Fig 5 - available via license: Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
Content may be subject to copyright.
Overall influence of state gun law provisions on firearm homicide mortality in the (a) total gun laws, (b) buyer regulation group, (c) dealer regulation group, (d) domestic violence regulation group, (e) gun types, components, and trafficking regulation group, and (f) possession, access, and carrying regulation group.
Source publication
Objectives
Gun violence is a pressing concern in the United States, where many laws targeting gun violence vary across states and localities. Studies have investigated the association between gun laws and gun violence, but not many focus on the role of time, which is critical for implementation. This study aims to determine the lagged association o...
Contexts in source publication
Context 1
... the overall influence of gun law provisions on firearm homicide, Fig. 5a shows that, when a state had a total of 97 gun law provisions in place, the RR reduced to the lowest level by 0.30 (95% CI ¼ 0.22, 0.42). In the buyer regulation group, the RR was significantly declined as low as 0.21 (95% CI ¼ 0.13, 0.35) with 23 gun law provisions in place, refer Fig. 5b. However, more gun laws in the dealer ...
Context 2
... influence of gun law provisions on firearm homicide, Fig. 5a shows that, when a state had a total of 97 gun law provisions in place, the RR reduced to the lowest level by 0.30 (95% CI ¼ 0.22, 0.42). In the buyer regulation group, the RR was significantly declined as low as 0.21 (95% CI ¼ 0.13, 0.35) with 23 gun law provisions in place, refer Fig. 5b. However, more gun laws in the dealer regulation group did not necessarily demonstrate a reduced RR, where the overall effect of the dealer regulation group had a significant RR less than 1 only up to 18 gun law provisions (RR ¼ 0.58; 95% CI ¼ 0.74, 0.95). The domestic violence group needed to accumulate at least 6 gun law provisions ...
Context 3
... demonstrate a reduced RR, where the overall effect of the dealer regulation group had a significant RR less than 1 only up to 18 gun law provisions (RR ¼ 0.58; 95% CI ¼ 0.74, 0.95). The domestic violence group needed to accumulate at least 6 gun law provisions to reduce RR significantly less than 1 (RR ¼ 0.92; 95% CI ¼ 0.85, 0.99), refer Fig. 5d. In the gun types, components, and trafficking regulation group, Fig. 5e shows that the significant negative association between gun laws and firearm homicide mortality did not appear until 15 related gun law provisions were in place (RR ¼ 0.64; 95% CI ¼ 0.49, 0.84). Lastly, a state should have at least 21 gun law provisions related to ...
Context 4
... regulation group had a significant RR less than 1 only up to 18 gun law provisions (RR ¼ 0.58; 95% CI ¼ 0.74, 0.95). The domestic violence group needed to accumulate at least 6 gun law provisions to reduce RR significantly less than 1 (RR ¼ 0.92; 95% CI ¼ 0.85, 0.99), refer Fig. 5d. In the gun types, components, and trafficking regulation group, Fig. 5e shows that the significant negative association between gun laws and firearm homicide mortality did not appear until 15 related gun law provisions were in place (RR ¼ 0.64; 95% CI ¼ 0.49, 0.84). Lastly, a state should have at least 21 gun law provisions related to the possession, access, and carrying group to significantly reduce the ...
Context 5
... between gun laws and firearm homicide mortality did not appear until 15 related gun law provisions were in place (RR ¼ 0.64; 95% CI ¼ 0.49, 0.84). Lastly, a state should have at least 21 gun law provisions related to the possession, access, and carrying group to significantly reduce the RR of firearm homicide mortality less than 1, refer Fig. ...
Similar publications
Background: In longitudinal studies, observations are made over time. Hence, the single observations at each time point are dependent, making them a repeated measurement. In this work, we explore a different, counterintuitive setting: At each developmental time point, a lethal observation is performed on the pregnant or nursing mother. Therefore, t...
Citations
... Because the research samples in the control group varied annually, the DID fixed-effects model is unsuitable. We built the empirical DID model in this part based on model 1 as follows: (4) Sometimes the policy impact has a time-lag effect [52,53]. To estimate the time-lag effect, we added the time-lag variables into model 4 and obtained a time-lag effect difference-in-difference model as follows: ...
