GUN violence kills tens of thousands of people in the US each year. Yet the basic characteristics of this modern social disease have never been studied in a rigorous way, according to a damning report by the US National Academy of Sciences (NAS).
It found that key intervention policies such as gun ownership laws and strategies for firearms education are based on poorly gathered or incomplete data and badly designed trials. This means there are few established facts about the cause-and-effect relationship between guns and many types of violence, or the effectiveness of gun control or educational programmes intended to steer young people away from firearms. 鈥淲hile there is a large body of empirical research on firearms and violence, there is little consensus on even the basic facts about these important policy issues,鈥� the report says.
What is not in dispute is the impact of firearms on American society. The US has the highest rate of firearms-related homicide in the industrialised world. In 2002, almost 30,000 Americans died from firearms injuries 鈥� suicide, homicide and unintentional shootings combined 鈥� about double the number of people who died from AIDS. Guns are the 12th most common cause of death overall, and second only to road vehicles in deaths caused by injury.
Advertisement
Yet very little is known about America鈥檚 gun culture. 鈥淭hat鈥檚 troubling because the conclusions we draw from any data out there are very important,鈥� says report author Robert Johnson, a paediatrician at the University of Medicine and Dentistry in New Jersey. 鈥淚f we decide on a course of action, we better have the best possible evidence to back that up.鈥�
鈥淚n 2002, almost 30,000 Americans died from firearms injuries 鈥� almost double the number who died from AIDS鈥�
Concern about the state of firearms and violence research led the National Institute of Justice, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and three private foundations to ask the NAS to study the issue. In choosing the panel, the academy deliberately included a number of experts who, like Johnson, had no experience in firearms or violence research but were experienced in designing rigorous scientific studies.
One of the strongest concerns voiced by the panel is that we still do not know who owns guns and how they use them. Criminals are unlikely to tell researchers about the illegal weapons they own, and legitimate gun owners are often reluctant to divulge details about their firearm. Researchers have come to accept that surveys of gun ownership and use will have a low response rate.
鈥淭here has been no systematic effort to gather information on gun use, partly because the task is so daunting鈥�
This is where experience of other research areas can help, says Charles Wellford, a criminologist at the University of Maryland at College Park, who chaired the report panel. 鈥淚n studies of illegal drug use or sexual assault, we鈥檝e been able to dramatically improve response,鈥� he says. 鈥淭he key was to recognise the problem and ask what can be done to solve it.鈥� Borrowing the successful 鈥渂lind鈥� technique from clinical trials or otherwise safeguarding the identity of participants is a strategy that needs to be explored for gun ownership, he says.
Another problem is that data on firearm use is not gathered in a way that is useful to policy makers. For example, in places where gun ownership is common, the rate of gun-related suicide is known to be high. But the poor design of studies examining the issue has prevented them showing whether guns increase the overall risk of suicide or whether their absence would simply drive anyone intent on suicide to choose another method. Flawed studies tend to look at rates of gun ownership and suicide, rather than individual details of each death and whether guns were involved.
Overall, says the report, there has been no systematic effort to gather information on gun use, partly because the task is so daunting.
A similar lack of research is also apparent in countries such as the UK, where gun crime is climbing steadily. Gun-related offences almost doubled in England and Wales between 1998 and 2003, from 13,874 a year to 24,070. While these account for less than 0.2 per cent of all crime, the government is taking the problem seriously. 鈥淭here has been a rise over the years and that is unacceptable. We are doing everything we can to stop it,鈥� a spokesman for the UK鈥檚 Home Office says.
Earlier this year, the Home Office launched a public consultation exercise to help inform its policies on gun crime, but the ministry does not specifically seek feedback on the quality of research carried out. A report on the criminal use of firearms published in May by the Inspectorate of Constabulary identified shortcomings in data collection and intelligence.
鈥淪tatistical data on firearms incidents and gun crime is incomplete,鈥� it said. There were discrepancies in the way gun crimes were defined and recorded in different police forces, the report found. 鈥淭aken together, these all contribute to an uncertain overall picture.鈥�
Ultimately, the goal is not merely to understand the details of gun violence, but to understand how to control or prevent it. This is why the dialogue on guns in the US is usually dominated by issues of intervention, such as gun control legislation and education programmes. However, the report鈥檚 authors found that what few studies have been done didn鈥檛 determine whether either type of intervention cuts gun violence. And some experts worry that educating young people about the dangers of guns might actually enhance the allure of the weapons.
The effectiveness of many of these strategies needs to be tested in the most scientifically rigorous manner possible, with a randomised controlled trial, says Robert Boruch, a statistician and expert on trial design at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, and another of the report鈥檚 authors. 鈥淭he good news is that the interest in better-quality evidence is there at a national level,鈥� he says. 鈥淧eople are realising that without strong science, you are left with rhetoric, romance and assumption.鈥�
鈥淓xperts worry that educating young people about the dangers of guns might enhance the allure of the weapons鈥�
