Gun Control and Violent Crime - Lewis-Clark State · Gun Control and Violent Crime 3 Gun control is...

Gun Control and Violent Crime

1

Jeffrey Wendt

Lewis-Clark State College


JS 499

Spring 2014


2

Abstract

This research examined the impact of gun control policy on violent crime. The study

took into account right-to-carry laws as well as citizens who believe it is the full responsibility of

law enforcement to protect individuals and society. The study looked at the question of whether

or not criminals are deterred from committing criminal acts due to right-to-carry laws and loose

gun control policy or do they have little or no deterrence effect. The research includes a records

review of crime rates and gun control policy in selected states in order to ascertain the effects of

the policy on violent crime rates. The study also included a survey of college students to

measure their knowledge and belief on gun control legislation. The findings indicated that the

states studied had very similar gun policies yet very different violent crime rates and other

variables may be more indicative of violent crime rates. The findings also concluded that a

majority of individuals believe they should be able to maintain the right to protect themselves.


3

Gun control is a huge political topic and it is often debated whether gun control policies

should be more lenient or more restrictive to best protect citizenry. Numerous studies have been

conducted in an attempt to settle longstanding debates concerning gun control and violent crime.

Researchers have argued that some states with right-to-carry laws have experienced higher rates

of homicide after the policy was enacted, while other states experienced a decline in homicide

rates. However, a majority of studies have concluded that robbery rates have not been affected

by right-to-carry policies (Valle, 2012, p. 585). Research from 2009 showed that in the United

States, 67% of murders were committed with a firearm (Hoskin, 2011, p. 125). It is very

difficult to determine the exact deterrence level that right-to-carry laws have on levels of violent

crime without biases.

Opponents of strict gun control policy often cite the idea that criminals will find illegal

ways to obtain firearms. A study by Vittes, Vernick, & Wenbster (2013), showed that out of the

inmates studied who were serving time for a crime involving a firearm, 96.1% of them obtained

a firearm through a venue that did not require a background check including family, friends, or

private sales (p. 26).

Gun control proponents assert that strict gun control policies lower violent crime in many

areas throughout the world. For example, England has banned handguns in attempt to lower

violent handgun crime. Some states in the U.S. do not allow individuals to carry concealed guns

in an attempt to lower the availability of guns. Research has indicated that as the availability of

guns increase there is also an increase in gun assault and gun robbery (Altheimer, Dec 2008, p.

19&20). A study showed that 38% of United States households have at least one firearm and

there are approximately 200 million guns in circulation in the United States compared to only


4

22% of households in Canada. These gun prevalence percentages are significant due to the fact

that the United States’ homicide rate is three times higher than Canada’s (Hoskin, 2011, p. 125).

Literature Review

Hood and Neeley (2009) surveyed concealed weapon permit holders in New Orleans and

compared them to non-permit holders in an attempt to analyze the factors associated with the

individuals obtaining a concealed weapon permit and carrying a concealed weapon (Hood &

Neeley, March 2009, p. 75). The findings of this research concluded that there was little

correlation between high neighborhood violent crime rates and a higher concentration of

concealed weapon permit holders (Hood & Neeley, March 2009, p. 83). This research also

concluded that the individuals who were most likely to actually be victims of violent crime such

as women, minorities, and younger individuals were least likely to obtain a concealed weapon

permit. One of the major factors associated with individuals legally carrying a gun was related

to their personal experience as being the victim of a crime. The research indicated that the

majority permit holders in New Orleans were older, wealthier, white, and male which is the

group that is the least likely to have been previously victimized. After the conclusion of the

research the article stated that it appears that the distribution of permits in New Orleans is largely

based on individual preference rather than personal experience of violent crime. The authors

stated that due to the findings under this research concerning the fact that permit holders were

not based majorly in high crime areas then it raises questions concerning the ability of right-to-

carry laws to actually deter violent crime (Hood & Neeley, March 2009, p. 85).


