shared fear” hypothesis has not been thoroughly tested in existing research, there is general support for it based on evidence that fear is an especially potent influence on risk assessment and decision-making when considering low-frequency catastrophic events (Chanel et al., 2009 ). In addition, biased risk assessments have been linked to individual feelings about a specific activity. Whereas many activities in the real world have both high risk and high benefit, positive attitudes about an activity are associated with biased judgments of low risk and high benefit while negative attitudes are associated with biased judgments of high risk and low benefit (Slovic et al., 2007 ). These findings match those of the gun debate, whereby catastrophic events like mass shootings can result in “probability neglect,” over-estimating the likelihood of risk (Sunstein, 2003 ; Sunstein and Zeckhauser, 2011 ) with polarized differences regarding guns as a root cause and gun control as a viable solution. For those that have positive feelings about guns and their perceived benefit, the risk of gun ownership is minimized as discussed above. However, based on findings from psychological research on fear (Loewenstein et al., 2001 ; Slovic et al., 2007 ), the reverse is also likely to be true—those with negative feelings about guns who perceive little benefit to ownership may tend to over-estimate risks. Consistent with this dichotomy, both calls for legislative gun reform, as well as gun purchases increase in the wake of mass shootings (Wallace, 2015 ; Wozniak, 2017 ), with differences primarily predicted by the relative self-serving attributional biases of gun ownership and non-ownership alike (Joslyn and Haider-Markel, 2017 ).

Psychological research has shown that fear is associated with loss of control, with risks that are unfamiliar and uncontrollable perceived as disproportionately dangerous (Lerner et al., 2015 ; Sunstein, 2003 ). Although mass shootings have increased in recent years, they remain extremely rare events and represent a miniscule proportion of overall gun violence. And yet, as acts of terrorism, they occur in places like schools that are otherwise thought of as a suburban “safe spaces,” unlike inner cities where violence is more mundane, and are often given sensationalist coverage in the media. A 2019 Harris Poll found that 79% of Americans endorse stress as a result of the possibility of a mass shooting, with about a third reporting that they “cannot go anywhere without worrying about being a victim” (American Psychological Association, 2019 ). While some evidence suggests that gun owners may be more concerned about mass shootings than non-gun owners (Dowd-Arrow et al., 2019 ), this is again a quantitative difference as with fear of victimization more generally. There is little doubt that parental fears about children being victims of gun violence were particularly heightened in the wake of Columbine (Altheide, 2019 ) and it is likely that subsequent school shootings at Virginia Tech, Sandy Hook Elementary, and Stoneman Douglas High have been especially impactful in the minds of those calling for increasing restrictions on gun ownership. For those privileged to be accustomed to community safety who are less worried about home invasion and have faith in the police to provide protection, fantasizing about “gun free zones” may reflect a desire to recreate safe spaces in the wake of mass shootings that invoke feelings of loss of control.

Altheide ( 2019 ) has argued that mass shootings in the US post-Columbine have been embedding within a larger cultural narrative of terrorism, with “expanded social control and policies that helped legitimate the war on terror”. Sunstein and Zeckhauser ( 2011 ) have similarly noted that following terrorist attacks, the public tends to demand responses from government, favoring precautionary measures that are “not justified by any plausible analysis of expected utility” and over-estimating potential benefits. However, such responses may not only be ineffective, but potentially damaging. For example, although collective anxieties in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks resulted in the rapid implementation of new screening procedures for boarding airplanes, it has been argued that the “theater” of response may have done well to decrease fear without any evidence of actual effectiveness in reducing danger (Graham, 2019 ) while perhaps even increasing overall mortality by avoiding air travel in favor of driving (Sunstein, 2003 ; Sunstein and Zeckhauser, 2011 ).

As with the literature on DGU, the available evidence supporting the effectiveness of specific gun laws in reducing gun violence is less than definitive (Koper et al., 2004 ; Hahn et al., 2005 ; Lee et al., 2017 ; Webster and Wintemute, 2015 ), leaving the utility of gun reform legislation open to debate and motivated reasoning. Several authors have argued that even if proposed gun control measures are unlikely to deter mass shooters, “doing something is better than nothing” (Fox and DeLateur, 2014 ) and that ineffective counter-terrorism responses are worthwhile if they reduce public fear (Sunstein and Zeckhauser, 2011 ). Crucially however, this perspective fails to consider the impact of gun control legislation on the fears of those who value guns for self-protection. For them, removing guns from law-abiding “good guys” while doing nothing to deter access to the “bad guys” who commit crimes is illogical anathema. Gun owners and gun advocates likewise reject the concept of “safe spaces” and regard the notion of “gun free zones” as a liability that invites rather than prevents acts of terrorism. In other words, gun control proposals designed to decrease fear have the opposite of their intended effect on those who view guns as symbols of personal safety, increasing rather than decreasing their fears independently of any actual effects on gun violence. Such policies are therefore non-starters, and will remain non-starters, for the sizeable proportion of Americans who regard guns as essential for self-preservation.

In 2006, Braman and Kahan noted that “the Great American Gun Debate… has convulsed the national polity for the better part of four decades without producing results satisfactory to either side” and argued that consequentialist arguments about public health risks based on cost–benefit analysis are trumped by the cultural meanings of guns to the point of being “politically inert” (Braman and Kahan, 2006 ). More than a decade later, that argument is iterated in this series on “What Guns Mean”. In this essay, it is further argued that persisting debates about the effectiveness of DGU and gun control legislation are at their heart trumped by shared concerns about personal safety, victimization, and mass shootings within a larger culture of fear, with polarized opinions about how to best mitigate those fears that are determined by the symbolic, cultural, and personal meanings of guns and gun ownership.

Coming full circle to the riddle, “Do guns kill people or do people kill people?”, a psychologically informed perspective rejects the question as a false dichotomy that can be resolved by the statement, “people kill people… with guns”. It likewise suggests a way forward by acknowledging both common fears and individual differences beyond the limited, binary caricature of the gun debate that is mired in endless arguments over disputed facts. For meaningful legislative change to occur, the debate must be steered away from its portrayal as two immutable sides caught between not doing anything on the one hand and enacting sweeping bans or repealing the 2nd Amendment on the other. In reality, public attitudes towards gun control are more nuanced than that, with support or opposition to specific gun control proposals predicted by distinct psychological and cultural factors (Wozniak, 2017 ) such that achieving consensus may prove less elusive than is generally assumed. Accordingly, gun reform proposals should focus on “low hanging fruit” where there is broad support such as requiring and enforcing universal background checks, enacting “red flag” laws balanced by guaranteeing gun ownership rights to law-abiding citizens, and implementing public safety campaigns that promote safe firearm handling and storage. Finally, the Dickey Amendment should be repealed so that research can inform public health interventions aimed at reducing gun violence and so that individuals can replace motivated reasoning with evidence-based decision-making about personal gun ownership and guns in society.

Aisch G, Keller J (2016). What happens after calls for new gun restrictions? Sales go up. New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/12/10/us/gun-sales-terrorism-obama-restrictions.html . Accessed 19 Nov 2019.

Altheide DL (2019) The Columbine shootings and the discourse of fear. Am Behav Sci 52:1354–1370

Article   Google Scholar  

American Psychological Association (2019). One-third of US adults say fear of mass shootings prevents them from going to certain places or events. Press release, 15 August 2019. https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2019/08/fear-mass-shooting . Accessed 19 Nov 2019

Anglemeyer A, Horvath T, Rutherford G (2014) The accessibility of firearms and risk for suicide and homicide victimization among household members: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Int Med 160:101–110

Google Scholar  

Atchley P, Atwood S, Boulton A (2011) The choice to text and drive in younger drivers: behavior may shape attitude. Accid Anal Prev 43:134–142

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Ayres I, Donohue III JJ (2003) Shooting down the more guns, less crime hypothesis. Stanf Law Rev 55:1193–1312

Azrael D, Hemenway D (2000) ‘In the safety of your own home’: results from a national survey on gun use at home. Soc Sci Med 50:285–291

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Azrael D, Hepburn L, Hemenway D, Miller M (2017) The stock and flow of U.S. firearms: results from the 2015 National Firearms Survey. Russell Sage Found J Soc Sci 3:38–57

Barry CL, Webster DW, Stone E, Crifasi CK, Vernick JS, McGinty EE (2018) Public support for gun violence prevention policies among gun owners and non-gun owners in 2017. Am J Public Health 108:878–881

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Bhatia R (2019). Guns, lies, and fear: exposing the NRA’s messaging playbook. Center for American Progress. https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/guns-crime/reports/2019/04/24/468951/guns-lies-fear/ . Accessed 19 Nov 2019

Braman D, Kahan DM (2006) Overcoming the fear of guns, the fear of gun control, and the fear of cultural politics: constructing a better gun debate. Emory Law J 55:569–607

Cook PJ, Ludwig J (1997). Guns in America: National survey on private ownership and use of firearms. National Institute of Justice. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/165476.pdf . Accessed 19 Nov 2019

Chanel O, Chichilnisky G(2009) The influence of fear in decisions: Experimental evidence. J Risk Uncertain 39(3):271–298

Article   MATH   Google Scholar  

Cook PJ, Ludwig J (1998) Defensive gun use: new evidence from a national survey. J Quant Criminol 14:111–131

Cramer CE, Burnett D (2012). Tough targets: when criminals face armed resistance from citizens. Cato Institute https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/WP-Tough-Targets.pdf . Accessed 19 Nov 2019

Craven J (2017). Why black people own guns. Huffington Post. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/black-gun-ownership_n_5a33fc38e4b040881bea2f37 . Accessed 19 Nov 2019

Cummings P, Koepsell TD (1998) Does owning a firearm increase or decrease the risk of death? JAMA 280:471–473

Dahlberg LL, Ikeda RM, Kresnow M (2004) Guns in the home and risk of a violent death in the home: findings from a national study. Am J Epidemiol 160:929–936

Defilippis E, Hughes D (2015). The myth behind defensive gun ownership: guns are more likely to do harm than good. Politico. https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/01/defensive-gun-ownership-myth-114262 . Accessed 19 Nov 2019

Depetris-Chauvin E (2015) Fear of Obama: an empirical study of the demand for guns and the U.S. 2008 presidential election. J Pub Econ 130:66–79

Doherty B (2015). How to count the defensive use of guns: neither survey calls nor media and police reports capture the importance of private gun ownership. Reason. https://reason.com/2015/03/09/how-to-count-the-defensive-use-of-guns/ . Accessed 19 Nov 2019

Dowd-Arrow B, Hill TD, Burdette AM (2019) Gun ownership and fear. SSM Pop Health 8:100463

Fox JA, DeLateur MJ (2014) Mass shootings in America: moving beyond Newtown. Homicide Stud 18:125–145

Galea S, Abdalla SM (2019) The public’s health and the social meaning of guns. Palgrave Comm 5:111

Graham DA. The TSA doesn’t work—and never has. The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/06/the-tsa-doesnt-work-and-maybe-it-doesnt-matter/394673/ . Accessed 19 Nov 2019

Hahn RA, Bilukha O, Crosby A, Fullilove MT, Liberman A, Moscicki E, Synder S, Tuma F, Briss PA, Task Force on Community Preventive Services (2005) Firearms laws and the reduction of violence: a systematic review. Am J Prev Med 28:40–71

Hansen PG, Skov LR, Skov KL (2016) Making healthy choices easier: regulation versus nudging. Annu Rev Public Health 37:237–51

Harriott M (2018). Report: white men stockpile guns because they’re afraid of black people. The Root. https://www.theroot.com/report-white-men-stockpile-guns-because-they-re-afraid-1823779218 . Accessed 19 Nov 2019

Haselton MG, Nettle D (2006) The paranoid optimist: an integrative evolutionary model of cognitive biases. Pers Soc Psychol Rev 10:47–66

Hauser W, Kleck G (2013) Guns and fear: a one-way street? Crime Delinquency 59:271–291

Hemenway (1997) Survey research and self-defense gun use: an explanation of extreme overestimates. J Crim Law Criminol 87:1430–1445

Hemenway D, Azrael D, Miller M (2000) Gun use in the United States: results from two national surveys. Inj Prev 6:263–267

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Hemenway D (2011) Risks and benefits of a gun in the home. Am J Lifestyle Med 5:502–511

Hibert M (2012) Toward a synthesis of cognitive biases: how noisy information processing can bias human decision making. Psychol Bull 138:211–237

Joslyn MR, Haider-Markel DP (2017) Gun ownership and self-serving attributions for mass shooting tragedies. Soc Sci Quart 98:429–442

Kahan DM, Braman D (2003) More statistics, less persuasion: a cultural theory of gun-risk perceptions. Univ Penn Law Rev 151:1291–1327

Kalesan B, Villarreal MD, Keyes KM, Galea S (2016) Gun ownership and social gun culture. Inj Prev 22:216–220

Kellermann AL, Reay DT (1986) Protection or peril? An analysis of fire-arm related deaths in the home. N Engl J Med 314:1557–1560

Kellermann AL, Rivara FP, Rushforth NB, Banton JG, Reay DT, Francisco JT, Locci A, Prodzinski J, Hackman BB, Somes G (1993) Gun ownership as a risk factor for homicide in the home. N Engl J Med 329:1084–1091

Kellerman AL, Somes G, Rivara F, Lee R, Banton J (1998) Injuries and deaths due to firearms in the home. J Trauma Inj Infect Crit Care 45:263–267

Kelly K (2019) I’m a left-wing anarchist. Guns aren’t just for right-wingero. Vox. https://www.vox.com/first-person/2019/7/1/18744204/guns-gun-control-anarchism . Accessed 19 Nov 2019

Kleck G (2015) Defensive gun use is not a myth: why my critics still have it wrong. Politico. https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/02/defensive-gun-ownership-gary-kleck-response-115082 . Accessed 19 Nov 2019

Kleck G, Kovandzic T, Saber M, Hauser W (2011) The effect of perceived risk and victimization on plans to purchase a gun for self-protection. J Crim Justice 39:312–319

Kleck G, Gertz M (1995) Armed resistance to crime: the prevalence and nature of self-defense with a gun. J Crim Law Criminol 86:150–187

Kleck G, Gertz M (1998) Carrying guns for protection: results from the national self-defense survey. J Res Crime Delinquency 35:193–224

Koper CS, Woods DJ, Roth JA (2004) An updated assessment of the federal assault weapons ban: impacts on gun markets and gun violence, 1994–2003. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/204431.pdf . Accessed 19 Nov 2019

Kunda Z (1990) The case for motivated reasoning. Psychol Bull 108:480–498

Lee LK, Fleegler EW, Farrell C, Avakame E, Srinivasan S, Hemenway D, Monuteaux MC (2017) Firearm laws and firearm homicides: a systematic review. JAMA Int Med 177:106–119

Lerner JS, Li Y, Valdesolo P, Kassam KS (2015) Emotion and decision making. Ann Rev Psychol 66:799–823

Loewenstein GF, Weber EU, Hsee CK, Welch N (2001) Risk as feelings. Psychol Bull 127:267–286

Lott JR (1998) More guns, less crime. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

Lott JR (1999) More guns, less crime: a response to Ayres and Donohue. Yale Law & Economics Research paper no. 247 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=248328 . Accessed 19 Nov 2019

Matjasko JL, Cawley JH, Baker-Goering M, Yokum DV (2016) Applying behavioral economics to public health policy: illustrative examples and promising directions. Am J Prev Med 50:S13–S19

McDowall D, Loftin C, Presser S (2000) Measuring civilian defensive firearm use: a methodological experiment. J Quant Criminol 16:1–19

Mencken FC, Froese P (2019) Gun culture in action. Soc Prob 66:3–27

Metzl J (2019) What guns mean: the symbolic lives of firearms. Palgrave Comm 5:35

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

Moyer MW (2017). More guns do not stop more crimes, evidence shows. Sci Am https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/more-guns-do-not-stop-more-crimes-evidence-shows/ . Accessed 19 Nov 2019.

National Research Council (2005) Firearms and violence: a critical review. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC

O’Brien K, Forrest W, Lynott D, Daly M (2013) Racism, gun ownership and gun control: Biased attitudes in US whites may influence policy decisions. PLoS ONE 8(10):e77552

Article   ADS   PubMed   PubMed Central   CAS   Google Scholar  

Pachur T, Hertwig R, Steinmann F (2012) How do people judge risks: availability heuristic, affect heuristic, or both? J Exp Psychol Appl 18:314–330

Pederson J, Hall TL, Foster B, Coates JE (2015) Gun ownership and attitudes toward gun control in older adults: reexamining self interest theory. Am J Soc Sci Res 1:273–281

Pew Research Center (2017) America’s complex relationship with guns. https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2017/06/Guns-Report-FOR-WEBSITE-PDF-6-21.pdf . Accessed 19 Nov 2019

Pierre JM (2015) The psychology of guns. Psych Unseen. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/psych-unseen/201510/the-psychology-guns . Accessed 19 Nov 2019

Pluviano S, Watt C, Della Salla S (2017) Misinformation lingers in memory: failure of three pro-vaccination strategies. PLoS ONE 23(7):e0811640

RAND (2018) The challenges of defining and measuring defensive gun use. https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/essays/defensive-gun-use.html . Accessed 19 Nov 2019

Rogers P, Webley P (2001) “It could be us!”: cognitive and social psychological factors in UK National Lottery play. Appl Psychol Int Rev 50:181–199

Rostron A (2018) The Dickey Amendment on federal funding for research on gun violence: a legal discussion. Am J Public Health 108:865–867

Slovic P, Finucane ML, Peters E, MacGregor DG (2007) The affect heuristic. Eur J Oper Res 177:1333–1352

Smith TW (1997) A call for a truce in the DGU war. J Crim Law Criminol 87:1462–1469

Smith JA (2018) Why are white men stockpiling guns? Sci Am Blogs. https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/why-are-white-men-stockpiling-guns/ . Accessed 19 Nov 2019

Smith TW, Son J (2015). General social survey final report: Trends in gun ownership in the United States, 1972–2014. http://www.norc.org/PDFs/GSS%20Reports/GSS_Trends%20in%20Gun%20Ownership_US_1972-2014.pdf . Accessed 19 Nov 2019

Stroebe W, Leander NP, Kruglanski AW (2017) Is it a dangerous world out there? The motivational biases of American gun ownership. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 43:1071–1085

Stroud A (2012) Good guys with guns: hegemonic masculinity and concealed handguns. Gend Soc 26:216–238

Sunstein CR (2003) Terrorism and probability neglect. J Risk Uncertain 26:121–136

Sunstein CR, Zeckhauser R (2011) Overreaction to fearsome risks. Environ Resour Econ 48:435–449

Tark J, Kleck G (2004) Resisting crime: the effects of victim action on the outcomes of crimes. Criminol 42:861–909

Tversky A, Kahneman D (1974) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 185:1124–1131

Article   ADS   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Vacha EF, McLaughlin TF (2000) The impact of poverty, fear of crime, and crime victimization on keeping firearms for protection and unsafe gun-storage practices” A review and analysis with policy recommendations. Urban Educ 35:496–510

Vacha EF, McLaughlin TF (2004) Risky firearms behavior in low-income families of elementary school children: the impact of poverty, fear of crime, and crime victimization on keeping and storing firearms. J Fam Violence 19:175–184

Wallace LN (2015) Responding to violence with guns: mass shootings and gun acquisition. Soc Sci J 52:156–167

Webster DW, Wintemute GJ (2015) Effects of policies designed to keep firearms from high-risk individuals. Ann Rev Public Health 36:21–37

Wertz J, Azrael D, Hemenway D, Sorenson S, Miller M (2018) Differences between new and long-standing US gun owners: results from a National Survey. Am J Public Health 108:871–877

Wiebe DJ (2003) Homicide and suicide risks associated with firearms in the home: a national case-control study. Ann Emerg Med 47:771–782

Willis J (2010). I was anti-gun, until I got stalked. Salon. https://www.salon.com/2010/10/21/buying_gun_protect_from_stalker/ . Accessed 19 Nov 2019

Wintemute GJ (2008) Guns, fear, the constitution, and the public’s health. N. Engl J Med 358:1421–1424

Wolfson JA, Teret SP, Azrael D, Miller M (2017) US public opinion on carrying firearms in public places. Am J Public Health 107:929–937

Wolpert RM, Gimpel JG (1998) Self-interest, symbolic politics, and public attitudes toward gun control. Polit Behav 20:241–262

Wozniak KH (2017) Public opinion about gun control post-Sandy Hook. Crim Just Pol Rev 28:255–278

Wuertenberg N (2018). Gun rights are about keeping white men on top. Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/made-by-history/wp/2018/03/09/gun-rights-are-about-keeping-white-men-on-top . Accessed 19 Nov 2019

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, Los Angeles, USA

Joseph M. Pierre

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joseph M. Pierre .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The author declares no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Pierre, J.M. The psychology of guns: risk, fear, and motivated reasoning. Palgrave Commun 5 , 159 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-019-0373-z

Download citation

Received : 30 July 2019

Accepted : 27 November 2019

Published : 10 December 2019

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-019-0373-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Packing heat: on the affective incorporation of firearms.

• Jussi A. Saarinen

Topoi (2024)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection

An Examination of US School Mass Shootings, 2017–2022: Findings and Implications

Antonis katsiyannis.

1 Department of Education and Human Development, College of Education, Clemson University, 101 Gantt Circle, Room 407 C, Clemson, SC 29634 USA

Luke J. Rapa

2 Department of Education and Human Development, College of Education, Clemson University, 101 Gantt Circle, Room 409 F, Clemson, SC 29634 USA

Denise K. Whitford

3 Steven C. Beering Hall of Liberal Arts and Education, Purdue University, 100 N. University Street, BRNG 5154, West Lafayette, IN 47907-2098 USA

Samantha N. Scott

4 Department of Education and Human Development, College of Education, Clemson University, 101 Gantt Circle, Room G01A, Clemson, SC 29634 USA

Gun violence in the USA is a pressing social and public health issue. As rates of gun violence continue to rise, deaths resulting from such violence rise as well. School shootings, in particular, are at their highest recorded levels. In this study, we examined rates of intentional firearm deaths, mass shootings, and school mass shootings in the USA using data from the past 5 years, 2017–2022, to assess trends and reappraise prior examination of this issue.

Extant data regarding shooting deaths from 2017 through 2020 were obtained from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, the web-based injury statistics query and reporting system (WISQARS), and, for school shootings in particular (2017–2022), from Everytown Research & Policy.

The number of intentional firearm deaths and the crude death rates increased from 2017 to 2020 in all age categories; crude death rates rose from 4.47 in 2017 to 5.88 in 2020. School shootings made a sharp decline in 2020—understandably so, given the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent government or locally mandated school shutdowns—but rose again sharply in 2021.

Conclusions

Recent data suggest continued upward trends in school shootings, school mass shootings, and related deaths over the past 5 years. Notably, gun violence disproportionately affects boys, especially Black boys, with much higher gun deaths per capita for this group than for any other group of youth. Implications for policy and practice are provided.

On May 24, 2022, an 18-year-old man killed 19 students and two teachers and wounded 17 individuals at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, TX, using an AR-15-style rifle. Outside the school, he fired shots for about 5 min before entering the school through an unlocked side door and locked himself inside two adjoining classrooms killing 19 students and two teachers. He was in the school for over an hour (78 min) before being shot dead by the US Border Patrol Tactical Unit, though police officers were on the school premises (Sandoval, 2022 ).

The Robb Elementary School mass shooting, the second deadliest school mass shooting in American history, is the latest calamity in a long list of tragedies occurring on public school campuses in the USA. Regrettably, these tragedies are both a reflection and an outgrowth of the broader reality of gun violence in this country. In 2021, gun violence claimed 45,027 lives (including 20,937 suicides), with 313 children aged 0–11 killed and 750 injured, along with 1247 youth aged 12–17 killed and 3385 injured (Gun Violence Archive, 2022a ). Mass shootings in the USA have steadily increased in recent years, rising from 269 in 2013 to 611 in 2020. Mass shootings are typically defined as incidents in which four or more people are killed (Katsiyannis et al., 2018a ). However, the Gun Violence Archive considers mass shootings to be incidents in which four or more people are injured (Gun Violence Archive, 2022b ). Regardless of these distinctions in definition, in 2020, there were 19,384 gun murders, representing a 34% increase from the year before, a 49% increase over a 5-year period, and a 75% increase over a 10-year period (Pew Research Center, 2022 ). Regarding school-based shootings, to date in 2022, there have been at least 95 incidents of gunfire on school premises, resulting in 40 deaths and 76 injuries (Everytown Research & Policy, 2022b ). Over the past few decades, school shootings in the USA have become relatively commonplace: there were more in 2021 than in any year since 1999, with the median age of perpetrators being 16 (Washington Post, 2022 ; see also, Katsiyannis et al., 2018a ). Additionally, analysis of Everytown’s Gunfire on School Grounds dataset and related studies point to several key observations to be considered in addressing this challenge. For example, 58% of perpetrators had a connection to the school, 70% were White males, 73 to 80% obtained guns from home or relatives or friends, and 100% exhibited warning signs or showed behavior that was of cause for concern; also, in 77% of school shootings, at least one person knew about the shooter’s plan before the shooting events occurred (Everytown Research & Policy, 2021a ).

