Noah Schoettle
Rhian Ellis
Policy change in response to mass shootings
Recent decades have witnessed a series of high-profile mass shootings throughout the United States in places that weren’t necessarily considered to be high profile in earlier times. While most singular or double homicides receive less attention from the general public, mass shooting events are extremely vulnerable to attention based on the severity of the murders and publicity. Nonetheless, a frequently common occurrence is that despite multiple discussions surrounding mass shootings amongst our federal government, they have little influence on policy changes in terms of school safety, gun control, etc. Should we expect our government to propose new legislation in the generation of exponential growth of mass shootings? Should this be a matter that goes beyond the federal government? Given that the vast majority of gun deaths do not result from mass shootings, it would be difficult to reconcile large responses to mass shootings with basic models of policy change aimed primarily at reducing gun violence in the United States. However, research shows that mass shootings may have another profound affect which is the general public’s attention concerning gun violence. Unfortunately, it’s as if Americans tend to respond the most after a tragedy has already occurred instead of tackling it head on to stop the tragedy from happening. For example, prior to 2001 when the twin towers in New York were struck by terrorist aircrafts, our country’s airport security was more or less a joke. It wasn’t until early 2002 when our federal government began to heavily crack down on terroristic activity in airports. Mass shootings potentially lead to policy changes by focusing attention on gun violence, even if they do not provide new information or change politicians’ preferences. Research from political scientists shows that issues tend to rise and fall within an agenda that has periods in which specific policies change very rapidly, while other periods in which they do not change at all (Baumgartner and Jones 2005). In the context of gun violence, events like the Columbine shooting have led to both calls for new restrictions on guns and vehement reaction from gun rights groups opposed to such changes (Goss 2006, Spitzer 2012). In this paper, the impact of mass shootings on gun enforcement is dissected, constructing a dataset of all U.S. gun legislation and mass shootings over a period of twenty-five years, combining data from a variety of media and government sources. We begin by looking at the extent of deaths resulting from mass shootings relative to other gun deaths. Overall, there are more than 30,000 gun related fatalities in the United States per year. Roughly 56% of these are suicides and 40% are homicides. The remaining 4% are accidents or incidents not relatable to homicide. Mass shootings accounted for about .13% of all gun deaths and 0.34% of gun murders between 1989 and 2014(Lopez, Mark, Oz 2018). Because mass shootings are mostly random and sporadic occurrences, a different implemented strategy must be used to measure their impact on federal government’s gun regulation in the US. In simpler terms, we must compare gun laws before and after mass shootings, in states where mass shootings regularly occur compared to all other states to see any significant change. This comparison and other data presented leads to three points regarding policy change on mass shootings. For the purpose of this research, the definition of a “mass shooting” as an incident in which 4 or more people, other than the perpetrator, are unlawfully killed with a firearm in a single, continuous incident that is not related to gangs, drugs, or other criminal activity(Krouse and Richardson 2015). The FBI’s definition of “mass murder” as 4 or more murders “occurring during the same incident, with no distinctive time period between the murders typically involving a single location” (Morton and Hilts 2008). First, mass shootings provoke large policy responses depending on where it occurs. A single mass shooting leads to an on average 15% increase in the number of firearm bills introduced within a state in the year after a mass shooting. This effect is largest after shootings with the most fatalities which in turn causes the most reform. Second, although mass shootings account for a small portion of all gun deaths, they have a disproportional influence relative to other homicides. Data according to the FBI’s database suggests that the impact of mass shootings on bills introduced is about 80 times as large as the impact of gun homicides in non-mass shooting incidents. Third, when looking at enacted laws, the impact of mass shootings depends on the party in power. A mass shooting increases the number of enacted laws that loosen gun restrictions by 75% in states with Republican-controlled legislatures. We find no significant effect of mass shootings on laws enacted when there is a Democrat-controlled legislature. These findings contribute to the conclusion that political parties play not only an affect with legislature, but can force action much quicker. (Makowsky and Stratmann 2009). Thus, policymakers seem to use mass shootings as an opportunity to propose bills that are consistent with their ideologies keeping them in office. This helps to shed light on the role of attention in shaping policy and also the existing political preferences in shaping the direction of enacted policies. The two major political parties in the United States (democrats and republicans) differ dramatically in their stances on how restrictive gun policy should be, with the Republican Party favoring fewer gun restrictions. To look at the impact of political parties on gun policy, the analysis of laws already enacted by both parties will be used to come to a conclusion. These results alone show that Democrats and Republicans respond differently to mass shootings. When there is a Republican-controlled legislature, mass shootings lead to more firearm laws that loosen gun control. A mass shooting in the previous year increases the number of enacted laws that loosen gun restrictions by 75% in states with Republican controlled legislatures. However, when there is a Democrat-controlled legislature, mass shootings lead to a statistically insignificant reduction in laws that loosen gun control. In terms of all legislatures, out of the approximate 30,000 annual gun deaths in the United States, fewer than 100 occur in mass shootings.
According to research from Morton and Hilts, a mass shooting leads to a 15% increase in firearm bills introduced. For the average state, this amounts to an additional 2.5 firearm bills introduced in the year following a mass shooting. Mass shootings with more deaths lead to larger effects. On average, each additional death in a mass shooting leads to a 2.5% increase in the number of gun bills introduced. This result holds both for Republican-controlled and Democrat-controlled legislatures. Also, it proves that fatalities resulting from mass shootings lead to much larger increases in gun bill introductions than gun homicides in non-mass shooting incidents. We estimate the models in this table using mass shooting fatalities and ordinary gun homicides per 100,000 people to facilitate comparison between the two types of murder. It would take approximately 80 people dying in individual gun homicide incidents to have as much impact on bills introduced as each person who dies in a mass shooting. On average, a single mass shooting has as much impact on the number of bills proposed as would a 270% increase in the number of gun homicides in a state. Given the average number of gun homicides per year is roughly 260 per state, this would be equivalent. The history of mass shootings today is so generally perceived as a growing problem. Although media makes it seem this way, that is not the case. Schools today are actually much safer than they used to be. For example, on average, back in the 1990’s there were about four to five school shootings a year. In present day America, we see about one a year. This number has dropped drastically over the years and why is that? Because people didn’t have the internet access that they do today. Another fact that should be accounted for is that back then, about .55 per million students were shot. Now, the number has drastically dropped to about .15 per million. This number is astonishing and people need to take that into account to see that school shootings have become less of a problem today. This still does not justify them happening because they do continue to happen but, we need to see that the problem is not growing. School shootings have actually become very rare but what has changed is how we perceive them. Gun violence in schools is actually much less common and the majority of the violence occurs during suicides and one on one shootings. Statistics actually show that most shootings actually take place at home. This statistic is actually an outlier by far. Home shootings account for more than double of all the other shootings combined. Another important fact is that out of 156 mass shootings, only 16 of them were performed with assault rifles. This again shows that yes most assault rifles are banned in the United States, people will still find ways to get them and even automatic assault rifles. Placing stricter bans on guns is not the solution to stopping
these shootings. Guns go hand and hand with drugs. With a little bit of investigating and perseverance, anyone who is looking to do harm will figure out how to obtain these weapons.
Gun violence in America is one of the highest rates in the world. This problem as many underlying factors as to why this is. One of the first and biggest factors is that out of civilian gun ownership in the world, America accounts for almost half. This number is unfathomable to think of. This is a serious problem that only wreaks negative benefits. It makes sense that our gun violence rate is so high. It is apparent that we need to drastically lower that number and the benefits will immediately begin to show.
to an additional 448 homicides per state year (Morton and Hilts 2008).