5

Valle and Glover (2012) conducted a study of right-to-carry policies in fifty-seven

different cities in the United States in order to establish the effects that right-to-carry laws have

on homicide rates. Some of the states included in this research had “shall issue” laws in place

and others had “may issue” laws (Valle, 2012, p. 596). States with “shall issue” laws are states

that will issue a concealed weapons permit to anyone who meets the states minimum

requirements which are based on objective grounds, in order to obtain a permit and “may issue”

states are states that have the right to refuse an otherwise qualified applicant a permit on

subjective grounds (Valle, 2012, p. 586). Out of the fifty-seven cities in the study, fourteen had

“may issue” policies, twenty-four had “shall issue” policies, seven cities had transitioned from

“shall issue” to “may issue” during the study, and twelve cities had no right-to-carry laws during

the study (Valle, 2012, p. 587). These cities with the differing right-to-carry laws and their

homicide rates were compared in the study in order to determine if these laws increase, decrease,

or have no effect on homicide (Valle, 2012, p. 580).

Valle and Glover conclude through their research that “may issue” right-to-carry laws

consistently reduce homicide rates by approximately 20 to 30% and “shall issue” laws may

increase homicide rates by approximately the same percentages. They also found through their

research that right-to-carry laws reduced incidents of interpersonal lethal violence, only if the

issuing agents have the ability to exercise discretion beyond objective licensing criteria however

when issuing agents do not use discretion the effects appear to cause more deaths (Valle, 2012,

p. 597).

Rosengart et al (2004) researched five different state gun laws and their relation to

firearm mortality. The research looked at the following policies: 1) “shall issue” laws, 2) a

minimum age of 21 years to purchase a handgun, 3) a minimum age of 21 years for handgun


6

possession, 4) purchase restriction of one gun a month laws, and 5) junk gun laws that ban the

sale of cheaply constructed handguns. The study included all fifty states and the District of

Columbia and measured firearm homicides, all homicides, firearm suicides, and all suicides

(Rosengart, 2004, p. 77).

The study showed that the rate of firearm homicide was greater when a “shall issue” law

was present than when the law was not present. The study also concluded that no law was

associated with a statistically significant decrease in firearm homicide or suicide rates; however,

a law that banned junk guns was associated with a decrease in total suicide rates (Rosengart,

2004, p. 79). These findings could indicate that “shall issue” laws lean toward a greater gun

prevalence which in turn leads to higher homicide rates and a ban on junk guns could lead to less

accidental suicides as well as a cheap option for suicide attempts.

Altheimer (2008) randomly selected 45,913 individuals in thirty nine different developed

cities in the world for face-to-face interviews in order to develop statistics related to how many

guns are available within each different city and compare those with assault and robbery

victimization rates (Altheimer, Dec 2008, p. 15). Altheimer concluded that as the availability of

guns increase, the odds of gun robbery victimization also increase (Altheimer, Dec 2008, p. 19).

The article also concluded that an increase in the availability of guns increased the odds of being

victim of a gun assault (Altheimer, Dec 2008, p. 20).

Hoskin (2011) conducted a study in order to determine the relationship between violence

and gun availability. The research looked at 120 of the United States most populous counties

and gun ownership as they relate to three violent crimes: homicide, robbery, and aggravated

assault (Hoskin, 2011, p. 125).


7

Hoskin concluded that counties with higher household gun prevalence have higher

homicide and aggravated assault rates, but not higher robbery rates. The study found that higher

gun prevalence did not equate to a deterrence factor for violent crime (Hoskin, 2011, p. 133).

Hoskin found that population density, income inequality, unemployment, and alcoholism are

associated with higher homicide rates. Hoskin concluded that fewer whites, lower levels of

unemployment, and high rates of alcoholism are all associated with high rates of aggravated

assault (Hoskin, 2011, p. 132). After looking at the relationship between gun availability and

violent crime the research indicated no support for the “more guns less crime” thesis and if guns

were used to stop crime more than they are used to commit violent crime, then one would not

expect to find that high levels of gun ownership are associated with higher levels of homicide

and aggravated assault (Hoskin, 2011, p. 133).