The USA has had 57 times as many school shootings as all other major industrialized nations combined (Rowhani-Rahbar & Moe, 2019 ). Guns are the leading cause of death for children and teens in the USA, with children ages 5–14 being 21 times and adolescents and young adults ages 15–24 being 23 times more likely to be killed with guns compared to other high-income countries. Furthermore, Black children and teens are 14 times and Latinx children and teens are three times more likely than White children to die by guns (Everytown Research & Policy, 2021b ). Children exposed to violence, crime, and abuse face a host of adverse challenges, including abuse of drugs and alcohol, depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, school failure, and involvement in criminal activity (Cabral et al., 2021 ; Everytown Research and Policy, 2022b ; Finkelhor et al., 2013 ).

Yet, despite gun violence being considered a pressing social and public health issue, federal legislation passed in 1996 has resulted in restricting funding for the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The law stated that no funding earmarked for injury prevention and control may be used to advocate or promote firearm control (Kellermann & Rivara, 2013 ). More recently, in June 2022, the US Supreme Court struck down legislation restricting gun possession and open carry rights (New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen, 2021 ), broadening gun rights and increasing the risk of gun violence in public spaces. Nonetheless, according to Everytown Research & Policy ( 2022a ), states with strong gun laws experience fewer deaths per capita. In the aggregate, states with weaker gun laws (i.e., laws that are more permissive) experience 20.0 gun deaths per 100,000 residents versus 7.4 per 100,000 in states with stronger laws. The association between gun law strength and per capita death is stark (see Table ​ Table1 1 ).

Gun law strength and gun law deaths per 100,000 residents

Accounting for the top eight and the bottom eight states in gun law strength, gun law strength and gun deaths per 100,000 are correlated at r  =  − 0.85. Stronger gun laws are thus meaningfully linked with fewer deaths per capita. Data obtained from Everytown Research & Policy ( 2022a )

Notwithstanding the publicity involving gun shootings in schools, particularly mass shootings, violence in schools has been steadily declining. For example, in 2020, students aged 12–18 experienced 285,400 victimizations at school and 380,900 victimizations away from school; an annual decrease of 60% for school victimizations (from 2019 to 2020) (Irwin et al., 2022 ). Similarly, youth arrests in general in 2019 were at their lowest level since at least 1980; between 2010 and 2019, the number of juvenile arrests fell by 58%. Yet, arrests for murder increased by 10% (Puzzanchera, 2021 ).

In response to school violence in general, and school shootings in particular, schools have increasingly relied on increased security measures, school resource officers (SROs), and zero tolerance policies (including exclusionary and aversive measures) in their attempts to curb violence and enhance school safety. In 2019–2020, public schools reported controlled access (97%), the use of security cameras (91%), and badges or picture IDs (77%) to promote safety. In addition, high schools (84%), middle schools (81%), and elementary schools (55%) reported the presence of SROs (Irwin et al., 2022 ). Research, however, has indicated that the presence of SROs has not resulted in a reduction of school shooting severity, despite their increased prevalence. Rather, the type of firearm utilized in school shootings has been closely associated with the number of deaths and injuries (Lemieux, 2014 ; Livingston et al., 2019 ), suggesting implications for reconsideration of the kinds of firearms to which individuals have access.

Zero tolerance policies, though originally intended to curtail gun violence in schools, have expanded to cover a host of incidents (e.g., threats, bullying). Notwithstanding these intentions, these policies are generally ineffective in preventing school violence, including school shootings (American Psychological Association Zero Tolerance Task Force, 2008 ; Losinski et al., 2014 ), and have exacerbated the prevalence of youths’ interactions with law enforcement in schools. From the 2015–2016 to the 2017–2018 school years, there was a 5% increase in school-related arrests and a 12% increase in referrals to law enforcement (U.S. Department of Education, 2021 ); in 2017–18, about 230,000 students were referred to law enforcement and over 50,000 were arrested (The Center for Public Integrity, 2021 ). Law enforcement referrals have been a persistent concern aiding the school-to-prison pipeline, often involving non-criminal offenses and disproportionally affecting students from non-White backgrounds as well as students with disabilities (Chan et al., 2021 ; The Center for Public Integrity, 2021 ).

The consequences of these policies are thus far-reaching, with not only legal ramifications, but social-emotional and academic ones as well. For example, in 2017–2018, students missed 11,205,797 school days due to out-of-school suspensions during that school year (U.S. Department of Education, 2021 ), there were 96,492 corporal punishment incidents, and 101,990 students were physically restrained, mechanically restrained, or secluded (U.S. Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights, 2020 ). Such exclusionary and punitive measures have long-lasting consequences for the involved students, including academic underachievement, dropout, delinquency, and post-traumatic stress (e.g., Cholewa et al., 2018 ). Moreover, these consequences disproportionally affect culturally and linguistically diverse students and students with disabilities (Skiba et al., 2014 ; U.S. General Accountability Office, 2018 ), often resulting in great societal costs (Rumberger & Losen, 2017 ).

In the USA, mass killings involving guns occur approximately every 2 weeks, while school shootings occur every 4 weeks (Towers et al., 2015 ). Given the apparent and continued rise in gun violence, mass shootings, and school mass shootings, we aimed in this paper to reexamine rates of intentional firearm deaths, mass shootings, and school mass shootings in the USA using data from the past 5 years, 2017–2022, reappraising our analyses given the time that had passed since our earlier examination of the issue (Katsiyannis et al., 2018a , b ).

As noted in Katsiyannis et al., ( 2018a , b ), gun violence, mass shootings, and school shootings have been a part of the American way of life for generations. Such shootings have grown exponentially in both frequency and mortality rate since the 1980s. Using the same criteria applied in our previous work (Katsiyannis et al., 2018a , b ), we evaluated the frequency of shootings, mass shootings, and school mass school shootings from January 2017 through mid-July 2022. Extant data regarding shooting deaths from 2017 through 2020 were obtained from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, utilizing the web-based injury statistics query and reporting system (WISQARS), and for school shootings from 2017 to 2022 from Everytown Research & Policy ( https://everytownresearch.org ), an independent non-profit organization that researches and communicates with policymakers and the public about gun violence in the USA. Intentional firearm death data were classified by age, as outlined in Katsiyannis et al., ( 2018a , b ), and the crude rate was calculated by dividing the number of deaths times 100,000, by the total population for each individual category.

The number of intentional firearm deaths and the crude death rates increased from 2017 to 2020 in all age categories. In absolute terms, the number of deaths rose from 14,496 in 2017 to 19,308 in 2020. In accord with this rise in the absolute number of deaths, crude death rates rose from 4.47 in 2017 to 5.88 in 2020. Table ​ Table2 2 provides the crude death rate in 2017, 2018, 2019, and 2020, the most current years with data available. Figure  1 provides the raw number of deaths across the same time period.

Intentional firearm deaths across the USA (2017–2020)

Data obtained from WISQARS (2022)

Intentional firearm deaths across the USA (2017–2020). Note. Data obtained from WISQARS (2022)

As expected, in 2020, the number of fatal firearm injuries increased sharply from age 0–11 years, roughly elementary school age, to age 12–18 years, roughly middle school and high school age. Table ​ Table3 3 provides the crude death rates of children in 2020 who die from firearms. Males outnumbered females in every category of firearm deaths, including homicide, police violence, suicide, and accidental shootings, as well as for undetermined reasons for firearm discharge. Black males drastically surpassed all other children in the number of firearm deaths (2.91 per 100,000 0–11-year-olds; 57.10 per 100,000 12–18-year-olds). Also, notable is the high number of Black children 12–18 years killed by guns (32.37 per 100,000), followed by American Indian and Alaska Native children (18.87 per 100,000), in comparison to White children (12.40 per 100,000 children), Hispanic/Latinx children (8.16 per 100,000), and Asian and Pacific Islander children (2.95 per 100,000). A disproportionate number of gun deaths were also seen for Black girls relative to other girls (1.52 per 100,000 0–11-year-olds; 7.01 per 100,000 12–18-year-olds).

Fatal firearm injuries for children age 0–18 across the USA in 2020

  AN Alaska Native; – indicates 20 or fewer cases

Mass shootings and mass shooting deaths increased from 2017 to 2019, decreased in 2020, and then increased again in 2021. School shootings made a sharp decline in 2020—understandably so, given the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent government or locally mandated school shutdowns—but rose again sharply in 2021. Current rates reveal a continued increase, with numbers at the beginning of 2022 already exceeding those of 2017. School mass shooting counts were relatively low between 2017 through 2022, with four total during that time frame. Figure  2 provides raw numbers for mass shootings, school shootings, and school mass shootings from 2017 through 2022. Importantly, figures from the recent Uvalde, TX, school mass shooting at Robb Elementary School had not yet been recorded in the relevant databases at the time of this writing. With those deaths accounted for, 2022 is already the deadliest year for school mass shootings in the past 5 years.

Mass shootings, school shootings, and mass school shootings across the USA (2017–2022). Note. Data obtained from Everytown Research and Policy. Overlap present between all three categories

Gun violence in the USA, particularly mass shootings on the grounds of public schools, continues to be a pressing social and public health issue. Recent data suggest continued upward trends in school shootings, school mass shootings, and related deaths over the past 5 years—patterns that disturbingly mirror general gun violence and intentional shooting deaths in the USA across the same time period. The impacts on our nation’s youth are profound. Notably, gun violence disproportionately affects boys, especially Black boys, with much higher gun deaths per capita for this group than for any other group of youth. Likewise, Black girls are disproportionately affected compared to girls from other ethnic/racial groups. Moreover, while the COVID-19 pandemic and school shutdowns tempered gun violence in schools at least somewhat during the 2020 school year—including school shootings and school mass shootings—trend data show that gun violence rates are still continuing to rise. Indeed, gun violence deaths resulting from school shootings are at their highest recorded levels ever (Irwin et al., 2022 ).

Implications for Schools: Curbing School Violence

In recent years, the implementation of Multi-Tier Systems and Supports (MTSS), including Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) and Response to Intervention (RTI), has resulted in improved school climate and student engagement as well as improved academic and behavioral outcomes (Elrod et al., 2022 ; Santiago-Rosario et al., 2022 ; National Center for Learning Disabilities, n.d.). Such approaches have implications for reducing school violence as well. PBIS uses a tiered framework intended to improve student behavioral and academic outcomes; it creates positive learning environments through the implementation of evidence-based instructional and behavioral interventions, guided by data-based decision-making and allocation of students across three tiers. In Tier 1, schools provide universal supports to all students in a proactive manner; in Tier 2, supports are aimed to students who need additional academic, behavioral, or social-emotional intervention; and in Tier 3, supports are provided in an intensive and individualized manner (Lewis et al., 2010 ). The implementation of PBIS has resulted in an improved school climate, fewer office referrals, and reductions in out-of-school suspensions (Bradshaw et al., 2010 ; Elrod et al.,  2010 , 2022 ; Gage et al., 2018a , 2018b ; Horner et al., 2010 ; Noltemeyer et al., 2019 ). Likewise, RTI aims to improve instructional outcomes through high-quality instruction and universal screening for students to identify learning challenges and similarly allocates students across three tiers. In Tier 1, schools implement high-quality classroom instruction, screening, and group interventions; in Tier 2, schools implement targeted interventions; and in Tier 3, schools implement intensive interventions and comprehensive evaluation (National Center for Learning Disabilities, n.d ). RTI implementation has resulted in improved academic outcomes (e.g., reading, writing) (Arrimada et al., 2022 ; Balu et al., 2015 ; Siegel, 2020 ) and enhanced school climate and student behavior.

In order to support students’ well-being, enhance school climate, and support reductions in behavioral issues and school violence, schools should consider the implementation of MTSS, reducing reliance on exclusionary and aversive measures such as zero tolerance policies, seclusion and restraints, corporal punishment, or school-based law enforcement referrals and arrests (see Gage et al., in press ). Such approaches and policies are less effective than the use of MTSS, exacerbate inequities and enhance disproportionality (particularly for youth of color and students with disabilities), and have not been shown to reduce violence in schools.

Implications for Students: Ensuring Physical Safety and Supporting Mental Health

Students should not have to attend school and fear becoming victims of violence in general, no less gun violence in particular. Schools must ensure the physical safety of their students. Yet, as the substantial number of school shootings continues to rise in the USA, so too does concern about the adverse impacts of violence and gun violence on students’ mental health and well-being. Students are frequently exposed to unavoidable and frightening images and stories of school violence (Child Development Institute, n.d. ) and are subject to active shooter drills that may not actually be effective and, in some cases, may actually induce trauma (Jetelina, 2022 ; National Association of School Psychologists & National Association of School Resources Officers, 2021 ; Wang et al., 2020 ). In turn, students struggle to process and understand why these events happen and, more importantly, how they can be prevented (National Association of School Psychologists, 2015 ). School personnel should be prepared to support the mental health needs of students, both in light of the prevalence of school gun violence and in the aftermath of school mass shootings.

Research provides evidence that traumatic events, such as school mass shootings, can and do have mental health consequences for victims and members of affected communities, leading to an increase in post-traumatic stress syndrome, depression, and other psychological systems (Lowe & Galea, 2017 ). At the same time, high media attention to such events indirectly exposes and heightens feelings of fear, anxiety, and vulnerability in students—even if they did not attend the school where the shooting occurred (Schonfeld & Demaria, 2020 ). Students of all ages may experience adjustment difficulties and engage in avoidance behaviors (Schonfeld & Demaria, 2020 ). As a result, school personnel may underestimate a student’s distress after a shooting and overestimate their resilience. In addition, an adult’s difficulty adjusting in the wake of trauma may also threaten a student’s sense of well-being because they may believe their teachers cannot provide them with the protection they need to remain safe in school (Schonfeld & Demaria, 2020 ).

These traumatic events have resounding consequences for youth development and well-being. However, schools continue to struggle to meet the demands of student mental health needs as they lack adequate funding for resources, student support services, and staff to provide the level of support needed for many students (Katsiyannis et al., 2018a ). Despite these limiting factors, children and youth continue to look to adults for information and guidance on how to react to adverse events. An effective response can significantly decrease the likelihood of further trauma; therefore, all school personnel must be prepared to talk with students about their fears, to help them feel safe and establish a sense of normalcy and security in the wake of tragedy (National Association of School Psychologists, 2016 ). Research suggests a number of strategies can be utilized by educators, school leaders, counselors, and other mental health professionals to support the students and staff they serve.

Recommendations for Educators

The National Association of School Psychologists ( 2016 ) recommends the following practices for educators to follow in response to school mass shootings. Although a complex topic to address, the issue needs to be acknowledged. In particular, educators should designate time to talk with their students about the event, and should reassure students that they are safe while validating their fears, feelings, and concerns. Recognizing and stressing to students that all feelings are okay when a tragedy occurs is essential. It is important to note that some students do not wish to express their emotions verbally. Other developmentally appropriate outlets, such as drawing, writing, reading books, and imaginative play, can be utilized. Educators should also provide developmentally appropriate explanations of the issue and events throughout their conversations. At the elementary level, students need brief, simple answers that are balanced with reassurances that schools are safe and that adults are there to protect them. In the secondary grades, students may be more vocal in asking questions about whether they are truly safe and what protocols are in place to protect them at school. To address these questions, educators can provide information related to the efforts of school and community leaders to ensure school safety. Educators should also review safety procedures and help students to identify at least one adult in the building to whom they can go if they feel threatened or at risk. Limiting exposure to media and social media is also important, as developmentally inappropriate information can cause anxiety or confusion. Educators should also maintain a normal routine by keeping a regular school schedule.

Recommendations for School Leaders

Superintendents, principals, and other school administrative personnel are looked upon to provide leadership and comfort to staff, students, and parents during a tragedy. Reassurance can be provided by reiterating safety measures and student supports that are in place in their district and school (The National Association of School Psychologists, 2015 ). The NASP recommends the following practices for school leaders regarding addressing student mental health needs directly. First, school leaders should be a visible, welcoming presence by greeting students and visiting classrooms. School leaders should also communicate with the school community, including parents and students, about their efforts to maintain safe and caring schools through clear behavioral expectations, positive behavior interventions and supports, and crisis planning preparedness. This can include the development of press releases for broad dissemination within the school community. School leaders should also provide crisis training and professional development for staff, based upon assessments of needs and targeted toward identified knowledge or skill gaps. They should also ensure the implementation of violence prevention programs and curricula in school and review school safety policies and procedures to ensure that all safety issues are adequately covered in current school crisis plans and emergency response procedures.

Recommendations for Counselors and Mental Health Professionals

School counselors offer critical assistance to their buildings’ populations as they experience crises or respond to emergencies (American School Counselor Association, 2019 ; Brown, 2020 ). Two models that stand out in the literature utilized by counselors in the wake of violent events are the Preparation, Action, Recovery (PAR) model and the Prevent and prepare; Reaffirm; Evaluate; provide interventions and Respond (PREPaRE) model. PREPaRE is the only comprehensive, nationally available training curriculum created by educators for educators (The National Association of School Psychologists, n.d. ). Although beneficial, neither the PAR nor PREPaRE model directly addresses school counselors’ responses to school shootings when their school is directly affected (Brown, 2020 ). This led to the development of the School Counselor’s Response to School Shootings-Framework of Recommendations (SCRSS-FR) model, which includes six stages, each of which has corresponding components for school counselors who have lived through a school mass shooting. Each of these models provides the necessary training to school-employed mental health professionals on how to best fill the roles and responsibilities generated by their membership on school crisis response teams (The National Association of School Psychologists, n.d. ).

Other Implications: Federal and State Policy

Recent events at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, TX, prompted the US Congress to pass landmark legislation intended to curb gun violence, enhancing background checks for prospective gun buyers who are under 21 years of age as well as allowing examination of juvenile records beginning at age 16, including health records related to prospective gun buyers’ mental health. Additionally, this legislation provides funding that will allow states to implement “red flag laws” and other intervention programs while also strengthening laws related to the purchase and trafficking of guns (Cochrane, 2022 ). Yet, additional legislation reducing or eliminating access to assault rifles and other guns with large capacity magazines, weapons that might easily be deemed “weapons of mass destruction,” is still needed (Interdisciplinary Group on Preventing School & Community Violence, 2022 ; see also Flannery et al., 2021 ). In 2019, the US Congress started to appropriate research funding to support research on gun violence, with $25 million in equal shares provided on an annual basis from both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institutes of Health (Roubein, 2022 ; Wan, 2019 ). Additional research is, of course, still needed.

Despite legislative progress, and while advancements in gun legislation are meaningful and have the potential to aid in the reduction of gun violence in the USA, school shootings and school mass shootings are something schools and students will contend with in the months and years ahead. This reality has serious implications for schools and for students, points that need serious consideration. Therefore, it is imperative that gun violence is framed as a pressing national public health issue deserving attention, with drastic steps needed to curb access to assault rifles and guns with high-capacity magazines, based on extensive and targeted research. As noted, Congress, after many years of inaction, has started to appropriate funds to address this issue. However, the level of funding is still minimal in light of the pressing challenge that gun violence presents. Furthermore, the messaging of conservative media, the National Rifle Association (NRA) and republican legislators framing access to all and any weapons—including assault rifles—as a constitutional right under the second amendment bears scrutiny. Indeed, the second amendment denotes that “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Security of the nation is arguably the intent of the amendment, an intent that is clearly violated as evidenced in the ever-increasing death toll associated with gun violence in the USA.

Whereas federal legislation would be preferable, the possibility of banning assault weapons is remote (in light of recent Congressional action). Similarly, state action has been severely curtailed in light of the US Supreme Court’s decision regarding New York state law. However, data on gun fatalities and injuries, the correspondence of gun violence to laws regulating access across the world and states, and failed security measures such as armed guards posted in schools (e.g., Robb Elementary School) must be consistently emphasized. Additionally, the widespread sense of immunity for gun manufacturers should be tested in the same manner that tobacco manufacturers and opioid pharmaceuticals have been. The success against such tobacco and opioid manufacturers, once unthinkable, is a powerful precedent to consider for how the threat of gun violence against public health might be addressed.

Author Contribution

AK conceived of and designed the study and led the writing of the manuscript. LJR collaborated on the study design, contributed to the writing of the study, and contributed to the editing of the final manuscript. DKW analyzed the data and wrote up the results. SNS contributed to the writing of the study.

Declarations

The authors declare no competing interests.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

• American Psychological Association Zero Tolerance Task Force Are zero tolerance policies effective in the schools? An evidentiary review and recommendations. The American Psychologist. 2008; 63 (9):852–862. doi: 10.1037/0003-066x.63.9.852. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• American School Counselor Association (2019). ASCA national model: A framework for school counseling programs (4th edn.). Alexandria, VA: Author.
• Arrimada M, Torrance M, Fidalgo R. Response to intervention in first-grade writing instruction: A large-scale feasibility study. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal. 2022; 35 (4):943–969. doi: 10.1007/s11145-021-10211-z. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Balu, R., Zhu, P., Doolittle, F., Schiller, E., Jenkins, J., & Gersten, R. (2015). Evaluation of response to intervention practices for elementary school reading (NCEE 2016–4000). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
• Bradshaw CP, Mitchell MM, Leaf PJ. Examining the effects of schoolwide positive behavioral interventions and supports on student outcomes: Results from a randomized controlled effectiveness trial in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions. 2010; 12 (3):133–148. doi: 10.1177/1098300709334798. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brown CH. School counselors’ response to school shootings: Framework of recommendations. Journal of Educational Research and Practice. 2020; 10 (1):18. doi: 10.5590/jerap.2020.10.1.18. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cabral, M., Kim, B., Rossin-Slater, M., Schnell, M., & Schwandt, H. (2021). Trauma at school: The impacts of shootings on students’ human capital and economic outcomes. A working paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved June 21, 2022, from  https://www.nber.org/papers/w28311
• Chan P, Katsiyannis A, Yell M. Handcuffed in school: Legal and practice considerations. Advances in Neurodevelopmental Disorders. 2021; 5 (3):339–350. doi: 10.1007/s41252-021-00213-x. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Child Development Institute. (n.d.). How to talk to kids about violence. Retrieved July 22, 2022, from  https://childdevelopmentinfo.com/how-to-be-a-parent/communication/talk-to-kids-violence/
• Cholewa B, Hull MF, Babcock CR, Smith AD. Predictors and academic outcomes associated with in-school suspension. School Psychology Quarterly. 2018; 33 (2):191–199. doi: 10.1037/spq0000213. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cochrane, E. (2022). Congress passes bipartisan gun legislation, clearing it for Biden. The New York Times. Retrieved July 27, 2022 from https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/24/us/politics/gun-control-bill-congress.html
• Elrod BG, Rice KG, Bradshaw CP, Mitchell MM, Leaf PJ. Examining the effects of schoolwide positive behavioral interventions and supports on student outcomes: Results from a randomized controlled effectiveness trial in elementary schools. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions. 2010; 12 (3):133–148. doi: 10.1177/1098300709334798. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Elrod BG, Rice KG, Meyers J. PBIS fidelity, school climate, and student discipline: A longitudinal study of secondary schools. Psychology in the Schools. 2022; 59 (2):376–397. doi: 10.1002/pits.22614. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Everytown Research & Policy. (2021a). Keeping our schools safe: A plan for preventing mass shootings and ending all gun violence in American schools. Retrieved July 17, 2022, from https://everytownresearch.org/report/preventing-gun-violence-in-american-schools/
• Everytown Research & Policy. (2021b). The impact of gun violence on children and teens. Retrieved, June 21, 2022, from https://everytownresearch.org/report/the-impact-of-gun-violence-on-children-and-teens/
• Everytown Research & Policy. (2022a). Gun law rankings. Retrieved July 19, 2022, from https://everytownresearch.org/rankings/
• Everytown Research & Policy. (2022b). Gunfire on school grounds in the United States. Retrieved July 19, 2022, from https://everytownresearch.org/maps/gunfire-on-school-grounds/
• Finkelhor D, Turner HA, Shattuck AM, Hamby SL. Violence, crime, and abuse exposure in a national sample of children and youth: An update. JAMA Pediatrics. 2013; 167 (7):614–621. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2013.42. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Flannery, D. J., Fox, J. A., Wallace, L., Mulvey, E., & Modzeleski, W. (2021). Guns, school shooters, and school safety: What we know and directions for change. School Psychology Review, 50 (2-3), 237–253.
• Gage NA, Lee A, Grasley-Boy N, Peshak GH. The impact of school-wide positive behavior interventions and supports on school suspensions: A statewide quasi-experimental analysis. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions. 2018; 20 (4):217–226. doi: 10.1177/1098300718768204. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gage, N. A., Rapa, L. J., Whitford, D. K., & Katsiyannis, A. (Eds.) (in press). Disproportionality and social justice in education . Springer
• Gage N, Whitford DK, Katsiyannis A. A review of schoolwide positive behavior interventions and supports as a framework for reducing disciplinary exclusions. The Journal of Special Education. 2018; 52 :142–151. doi: 10.1272/74060629214686796178874678. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gun Violence Archive. (2022a). Gun violence archives 2021. Retrieved June 23, 2022, from https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/past-tolls
• Gun Violence Archive. (2022b). Charts and maps. Retrieved June 23, 2022, from  https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/
• Horner RH, Sugai G, Anderson CM. Examining the evidence base for schoolwide positive behavior support. Focus on Exceptional Children. 2010; 42 (8):1–14. doi: 10.17161/fec.v42i18.6906. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Interdisciplinary Group on Preventing School and Community Violence. (2022). Call for action to prevent gun violence in the United States of America. Retrieved July 15, 2022, from https://www.dropbox.com/s/006naaah5be23qk/2022%20Call%20To%20Action%20Press%20Release%20and%20Statement%20COMBINED%205-27-22.pdf?dl=0
• Irwin, V., Wang, K., Cui, J., & Thompson, A. (2022). Report on indicators of school crime and safety: 2021 (NCES 2022–092/NCJ 304625). National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education, and Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Washington, DC. Retrieved July 21, 2022 from https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2022092
• Jetelina, K. (2022). Firearms: What you can do right now. Retrieved July 15, 2022, from https://yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com/p/firearms-what-you-can-do-right-now
• Katsiyannis A, Whitford D, Ennis R. Historical examination of United States school mass shootings in the 20 th and 21 st centuries: Implications for students, schools, and society. Journal of Child and Family Studies. 2018; 27 :2562–2573. doi: 10.1007/s10826-018-1096-2. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Katsiyannis A, Whitford D, Ennis R. Firearm violence across the lifespan: Relevance and theoretical impact on child and adolescent educational prospects. Journal of Child and Family Studies. 2018; 27 :1748–1762. doi: 10.1007/s10826-018-1035-2. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kellermann AL, Rivara FP. Silencing the science on gun research. Journal of the American Medical Association. 2013; 309 (6):549–550. doi: 10.1001/jama.2012.208207. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lemieux F. Effect of gun culture and firearm laws on firearm violence and mass shootings in the United States: A multi-level quantitative analysis. International Journal of Criminal Justice Sciences. 2014; 9 (1):74–93. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lewis T, Jones S, Horner R, Sugai G. School-wide positive behavior support and students with emotional/behavioral disorders: Implications for prevention, identification and intervention. Exceptionality. 2010; 18 :82–93. doi: 10.1080/09362831003673168. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Livingston MD, Rossheim ME, Stidham-Hall K. A descriptive analysis of school and school shooter characteristics and the severity of school shootings in the United States, 1999–2018. Journal of Adolescent Health. 2019; 64 (6):797–799. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2018.12.006. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Losinski M, Katsiyannis A, Ryan J, Baughan C. Weapons in schools and zero-tolerance policies. NASSP Bulletin. 2014; 98 (2):126–141. doi: 10.1177/0192636514528747. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lowe SR, Galea S. The mental health consequences of mass shootings. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse. 2017; 18 (1):62–82. doi: 10.1177/1524838015591572. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• National Association of School Psychologists. (n.d.). About PREPaRE. Retrieved July 22, 2022, from https://www.nasponline.org/professional-development/prepare-training-curriculum/aboutprepare#:~:text=Specifically%2C%20the%20PREPaRE,E%E2%80%94Evaluate%20psychological%20trauma%20risk
• National Association of School Psychologists. (2015). Responding to school violence: Tips for administrators. Retrieved July 22, 2022, from https://www.nasponline.org/resources-and-publications/resources-and-podcasts/school-safety-and-crisis/school-violence-resources/school-violence-prevention/responding-to-school-violence-tips-for-administrators
• National Association of School Psychologists. (2016). Talking to children about violence: Tips for parents and teachers. Retrieved July 22, 2022, from https://www.nasponline.org/resources-and-publications/resources-and-podcasts/school-safety-and-crisis/school-violence-resources/talking-to-children-about-violence-tips-for-parents-and-teachers
• National Association of School Psychologists & National Association of School Resource Officers (2021). Best practice considerations for armed assailant drills in schools. Bethesda, MD: Author. Retrieved July 22, 2022, from https://www.nasponline.org/resources-and-publications/resources-and-podcasts/school-safety-and-crisis/systems-level-prevention/best-practice-considerations-for-armed-assailant-drills-in-schools
• National Center for Learning Disabilities. (n.d.). What is RTI? Retrieved July 21, 2022 from http://www.rtinetwork.org/learn/what/whatisrti
• New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen, 20–843. (United States Supreme Court, 2021). Retrieved July 27, 2022, from https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-843_7j80.pdf
• Noltemeyer A, Palmer K, James AG, Wiechman S. School-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports (SWPBIS): A synthesis of existing research. International Journal of School & Educational Psychology. 2019; 7 :253–262. doi: 10.1080/21683603.2018.1425169. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pew Research Center. (2022). What the data says about gun deaths in the U.S. Retrieved June 21, 2022 from https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/02/03/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/
• Puzzanchera, C. (2021). Juvenile arrests, 2019 . U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs. Juvenile Justice Statistics National Report Series Bulletin. Retrieved July 27, 2022, from https://ojjdp.ojp.gov/publications/juvenile-arrests-2019.pdf
• Roubein, R. (2022). Now the government is funding gun violence research, but it’s years behind. The Washington Post. Retrieved July 17, 2022 from https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/05/26/now-government-is-funding-gun-violence-research-it-years-behind/
• Rowhani-Rahbar A, Moe C. School shootings in the U.S.: What is the state of evidence? Journal of Adolescent Health. 2019; 64 (6):683–684. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2019.03.016. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rumberger, R. W., & Losen, D. J. (2017). The hidden costs of California’s harsh school discipline: And the localized economic benefits from suspending fewer high school students . California Dropout Research Project : The Civil Rights Project. Retrieved July 27, 2022, from https://www.civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/resources/projects/center-for-civil-rights-remedies/school-to-prison-folder/summary-reports/the-hidden-cost-of-californias-harsh-discipline/CostofSuspensionReportFinal-corrected-030917.pdf
• Sandoval, E. (2022). Inside a Uvalde classroom: A taunting gunman and 78 minutes of terror. The New York Times. Retrieved July 27, 2022, from https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/10/us/uvalde-injured-teacher-reyes.html
• Santiago-Rosario, M. R., McIntosh, K., & Payno-Simmons, R. (2022). Centering equity within the PBIS framework: Overview and evidence of effectiveness. Center on PBIS, University of Oregon. Retrieved July 27, 2022 from www.pbis.org
• Schonfeld DJ, Demaria T. Supporting children after school shootings. Pediatric Clinics. 2020; 67 (2):397–411. doi: 10.1016/j.pcl.2019.12.006. [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Skiba RJ, Arredondo MI, Williams NT. More than a metaphor: The contribution of exclusionary discipline to a school-to-prison pipeline. Equity & Excellence in Education. 2014; 47 (4):546–564. doi: 10.1080/10665684.2014.958965. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Siegel LS. Early identification and intervention to prevent reading failure: A response to Intervention (RTI) initiative. Educational and Developmental Psychologist. 2020; 37 (2):140–146. doi: 10.1017/edp.2020.21. [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• The Center for Public Integrity. (2021). When schools call police on kids. Retrieved June 21, 2022 from https://publicintegrity.org/education/criminalizing-kids/police-in-schools-disparities/
• Towers S, Gomez-Lievano A, Khan M, Mubayi A, Castillo-Chavez C. Contagion in mass killings and school shootings. PLoS One. 2015; 10 (7):e0117259. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0117259. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• U. S. Department of Education. (2021). An overview of exclusionary discipline practices in public schools for the 2017–18 school year . Civil Rights Data Collection. Retrieved June 21, 2022, from https://ocrdata.ed.gov/estimations/2017-2018
• U.S. Department of Education, Office of Civil Rights. (2020). 2017–18 civil rights data collection: The use of restraint and seclusion in children with disabilities in K-12 schools. Retrieved July 27, 2022 from https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/restraint-and-seclusion.pdf
• U.S. General Accountability Office (2018). K-12 education: Discipline disparities for Black students, boys, and students with disabilities (GAO-18–258). Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved July 27, 2022, from https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-18-258
• Wan, W. (2019). Congressional deal could fund gun violence research for first time since 1990s. The Washington Post. Retrieved July 17, 2022 from https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2019/12/16/congressional-deal-could-fund-gun-violence-research-first-time-since-s/
• Wang, K., Chen, Y., Zhang, J., & Oudekerk, B. A. (2020). Indicators of school crime and safety: 2019 (NCES 2020–063/NCJ 254485). National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education, and Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved July 27, 2022, from https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2020/2020063-temp.pdf
• Washington Post. (2022). The Washington Post’s database of school shootings. Retrieved June 21, 2022 from https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/local/school-shootings-database/

Sorry, there was an error while processing your request. Please try again.

Thank You for signing up for Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence's newsletter.

• Take Action

Ready to Make Change?

You are leaving www.efsgv.org . By clicking "TAKE ACTION," you will be directed to the Ed Fund’s affiliate organization, the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, a 501(c)(4) entity.

Gun Violence in the United States

Gun violence is a preventable public health tragedy affecting communities all over the United States. Every day, more than 100 Americans die by gun violence, including 64 who die by firearm suicide, 39 Americans who die by firearm homicide, and 3 who are killed by other forms of gun violence. In addition, every day nearly 200 Americans visit the emergency department for nonfatal firearm injuries. Over half of these cases are a result of a firearm assault and an additional 37% are unintentional injuries. Overwhelming evidence shows that firearm ownership and access is associated with increased suicide, homicide, unintentional firearm deaths, and injuries. These injuries and deaths are preventable, and we must advocate for evidence-based solutions to make gun violence in the U.S. rare and abnormal.

Gun Ownership

How does gun ownership and access to firearms affect gun deaths, an in-depth look at gun violence in the united states, gun death rates by state, gun deaths by demographics, recommendations.

Gun violence is a public health epidemic in the United States. Every year nearly 40,000 Americans are killed by guns, including more than 23,000 who die by firearm suicide, 14,000 who die by firearm homicide, more than 500 who die by legal intervention, 12 nearly 500 who die by unintentional firearm injuries, and more than 300 who die by undetermined intent. 12 This equates to more than 100 gun deaths every single day. In addition, every day nearly 200 Americans visit the emergency department for nonfatal firearm injuries. 13

In 2019, the most recent year of data available, there were 39,707 gun deaths – 109 every single day. 14 Three in every five gun deaths are suicides and more than one-third are homicides, while the remainder are unintentional, of unknown intent, or law enforcement intervention.

Among high-income countries, the United States is an outlier in terms of gun violence. It has been well-documented that firearm ownership rates ? are associated with increased firearm-related death rates. The U.S. has the highest firearm ownership and highest firearm death rates of 27 high-income countries. 15 The firearm homicide rate in the U.S. is nearly 25 times higher than other high-income countries and the firearm suicide rate is nearly 10 times that of other high-income countries. 16

It is a common misconception that individuals living with mental illness are responsible for gun violence. When compared to other countries, the United States has similar rates of mental illness, yet we have much higher rates of gun violence. 17, 18 To be clear, mental illness does not cause gun violence – the problem is access to firearms.

While gun death data are the most reliable type of gun violence data currently available, it is important to recognize that gun deaths are only the tip of the iceberg of the gun violence epidemic. In addition to gun deaths, many more people are shot and survive their injuries, are shot at but not hit, or witness gun violence. Many experience gun violence in other ways, for example by living in impacted communities, losing loved ones to gun violence, or being threatened with a gun.

The CDC Plays a Vital Role in Providing Public Health Data to Researchers

Researchers need robust and reliable data to study and develop solutions to address the epidemic of gun violence in the United States. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is the federal agency responsible for protecting the health of Americans by ensuring that data is properly collected to develop solutions to our nation’s public health crises, including gun violence. The CDC’s National Violent Death Reporting System (NVDRS) plays an instrumental role for gun violence prevention advocates and researchers. The NVDRS uses death certificates, police reports, and hospital records to report information about the victim, the cause of death, and the circumstances surrounding their death. 19 The CDC makes this data publicly available and easily accessible through their Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System (WISQARS).

To learn more, visit our page on nonfatal firearm injuries.

The following data presented on this page focuses on the impact to those who were killed by gun violence.

Many Americans celebrate guns in our culture and disregard the inherent public safety issues that a gun-friendly culture creates. U.S. firearm ownership rates exceed those of other high-income countries 20 and Americans own 46% of the world’s civilian-owned firearms. 21 Thirty percent of Americans report owning a gun, 22 with estimates of the total number of privately-owned guns in the U.S. ranging from 265 million to nearly 400 million. 23, 24, 25 The majority of gun owners (66%) report owning multiple guns, 26 and it is estimated that half of all guns are in the hands of just 3% of the U.S. population. 27

Gun Ownership by State

Gun ownership varies significantly by state. For example, one study found that gun ownership varies from 61.7% in Alaska to 5.2% in Delaware. 28 Higher levels of gun ownership are correlated with higher rates of suicide, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 homicide, 34, 35, 36, 37 unintentional firearm deaths, 38, 39 law enforcement killings, 40 and violent crime. 41

Reasons for Gun Ownership – “Protection”

More than 6 in 10 Americans believe that a gun in the home makes the family safer – a figure that has nearly doubled since 2000. 42 This increase in perceived safety is reflected in shifting reasons for gun ownership. In a 2017 Pew Research survey, two-thirds (67%) of gun owners cited protection as a major reason for gun ownership. 43 This represents a notable increase from the mid-1990s, when the majority of American gun owners cited recreation as their primary reason for gun ownership and fewer than half owned guns primarily for protection. 44

However, the evidence is clear: guns don’t make you safer. Contrary to the gun lobby’s talking points, overwhelming research shows that gun ownership and easy access to guns inherently puts individuals and their families at higher risk of death and injury. 22, 23 With a recent study estimating that there are more guns than people in the United States 45 and with a rate of gun violence continually increasing, it is imperative to know the facts about guns and gun violence.

“We must remember that stopping gun violence isn’t only about preventing high-profile mass shootings. It is about stopping gun violence in all its forms. We must acknowledge that gun violence comes in many different forms — from gun suicide to police brutality to domestic violence to unintentional shootings to daily gun violence in neighborhoods across the country.”

- Bryan Barks, Director of Strategic Communications

Every year, nearly 40,000 Americans are killed by guns, including: 46

• More than 23,000 who die by firearm suicide
• 14,000 who die by firearm homicide
• More than 500 who die by legal intervention ?
• Nearly 500 who die by unintentional firearm injuries
• More than 300 who die by undetermined intent

This equates to more than 100 gun deaths every single day.

More than 60% of all gun deaths are suicides. 58 Evidence consistently shows that access to firearms increases the risk of suicide. 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54 Access to a gun in the home increases the odds of suicide more than three-fold. 55 Firearms are so dangerous when someone is at risk for suicide because they are the most lethal suicide attempt method.

Though research shows that few individuals substitute means for suicide if their preferred method is not available, if firearms are not available, the person at risk for suicide is much more likely to survive even if they attempt using another method. 56 Delaying a suicide attempt can also allow suicidal crises to pass and lead to fewer suicides. Ninety percent of individuals who attempt suicide do not go on to die by suicide. 57 The use of a firearm in a suicide attempt often means there is no second chance.

To learn more, visit PreventFirearmSuicide.com or visit our page on firearm suicide .

Over 35% of all gun deaths are homicides. 58 Access to firearms – such as the presence of a gun in the home – is correlated with an increased risk for homicide victimization. 58, 59 States with high rates of gun ownership consistently have higher firearm homicide rates. 60, 61, 62 Studies show that access to firearms doubles the risk of homicide. 63 Nearly 75% of all U.S. homicides are by firearm. 64 Firearm homicide is a complex issue that includes different types of gun violence – domestic violence, interpersonal community violence, and mass shootings – and requires an array of different policies, programs, and practices if we want to see meaningful change.

Gun ownership also has implications for the number of mass shootings in a state. A 2019 study found that the permissiveness of state gun laws and an increase in a state’s gun ownership were associated with higher rates of mass shootings. Specifically, every 10 unit increase in the permissiveness of a state’s gun laws is associated with a 9% higher rate of mass shootings. For every 10% increase in gun ownership, states have a 35.1% higher rate of mass shootings. 65 The authors wrote, “This means that a state like California, which has approximately two mass shootings per year, will have an extra mass shooting for every 10 unit increase in permissiveness over five years. It will also have three to five more mass shootings per five years for every 10 unit increase in gun ownership.” 66

To learn more, visit our pages on firearm homicide or mass shootings .

Unintentional Shootings

About 1% of all gun deaths are unintentional. 67 “Unintentional” is the description used for a death that was not caused purposely. In gun violence, examples include fatal injuries that occur when a weapon misfires or is mishandled by a child and results in the victim being shot (in contrast with homicide and suicide, both of which involve an intent to pull the trigger and cause harm). Easy access to firearms, particularly unsecured firearms and the presence of firearms in risky situations, increases risk of unintentional injury and death by firearm. Mitigating access with safer storage practices and through evidence-based policy prevents unintentional gun violence.

To learn more, visit our page on unintentional shootings .

Legal Intervention / Police-Involved Shootings

“Legal intervention” is the description used by the CDC for injuries inflicted by the police or other law enforcement agents, including military on duty, in the course of arresting or attempting to arrest lawbreakers, suppressing disturbances, maintaining order, and other legal actions. In gun violence, these are also known as police-involved shootings. According to the CDC, more than 500 Americans die by legal intervention every year.

However, the government’s data (including the CDC data) provide a substantial under-count of police-involved injuries and deaths. To address this gap, a number of media sources have tracked police-involved shootings in recent years, most notably the Washington Post’s Fatal Force database. This database found that 1,000 Americans are shot and killed by police every year – more than double the number of police-involved fatal shootings than are reported in FBI and CDC databases. 68 Black Americans are disproportionately impacted by police-involved shootings and are killed at more than twice the rate as White Americans. 69

Ultimately, better data on police-involved injuries and deaths are sorely needed. Compulsory and comprehensive data collection at the local level, reporting to the federal government, and transparency in public dissemination of data will be critical for understanding this unique kind of gun violence and developing evidence-based solutions to minimize police-involved shootings.

Gun Violence in America - A Public Health Crisis Decades in the Making

A report from the Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence and Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, A Public Health Crisis Decades in the Making: A Review of 2019 CDC Gun Mortality Data , draws on the most recent gun death data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to illustrate the fatal toll of the gun violence epidemic in the U.S. The report outlines gun death data from 2019, including demographic details, state-by-state breakdowns, and reviews trends over the last two decades.

Gun Death Trends Over Time

39,707 Americans died by gun violence in 2019, a small decrease of 33 gun deaths from 2018. 70

• An average of 109 people died of gun violence each day in 2019, bringing the most recent five-year average (2015-2019) to 106 gun deaths per day.
• 23,941 Americans died by firearm suicide in 2019, 66 people every day.
• 14,414 Americans died by firearm homicide in 2019, more than 39 people every day.

Gun Deaths in the United States, 2010-2019

Number of deaths

Source: CDC WONDER.

Gun Death Rate Trends Over Time

The overall gun death rate increased 17% over the last decade – the gun suicide rate increased 12.5% and the gun homicide rate increased nearly 26%. 71

• While the firearm suicide rate decreased slightly from 2018 to 2019, the rate has trended upward  over the last decade.
• The firearm homicide rate increased over the last decade spiking 31% from 2014 to 2016 and remaining at at this elevated level.

Gun Death Rates in the United States, 2010-2019

Age-adjusted rate per 100,000

All rates listed are age-adjusted in order to allow for accurate comparisons between populations with differing age distributions.

Gun violence is an epidemic that reaches communities large and small, but it is more common in some places than others. Among the states in 2019, Alaska had the highest gun death rate (24.40 per 100,000 people), followed by Mississippi, Wyoming, and New Mexico (24.23, 22.33, and 22.27 per 100,000, respectively). Conversely, Massachusetts had the lowest gun death rate (3.40 per 100,000 people), followed by New York, New Jersey, and Hawaii (3.94, 4.13, and 4.42 per 100,000, respectively). 72

Age-adjusted gun death rate, 2019

• 3.40 to 8.70
• 8.71 to 14.01
• 14.02 to 19.32
• 19.33 to 24.40

For all forms of gun violence, males die at much higher rates than females. 72 In 2019:

• 87% of firearm suicide decedents were male
• 84% of firearm homicide decedents were male
• 90% of unintentional firearm decedents were male
• 96% of police-involved shooting decedents were male

Firearm Suicide Deaths by Sex, 2019

Firearm homicide deaths by sex, 2019, unintentional firearm deaths by sex, 2019, police-involved shooting firearm deaths by sex, 2015-2020.

Source: Washington Post.

By Race, Ethnicity, and Age

Overall: 73

• Firearm suicide rates are highest among White people, followed by American Indian/Alaska Native people. Firearm suicide risk is highest among people age 75 and older across the population as a whole, but that is primarily due to the very high rate of suicide among White males in that age group. Firearm suicide rates peak at younger ages (ages 20-34) for American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian, and Black males and females.
• Firearm homicide rates are highest among Black people as compared to people of other racial and ethnic identities and firearm homicide risk is highest among people ages 20-34 across the entire population.
• Unintentional firearm death rates are highest among American Indian/Alaska Native and Black Americans, followed by White Americans. Nearly one-quarter of all unintentional firearm decedents are 0-19 years old.
• Police-involved shootings disproportionately affect Black Americans and Hispanic/Latino Americans. Black Americans are killed in police-involved shootings at more than twice the rate of White Americans. Hispanic/Latino Americans are killed by police-involved shootings at nearly twice the rate of White Americans. 74

Stop gun violence in all its forms through a multifaceted public health approach.

Gun violence is a complex issue requiring many approaches to its prevention. We are committed to evidence-based policies, programs, and practices and ensuring that all of these preventative measures are designed and implemented equitably. To stop gun violence in all its forms:

• Apply the public health approach for effective gun violence prevention. See Public Health Approach for more information.
• Fund and conduct gun violence research, which is fundamental for effective gun violence prevention. See Gun Violence Research for more information.
• Enact and implement policies, programs, and practices that create time and space between individuals who may be at risk of suicide and firearms. See Firearm Suicide for more information.
• Enact and implement policies, programs, and practices that reduce easy access to firearms by people at risk of interpersonal violence and invest in interventions that address the root causes of gun violence in structurally disadvantaged communities. See Firearm Homicide , Community Violence , and Nonfatal Injuries for more information.
• Expand both federal and state domestic violence firearm prohibitions to reduce abusers’ access to firearms and improve collection and reporting of domestic violence related data. See Domestic Violence for more information.
• Enact and implement policies that reduce easy access to firearms by people at elevated risk of interpersonal violence and ban assault weapons and large capacity magazines that increase lethality in mass shootings. See Mass Shootings for more information.
• Implement programs and practices that promote safer firearm storage and handling. See Unintentional Shootings for more information.
• Train healthcare professionals on lethal means safety counseling so they are prepared to ask patients about firearm access and provide effective and respectful counseling when appropriate. See Lethal Means Safety Counseling for more information.
• Enact and implement a true universal background check law that requires background checks on all gun sales and transfers, including private and online sales, and eliminate “default proceed” sales. See Universal Background Checks for more information.
• Enact and implement state extreme risk laws to prevent tragedy before it occurs and support robust implementation through federal funding. See Extreme Risk Laws for more information.
• Reinstate the federal ban on assault weapons and large capacity magazines. In the absence of federal action, states should continue to enact and implement assault weapons and large capacity magazine bans. See Assault Weapons and Large Capacity Magazines for more information.
• Focus gun violence prevention policies on evidence-based risk factors — not mental illness. Use appropriate language and avoid harmful stereotypes. See Mental Illness for more information.

Educational Materials

• A Public Health Crisis Decades in the Making: A Review of 2019 CDC Gun Mortality Data
• Gun Violence in America: An Analysis of 2018 CDC Data
• Gun Violence in America: Data Brief

Fact sheets

• Overview of U.S. Gun Deaths: 2020
• United States Gun Deaths: 2019
• Guns Don’t Make You Safer    
• Staying Safe At Home    
• December 2018 op-ed in The Hill , Five gun violence prevention priorities for the incoming Congress
• June 2018 blog, On Wear Orange Day, we must focus on gun violence in all its forms
• November 2017 op-ed in The Hill ,  The path forward for Democrats starts with gun violence prevention
• Anglemyer A, Horvath T, & Rutherford G. (2014). The accessibility of firearms and risk for suicide and homicide victimization among household members: a systematic review and meta-analysis . Annals of Internal Medicine.
• Bangalore S & Messerli FH. (2013). Gun ownership and firearm-related deaths. American Journal of Medicine.
• Choron R, Spitzer S, & Sakran JV. (2019). Firearm violence in America: Is there a solution? Advances in Surgery.
• Dahlberg LL, Ikeda RM, & Kresnow MJ. (2004). Guns in the home and risk of a violent death in the home: findings from a national study. American Journal of Epidemiology.
• Grinshteyn E & Hemenway D. (2019). Violent death rates in the U.S. compared to those of the other high-income countries, 2015. Preventive Medicine.
• Kalesan B, Villarreal MD, Keyes KM, & Galea S. (2016). Gun ownership and social gun culture. Injury Prevention.
• Karp A. (2018). Estimating global civilian-held firearms numbers. Small Arms Survey.
• Knopov A, Sherman RJ, Raifman JR, Larson E, & Siegel MB. (2019). Household gun ownership and youth suicide rates at the state level, 2005–2015. American Journal of Preventive Medicine.
• Miller M, Azrael D, & Hemenway D. (2002). Rates of household firearm ownership and homicide across U.S. regions and states, 1988-1997. American Journal of Public Health.
• Miller M, Hemenway D, & Azrael D. (2007). State-level homicide victimization rates in the US in relation to survey measures of household firearm ownership, 2001-2003. Social Science & Medicine.
• Monuteaux MC, Lee LK, Hemenway D, Mannix R, & Fleegler EW. (2015). Firearm ownership and violent crime in the US: an ecologic study. American Journal of Preventive Medicine.
• Parker K, Horowitz JM, Igielnik R, Oliphant JB, & Brown A. (2017). America’s complex relationship with guns. Pew Research Center.
• Reeping PM, Cerdá M, Kalesan B, Wiebe DJ, Galea S, & Branas CC. (2019). State gun laws, gun ownership, and mass shootings in the US: cross sectional time series. British Medical Journal.
• Siegel M, Ross CS, & King C. (2014). Examining the relationship between the prevalence of guns and homicide rates in the USA using a new and improved state-level gun ownership proxy. Injury Prevention.