To promote the harmonious human-land relationships and increased urban-rural interaction, rural collective-owned commercial construction land (RCOCCL) marketization reform in some pilot areas was a new attempt by the Chinese Central Government in 2015. In this areas, a novel interest distribution system was established with the land right adjustment and the corresponding local governments were likely to benefit through taxation and land appreciation adjustment fund. This study proposed the hypothesis that the RCOCCL marketization reform would improve local government revenue, and explored the actual effect based on panel census data of county-level administrative units from 2010 to 2018. We applied the difference-in-difference (DID) method to analyze the causal effect of this reform on fiscal revenue with 29 pilot areas selected as the treatment group and 1602 county-level units as the control group. The empirical results of the optimized DID robustness test models and the Heckman two-step method showed that the RCOCCL marketization reform does not have a significant impact because of lower land circulation efficiency, the transfer of land transaction costs, and the policy implementation deviations. Thus, weakening the administrative intervention of local governments in the RCOCCL marketization is essential to the land market development in China.
Despite well-studied associations of state firearm laws with lower state- and county-level firearm homicide, there is a shortage of studies investigating differences in the effects of distinct state firearm law categories on various cities within the same state using identical methods. We examined associations of 5 categories of state firearm laws—pertaining to buyers, dealers, domestic violence, gun type/trafficking, and possession—with city-level firearm homicide, and then tested differential associations by city characteristics. City-level panel data on firearm homicide cases of 78 major cities from 2010 to 2020 was assessed from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Vital Statistics System. We modeled log-transformed firearm homicide rates as a function of firearm law scores, city, state, and year fixed effects, along with time-varying city-level confounders. We considered effect measure modification by poverty, unemployment, vacant housing, and income inequality. A one z-score increase in state gun type/trafficking, possession, and dealer law scores was associated with 25% (95% confidence interval [CI]:−0.37,−0.1), 19% (95% CI:−0.29,−0.07), and 17% (95% CI:−0.28, −0.4) lower firearm homicide rates, respectively. Protective associations were less pronounced in cities with high unemployment and high housing vacancy, but more pronounced in cities with high income inequality. In large US cities, state-level gun type/trafficking, possession, and dealer laws were associated with lower firearm homicide rates, but buyers and domestic violence laws were not. State firearm laws may have differential effects on firearm homicides based on city characteristics, and city-wide policies to enhance socioeconomic drivers may add benefits of firearm laws.
Objectives
Although some existing indices quantified the mixture strength of state gun laws, methodological supports are still lacking. The study aimed to build a new state gun law strength (GLS) index, evaluate the contribution of all state gun laws to the new index, and assess the association between the new index and firearm homicide mortality.
Study design
This is a population-based ecological study.
Methods
We condensed 134 state gun laws into a mixture GLS index at the state level to quantify each state's overall GLS by using the weighted quantile sum regression in each year from 1999 to 2018. The weights of state gun laws in the GLS index revealed their influence on GLS. The model also estimated the association between the GLS index and state-level firearm homicide mortality.
Results
From 1999 to 2018, 15 of 134 (11.19%) state gun laws significantly contributed to the GLS index for firearm homicide every year, five of which related to the minimum age of possessing firearms. The most influential gun law was “no possession of handguns until age 21.” The GLS index was significantly and negatively associated with firearm homicide mortality; however, the association gradually diminished over time.
Conclusions
The GLS index has methodological support and can take different gun violence outcomes into account. Future research can adopt the GLS index to conduct additional gun violence research or apply the modeling approach to build new GLS indexes for other gun violence outcomes.
Gun violence is a socially relevant topic and debatable public policy matter. This paper relies on behavioral science tools to contribute data-driven guidance for reviewing gun violence policies. The present study adopted a time-series design to measure state-level behavioral changes from 1994–2003 on firearm homicide and suicide rates pre-, during, and post-enforcement of the federal regulation (i.e., The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act). The Brady Act, which took place from 1994–1998, enforced background checks and gun purchasing waiting periods for states that did not already have such in place. Luca et al. (2017) concluded through statistical analyses that gun purchasing waiting periods reduce gun homicides; however, Ludwig and Cook (2000) suggested that this was not the case. The present study explored visual analysis within a time-series design on a state-by-state basis and found that this type of analysis led to different conclusions than those found by Luca et al. (2017) and Ludwig and Cook (2000). The results indicate that differences in each state are possibly due to state regulations and socio-political variables, making the impact of the Brady Act challenging to analyze. Future research investigating effective firearm policies should consider employing repeated time-series designs and visual analysis to expand on trends that depend upon the policy's length.