Stell (2004) researched the purpose of strict gun control policy and how it relates to gun

scarcity. Stell advised that from the period of 1982-2001, 77,361,013 firearms were produced by

American gun manufacturers and out of those produced only 161,674 were exported; the rest

were sold in American society. With the amount of guns sold in America during this time and

along with the fact that thirty-four different states adopted right-to-carry policies within this time

frame, Stell suggested that if gun scarcity lowers violent crime, then violent death by firearms

should have been high during this period. The data during this period showed that death by

firearm in America remained around the 70% rate that has always remained steady (Stell, 2004,

p. 43).

Malcolm (2003) conducted a policy analysis concerning the gun restricting policies in

England and the affect those policies had on the crime rates. The author also looked at the

overall crime rates in the United States which has much less restrictive gun regulation policies,


8

including allowing citizens to carry concealed weapons to protect themselves (Malcolm, 2003, p.

177). The author advised that over the last eighty years England has adopted restrictive gun

control legislation until they eventually banned all handguns. The article stated that in 1997,

England had banned all handguns and from 1997 up to the date the article was written, handgun

crime has more than doubled. The author stated that in 2002 crimes with banned handguns had

increased by forty-six percent (Malcolm, 2003, p. 176). The author discussed that although

America’s rates of murder have been higher, England’s murder rates are now converging on the

United States murder rates. America’s murder rates have been decreasing over the last ten years

and England’s murder rates have been increasing (Malcolm, 2003, p. 177).

The author discussed the fact that England had enjoyed low violent crime rates before

and during the time in which they adopted strict gun control policy and that even though

proponents of gun control have often credited their gun control policy for low crime rates, the

rates were low to begin with (Malcolm, 2003, p. 178). The author stated that one of the issues

with the tight gun control policy in England is that they experience large amounts of gun crime

in which the guns used have been illegally obtained (Malcolm, 2003, p. 176). The author

discussed that there are large amounts of illegal guns and due to the gun control policies, law-

abiding citizens have little to no means of protecting themselves when faced with a perpetrator

possessing a gun (Malcolm, 2003, p. 185). The author advised that loosening gun restrictions

may not reduce violent crime, but it will afford the opportunity for citizens to be able to protect

themselves, their families, and their homes (Malcolm, 2003, p. 187).

Kasprzak (2013) conducted a study looking at the illegal possession of weapons in

Poland and the motives for the crime. He estimated that there are anywhere between 300,000

and 500,000 units of illegally possessed firearms and ammunition in the hands of individuals


9

within Poland (Kasprzak, 2013, p. 148). The study showed that in the cases of illegal possession

of firearms or ammunition investigated, the perpetrator was a male in the age group of twenty-

one to forty years of age and lived in large cities (Kasprzak, 2013, p. 151).

Kasprzak stated that possession of illegal weapons or ammunitions is not necessarily a

social threat however the crime can be a huge liability when they are used for the commission of

homicide or other violent crimes. The research discussed that the most common reasons for

individuals to illegally possess weapons were to commit another crime in which the weapon

would be a good tool to carry out the crime such as homicide, robbery, and assaults (Kasprzak,

2013, p. 152). Other reasons that perpetrators possess illegal weapons, which are not huge social

liability concerns, are for the purpose of poaching, and to collect, renovate, and sell the weapons

for profit (Kasprzak, 2013, p. 153). Poland maintains strict gun control policy allowing

individuals to possess certain firearms such as for hunting only if they obtain a license which

requires a valid purpose for obtaining the license (Kasprzak, 2013, p. 150&152).

Vittes, Vernick, and Webster (2004) conducted a survey of inmates in thirteen state

correctional facilities to ascertain if the inmate used a weapon during the crime for which they

were serving time for and how they acquired the firearm. The researchers also reviewed the

states’ different gun ownership restrictions including, minimum age requirement for gun

possession, previous felony convictions, previous domestic violence convictions, and previous

assault convictions (Vittes, Vernick, & Webster, 2013, p. 27).

The study concluded that 40% of the offenders were prohibited from possession of

firearms under current state or federal restriction, 31% of the offenders would not have been

disqualified from firearm possession based on prior convictions or a minimum age requirement,


10

and 28.9% were not prohibited from legal possession under their state’s current policy.

However, they would have been prohibited if their state had adopted more stringent restrictions

similar to those that other states have in place (Vittes, Vernick, & Webster, 2013, p. 29).