Additional resources

• Reducing Gun Violence in America: Informing Policy with Evidence and Analysis by Daniel Webster and Jon Vernick.
• Gunfight: The Battle Over the Right to Bear Arms in America by Adam Winkler.

Last updated February 2021

805 15th Street NW | Washington, DC 20005 | (202) 408-7560 |  [email protected]

SIGN UP FOR EMAIL ALERTS

© 2020 Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence Information on this website does not constitute legal or medical advice. Every factual situation is unique; if you want advice specific to your particular circumstances, you should consult knowledgeable counsel or medical personnel.

Introduction

• Why non-carceral community-based investments are key for preventing gun violence
• How state and local leaders are leveraging ARP funds to invest in non-carceral safety strategies
• Recommendations from the field: Maximizing ARP funds to promote holistic community safety

In June 2022, the most significant piece of gun violence prevention legislation in decades, the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act , became law. Alongside several common-sense gun regulations, the law allocates $250 million for community-based violence prevention initiatives—a promising step toward promoting safety through non-carceral and community-centered approaches. 1  

This federal action is important, but it only scratches the surface of what can be done to keep communities safe from gun violence. From investing in youth employment programs to revitalizing vacant lots to improving the quality of neighborhood housing, a wealth of community-based safety interventions are proven to reduce violent crime—including gun violence—in the places most impacted by it, and tackle the conditions of inequality that allow violence to concentrate in the first place. 2 But far too often, these community-based interventions are under-funded, particularly when compared to more punitive approaches. 3

Luckily, another source of federal aid can fund community-based safety investments: the American Rescue Plan’s (ARP) $350 billion in Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds. In addition to helping states and localities recover from the pandemic, the funds also provide local leaders with an unparalleled opportunity to address the public health crisis of gun violence. Indeed, President Joe Biden recently called on state and local leaders to use portions of this funding to address gun violence, including by “expanding evidence-based community violence intervention programs, and preventing crime by making our neighborhoods stronger with more educational and economic opportunities.” 4    

This research brief documents how state and local leaders are leveraging ARP funds to invest in non-carceral community-based safety initiatives; presents perspectives and case studies from leaders on-the-ground innovating on such strategies; and offers recommendations for how state and local leaders can maximize ARP funds to promote community safety prior to 2024 (when all funds must be obligated) and 2026 (when all funds must be spent). This is an unparalleled—and time-limited—window of opportunity, and states and localities should be thinking strategically right now about how to not only invest in proven strategies to reduce gun violence, but also promote life-affirming safety investments that  support thriving communities. 

Why non-carceral community-based investments are key for preventing gun violence 

Despite news headlines to the contrary, the U.S. is not in the midst of a crime wave . But it is experiencing an unprecedented and alarming increase in murders, driven largely by gun homicides. 5 Between 2019 and 2020, murder rates nationwide rose nearly 30%, while other forms of crime went down. 6 Since then, homicides, gun assaults, and other forms of violent crime have continued to trend upward, and as of June 2022, the homicide rate was 39% higher than it was prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. 7 For this reason, this brief focuses primarily on the role that community-based safety investments can play in addressing gun violence but it is important to note that these investments can also have broader impacts on public safety and community well-being.  

To understand the effectiveness of community-based safety investments, it helps to look at where most gun violence occurs. 8 Within cities and towns, gun violence is spatially concentrated—disproportionately occurring within a select set of high-poverty and disinvested neighborhoods, and within these neighborhoods, a select set of streets. 9  These are also the places where indicators of structural disadvantage (such as poverty, racial segregation, lower educational attainment, and high unemployment) cluster. 10 This pattern held during the recent nationwide increase in gun violence. 11   

The spatial concentration of violence stems from generations of policies and public and private investment decisions. Numerous studies have found a connection between state-sponsored racial segregation and gun violence, with the same places historically deemed unworthy of economic investment (through redlining) being more likely to be where gun violence concentrates today. 12 Research has also identified a link between concentrated poverty, densely crowded housing, and vacant buildings with higher rates of violent crime, including gun homicides. 13   

Given the many place-based factors that contribute to gun violence, there is growing recognition that just like improving public health in other ways, reducing gun violence requires addressing its social determinants and looking outside traditional systems (such as courts or hospitals) to tackle its root causes. 14   This approach is consistent with the preferences of survivors of violent crime, who overwhelmingly prefer investments in non-punitive crime prevention over criminal legal system responses. 15 As the John Jay College of Criminal Justice recently pointed out , this approach is also consistent with an emerging and growing body of research that elevates the effectiveness of non-carceral public safety investments that put communities at the center and builds their capacity to advance safety, health, and economic opportunity. 16  

The next section of this brief examines four categories of non-carceral community safety investments that ARP funds are being used for. Before introducing examples of investments in each category, we provide further empirical justification for specific investments within that category. But while the empirical evidence matters, the underlying moral argument does as well: Mass incarceration is not a morally acceptable solution to systemic disinvestment . 17 Local leaders should support non-carceral community safety interventions not only because they are effective, but because investing in struggling communities is the right thing to do. 

Methodology   This brief pulls from public data state and local governments reported to the U.S. Treasury Department regarding ARP spending. 18 We filtered projects by “Expense Category Group- 3-Services to Disproportionately Impacted Communities,” and further filtered by “Category-3.16-Social Determinants of Health: Community Violence Interventions.” 19 These filters, which Treasury has since recategorized as “Category 1 Public Health, 1.11 Community Violence Intervention,” document instances in which state and local leaders are purposefully aiming to reduce violence by addressing social determinants. We recognize that there are many more projects that are not coded as violence interventions that can still have an outsized impact in reducing violence, such as those designed to restore vacant lots or pilot universal basic incomes. However, we believe it is important to highlight how states and localities are explicitly thinking about violence prevention through community-centered approaches.   Within the Community Violence Intervention designation, we also filtered out funding allocated to victim services. While such projects are commendable and necessary, they are responses to violence, whereas our brief is concerned with interventions that prevent violence. Additionally, this brief focuses entirely on non-carceral safety uses of ARP funds, meaning we excluded uses that expand the reach of the criminal legal system (such as increasing the size of the police force or acquiring new public safety technology). The justification behind this approach is to highlight forward-looking and life-affirming visions of community safety, rather than carceral approaches that produce negative intergenerational consequences (such as mental health ramifications, family separation, poor educational performance, and racialized class stratification). 20 Finally, we conducted qualitative interviews with 14 government and civic leaders working at the state, county, and city level. 21 In selecting interviewees, we balanced attention to government and civil society and sought to center Black voices, particularly in localities with a large Black population.

How state and local leaders are leveraging ARP funds to invest in non-carceral safety strategies 

While the most straightforward uses of the American Rescue Plan’s State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds are to replace lost tax revenue or shore up general funds, the Treasury Department’s rules allow for a broad range of uses that “build a strong, resilient, and equitable recovery by making investments that support long-term growth and opportunity.” 22 Treasury also makes clear that community safety interventions are valid expenditure types for all communities, particularly those that have suffered an uptick in violence. 23 And as analysts at Civil Rights Corps , Alliance for Safety and Justice , the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities , and other organizations have pointed out, these flexible funds offer the largest-ever influx of federal dollars to support states and localities advance non-carceral interventions that promote a holistic vision of community safety. 24  

Below is a curated list of state and local investments in non-carceral community safety interventions, categorized along four key dimensions of community well-being. 25 While there are many more examples, our list represents a diverse set of locations with distinct approaches.  

Enhancing economic opportunity to promote safety 

A place’s economic health has a significant influence on its rates of violence; neighborhoods with higher poverty rates, unemployment, and income inequality have higher rates of violent crime. 26 On the other side of this relationship, a promising body of evidence demonstrates that by enhancing economic opportunity and reducing inequality within neighborhoods, places can significantly reduce crime. 27 For instance, evidence shows that youth workforce development and employment programs can reduce youth involvement in violent crime by as much as 45%. 28 Improving school quality has also been found to reduce violent crime arrests. 29 Finally, helping families avoid financial stress has been found to reduce crime and produce numerous other community benefits. 30   

Figure 1 illustrates how state and local governments are heeding this body of evidence and using ARP funds to advance community safety through economic mobility. For example, Illinois allocated $60 million investment toward youth employment programming, which subsidizes wages for high-risk youth and allows them to gain employability skills, participate in career development and apprenticeship programming, and receive wraparound services to address the root causes of employment barriers.  

Case study: How a small city in Virginia is using ARP funds to reduce violent crime through youth workforce development   Danville is a Black-majority (49%) city in southern Virginia with a population of approximately 42,000 . In 2016, it had the state’s highest per capita homicide rate , largely driven by gang-related violence . To tackle this, the city implemented a variety of community-centered programs to build trust in high-violence neighborhoods and prevent violence among at-risk youth. As Danville’s City Manager Ken Larking told us, “The best way to reduce crime is to prevent it and intervene before it happens.”  In 2020 (the year with the most recently reported data ), Danville saw a 50% reduction in violent crime from 2016. The city’s focus on prevention is also central to how it’s using ARP funds. Larking said that Danville is allocating funds on both “direct” violence prevention (including $236,000 on community violence initiatives) as well as “indirect” violence prevention, such as $1 million to address blight and additional grants to help residents of disinvested neighborhoods start businesses.   Of particular note is Project Imagine , a youth workforce development and violence prevention initiative that received $36,000 in ARP funding. Project Imagine provides gang-involved or at-risk youth with mentorship, apprenticeships, and employment opportunities, and enables former participants to become “ambassadors” who represent their neighborhoods in city meetings and provide input on the city’s strategic plan.  “One thing I knew coming into this city is that there was no voice from the Black community that was being heard,” Robert David, who leads Project Imagine, told us. When David was brought on in 2018, he had no staff or budget, but was able to access unused city funds from the federal Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act to begin offering paid jobs to youth. He also turned everyday community spaces into hubs to promote workforce development. “We made the barbershop a haven,” he said, noting when one of his outreach workers isn’t there, people will ask the barber, “Where’s my man with the jobs?”  The infusion of ARP funds has helped David hire permanent outreach workers to connect with more youth, which has since significantly increased enrollment in the initiative. The funds have also enabled him to acquire a permanent building for Project Imagine, which will serve as a safe drop-in space and community center for youth. 

Investing in the built environment and public health to promote safety  

The most consistent evidence on the relationship between violence prevention and place exists in the realm of the built environment. Numerous studies find that the renovation of housing, vacant buildings, land, and lots as well as efforts to add greenery and improve air quality significantly reduce violent crime. 31 These place-based strategies aim to counter decades of public and private disinvestment by revitalizing the physical environment and improving the health and safety of entire communities, rather than focusing on a sub-set of high-risk individuals (which many violence prevention programs, such violence interrupters, tend to focus on). 32 These interventions also align with a public health approach to preventing violence, which addresses the environmental factors that increase susceptibility to violence and advances protective environments that nurture safety, health, and well-being. 33 Examples range from addressing air pollution to increasing Medicaid coverage to expanding access to substance abuse and mental health treatment. 34  

Figure 2 highlights how state and local governments are using ARP funds to advance built environment improvements in communities and bolster public health system responses to community violence. For example, Chicago allocated ARP dollars to fund public realm improvements, building restorations, the preservation of safe and affordable housing, and the reactivation of city-owned land in the 15 areas with the highest rates of homicide and nonfatal shootings. 

It is important to note that while Figure 2 includes built environment and public health interventions explicitly categorized as “community violence interventions,” there are many other examples of state and local governments investing in built environment improvements that have the potential to prevent violence and are not categorized as such. These include city beautification and a revitalized community park in Milwaukee , streetlight repair in Los Angeles , and weatherization efforts to remove lead and mold in Washington, D.C . 35  

Case study: How Multnomah County, Ore. is taking a public health approach to violence prevention Multnomah County is home to Portland, Oregon’s most populous city. During the pandemic, gun violence in the city nearly tripled . In response to this sharp uptick and an over-burdened social service system, county officials allocated over $61 million of their ARP funds to violence prevention, including $4 million in public health approaches .    “We drew a one-to-one connection between the uptick and gun violence and the pandemic,” said Adam Renon, senior policy advisor to the Multnomah County chair. “The loss of social cohesion, the isolation, the breakdown of traditional society norms. So, we said, let’s use ARP funds to address that.” The county allocated $300,000 to hire “community health specialists” who provide families directly impacted by gun violence with safety plans and trauma support. An additional $1.2 million went toward creating a behavioral health response team of clinicians and peers to serve youth and families affected by gun violence. And the county expanded existing programs, including the Habilitation, Empowerment, Accountability, Therapy (H.E.A.T.) curriculum —a cognitive behavioral therapy program meant to address generational traumas for justice-involved people.    Raffaele Timarchi, policy advisor to the county chair, explained the importance of embedding public health approaches to violence prevention across multiple county departments: “[Just because] we take a public health approach to violence prevention doesn’t mean that all of our investments have to be in a public health department…We want to spread the tools of public health into these other departments, including people working at the community level.” This approach ran through Multnomah County’s ARP safety allocations, which included significant investments to strengthen communities through emergency rental assistance, community organization incubators, and a $4.8 million investment in direct assistance to help pay for residents’ pressing financial needs, including food, child care, transportation, and living expenses 

“We drew a one-to-one connection between the uptick and gun violence and the pandemic. The loss of social cohesion, the isolation, the breakdown of traditional society norms. So, we said, let’s use ARP funds to address that.” Adam Renon, Senior Policy Advisor, Multnomah County

Nurturing social cohesion to promote safety  

A significant body of evidence demonstrates that social cohesion and feelings of belonging to a neighborhood are associated with lower violent crime rates. 36 Research has also found that increasing the number of spaces for informal contact between neighbors (e.g., parks, community centers) is linked to a greater sense of safety for people in urban areas. 37 A growing body of evidence even indicates that creative placemaking can enhance community safety. 38

The evidence linking social cohesion with reduced violence forms the basis for many evidence-based community violence intervention programs, such as Cure Violence or Advance Peace , 39 which rely on community outreach to reach individuals in neighborhoods at the highest risk for violence. 40 These violence interrupting programs have contributed to significant declines in violence in high-crime neighborhoods in Richmond, Calif., Stockton, Calif., Los Angeles, Washington, D.C., Chicago, Baltimore, and others. 41  

Figure 3 highlights how state and local governments are using ARP funds to either invest in community violence interruption programs or in activities and programs that promote social cohesion. For example, Elkhart, Ind. is using ARP dollars to host summer events with music and food, present talks by credible messengers (e.g., people who have formerly been involved with the criminal legal system and now work in violence prevention), distribute anti-gun-violence yard signs, and provide COVID-19 information. Cincinnati is funding the Save Our Youth: Kings & Queens program, in which at-risk teens participate in a three-month program involving field trips and speakers focusing on Black history.  

Case study: How St. Louis is preventing violence by investing in safe youth spaces St. Louis is a midsized city (45.7% Black) with a population of roughly 300,000 . Even with a slight decline in 2021, St. Louis continues to have one of the highest homicide rates in the nation . In recent years, there has been growing recognition among city officials that to prevent violence, they must target its root causes—starting with offering resources to those who are most at-risk for committing and be victims of violence, including youth in disinvested neighborhoods.  “We have over 50 kids that have been shot since the beginning of this year,” said Wilford Pinkney Jr., director of the Mayor’s Office of Children, Youth, and Families. “Most of our car jackings and car thefts are all juveniles…There was no one engaging with them to determine what is happening, why they engaged in that behavior, and to try to deal with addressing it early on. We need to deal with that before we get to the point that they’re car jacking and shooting people.”    As part of its ARP allocation, St. Louis devoted $5.5 million to violence interruption initiatives. One is Safer Summer St. Louis, which funds youth- and grassroots-led organizations to plan pop-up events aimed at providing safe, community-building spaces. Jessica Meyers, director for the St. Louis Area Violence Prevention Commission , said that motivation for the program came from youth themselves: “We heard from the youth that they feel like they do not have access to their whole neighborhood. They do not have access to safe spaces in their neighborhood. The spaces that should be safe, like parks, aren’t safe because of gun violence or drug dealing or gang activity. Or the spaces that are safe—like a recreation center or a YMCA or a business—they don’t feel welcome in them, or they feel there are barriers, whether that’s a fee or transportation.” Safer Summer St. Louis seeks to tackle this by providing funding (up to $5,000 per event) to youth in neighborhoods most impacted by gun violence to host events like block parties, bike rides, fitness events, and other activities of their choosing.  Meyers said that while the program is based on evidence about what works to prevent violence, it is really about showing St. Louis youth that the city is invested in their future. “[Safer Summer St. Louis] is about investing in youth and telling them we value them enough that we’re taking this $1 million in [ARP] funding and we’re going to put it directly to events that allow you to be young and have fun in St. Louis—in a safer St. Louis.” 

“[Safer Summer St. Louis] is about investing in youth and telling them we value them enough that we’re taking this $1 million in [ARP] funding and we’re going to put it directly to events that allow you to be young and have fun in St. Louis—in a safer St. Louis.” Jessica Meyers, Director of the St. Louis Area Violence Prevention Commission

Strengthening civic infrastructure to promote safety  

Nearly every non-carceral community-based safety intervention requires the leadership and dedication of civic and community-based organizations to be implemented. 42 And aside from that, research indicates that the mere presence of such organizations within a neighborhood leads to reductions in violent crime. 43 The challenge, however, is that while city resources are plentiful for increasing police in high-crime neighborhoods, cities routinely fail to fund the community infrastructure (such as grassroots organizations) that stabilize communities. 44  

Figure 4 highlights how state and local governments are using ARP funds to enhance the capacity of community-based and civic organizations to prevent violence. For example, New Haven, Conn. used $785,000 of its ARP funds to create Civic Space , a centralized public forum for citizens and grassroots organizations to share input on ARP investments, learn about new community-centered violence prevention initiatives, and partner with other organizations working on similar aims. 

Case study: How Minnesota is supporting locally led grassroots organizations prevent violence Minnesota has a population of 5.7 million , with the largest concentrations in the cities of Minneapolis and Saint Paul. Despite relatively strong gun laws, firearms are the leading cause of death for youth in the state. With Minneapolis being the site of George Floyd’s murder and the catalyst for global protests against racial injustice, the state knew it needed to act boldly in allocating ARP funds toward non-carceral public safety approaches—ultimately obligating $16.8 million for violence prevention and intervention activities as well as survivor support.   As part of this, state leaders allocated $5 million toward a new Innovation in Community Safety grant program . Kate Weeks, executive director of the Minnesota Department of Public Safety, said the program is “a new way for Minnesota to push out money that was community-focused,” where “decisions about where funds would go come directly from the community.” The grant program provides local organizations in targeted neighborhoods with up to $1 million for community safety programming, prioritizing areas with the highest rates of violent crime. According to Weeks, the recipients have been “virtually all nonprofits.”   The state made another $2.5 million available through Violence Intervention Grants , with a maximum per-grant amount of $250,000. These grants were designed to have a more equitable distribution of applicants, with a fiscal agent administering smaller funding amounts more quickly to grassroots organizations.

Recommendations from the field: Maximizing ARP funds to promote holistic community safety  

The state, county, and local leaders we interviewed offered five primary recommendations on how to more equitably and effectively allocate ARP spending toward non-carceral community safety interventions. These recommendations, which align with emerging research on best practices for the equitable use of ARP funds, include:  

• Build the capacity of smaller, grassroots nonprofits to deploy funds. States and municipalities rely on nonprofit partners to execute ARP obligations; small and grassroots nonprofits (which often serve and hold greater trust with disinvested communities) are at a structural disadvantage in becoming aware of and applying for federal funds, as well as in navigating the reporting requirements tied to federal dollars. 45 As Robert David explained, prior to Danville’s efforts to invest in violence prevention, there was a disconnect between grassroots organizations and “where the funding was,” which made the city “resource-rich but collaboratively poor.” Our interviewees explained how solving this mismatch requires direct outreach to nonprofits in disinvested communities to make them aware of ARP funds, simplifying the application process or dedicating state or municipal resources to support grassroots partners through the process, and loosening reporting requirements. For example, in St. Louis, the city hired a consultant to help grassroots nonprofits apply for funds. And in Minnesota, the state allocated different funding streams through a “social compact” model to allow some smaller nonprofits to pool their applications to make a stronger case for funding.  
• Employ participatory and community-informed processes to guide investment decisions . To be true to the White House’s directive to use ARP funds equitably , disproportionately impacted communities should be engaged in determining how these federal dollars are spent. A variety of traditional mechanisms can be used to do so, including surveys, online forms, public meetings, and listening sessions. But these tools alone can often exclude citizens who are not already highly engaged or who have limited broadband access. Leaders must be intentional about diversifying the forms of community engagement and ensuring engagement is meaningful. Some strategies include targeted outreach in disadvantaged census tracts, using paid community reviewers (including youth) to review proposals and help make grantmaking decisions, conducting outreach to incarcerated and returning citizens, and launching longer-term processes such as participatory budgeting . For example, the St. Louis Area Violence Prevention Commission hired youth to review proposals for their Safer Summer St. Louis program, and Danville leveraged previous community engagement processes to guide the allocation of ARP funds. Stakeholders across all cities emphasized the importance of engaging youth.

“When we give power to young people to use their voice, to be able to co-create, that is more powerful than [when] we are just ordaining from on high and not letting them be effective partners,” Devanshi Patel, CEO of the Center for Youth and Family Advocacy in Virginia. 

• Prioritize equity in the allocation, implementation, and evaluation of ARP funds. The Treasury Department explicitly urged states and localities to prioritize equity in their distribution of ARP funds. In terms of funding allocations, equity can mean ensuring funding flows to census tracts with disproportionate rates of violence or to organizations whose leadership and staff are demographically representative of the communities they serve (for example, by requiring grant seekers to disclose this information in applications, as Minnesota did). In terms of implementation, interviewees explained that equity means trusting community-based organizations—particularly those with deep ties to underserved places—to use their funding in nimble ways that respond to communities’ evolving needs. Equity also means recognizing that people involved in implementation might not have standard resumes or may have criminal records, but their lived experiences and community ties are valuable assets for expanding the success and impact of these interventions. As Multnomah County’s Adam Renon told us, “We need to learn from the individuals who have been incarcerated or who have committed gun violence, and ask them, ‘What would have prevented you from entering that life?’” Finally, in terms of evaluation, equity means thinking expansively about compliance requirements and reporting metrics—including incorporating qualitative data and perspectives from directly impacted communities—as burdensome requirements can strain capacity and limit the ability of smaller organizations to access funding.

“ We need to learn from the individuals who have been incarcerated or who have committed gun violence, and ask them, ‘What would have prevented you from entering that life?’” Adam Renon, Senior Policy Advisor, Multnomah County

• Use data to not just understand program effectiveness, but to respond to evolving community needs. Upticks in violence can be unpredictable and send shockwaves across entire communities—disrupting school, family, and social life even for residents who may not have been directly victimized themselves. For this reason, interviewees stressed the importance of using public safety indicators not just to gauge whether prevention initiatives are working, but also as a way to shift implementation and resource allocation to respond to communities’ needs. “We really tried to take a look at the data in front of us,” Multnomah County’s Raffaele Timarchi said. “We knew that mental health concerns were up, we knew youth were disconnected from school and social supports…The safety net had been frayed.” Timarchi explained how the intersecting challenges of rising gun homicide rates, school closures, and frontline workers’ burnout guided their cross-disciplinary approach to violence prevention. Wilford Pinkney Jr. described using St. Louis’ crisis response data to craft programs that better fit community needs: “If you’re doing crisis response right, you’re engaging people and gathering a lot of data that’s hard for people to refute in terms of what the needs are in the community. We don’t have to guess what people need. We have 6,000 interactions from people in this community saying what they need.” Interviewees stressed this imperative to use data not as a way to judge high-violence communities, but rather as a tool to more deeply understand their shifting needs.

“If you’re doing crisis response right, you’re engaging people and gathering a lot of data that’s hard for people to refute in terms of what the needs are in the community. We don’t have to guess what people need. We have 6,000 interactions from people in this community saying what they need.” Wilford Pinkney Jr., St. Louis

• Create dedicated and sustainable funding streams—including as line items in city budgets—and braid funding streams whenever possible to increase scale. ARP provides state and local leaders with a once-in-a-generation influx of funds, but it is time-limited. Multiple interviewees expressed their concern that too great a reliance on this one-time funding could lead to programmatic cliffs. They noted that creating line items in city, county, or state budgets, and/or creating permanent agencies devoted to community safety could provide stability in financing—especially since political cycles and new administrations can disrupt initiatives that lack permanency. 46 Our Brookings colleagues have also suggested braiding or blending funding streams to increase sustainability, which could involve braiding ARP dollars with  private funding , funding from  surrounding regional jurisdictions , or major new federal investments like those in the  Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act . Finally, municipalities should harness revenue from traditional economic development initiatives to sustain public priorities. For example, Danville City Manager Ken Larking outlined a vision for current development that includes the goal of never being “in a budget crisis where a neighborhood park has to be sacrificed because there isn’t enough money to do police services or whatever else.” And as an added benefit, by tying revenue to priorities that reflect established city values and priorities, governments are held accountable to steering development that benefits the entire community.  

