Every mass shooting in America raises concerns about the need for better policies to prevent these tragedies. Scientists who study mass shootings say that there is evidence to suggest that certain types of laws can reduce the number of deaths. However, these policy options are not those usually discussed after such events.
Michael Anestis, executive Director of Rutgers University’s New Jersey Gun Violence Research Center, says that scientists only have a limited amount of research data. He says that mass shooting research is only a small part of gun violence research.
Anestis says mass shootings are less than 1% among the approximately 40,000 gun-related deaths in this country each year. They are horrific, they’re all too common, but it’s only the tip of the iceberg.
He says that gun violence research tends to be focused on suicide and other forms of violence. He adds that the entire field has been neglected for decades and is not well-funded.
Anestis says that although there is money, it is far below what it should be due to the economic and financial costs associated with gun violence. It’s simply disproportionally underfunded.
Nevertheless, there are some studies that have shown how to prevent mass shootings.
One such study made use of the fact that gun laws in the United States vary from one state to the next. Daniel Webster, codirector of the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions, says that while this is not ideal for public safety, it does offer researchers opportunities.
Recent data analysis by him and his colleagues on shootings in the U.S. with at least four victims was done. To determine the effects of gun laws, they compared different states. Webster admits that it is difficult and inexact science.
He says that despite these limitations, he believes that there were two policies that had significant protective effect in lowering the rate of mass shootings.
One required that gun buyers go through a licensing process. Webster states that a licensing process requires that someone apply directly to law enforcement and engage with them. Sometimes, there are safety training requirements.
Another way to decrease mass shooting deaths was to ban the purchase of large-capacity magazines and ammunition-feeding devices.
Webster says that this makes sense intuitively because the items allow shooters to fire multiple bullets at once without any interruption. Shooters can stop to reload and victims can escape or fight back if they do.
Another study on mass shootings shows that this type of law seems to have a protective impact. David Hemenway, the Harvard Injury Control Research Center director, collaborated with colleagues to study the effects of banning large-capacity magazines in mass shootings that have occurred over almost three decades in different states.
Hemenway says that states with bans had fewer mass shootings and that mass shootings that did occur were less deadly in terms the number of victims.
Webster says that many people argue for thorough background checks in the aftermath of mass shootings. Webster supports this policy, but says that his research does not show it to be associated with a decrease in the number of such deadly events.
He also said that a common refrain following a mass shooting is the call for policies to make it easier for people with guns to defend themselves. Webster says, “Well, guess, what? The data don’t bear that out at all.” It shows that civilian concealed carry regulations are weaker than the actual rates of mass shootings.
Hemenway says that school systems may try to address the threat of mass shootings with police officers present on-site or students participating in drills. However, Hemenway says that there is not enough research to support such an approach.
Webster says that keeping guns out of reach of young people would have a protective effect. This could be done through age restrictions on buying or safe storage of firearms at home. Webster cites data which shows that the peak age for violent offense with firearms is around 18-21.
He says that the ban on young people drinking alcohol was imposed because of the health risks to their health. The shooter in Uvalde was legally able to buy semiautomatic rifles after his 18th birthday.
Anestis suggests that it might be possible for younger adults to have more difficulty accessing weapons capable of causing a mass shooting. However, “does the government have large data-based resources” to assess these policies. We don’t.
A policy option that is emerging with some evidence backing it is for police officers to temporarily remove guns from those who appear to be in imminent danger. California’s two-year-old study looked at how the process was used. It found 21 instances where it was used in response to mass shooting threats aEUR,” many of which were schools.
Although it is impossible to determine if these guns prevented mass shootings from happening, researchers believe that this data is still valuable due to the lack of information and limited funding. A 2017 study found that guns kill about the same number of people as sepsis each year, which is a life-threatening reaction to infection. However, funding for gun violence research was only 0.7% of what it was for sepsis.
Hemenway says that there are so many areas to research in the gun industry, and that we have not had enough studies in 25 years. “We know very little once you scratch the surface of what is known.”
