More ways to engage:
- Add your organization's content to this collection.
- Send us content recommendations.
- Easily share this collection on your website or app.
54 results found
This document reviews the Joyce Foundation's 25-year history of grant making to advance gun violence prevention research. Since 1993, the Joyce Foundation has provided support to researchers who have produced hundreds of scientific publications and innumerable insights about gun violence in the United States, and its solutions. This is necessarily an incomplete accounting, but provides an approximate measure of the unique impact of the Joyce Foundation's grant making during a critical time period when few other private or public funders supported the field.
Groundbreaking research by Benenson Strategy Group (BSG) and Lester and Associates was released on April 28, 2016 alongside a policy roadmap that lays out a series of proposed policy solutions for gun violence based on conversations with community stakeholders in Richmond, VA, Milwaukee, WI, and Stockton, CA. The research and report grew out of a project launched last year by The Joint Center for Economic and Political Studies, The Urban Institute and The Joyce Foundation. The study found that African Americans and Latinos believe that fixing the gun violence crisis in the United States is a pathway to addressing issues with the criminal justice system, including police-community relationships and mass incarceration.
Firearm violence takes a tragic toll on society. Recent data shows there are more than 8 4,000 nonfatal firearm injuries 1 and 33,000 deaths 2 — nearly two - thirds of which are suicides 3 — per year in the United States. Effective solutions to reduce gun violence demand a comprehensive, evidence-based strategy. The Consortium for Risk - Based Firearm Policy (Consortium), a group of the nation's leading experts in public health, mental health, and gun violence prevention, came together in March 2013 to address this complex issue. These esteemed researchers, practitioners, and advocates developed evidence - based gun violence prevention policy recommendations to reduce access to firearms by people who are at an increased risk of dangerous behavior.This analysis from the Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence (Ed Fund) examines how New York law compares to the Consortium's recommendations, and outlines steps New York can take to prohibit individuals at increased risk of dangerous behavior from accessing firearms. The evidence supporting these recommendations is presented in the full Consortium Report: Guns, Public Health, and Mental Illness: An Evidence - Based Approach for State Policy.
This report answers the President's call, and offers five life-saving measures that the Administration could advance today to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous people.These five critical and simple steps would: keep dangerous people with guns out of our schools; crack down on gun trafficking and curb the sale of guns without background checks; ensure that law enforcement identifies and prosecutes the most dangerous criminals who try to illegally obtain guns; help states to enforce their own background check laws; and ensure that all convicted domestic abusers are prohibited from possessing guns. A comprehensive list of these and other recommended executive actions is set forth in the appendix to this report.
In 2013, the National Task Force on Stand Your Ground Laws was convened by the American Bar Association to review and analyze the recently enacted Stand Your Ground laws in multiple states and their impact on public safety and the criminal justice system. The Task Force members are a diverse array of leaders from law enforcement, government, and the public and private health sector. They also include public and private criminal attorneys, academic experts, and other legal and social science experts.The Task Force has conducted a comprehensive legal and multidisciplinary analysis of the impact of the Stand Your Ground laws, which have substantially expanded the bounds of self-defense law in over half of the jurisdictions in the United States. The study detailed herein is national in its scope and assesses the utility of previous, current, and future laws in the area of self-defense across the United States.
A new Brady report shows how dangerous loopholes allow criminals to buy guns easily online without a background check. This report demonstrates why Brady background checks on gun purchases are an effective policy that prevents gun crime and saves lives by keeping guns out of the hands of dangerous people prohibited from owning guns. It also makes the case for why Oregon needs to pass legislation to close the "Internet loophole" by expanding Brady background checks to all gun sales. Every year, gun violence kills more than 400 Oregonians. From 2004 to 2013, more than 4,000 people were killed with guns. This means that, on average, somebody is killed in Oregon with a gun every 21 hours.
