Gun Control and Violent Crime
Jeffrey Wendt
Lewis-Clark State College
Gun Control and Violent Crime
JS 499
Spring 2014
1
Gun Control and Violent Crime
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.
2
Gun Control and Violent Crime
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
3
Gun Control and Violent Crime
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-tocarry laws to actually deter violent crime (Hood & Neeley, March 2009, p. 85).
4
Gun Control and Violent Crime
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
5
Gun Control and Violent Crime
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).
6
Gun Control and Violent Crime
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,
7
Gun Control and Violent Crime
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, lawabiding 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
8
Gun Control and Violent Crime
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 twentyone 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,
9
Gun Control and Violent Crime
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,
10
Gun Control and Violent Crime
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
11
Gun Control and Violent Crime
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
12
Gun Control and Violent Crime
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.
13
Gun Control and Violent Crime
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
14
Gun Control and Violent Crime
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
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
Total violent crime
(per 100,000)
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.
15
Gun Control and Violent Crime
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
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Arizona
Colorado
Idaho
29.6
33.3
33.0
33.7
39.7
37.1
33.8
34.6
34.2
38.6
34.7
45.9
42.1
42.3
43.4
45.4
42.7
43.5
45.2
44.2
44.7
40.7
37.0
39.1
42.6
40.4
41.7
40.5
38.0
37.2
33.9
28.0
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.
Arizona
Colorado
Idaho
Murder
68.63%
56.5%
54.9%
Robbery
47.75%
38.9%
34.13%
Aggravated assault
26.25%
21%
16.13%
16
Gun Control and Violent Crime
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
Knives or cutting
instruments
Other weapons (clubs,
blunt objects, etc.)
Personal weapons
(hands, fists, feet, etc.)
Arizona
Colorado
Idaho
27%
21%
16%
17%
23%
17%
32%
27%
35%
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
17
Gun Control and Violent Crime
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
Percentage
protection?
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.
18
Gun Control and Violent Crime
How safe do you feel knowing that others may
Percentage
be carrying a firearm when out in public?
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
Percentage
law?
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.
19
Gun Control and Violent Crime
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
Percentage
crime
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.
20
Gun Control and Violent Crime
Ban of assault rifles
Ban of high capacity
magazines
Ammunition
restrictions
Firearms registration
Favor
Oppose
Unsure
28%
49%
23%
25%
48%
27%
18%
64%
18%
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
Percentage
campuses
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
21
Gun Control and Violent Crime
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.
22
Gun Control and Violent Crime
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.
23