Memorandum
From: The Firearm Injury Center
Medical College of Wisconsin
Stephen W. Hargarten MD, MPH,
Director
Richard L. Withers JD, Co-Director
To: The Wisconsin Council On Children
and Families (WCCF)
The Wisconsin Public Health
Association (WPHA)
Date: September 15, 2003
The following information and analysis is provided per
request of representatives of the WCCF and the WPHA. This replaces and updates
earlier memoranda. For further information please contact Richard Withers at
(414) 456-766, rlwjd@mcw.edu.
Assessing the
Implications for Wisconsin Children and Youth of Legislation to Permit
Concealed Carrying of Firearms by Adults
Background:
Wisconsin is one of five states that prohibit concealed
carrying of firearms by persons other than peace officers.[1]
Legislation has been introduced in the 2003-2004 session of
the Wisconsin Legislature to establish a process for issuing permits to allow
carrying of concealed and dangerous weapons.[2]
Requirements that applicants must satisfy include:
1) must
be at least 21 years old;
2) must
not be prohibited from firearm possession under federal law or as a result of
state felony or juvenile adjudications or court orders;
3) must
not have been convicted of a controlled substance offense or been committed for
drug dependency within three years;
4) must
not have been found guilty of a violent misdemeanor within three years
5) must
not have been found incompetent or guilty of a crime due to mental defect
within five years;
6) must
have taken a specified firearm training or safety course.
Concealed carrying permits and licenses from other states
would be recognized under the proposed legislation without regard to age or
training requirements. Under the legislation, concealed firearms may be carried
without notice to or permission of property owners or managers of day care and
health care centers, private homes, colleges and universities, as well as
athletic and entertainment venues. No restriction is placed on the type or
design of the weapon(s) that may be carried under the legislation. A public
hearing was held on the legislation on September 9, 2003 and it is presently
awaiting action and possible amendment in committee.
Limitations
of Research to Evaluate Concealed Carry Policies:
Researchers who have conducted studies on the experience of
states that have passed laws to permit civilian concealed carry disagree on
what, if any, impact such laws actually have on violent injury and crime.
Studies by economist John Lott have concluded that states that have passed
permissive laws for the issuance of concealed carry permits have experienced a
reduction in violent crime (although an increase in property crimes).[3]
Lott’s findings have been widely cited by proponents of concealed carrying and
have sparked much debate. Professor Lott’s analyses rely upon data from the
voluntary reporting of certain crimes in the FBI sponsored Uniform Crime
Reports (UCR). He does not analyze changes in suicide experience or unintended
firearm injuries and deaths. His
methodologies have been criticized by other researchers.[4]’[5]’[6]
Few studies have been conducted to analyze the impact of concealed carry laws
and none that provide comprehensive evaluation. A recent study involving
Professor Lott’s data and methodology and including data from additional years
(through 1997) found that ‘shall issue’ laws were uniformly associated with
crime increases.[7] A chapter of
the recently published Evaluating Gun Policy[8]
entitled “The Impact of Concealed-Carry Laws”[9]
provides a review of currently available literature analyzing or evaluating
such legislation in which the strengths and weaknesses of methodologies and
approaches are explored.[10]
Generally, a number of factors contribute to the difficulty of evaluating
policies such as concealed carry laws. Time studies are confounded by the
inability to characterize concealed carrying practices prior to the passage of
permit laws. It is also difficult to establish and to evaluate the carrying
practices of persons who obtain permits. The changes in violent crime experience
observed in ecological studies such as Professor Lott’s may actually be
influenced by other policies and factors as well as the observed cycle of
increases and decreases in particular types of crime.[11]
The most current evaluation of the Lott analyses carefully describes the coding
errors and mistakes in regression methodologies that contributed to the Lott
and Mustard findings.[12]
Importantly, almost all research to date has focused upon
potential impacts of CCW laws on crime experience and no studies have examined
the impact of concealed carry laws or practices on unintended or self inflicted
injuries. Neither have there been any analyses of the risks that a firearm
carried by a permit holder will be turned upon the owner. FBI studies find that
15% of police officers killed in the line of duty by handguns are killed with
their own service weapon.[13]
This suggests that even an unarmed assailant poses significant risk of death to
persons carrying firearms, including permit-holders who have received
comprehensive training.
