Running Head: Firearms and Risk of Victimization: An Overview of Modern Research

within the Field 1

Firearms and Risk of Victimization: An Overview of Modern Research within

the Field
Brandon Brown
Indiana University, Fall 2011
Professor Mark Berg, CJUS P444

Firearms and Risk of Victimization: An Overview of Modern Research within the Field
2

Abstract

The amount of controversy surrounding the issues of gun control and

ownership in the United States is, without question, quite substantial.
Firearms are often noted as the premier instruments of homicide and are
detested by many lobbying groups and politicians as predicating more
violence or creating unsafe neighborhoods. Research into the area of gunrelated violence shows a strong correlation between the possession of a
firearm and an increased likelihood of victimization. Firearms and
victimization risk is the central issue of this paper. A majority of research
shows a positive relationship between the possession of a firearm and
whether or not said weapon will result in the carrier being more likely to be
victimized. Numerous researchers have investigated this problematic result
of gun ownership as it is crucial to the policies of gun control and to those
implementing legislation related to the availability, purchasing powers, and
limits of gun control and possession.
With more than 250,000,000 firearms in circulation in the United States
alone (Ruback, Shaffer, Clark), the issue of risk of victimization and of risktaking by those owning firearms becomes a serious issue. The general issue
of risk of victimization associated with firearms is more complex than most
may think. Rice, Ross, and Mizcek (1994) discuss the issue of victim

Firearms and Risk of Victimization: An Overview of Modern Research within the Field
3

resistance. In their research, two types of counter-resistance strategies were

discussed: risk management and risk avoidance. The possession of firearm
automatically fell into the arena of victim resistance and risk management,
but ultimately proved to be a way of not avoiding risk. The mere possession
of a firearm provided the carrier with an increased likelihood of victimization.
The carrying of a firearm to protect ones self on the streets is not the only
problem that arises from the ownership of a firearm. At the domestic level,
gun ownership has been cited as a factor in both increased rates of homicide
within the home (Kellerman et. al. 1998) and of suicide (Dahlberg et al.
1993). More often than not, the injuries and deaths associated with firearms
come from a combination of unsafe storage practices (Vacha & McLaughln
2000) and of practices, such as lack of safe equipment or knowledge of gun
use. Most of the studies completed in this area tend to illustrate the positive
correlation between firearm possession/ownership and victimization from
said firearms.

Keywords: firearm(s), victimization, risk, gun control, victim-offender

relationship

Firearms and Risk of Victimization: An Overview of Modern Research within the Field
4

Firearms and Risk of Victimization: An Overview of Modern Research within

the Field

Introduction
Numerous studies have been conducted to test whether there is a link
between the possession of a firearm and whether the risk of victimization will
increase from said ownership. This paper aims to outline the current status of
research within the field. As research within the field varies from general
discussion of firearm possession and risk of homicide all the way to social
issues, such as the impact of poverty or the fear of crime (as discussed by
Edward F. Vacha and T. F. McLaughlin), it is important to remember that this
wide spectrum of research varies substantially with bot subject matter,
research methods, and sometimes with results. A linear discussion of
firearms and victimization risk literature ranging from the early 1990s all the
way to 2011 will comprise the rest of this paper.

Firearms and Risk of Victimization: An Overview of Modern Research within the Field
5

Early Research and Discussion of the Topic

To date, there is not much consensus on whether firearms actually
result in an increased rate of crime or victimization. Albert J. Reiss, Jeffrey A.
Roth, and Klaus A. Miczek discuss many issues related to firearms and
victimization risk in their book, Understanding and Preventing Violence:
Social influences, which was part of a report done by the National Research
Council (U.S.) Panel on the Understanding and Control of Violent Behavior.
Although this text is largely about the general topic of victimization, it points
out a few key areas of research that have been completed in the peerreviewed arena that specifically mention firearms. One of the firearms
studies the authors mention in the report is one by Bordua completed in
1986. The authors, in this part of the report are actually discussing the
robbery rates and gun availability study done by Cook in the late 1970s.
While no positive correlation was found with the robbery rate and gun
ownership, there was an increase in how the robberies were completed. As in
the discussion of many other crime rate topics, an instance of gun ownership
or other factor that may cause at least a perceived increased in crime may
not statistically cause an actual increase in the rate of crime. For example,
the possession of a gun by a majority of an area may not necessarily cause
an increase in the rate of assault or homicides, but it may increase the

