Firearm possession and violent death: A critical review

This article critically reviews the empirical research on the association of firearm possession with suicide and homicide. Both suicide and homicide reflect intentional behavior with the goal of killing oneself or another person. Firearms provide merely a means of reaching this goal. The possession of a firearm can, therefore, not be a primary cause of either suicide or homicide. However, since a defining characteristic of both suicide and homicide is the success of killing, and since guns are more effective means for reaching this goal than poison or other weapons, the rate of firearm possession can be expected to be positively related to overall rates of suicide and homicide. This prediction has been tested with individual-level as well as macro-level studies. Individual-level studies, which typically use case–control designs, allow a better control than macro-level studies of the cultural, demographic, and economic determinants of suicide and homicide. In macro-level studies, the potential impact of gun possession on overall rates is likely to be confounded by the factors that motivate people to commit suicide or homicide. Despite these methodological limitations, the research reviewed in this article supports the assumption that easy access to firearms increases the risk of dying from violent causes. With very few exception, studies found gun ownership positively related to gun-related suicides and homicides. Furthermore, there is evidence that guns do not merely serve as substitutes for other means of killing, but increase the overall rates of suicide and homicide.     

Gun attitudes on campus: United and divided by safety needs

All people share a need for safety. Yet people’s pursuit of safety can conflict when it comes to guns, with some people perceiving guns as a means to safety and others perceiving guns as a threat to safety. We examined this conflict on a U.S. college campus that prohibits guns. We distinguished between people (N = 11,390) who (1) own a gun for protection, (2) own a gun exclusively for reasons other than protection (e.g., collecting, sports), and (3) do not own a gun. Protection owners felt less safe on campus and supported allowing guns on campus. They also reported that they and others would feel safer and that gun violence would decrease if they carried a gun on campus. Non-owners and non-protection owners felt the reverse. The findings suggest that protection concerns, rather than gun-ownership per se, account for diverging perceptions and attitudes about guns and gun control.     

Gun control, gun ownership, and suicide prevention

The relationship of the extent of gun ownership and the strictness of gun control laws to suicide and homicide rates in the nine major geographic regions of the United States was explored. Gun ownership, rather than the strictness of gun control laws, was found to be the strongest correlate of the rates of suicide and homicide by guns. Regions with a higher extent of gun ownership had higher rates of suicide and homicide by firearms.     

Action alters object identification: Wielding a gun increases the bias to see guns

Stereotypes, expectations, and emotions influence an observer's ability to detect and categorize objects as guns. In light of recent work in action-perception interactions, however, there is another unexplored factor that may be critical: The action choices available to the perceiver. In five experiments, participants determined whether another person was holding a gun or a neutral object. Critically, the participant did this while holding and responding with either a gun or a neutral object. Responding with a gun biased observers to report "gun present" more than did responding with a ball. Thus, by virtue of affording a perceiver the opportunity to use a gun, he or she was more likely to classify objects in a scene as a gun and, as a result, to engage in threat-induced behavior (raising a firearm to shoot). In addition to theoretical implications for event perception and object identification, these findings have practical implications for law enforcement and public safety. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved).     

Impact of Firearm Availability and Gun Regulation on State Suicide Rates

Past studies on suicide have investigated the association of firearm ownership and suicide risk in the United States. The aim of the present study was to build on previous work by examining the impact of firearm storage practices and the strictness of firearm regulation on suicide rates at the state level. Data were compiled from primarily three sources. Suicide and firearm ownership information was obtained from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Strictness of handgun regulation was derived from figures available at the Law Center to Prevent Violence, and controls were taken from the US Bureau of the Census. Mixed models were fitted to the data. Household firearm ownership was strongly associated with both suicide by all mechanisms, and firearm suicide. Storage practices had especially elevated consequences on suicide rates. Percent with loaded guns and gun readiness increased suicide rates, and strictness of gun regulation reduced suicide rates. Ready access to firearms can make a difference between life and death. Loaded and unlocked firearms within reach become risk factors for fatal outcomes from suicidal behavior. Future research might want to examine ways of obtaining more recent data on individual firearm ownership. This study proposes several policy recommendations for suicide prevention.     

Interactive effects of life experience and situational cues on aggression: The weapons priming effect in hunters and nonhunters

Recent research (Anderson, Benjamin, & Bartholow, 1998) indicates that the presence of guns increases the accessibility of aggressive thoughts via automatic priming. Our research examined whether this “weapons priming effect” differs depending on the structure of an individual's knowledge about guns, and if so, whether that difference results in corresponding differences in aggressive behavior. Experiment 1 revealed that individuals with prior gun experience (hunters) have more detailed and specific information about guns than do individuals with no direct gun experience (nonhunters), and that hunting experience interacts with gun type (hunting versus assault) in predicting affective and cognitive reactions to guns. Experiment 2 revealed that pictures of hunting guns were more likely to prime aggressive thoughts among nonhunters, whereas pictures of assault guns were more likely to prime aggressive thoughts among hunters. Experiment 3 showed differences in aggressive behavior following gun primes that correspond to differences in affective and cognitive responses to gun cues. Our findings are discussed in light of the General Aggression Model.     