The research also noted that only 13.4% of the incarcerated offenders purchased the gun

they used in the crime through a gun store or a pawnshop in which the federal and state laws

require the store to abide by the laws in order to sell firearms. Ninety-six percent of inmates

acquired their firearm through illicit channels (Vittes, Vernick, & Webster, 2013, p. 29).

Chapman et al, (2006) discussed a research and policy analysis concerning Australia’s

1996 gun control policies in response to a mass shooting that left thirty-five people dead and

eighteen seriously wounded. In 1996 Australia adopted gun control policy that included banning

semi-automatic and pump-action shotguns and rifles from civilian possession in order to reduce

their availability for mass shootings. This policy caused over 700,000 guns to be destroyed from

a population of about 12 million adults along with restrictions of private gun sales, legal

registration of all firearms, prohibiting firearm possession for self-defense, and a limited legal

licenses for handguns (Chapman, 2006, p. 365).

Chapman concluded that in the eighteen years studied prior to 1996, Australia

experienced thirteen mass shootings which caused a total of 112 deaths and 52 other people

injured, and in the ten and a half years after the 1996 gun control policy no mass shootings have

occurred in Australia (Chapman, 2006, p. 366). The research also concluded that in eighteen

years prior to the gun control policy, there were 11,299 deaths from firearms, 8,850 firearm

suicides, and 1,672 firearm homicides and in seven years after the gun control policy there were,

2,328 deaths from firearms, 1,726 firearm suicides, and 389 firearm homicides (Chapman, 2006,


11

p. 367). The research showed that even though this policy appears to have a positive effect on

the overall rates of deaths from firearms the study did show a slight increase in accidental

firearm deaths. The research could not distinguish an explanation for the increase in accidental

firearm deaths however the rate only increased by 1.4 deaths per year (Chapman, 2006, p. 370).

A review of the literature revealed a positive correlation between strict gun control

policies, gun availability, and firearm deaths. Based on the findings, this study will examine

strict and lenient gun control policy in three different states and how those policies relate to the

violent crime rates in those different states.

Paradigm

The deviant elements in society will manipulate societal protections to advance their

criminal ambitions.

Theory

The majority of citizens will abide by laws meant to protect individuals while criminal

offenders will disregard laws, even those meant to protect them.

Hypothesis

Stringent gun and ammunition regulations will increase incidence of violent crime.

Method

Purpose

The purpose of this research is to compare areas with strict gun control legislation to

areas with lenient gun control policy. The comparison will incorporate the violent crime rates of


12

the different areas in order to understand the impact of gun control legislation on violent crime

rates. The research will attempt to conclude whether areas with strict gun control legislation has

higher or lower violent crime rates compared to the violent crime rates in the areas with lenient

gun control legislation.

Participants and Sampling Procedures

The research will look at three different states with varying levels of gun control and the

effects of those policies on the populations. The research will also include a survey of a sample

of college students. Participants will be a convenience sample due to time constraints and

limited resources. The unit of analysis would be the comparison groups in different states with

stricter gun and ammunition regulations compared to states with less restrictive regulations of

guns and ammunition, as well as the students completing the survey. The research will look at

the gun control policies compared to the violent crime rates for Arizona, Colorado, and Idaho.

The reason these states were chosen for the research is that Arizona has less restricting gun

control policies than Colorado with similar demographics. Idaho will be included in this

research for the purpose of gathering data for the local area.

Research Design

The type of research that would best explain this research proposal would be exploratory

and application. The reason that this research could be exploratory is that gun control has been a

huge topic of debate within the United States for a long time. There have been numerous

incidents such as mass shootings that have caused political debates arguing for stricter gun

control legislation or less strict gun and ammunition policy. This research will explore the issues


13

concerning gun control policy and the ongoing debate of these policies, as well as exploring

some Idaho residents’ knowledge and opinion of gun laws.

This research can also be considered an application type of research. The reason is that

there are policies in place in different states and countries tightening gun and ammunition

restrictions in an attempt to lower violent crime in those areas. This research will attempt to

evaluate these policies and to discuss whether areas with high violent crime rates should

implement stricter gun control policies or loosen such polices in order to make an attempt at

lowering violent crime.