Firearms and Risk of Victimization: An Overview of Modern Research within the Field
6

likelihood that an encounter or victimization will be more serious than if a

firearm were to not be involved. Reiss et. al attempt to explain to the reader
how gun ownership does not necessarily result in a higher risk of
victimization, but ultimately do not come through in this area as their
research is limited to conjecture and is positioned upon an ambivalent
stance. With reference to the Bordua study, Reiss et. Al mention Borduas
conclusion, variation in firearms ownership has no independent causal
effect on violent crime at all, while countering, The issue is complex and
unresolved. The authors reference to the studies of Bordua and Cook aim to
highlight the inexistence of a connection between the rate of victimization,
whether assault, robbery, homicide, etc., and gun ownership, but fail to
provide a clear conclusion on what the consensus into this issue suggests.
While attempting to stay clear of bias and only report on studies completed
that mention firearms and victimization risk, the authors have omitted
completing or mentioning that more work needs to be done within this area
of research.
The next study being discussed is from an article in the October 1998,
JAMA (Journal of American Medicine). Two professors, Dr. Peter Cummings
and Dr. Thomas Koepsell, consider the implications of how and how not to
study whether the ownership of a firearm results in a greater risk of death.
Cummings and Koepsells study is highlighted here to show how the social
sciences, discussed in the previous paragraph, may point to different
resolutions in gun control policy and even how gun ownership can result in a

Firearms and Risk of Victimization: An Overview of Modern Research within the Field
7

higher rate of victimization. The study in this journal is not an exhaustive

statistical insight into victimization rates, but rather an intelligent insight into
the area of how much of this research should be completed. The researches
chose to look at how both homicide and suicide can be correlated with gun
ownership. Numerous studies were cited throughout their discussion. None
will be listed here, however, as the only goal they achieve is to inform the
reader that there is a large amount of discrepancy in statistics relating to
incidents of self-protection with a gun, among other studies relating to
availability of a weapon. The researchers also make sure to note that most
who are studying this area of gun control prefer not to publish based on
results of individual cases. This is understandable, as the likelihood some
bias will interfere with the results is extremely probable. In the conclusion of
this study, Cummings and Koepsell specifically state that, gun ownership is
associated with a net increase in the risk of death for a typical individual.
The researchers state this is primarily associated with an increased likelihood
of suicide, although they do mention that risk of homicide may be correlated,
but there is not enough statistical evidence to make a substantive
conclusion. Here, the interested reader can already see the differences in
research done between the social and medical sciences and how studies
from within the same time period can differ greatly. These two studies should
not be a primary source of information, however, as they do not provide
enough independent statistical research to stand on their own.

Firearms and Risk of Victimization: An Overview of Modern Research within the Field
8

The Turn of the Century and its Effect on Research within the Field
As is the case with many areas of developing social science research
issues, a great amount of topics seem to take decades to develop into fully
comprehensible and repeatable theories. The issue of gun control and risk of
victimization has always taken a prime position in the political arena.
Representatives and lobbyists, from around the nation, aim to sway other
politicians and society that guns are either good for citizens to bear and
rightfully so, or that guns aid in an increase in both minor and severe
injuries, and even death. The issue of gun control represents a highly
contested political debate which has fueled the area of research surrounding
the issue. This has been both a positive and negative movement for the
academic side of this debate. A multitude of propaganda supporting either
side of the debate has come out over the last decade or so and presented
itself as unbiased pure academic research. Often, the parties involved in the
funding have much to do with how the research is conducted and repeatedly
influence the conclusion or results of said studies. The following studies aim
to break down the issue of firearms and risk of victimization from a complex
problem into a sensible, coherent theory supported by not only theoretical
evidence, but also by statistical and empirical findings.
In November of 2000, Edward Vacha and T.F. McLaughlin, of Gonzaga
University, released a study entitled, The Impact of Poverty, Fear of Crime,
and Crime Victimization on Keeping Firearms for Protection and Unsafe Gun-

Firearms and Risk of Victimization: An Overview of Modern Research within the Field
9

Storage Practices: A Review and Analysis with Policy Recommendations.

Restating the entire title of Vacha and McLaughlins study may seem
redundant and cumbersome, however, the title of their study suggests to the
reader that the issue of firearms and victimization is a very real one and that
it is more complex than just whether or not guns cause more homicides or
injuries. The sample used in the study in question was comprised of children
younger than thirteen in poverty-stricken urban neighborhoods. Vacha points
out to the reader within the first few paragraphs that this is actually the first
body of research that has been completed with this specific sample. This is
important to note because, as pointed out earlier, most of the research
within this broad issue has either not been done at all or has not been
repeated enough times to construct concrete victimization theories. The
study, itself, was primarily focused on the reasons for keeping a gun within
the household and how practices associated with ownership and safekeeping
of a weapon ultimately could lead to victimization within the home. Vacha
and McLaughlin point out a number of reasons why low-income families are
more likely to be firearms victims, including the perceived need to keep a
gun for protection and the lack of safe storage and use/protection of a
weapon (506). The authors of this study conclude that, the higher risk of
injury stemming from risky firearms behavior in low-income households may
reflect the unique living conditions associated with their
neighborhoods(506). Ultimately, Vacha and McLaughlin are trying to
illustrate to the reader how perceived fear of crime, such as a family thinking