Guns,Impulsive Angry Behavior,and Mental Disorders: Results from the National Comorbidity Survey Replication (NCS-R)

Analyses from the National Comorbidity Study Replication provide the first nationally representative estimates of the co-occurrence of impulsive angry behavior and possessing or carrying a gun among adults with and without certain mental disorders and demographic characteristics. The study found that a large number of individuals in the United States self-report patterns of impulsive angry behavior and also possess firearms at home (8.9%) or carry guns outside the home (1.5%). These data document associations of numerous common mental disorders and combinations of angry behavior with gun access. Because only a small proportion of persons with this risky combination have ever been involuntarily hospitalized for a mental health problem, most will not be subject to existing mental health-related legal restrictions on firearms resulting from a history of involuntary commitment. Excluding a large proportion of the general population from gun possession is also not likely to be feasible. Behavioral risk-based approaches to firearms restriction, such as expanding the definition of gun-prohibited persons to include those with violent misdemeanor convictions and multiple DUI convictions, could be a more effective public health policy to prevent gun violence in the population. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Motivations for gun possession and carrying among serious juvenile offenders

Though the prevalence of gun possession and carrying among juveniles is now fairly well documented (at least among non-serious offenders), little research has examined juveniles' reasons for possessing and carrying guns beyond noting that youth who report robbery and assaultive behavior have higher rates of gun and other weapon possession than do non-violent youth. The present study examines the question of motivation behind gun possession and carrying by criminally-inclined youths through analysis of survey data collected from juveniles incarcerated in maximum security reformatories. The findings support the popular fear that juvenile offenders are heavily involved in gun-related crime, though the same findings point to multiple needs and uses for guns. Using a number of measures—reasons for carrying guns, for using them during the commission of crimes, for purchasing them, etc.—it appears that the primary reason for gun possession and carrying is the juvenile's perception of the need to be armed for protection. This is the case even among those who were involved in such predatory crimes as armed robbery prior to incarceration. Thus, legislative attempts to dissuade youth from obtaining guns to commit crimes are likely misplaced, since the guns eventually used in crime are usually obtained for protective purposes. Only when firearms are perceived as no longer needed can we expect a serious drop in gun-related offenses among youth.     

Patterns and correlates of gun ownership among nonmetropolitan and rural middle school students

Examined prevalence of gun ownership and the links among gun ownership, reasons for gun ownership, and antisocial behavior in a sample of nonmetropolitan and rural middle school students. Participants completed the Questionnaire for Students (Olweus, 1995) and included 6,263 students from 36 elementary and middle schools, of whom most were African American (range = 46%-95% per school). Reasons for gun ownership were strongly associated with rates of antisocial behavior. Youths who owned guns for sporting reasons reported rates of antisocial behavior that were only slightly higher than those reported by youths who did not own guns. Youths who owned guns to gain respect or to frighten others reported extremely high rates of antisocial behavior. These high-risk adolescent gun owners were likely to come from families of high-risk gun owners, associate with friends who were high-risk gun owners, and engage in high rates of bullying behavior. Findings suggest that effective violence prevention programs must target high-risk youths, address risk factors that go beyond individual settings, and address a comprehensive array of risk factors.     

How Many People Are Exposed to Suicide? Not Six

It has long been stated that six people are left behind following every suicide. Despite a lack of empirical evidence, this has been extensively cited for over 30 years. Using data from a random‐digit dial survey, a more accurate number of people exposed to each suicide is calculated. A sample of 1,736 adults included 812 lifetime suicide‐exposed respondents who reported age and number of exposures. Each suicide resulted in 135 people exposed (knew the person). Each suicide affects a large circle of people, who may be in need of clinician services or support following exposure.     

Firearms and Their Role in Homicide and Suicide*

ABSTRACT: Various arguments against firearms from the standpoint of their role in homicide and suicide are discussed. It is contended by some that murderers are law-abiding citizens who get into trouble because of the availability of firearms. A study in Detroit indicated that both murderers and suicidal persons are prone to misuse the firearm as they would misuse any potential instrument of destruction, independent of gun control measures. If the Second Amendment to the Constitution is to be used by those favoring the right to bear arms, the argument must involve an incorporation of an inherent responsibility toward the use of the firearm; that people wanting to use them should be able to accept reasonable rules and personality qualification as a factor in having the right to obtain them. More effective education and screening of the overly aggressive person or the self-destructive individual are suggested, in terms of school mental health programs, screening at the police precinct level, gun permit application level, and through effective suicide prevention and crisis centers.     