Conclusion 

At the end of 2021, cities and counties had budgeted only 40% of their total ARP allocation (82% of the first of two funding tranches). While more money has been budgeted this year, there is still plenty of funding left to be allocated prior to the 2024 deadline and spent prior to the 2026 deadline. It is vital that state and local leaders seize this once-in-a-generation opportunity to invest in community-based violence prevention efforts now, as these programs can take time to establish roots at the local level and scale up. 

By investing in critical community safety infrastructure before the next rise in gun violence, communities will be better supported and equipped to avoid such violence, while also averting the intergenerational consequences that accompany punitive responses to it. As Devanshi Patel of Virginia’s Center for Youth and Family Advocacy said, it is imperative to invest in “restorative justice and community-based programming now to help kids stay out of the legal system” because system-involvement and incarceration can create harms for people and communities that are felt for generations. 

Ultimately, the benefits of addressing the root causes of gun violence go far beyond the shots you don’t hear. In addition to the lives saved, the benefits can be seen in the children playing in parks, the youth finding employment, the sick accessing treatment, the entrepreneurs launching businesses, or neighbors hosting block parties. By investing in economic opportunity, bolstering social cohesion, upgrading the built environment, and strengthening neighborhoods’ civic ties, state and local leaders can create the conditions necessary for long-lasting individual and collective flourishing. 

Acknowledgments:

The authors express their sincere gratitude to the state and local leaders who participated in research interviews to inform this piece: Gregory Baldwin, Thomas Carr, Robert David, Patrick Hogan, Tricia Hummel, Ken Larking, Jessica Meyers, Ahna Minge, Dr. Kiah E. Nyame, Devanshi Patel, Wilford Pinkney Jr., Adam Renon, Raffaele Timarchi, and Kathryn Weeks. The authors also thank the following experts for their review of various drafts of the research brief: Alan Berube, Jennifer S. Vey, and Eli Byerly-Duke (of Brookings Metro), Sam Washington and Thea Sebastian (of Civil Rights Corps), and Leah Sakala (of Alliance for Safety and Justice).  

About the Authors

Research associate – brookings metro, anthony barr, senior research assistant – brookings metro, oluwasekemi odumosu, research intern – brookings metro.

• “Non-carceral” safety interventions are those that exist outside of the formal criminal justice system, and are implemented by actors who are not part of the criminal justice system.
• Heller, S., Pollack, H. A., & Davis, J. M. (2017). The effects of summer jobs on youth violence. National Criminal Justice Reference Service, Office of Justice Programs. South, E. C., MacDonald, J., & Reina, V. (2021). Association between structural housing repairs for low-income Homeowners and neighborhood crime. JAMA network open, 4(7), e2117067-e2117067. South, E.C. (2021). Opinion: To combat gun violence, clean up the neighborhood. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/08/opinion/gun-violence-biden-philadelphia.html.
• Cashin, S. (2021). Opinion: It’s time to dismantle America’s residential caste system. Politico Magazine. https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/09/12/its-time-to-dismantle-americas-residential-caste-system-511150
• White House. FACT SHEET: President Biden Issues Call for State and Local Leaders to Dedicate More American Rescue Plan Funding to Make Our Communities Safer – And Deploy These Dollars Quickly | The White House
• Michaels, Samantha. (2021). What If Everything You Know About Murder Rates and Policing Is Wrong? Mother Jones.
• MacFarquhar, Neil. (2021). Murders Spiked in 2020 in Cities Across the United States. New York Times.
• Council on Criminal Justice (2022). Pandemic, Social Unrest, and Crime in U.S. Cities: Mid-Year 2022 Update
• Love, H. (2021). Want to reduce violence? Invest in place. Brookings Institution.
• Weisburd, D. (2015). The law of crime concentration and the criminology of place. Criminology, 53(2), 133-157.
• Beard, J., C. Morrison, Jacoby, S., Dong, B., Smith, R., Sims, C., and Weibe, D. (2017). Quantifying disparities in urban firearm violence by race and place in Philadelphia, PA: A Cartographic Study. American Journal of Public Health.
• Rowlands, D. & Love, H. (2022). Mapping gun violence: A closer look at the intersection between place and gun homicides in four cities. Brookings Institution.
• Light, M. T., & Thomas, J.T. (2019). Segregation and violence reconsidered: Do whites benefit from residential segregation? American Sociological Review, 84(4), 690-725. Jacoby, S., Dong, B., Beard, J., Wiebe, D., and Morrison, C. (2018) The enduring impact of historical and structural racism on urban violence in Philadelphia. Social Science & Medicine 199: 87-95.
• Light, M. T., & Thomas, J. T. (2019). Segregation and violence reconsidered: Do whites benefit from residential segregation?. American sociological review, 84(4), 690-725. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (n.d.). Neighborhoods and violent crime. https://www.huduser.gov/portal/periodicals/em/summer16/highlight2.html. Kondo, M. C., Andreyeva, E., South, E. C., MacDonald, J. M., & Branas, C. C. (2018). Neighborhood interventions to reduce violence. Annual review of public health, 39(1), 253-271. Branas, C. C., Rubin, D., & Guo, W. (2012). Vacant properties and violence in neighborhoods. International Scholarly Research Notices, 2012.
• U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (n.d.). Healthy People 2030. https://health.gov/healthypeople/objectives-and-data/social-determinants-health
• Jones, A. (2020). Reforms without Results: Why states should stop excluding violent offenses from criminal justice reforms. Prison Policy Initiative. https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/violence.html#victims
• Branas, C., Buggs, S., Butts, J. A., Harvey, A., Kerrison, E. M., Meares, T., … & Webster, D. (2020). Reducing Violence Without Police: A Review of Research Evidence. John Jay College of Criminal Justice Research and Evaluation Center. Janetta, J., Sakala, L., & Rejon, F. (2020). Federal investment in community-driven public safety. Urban Institute. Sakala, L. and La Vigne, L. (2019). Community-driven models for safety and justice. Du Bois Review, 16:1 253–266.
• Barr, Anthony. & Broady, Kristen. (2021) Dramatically increasing incarceration is the wrong response to the recent uptick in homicides and violent crime. The Brookings Institution. Retrieved December 4, 2021, from http://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2021/11/02/dramatically-increasing-incarceration-is-the-wrong-response-to-the-recent-uptick-in-homicides-and-violent-crime/
• U.S. Department of the Treasury. https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/coronavirus/assistance-for-state-local-and-tribal-governments/state-and-local-fiscal-recovery-funds/recipient-compliance-and-reporting-responsibilities
• In July 2022, The U.S. Department of Treasury released a new batch of reporting that includes data through March 2022 and can be found here: Recipient Compliance and Reporting Responsibilities | U.S. Department of the Treasury
• Geller, A., Fagan, J., & Tyler, T. (2017). Police contact and mental health. Columbia Public Law Research Paper, (14-571). Legewie, J., & Fagan, J. (2019). Aggressive policing and the educational performance of minority youth. American Sociological Review, 84(2), 220-247. Soss, J., & Weaver, V. (2017). Police are our government: Politics, political science, and the policing of race–class subjugated communities. Annual Review of Political Science, 20(1), 565-591. Underwood, E. & Krinsky, M.A. (2019). Millions of children lose their parents to incarceration. That doesn’t have to happen. The Appeal. https://theappeal.org/millions-of-children-lose-their-parents-to-incarceration-that-doesnt-have-to-happen/ Sakala, L., Harvell, S., & Thompson, C. (2018) Public investment in community-driven safety initiatives: Landscape study and key considerations. Urban Institute.
• Our list of interviewees consisted of the following: From Danville, Va.: Gregory Baldwin (Director of Restorative Practices at Center for Youth and Family Advocacy), Robert David (Youth and Gang Violence Prevention Coordinator), Ken Larking (City Manager), and Devanshi Patel (Co-Founder and CEO at Center for Youth and Family Advocacy. From St. Louis: Jessica Meyers (Director, St. Louis Area Violence Prevention Commission) and Wilford Pinkney Jr. (Director, Mayor’s Office of Children, Youth, and Families). From Multnomah County, Ore: Adam Renon (Senior Policy Advisor for Multnomah County Chair Deborah Kafoury) and Raffaele Timarchi (Policy Advisor for Multnomah County Chair Deborah Kafoury). From Minnesota: Thomas Carr (Executive Budget Officer at Minnesota Management & Budget), Patrick Hogan (Director of Communications at Minnesota Management & Budget), Tricia Hummel (Assistant Director, Minnesota Office of Justice Programs), Ahna Minge (Assistant Commissioner for Budget Services and State Budget Director, Minnesota Management & Budget), and Kathryn Weeks (Executive Director, Minnesota Office of Budget Programs). From Rochester, N.Y.: Dr. Kiah E. Nyame (Coordinator, Rochester Office of Neighborhood Safety).
• Coronavirus State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds | U.S. Department of the Treasury
• https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2022-01-27/pdf/2022-00292.pdf
• Civil Rights Corps. (n.d). Community safety & the American Rescue Plan: A guide to using fiscal recovery grants to advance holistic safety. https://civilrightscorps.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Community-Safety-and-ARP_Policy-Guide_CivRightsCorps.pdf, Lazere, E. (2021). Using federal relief funds to invest in non-police approaches to public safety. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Heuvel, S., Nelson, M., & Nguyen, L. (2021). How the American Rescue Plan can foster an equitable recovery: An equitable recovery requires strategic investments in safety. Vera Institute of Justice.
• U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (n.d.). Neighborhoods and violent crime. https://www.huduser.gov/portal/periodicals/em/summer16/highlight2.html.
• Sebastian, T., Bou, L., & Washington, S. Getting Smart on Safety Evidence on Non-Carceral Investments That Work to Prevent Violence & Harm. Civil Rights Corps.
• Heller, S. B. (2014). Summer jobs reduce violence among disadvantaged youth. Science, 346(6214), 1219-1223.
• Branas, C., Buggs, S., Butts, J. A., Harvey, A., Kerrison, E. M., Meares, T., … & Webster, D. (2020). Reducing Violence Without Police: A Review of Research Evidence. John Jay College of Criminal Justice Research and Evaluation Center.
• South, E. C., MacDonald, J., & Reina, V. (2021). Association between structural housing repairs for low-income Homeowners and neighborhood crime. JAMA network open, 4(7), e2117067-e2117067. Branas, C. C., South, E., Kondo, M. C., Hohl, B. C., Bourgois, P., Wiebe, D. J., & MacDonald, J. M. (2018). Citywide cluster randomized trial to restore blighted vacant land and its effects on violence, crime, and fear. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(12), 2946-2951. Kondo, M. C., South, E. C., Branas, C. C., Richmond, T. S., & Wiebe, D. J. (2017). The association between urban tree cover and gun assault: a case-control and case-crossover study. American journal of epidemiology, 186(3), 289-296. Bondy, M., Roth, S., & Sager, L. (2020). Crime is in the air: The contemporaneous relationship between air pollution and crime. Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, 7(3), 555-585.
• American Public Health Association. (2018). Violence is a public health issue: Public health is essential to understanding and treating violence in the U.S. https://apha.org/policies-and-advocacy/public-health-policy-statements/policy-database/2019/01/28/violence-is-a-public-health-issue.
• Brookings Institution (2022). Interactive: Local government ARPA investment tracker. http://www.brookings.edu/interactives/arpa-investment-tracker/.
• Weisburd, D., White, C., & Wooditch, A. (2020). Does collective efficacy matter at the micro geographic level?: Findings from a study of street segments. The British Journal of Criminology, 60(4), 873-891. Branas, C., Buggs, S., Butts, J. A., Harvey, A., Kerrison, E. M., Meares, T., … & Webster, D. (2020). Reducing Violence Without Police: A Review of Research Evidence. John Jay College of Criminal Justice Research and Evaluation Center.
• Sullivan, William C., Frances E. Kuo, and Stephen F. Depooter. “The fruit of urban nature: Vital neighborhood spaces.” Environment and behavior 36, no. 5 (2004): 678-700.
• Treskon, M., Esthappan, S., Okeke, C., & Vásquez-Noriega, C. (2018). Creative Placemaking and Community Safety: Synthesizing Cross-Cutting Themes. Urban Institute.
• Dholakia, N. & Gilbert, D. (2021). Community violence intervention programs, explained. Vera Institute of Justice. https://www.vera.org/community-violence-intervention-programs-explained?emci=1e33529c-0d38-ec11-9820-c896653b26c8&emdi=c5fd9ca1-1738-ec11-9820-c896653b26c8&ceid=954462. Delgado, S. A., Alsabahi, L., Wolff, K., Alexander, N., Cobar, P., & Butts, J. A. (2021). Denormalizing violence: A series of reports from the John Jay College Evaluation of Cure Violence Programs in New York City. Advance Peace (n.d.). Learning and Evaluation. https://www.advancepeace.org/about/learning-evaluation-impact/.
• Pearl, B. (2020). Beyond policing: Investing in offices of neighbourhood safety. Washington: Center for American Progress. Rust, M., Calvert, S., & Elinson, Z. Murder in America: What makes cities safer. Wall Street Journal. Corburn, J. & Fukutome, A. Advance Peace Stockton: 2018-2020 evaluation. Center for Global Healthy Cities.
• Sakala, L., Harvell, S., Thompson, C. (2018) Public investment in community-driven safety initiatives: Landscape study and key considerations. Urban Institute.
• Sharkey, P., Torrats-Espinosa, G., & Takyar, D. (2017). Community and the crime decline: The causal effect of local nonprofits on violent crime. American Sociological Review, 82(6), 1214-1240. Sharkey, P. (2018). Uneasy peace: The great crime decline, the renewal of city life, and the next war on violence. WW Norton & Company.
• Holder, S., Akinnibi, F., Cannon, C. (2020). ‘We have not defunded anything’: Big cities boost police budgets, CityLab.
• Brachman, L. (2022). Nonprofits’ critical role in deploying federal investments: Observations from the Transforming Cities Lab. Brookings Institution.
• Pearl, B. (2020). Beyond Policing: Investing in Offices of Neighborhood Safety. Center for American Progress

You are leaving

You will be redirected momentarily.

• Share on Twitter
• Share on Facebook
• Email this page
• See the Research

At least one firearm is stolen from a car every nine minutes in the US. But these thefts are preventable.

The Impact of Gun Violence on Children and Teens

Last Updated: 5.9.2024

Learn More:

• Child & Teen Gun Safety
• Guns in Schools
• Mass Shootings
• Reconsider Active Shooter Drills
• Secure Gun Storage
• Stop Arming Teachers

Introduction

When Davonte was asked what he wanted for his birthday, he didn’t ask for a big celebration, he only said, “I’m glad I made it to see 18.” He was shot and killed less than one week after turning 18. He had previously spoken before the Baltimore City Council on youth violence prevention.

Key Findings

The deadly impact of guns on children and teens in america.

Annually, more than 4,000 children and teens (ages 0 to 19) are shot and killed, and more than 17,000 are shot and wounded—that’s an average of 59 American children and teens every day. 1 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, WONDER Online Database, Underlying Cause of Death. A yearly average was developed using five years of the most recent available data: 2018 to 2022. Ages 0 to 19. Everytown Research analysis of 2020 HCUP nonfatal injury data. And the effects of gun violence extend far beyond those struck by a bullet: An estimated three million children witness a shooting each year. 2 Finkelhor D, Turner HA, Shattuck A, Hamby SL. Prevalence of childhood exposure to violence, crime, and abuse: results from the National Survey of Children’s Exposure to Violence. JAMA Pediatrics . 2015;169(8):746-54. Everytown analysis derives this number by multiplying the share of children (aged 0 to 17) who are exposed to shootings per year (4%) by the total child population of the US in 2016 (~73.5M). Gun violence shapes the lives of the children who witness it, know someone who was shot, or live in fear of the next shooting.

Gun deaths among children and teens by intent

Last updated: 2.20.2023

Firearms are the leading cause of death for children and teens . 3 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. WONDER Online Database, Underlying Cause of Death, Injury Mechanism & All Other Leading Causes. Data from 2022. Children and teenagers aged 1 to 19. This is a uniquely American problem. Compared to other high-income countries, American children aged 5 to 14 are 21 times more likely to be killed with guns, and American adolescents and young adults aged 15 to 24 are 23 times more likely to be killed with guns. 4 Grinshteyn E, Hemenway D. Violent death rates in the US compared to those of the other high-income countries, 2015. Preventive Medicine . 2019;123:20-26.

When American children and teens are killed with guns, 63 percent are homicides—more 2,500 deaths per year. 5 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, WONDER Online Database, Underlying Cause of Death. A yearly average was developed using five years of the most recent available data: 2018 to 2022. Ages 0 to 19. Homicide includes shootings by police. Children are particularly impacted by the intersection of domestic violence and gun violence . For children under age 13 who are victims of gun homicides, 85 percent of those deaths occur in the home, and nearly a third of those deaths are connected to intimate partner or family violence. 6 Fowler KA, Dahlberg LL, Haileyesus T, Gutierrez C, Bacon S. Childhood firearm injuries in the United States. Pediatrics . 2017;140(1). Between 2015 and 2022, nearly two in three child and teen victims of mass shootings died in incidents connected to domestic violence. 7 Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund. Mass Shootings in America. https://every.tw/1XVAmcc . March 2023. Data drawn from 16 states indicate that nearly two-thirds of child fatalities involving domestic violence were caused by guns. 8 Adhia A, Austin SB, Fitzmaurice GM, Hemenway D. The role of intimate partner violence in homicides of children aged 2-14 years. American Journal of Preventive Medicine . 2019;56(1):38-46.

Another 31 percent of child and teen gun deaths are suicides—nearly 1,300 per year . 9 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, WONDER Online Database, Underlying Cause of Death. A yearly average was developed using four years of the most recent available data: 2018 to 2022. Ages 0 to 19. And firearm suicide has been rising dramatically: Over the past decade, the firearm suicide rate among children and teens has increased by 43 percent. 10 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. WONDER Online Database, Underlying Cause of Death. A percent change was developed using 2013–2022 crude rates for children and teens aged 0 to 19. For people of all ages, having access to a gun increases the risk of death by suicide by three times. 11 Anglemyer A, Horvath T, Rutherford G. The accessibility of firearms and risk for suicide and homicide victimization among household members: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Annals of Internal Medicine . 2014;160(2):101-110. Research shows that an estimated 4.6 million American children live in homes with at least one gun that is loaded and unlocked. 12 Matthew Miller and Deborah Azrael, “Firearm Storage in US Households with Children: Findings from the 2021 National Firearm Survey,” JAMA Network Open 5, no. 2 (2022): e2148823, https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.48823 . The combination of suicidal ideation and easy firearm access can be lethal. When children under the age of 18 die by gun suicide, they are likely to have used a gun they found at home: Over 80 percent of child gun suicides involved a gun belonging to a parent or relative. 13 Johnson RM, Barber C, Azrael D, Clark DE, Hemenway D. Who are the owners of firearms used in adolescent suicides? Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior. 2010;40(6):609-611.

Gun violence manifests in a myriad of ways in American schools, and school shootings have created new anxieties for the younger generation of students. According to an Everytown analysis , there have been at least 549 incidents of gunfire on school grounds from 2013 to 2019. 14 Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund. Keeping Our Schools Safe: A Plan for Preventing Mass Shootings and Ending All Gun Violence in American Schools. everytownresearch.org/school-safety-plan . February 2020. Of these, 347 occurred on the grounds of elementary, middle, or high schools, resulting in 129 deaths and 270 people wounded. 15 Everytown’s Gunfire on School Grounds database includes 201 incidents on colleges and universities. These incidents were excluded from analyses to focus on gunfire on K-12 school grounds. While mass shootings like the incident at Sandy Hook Elementary School—and, more recently, Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School and Santa Fe High School—are not commonplace, schools are more likely to experience gun homicides and assaults, unintentional shootings resulting in injury or death, and gun suicide and self-harm injuries. All incidents of gun violence in schools, regardless of their intent or victim count, compromise the safety of students and staff.

Children and teens who live in cities are at a significantly higher risk of gun homicides and assaults compared to their peers in rural areas. Ninety-two percent of all hospitalizations of children for firearm injuries occur in urban areas (counties with over 50,000 residents). 16 Herrin BR, Gaither JR, Leventhal JM, Dodington J. Rural versus urban hospitalizations for firearm injuries in children and adolescents.  Pediatrics.  2018;142(2): e20173318. Everytown calculation from dividing the number of urban hospitalizations by the total number of hospitalizations. These injuries have lifelong consequences: Almost 50 percent of the wounded have a disability when they are discharged from the hospital. 17 DiScala C, Sege R. Outcomes in children and young adults who are hospitalized for firearms-related injuries.  Pediatrics . 2004;113(5):1306–12. Fifteen- to 19-year-olds in urban areas are hospitalized for firearm assaults at a rate eight times higher than 15- to 19-year-olds in rural areas. 18 Herrin BR, Gaither JR, Leventhal JM, Dodington J. Rural versus urban hospitalizations for firearm injuries in children and adolescents.  Pediatrics . 2018;142(2): e20173318. Children and teens from 15 to 19; Nance ML, Denysenko L, Durbin DR. The rural-urban continuum: variability in statewide serious firearm injuries in children and adolescents.  Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine.  2002;156(8):781-5. Urban and low-income youth are much more likely to witness gun violence than suburban and higher-income youth. 19 Stein BD, Jaycox LH, Kataoka S, Rhodes HJ, Vestal KD. Prevalence of child and adolescent exposure to community violence.  Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review . 2003 Dec;6(4):247-64.

The Disproportionate Impact of Gun Violence on Black and Latinx Children and Teens

As with gun violence generally, impact among children and teens is not equally shared across populations. Black children and teens in America are more than 17 times more likely than their white peers to die by gun homicide. 20 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. WONDER Online Database, Underlying Cause of Death. A yearly average was developed using five years of the most recent available data: 2018 to 2022. Ages 0 to 19. Black and white defined as non-Latinx origin. Homicide includes shootings by police. Black children and teens are 13 times more likely to be hospitalized for a firearm assault than white children. 21 Everytown for Gun Safety, “A More Complete Picture.” Latinx children and teens are 3 times more likely to die by gun homicide than their white peers. 22 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. WONDER Online Database, Underlying Cause of Death. A yearly average was developed using five years of the most recent available data: 2018 to 2022. Ages 0 to 19. Latinx defined as all races of Latinx origin. White defined as non-Latinx origin. Homicide includes shootings by police.

White and Black children may live in the same city yet experience it differently. Due to policy decisions that enforce racial segregation and disinvestment in certain communities, gun violence is concentrated in Black neighborhoods within cities, many of which are marked by high levels of poverty and joblessness and low levels of investment in education. 23 Chandler A. Interventions for reducing violence and its consequences for young Black males in America. Cities United. 2016.  https://bit.ly/2xGoNPG . A high concentration of these factors in a neighborhood is referred to as “concentrated disadvantage” and is a strong predictor of violent crime. Youth in neighborhoods that experience concentrated disadvantage can be isolated from institutions such as schools and jobs, increasing the risk that they will engage in crime and violence, thus feeding into this vicious cycle of violence. 24 Ibid.

Black and Latinx children in cities are exposed to violence at higher rates than white children. Exposure includes witnessing violence, hearing gunshots, and knowing individuals who have been shot. Black children in Columbus, OH, were exposed to 66 percent more violence, on average, than white children. 25 Browning CR, Calder CA, Ford JL, Boettner B, Smith AL, Haynie D. Understanding racial differences in exposure to violent areas: integrating survey, smartphone, and administrative data resources.  Annals of the American Academy of Pediatrics.  2017;669(1):41-62. In Chicago, Latinx children had 74 percent greater odds of exposure to violence, and Black children 112 percent greater odds, than white children. 26 Zimmerman GM, Messner SF. Individual, family background, and contextual explanations of racial and ethnic disparities in youths’ exposure to violence.  American Journal of Public Health.  2013;103(3):435-442. When children in these cities are exposed to gun violence, their communities and schools often lack the resources to help them heal. 27 Kohli S, Lee I. What it’s like to go to school when dozens have been killed nearby.  Los Angeles Times . February 27, 2019.  https://lat.ms/2VrTDqt .

Although Black students represent 15 percent of the total K-12 school population in America, they make up 25 percent of K-12 victims of gunfire at school.

