Suicide Rates and State Laws Regulating Access and Exposure to Handguns

Abstract

Our results were supportive of a potentially vital role in suicide prevention for state legislation that limits access and exposure to handguns.

The Association Between Gun Ownership and Statewide Overall Suicide Rates

“…Although we certainly agree that mental illness is an important factor in suicide and that individual factors ranging from poverty to religious affiliation might have an important role in the development of suicidal desire in many individuals, our results indicate that such factors alone do not explain the association between guns and suicide. Our findings are thus highly consistent with the robust literature base supporting the utility of means safety in suicide prevention (Anestis & Anestis, ; Anestis et al., ; Kreitman, ; Oliver & Hetzel, ; Pirkis et al., ). Furthermore, our results provide a rebuttal to the notion of means substitution (Daigle, ), as gun ownership predicted overall state suicide rates, not simply firearm suicide rates.…”

“…We utilized the same statewide demographic variables reported in Anestis and Anestis (). These included the percentage of the state that was male, the percentage of the state that was White, the percentage of the state aged 25 years or higher that had obtained a college degree, the percentage of the state living beneath the poverty line, and the state population density.…”

“…Studies examining the association between firearms and suicide have also considered a wide array of covariates in an effort to address the possibility that one or more other variables better explain that relationship. For instance, in recent work reporting significant associations between specific gun laws and overall suicide rates (Anestis & Anestis, ; Anestis et al., ), the authors used population‐level demographic variables (sex, poverty) as covariates. These authors did not include other potentially relevant variables, such as psychopathology, religiosity, and prior suicidality, however, noting concerns that such variables are not tracked systematically at a population level.…”

Limiting access to lethal means: applying the social ecological model for firearm suicide prevention

“…Finally, any policies that generally reduce access to firearms by individuals who may be at risk for suicide are critical to prevent suicide. Such policies may include, but are not limited to, universal background checks including permit-to-purchase laws, 24 mandatory waiting periods 25 and policies to support or incentivise interventions at other levels of the model (such as a policy that provides funding to train healthcare providers on lethal means safety counselling). Enacting evidence-based firearms violence prevention policies is a societal-level intervention that will enable and support actions at subsequent levels of the SEM while contributing to a shift in cultural norms towards (1) acknowledgement of the role of firearms in suicide; (2) acceptance of reducing firearms access as a viable suicide prevention strategy; and (3) a decrease in the ubiquitous nature of firearms in American society.…”

Biting the bullet: Fixing America’s quiet epidemic of gun suicide

“…While the long-term impact of these campaigns cannot be measured yet, and their effectiveness hamstrung by their scale and jurisdictional boundaries, early reports appear positive. One preliminary study found that states that had introduced trigger locks experienced a lower firearm suicide and general suicide rate, although a direct causation remains to be proven (Anestis & Anestis, 2015). There is evidently a delicate balancing act between gun restriction and public safety initiatives, but these examples show that compromise and cooperation is possible.…”