The Association Between Gun Ownership and Statewide Overall Suicide Rates

An extensive body of research has demonstrated an association between gun ownership and suicide that extends beyond the effects of a range of covariates. We aimed to expand on extant research by examining the extent to which gun ownership predicts statewide overall suicide rates beyond the effects of demographic, geographic, religious, psychopathological, and suicide‐related variables. By extending the list of covariates utilized, considering those covariates simultaneously, and using more recent data, we sought to present a more stringent test. Gun ownership predicted statewide overall suicide rates, with the full model accounting for more than 92% of the variance in statewide suicide rates. The correlation between firearm suicide rates and the overall suicide rate was significantly stronger than the correlation between nonfirearm suicide rates and the overall suicide rate. These findings support the notion that access to and familiarity with firearms serves as a robust risk factor for suicide. Therefore, means safety efforts aimed at reducing accessibility and increasing safe storage of firearms would likely have a dramatic impact on statewide overall suicide rates.     

Preparedness and electrodermal fear-conditioning: ontogenetic vs phylogenetic explanations

In a review of existing theories of learning, Seligman (Psychol. Rev. 77, 406-418, 1970) suggested that humans should have an evolutionary derived preparedness to associate fear-relevant (e.g. snakes) events with aversive reinforcers. The preparedness hypothesis has been extensively tested by Ohman and his colleagues. One argument against a non-preparedness explanation for the Ohman findings has been that culturally aversive stimuli, like pictures of guns have not shown the same resistance towards extinction as pictures of snakes. However, the effect of pointing a gun directly towards the S vs pointing it to the side has not been tested. Therefore both slides of guns and snakes, directed both towards and aside from the subject, were used as conditioned stimuli (CSs) in the present study. A second question that has been discussed in the preparedness-literature is the quality of the unconditioned stimulus (UCS), i.e. if only shock can act as UCS for prepared CSs. Thus, both shock and noise UCSs were used in the present study. Skin conductance responses (SCRs) were recorded as dependent measures. The results showed conditioned acquisition, i.e. larger SCRs to CS+ than to CS-, in all groups except for the shock and noise UCS groups with the gun pointing aside as CS+ (where actually larger responses were observed to the CS-, i.e. the gun pointing towards). The extinction data showed significantly larger SCRs to CS+ than to CS- for both snakes and guns directed towards the S. Strongest resistance to extinction was observed for the group with the gun pointed towards as CS+ and with noise as UCS. The gun with noise as UCS pointed towards the S was not different from the snake with shock as UCS. Taken together, the results have shown three things; (a) directing a fear-relevant CS towards the S was a potent manipulation, and especially directing a gun with noise as UCS; (b) shock was overall not superior to noise as UCS, and especially not for snake CSs; (c) a weak form of unique belongingness was demonstrated.     

The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Gun Ownership

This question on how religious beliefs shape attitudes about guns has received little attention in the literature. We use the religious concept of supernatural evil, or beliefs about Satan, Hell, Armageddon, and demons, to provide context for ideas about gun ownership and the development of attitudes toward gun policy. While this has been explored quantitatively using national survey data, we argue that an in-depth qualitative approach provides necessary nuance. As part of an ongoing ethnography in Northeastern Kansas, we conducted interviews with 55 women and 7 men who own and shoot guns. For this paper, we report on a religion module subsample that probes religiosity, spirituality, and gun ownership. Based on the rich contextual information from the interviews, we illuminate a package of beliefs that come together as an ethic, a set of moral principles guiding gun ownership for a subset of gun owners. We suggest the spirit of gun ownership is a bundle of duties that guide individual gun owners to stress the need to protect, be diligent, and defend. Moreover, belief in supernatural evil is bound up in policy attitudes that protect or expand gun rights.     

Suicide attempts with drugs]

A sample of 352 subjects, who had made a suicide attempt by ingesting pills examined in the aspects of age and sex, number and origin of used tablets and combination of pill ingestion with alcohol or other methods. Younger people under 20, took nearly exclusively tablets, which they accidentally found at home. Elder patients over 50, used nearly exclusively prescribed drugs. The typical patients attitudes to this suicidal method gives us the right to speak about such suicide attempts as "attempts by tablets". The pharmacological substance is unimportant and plays a secondary role. The seriousness of suicide attempts depends on topical situation of person, biological and social factors; it does'nt dependent on number or pharmacological substance of tablets.     