US Department of Education. “State Nonfiscal Survey of Public Elementary and Secondary Education, 1998-99 through 2016-17; National Elementary and Secondary Enrollment by Race/Ethnicity Projection Model, 1972 through 2028,” Common Core Data (CCD). (2019). https://bit.ly/2Gl05d3

The disproportionate impact of gun violence on Black and Latinx children and teens extends to schools. Among the 335 incidents of gunfire at K-12 schools between 2013 and 2019, where the racial demographic information of the student body was known, 64 percent occurred in majority-minority schools. 28 Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund. Keeping Our Schools Safe: A Plan for Preventing Mass Shootings and Ending All Gun Violence in American Schools. everytownresearch.org/school-safety-plan. February 2020. Everytown gathered demographic information on the student population of each school included in the database for which data were available. A majority-minority school is defined as one in which one or more racial and/or ethnic minorities (relative to the US population) comprise a majority of the student population. Everytown identified the race of 102 of the 208 student victims identified in the database. Of those, 25 were identified as Black, 57 as white, 23 as Hispanic or Latino, 3 as Asian-Pacific Islander, and 4 as other. The analysis includes in the count of these victims both people shot and wounded and deaths resulting from homicides, non-fatal assaults, unintentional shootings, and suicides and incidents of self-harm where no one else was hurt. Although Black students represent approximately 15 percent of the total K-12 school population in America, they constitute 25 percent of the K-12 student victims of gunfire who were killed or shot and wounded on school grounds. 29 US Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Common Core of Data (CCD). “State nonfiscal survey of public elementary and secondary education,” 1998-99 through 2015-16; National elementary and secondary enrollment by race/ethnicity projection model, 1972 through 2027. Everytown averaged the student population size, both total and Black student populations, for the years 2013 to 2018. February 2018.  https://bit.ly/2MTkw3C . Everytown identified the race of 95 of the 177 student victims identified in the database. Of those, 23 were identified as Black, 54 as white, 13 as Hispanic or Latino, 1 as Asian-Pacific Islander, and 4 as other. The analysis includes both injuries and deaths resulting from homicides, assaults, unintentional shootings, and suicides and incidents of self-harm where no one else was hurt, in the count of these victims.

While the above discussion shows the disparate experiences of gun violence by race and ethnicity, the data further show that gun violence is concentrated in specific neighborhoods in cities, with some schools and certain communities experiencing gun violence with an alarming frequency.

• Of the schools covered by gunshot detection technology in Washington, DC , just 9 percent experienced nearly half of all gunfire incidents. Four schools, including two middle schools and two high schools, had at least nine incidents of gunfire within just 500 feet of the school. 30 Bieler S, La Vigne N. Close-range gunfire around DC schools. Urban Institute. September 2014.  https://urbn.is/2Hazr8y . Gunshot detection technology covered 66 percent (116 out of 175) of traditional public schools and charters during the study period.
• Similarly, in Los Angeles , 34 percent of middle school students in one neighborhood with high rates of violence reported exposure to firearm violence. 31 Aisenberg E, Ayón C, Orozco-Figueroa A. The role of young adolescents’ perception in understanding the severity of exposure to community violence and PTSD.  Journal of Interpersonal Violence . 2008;23(11):1555-78.
• At certain urban middle schools in Texas , nearly 40 percent of boys and 30 percent of girls have witnessed a gun being pulled. 32 Barroso CS, Peters RJ, Kelder S, Conroy J, Murray N, Orpinas P. Youth exposure to community violence: association with aggression, victimization, and risk behaviors.  Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma.  2008;17(2):141-155.
• A study of 7-year-olds in an urban neighborhood found that 75 percent had heard gunshots, 18 percent had seen a dead body, and 61 percent worried some or a lot of the time that they might get killed or die. 33 Hurt H, Malmud E, Brodsky NL, Giannetta J. Exposure to violence: psychological and academic correlates in child witnesses.  Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine . 2001;155(12):1351-6.

The Far-reaching Impact of Children’s and Teens’ Exposure to Gun Violence

Children are harmed in numerous ways when they witness violence. Children exposed to violence, crime, and abuse are more likely to abuse drugs and alcohol; suffer from depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress disorder; resort to aggressive and violent behavior; and engage in criminal activity. 34 Finkelhor D, Turner HA, Ormrod R, Hamby S, Kracke K. Children’s exposure to gun violence: a comprehensive national survey. US Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.  https://bit.ly/PwXoZN . 2009; Morris E. Youth violence: implications for posttraumatic stress disorder in urban youth. National Urban League.  https://bit.ly/2KBpOyg . March 2009; Fowler PJ, Tompsett CJ, Braciszewski JM, Jacques-Tiura AJ, Baltes BB. Community violence: a meta-analysis on the effect of exposure and mental health outcomes of children and adolescents.  Development and Psychopathology . 2009;21(1):227-59. Exposure to community violence, including witnessing shootings and hearing gunshots, makes it harder for children to succeed in school. 35 Hurt H, Malmud E, Brodsky NL, Giannetta J. Exposure to violence: psychological and academic correlates in child witnesses.  Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine . 2001;155(12):1351-6; Schwartz D, Gorman AH. Community violence exposure and children’s academic functioning.  Journal of Educational Psychology . 2003;95(1):163-173.

Children’s exposure to gun violence can also erode physical health. When children live in neighborhoods where gun violence is common, they spend less time playing and being physically active, with one study finding that children said they would engage in an additional hour of physical activity every week if safety increased in their neighborhood. 36 Molnar BE, Gortmaker SL, Bull FC, Buka SL. Unsafe to play? Neighborhood disorder and lack of safety predict reduced physical activity among urban children and adolescents.  American Journal of Health Promotion.  2004;18(5):378-86.

Stress related to gun violence affects student performance and well-being in schools. School-aged children have lower grades and more absences when they are exposed to violence. 37 Hurt H, Malmud E, Brodsky NL, Giannetta J. Exposure to violence: psychological and academic correlates in child witnesses.  Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine . 2001;155(12):1351-6; Schwartz D, Gorman AH. Community violence exposure and children’s academic functioning.  Journal of Educational Psychology . 2003;95(1):163-173. High school students who have been exposed to violence have lower test scores and lower rates of high school graduation. 38 Harding DJ. Collateral consequences of violence in disadvantaged neighborhoods.  Social Forces . 2009;88(2):757-784; Finkelhor D, Turner H, Shattuck A, Hamby S, Kracke K. US Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention. Children’s exposure to gun violence, crime, and abuse: an update. September 2015.  https://bit.ly/2tK7ah6 . One study estimated that Black children in Chicago’s most violent neighborhoods spend at least a week out of every month functioning at lower concentration levels due to local homicides. 39 Sharkey P. The acute effect of local homicides on children’s cognitive performance.  Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.  2010;107(26):11733-11738. In Syracuse, NY, elementary schools located in areas with high concentrations of gunshots had 50 percent lower test scores and higher rates of standardized test failure compared to elementary schools in areas with a low concentration of gunshots. 40 Bergen-Cico D, Lane SD, Keefe RH. Community gun violence as a social determinant of elementary school achievement.  Social Work in Public Health . 2018;33(7-8):439-448.

Black high school students in the US are over twice as likely as white high school students to miss school due to safety concerns. 41 Sheats KJ, Irving SM, Mercy JA, et al. Violence-related disparities experienced by Black youth and young adults: opportunities for prevention.  American Journal of Preventive Medicine.  2018;55(4):462-469. In Chicago, following spikes in neighborhood violence, students reported feeling less safe, experiencing more disciplinary problems, and having less trust in teachers. 42 Burdick-Will J. Neighborhood violence, peer effects, and academic achievement in Chicago.  Sociology of Education.  2018;91(3):205-223.

Recommendations

One essential way to protect our youth and prevent children’s exposure to gun violence in their communities and schools is to prevent people with dangerous histories from ever getting a gun. Recommendations for comprehensive gun safety laws include:

Background checks on all gun sales

The foundation of any comprehensive gun violence prevention strategy must be background checks for all gun sales. Under current federal law, criminal background checks are required only for sales conducted by licensed dealers. This loophole is easy to exploit and makes it easy for convicted felons or domestic abusers to acquire guns without a background check simply by finding an unlicensed seller online or at a gun show.

Extreme Risk laws

These laws, increasingly being adopted by states, empower family members and law enforcement to petition a judge to temporarily block a person from having guns if they pose a danger to themselves or others. Extreme Risk laws —sometimes referred to as “red flag” laws—can help prevent suicide, too. That is meaningful because nearly six out of every 10 gun deaths are suicides, 43 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. WONDER Online Database, Underlying Cause of Death. Firearm suicide deaths to total gun deaths ratio developed using five years of the most recent available data: 2018 to 2022. and the suicide rate among children and teens has been increasing exponentially in the past 10 years.

Secure gun storage and child access prevention laws

Secure storage laws require people to store firearms responsibly to prevent unsupervised access to firearms. A subset of these laws, known as child access prevention laws, specifically target unsupervised access by minors. Secure firearm storage practices are associated with reductions in the risk of self-inflicted and unintentional firearm injuries among children and teens—up to 85 percent depending on the type of storage practice. 44 Grossman DC, Mueller BA, Riedy C, et al. Gun storage practices and risk of youth suicide and unintentional injuries.  JAMA . 2005;293(6):707-714. Study found households that locked both firearms and ammunition had an 85 percent lower risk of unintentional firearm deaths than those that locked neither.

Keeping guns out of the hands of domestic abusers

Children are frequent casualties of domestic violence homicides when a gun is involved. Research also shows that the presence of a gun in a domestic violence situation makes it five times more likely that a woman will be killed. 45 Campbell JC, Webster D, Koziol-McLain J, et al. Risk factors for femicide within physically abuse intimate relationships: results from a multisite case control study.  American Journal of Public Health . 2003;93(7):1089-1097. It is imperative to keep guns out of the hands of domestic abusers to keep women, children, and their families safe. When abusers are convicted of domestic violence or subject to final restraining orders, they should be blocked from purchasing guns and required to turn in those they already own. We also need to close the “boyfriend loophole” by making sure those laws apply to abusers regardless of whether the violence is directed towards a spouse or a dating partner.

In addition to evidence-based gun safety laws, there are a number of programs and strategies that communities and schools can adopt to keep children and teens safe from gun violence, some examples of which include:

Threat assessment programs

Threat assessment programs—like the Everytown and AFT-endorsed Comprehensive Student Threat Assessment Guidelines (CSTAG) 46 Cornell DG, Sheras PL.  Guidelines for responding to student threats of violence.  Longmont, CO: Sopris West; 2006. —help schools identify students who are at risk of committing violence and get them the help they need in order to resolve student threat incidents. 47 Ibid. The programs generally consist of multi-disciplinary teams that are specifically trained to intervene at the earliest warning signs of potential violence and divert those who would do harm to themselves or others to appropriate treatment. Several studies have found that schools that use threat assessment programs see fewer students carry out threats of violence; and experience fewer suspensions, expulsions, and arrests. 48 Cornell, D, Maeng, J, Burnette AG., et al. Student threat assessment as a standard school safety practice: results from a statewide implementation study.  School Psychology Quarterly . 2017;33(2):213-222; Cornell D., Maeng, J. Burnette AG, Datta P, Huang F, Jia Y. Threat assessment in Virginia schools: technical report of the Threat Assessment Survey for 2014-2015. Curry School of Education, University of Virginia. May 12, 2015; Cornell DG, Allen K, Fan X. A randomized controlled study of the Virginia Student Threat Assessment Guidelines in kindergarten through grade 12.  School Psychology Review.  2012;41(1):100-115. Importantly, studies have shown that CSTAG threat assessment programs generally do not have a disproportionate impact on students of color. 49 Cornell, D, Maeng, J, Burnette AG., et al. Student threat assessment as a standard school safety practice: results from a statewide implementation study. School Psychology Quarterly. 2017;33(2):213-222; Cornell D., Maeng, J. Burnette AG, Datta P, Huang F, Jia Y. Threat assessment in Virginia schools: technical report of the Threat Assessment Survey for 2014-2015. Curry School of Education, University of Virginia. May 12, 2015; Cornell DG, Allen K, Fan X. A randomized controlled study of the Virginia Student Threat Assessment Guidelines in kindergarten through grade 12. School Psychology Review. 2012;41(1):100-115.

Safe and equitable schools

School communities must look inside their schools to make sure they are encouraging effective partnerships between students and adults, while also looking externally to ensure that they are a key community resource. Schools should review discipline practices and ensure threat assessment programs are not adversely affecting school discipline. They should work to become “community schools” by building effective community partnerships that provide services that support students, families, and neighborhoods. If and when employing school resource officers (SROs), schools should take steps to build relationships between communities and law enforcement.

Youth-centric intervention programs

A variety of programs exist to help children cope with witnessing firearm violence. School-based programs, including social emotional learning , have been shown to reduce the negative effects of children’s exposure to gun violence. Mentoring programs are effective at improving academic performance and reducing youth violence. Chicago’s Safe Passage program makes children feel safer on their way to and from school and may increase school attendance. To learn more about two specific organizations that help children succeed after witnessing violence, please explore these resources about the Hip Hop Heals and Becoming A Man programs.

If you or someone you know has been exposed to gun violence, there are resources that can help. Everytown’s Children’s Responses to Trauma provides information for parents and adults about how to support children and teens who have experienced a shooting or are upset by images of gun violence. Additional information to help with the emotional, medical, financial, and legal consequences of gun violence for individuals and communities is on our Resources page.

Everytown Research & Policy is a program of Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund, an independent, non-partisan organization dedicated to understanding and reducing gun violence. Everytown Research & Policy works to do so by conducting methodologically rigorous research, supporting evidence-based policies, and communicating this knowledge to the American public.

Gun Thefts from Cars: The Largest Source of Stolen Guns

Hospital-based violence intervention programs: a guide to implementation and costing, freedom from fear of hate-fueled violence: preventing transgender homicides.

The statistics make it clear: violence against transgender people is a gun violence issue.

Those Who Serve: Addressing Firearm Suicide Among Military Veterans

Did you know?

Every day, more than 120 people in the United States are killed with guns, twice as many are shot and wounded and countless others are impacted by acts of gun violence.

Everytown Research analysis of CDC, WONDER, Underlying Cause of Death , 2018–2022; Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project (HCUP) nonfatal firearm injury data, 2020; and SurveyUSA Market Research Study #26602 , 2022.

Last updated: 5.7.2024

Subscribe or renew today

Every print subscription comes with full digital access

Science News

Mass shootings and gun violence in the united states are increasing.

The United States is the only country with more civilian-owned firearms than citizens

Law enforcement officers look at a memorial following a mass shooting at Robb Elementary School on May 26, 2022, in Uvalde, Texas, where 19 students and 2 adults were killed. 

Brandon Bell / Staff / Getty Images News

Share this:

By Nikk Ogasa

May 26, 2022 at 6:00 pm

On May 24, at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas, 19 children and two teachers were killed by a shooter. Just 10 days earlier, a white gunman was accused of a racially motivated shooting in a grocery store in Buffalo, N.Y., that left 10 Black people dead. These tragic incidents are among the latest mass shootings to rattle the United States, the only country with more civilian-owned firearms than citizens .

Sadly, mass shootings — the definitions of which vary — are just a fraction of the story. In the United States, gun violence incidents are on the rise. In 2021, nearly 21,000 people were killed by firearms (not including suicides), according to the Gun Violence Archive , an online database of U.S. gun violence incidents. That’s a 33 percent increase from 2017, the year that firearm-related injuries usurped motor vehicle crashes as the most common cause of death among children and adolescents. 

In that same time frame, active shooter incidents nearly doubled. The FBI designates an active shooter as “one or more individuals who are engaged in killing or attempting to kill in a populated area.” In 2021, 61 such incidents in the United States killed 103 people. In 2017, the number of incidents was 31, though deaths totaled 143.

“I can’t think of an issue that requires more urgency and attention,” says Sonali Rajan, a school violence prevention researcher from Columbia University. “Gun violence is a solvable problem.”

Active shooters

Data collected by the FBI reveal a steady increase over the past 20 years in active shooter incidents, which the Bureau defines as “one or more individuals who are engaged in killing or attempting to kill in a populated area.”

In 2020, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institutes of Health awarded a combined $25 million in grants for research on gun violence prevention, ending a 25-year paucity of federal funding in the field ( SN: 5/3/16 ). During that decades-long financial drought, research on gun violence prevention relied on funds from private foundations and state grants. 

One of the few state-funded institutions in the country is the New Jersey Gun Violence Research Center at Rutgers University in Piscataway. The center conducts interdisciplinary research on the causes and prevention of gun violence, including homicides and suicides. Richard Barnes, the center’s assistant director, manages research projects that focus on suicide prevention and how social disparities relate to violence in Black and brown communities

Science News spoke with Barnes and Rajan about U.S. gun violence, ways to help reduce it and what research is needed. The following conversations have been edited for length and clarity.

SN : What recent trends in gun violence in the United States stand out to you?

Rajan: Gun violence as a problem has only gotten worse over the past several years. There are on average about 100,000 Americans who are shot with a firearm every single year and an estimated 40,000 of those individuals die from their firearm-related injuries. [These numbers include suicides.] In the last couple of years, that number has gone up. 

Barnes: In the last two years, during the pandemic, there was a significant surge in gun purchasing. And we’ve seen increasing rates of homicides and interpersonal violence in our cities across the country. 2021 was a record-breaking year, with the most gun deaths period, including suicide. It was also record-breaking in the sense that a lot of Black and brown communities throughout the country experienced a significant increase in gun violence. [According to the CDC, the nearly 35 percent increase in overall firearm homicides from 2019 to 2020 – rising from 4.6 to 6.1 deaths per 100,000 people – hit Black communities particularly hard.] 

This American problem of gun violence is significant, and I’m hoping soon that we are able to distance ourselves from this trend of increased gun violence, which is so devastating.

SN : Why is gun violence so much worse in the United States than in so many other countries?

Barnes: We have to consider our unique difference in terms of gun ownership. We have way more guns than a lot of other countries. And where you have a lot of firearms, you are going to have more gun violence. 

Gun ownership

The United States has more than twice the number of guns per 100 people than any other country, data from the Small Arms Survey show. With 120.5 firearms per 100 residents, that means there are more guns in the United States than people. 

SN : What does research suggest can help reduce gun violence?

Barnes: Again, where there are more firearms, there is more gun violence. So the first thing to consider is access to firearms. I’m not advocating that we shouldn’t have firearms, but that’s one way.

We also have violence interruption organizations ( SN: 11/4/19 ). Their role is to work locally with other organizations — a lot of times they work with law enforcement — to gather information about the effectiveness of outreach programs and do their best to prevent and intervene in those skirmishes that might lead to gun violence. We know that when those organizations run right, they can have an impact on reducing gun violence. It really focuses on and encourages investment in public safety within those communities. That’s not a cheap course of action, it takes resources. And it’s been really difficult to get those needed resources for folks in the community, and also the research.

SN : Does increasing police presence help quell gun violence? 

Rajan : Increasing police is not a solution to gun violence. There is no evidence that that works. In fact, I think it’s important to underscore that police violence is a form of gun violence. Rather than increasing funding to the police, there are a number of things that we could do, such as investing in communities and in schools in ways that are far more effective at deterring gun violence.

SN: In the wake of the Texas school shooting, there’s been talk about increasing campus security and arming teachers . Is that effective? 

Rajan: There’s actually evidence that shows that criminalizing a school space [by increasing police presence] is hugely detrimental both for children and their learning outcomes, and it also disproportionately impacts children of color in very negative ways. That to me is a really good example of our school districts investing lots of money into practices that are not doing anything productive, and may in fact be having unintended negative consequences.

In the context of schools, there are a lot of things that actually have no evidence to support their effectiveness: metal detectors, zero tolerance policies, anonymous threat reporting systems and arming teachers with firearms. There is absolutely no scientific evidence that any of these kinds of safety strategies are actually effective at deterring gun violence in a school.

Rising gun violence

In 2021, there were nearly 21,000 gun-related deaths in the United States, not counting suicides. That’s a 35 percent increase from just two years earlier, and part of an ongoing rise in U.S. firearm deaths, data from the Gun Violence Archive show.

SN : What kind of research is needed to reduce gun violence?

Barnes: [At the New Jersey Gun Violence Research Center], we’re speaking to people who have owned a firearm illicitly within the last five years. Our question is very different from the criminal question, which is where you get your firearms from. That question is fine, but we’re aiming to better understand the lived experience of illicit firearm owners, to better understand why they own guns. What is it about where they live, how they live and why they think they need a firearm?

I think a lot of times, people discount the lived experience, because they start and end with the question over whether it’s legal to own guns. They don’t ask the question of whether you should own a firearm. But if you’re living in an area that’s dangerous, where people get shot, how are you going to protect yourself, your family, your loved ones? So, we’re trying to answer that question, in hopes of being able to suggest: Here’s some meaningful things that can be done.

SN : What other kinds of information can help prevent gun violence?

Barnes: Social determinants of health are the factors that either contribute or hinder communities from thriving [such as economic stability, social support, education and health care access]. There are so many similarities among communities that are struggling the most from gun violence. I think the conversation around gun violence has to include questions around how much [these social determinants] contribute to or impact what we understand about gun violence. And in particular, the increase or uptick in gun violence.

SN: What is a major misconception in gun violence prevention?

Rajan: That the solution to gun violence is entirely based on gun laws. The gun laws are an extremely important part of the gun violence prevention puzzle. But it is not the only part. We need to think about all of the ways in which we are attending to the health and well-being of children and adults. Like, why would a 14-year-old choose to carry a firearm to begin with? They fundamentally don’t feel safe and we as a society are failing our children. What are the big systemic factors that are driving this level of violence? We need to reimagine what gun violence prevention looks like. 

SN : What challenges do gun violence prevention researchers face?

Barnes: Funding is the biggest one, but also having partners on the ground is important. 

We’re a research institution, so there’s a lot of distrust that needs to be overcome when we enter a community. A lot of Black and brown communities feel like they’ve been poked and prodded, they’ve seen this before. We need to have relationships on the ground that start with trust, to figure out how we can get at some of the questions that may lead to recommendations and prevention methods that work. 

To do that, organizations on the ground need to be funded as well. Because if they go away, it makes it nearly impossible for us to penetrate those communities that have a well-reasoned fear of outsiders, in particular researchers. That’s the only way that you really get under the issue of gun violence in the community.

More Stories from Science News on Science & Society

Should we use AI to resurrect digital ‘ghosts’ of the dead?

A hidden danger lurks beneath Yellowstone

Online spaces may intensify teens’ uncertainty in social interactions

Want to see butterflies in your backyard? Try doing less yardwork

Ximena Velez-Liendo is saving Andean bears with honey

‘Flavorama’ guides readers through the complex landscape of flavor

Rain Bosworth studies how deaf children experience the world

Separating science fact from fiction in Netflix’s ‘3 Body Problem’ 

Subscribers, enter your e-mail address for full access to the Science News archives and digital editions.

Not a subscriber? Become one now .

The independent source for health policy research, polling, and news.

The Impact of Gun Violence on Children and Adolescents

Nirmita Panchal Published: Feb 22, 2024

Firearm injuries and deaths in the United States have increased  in recent years and adversely affect many children and adolescents. Firearms now kill more children and adolescents than any other cause, surpassing motor vehicle crashes. Additionally, the U.S. has by far the highest rate of child and teen firearm mortality compared to peer countries. Beyond deaths, there are many more youth who survive gunshot wounds or are otherwise exposed to gun violence. These exposures can lead to negative behavioral health outcomes among youth and their family members. This brief explores the impacts of gun violence on children and adolescents (ages 17 and below) by answering the following key questions:

• How have firearm deaths changed in recent years among children and adolescents and how do these deaths vary by demographic characteristics?
• What is known about nonfatal firearm injury and gun exposure among children and adolescents?

How does gun violence affect the mental health and well-being of children and adolescents?

• What policies are in place to address youth exposure to gun violence?

How have firearm deaths changed in recent years among children and adolescents?

Firearm-related deaths have increased among children and adolescents since the pandemic began, with seven children per day dying by firearm in 2022.  From 2012 to 2022, nearly 19,700 children ages 17 and younger died by firearm. 1 During this period, firearm death rates gradually rose until 2017, then slowed through 2019, before sharply rising with the onset of the pandemic and holding steady in 2022 (Figure 1). From 2019 to 2022, the firearm death rate among children and adolescents increased by 46% (from 2.4 to 3.5 per 100,000). This translates to seven children per day dying by firearm in 2022.

Recent increases in firearm deaths were driven by gun assaults, which accounted for two out of three firearm deaths among children and adolescents in 2022. Gun assault deaths among children and adolescents have increased over the past decade, resulting in 1,674 deaths in 2022 (Figure 2). Leading up to the pandemic, gun assaults made up about half of all child and adolescent firearm deaths. However, from 2019 to 2022, the share of these firearm deaths attributed to gun assaults grew from 54% to 66%.

Among child and adolescent firearm deaths in 2022, 27% were due to suicides and 5% were accidental. Suicides by firearm have increased over the past decade among children and adolescents, peaking in 2021 with 827 deaths before declining to 686 deaths in 2022. Despite this decline, firearm suicides made up 27% of all child and adolescent firearm deaths. Further, 43% of total suicide deaths among children and adolescents in 2022 involved firearms. Accidental firearm deaths have shown little variation over the past decade and continue to account for roughly 5% of all child and adolescent firearm deaths.

How do youth firearm deaths vary by demographic characteristics?

Firearm death rates have sharply increased among Black and Hispanic children and adolescents since the pandemic began. In 2022, the rate of firearm deaths among Black youth was 12.2 per 100,000 – substantially higher than any other racial and ethnic group and six times higher than White youth (Figure 3). Additionally, from 2018 to 2022, the rate of firearm deaths doubled among Black youth and increased by 73% among Hispanic youth. While firearm death rates for American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) youth fluctuated over the same period, they remained higher than the rates of their White, Hispanic, and Asian peers throughout the period. White youth experienced relatively stable and lower firearm mortality rates from 2018 to 2022 (2.0 per 100,000), while Asian youth had the lowest firearm mortality rates across the period (Figure 3).

