simon
Member
By KRISTEN WYATT, Associated Press Writer
ATLANTA - A sweeping federal review of the nation's gun control laws
— including mandatory waiting periods and bans on certain weapons —
found no proof such measures reduce firearm violence.
The review, released Thursday, was
conducted by a task force of scientists
appointed by the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (news - web sites).
The CDC said the report suggests more
study is needed, not that gun laws don't
work. But the agency said it has no plans to
spend more money on firearms study.
Some conservatives have said that the CDC
should limit itself to studying diseases, and
some have complained in the past that the
agency has used firearms-tracking data to
subtly push gun control. In fact, since a 1996 fight in Congress, the CDC
has been prohibited from using funds to press for gun control laws.
Since then, the task force reviewed 51 published studies about the
effectiveness of eight types of gun-control laws. The laws included bans
on specific firearms or ammunition, measures barring felons from buying
guns, and mandatory waiting periods and firearm registration. None of
the studies were done by the federal government.
In every case, a CDC task force found "insufficient evidence to determine
effectiveness."
"I would not want to speculate on how different groups may interpret this
report," said Dr. Sue Binder, Director of CDC's Center for Injury
Prevention and Control. "It's simply a review of the literature."
Most of the studies were not funded by the CDC. Gun-control advocates
quickly called on the government to fund better research.
A spokesman for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence said the
laws work, but it is nearly impossible to prove it because people can buy
guns in one state and carry them into one of the handful of states with
strong antigun measures.
"It's hard to study whether gun control laws work in this country because
we have so few of them," said Peter Hamm. "Talking about studying gun
control in this country is like talking about studying democracy in Iraq
(news - web sites)."
The National Rifle Association said it needed more time to review the
report before commenting on it.
Firearms injuries were the second leading cause of injury deaths, killing
28,663 people in 2000, the most recent year for which data was
available. About 58 percent of the deaths were suicides. Gun accidents
claimed about 775 lives that year.
About the only conclusion the task force could draw from the surveys
was that mandatory waiting periods reduced gun suicides in people over
55. But even that reduction was not big enough to significantly affect gun
suicides for the overall population.
The task force complained that many of the studies were inconsistent,
too narrow, or poorly done.
"When we say we don't know the effect of a law, we don't mean it has no
effect. We mean we don't know," said Dr. Jonathan Fielding, chairman of
the CDC task force. "We are calling for additional high-quality studies."
Among the problems:
_ Studies on firearm bans and ammunition bans were inconsistent.
Some showed the bans decreased violence; others found the bans
actually increased violence. Many firearm bans grant exemptions to
people who already owned the weapons, making it hard to tell how well a
ban worked. Other evidence showed that firearms sales go up right
before bans take effect.
_ Studies on background checks were also inconsistent, with some
showing decreased firearm injuries and others showing increased
injuries. A major problem with those studies, the report said, was that
"denial of an application does not always stop applicants from acquiring
firearms through other means."
_ Only four studies examined the effectiveness of firearm registration
on violent outcomes, and all of the findings were again inconsistent.
_ Too few studies have been done on child-access gun laws to gauge
their effectiveness.
_ Study periods often are too narrow to tell whether gun laws work.
The task force noted that "rates of violence may affect the passage of
firearms laws, and firearms laws may then affect rates of violence."
ATLANTA - A sweeping federal review of the nation's gun control laws
— including mandatory waiting periods and bans on certain weapons —
found no proof such measures reduce firearm violence.
The review, released Thursday, was
conducted by a task force of scientists
appointed by the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention (news - web sites).
The CDC said the report suggests more
study is needed, not that gun laws don't
work. But the agency said it has no plans to
spend more money on firearms study.
Some conservatives have said that the CDC
should limit itself to studying diseases, and
some have complained in the past that the
agency has used firearms-tracking data to
subtly push gun control. In fact, since a 1996 fight in Congress, the CDC
has been prohibited from using funds to press for gun control laws.
Since then, the task force reviewed 51 published studies about the
effectiveness of eight types of gun-control laws. The laws included bans
on specific firearms or ammunition, measures barring felons from buying
guns, and mandatory waiting periods and firearm registration. None of
the studies were done by the federal government.
In every case, a CDC task force found "insufficient evidence to determine
effectiveness."
"I would not want to speculate on how different groups may interpret this
report," said Dr. Sue Binder, Director of CDC's Center for Injury
Prevention and Control. "It's simply a review of the literature."
Most of the studies were not funded by the CDC. Gun-control advocates
quickly called on the government to fund better research.
A spokesman for the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence said the
laws work, but it is nearly impossible to prove it because people can buy
guns in one state and carry them into one of the handful of states with
strong antigun measures.
"It's hard to study whether gun control laws work in this country because
we have so few of them," said Peter Hamm. "Talking about studying gun
control in this country is like talking about studying democracy in Iraq
(news - web sites)."
The National Rifle Association said it needed more time to review the
report before commenting on it.
Firearms injuries were the second leading cause of injury deaths, killing
28,663 people in 2000, the most recent year for which data was
available. About 58 percent of the deaths were suicides. Gun accidents
claimed about 775 lives that year.
About the only conclusion the task force could draw from the surveys
was that mandatory waiting periods reduced gun suicides in people over
55. But even that reduction was not big enough to significantly affect gun
suicides for the overall population.
The task force complained that many of the studies were inconsistent,
too narrow, or poorly done.
"When we say we don't know the effect of a law, we don't mean it has no
effect. We mean we don't know," said Dr. Jonathan Fielding, chairman of
the CDC task force. "We are calling for additional high-quality studies."
Among the problems:
_ Studies on firearm bans and ammunition bans were inconsistent.
Some showed the bans decreased violence; others found the bans
actually increased violence. Many firearm bans grant exemptions to
people who already owned the weapons, making it hard to tell how well a
ban worked. Other evidence showed that firearms sales go up right
before bans take effect.
_ Studies on background checks were also inconsistent, with some
showing decreased firearm injuries and others showing increased
injuries. A major problem with those studies, the report said, was that
"denial of an application does not always stop applicants from acquiring
firearms through other means."
_ Only four studies examined the effectiveness of firearm registration
on violent outcomes, and all of the findings were again inconsistent.
_ Too few studies have been done on child-access gun laws to gauge
their effectiveness.
_ Study periods often are too narrow to tell whether gun laws work.
The task force noted that "rates of violence may affect the passage of
firearms laws, and firearms laws may then affect rates of violence."
