Sanchez 1

Carlos Sanchez

Professor Martinez

ENGL 1302-217

8 March 2024

A Literature Review of Gun Laws in the United States

Introduction

Laws are created for the purpose of providing law and order to a community. This

literature review specifically goes into detail on gun laws and the effects these laws have in the

United States. When it comes to gun laws and their effectiveness in each state, scholars are

divided on the impacts that each of the laws have on practice vs. theory. Most scholars

mentioned in this literature review argue for states to have stricter gun laws because these laws

contribute to many benefits. Other scholars are arguing for other means/ways of reducing

violence rather than relying on the passing of laws. This literature review touches on the benefits

of stricter gun laws by analyzing gun violence in permissive states vs. restrictive states, the

effects gun laws have on suicide, homicide, and robbery rates, and programs that are designed to

reduce violence rather than relying on gun laws. The scholars’ articles show there are benefits for

the American people by strengthening U.S. gun laws and community-building programs because

they save lives, help Americans feel safer, and prevent increases in mass shootings, suicides,

homicides, and robberies.

Benefits of Stricter Gun Laws

 Sanchez 2

Barry, Colleen L., et al., Ghiani, Marco, et al., and Reeping, Paul M., et al. each have

their own stance and opinions about state gun laws. Barry et al. claim “that large majorities of

both gun owners and non-gun owners strongly support a range of measures to strengthen US gun

laws” (Barry 1733-1734). The results show that there is “a 5-percentage-point increase in support

for requiring purchases licensing (from 72 to 77 percent), a 5-percentage-point increase for safe

gun storage laws (from 69 to 74 percent), and a 4-percentage-point increase for universal

background check laws (from 84 percent to 88 percent)” (Barry 1730). The evidence shows that

as time has passed, there has been a growing amount of support for stricter gun laws in the

United States. The reasoning for this support could be that the American people are seeing results

by passing these laws. Ghiani et al. claim that states that have restrictive gun laws result in fewer

students carrying weapons, and students will have a much better “perception of school safety”

(Ghiani 513). Strong U.S. gun laws are “associated with a decrease in the probability that an

adolescent reported being threatened or injured with a weapon at school, missed at least one day

of school due to feeling unsafe, or carried a weapon at any location” (Ghiani 514). A person who

wants to obtain a weapon is discouraged because these laws make it more difficult and

challenging for them to acquire a weapon, so it results in there being less violence in schools.

Reeping et al. claim that states that have permissive laws with a high amount of gun ownership

tend to have a higher chance of a mass shooting in that state. The evidence shows that the

“[f]ully adjusted regression analyses showed that a 10 unit increase in state gun law

permissiveness was associated with a significant 11.5% (95% confidence interval 4.2% to

19.3%, P=0.002) higher rate of mass shootings” (Reeping 1). States that had “[a] 10% increase in

gun ownership was associated with a significant 35.1% (12.7% to 62.7%, P=1.001) higher rate of

mass shootings” (Reeping 1). There is a clear difference between states that have permissive and
 Sanchez 3

restrictive laws. An increase in gun violence is evident when there are two factors: a permissive

state and an above-average percentage of gun ownership. Statistics such as the ones used by

Reeping show a clear connection between the two factors mentioned above and an increase in

mass shootings. Although all scholars researched different aspects of gun laws and their effects,

they all agreed that with stricter gun laws, there were positive benefits associated with them.

Gun Law Effects on Suicides, Homicides, and Robberies

Continelli, T., Lott, Jr, John E. Whitley., and Wise, Jacqui all have separate conclusions

about how gun laws affect suicides, homicides, and robberies. Continelli claims that houses that

have a high percentage of gun ownership and states that have restrictive gun laws result in

“lower gun robbery and homicide rates” (Continelli 130). The reasoning for these results is that

if a state has strict gun laws, it discourages criminals, and it makes it a lot harder for them to get

a hold of these weapons, especially if they know the person they are targeting has a gun inside

the house. Lott, Jr and John E. Whitley claim that the “safe-storage gun laws have no impact on

accidental gun deaths or total suicide rates” (Lott 685). This law had no positive impact. On the

contrary, gun violence consistently continued to increase. The evidence behind this claim is that

“[t]he number of rapes and aggravated assaults is still rising 5 full years after the law is in effect,

while robberies peak at almost 31,000 during the their year. Of the property crimes, burglaries

show the biggest increase over the period” (Lott 682). The reasoning behind this evidence is that

this law only negatively affected law-abiding citizens. No evidence showed that criminals were

negatively affected by the passing of this law. Wise, Jacqui claims that the states with the most

restrictive gun laws have “lower rates of firearm homicides and suicides than states with more

relaxed laws” (Wise 1). The evidence showed “[f]irearm homicide rates were highest in counties

in states with the weakest state laws and where neighboring states also had laws of low or
 Sanchez 4

medium strength (incidence rate ratio 1.38 (95% confidence interval 1.02 to 1.88))” (Wise 1).