Experimental Manipulations/Interventions/Instrumentation

One of the constructs identified in this proposal is violent crime. The variables to define

violent crime could be aggravated assault, robbery, rape, and murder. Another construct

identified is guns and ammunition. The variables that could be used to define the construct could

be handguns, hunting rifles, shotguns, and assault style rifles. All the variables used to define

violent crime could be considered interval-ratio variables. All these crime rates should be able to

be identified and compared in exact statistics therefore all could be able to be considered

interval-ratio. All the variables that explain the construct guns and ammunition could be

considered nominal. These variables cannot be ranked nor are they statistical measurements

therefore should be considered nominal.

Data Collection

The data collection method will largely be looking at social artifacts such as criminal

statistics for different areas as well as researching the gun control policies in place for those

particular areas.


14

Ethical Consideration

Refer to attached IRB

Bias

The research will only be centered on the policies of three different states. Arizona will

be included in the research due to the less restricting gun control policies in place. Colorado will

be included in the research due to its restricting gun control policies in place. Idaho will also be

included in order to obtain data for the purposed hypothesis for a more local area.

Assumptions

The research will need to assume that the criminal data obtained for violent crime will

have the same accuracy for the different areas studied.

Limitations

The limitations for this research will be that there is very limited time (one semester) in

which to collect data for this very broad topic. Also there are various other variables that can

affect violent crime rates besides gun control policies.

Findings

After reviewing the criminal statutes and codes for Arizona, Colorado, and Idaho it

became apparent that the gun policies for each of the states were extremely similar. All three

states will issue a concealed weapons license to any applicant who passes a federal background

check and has passed a weapons safety course. The violent crime data that was collected for this

research was from 2002 to 2012 and it was not until after 2012 that the gun control policies


15

drastically differed between these states. Colorado has very recently started to create stricter gun

control policies such as magazine restrictions and stricter background checks for firearm

purchases. Arizona has recently adopted much more lenient gun control policies which include

allowing concealed firearm carry without a concealed weapons permit. Arizona’s policy

concludes that if an individual is legally allowed to purchase a firearm then they are allowed to

carry a concealed weapon without a permit. Idaho maintains a middle ground stance in terms of

gun control policy, allowing concealed carry permits without any other restrictions.

Even though the policies for the three states were similar throughout the data collection

period the violent crime rates were very different. Arizona maintained higher violent crime

rates compared to Colorado and Idaho except for the crime of rape.

Arizona Colorado Idaho

Total violent crime (per 100,000)

428.9 308.9 207.9

Murder 5.5 3.1 1.8

Robbery 112.7 65.4 15.2

Aggravated assault 276.0 199.6 160.9

This table shows the total violent crime rates, as well as murder, robbery, and aggravated

assault for the three states studied. Arizona has the highest total violent crime along with the

highest rates of murder, robbery, and aggravated assault. The statistics for this data set are for

2012. The previous ten years showed similar crime patterns. Idaho maintained the lowest total

violent crime rate as well as murder, robbery, and aggravated assault out of the three states

studied.


16

Unlike the other violent crimes studied, for the crime of rape, Colorado maintained the

highest rates throughout the years studied. Even Idaho had higher rape rates than Arizona from

2002 to 2009. Due to the fact that the violent crime of rape was the only crime that Arizona did

not report the highest rates out of the three states in the study, a table showing rape comparison is

included below.

Rape Rate Arizona Colorado Idaho

2002 29.6 45.9 37.0

2003 33.3 42.1 39.1

2004 33.0 42.3 42.6

2005 33.7 43.4 40.4

2006 39.7 45.4 41.7

2007 37.1 42.7 40.5

2008 33.8 43.5 38.0

2009 34.6 45.2 37.2

2010 34.2 44.2 33.9

2011 38.6 44.7 28.0

2012 34.7 40.7 30.0

This research included an examination of violent crimes committed with firearms. The

UCR database does not keep track of weapon use for rape, so it is not included in this section.

The next table shows an eight year average from 2005 to 2012 percentages of violent crime

offenses committed with firearms.


