Earlier editions of the research review and of the survey also used slightly different policies and outcomes. The outcomes listed here are also the same as those evaluated in our research review, except the survey did not include officer-involved shootings and did include property crime, the right to bear arms, and individuals' privacy. In some cases, the survey asked about a policy that was characterized slightly differently in our review of the scientific evidence for example, in the review, we distinguish between background checks and universal background checks and between permitless carry and various forms of concealed-carry laws. Note: Many of the policies listed here are the same as those evaluated in our research review. Legal acts of defensive gun use (using a firearm to protect oneself or others from imminent death or serious injury).Participation in hunting and sport shooting.Property crime (burglary, theft, and auto theft).Mass shootings (by the survey's definition, incidents in which four or more people are killed, not including the shooter).Policies and Outcomes Assessed in the Survey of Gun Policy Experts To begin to answer these questions, RAND researchers surveyed 173 gun policy experts (across two fieldings in 20) on what they believed the effects of the following 19 gun policies would be on ten different outcomes. If the experts chiefly disagree on the latter, this suggests a role for new and better scientific study of the true effects of gun policies.
Finally, it has not been clear whether experts disagree about which objectives gun policies should be trying to achieve or whether experts agree on the objectives but disagree on which policies are most likely to achieve those objectives. Less clear is whether there are laws or policies for which such differences are less stark, or whether there may be a combination of policies that experts of every stripe could regard as an improvement over existing policies. The opinions of these gun policy experts are an important influence on gun policy debates and decisions because people believe that the experts have an especially well-informed understanding of the gun polices under consideration, how similar laws have performed historically, and how specific policies would affect particular stakeholder groups.ĭifferent communities of gun policy experts have sharply divided views on many gun policies, as often becomes clear in the debates that occur when states and the federal government consider new gun legislation.
Without strong scientific evidence, policymakers and the public rely heavily on what advocates or social scientists believe the effects of policies are most likely to be. As our review of the existing literature demonstrated, there is very little scientific evidence available to support the decisions that policymakers and the public must make about whether to implement or change various gun policies.
0 kommentar(er)
