Curbing Gun Violence
America is awash in guns. The U.S. accounts for 4.4% of the world’s population and 42% of the world’s guns. It’s therefore not surprising that America has a serious problem with gun violence. According to the CDC, in 2020 the number of gun deaths in the U.S. was 45,222 which equates to 120.5 deaths per 1,000 residents. That’s more than twice the corresponding number of per capita gun deaths in Saudi Arabia (the country with the second highest per capita rate) and roughly five times the per capita death rate from gun violence in other developed nations.
This does not even take into consideration the roughly 85,000 Americans who annually suffer non-fatal gun wounds. Individuals wounded by gun fire generally require medical and rehabilitative treatment and suffer the loss of productive activity during the period of their recuperation and over the balance of their lifetimes. Many turn to alcohol and addictive drugs and 28% develop PTSD. A 2019 Congressional study found that that gun violence annually costs our nation’s approximately $280 billion (or roughly 1.2% of our GDP). Such costs only include lost income and healthcare costs sustained by the victims, additional costs incurred by their employers and expenses incurred in processing criminal charges.
They do not include the psychological damage inflicted on otherwise uninjured individuals (particularly young children) who are witnesses to wanton gun violence. These individuals may continue to incur medical costs and reduced productivity for many years. Also, our high level of gun violence annually causes our government and business enterprises to expend billions of dollars every year just to secure their day-to-day operations. For example, the Transportation Security Administration alone spends roughly $7.5 billion annually screening airline passengers for guns. A third adverse consequence of private gun ownership can be found in the budgets of law enforcement agencies that not only have to purchase additional equipment and hire additional personnel to deal with the threat of armed criminals but also have to modify their practices because of the threat of encountering heavily armed criminals. For example, police now have to be trained in handling active shooter situations.
Other costs associated with individual ownership of firearms include the costs of crimes committed with such weapons, such as robberies, burglaries, kidnappings and hijackings. Even the threat of gun violence can cause individuals to act in an illegal or self-destructive manner. Just consider individuals who give false testimony in judicial proceedings out of fear for themselves or members of their family. Public officials similarly may violate their oaths of office in response to threats of bodily harm.
I am not advocating that private ownership of all firearms be outlawed although that would undoubtedly have a positive impact on our nation’s economy. Australia, New Zealand and the U.K have banned assault weapons following mass shootings in their countries which virtually eliminated such events in the years that followed. The recent mass shootings in this country are prompting Canada to go even further. Nevertheless, those living in rural areas occasionally have to deal with bears, wolves and mountain lions and need be able to protect themselves, their family members and their livestock. I also appreciate that hunting is a popular sport with few, if any, adverse effects. In addition, most states countenance gun ownership so that individuals can protect their home as well as themselves. This is necessary because of the costs of providing adequate police protection for those living outside municipalities is frequently economically unfeasible. Still, even this problem would be greatly diminished if there were far fewer guns in the hands of the public.
The simple fact is that the number and nature of guns owned by Americans has reached a level that is not warranted by recognized appropriate uses of firearms. It has been reported that in 2017 the number of guns held by private citizens living in the U.S. was over 393 million or roughly 1.4 guns for every man, woman and child. What is particularly troubling is that roughly 20 million of these weapons are assault rifles designed to kill scores of humans in a matter of seconds. Not only is there no acceptable reason for why non-law enforcement personnel should be allowed to own such weapons, they are regrettably becoming the weapon of choice for individuals who commit mass murder. This phenomenon was on display in the recent shooting of 19 fourth graders and their two teacher at the Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas.
Aside from banning all private ownership of firearms (which is politically unrealistic), no single solution can prevent the vast majority of our nation’s gun deaths. Therefore, before racing to prescribe how this disturbing situation should be addressed, it’s important to understand who are the perpetrators of gun violence and what leads them to their acts of violence. Of the 45,222 Americans who died of gunshot wounds in 2020, 24,292 (or 53.7%) committed suicide, 19,384 (or 42.9%) were homicide victims, 535 were victims of accidental shootings and 611 were killed by law enforcement officials in the line of duty. Because of the relative numerical insignificance of the latter two categories of killings, they are not addressed in this article.