Murder 68.63% 56.5% 54.9%

Robbery 47.75% 38.9% 34.13%

Aggravated assault 26.25% 21% 16.13%


17

Arizona has a murder with firearm rate that closely resembles the national average of 70% found

in previous research. Idaho and Colorado maintained a much lower murder with firearm rate

than the national average. This table also shows that for all three states, aggravated assault has a

very low percentage of firearm use (compared to murder and robbery) therefore other weapons

were used a majority of the time to accomplish the crime of aggravated assault. The table below

details other weapons that were used to commit this crime.


Firearms 27% 21% 16%

Knives or cutting

instruments

17% 23% 17%

Other weapons (clubs,

blunt objects, etc.)

32% 27% 35%

Personal weapons

(hands, fists, feet, etc.)

24% 29% 32%

Aggravated assault may have a lower firearms percentage due to the fact that it can be a more

spontaneous crime than murder or robbery, which often include planning.

The statistics have shown that Arizona has maintained the highest violent crime rates out

of the three states studied except for the crime of rape. Due to the fact that the three states had

similar gun policies during the years studied and yet Arizona has been the most violent of the

three states, other variables must be examined to determine why this state might be more violent.

Possible causes might include that Arizona contains a more condensed population with 56.3

persons per square mile compared to Idaho with just 19 persons per square mile. Arizona is a

border state and has population of individuals not accounted for in the census. Arizona has

drastically changing population from border towns with individuals that would never be counted


18

in the census therefore their population would be much higher than the statistics show. Arizona

also has a much more diverse population than the other two states. The 2012 United States

census bureau shows that Arizona’s population is 30.2% Hispanic or Latino compared to Idaho

with 11.6% of their population being Hispanic or Latino (Arizona QuickFacts from the U.S.

Census Bureau, 2014).

This study also included a survey of a random sample of 44 North Idaho College

students. The survey questions and results are represented in the tables below.

Own a firearm for personal protection? Percentage

Yes 43%

No 57%

How often do you carry a firearm for

protection?

Percentage

Majority of the time 4%

Some of the time 25%

None of the time 71%

The tables above show that a majority of participants do not own or carry a firearm for personal

protection. However, 64% of the participants in the study believed that they should intervene if

they witnessed a violent crime in progress and not just rely on the police to protect the victim.


19

How safe do you feel knowing that others may

be carrying a firearm when out in public?

Percentage

Much safer 25%

Slightly safer 28%

No safer 36%

Not safe at all I actually feel threatened 11%

Participants were fairly evenly split regarding their feelings of safety, knowing that others may

be carrying a concealed weapon when out in public. A very low percentage of the participants in

the study actually felt threatened by other citizens carrying a firearm.

What is Idaho’s current concealed weapon

law?

Percentage

Any resident can obtain a concealed weapon 5%

The correct answer 70%

Don’t know 25%

The survey question asked the participants if they knew what Idaho’s current concealed weapon

law is and 70% of the participants knew that Idaho’s policy states that any Idaho resident who

passes a background check and has achieved any firearms training can obtain a concealed

weapons permit.


20

Favor or oppose stricter gun control laws Percentage

Favor 37%

Oppose 44%

Unsure 19%

This table shows that the largest percentage of individuals who participated in the study opposed

the idea of stricter gun control laws. Based on their written explanations for their answer

choices, the general idea for those who opposed stricter gun control policies believed that

criminals will always be able to find ways to illegally obtain firearms, and stricter gun control

policies will just restrict the ability for law abiding citizens to defend themselves and others.

Strict gun control laws aid in reducing violent

crime

Percentage

Agree 14%

Disagree 72%

Unsure 14%

Out of the study participants, only 14% agreed with the statement that strict gun control laws aid

in reducing violent crime, this could indicate a stronger belief that lenient gun control laws aid in

reducing violent crime; because more people can legally obtain guns to protect themselves and

others.


21

Favor Oppose Unsure

Ban of assault rifles 28% 49% 23%

Ban of high capacity

magazines

25% 48% 27%

Ammunition

restrictions

18% 64% 18%

Firearms registration 41% 45% 14%

This table shows that a majority of participants opposed the idea of ammunition purchase

restrictions, and the largest percentage of study participants opposed the idea of a ban of assault

rifles and high capacity magazines. Participants were fairly evenly split on the idea of a law that

would require firearms registration with the government on a national registry list. This could be

due to the perception that a registry is less direct restriction on their individual decisions to own

firearms and ammunition.

