Invited Commentary: Concealed Carrying of Firearms, Public Policy, and Opportunities for Mitigating Harm.
Invited Commentary: Concealed Carrying of Firearms, Public Policy, and Opportunities for Mitigating Harm.
复制标题
特邀评论：隐蔽携带枪支、公共政策和减轻伤害的机会。
DOI：
10.1093/aje/kwad053
复制
发表时间：
2023
影响因子：
5
通讯作者：
Kagawa,RoseMC
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Matthay,EllicottC;Kagawa,RoseMC
在过去的30年里，美国有25个州放宽了管制隐蔽携带枪支的法律（隐蔽携带武器（CCW）法）。这些变化可能对暴力犯罪产生重大影响。在最近的研究中，Doucette等人（Am J Epidemiol.二○二三年; 192（3）：342-355）采用了综合控制的方法，评估了从限制性较强的“可/不可发布”《特定常规武器公约》法律转向限制性较弱的“应发布”《特定常规武器公约》法律对涉及枪支或以其他手段实施的杀人、严重袭击和抢劫的影响。这项研究进一步证明，更宽松的《特定常规武器公约》法律可能增加了采用这些法律的州的枪支袭击率。重要的是，这项研究是第一个确定的具体规定shall-issue常规武器公约的法律，包括拒绝许可证的人与暴力轻罪定罪，危险行为的历史，或“可疑的性格”和实弹训练的要求，可能有助于减轻伤害与shall-issue常规武器公约的法律。鉴于最高法院最近的裁决推翻了五月颁布的法律的一个决定性因素，这些发现是及时和突出的。这项全面的研究提供了可操作的结果，并为国家枪支政策评估提供了方法模型。它的局限性反映了该领域更广泛的需求：更加关注种族/民族平等和州内差异，以及加强枪支暴力和犯罪的数据基础设施。
In the last 30 years, 25 US states have relaxed laws regulating the concealed carrying of firearms (concealed-carry weapons (CCW) laws). These changes may have substantial impacts on violent crime. In a recent study, Doucette et al. (Am J Epidemiol. 2023;192(3):342–355) used a synthetic control approach to assess the effects of shifting from more restrictive “may/no-issue” CCW laws to less restrictive “shall-issue” CCW laws on homicides, aggravated assaults, and robberies involving a gun or committed by other means. The study adds to the evidence that more permissive CCW laws have probably increased rates of firearm assault in states adopting these laws. Importantly, this study is the first to identify that specific provisions of shall-issue CCW laws—including denying permits to persons with violent misdemeanor convictions, a history of dangerous behavior, or “questionable character” and live-fire training requirements—may help mitigate harms associated with shall-issue CCW laws. These findings are timely and salient given the recent Supreme Court ruling striking down a defining element of may-issue laws. This thorough study offers actionable results and provides a methodological model for state firearm policy evaluations. Its limitations reflect the needs of the field more broadly: greater focus on racial/ethnic equity and within-state variation, plus strengthening the data infrastructure on firearm violence and crime.