Frozen Funding on Firearm Research: “Doing Nothing Is No Longer an Acceptable Solution”

Betz, Marian E.; Ranney, Megan L.; Wintemute, Garen J.

doi:10.5811/westjem.2016.1.29767

Cited by 13 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, healthcare providers have been limited in their ability to use this standard approach to firearm injury prevention because of lack of funding. 12 We can track the effect of funding restrictions on both the science and the burden of injury. In 1996, the Dickey Amendment was passed, stating "none of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) may be used to advocate or promote gun control."…”

Section: Firearm Injury Prevention Research: Gaps and Opportunitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Proceedings from the Medical Summit on Firearm Injury Prevention: A Public Health Approach to Reduce Death and Disability in the US

Bulger

Kuhls

Campbell

et al. 2019

Journal of the American College of Surgeons

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Firearm Injury Prevention Research: Gaps and Opportunitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Proceedings from the Medical Summit on Firearm Injury Prevention: A Public Health Approach to Reduce Death and Disability in the US

Bulger

Kuhls

Campbell

et al. 2019

Journal of the American College of Surgeons

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In understanding and preventing racial disparities in youth firearm violence and its effects, a key barrier to progress has been a lack of federal public health funding, both for programming and research. Public health research on firearm violence has been highly restricted at federal levels (Betz, Ranney, & Wintemute, 2016; Rajan et al, 2019), particularly as it relates to pediatric populations (Alcorn, 2017). However, a Congressional clarification that the federal government has authority to conduct research into the causes of firearm violence and allocate funds for this purpose have opened a window of opportunity for more systematic research on firearm violence (Rostron, 2018).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Annual Research Review: Youth firearm violence disparities in the United States and implications for prevention

Bottiani

Camacho

Johnson

et al. 2021

Child Psychology Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectiveResearch has identified the United States (U.S.) as a global outlier in its firearm ownership rates, with a correspondingly higher risk of youth firearm violence compared to other countries. The relative extent of disparities in youth firearm violence within the U.S. has been less clear. Little is known about factors in the social ecology driving these disparities and whether current firearm violence prevention approaches sufficiently address them.MethodApplying a health disparities framework, we synthesized epidemiological, sociological, and prevention science literatures, emphasizing structural inequalities in youth sociocultural positionality in life course developmental context. We also highlighted findings from national injury data and other studies regarding the magnitude and impacts of youth firearm violence disparities.ResultsThe burden of firearm violence varied markedly at intersections of gender, race, place, developmental stage, and homicidal or suicidal intent. Firearm homicide among Black boys and young men (ages 15‐24) was at outlier levels ‐ many times greater than the rates of any other demographic group, developmental stage, or violence intent, particularly in urban settings. Recent research has operationalized structural racism and implicated historically racialized spaces as a root cause of this disparity. In contrast, elevated firearm suicide rates were found among Native and White boys and young men in rural settings; firearm‐related cultural attitudes and gender socialization were points of consideration to explain these disparities. We highlighted research‐based youth firearm violence preventive interventions, and emphasized gaps in efforts focused on structural and sociocultural factors.ConclusionsMore explicit attention to reducing firearm homicide among Black boys and young men and firearm suicide among Native and rural White boys and young men is urgently needed and has potential to substantially lower overall rates of firearm violence in the U.S.

show abstract

“… 2 15 17 Although no single law is likely to have an overwhelming effect, continuing to assess and implement strategies that contribute to driving this rate down is a key principle for curbing this public health emergency. Even former Representative Jay Dickey, the author of the amendment banning gun violence research, has evolved to state that funding is needed and that “doing nothing is no longer an acceptable solution.” 6 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Unfortunately, there has been a paucity of high-quality research since the Dickey Amendment (1996), which prohibited the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) from using federal funds to advocate for or promote gun control. 5 6 This ban was lifted in 2013 after several mass shootings, 6 and there has been a steady increase in the number of investigations. Although studies have shown that states with the most restrictive gun laws have lower homicide rates 1 3 and suicide rates, 7–9 it is not clear if further restricting laws on gun possession, including open carry, have additional benefits.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Banning open carry of unloaded handguns decreases firearm-related fatalities and hospital utilization

Callcut

Robles

Mell³

2018

Trauma Surg Acute Care Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundSince 1967, in California it has been illegal to openly carry a loaded firearm in public except when engaged in hunting or law enforcement. However, beginning January 1, 2012, public open carry of unloaded handguns also became illegal. Fatal and non-fatal (NF) firearm injuries were examined before and after adoption of the 2012 ban to quantify the effect of the new law on public health.MethodsState-level data were obtained directly from California and nine other US state inpatient and emergency department (ED) discharge databases, and the Centers for Disease Control Web-Based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System. Case numbers of firearm fatalities, NF hospitalizations, NF ED visits, and state-level population estimates were extracted. Each incident was classified as unintentional, self-inflicted, or assault. Crude incidence rates were calculated. The strength of gun laws was quantified using the Brady grade. There were no changes to open carry in these nine states during the study. Using a difference-in-difference technique, the rate trends 3 years preban and postban were compared.ResultsThe 2012 open carry ban resulted in a significantly lower incident rate of both firearm-related fatalities and NF hospitalizations (p<0.001). The effect of the law remained significant when controlling for baseline state gun laws (p<0.001). Firearm incident rate drops in California were significant for male homicide (p=0.023), hospitalization for NF assault (p=0.021 male; p=0.025 female), and ED NF assault visits (p=0.04). No significant decreases were observed by sex for suicides or unintentional injury. Changing the law saved an estimated 337 lives (3.6% fewer deaths) and 1285 NF visits in California during the postban period.DiscussionOpen carry ban decreases fatalities and healthcare utilization even in a state with baseline strict gun laws. The most significant impact is from decreasing firearm-related fatal and NF assaults.Level of evidenceIII, epidemiology.

show abstract

Frozen Funding on Firearm Research: “Doing Nothing Is No Longer an Acceptable Solution”

Cited by 13 publications

References 11 publications

Proceedings from the Medical Summit on Firearm Injury Prevention: A Public Health Approach to Reduce Death and Disability in the US

Proceedings from the Medical Summit on Firearm Injury Prevention: A Public Health Approach to Reduce Death and Disability in the US

Annual Research Review: Youth firearm violence disparities in the United States and implications for prevention

Banning open carry of unloaded handguns decreases firearm-related fatalities and hospital utilization

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About