An individual bent on ending his or her life will generally opt to pursue the most readily available and least painful way of achieving that goal. In 2020 there were 1.2 million suicide attempts. This does not mean that most suicide attempts employ firearms and it may surprise you to learn that in 2020 women were three times more likely than men to attempt suicide. In that year over 800,000 women attempted suicide while roughly only 300,000 men did. Women, however, seem to favor ingesting some form of poison and in 2020 such attempts ended in failure approximately 90% of the time. By contrast, firearms are the preferred means of committing suicide by men and the failure rate for firearm suicide attempts was only 8%. As a result, in 2020 82.5% of successful suicide victims used a firearm to end their lives. Of them approximately 36,500 (or 80%)were men and 9,350 (or 20%) were women. While the number of Americans who died in 2020 from drug overdoses greatly outnumber suicide deaths, only a small percentage of those deaths were characterized as suicides – as suicide is defined as “self-directed injurious behavior with intent to die.” A virtual treasure-trove of information regarding gun suicides can be found at https://www.thetrace.org/2016/09/10-essential-facts-guns-suicide/.
There is a strong correlation between gun deaths and gun ownership. Specifically, a very high rate of gun deaths (over 20 per 100,000 residents) occur in rural states like Alaska, Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, West Virginia and Arkansas. Not surprisingly these states also have the highest percentages of households with one or more guns (ranging from 57% to 65%). This supports the proposition that the ready availability of guns is a major factor in determining the method a person seeking to commit suicide will choose. It also suggests that suicide deaths can be reduced by reducing the number of households with guns.
Gun-rights advocates frequently argue that if guns were not available, those determined to end their own lives would simply pursue another means. That is undoubtedly true, however, other ways of committing suicide tend to be far less successful and only 10% of those who have made a failed suicide attempt are likely to try again. That’s because a suicide attempt is often a cry for help and help is usually made readily available in the wake of a suicide attempt.
In many cases suicide attempts are made shortly after the purchase of a firearm. Thus, some suicides can be avoided by drawing out the time period for obtaining a gun. This can be achieved by mandating a license for each gun, requiring background checks for gun purchasers or simply by instituting statutory waiting periods. For example, Hawaii prohibits the delivery of guns for two weeks after they have been purchased. This restriction is frequently credited with why Hawaii has the nation’s lowest suicide rate even though it has the 10th highest percentage of household gun ownership (45.1%). Conversely, when South Dakota repealed its two-day waiting period the suicide rate in that state rose by 7.6%.
Suicides are also a by-product of mental problems. Gun advocates are quick to argue that “gun bans don’t work” This assertion is belied by the experience of Australia, the U.K. and New Zealand whose restrictions on gun ownership in the wake of mass shootings greatly reduced gun violence. It is also in conflict with evidence in this country where states with strong gun laws enjoy lower rates of gun violence. Gun advocates also contend that mental problems, and not guns, are the principal cause of gun deaths. That is certainly the case with suicide deaths. This means that one way to reduce suicide deaths involving firearms is to enact “Red Flag” laws which empower law enforcement personnel and family members to seek court orders precluding troubled individuals from obtaining access to firearms. Currently only 19 states have enacted such statutes. Florida and Indiana are the only “red states” in this group. Unfortunately, it is the “red states” that have the highest per capita rates of gun ownership and suicide.
The vast majority (79%) of homicides (as opposed to suicides) are effected with guns and hand guns were used in 62% of gun homicides. Reducing them presents a very different set of issues because the circumstances in which such incidents take place vary widely. They arise out of household disputes, disputes outside the household, armed robberies and burglaries, armed clashes between street gangs, mass shootings in schools and mass shootings in commercial establishments and other public spaces. Each of these situations involves different actors and victims, different weapons and different motivations with the result that each must be treated as a separate problem.
Gun homicides have become everyday occurrences all around the country with a preponderance of them taking place in urban settings. Black males are disproportionately the victims of such shootings. In 2020 black males represented 52% of all gun homicide victims even though they only represent 7% of the population. White men represent the largest percentage of shooters in all U.S. homicide cases although many black victims are killed by black gunmen.
Although mass shootings tend to capture the most public attention, they lead to a relatively small portion of our nation’s annual gun homicides victims. Between August 1966 (when the Texas Tower Sniper killed 14 people) and May 2021 there were 189 mass shootings recorded in the U.S. resulting in 1,322 deaths. More specifically, the average number of people killed in each mass shooting was 13. This seemingly low number is partly because mass shootings are defined as “four or more gun-inflicted deaths or injuries.” Also somewhat surprising is that 61% of mass shootings occur in private homes and not public spaces. While mass shootings involve relatively few deaths, they do, however, involve a very large number of gun injuries (roughly 73,000 annually). They also precipitate a high level of social anxiety leaving many to be fearful of attending certain public gatherings. Sadly the number of mass shootings is on the rise with 417 in 2019, 611 in 2020 and 693 in 2021.
