Gun-free zones and active shootings in the United States: a matched case-control study

IF 7 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Lancet Regional Health-Americas Pub Date : 2024-07-13 DOI:10.1016/j.lana.2024.100837
Paul M. Reeping , Christopher N. Morrison , Ariana N. Gobaud , Sonali Rajan , Douglas J. Wiebe , Charles C. Branas
{"title":"Gun-free zones and active shootings in the United States: a matched case-control study","authors":"Paul M. Reeping ,&nbsp;Christopher N. Morrison ,&nbsp;Ariana N. Gobaud ,&nbsp;Sonali Rajan ,&nbsp;Douglas J. Wiebe ,&nbsp;Charles C. Branas","doi":"10.1016/j.lana.2024.100837","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Most Americans believe that gun-free zones make locations more vulnerable to violent crimes, particularly active shootings. However, there is no empirical evidence regarding the impact of gun-free zones on protecting locations from violence. The objective of this study was to estimate the association between gun-free zones and active shootings.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We used a pair-matched case-control study where cases were all US establishments where active shootings occurred between 2014 and 2020, and controls were randomly selected US establishments where active shootings could have but did not occur, pair-matched by establishment type, year, and county. Gun-free status of included establishments was determined via local laws, company policy, news reporting, Google Maps and posted signage, and calling establishments.</p></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><p>Of 150 active shooting cases, 72 (48.0%) were determined to have occurred in a gun-free zone. Of 150 controls where no active shooting occurred, 92 (61.3%) were determined to be gun-free. After accounting for matched pairs, the conditional odds of an active shooting in gun-free establishments were 0.38 times those in non-gun-free establishments, with a 95% confidence interval of 0.19–0.73 (p-value = 0.0038). Several robustness analyses affirmed these findings.</p></div><div><h3>Interpretation</h3><p>It is unlikely that gun-free zones attract active shooters; gun-free zones may be protective against active shootings. This study challenges the proposition of repealing gun-free zones based on safety concerns.</p></div><div><h3>Funding</h3><p>This work was funded in part by the <span>National Collaborative on Gun Violence Research</span> and the <span>Arnold Foundation</span>.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":29783,"journal":{"name":"Lancet Regional Health-Americas","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":7.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667193X24001649/pdfft?md5=ba1b1cd67365cd29dd2fa132192e0206&pid=1-s2.0-S2667193X24001649-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lancet Regional Health-Americas","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2667193X24001649","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Most Americans believe that gun-free zones make locations more vulnerable to violent crimes, particularly active shootings. However, there is no empirical evidence regarding the impact of gun-free zones on protecting locations from violence. The objective of this study was to estimate the association between gun-free zones and active shootings.

Methods

We used a pair-matched case-control study where cases were all US establishments where active shootings occurred between 2014 and 2020, and controls were randomly selected US establishments where active shootings could have but did not occur, pair-matched by establishment type, year, and county. Gun-free status of included establishments was determined via local laws, company policy, news reporting, Google Maps and posted signage, and calling establishments.

Findings

Of 150 active shooting cases, 72 (48.0%) were determined to have occurred in a gun-free zone. Of 150 controls where no active shooting occurred, 92 (61.3%) were determined to be gun-free. After accounting for matched pairs, the conditional odds of an active shooting in gun-free establishments were 0.38 times those in non-gun-free establishments, with a 95% confidence interval of 0.19–0.73 (p-value = 0.0038). Several robustness analyses affirmed these findings.

Interpretation

It is unlikely that gun-free zones attract active shooters; gun-free zones may be protective against active shootings. This study challenges the proposition of repealing gun-free zones based on safety concerns.

Funding

This work was funded in part by the National Collaborative on Gun Violence Research and the Arnold Foundation.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
美国的无枪区和主动枪击事件:一项匹配的病例对照研究
背景大多数美国人认为,无枪区使一些地方更容易发生暴力犯罪,尤其是主动枪击事件。然而,关于无枪区对保护地点免受暴力侵害的影响,目前还没有实证证据。本研究的目的是估算无枪区与主动枪击事件之间的关联。方法我们采用了配对病例对照研究,病例是 2014 年至 2020 年期间发生主动枪击事件的所有美国机构,对照是随机选择的可能发生但未发生主动枪击事件的美国机构,并按机构类型、年份和郡进行配对。通过当地法律、公司政策、新闻报道、谷歌地图和张贴的标牌以及拨打电话等方式来确定所包含场所的无枪状态。在 150 个未发生主动枪击事件的对照区中,有 92 个(61.3%)被确定为无枪区。在考虑配对因素后,无枪场所发生主动枪击事件的条件几率是非无枪场所的 0.38 倍,95% 置信区间为 0.19-0.73 (P 值 = 0.0038)。几项稳健性分析证实了这些结果。释义无枪区不太可能吸引主动枪击者;无枪区可能对主动枪击事件具有保护作用。这项研究对基于安全考虑而废除无枪区的主张提出了质疑。资金支持这项工作部分由全国枪支暴力研究合作组织和阿诺德基金会资助。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Lancet Regional Health – Americas, an open-access journal, contributes to The Lancet's global initiative by focusing on health-care quality and access in the Americas. It aims to advance clinical practice and health policy in the region, promoting better health outcomes. The journal publishes high-quality original research advocating change or shedding light on clinical practice and health policy. It welcomes submissions on various regional health topics, including infectious diseases, non-communicable diseases, child and adolescent health, maternal and reproductive health, emergency care, health policy, and health equity.
期刊最新文献
HIVR4P conference 2024 Leticia de Oliveira — a voice against gender-biased research opportunities Brazil's tax exemption on ultra-processed foods: a public health setback Opportunities for tuberculosis elimination in the Canadian Arctic: cost-effectiveness of community-wide screening in a remote Arctic community Active shooters and gun-free zones: emotional versus legal motivations – author's reply
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1