The recent increases in firearm deaths among Black and Hispanic children and adolescents were primarily driven by gun assaults.  Since the onset of the pandemic, the gap in gun assault death rates between Black and White children and adolescents has significantly widened. While the gun assault death rate among Black youth grew from 4.9 to 10.3 per 100,000 between 2018 and 2022, the death rate remained steady and below 1.0 per 100,000 among White youth (Figure 3). The gun assault death rate among Hispanic youth doubled during this period, from 0.9 to 2.0 per 100,000 between 2018 and 2022. Firearm suicide rates have also increased among Black   youth in recent years, from 0.7 to 1.1 per 100,000 from 2018 to 2022. Meanwhile, firearm suicide rates have remained steady among White youth and by 2022, rates were similar between White and Black youth (1.2 vs. 1.1 per 100,000). Firearm suicide and assault rates were not available for other non-Hispanic race groups.

As a result of worsening trends in firearm deaths, in 2022, Black youth accounted for 48% of all youth firearm deaths although they made up only 14% of the U.S. youth population (Figure 4). From 2018 to 2022, the share of firearm deaths attributed to Black children and adolescents grew from 35% to 48%; and the share attributed to Hispanic children and adolescents grew from 16% to 19%.

Firearm death rates for male children and adolescents are over four times higher than their female peers.  From 2018 to 2022, the rate of deaths due to firearms increased by 50% among male children and adolescents but remained lower and stable among females (Figure 5).

Among firearm deaths, suicides by firearm are more common among adolescents compared to younger children; and accidental gun deaths are more common among younger children than adolescents. Gun assaults accounted for roughly two-thirds of firearm deaths among both adolescents and younger children in 2022 (Figure 6). The second most common type of firearm death among adolescents was firearm suicides (31%), and among younger children was accidental gun deaths (19%).

Firearm death rates among children and adolescents vary considerably by state; however, almost all states have seen a growth in these death rates in pandemic years. During the pandemic years, the states with the highest firearm death rates among children and adolescents were Louisiana, Mississippi, and the District of Columbia (8.8, 8.8, and 8.4 per 100,000 respectively for combined years, 2020-2022). The states with the lowest firearm death rates were Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New York (0.6, 0.9, and 1.1 per 100,000 respectively for combined years, 2020-2022). Almost all states experienced an increase in firearm death rates from pre-pandemic to pandemic years, with the largest changes seen in North Carolina, Wisconsin, and Montana (104%, 100%, and 84% respectively) (Figure 7).

What do we know about nonfatal firearm injury and exposure among children and adolescents?

The number of nonfatal firearm injuries far exceed the number of firearm fatalities among children and adolescents. However, estimates vary, with research suggesting nonfatal firearm injuries occur anywhere from two to four times more often than firearm fatalities. Recent data also indicates that since the pandemic began, nonfatal firearm injuries among children and adolescents have increased . The majority of youth nonfatal firearm injuries are a result of assaults.

Many children and adolescents are exposed to gun violence, even if they are not directly injured. Data on exposure to gun violence among youth is generally limited. However, a recent analysis found that in 34% of unintentional child and adolescent firearm deaths, at least one other child was present during the incident. Prior data from the National Survey of Children’s Exposure to Violence found that 8% of children and adolescents were exposed to a shooting in their lifetime, with a higher share (13%) reported among adolescents (ages 14-17). Further, in a recent KFF poll , 17% of adults in the U.S. reported witnessing someone being injured by a gun.

Black children and adolescents are more likely to experience firearm injuries and exposures than their White peers. Leading up to the pandemic, Black and male children and adolescents were more likely to experience nonfatal firearm injuries than their peers. This disparity among Black youth firearm injuries and exposures has been exacerbated since the pandemic began. In general,  children  of color are more often exposed to gun violence than their White peers. Children living in areas with a high concentration of poverty are more likely to experience firearm-related deaths and poverty disproportionately affects children of color.

Gun violence can adversely affect the mental health and well-being of children and adolescents. Exposure to gun violence is linked to  post-traumatic stress disorder  and  anxiety , in addition to other mental health concerns among youth. Gun violence may also lead to challenges with  school performance , including increased absenteeism and difficulty concentrating. Children and adolescents are exposed to gun violence in a number of ways, outlined below.

• Neighborhood and community violence. Many children and adolescents experience violence  within their communities. Firearm homicides occurring within an adolescent’s community have been linked to anxiety and depression among adolescents, particularly for females. Other analyses have similarly found an association between incidents of neighborhood firearm homicides and poor mental health outcomes among youth.
• Suicide. Suicides are the second leading cause of death among adolescents and many suicides involve a firearm. Research  has found that access to  firearms , particularly in the home, is a risk factor for  suicide deaths  among  children  and  adolescents . Nearly half of suicide attempts occur within  10 minutes  of the current suicide thought, further underscoring access to  firearms as a risk factor for suicide.
• Domestic or intimate partner violence. Women and children are often the victims of intimate partner violence, which may involve firearms. The presence of a firearm in the home is linked to the escalation of intimate partner violence to homicides. Even when firearms are not used, they may serve as a means to threaten and intimidate victims of domestic violence.
• Mass shootings. Although mass shootings, including school shootings, account for a small portion of firearm-related deaths, they can negatively impact the  mental health  of children and communities at large. Research has found that  youth antidepressant use  and  suicide risk  increased in communities with exposures to school shootings. Additionally, a survey prior to the pandemic found that the majority of teenagers and their parents felt at least somewhat  worried  that a school shooting may occur at their school. In response to school shootings, nearly all  schools  practice active shooter drills, which may have a negative psychological impact on participants. Although research is limited on how mass shootings affect individuals not directly exposed to them, current literature suggests that information and knowledge of mass shootings may be linked to increased levels of  fear  and  anxiety .

Youth   survivors  of firearm injuries are at increased risk of mental health and substance use issues , in addition to chronic physical health conditions. An analysis of commercially insured children and adolescents found that, in the year following a firearm injury, survivors were significantly more likely to experience psychiatric and substance use disorders compared to their peers. Additionally, the increases in psychiatric disorders were more pronounced among youth with more severe firearm injuries compared to youth with less severe firearm injuries. Youth gunshot survivors are more likely to utilize mental health services following their injury compared to their uninjured peers. However, a study of youth survivors enrolled in Medicaid found that more than three out of five survivors had not received mental health services within the first six months following their injury.

Negative mental health impacts can extend to the family members of youth gun violence victims. Parents, particularly mothers, of youth firearm-injury survivors had an increase in psychiatric disorders and mental health visits in the year following the firearm incident, based on an analysis of commercially insured individuals. These increases in psychiatric disorders and mental health visits were more pronounced among families of youth firearm fatalities.

Gun violence disproportionately impacts Black children and adolescents, leaving them more vulnerable to negative mental health outcomes. In addition to increased assaults, firearm suicides, and exposure to community violence, Black communities are disproportionately exposed to police shootings . Research found that Black people living near the scene of a police killing of an unarmed Black individual experienced worsened mental health in the months that followed. Separately, despite mental health concerns among Black youth injured by gun violence, research on mental health service utilization in the months following a firearm injury is mixed, with one study finding higher utilization among Black youth compared to their White peers, and another study finding the reverse. Historically, Black individuals are less likely to receive mental health treatment and face additional barriers to care, such as the lack of culturally competent care.

What policies address child and adolescent exposure to gun violence and poor mental health?

Gun control debates are deeply divided politically in the U.S.; but beyond gun control, other approaches seek to reduce the impact of firearms on health, for example, through safe storage practices . Safe storage and child access prevention provisions have been linked to a reduction in adolescent firearm homicides and non-fatal gun injuries . These provisions vary widely across states ; some states have multiple provisions, while others have none. Some states have also enacted unique approaches to promote gun safety . For example, beginning with the 2023-2024 school year, local education agencies in California are required to notify parents annually on the safe storage of firearms; and some states provide tax rebates on safe storage devices. In January 2024, the Biden-Harris administration put forth additional steps to promote safe storage of firearms, including the U.S. Department of Justice providing guidance on safe storage. A recent KFF poll found that 44% of parents with children under the age of 18 have a gun in their household. Among parents with guns in their home, about one-third said a gun is stored loaded (32%) or stored in an unlocked location (32%) (Figure 8). More than half of parents (61%) said any gun in their home is stored in the same location as ammunition. The KFF poll also found that only 8% of parents said their child’s pediatrician talked to them about gun safety.

Recent policies address gun reform and expand mental health services for children and adolescents.  The  Bipartisan Safer Communities Act  was passed in 2022 in response to increasing gun violence. This legislation introduced several gun reform provisions, such as strengthening background checks for young adults and reducing gun access for individuals with a history of domestic violence. The legislation also focused on youth mental health,  including  expanding school-based mental health services and providing trauma care to students in need. In 2023, the White House detailed several new actions to maximize the Safer Communities Act, including developing more resources to inform states and schools on how they can use Medicaid to fund school-based behavioral health services, and highlighting effective examples of communities using Safer Communities Act funds to address gun violence trauma. While many funds have been dispersed through the original legislation, some school districts in need are still waiting to receive their mental health funding. Separately, other measures that may address youth mental health and gun violence trauma have been introduced, including the rollout of 988 , the federally mandated crisis number that can connect individuals experiencing suicidal thoughts to crisis counselors. Additionally, federal funding freezes on gun violence research were lifted. Since the unfreezing, some initial research from the CDC and NIH includes a focus on youth gun violence prevention.

Gun violence  disproportionately affects many children and adolescents of color, particularly Black children and adolescents, and this disparity has grown since the pandemic. Children and adolescents of color  may also face added barriers to mental health care in light of long-standing cultural inequities and a lack of culturally informed care. In 2022, the Department of Health and Human Services announced an initiative aimed at promoting  Black youth mental health  in response to sharply rising suicide rates among  Black  youth. In 2023, the Mental Health for Latinos Act was introduced in Congress to address disparities and cultural stigma Hispanic individuals experience with mental health care. In the same year, SAMHSA announced funding opportunities to create a Behavioral Health Center of Excellence aimed at improving behavioral health equity for Hispanic and Latino communities.

Gun violence can lead to increased mental health and substance use concerns. The recent increase in child and adolescent firearm injuries and deaths come at a time when concerns about  youth   mental health  have grown but access to and utilization of mental health care may have  worsened .

This work was supported in part by Well Being Trust. KFF maintains full editorial control over all of its policy analysis, polling, and journalism activities.

KFF analysis of youth firearm mortality is based on data from Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Wonder injury and mortality database. In this analysis, firearm-related deaths are defined as gun assault deaths, suicide deaths by firearm, deaths due to accidental firearm discharge, legal intervention leading to firearm death, and firearm deaths from an undetermined cause.

← Return to text

• Mental Health
• Gun Violence
• Adolescents
• Race/Ethnicity
• Coronavirus

news release

• Recent Increases in Firearm Deaths of Children and Adolescents Have Been Driven by Gun Assaults, Black Youths Are Disproportionally Affected

Also of Interest

• Americans’ Experiences With Gun-Related Violence, Injuries, And Deaths
• Child and Teen Firearm Mortality in the U.S. and Peer Countries
• Do States with Easier Access to Guns have More Suicide Deaths by Firearm?
• Recent Trends in Mental Health and Substance Use Concerns Among Adolescents
• The Landscape of School-Based Mental Health Services

Support journalism that shines a light on gun violence.

‘one more gun on the street actually changed our lives forever’.

Sometimes, police choose to resell their used guns — and sometimes, those guns wind up in the hands of criminals thousands of miles away.

Go beyond the headlines.

Your weekly briefing on gun violence..

• Share on Twitter
• Share on Facebook
• Email a link to this page

When federal law enforcement agencies retire their service guns, they’re legally required to destroy the weapons. There’s no similar mandate for state and local agencies, so decisions about what to do with old guns are left up to state and local leaders, and police chiefs, who’ve taken a variety of stances. Sometimes, they choose to resell their used guns — and sometimes, those guns wind up in the hands of criminals thousands of miles away.

In 2019, a Kentucky State Police pistol sold to a retiring detective ended up in Buffalo, New York, where federal agents executing a search warrant on a murder suspect found the gun in a backpack alongside heroin and a bulletproof vest. In 2020, San Antonio police recovered a weapon resold by the Stanislaus County Sheriff’s Office in Modesto, California, in connection with the shooting of a 15-year-old. The same agency resold the Glock pistol that was used to kill Cameron Brown, a 19-year-old who loved fishing with his grandfather, in Indianapolis in 2021.

The Trace, in partnership with CBS News and Reveal from The Center for Investigative Reporting, reviewed records from hundreds of law enforcement agencies across the United States and found that many had routinely resold or traded in their used duty weapons. Some of the guns were later involved in shootings, domestic violence incidents, and other violent crimes. Many police departments resold their weapons while holding buyback events, which they say are important to pull guns off the street; in some cases, departments added more guns to the marketplace than they removed . 

“One more gun on the street actually changed our lives forever,” said Brown’s grandmother, Maria Leslie, a pastor. Brown’s mother added: “I’m losing trust in the people who’re supposed to protect and serve us.”

From The Trace

The latest from our team.

Shot by a Civilian Wielding a Police Gun

More than 52,000 police guns have been involved in crimes since 2006. Many of those weapons were resold by law enforcement agencies sworn to protect the public.

The Mothers Holding Onto the Likenesses of Children Lost to Gun Violence

Five Chicago moms talk about how life-size cardboard cutouts have allowed them to continue motherhood — and create new memories — after losing a child.

How a SCOTUS Decision Led to an Unprecedented Gun Sales Boom

In Episode 5 of “Long Shadow: In Guns We Trust,” host Garrett Graff speaks with the architect of the seismic District of Columbia v. Heller case about his search for the perfect plaintiff.

Biden Called on States to Create Violence Prevention Offices. Maryland Answered.

The state’s new centralized office is an experiment that approaches gun violence reduction through a public health lens.

The Supreme Court’s Ghost Gun Case Could Jeopardize Other Firearm Regulations

Legal experts say the ruling could expand Second Amendment protections to the gun industry, imperiling a host of laws governing the manufacture and sale of firearms.

The Trace Adds Two Journalists to Growing Team

Alma Beauvais and Ava Sasani will help with news gathering and the Gun Violence Data Hub.

What to Know This Week

Two decades ago, federal and local law enforcement routinely identified the source of crime guns to anyone who inquired. But in 2003, Congress approved the so-called Tiahrt Amendments , which bar the ATF from releasing trace data to anyone other than a law enforcement agency or prosecutor — and shield stores that have sold guns used in crimes from public scrutiny. A new investigation into the origin of a gun used in the 2021 killing of a Chicago police officer highlights the challenges these rules present for researchers and cities trying to tamp down firearm trafficking. [ ProPublica ]

Planning commissioners in Half Moon Bay, California, approved a new apartment building for low-income, older farm workers, following a protracted debate that took on new urgency after a mass shooting at two nearby mushroom farms last year, when the workers’ poor living conditions were revealed. The project was approved after Governor Gavin Newsom threatened legal action over the delay; it now goes to the City Council. [ KQED ] 

When the National Rifle Association conceived the law known as “stand your ground,” the intention was to protect from prosecution those who shoot others in self-defense. In the weeks since a Florida sheriff’s deputy shot and killed 23-year-old Roger Fortson — a young Black senior airman who was holding a downturned gun he legally possessed when he answered his front door door and the officer opened fire — a debate about race, gun laws, and who is afforded deference in claims of self-defense has been playing out across the state. [ Associated Press ] 

The Type 07 Federal Firearms License is a basic permit granted by the ATF to manufacture firearms. In 2010, agency data shows, the number of Type 07 licenses began to dramatically increase — yet relatively few reported producing any guns. These licenses can be used to bypass many sale and transfer laws, like background checks, that private citizens are subject to, and allow holders to purchase discounted guns from wholesalers across state lines and in unlimited quantities. [ Violence Policy Center ] 

New York Mayor Eric Adams wants to test Evolv’s artificial intelligence-powered gun-detection technology in the city’s subway system, internal emails show, despite the company saying it’s not designed for that environment. The controversial tech, which is under investigation by federal regulators, still found a way in. [ WIRED ]

In Memoriam

Ondria Glaze, 36, seemed born to be a teacher, her aunt told The Philadelphia Inquirer — she was a force for positivity, and a natural caretaker who often joked that the students at Philadelphia’s Olney High School were her children. Glaze was shot and killed in her home earlier this month. She was a quintessential Philadelphian, loved ones said: She grew up going to local public schools, and friends knew not to call her when the Eagles were on the field. Glaze, who headed up Olney’s special education department, was known for going out of her way for students. She got to know their families, organized Thanksgiving food events, and even bought headphones for a student who struggled with classroom noise. The kids loved Glaze for it, and seemingly everyone she came across loved her, too. “She was a person that I could always look up to,” an Olney student said. “She just had a radiance to her.”

We Recommend

After a Borderland Shootout, a 100-Year-Old Battle for the Truth : “Whose story is remembered and celebrated when it comes to the ugly chapters of Texas history?” [ The Washington Post ]

“Firearms are associated with a number of adverse health effects. Wouldn’t we like to know where that hazard is coming from?”

— Dr. Garen Wintemute, director of the Violence Prevention Research Program at the University of California-Davis, on how the Tiahrt Amendments have inhibited the study of illicit gun markets, to ProPublica

The only newsroom dedicated to reporting on gun violence.

Your tax-deductible donation to The Trace will directly support nonprofit journalism on gun violence and its effects on our communities.

• Share full article

Advertisement

The Morning

Mapping gun violence.

The Times found that, by the end of last year, one in seven Americans lived within a quarter mile of a recent fatal shooting

By Robert Gebeloff

Data reporter

As Covid swept the United States, another epidemic took hold: Americans shot one another at the fastest pace since the 1990s.

To document the toll, we plotted every fatal shooting on a map and then compared the four pandemic years with the four years that came before. Not only were more people killed, we found, but the boundaries of where these killings took place expanded. By the end of last year, one in seven Americans lived within a quarter mile of a recent fatal shooting, up from one in nine before the pandemic.

Change in fatal shootings since 2016-2019

No shootings

Pennsylvania

Philadelphia

Cherry Hill

Collingswood

Why did shootings surge during the pandemic? Americans bought more guns, turning violent disputes more deadly. They also used more drugs, leading to more violent conflicts. School buildings closed, and once-busy streets emptied. Gangs became more active. And after George Floyd’s murder, reform measures and criticism of the police led some departments to pull back from enforcement.

We have been able to tell the story of gun violence more granularly with data from the Gun Violence Archive — neighborhood by neighborhood, instead of city by city. The analysis, which The Times published today , found:

The violence spread in cities nationwide. One area of downtown Austin, Texas, famous for its thriving nightlife saw 17 shootings during the pandemic years, up from six in the four years before. In Everett, Wash., a smaller city where gun violence had been rare, a series of shootouts involved young people.

The shootings got worse in dangerous neighborhoods, too. The Kensington section of Philadelphia was already one of the most violent places in the United States. One block of 167 residents had 24 fatal shootings in the four years before the pandemic. In the four years that followed, there were 64.

A citywide homicide rate offers an incomplete picture, because the effects of violence are felt unevenly. One-quarter of Chicago residents lived in neighborhoods with four or more shootings during the pandemic years, while one-third lived in areas where there were no fatal shootings nearby.

If you explore our interactive , you’ll see that different racial groups experience different levels of gun violence. African Americans and Latinos tend to live in neighborhoods that are far more violent than those of white Americans.

Racial demographics of neighborhoods with:

While the homicide rate is falling in many cities, it has not returned to prepandemic levels. And it is still up from its low point in the middle of the last decade.

Gun homicide victims per 100,000 people

in the United States

Gun homicide victims per 100,000 people in the United States

Enter your address here to see how gun violence has affected your neighborhood. You may be surprised by what you find.

THE LATEST NEWS

Trump on trial.

At Donald Trump’s Manhattan criminal trial, his lawyer sought to portray Michael Cohen as obsessed with his former boss and driven by self-interest and spite .

The defense asked Cohen about his public criticisms of Trump, including his suggestion that Trump belonged in jail. Cohen mostly kept his composure. “Sounds like something I would say,” he answered.

Cohen testified that he and Trump discussed the hush-money reimbursements in the Oval Office and that the checks were disguised as legal fees. That contention is key to the prosecutors’ case.

Trump’s political allies — including Speaker Mike Johnson — defended him outside the courthouse . Johnson called the trial a “sham” and criticized Cohen .

For the public, getting a seat in court was competitive. Some people lined up overnight. One woman paid $750 for a line sitter , saying, “It’s better than a Broadway show.”

2024 Elections

Angela Alsobrooks, a Democratic county official in Maryland, will face Larry Hogan , the state’s Republican former governor, for a U.S. Senate seat this fall.

Gov. Jim Justice won the West Virginia Republican Senate primary, positioning him to flip the seat that Joe Manchin, a Democrat, is vacating .

Sarah Elfreth, Maryland’s youngest female state senator, won the Democratic primary in a deep-blue U.S. House district, defeating Harry Dunn , a former Capitol Police officer who was on duty during the Jan. 6 attack.

William Davis for president: In an experiment, The Times added the name of its polling editor to a list of third-party candidates. He received almost 2 percent of the vote.

War in Ukraine

The White House is worried that the momentum of Russia’s new offensive is changing the trajectory of the war .

In recent days, Russian troops have captured settlements and villages near Kharkiv, Ukraine’s second-largest city. See a map of Moscow’s push .

“We can feel that victory is near”: In Russia, Vladimir Putin is selling victory to the public, and many people are buying it .

At a Kyiv bar, Secretary of State Antony Blinken — who is also an amateur guitarist — played Neil Young’s “Rockin’ in the Free World.”

Israel-Hamas War

The Biden administration told Congress that it intends to sell more than $1 billion in new weapons to Israel .

Israeli military leaders have voiced frustration with Benjamin Netanyahu for failing to develop a plan to govern Gaza after the war.

Israel directed many Palestinians in Rafah to a “humanitarian zone.” Satellite imagery shows that the zone is overcrowded and damaged by strikes.

Singapore’s prime minister, Lee Hsien Loong, will step down today after 20 years . He oversaw the city-state’s rise to prosperity.

China deployed dozens of ships in the South China Sea to block a Philippine flotilla of small fishing boats. The Filipinos were protesting China’s control of a shoal.

YouTube, in compliance with a court order, will block users in Hong Kong from viewing a democracy anthem , “Glory to Hong Kong.”

Armed attackers ambushed a prison convoy northwest of Paris, killed two guards and freed an inmate .

Orcas sank another boat near the Strait of Gibraltar. The animals’ activity has plagued sailors and intrigued marine biologists.

Other Big Stories

Scammers pretending to be women coerce young men into sending nude images of themselves, then demand money. Some teenagers have killed themselves as a result.

A group of TikTok creators, including a rancher and a skin care entrepreneur, sued the U.S. government over its plan to either ban the app or force its sale.

The ship that toppled a Baltimore bridge after losing power had at least two electrical failures before it left port.

Alice Munro, whose psychologically dense short stories dazzled the literary world and earned her a Nobel Prize, died at 92 .

A.I. is overrated : Companies are spending billions on improvements to mediocre email writing instead of on educated workers, Julia Angwin writes.

Teenagers’ social media feeds are flooded with mental health awareness videos . It’s making their anxiety worse, Lucy Foulkes argues in Opinion Video.

Here are columns by Bret Stephens on a future Palestinian state , and Thomas Edsall on sympathy for authoritarianism .

MORNING READS

‘American Prometheus’ and ‘The Iliad’: Inside OpenAI’s offices is an old-fashioned library stocked with books chosen by employees. See what’s on the shelves .

Evil fruit: When tomatoes arrived in Europe 500 years ago, many considered them dangerous . Now they define Italy’s cuisine.

Can you lose your native tongue? After moving to Paris, a writer found that her French got better — and her English got worse .

Spoiler: Meat doesn’t last as long in the fridge as you might think.

Ask Well: I was prescribed a long-term antibiotic. Is that safe?

Lives Lived: The saxophonist David Sanborn was best known as a jazz musician, but he also enlivened records by Stevie Wonder, Bruce Springsteen and others. “Real musicians don’t have any time to spend thinking about limited categories,” Sanborn once said. He died at 78 .

N.B.A.: The Denver Nuggets are one win away from the Western Conference Finals after defeating the Minnesota Timberwolves. And the New York Knicks’ Jalen Brunson scored 44 points in his team’s win over the Indiana Pacers.

W.N.B.A.: The Indiana Fever lost to the Connecticut Sun. Caitlin Clark scored 20 points in her professional debut for the Fever but also struggled with 10 turnovers .

ARTS AND IDEAS

The late 2010s seemed to usher in a new golden age of Black satire, with films like “Get Out” and “Sorry to Bother You” offering complex characters. But more recent entries in the genre haven’t kept pace, the Times culture critic Maya Phillips argues . The problem, she writes, is that these newer movies — including “American Fiction” and “The American Society of Magical Negroes” — are too focused on white guilt, which oversimplifies Black characters.

More on culture

King Charles III unveiled his first official portrait since his coronation, an oil painting by the artist Jonathan Yeo.

Sage, a miniature poodle, won the Westminster dog show . Ahead of the competition, she was ranked just 39th of all show dogs in the U.S.

Prime Video will stream “Pop Culture Jeopardy!,” an entertainment-focused spinoff that features teams of three contestants.