Implications
for Children and Youth in Wisconsin:
For children and youth ages 1-20 in Wisconsin, unintentional
injuries, homicide and suicide are the first, second and third leading causes
of death; 72.2% of the homicides, 55.2% of suicides and 2.2% of these
unintended deaths involve firearms.[14]
The use of a deadly weapon in self-defense or defense of
another is justified under the laws of Wisconsin when a person is threatened
with imminent and lethal harm. Fewer than 10 cases of justifiable homicide in
defense of self or others occur in Wisconsin each year. In addition, it is
important to note that Wisconsin’s overall homicide rate is markedly lower than
the rate for the nation (3.3 vs. 5.9 per 100,000 and for juveniles age 14-20 it
is 6.8 vs. 8.0 per 100,000).[15]
While there is a debate about the extent of a deterrent effect of firearm use
in self defense, if there is a benefit, it would not appear to accrue to
children and youth under 21 years of age under the concealed carry legislation
proposed for Wisconsin.
If additional firearms are purchased or otherwise made more
readily accessible upon passage of concealed carry legislation in Wisconsin,
then children will be exposed to greater potential risk of firearm injury,
fatal accident, homicide and suicide.
The extent of such increases in risk has not been analyzed in states
that have passed concealed-carry laws. Sale to and possession of handguns by
children and youth under age 21 in Wisconsin – though not entirely prohibited -
are substantially restricted. Unsupervised or unauthorized access to firearms
by children and youth (ages 10-20) in Wisconsin contributed to thirty-eight
suicides of in 2000. This is a rate of 4.2 per 100,000 – higher than the
overall firearm homicide rate. The national rate of firearm suicide for
children and youth (ages 10-20) was 2.9 per 100,000 in 2000.[16]
Circulation of concealed weapons will also increase
opportunities for theft and subsequent misuse of handguns, especially by
children and youth or in a manner that harms children and youth. Mechanisms
have not been established in concealed-carry states to assess this additional
exposure.
The
Need for More Comprehensive Data and Research; Recommendations for
Consideration:
Development and evaluation of violent injury prevention
strategies and policies should be informed by comprehensive data on the victims
(as well as perpetrators) of violent injury, with analysis of the social and
physical environment in which violent injuries occur, and with comprehensive
information about the agent/vehicle that contributes to the injury (in this
case, firearms and other dangerous weapons). This is sometimes referred to as
the public health model.[17]
There is little information about the type and
characteristics of firearms associated with the deaths and injuries of children
and youth. Firearms associated with fatalities in Wisconsin, especially
homicides, are often small, cheaply made and easily concealed. Design defects in such firearms such as
exposed hammers that rest on firing pins and a lack of extrinsic safety
features including trigger guards may contribute to unintended fatalities.
Newspaper accounts from around the nation and in Wisconsin reflect the types of
injuries found in the data of the Violent Injury Reporting System of the
Firearm Injury Center. One prominent example from Indianapolis involved a CCW
permit holder who brought a derringer into a Planet Hollywood, leaned over to
pick up a waitress’s necklace dropping his derringer which discharged injuring
two visitors who were at a public health convention – the Davis D-32 derringer
he was carrying has no trigger guard and the exposed hammer was resting
directly on the firing pin.[18]
The same type of design flaw has led to fatalities in Wisconsin including the
case of 7 year-old Brian Welch who found a small loaded derringer in a clothes
drawer. He dropped it and it discharged; Brian died of his injuries at
Children’s Hospital of Wisconsin.[19]
The need for more research and analysis on the environmental
factors that contribute to violence and to violence prevention has been
recently examined.[20]
The case of Brian Welch points to a combination of both design factors and
environmental circumstances – easy access to a loaded firearm - that
contributed to a fatal outcome. Similarly, a Kenosha County case involved two
twelve year-olds playing with semiautomatic pistols they found under a bed;
they removed the bullets from the magazines not realizing that a round remained
chambered in a 9mm semiautomatic. One of the boys fatally shot his friend.[21]
Legislators who are reviewing the proposed legislation and
considering improving amendments may note the lack of comprehensive data and
analysis from states that have enacted CCW legislation and may consider
building a meaningful evaluation component into the proposed law. Legislators
may wish to consider allowing sheriffs or the Department of Justice to contract
with researchers or analysts to conduct an evaluation of the law (with
protections to maintain the confidentiality of identifying information). It
also appears that the time frames provided in the legislation for reporting
statistical information may be too short to assure completeness or accuracy.