The explanation for these results is that the states that had more restrictive firearm laws resulted

in lower suicide and homicide rates. This applies vice versa; the states with the less restrictive

laws resulted in more suicides and homicides. The stricter state gun laws make it harder for

people to commit crimes such as suicides and homicides. Since all three scholars researched

different factors and/or effects of gun laws, it is no surprise that they all got different results. The

states with strict gun laws have a positive impact despite some laws, such as the safe-storage gun

law, that do not have an impact at all, so when looking at gun laws and their effects, there may be

different findings when analyzing the specifics rather than focusing on the term of gun laws in

general.

Community-building Programs

Branas, Charles C., et al., and Kwon, Eustina G., et al. argue for the creation of more

programs that are directed towards helping and building communities as a way to help reduce

violence. Specifically, the less fortunate communities that are not given many opportunities. As

stated by Kwon, “[a]lthough stricter gun laws were associated with lower death rates in all

communities, these gun laws did not equalize the consequences on a relative scale, and

disadvantaged communities remained disproportionally impacted” (Kwon 1-2). The reasoning

for this could be that the communities' needs are not being fully addressed, so that could explain

the disproportionate results. Branas, Charles C., et al. support their claim with evidence: “[a]

scientific review of programs in 264 cities showed that every additional nonprofit community-

building programs per 100[,]000 residents were associated with a 9% reduction in homicide and

a 6% reduction in violence” (Branas 243). The reasoning behind this is that many criminals seem

to act out of necessity when faced with social and economic hardships. Both of the authors argue
 Sanchez 5

that while gun laws do have an effect and yield results, more often than not, the disadvantaged

communities showed disproportional results. They argue that helping out the community can

yield more promising results. A pro that both of these authors note is that while these programs

help reduce violence, they also improve people's lives simultaneously.

Conclusion

Gun laws have always been a controversial topic in the United States. The goal of these

laws is to prevent suicides and homicides, which will ultimately save American lives. There is

evidence that shows a reduction in gun violence in restrictive states. Due to the amount of gun

violence taking place in the United States, scholars have conducted extensive research on the

effectiveness of gun laws. They all agree that gun laws are good for our community because they

result in fewer deaths. However, there are some gun laws, such as the safe storage gun law, that

do not have an impact at all. In order to combat violence, stricter gun laws should be enforced

throughout the United States, and there should be an increase in community-building programs.

These programs are especially needed for the less fortunate communities because they are more

likely to have money, mental health, and self-esteem issues. The less fortunate may feel crime is

their only way out so having a community program can help them by giving them a support

group to go to. For the most part, the results consistently from the research done by scholars

showed that states with stricter gun laws result in less violence and crime, and states with

permissive gun laws result in more violence and crime. To summarize, restrictive gun law states

with high gun ownership had a decrease in robberies and homicides; safe storage laws did not

show a decrease in the number of rapes, robberies, and burglaries; and restrictive states showed a

lower percentage of homicides and suicides compared to permissive states.

 Sanchez 6

Works Cited

Barry, Colleen L., et al. “Trends In Public Opinion On US Gun Laws: Majorities Of Gun Owners
And Non–Gun Owners Support A Range Of Measures.” Health Affairs, vol. 38, no. 10,
2019, pp. 1727–34, https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2019.00576.
Branas, Charles C., et al. “Beyond Gun Laws—Innovative Interventions to Reduce Gun Violence
in the United States.” JAMA Psychiatry (Chicago, Ill.), vol. 78, no. 3, 2021, pp. 243–44,
https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2020.2493.
Continelli, T. “The Effect of State Gun Laws on the Supply of Guns and Gun Crimes: A
Multilevel Modeling Analysis.” Health Services Research, vol. 55, no. S1, 2020, pp. 130–
130, https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.13517.
Ghiani, Marco, et al. “Gun Laws and School Safety.” Journal of Epidemiology and Community
Health (1979), vol. 73, no. 6, 2019, pp. 509–15, https://doi.org/10.1136/jech-2018-
211246.
Kwon, Eustina G., et al. “Association of Community Vulnerability and State Gun Laws With
Firearm Deaths in Children and Adolescents Aged 10 to 19 Years.” JAMA Network
Open, vol. 6, no. 5, 2023, pp. e2314863–e2314863,
https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.14863.
Lott, Jr, and John E. Whitley. “Safe‐Storage Gun Laws: Accidental Deaths, Suicides, and
Crime.” The Journal of Law & Economics, vol. 44, no. S2, 2001, pp. 659–89,
https://doi.org/10.1086/338346.
Reeping, Paul M., et al. “State Gun Laws, Gun Ownership, and Mass Shootings in the US: Cross
Sectional Time Series.” BMJ (Online), vol. 364, 2019, pp. l542–l542,
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l542.
Wise, Jacqui. “Stronger US Gun Laws Are Linked to Lower Homicide and Suicide Rates.” BMJ
(Online), vol. 360, 2018, pp. k1030-, https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k1030.