Favor or oppose concealed firearms on college

campuses

Percentage

Favor 41%

Oppose 45%

Unsure 14%

Participants were fairly evenly split on the recent Idaho legislation allowing concealed firearms

on college campuses. An explanation for these results could be due to the fact that there was a

recent incident on campus before the survey was administered, where law enforcement had been

called to respond to an individual who had brought firearms on the campus. This incident would


22

have been in the minds of the survey participants and may have caused them to answer

differently than they would have if this incident had not happened so near to the date of the

survey.

A summary of the survey portion of the study indicated that a majority of individuals

believe that they should maintain the right to protect themselves. These findings indicate that

while gun policies are perceived as very important by citizens and legislators, other factors may

be more predictable of gun violence. For example, as previously stated, the differences could be

attributed to population density and racial diversity.

After considering the findings of this research it is apparent that the government and

citizens should maintain certain roles concerning gun control. The government should consider

safety issues when dealing with gun policies such as what was noted previously: Firearm

restrictions for previous felony convictions, domestic violence convictions, and minimum age

requirements. The government should also not restrict law abiding citizens’ right to protect

themselves and others. Citizens should take advantage of right-to-carry laws so that they can

protect themselves and others.

Due to the fact that the states had similar gun control policies for this research and it was

not until recently that the policies changed, further research will be needed years after these

policies have been implemented in order to determine if these different policies affected the

violent crime rates for each of the different states.


23

Works Cited Crime in the United States. (2012, December). Retrieved April 8, 2014, from FBI:

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s.

Results from state-level crime estimates database. (2012, March 29). Retrieved April 7, 2014, from

Uniform Crime Reporting Statistics:

http:///www.ucrdatatool.gov/Search/Crime/State/RunCrimeStatebyState

Arizona QuickFacts from the U.S. Census Bureau. (2014, March 27). Retrieved April 17, 2014, from U.S.

Department of Commerce: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/04000.html

Altheimer, I. (Dec 2008). Do Guns Matter? A multi-level Cross-National Examination of Gun Availability

on Assault and Robbery Victimization. Western Criminology Review Vol. 9 Issue 2, 9-32.

Chapman, S. S. (2006). Australia's 1996 gun law reforms: faster falls in firearm deaths, firearm suicides,

and a decade without mass shootings. Injury Prevention, 12(6), 365-372.

Hood, M. N. (2009). Citizen, defend thyself: an individual-level analysis of concealed weapon permit

holders. Criminal Justice Studies, 22(1), 73-89.

Hoskin, A. (2011). Household gun prevelence and rates of violent crime: A test of competing gun

theories. Criminal Justice Studies, 125-136.

Kasprzak, J. (2013). Scope of illegal Possession of Weapons in Poland and Character Study of a

Perpetrator of this Crime. Internal Security, 147-158.

Malcolm, J. L. (2003). Lessons of History: Firearms Regulation and the Reduction of Crime. Texas Review

of Law and Politics, 175-187.

Rosengart, M. C. (2004). An evaluation of state firearm regulations and suicied death rates. Injury

Prevention, 77-83.

Stell, L. K. (2004). The Production of Criminal Violence in America: Is Strict Gun Control the Solution.

Journal Of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 32(1), 38-46.

Valle, J. &. (2012). Revisiting Licensed Handgun Carrying: Personal Protection or Interpersonal Liability?

American Journal of Criminal Justice, 580-601.

Vittes, K. A., Vernick, J. S., & Webster, D. W. (2013). Legal Status and Source of Offenders' Firearms In

States With the Least Stringent Criteria for Gun Ownership. Injury Prevention 19.1, 26-31.

Gun Control and Violent Crime - Lewis-Clark State · Gun Control and Violent Crime 3 Gun control is...

Documents

Transcript of Gun Control and Violent Crime - Lewis-Clark State · Gun Control and Violent Crime 3 Gun control is...