An integrated approach to estimating suicide risk

It is ironic that if we had a perfect predictive instrument we would not be able to recognize it because it could never be validated by its critical outcome criterion. Though some exceptions could occur, we would be obliged to take all available measures to prevent a suicidal outcome in cases where suicide was predicted. After the crisis we could have no way of knowing with certainty whether the person would have suicided or not. Even if we accepted the reality that people are not either 0% or 100% likely to suicide, and developed a perfect scale to estimate degree of risk, we would still be unable to validate it in individual cases. If it indicated "moderate" risk of 2.5-5.0%, for example, and no intervention were offered, we would have to observe one suicide in every 20-40 persons assessed at this level of risk to demonstrate its validity. The key to assessment is obtaining information, primarily regarding present or anticipated pain and the threshold of pain tolerance in the individual involved. Since different persons communicate in a variety of ways--verbal, nonverbal, symbolic, metaphoric, etc., eclecticism in approach is essential. For some clinicians communication will be facilitated most by one style; for others, a different method would be most effective. Thus, the "best" approach is the one that works best given the unique characteristics of the persons involved and under the conditions existing at the time. My own bias is that every assessment, whatever the approach, must include some form of direct inquiry regarding suicidal intent, and that the final decision in this regard must be a subjective and intuitive judgment. Contrary to possible assumptions in the legal world, accurate assessment does not necessarily mean safety. It can serve as a guide to the degree of risk that may be involved in a treatment program, but even low risk management measures may have an adverse outcome without implications of negligence or carelessness. There has been no mention here of biological markers of suicide, which are of much current interest but still in an investigational stage. Similarly, rational suicide has not been mentioned, though our aging population and the status of AIDS are making this issue progressively more important. The principles involved in assessment of risk are the same as with other forms of suicide, however. Finally, we can only presume that more precise assessment will operate to reduce suicidal deaths.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)     

Influence of Gun Ownership on Social Inferences About Women and Men1

In the past gun ownership was primarily a male-only phenomenon. There has been, however, an increase among American women in gun purchasing largely for purposes of self-defense. In the first study we examined the consequences of women and men owning handguns, versus not doing so, for social perception. Given that gun ownership is stereotype inconsistent for women but not for men, such a violation of expectancies was expected to have a greater impact on inferences about women than men. Subjects believed that women who owned handguns would possess masculine physical characteristics, although they were not perceived as losing feminine body attributes per se. Women who owned guns tended to be perceived as less likely to occupy female stereotypic social roles, while men who owned a weapon were perceived as more likely to do so. Men who owned a handgun were perceived as less likely to possess socially desirable male stereotypic traits, although women with a handgun gained in this respect. In the second study where a community sample was employed, the main pattern of outcomes was replicated. Affective reactions toward male and female gun owners were similar, and less positive than for persons who do not own guns. Individuals with both positive and negative attitudes toward guns displayed the same pattern of inferences based on gun ownership and target gender. These results are discussed in terms of their implications for social judgment and stereotype use.     

A three-factor scale of attitudes toward guns

Guns figure prominently in American culture. There is, however, considerable variability in attitudes toward guns. The beliefs and feelings that comprise attitudes toward guns may well be important moderators of numerous social behaviors. For this reason, a three-dimensional attitudes scale was constructed. The first factor consists of an abstract set of beliefs concerning the right of the American public to own or not own guns. The second and third factors tap more concrete beliefs about the consequences of gun ownership. Specifically, the second factor assesses the degree to which people believe gun ownership affords protection against crime. The third factor measures the degree to which people believe guns stimulate crime. Discriminant validity of the subscales is shown by the pattern of correlations obtained with the three dimensions and various other social and personality measures. Regression analyses indicate that the subscales are uniquely predicted by different social variables. Discussion centers on the usefulness of such a measure for future research on aggression, social policy, and attitude change.     

Gun Violence Restraining Orders: Alternative or Adjunct to Mental Health-Based Restrictions on Firearms?

The gun violence restraining order (GVRO) is a new tool for preventing gun violence. Unlike traditional approaches to prohibiting gun purchase and possession, which rely on a high threshold (adjudication by criminal justice or mental health systems) before intervening, the GVRO allows family members and intimate partners who observe a relative's dangerous behavior and believe it may be a precursor to violence to request a GVRO through the civil justice system. Once issued by the court, a GVRO authorizes law enforcement to remove any guns in the respondent's possession and prohibits the respondent from purchasing new guns. In September 2014, California's governor signed AB1014 into law, making California the first U.S. state to enact a GVRO law. This article describes the GVRO and the rationale behind the concept, considers case examples to assess the potential impact of the GVRO as a strategy for preventing gun violence, and reviews the content of the California law. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.