Firearms and Risk of Victimization: An Overview of Modern Research within the Field
10

they may be robbed or assaulted in their neighborhood, may lead a person

to attain a firearm, either legally or by other means, to control the threat of
victimization. Vacha and McLaughlins study seems to be the most complete
into this specific subset of the population and is especially meaningful
because of the associated policy recommendations the authors make at the
end of the article. The researchers contend that trade-in programs, along
with the supplementation of courses and equipment to further safe firearm
practices are essential in lessening the risk of victimization by weapons
(509). The last, and most urgent of the policy considerations discussed in this
study addresses the foundation upon which these problems associated with
firearms stem from. At the base of this issue, the environment, itself, needs
to be changed. Programs promoting neighborhood safety, community
outreach, and gun control are not only suggested, but should be required of
urban areas with rising firearms victimization rates. The authors supplant this
notion by collecting their data into a semi-empirical study which aims to
highlight a specific issue while also discoursing about potential solutions. The
review of policies associated with firearms is relevant to this area of research
as it has the biggest impact on how lawmakers should handle the plague of
gun violence. The previous studies only mentioned theoretical points,
illustrating how guns may or may not affect risk of victimization. Here, one
can research being put into motion and addressing the problem, not just
talking about it.

Firearms and Risk of Victimization: An Overview of Modern Research within the Field
11

Following in the footsteps of Vacha and McLaughlin, Matthew Miller,

David Hemenway, and Deborah Azrael attempted to furnish a causal
association between firearms and risk of victimization (homicide, in this
instance). Their work ultimately culminated in an article published by the
Harvard School of Public Health, entitled State-level homicide victimization
rates in the US in relation to survey measures of household firearm
ownership (2001-2003). The researchers completed their work over a three
year period and ultimately sought to examine the relationship between
possession of a firearm and homicide. Although this study seems to be
compelling, it should be noted that the numbers used within this body of
research are from estimates of gun ownership from a study completed in
2001, while homicide numbers were attained from a three year period. While
the authors address this problem in the discussion section of their text, I
believe it is significant to mention that this study may be skewed statistically.
A startling number that the researchers use to grab the attention of the
reader in the introduction of this study is that, approximately two in three
homicide victims in the US are killed with guns (Miller et. Al.). By calling
attention to the seriousness of the problem, the researchers gained the
attention of the reader throughout the rest of their article. Analysis of this
survey produced three key findings from the authors body of research:
states with higher levels of gun ownership had higher levels of lethal
victimization, ownership of firearms was associated with lethal victimization
of women(this finding is repeated in a study completed by Miller, Hemenway,

Firearms and Risk of Victimization: An Overview of Modern Research within the Field
12

and Shinoda-Tagawa while examining homicide rates among the most

populous countries), and that the most likely offender-victim makeup was
one young male murdering another young male (Miller et. Al). These three
revelations are important to researchers because the potential victims can
be helped by addressing the precursors associated with the victimization of
each particular subset of likely victims. Miller, Hemenway, and Azrael
produced an excellent insight into possibilities of how firearms are associated
with risk of victimization, however, their methods seem to present too much
bias, for example, some case-based findings were used. In addition, as
mentioned earlier, the researchers tried to aggregate data from two sources
and extrapolate it to fit their objectives. While the Miller et. Al. Study
provides an intriguing look at firearms and victimization risks, it fails to
objective produce a causal relationship between firearms and risk of
victimization.

Age-Associated Risks of Victimization and the Current State of Research

Not enough can be said about the intensity of the issue of gun control.
While arising from a politically-centered debated, gun control has spread all
the way out to become a subject of policy reform, various legislation, and
even a factor in the public health arena. The previous studies mentioned in
this text of Miller et. Al., examining the risk of homicide associated with
ownership of a firearm, and also of Cummings and Koepsell, investigating the