This report provides a series of proposals that state legislators should enact in their states to help protect children from improperly stored firearms. These proposals include:Requiring adults to keep guns properly locked up or under their immediate control, whenever they have a reason to know a child is present or might have access to the area;Requiring gun dealers to ensure that all gun buyers, including buyers of rifles or shotguns, are provided with a gun lock or other safety device;Ensuring that appropriate safety information accompanies the sale or transfer of every gun by a licensed gun dealer;Prohibiting adults from allowing children to handle machine guns, even if they are supervised, due to the unusually dangerous nature of these weapons.This report provides arguments in support of these proposals, along with the legal and factual background for each proposal. It also provides a list of the features that make up a strong law on each topic. Too many families have needlessly suffered the horrific loss of a child due to an unsecured gun. It is our hope that this report will provide a "toolkit" for legislators and advocates who want to move forward to help prevent unintended gun deaths of children.
The success or failure of community strategies to address the youth gun violence crisis is often attributed in part to how well the problem is understood and diagnosed. With support from The New York Community Trust, the Crime Commission has undertaken an analysis of youth gun violence and crew activity -- violent turf rivalries among less-organized, smaller and normally younger groups than traditional gangs -- in select New York City communities. Our initial findings from available data, existing research and interviews with stakeholders are presented in a series of papers titled, "Assessing New York City's Youth Gun Violence Crisis: Crews."
The success or failure of community strategies to address the youth gun violence crisis is often attributed in part to how well the problem is understood and diagnosed. With support from The New York Community Trust, the Crime Commission has undertaken an analysis of youth gun violence and crew activity -- violent turf rivalries among less-organized, smaller and normally younger groups than traditional gangs -- in select New York City communities. Our initial findings from available data, existing research and interviews with stakeholders are presented in a series of papers titled, Assessing New York City's Youth Gun Violence Crisis: Crews.
This report discusses states rights vs. federally mandated concealed carry reciprocity in determing permit laws for people who carry hidden or concealed guns. Determining who is too dangerous to carry a hidden, loaded gun in public is among the most important judgments that a state government can make, and exercising that police power is among the most basic of states' rights. Under current law, each state makes its own determinations about who can carry a concealed, loaded weapon in public, including deciding which other states' permits to recognize. But dangerous legislation introduced in Congress would interfere with states' rights and let the federal government dictate to each and every state who can carry hidden, loaded guns within its borders. Under this proposed "concealed carry reciprocity" legislation, the federal government would force every state to recognize concealed carry permits issued by every other state -- no matter how lax or ineffective a given state's permitting standards. Federally mandated concealed carry reciprocity would upend each state's carefully considered judgments about public safety. Under this scheme, even if a state has determined that public safety requires live-fire training for permit holders, the state would have to allow permit-holders from other states without any training requirement to carry guns on their streets. States that determined teenagers too young to buy alcohol or criminals convicted of assault or stalking should not be granted concealed carry permits would have to allow such people with out-of-state permits to carry hidden, loaded guns within their borders. Federally mandated concealed carry reciprocity would be a severe encroachment on states' rights. It offends the basic traditions of federalism on which the country was founded.
Gun violence is a major threat to the public's health and safety in the United States. The articles in this volume's symposium on gun violence reveal the scope of the problem and new trends in mortality rates from gunfire. Leading scholars synthesize research evidence that demonstrates the ability of numerous policies and programs -- each consistent with lessons learned from successful efforts to combat public health problems -- to prevent gun violence. Each approach presents challenges to successful implementation. Future research should inform efforts to assess which approaches are most effective and how to implement evidence-based interventions most effectively.
This article summarizes and critiques available evidence from studies published between 1999 and August 2014 on the effects of policies designed to keep firearms from high-risk individuals in the United States. Some prohibitions for high-risk individuals (e.g., those under domestic violence restraining orders, violent misdemeanants) and procedures for checking for more types of prohibiting conditions are associated with lower rates of violence. Certain laws intended to prevent prohibited persons from accessing firearms -- rigorous permit-to-purchase, comprehensive background checks, strong regulation and oversight of gun dealers, and requiring gun owners to promptly report lost or stolen firearms -- are negatively associated with the diversion of guns to criminals. Future research is needed to examine whether these laws curtail nonlethal gun violence and whether the effects of expanding prohibiting conditions for firearm possession are modified by the presence of policies to prevent diversion.