Factors Associated with State Variations in Homicide, Suicide, and Unintentional Firearm Deaths
ABSTRACT This study examined the relationship of 16 variables with homicide, suicide, and unintentional firearm deaths. This cross-sectional analysis, using adjusted partial correlation coefficients, found that state-level firearm homicide rates significantly varied by the prevalence of firearms and by percent of the population which was African American. Whereas, state-level variations in firearm suicide mortality significantly varied by firearm prevalence, per capita alcohol consumption, percent of the population which was African American, and level of urbanization. None of the variables were significantly (p < or = .05) related to state-level variations in unintentional firearm mortality. Furthermore, state gun laws had only a limited effect on firearm-related homicide deaths. Although the current study cannot determine causation, firearm mortality in its various forms is most commonly related to the prevalence of firearms and the percent of the population that is African American.
- SourceAvailable from: Antonio R Andres
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "However, one study has a weak design, while the other does not capture the most relevant types of firearms regulations. Price et al.  use cross-sectional state data for 1999 to perform a simple partial correlation analysis between several types of gun control laws and suicide rates. Their results suggest that gun control laws were not significantly related to suicide in 1999, even after controlling for firearm prevalence. "
ABSTRACT: To empirically assess the impact of firearm regulation on male suicides. A negative binomial regression model was applied by using a panel of state level data for the years 1995-2004. The model was used to identify the association between several firearm regulations and male suicide rates. Our empirical analysis suggest that firearms regulations which function to reduce overall gun availability have a significant deterrent effect on male suicide, while regulations that seek to prohibit high risk individuals from owning firearms have a lesser effect. Restricting access to lethal means has been identified as an effective approach to suicide prevention, and firearms regulations are one way to reduce gun availability. The analysis suggests that gun control measures such as permit and licensing requirements have a negative effect on suicide rates among males. Since there is considerable heterogeneity among states with regard to gun control, these results suggest that there are opportunities for many states to reduce suicide by expanding their firearms regulations.Health Policy 10/2010; 101(1):95-103. DOI:10.1016/j.healthpol.2010.10.005 · 1.73 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "However, one study has a weak design, while the other does not capture the most relevant types of firearms regulations. Price et al. (2004) use cross-sectional state data for 1999 to perform a simple partial correlation analysis between several types of gun control laws and suicide rates. Their results suggest that gun control laws were not significantly related to suicide in 1999, even after controlling for firearm prevalence. "
ABSTRACT: A vast and often confusing economics literature relates competition to investment in innovation. Following Joseph Schumpeter, one view is that monopoly and large scale promote investment in research and development by allowing a firm to capture a larger fraction of its benefits and by providing a more stable platform for a firm to invest in R&D. Others argue that competition promotes innovation by increasing the cost to a firm that fails to innovate. This lecture surveys the literature at a level that is appropriate for an advanced undergraduate or graduate class and attempts to identify primary determinants of investment in R&D. Key issues are the extent of competition in product markets and in R&D, the degree of protection from imitators, and the dynamics of R&D competition. Competition in the product market using existing technologies increases the incentive to invest in R&D for inventions that are protected from imitators (e.g., by strong patent rights). Competition in R&D can speed the arrival of innovations. Without exclusive rights to an innovation, competition in the product market can reduce incentives to invest in R&D by reducing each innovator's payoff. There are many complications. Under some circumstances, a firm with market power has an incentive and ability to preempt rivals, and the dynamics of innovation competition can make it unprofitable for others to catch up to a firm that is ahead in an innovation race.