Officials temporarily closed a livestream video portal between Dublin and New York City after inappropriate behavior , Time reports.

The “Tonight Show” host Jimmy Fallon celebrated 10 years at the helm . “It’s hard to believe, when I got the job, Joe Biden was just a fresh-faced 71-year-old,” he said.

THE MORNING RECOMMENDS …

Make spicy kung pao tofu .

Listen to African guitar greats .

Wear a comfortable bra .

Get a deal on a graduation gift .

Here is today’s Spelling Bee . Yesterday’s pangrams were dehumidified and humidified .

And here are today’s Mini Crossword , Wordle , Sudoku , Connections and Strands .

Thanks for spending part of your morning with The Times. See you tomorrow.

Sign up here to get this newsletter in your inbox . Reach our team at [email protected] .

Robert Gebeloff is a data journalist for The Times, using data analysis to augment traditional reporting. More about Robert Gebeloff

Home — Essay Samples — Social Issues — Gun Violence — Gun Violence In The United States

Gun Violence in The United States

• Categories: Gun Control Gun Violence

About this sample

Words: 773 |

Published: Apr 29, 2022

See expert comments

Words: 773 | Pages: 2 | 4 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Prof Ernest (PhD)

Verified writer

• Expert in: Social Issues

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

1 pages / 559 words

3 pages / 1355 words

3 pages / 1142 words

3 pages / 1351 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Gun Violence

Why are guns dangerous? Guns, often considered tools for personal protection, pose significant dangers that extend far beyond their intended purposes. This essay delves into the inherent dangers of firearms by analyzing the [...]

Gun control is a topic that has been debated for decades in the United States. The issue is a complex one that involves balancing the right to bear arms with the need to protect public safety. In the wake of numerous mass [...]

Roughly 30,000 men, women, and children are murdered in the United States every year at the barrel of a firearm. Whether it is in educational institutions, cinema theaters, work environments, places of worship, or on live TV, [...]

Guns have been a controversial topic in the United States for many years. While some argue that owning a gun is a right and can be used for self-defense, there are several reasons why guns are bad for society. This essay will [...]

Comprehensively understanding the behavioral profiles of those who commit gun violence requires an examination of individual characteristics, psychological factors, and social contexts. Individuals with a history of violence or [...]

In conclusion, social psychology plays a crucial role in understanding the complexities of the gun control debate. By examining attitudes, group dynamics, emotions, and persuasion strategies, we gain valuable insights into the [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Gun Violence Must Stop. Here's What We Can Do to Prevent More Deaths

Listen to "How Communities Can Prevent Gun Violence," a Prevention Institute podcast episode

Time and again, we are heartbroken by the news of another mass shooting. Part of our healing must be the conviction that we will do everything in our power to keep these tragedies from happening in a nation that continues to face a pandemic of gun violence. It's not only the high-profile mass shootings that we must work to prevent, but also the daily death-by-guns that claims more than 30,000 lives every year.

We know that these deaths are a predictable outcome of our country’s lack of political will to make a change and an underinvestment in prevention approaches that work. Through a public health approach that focuses on drawing from evidence and addressing the factors that increase or decrease the risk of gun violence, particularly in communities that are disproportionately impacted, we can save lives.

Each time a major tragedy occurs, the discourse tends to focus on addressing a specific venue. In the wake of the deadly shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas School in Parkland, Florida on February 14, 2018, there is an understandable focus on school safety. We strongly support broad engagement of community members, including young people and other survivors of gun violence, policymakers, and others, in insisting that schools be safe. We must also insist on that same level of safety for our places of worship, shopping malls, movie theaters, concert venues, nightclubs, workplaces, neighborhoods, and homes.

We are listening to young people from all races, classes, and sexualities, in Florida, Baltimore, Philadelphia, and throughout the country, who are unifying to speak truth to power. We have renewed hope that, together, we can prevent gun violence— not just in the case of mass shootings but also in the case of domestic violence, suicide, community violence, and violence involving law enforcement. We first developed this list after the Sandy Hook tragedy in 2012. The public health approach has evolved since then, and we have now updated it, including more attention to addressing multiple forms of gun violence.

The recommendations below begin with attention to reducing immediate risks related to guns, broaden to address the underlying contributors to gun violence, and then address the prevention infrastructure necessary to ensure effectiveness. We also include recommendations related to new frontiers for research and practice, to ensure that we continue to learn, innovate, and increase our impact over time. The set of recommendations illustrate that one program or policy alone is not going to significantly reduce gun violence, but rather, through comprehensive strategies, we can achieve safety in our homes, schools, and communities. 

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

Gun safety: Reduce the imminent risk of lethality through sensible gun laws and a culture of safety.

1. Sensible gun laws: Reduce easy access to dangerous weapons.

2. Establish a culture of gun safety.

• Reduce firearm access to youth and individuals who are at risk of harming themselves or others.  
• Hold the gun industry accountable and ensure there is adequate oversight over the marketing and sales of guns and ammunition.  
• Engage responsible gun dealers and owners in solutions.  
• Insist on mandatory training and licensing for owners.  
• Require safe and secure gun storage.  

Underlying contributors to gun violence: systematically reduce risks and increase resilience in individuals, families, and communities. 

3. Public health solutions: Recognize gun violence as a critical and preventable public health problem.

4. Comprehensive solutions: Support community planning and implementation of comprehensive community safety plans that include prevention and intervention.

5. Trauma, connection, and services: Expand access to high quality, culturally competent, coordinated, social, emotional, and mental health supports and address the impact of trauma.

Prevention Infrastructure: ensure effectiveness and sustainability of efforts

6. Support gun violence research: Ensure that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and others have the resources to study this issue and provide science-based guidance.

7. Health system: Establish a comprehensive health system in which violence prevention is a health system responsibility and imperative.

New Frontiers: continue to learn, innovate, and increase impact through research and practice

8. Community healing: Prevent community trauma.

9. Mental health and wellbeing: Invest in communities to promote resilience and mental health and wellbeing.

10. Support health y norms about masculinity: Explore the pathways between gun violence and harmful norms that have been about maintaining power and privilege.

11. Impulsive anger: Explore the linkages between anger and gun violence.

12. Economic development: Reduce concentrated disadvantage and invest in employment opportunities.

13. Law enforcement violence: Establish accountability for sworn officers and private security.

14. Technology: Advance gun safety and self-defense technology.

FULL RECOMMENDATIONS for Preventing Gun Violence

Gun safety: Part of a public health approach to gun violence is about preventing the imminent risk of lethality through sensible gun laws and a culture of safety.    

• Sensible gun laws: Reduce easy access to dangerous weapons by banning high capacity magazines and bump stocks, requiring universal background checks without loopholes, instituting waiting periods , and reinstituting the assault weapons ban immediately.  
• Establish a culture of gun safety: As the nation on earth with the most guns, we must make sure people are safe.  
• Reduce firearm access to youth and individuals who are at risk of harming themselves or others . This includes keeping guns out of the hands of those who have been violent toward their partners and families, and those with previous violent convictions, whether through expanding lethality assessment and  background checks  or supporting  domestic violence bills , and gun violence restraining orders .  
• Hold the gun industry accountable and ensure there is adequate oversight over the marketing and sales of guns and ammunition . Five percent of gun dealers sell 90% of guns used in crimes, and must be held accountable to a code of conduct . Further, states can pass laws requiring sellers to obtain state licenses, maintain records of sales, submit to inspections and fulfill other requirements. Unlike other industries, gun companies have special legal protections against liability leaving them immune from lawsuits. There is a need to repeal gun industry immunity laws in states that have them, and resist their enactment in states without current immunity laws. Increasingly, in the absence of legislative action, organizations are divesting from companies that manufacture firearms, and consumers are pressuring companies directly. More and more companies are setting new policies about what they are selling to the public and/or who they are selling products to.  
• Engage responsible gun dealers and owners in solutions. For example, some gun dealers and range owners are already being trained in suicide prevention .  
• Insist on mandatory training and licensing for owners . This training should include recurring education to renew permits, with a graduated licensing process at least as stringent as for driver's licenses.  
• Require safe and secure gun storage. For example, in King County, Washington, public health has teamed up with firearm storage device retailers. In addition to safe storage being tax exempt in Washington, through the LOK-IT-UP initiative , residents can learn about the importance of safe storage, purchase devices at discounted rates and learn how to practice safe storage in the home.  

Underlying contributors to gun violence: Risk and resilience. A public health approach to preventing gun violence expands solutions beyond gun access to reduce additional risk factors associated with gun violence and bolster resilience in individuals, families, and communities.  

• Public health solutions: Recognize gun violence as a critical and preventable public health problem. Gun violence is a leading cause of premature death in the country. Yet, unlike other preventable causes of death, we haven't mustered the political will to address it. Gun violence is most noticed when multiple people die at once, but it affects too many communities and families on a daily basis whether through suicide, domestic violence, community violence, or other forms. Data shows that risk for firearm violence varies substantially by age, race, gender, and geography, in patterns that are quite different for suicide and homicide. Through a public health approach, we have learned that violence is preventable across all of its forms. The public health approach studies data on various forms of violence and who is affected and identifies the biggest risk factors and what’s protective, and develops policy, practice, and program solutions in partnership with other sectors and community members. Many communities and groups have adopted a public health approach to preventing violence such as Prevention Institute’s UNITY City Network and Cities United , a growing network of over 100 mayors.  
• Comprehensive solutions: Support community planning and implementation of comprehensive community safety plans that include prevention and intervention. A growing research base demonstrates that it is possible to prevent shootings and killings through approaches such as hospital-based intervention programs , the Cure Violence model , and Advance Peace . A growing number of safety plans across the country include upstream strategies such as youth employment , neighborhood economic development, safe parks , restoring vacant land , and reducing alcohol outlet density . Following the implementation of Minneapolis’ Blueprint for Action to Prevent Youth Violence , which prioritized prevention and upstream strategies, the City experienced a 62% reduction in youth gunshot victims, a 34% reduction in youth victims of crime, and a 76% reduction in youth arrests with a gun from 2007-2015. Yet too many communities lack the resources to do what is needed. We must commit to helping communities identify and implement solutions.  
• Trauma, connection, and services: Expand access to high quality, culturally competent, coordinated, social, emotional, and mental health supports and a ddress the impact of trauma.  Too often gun violence is blamed on mental illness, when in fact in most cases people who carry out shootings do not have a diagnosable mental illness. However, throughout a community, members often recognize individuals who are disconnected and/or otherwise in need of additional supports and services. It is critical to reduce the stigma associated with mental health needs and support our children, friends, family members, and neighbors in seeking and obtaining appropriate supports. For this to work, communities need resources to assess and connect individuals at a high risk for harming themselves or others to well-coordinated social, emotional, and mental health supports and services, particularly in critical times of crisis and high need. Further, trauma can have damaging effects on learning, behavior, and health across the life course, especially during key developmental stages such as early childhood and adolescence, and can increase the risk for multiple forms of violence . We need to do more to recognize trauma, develop trauma-informed protocols, including for law enforcement, and support healing and treatment for individuals who have experienced or are experiencing trauma, including from exposure to violence in any form.  

Prevention Infrastructure: Beyond addressing the risk and underlying factors of gun violence, a public health approach also entails building a prevention infrastructure with mechanisms for scale, sustainability, and effectiveness. The UNITY RoadMap is a tool to support prevention infrastructure.  

• Support gun violence research: Ensure that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and others have the resources to study this issue and provide science-based guidance. The CDC, the nation's public health agency, has long been restricted from conducting the kind of research that will support solutions to reduce gun violence. CDC can track, assess, and develop strategies to prevent gun violence, just as we do with influenza and tainted spinach. In the absence of sufficient tracking and evidence at the federal level, California launched the Firearm Violence Prevention Research Center at UC Davis, and other states are proposing to establish research centers as well.  
• Health system: Establish a comprehensive health system in which violence prevention is a health system responsibility and imperative. The Movement towards Violence as a Health Issue , which consists of over 400 individuals representing more than 100 organizations across the country dedicated to a health and community response to violence has proposed a framework for addressing and preventing violence in all of its forms. Moving away from the current, fragmented approach to violence that leans heavily on the justice system, this unifying framework encourages and supports extensive cross-sector collaboration. The framework includes 18 system elements such as public health departments, primary care, behavioral health care, law enforcement and the justice system, schools, and faith-based institutions, which together can move the nation toward safety, health, and equity.  

New Frontiers: A public health approach includes continuous learning and innovation to increase impact through research and practice. These emerging areas require further examination and are important additions to reducing the impact of gun violence in our society.  

• Community healing: Prevent community trauma. Community trauma can result from experiencing violence and it can also increase the likelihood of violence, contributing to a mutually reinforcing cycle. Let’s support healing and resilience through strategies that rebuild social relationships and networks, reclaim and improve public spaces, promote community healing, and foster economic stability and prosperity. Prevention Institute’s Adverse Community Experiences and Resilience Framework , provides an approach for addressing and preventing community trauma.  
• Mental health and wellbeing: Invest in communities to promote resilience and mental health and wellbeing. Mental illness is not at the root of our country’s high rate of gun violence, in fact, people with mental illness are more likely to be victims of violence than perpetrators. However, we know we can do more to foster mental health and wellbeing in the first place . Through our national initiative, Making Connections for Mental Health and Wellbeing Among Men and Boys , with communities across the US, we’re learning that there are pillars of wellbeing that promote wellbeing which is supportive of efforts to prevent multiple forms of violence, including belonging/connectedness, control of destiny, dignity, hope/aspiration, safety and trust. We are also seeing community members come together to change their community environments to promote mental health and wellbeing, including as a suicide prevention approach.  
• Support healthy norms about masculinity: Explore the pathways between gun violence and harmful norms that have been about maintaining power and privilege. The majority of men do not perpetrate gun violence; however, the majority of people who use guns against others and themselves are boys and men. For instance, the majority of the mass shooters over decades have been men. How do expectations about masculinity in different cultural contexts that promote, domination, control, and risk-taking connect to distress, bias and discrimination, and gun violence perpetration? How do gaps in expectations of power and privilege versus reality play into this? Why does our dominant culture permit a destructive desire for power over others? Answering questions like these can glean important insights and help us move toward a culture of equitable safety.   
• Impulsive anger: Explore the linkages between anger and gun violence. More research is needed to examine patterns of impulse control, empathy, problem solving, and anger management across shootings, as well as interactions of these functions with the harmful norms described in the previous recommendation. Through a public health approach, we want to understand who is at a greater risk for violence as a means to creating long-term solutions to stop the issue in the first place. Further analysis may provide answers regarding particular linkages and what to do when functions are compromised.  
• Economic development: Reduce concentrated disadvantage and invest in employment opportunities. As Rev. Gregory Boyle has long said of his work in East Los Angeles, “Nothing stops a bullet like a job.” Lack of employment opportunities increases the risk for gun violence, and on the other hand, economic opportunity protects against violence. Promoting equitable access to education programs, job training, and employment programs with mentorship for residents of neighborhoods with concentrated disadvantage, especially young people can be effective in reducing gun violence. For example, a study of One Summer Chicago Plus , a jobs program designed to reduce violence and prepare youth from some of the city’s most violence neighborhoods for the labor market – saw a 43% drop in violent-crime arrests of participants. Further, neighborhood-based economic development strategies such as Business Improvement Districts that bring public and private partners together to invest in neighborhood services, activities, and improvements, have also been shown to reduce violence, including gun violence.    
• Law enforcement violence: Establish accountability for sworn officers and private security. Ensure that police and security industries examine disparities regarding who they protect versus who is most often harmed as a result of their actions. With this information, these sectors should develop effective approaches to reduce harm in those populations, including unarmed African American men and people with mental illnesses. Current approaches being explored include implicit-bias training , problem-oriented policing , and restorative justice . Moving forward, it’s important to determine and understand the most effective strategies.     
• Technology: Advance gun safety and self-defense technology. As the call for gun safety continues to increase, we must consider the role of new technologies . Just as cars continue to have new safety measures embedded in the technology, from fingerprint scanners to PIN codes and RFID chips, there are ongoing developments to increase the safety of guns and gun storage that require further analysis to assess effectiveness. In addition, technologies that are alternatives to guns are being developed to support self-protection to reduce the perceived need for a firearm for self-defense.

As our families, communities, and country reel from terrible daily tragedies, we must vow to change our culture and our policies and to stop this cycle of violence. We should be able to live in our homes, send our children to first grade, pray in our houses of worship, shop in our local malls, and walk through our streets and neighborhoods without being shot. Together we can take action in the memory of those who died and insist that this never happen again. Please take action and support changes like those outlined above to prevent gun violence.  

Learn more about preventing gun violence from other organizations and resources we’ve found helpful:

American Journal of Public Health

American Public Health Association

American Psychological Association

Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence

Everytown for Gun Safety

Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence

Harvard T.H. School of Public Health

Hope and Heal Fund

Interdisciplinary Group on Preventing School and Community Violence call to action

International Firearm Injury Prevention and Policy

Movement towards Violence as a Health Issue

Pew Research Center Americans’ views on guns and gun ownership

RAND Corporation

Smart Tech Challenges Foundation

Smarter Crime Control: A Guide to a Safer Future for Citizens, Communities, and Politicians.

Speak for Safety campaign for Gun Violence Restraining Order

States for Gun Safety Coalition

The Joyce Foundation

University of California, Davis – Violence Prevention Program

Violence Policy Center

If you have additional resources we should add to the list, email [email protected] .

Supported by a grant from the Langeloth Foundation

Related Publications

Prevention institute summary of recommendations to prevent gun violence, prevention institute full recommendations for preventing gun violence.

15 Reasons Why Americans Cling to Their Guns

Posted: May 19, 2024 | Last updated: May 19, 2024

Gun ownership is deeply rooted in American culture, stemming from historical, practical, and constitutional factors. The debate around gun control continues to polarize the nation, with staunch defenders on both sides. This list explores the multifaceted reasons why many Americans remain steadfast in their commitment to gun ownership. From self-defense to cultural heritage, these points highlight the diverse motivations behind this enduring stance.

For many, guns are more than just tools; they symbolize freedom, independence, and self-reliance. The complexities of American society, geography, and history contribute to a unique relationship with firearms. Understanding these reasons provides insight into the persistent resistance to gun control measures. Here are fifteen reasons why Americans will never give up their guns.

Self-Defense

One of the primary reasons Americans own guns is for self-defense. In a country where the right to protect oneself is highly valued, firearms provide a means of security and peace of mind. Many believe that owning a gun is essential for defending against potential threats in their homes and communities. This belief is reinforced by stories and statistics highlighting instances where gun ownership has prevented crime.

Second Amendment Rights

The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right to bear arms. For many Americans, this constitutional right is non-negotiable and represents a fundamental freedom. The amendment is seen as a safeguard against tyranny and a crucial element of the nation’s democratic framework. This historical context fuels the ongoing commitment to gun ownership as a protected liberty.

Hunting Tradition

Hunting is a long-standing tradition in many American families, particularly in rural areas. Guns are an integral part of this heritage, passed down through generations. Hunting fosters a connection to nature and a sense of self-sufficiency, reinforcing the cultural significance of firearms. For these communities, giving up guns would mean losing a cherished aspect of their way of life.

Sport Shooting

Sport shooting is a popular recreational activity in the United States. Competitions and casual target practice are enjoyed by millions, promoting responsible gun use and marksmanship skills. Gun ranges and shooting clubs foster a sense of community and camaraderie among enthusiasts. This sport’s popularity underscores the recreational value that firearms hold for many Americans.

Rural Living

In rural areas, guns are often considered essential tools for daily life. They are used for protecting livestock, controlling pests, and ensuring personal safety in remote locations where law enforcement may be far away. The practicality of gun ownership in these settings is a significant reason why many rural Americans are resistant to giving up their firearms. This practical necessity is deeply ingrained in rural lifestyles.

Personal Freedom

For many, gun ownership is a symbol of personal freedom and autonomy. The ability to own and carry firearms is seen as a fundamental right that should not be infringed upon by the government. This belief is rooted in a broader cultural emphasis on individual rights and liberties. The notion of self-reliance and the ability to protect oneself and one’s family is a cornerstone of American identity.

Political Beliefs

Gun ownership often aligns with certain political ideologies, particularly those advocating for limited government intervention. Many see gun control measures as an overreach of government power and a threat to personal freedoms. This political perspective fuels the resolve to maintain the right to bear arms. The issue of gun control is a key factor in political debates and campaigns, highlighting its importance to many voters.

Historical Legacy

America’s history is intertwined with the use of firearms, from the Revolutionary War to the settling of the frontier. Guns played a crucial role in shaping the nation, and this historical legacy continues to influence contemporary attitudes toward gun ownership. Many Americans view their right to own guns as a connection to their historical roots and national identity. This sense of continuity and heritage reinforces their commitment to gun rights.

Economic Impact

The firearms industry is a significant contributor to the U.S. economy, providing jobs and generating revenue. Gun manufacturing, sales, and related activities support local and national economies. This economic impact is a strong argument for many against stricter gun control laws. The financial benefits and employment opportunities provided by the gun industry are crucial for many communities.

Home Defense

Owning a gun for home defense is a common reason cited by many Americans. The ability to protect one’s home and family from intruders is a powerful motivator. Stories of home invasions thwarted by armed homeowners reinforce the perceived necessity of having a firearm for protection. This belief is deeply ingrained and continues to drive gun ownership.

Self-Reliance

Self-reliance is a core value for many Americans, and gun ownership is seen as an extension of this principle. The ability to provide for and protect oneself without relying on external help is highly valued. Firearms are viewed as essential tools for maintaining this independence. This cultural emphasis on self-sufficiency supports the strong attachment to guns.

Fear of Government Overreach

Many Americans fear that increased gun control could lead to government overreach and the erosion of other civil liberties. This concern is rooted in a distrust of government and a desire to safeguard individual freedoms. The belief that an armed populace is a check against tyranny is a powerful motivator for gun ownership. This perspective fuels resistance to any perceived infringement on the right to bear arms.

Crime Rates

High crime rates in certain areas drive the desire for self-protection through gun ownership. Many believe that owning a gun deters criminals and provides a means of defense if confronted with violence. This belief is reinforced by statistics and personal experiences, leading to a greater emphasis on the right to bear arms. The correlation between crime rates and gun ownership is a significant factor in the ongoing debate.

For some, guns are valuable collectibles, with historical and aesthetic appeal. Collectors often invest significant time and money into acquiring unique and rare firearms. This hobby is a legitimate and respected aspect of gun culture in America. The appreciation for the craftsmanship and history of firearms drives a passionate commitment to gun ownership.

Cultural Identity

Gun ownership is a significant part of the cultural identity for many Americans. It symbolizes a connection to heritage, values, and traditions. The cultural significance of guns extends beyond their practical use, embedding them deeply in the national consciousness. This cultural identity is a powerful force behind the resistance to giving up guns.

Preparedness

Preparedness for emergencies, whether natural disasters or societal collapse, drives some Americans to own guns. They see firearms as essential for survival in worst-case scenarios. This mindset is part of a broader culture of preparedness and self-sufficiency. Owning a gun is viewed as a practical measure to ensure safety and security in uncertain times.

The unwavering commitment to gun ownership in America is rooted in a complex blend of historical, cultural, practical, and ideological factors. Each reason reflects a unique aspect of American life and values, highlighting why the debate over gun control remains deeply polarized. Understanding these reasons is essential to grasp the broader context of this ongoing issue. The diverse motivations behind gun ownership underscore the multifaceted nature of American identity and the powerful role that firearms play within it.

What To Read Next

• This Genius Trick Every Online Shopper Should Know
• Best High-Yield Savings Accounts This Month
• Best Gold IRA This Year
• Deals On Popular Cruises
• The Best Internet Deals For Seniors
• Affordable Life Insurance Options for Seniors

For the Latest Breaking Crime & Justice News, Headlines & Videos, head to Body Cams+

More for You

Iran Searches for President After His Helicopter Crashes

Taylor Sheridan Says Farewell To Dabney Coleman, Explains Why He Gave Mentor Unforgettable Turn As Dutton Family Patriarch In ‘Yellowstone'

7 Ways People Destroy the Value of Their Homes, According to a Real Estate Agent

The 10 Cars Most Likely to Get You a Speeding Ticket

Fetterman responds to AOC's suggestion he's a bully after House Oversight clash: 'That's absurd'

Map reveals best places to live in the US if nuclear war breaks out

Most Dangerous Motorcycles Ever Made

'SNL' star Chloe Fineman to critics of her Cannes look: 'No need to be so mean'

‘American Idol' Season 22 Finale: Katy Perry Prepares For Emotional Goodbye Saying, "I Think I Will Be Crying At Anything"

Foul Play? Double Headbutt Stops ‘Prelims’ Scrap Early

The New Math of Driving Your Car Till the Wheels Fall Off

2024 Dallas Cowboys schedule has been officially released

Zits by Jeremy Scott and Jim Borgman

10 best new Netflix originals you need to add to your watch list

Donald Trump's Lawyer Made 'Rookie Mistakes' During Trial—Legal Analyst

Emma Stone Wore a Sequin Dress With a Daringly Low Neckline at the Cannes Film Festival

Indiana Fever Coach Calls Caitlin Clark A "Problem" After Third Straight Loss

5 Things You Need To Stop Doing If Your Car Has An Automatic Transmission

The Top 10 Most Successful Girl Bands Worldwide

Bankruptcy Looms For Major Cable Network as Revenue Declines