In addition to addressing the need for better data and
analysis, a number of concerns and issues involving the nature of the firearms
to be carried and environmental factors, especially those affecting the safety
of children, should be explored. These include provisions:
1) regarding
the design and future use and sale of handguns such as those enacted in New
Jersey that require ‘personalization’ – i.e., technologies that only allow an
authorized user to discharge a weapon;
2) requiring
that firearms carried concealed meet design and safety standards such as
drop-safety tests;
3) restricting
concealed carrying where young children are present in locations such as day
care and health centers that have historically not been the scene of criminal
violence in need of armed protection;
4) strengthening
the child access prevention law; e.g., assuring that children ages 14 to 17 be
included or requiring that when firearms are not being carried under permit,
they are maintained securely to prevent theft or unauthorized use; and
5) increasing
the penalties for unlawful concealed carrying.
The proposed legislation also appears to create several anomalies that legislators may wish to address. Individuals from states with weaker permit requirements would appear to be able to carry concealed weapons in Wisconsin without notice to local officials including individuals who have not had safety training, individuals who have committed certain kinds of misdemeanor violence or are charged with such violence, habitual drunkards, etc. It appears that individuals from states that allow concealed carrying without permit, such as Vermont and Alaska, would nevertheless be required to become residents of Wisconsin and apply. Further information is needed about the ability of the state of Wisconsin to obtain or verify out-of-state information especially about non-felony crimes including charges and convictions for driving under the influence, misdemeanor controlled substance offenses. The exemption from background checks for law enforcement officers, corrections, probation and parole may allow persons prohibited under domestic violence restraining orders or injunctions to escape detection.
Whether enacted, enacted with amendments, or laid over for further consideration, it appears that many of the potential impacts of this legislation – especially on children and youth – have not been fully explored and require closer scrutiny.
[1] National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative
Affairs: “Right To Carry 2003,” http://www.nraila.org/FactSheet,
accessed 08/27/03. Note: The Missouri
legislature overrode the governor’s veto of concealed carry legislation on
September 11, 2003.
[2] AB 444, SB 214.
[3] John R. Lott, Jr., More Guns, Less Crime: Understanding Crime and Gun-Control Laws (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998).
[4] “Concealed Handguns: The Counterfeit Deterrent” Franklin Zimring and Gordon Hawkins, The Responsive Community, Spring 1997, pp. 46-60.
[5] “Two Guns, Four Guns, Six Guns, More Guns: Does Arming the Public Reduce Crime?,” Albert W. Alschuler, Valparaiso University Law Review, Spring 1997, pp. 365-373.
[6] “Flawed Gun Policy Research Could Endanger Public Safety,” Daniel W. Webster, Jon S. Vernick, Jens Ludwig, and Kathleen J. Lester, American Journal of Public Health, June 1997, pp. 918-921.
[7] Ayres and Donohue (forthcoming).
[8] Ludwig & Cook (2003)
[9] Ibid, John J. Donohue.
[10] Id at 287-325.
[11] More Guns, Less Crime, at p.153. Lott acknowledges the possibility that factors not controlled for in his methods may have actually contributed to the changes he observes in crime levels.
[12] “The Latest Misfires in Support of the ‘More Guns, Less Crime’ Hypothesis,’ Ayers & Donohue, Stanford Law Review. Vol. 55:1371-1398 (April, 2003).
[13] http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/killed/98killed.pdf (accessed 09/14/03)
[14] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System (WISQARS) (2002). National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (producer). Available from: URL http://webapp.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/leadcaus10.html. Accessed 09/15/03
[15] Annual Statistical Report of the Violent Injury Reporting System of Wisconsin (VIRS), Spring 2002, p3.
[16] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System (WISQARS) (2002). National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (producer). Available from: URL: www.cdc.gov/ncipc/wisqars. Accessed 09/13/03
[17] Withers RL, Mercy JA, Hargarten SW. Public health: a successful paradigm applied to firearm injuries. WMJ 2000; 99(1):48-49.
[18] “2 in city for public-health convention accidentally shot at Planet Hollywood,” Indianapolis Star, Nov. 11, 1997; “Safety educators learn gun problems firsthand,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Nov. 12, 1997.
[19] “West side boy, 7, killed in gun accident,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, May 9, 1999.
[20] Mair and Mair, “Violence Prevention and Control Through Environmental Modifications,” Annu. Rev. Public Health 2003. 24:209-25.
[21] “Friend accidentally shoots and kills 12-year-old boy,” Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, May 9, 1999.