Virtually all (96%) mass shooting were perpetrated by males (53.9% of whom were white) whose average age was 33. There is also a misconception that assault rifles are the most commonly used firearms in mass shootings. While hand guns were used in 68% of the mass shootings resulting in four or more deaths or injuries, assault rifles were involved in 68% of all U.S. mass shootings resulting in six or more deaths.
The most frightening aspect of mass shootings is that increasingly they have been taking place in the nation’s schools, leaving surviving students traumatized and a large number of parents of school-age children fearful of sending their children to school. On average, 12 children die and 32 more are wounded from gun violence every day. Today, gunshot wounds have become the most frequent cause of death of children between the age of 1 and 19. While school systems all around the country have hired security guards, installed metal detectors and have trained students how to respond when a shooter enters their school, these measures have had no noticeable impact in reducing the deaths of school children and school employees. Quite the contrary, school shootings seem to be happening at an accelerating rate. The number of school shootings in this year alone now total 38 with the recent event in Uvalde, Texas being only the 27th. Since the tragedy that took place and the Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012, there have been 948 school shootings .
School shootings have a number of common characteristics. They tend to be perpetrated by males with an average age of 18. In addition, virtually all of the attackers have a prior connection with the school and have previously made known their intention to carry out their assault. Most of the perpetrators harbor animus against the school or its students. They are frequently the victims of bullying or discrimination and their actions tend to be motivated by revenge. Indeed, 93% of school mass shootings are planned in advance and four out of five of the attackers have previously made their intentions known to others. Most school shooters have also studied prior school shootings and try to emulate them. This explains why those who perpetrate these assaults are increasingly using assault weapons or other automatic firearms. While most of these school shootings are carried out by a lone gunmen, a few (such as the massacre that took place in Columbine in 1999) were perpetrated by more than one assailant.
Although it seems apparent that the police officers standing outside the Root Elementary School while the attack was on-going failed to properly perform their duties, their reticence to enter the school was nevertheless understandable. Assault rifles like the one the used by the perpetrator are far more lethal than the pistols carried by police officers and security guards. That’s because they fire faster and their bullets are bigger, travel faster and do far more damage to a human body. This explains why some of the children who died in that shooting could only be identified with DNA evidence.
Gun advocates have been reluctant to acknowledge that these disturbing incidents can be curtained by placing restrictions on gun ownership. They offer their “thoughts and prayers” and excuses why proposed actions will not help to end this scourge. They often insist that “gun bans don’t work” and that school shootings can be avoided by increasing school security personnel or arming school teachers, insisting that “a good guy with a gun can stop a bad guy with a gun.” The recent mass shootings in Buffalo and Uvalde, however, have debunked this contention as the security guard at the Buffalo supermarket was killed when his weapon was unable to penetrate the body armor being worn by the assailant. As noted above, the police contingent called to the Robb Elementary School in Uvalde appeared unwilling to go against a shooter armed with an assault weapon. One Republican House member even attributed the rise in gun violence to the rise in abortions, a claim also not supported by the facts.
Polling data reveal that there is widespread support for taking legislative action to curtail gun violence. Almost 90% of Americans favor preventing mentally ill individuals from purchasing a gun. A recent Politico report revealed that 88% of voters (including 77% of gun owners) support background checks on all gun sales. Similarly, 84% believe that persons who have been reported to the police as dangerous should be barred from possessing or acquiring a firearm and 70% want police to be able to request “red flag” intervention. The poll also revealed that 77% support requiring gun owners to maintain safe storage for their firearms. Banning assault weapons is supported by 67% of Americans.
Even though gun deaths are one of the largest cause of deaths in the U.S. and the annual number of gun homicides (roughly 19,500) is more than six times the number of Americans who died on 9/11, the Congress has taken no action in the past 25 years to curb this annual carnage. Much to the contrary, it has routinely attached the Dickey Amendment. That amendment precludes the use of federal funds to study gun violence. In addition, the U.S. Supreme Court has been quick to strike state laws that impose restrictions on gun ownership. This is nothing short of a national disgrace and it’s largely the result of actions taken by the Republican Party which has appointed a majority of Supreme Court justices and politicized the Court.