Firearms and Risk of Victimization: An Overview of Modern Research within the Field
13

correlation between risk of suicide/homicide with the possession of a firearm,

provide a general overview of how this issue has risen to become a public
health concern. A recent study by R. Barry Ruback, Jennifer Shaffer, and
Valerie Clark, arouses a concern for how lack of gun protection has made the
potential for victimization a realistic public health concern. In their 2011
study, Easy Access to Firearms: Juveniles Risks for Violent offending and
Violent Victimization, Ruback et. Al. examine how access to firearms is
related to victimization and offending (2111). This study is one of the most
recent done in the area of firearms and risk of victimization and provides a
general consensus of theories surrounding the field and does an excellent job
of presenting modern empirical research without biases. The researchers
used a sample that was comprised of young adolescents from around the
country. The study, itself, was divided into three primary sections: one:
addressing the personal attitudes of the adolescents on ease of gun access,
two: investigating how the access to weapons led to an increase in offending
or victimization, and three: how these patterns of behaviors (both offending
and victimization) followed the adolescents into young adulthood. Ruback et.
Al. also provide interesting statistics from other research to illustrate exactly
what is being discussed. The researchers note to the reader that are two
groups of gun owners: rural owners who present no or a low risk and urban
individuals, who often carry a gun illegally (2113). This distinction is
important for the reader because it exemplifies a basic differentiation
between gun owners that most are likely to pass over without second

Firearms and Risk of Victimization: An Overview of Modern Research within the Field
14

thought. The statistical interpretation of the data in this study is really welldone. Often, it is hard to present this type of complex relationship into an
empirical-based study. Ruback et. Al. present their findings in a manner
which can be replicated by many other scientists aiming to reproduce the
findings of their study. This quality of their research, being testable, is a
monumental step forward into researchers finally being able to say with
statistical significance that firearms are positive correlated with risk of
victimization. The causal relationship will only become valid after numerous
more studies have been completed. However, Ruback, Shaffer, and Clark
found that the individuals with ease of access to a weapon at home were
much (14%) more likely to be victimized than were individuals who lacked
access to firearms (2133).

Conclusion

Out of the research completed on firearms and risk of victimization,

Ruback et. Al. surpass all others in the quality of their empirical research.
The qualitative research surrounding firearms and risk of victimization is

Firearms and Risk of Victimization: An Overview of Modern Research within the Field
15

massive, however, the amount of quantitative research has largely not been
completed or is not substantial enough to be published. The complex nature
of the issue of gun control and resulting victimization presents a challenge
for the world of academia. It is difficult to entirely exclude the influence of a
number of external variables, such as collective efficacy, familial
relationships, gun purchasing powers, etc. The findings from most of the
studies presented within this paper and from other sources infer that the
ownership of a firearms, in fact, DOES result in an increased rate of
victimization.
As research into the relationship between firearms and risk of
victimization has involved, so has the need for said research to come with
results that discuss potential policy implementation. The researchers in the
1980s and 1980s did not view gun ownership as the great public health
concern that society views it as today. It is important for potential
researchers to create studies that are based off empirical findings and to pay
special attention to past works. One can clearly see how the research
surrounding this field has grown and evolved over the years, especially
during the early 2000s. The issues of gun control and ownership will always
be hotly debated, however, as a society, the general population and
academia alike, must push for deeper investigations into why some are
victimized and others are not and how society can prevent tragedies from
occurring.

Firearms and Risk of Victimization: An Overview of Modern Research within the Field
16

References

Azrael, Deborah & Hemenway, David & Miller, Matthew. (2007) State-level
homicide victimization rates in the US in relation to survey measures of
household firearm ownership, 20012003, Social Science; Medicine,
Volume 64, Issue 3, February 2007, Pages 656-664
Clark, Valerie A. & Ruback, Barry R. & Shaffer, Jennifer N. (2011). Easy
Access to Firearms: Juveniles Risks for Violent Offending and Violent
VictimizationJ Interpers Violence July 2011 26: 2111-2138
Cummings, Peter & Koepsell, Thomas D. (1998) . Does Owning a Firearm
Increase or Decrease the Risk of Death?, . JAMA. 1998;280(5):471-473.
Hemenway, David & Shinoda-Tagawa, Tomoko & Miller, Matthew. (2002)
Firearm Availability and Female Homicide Victimization Rates Among
25 Populous High-Income Countries. Journal of the American Medical
Womens Association; 57(2): p.100-104, 2002
McLaughlin, T.F. & Vacha, Edward F.(2000).The Impact of Poverty, Fear of
Crime, and Crime Victimization on Keeping Firearms for Protection and
Unsafe Gun-Storage Practices: A Review and Analysis with Policy
Recommendations. Urban Education November 2000 35: 496-510
Albert J. Reiss, Jeffrey A. Roth, Klaus A. Miczek, (1993). Understanding and
Preventing Violence: Social influences. Volume 3 of Understanding and
Preventing Violence, National Research Council (U.S.). Panel on the
Understanding and Control of Violent Behavior. National Academies
Press 1993.
Sorenson, Susan B. & Vittes, Katherine A., (2006) Risk-Taking among
Adolescents Who Say They Can Get a Handgun, Journal of Adolescent
Health, Volume 39, Issue 6, December 2006, Pages 929-932

Firearms and Risk of Victimization: An Overview of Modern Research within the Field
17