Inaction on the part of Congress can be attributed to the Senate’s filibuster rule and the refusal of Republican senators to support gun legislation. They take this action because gun owners constitute a significant portion of their voting base and, as members of a minority party, they desperately need the votes of all gun owners. This prompts them to also take steps to make gun ownership easy and subject to few restrictions. For example, there are now 25 states (all controlled by Republicans) that have eliminated the need for a permit to own or openly carry a firearm. To assure gun-owners support, they also regularly warn that Democrats want to “take away [your] guns.”
Republican politicians have also constructed a symbiotic relationship with gun and munition’s manufacturers. They not only routinely block legislation restricting gun ownership, but they also encourage gun ownership by warning that Democrats want to limit other freedoms enjoyed by their constituents. As a further entreaty to gun manufacturers, they have sponsored legislation relieving gun manufacturers from civil liability for gun deaths (The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act) and prohibiting the U.S. government from expending money on gun violence research. In return, gun and munitions manufacturers and dealers funnel campaign contributions to Republican politicians through the National Rifle Association.
For this reason, any legislative action designed to curb gun deaths must be limited and carefully crafted lest Republican legislators feel it will jeopardize the support they enjoy from gun owners. In this connection, many Republican legislators fear that any anti-gun legislation which they might support will invite well-funded opposition in their next primary election. This is not a hypothetical fear as the NRA tends to hinge its support based upon how legislators vote on gun issues.
With that in mind, I make the following suggestions:
1. Jettison the Dickey Amendment and make funds available for the federal government to study gun violence so that specific and limited measures to reduce gun violence can be enacted.
2. Raise the legal age for owning a gun to 21. The evidence is clear that males between the ages of 18-20 are disproportionately prone to gun violence. I also suggest that any adolescent sooner faced with an irresistible urge to own a gun should give serious consideration to enlisting in the U.S. Army.
3. Because guns are more likely to cause deaths than car accidents, require all gun owners to obtain a license for each of their firearms and outlaw the ownership and sale of ghost guns which are being increasingly used in gun violence.
4. Impose universal background checks to identify unfit gun owners. This coincides with the often stated Republican notion that mental health, and not guns, are the problem.
5. Impose a waiting period between the purchase and delivery of firearms. This will help reduce gun suicides while not preventing citizens from acquiring firearms. It will also drive gun sales away from unlicensed gun dealers and complement efforts to enforce gun registration requirements and background checks.
6. Impose a total ban on private ownership of assault weapons. It is frightening to think that the 20 million privately owned assault weapons is more than the aggregate number of our nation’s military and law enforcement personnel. More importantly, there is no legitimate reason why a private citizen should even own a weapon of war. Even though a 2004 Department of Justice study found that continuing the then existing ban on assault weapons would have little impact, subsequent events have proven that study wrong. A generous buy-back program should be instituted to encourage compliance with this stricture and a harsh penalty should be imposed to assure compliance with it.
7. Gun owners should be required to place their firearms in secure places if they have children under 21 living in their households. This will keep guns out of the hands of young children who might discharge a weapon causing serious injury. It will also keep weapons out of the hands of unsupervised adolescents. Failing to comply with this common sense mandate should subject the gun owner to criminal and civil liability if one of his/her guns is used to injure someone by a person living in or regularly visiting the gun-owner’s household.
8. Pass “red flag” laws empowering law enforcement officials and parents to petition the courts for an order restraining an individual perceived to be mentally unstable from possessing a firearm. In addition, parents should be responsible for notifying law enforcement authorities if they have reason to believe one of their children under the age of 21 could pose a threat to themselves or others.
9. States should be barred from prohibiting municipal and county governments from outlawing the open-carry of firearms. The only reason to openly carry a firearm is to intimidate others. The need for such measures is best left in the hands of local governments where the possibility of intimidation is greatest. Decisions made at the state level too often are made to appease rural voters where the need for such restrictions is limited and voter resistance is higher.
10. Limit the application of “stand-your-ground” laws to circumstances in which the victim was known to be in possession of a deadly weapon as such laws as currently enacted tend to unduly encourage the use of firearms.
These measures will not eradicate gun violence but should have a measurable effect on reducing it without denying individuals without significant mental problems the right to acquire firearms needed for all legitimate purposes.