Mike
Site Co-Founder
imported post
**The new study makes similar conclusions as did the Kates and Centerwall Studies**
Key findings:
[align=left]1. Gun control does not affect criminal use of guns.[/align] [align=left]2. Gun crimes are committed with illegally owned guns[/align] [align=left]3. Socio economic factors explain levels of violent conduct in societies[/align] [align=left]--[/align] [align=left]Firearm Homicide in Australia, Canada,[/align] [align=left]and New Zealand:[/align]
[align=left]What Can We Learn From Long-Term International Comparisons?[/align]
[align=left]Samara McPhedran1, Jeanine Baker, and Pooja Singh[/align]Journal of Interpersonal Violence XX(X) 1 –12
© The Author(s) 2010Reprints and permission:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0886260510362893
SNIP
[align=left]It is pertinent to note that the level of legislative restriction surrounding[/align] [align=left]firearms ownership differs between the three countries. For example, Canada[/align] [align=left]and New Zealand permit the ownership and use of the types of firearms that[/align] [align=left]are banned in Australia. In addition, Canada, like Australia, mandates registration[/align] [align=left]of all firearms whereas New Zealand, unlike Canada and Australia, does not[/align] [align=left]require registration of all firearms.
[/align][align=left]
[/align][align=left]However, these differences do not appear[/align] [align=left]to be reflected in the long-term declines in homicide rates, suggesting the[/align] [align=left]need to consider other explanations for the trends.[/align]
[align=left]Existing literature highlights relationships between social disadvantage[/align] [align=left]and crime (Jones-Webb & Wall, 2008; Phillips, 2002; Wilson, 1987), and[/align] [align=left]there is a degree of empirical support for the hypothesis that homicide rates are[/align] [align=left]associated with economic indices such as unemployment
[/align] [align=left](Bellair & Roscigno, 2000; Krivo & Peterson, 2004; Lee & Slack, 2008).[/align][align=left]
[/align][align=left] Although a great deal of[/align] [align=left]study in this field comes from the United States and may not be wholly[/align] [align=left]applicable to other countries, Australian research, too, has found associations[/align] [align=left]between male youth unemployment and rates of lethal violence
[/align] [align=left] (Narayan & Smyth, 2004).[/align][align=left]
[/align][align=left] In the current context, it is worthwhile considering socioeconomic[/align] [align=left]correlates of crime in relation to the three countries of interest.[/align] [align=left]There are a range of socioeconomic indicators on which New Zealand has[/align] [align=left]varied from Australia and Canada over the past years, and some of these may[/align] [align=left]offer insight into the apparent differences in firearm homicide trends between[/align] [align=left]countries. Of particular note is that unemployment rates in Australia, New[/align] [align=left]Zealand, and Canada have consistently differed.
[/align][align=left]
[/align][align=left]According to Labor Force[/align] [align=left]Survey results from each country, after passing through the economic downturn[/align] [align=left]of the early 1990s and experiencing unemployment rates in the order of 10%,[/align] [align=left]all three countries have experienced declining rates of unemployment.[/align]
[align=left]However, unemployment rates in New Zealand have consistently been[/align] [align=left]lower than Australian unemployment rates, which have in turn been lower than[/align] [align=left]Canadian unemployment rates (ABS, 2008; Statistics Canada, 2008; Statistics[/align] [align=left]New Zealand, 2008). It should be noted that these figures do not differentiate[/align] [align=left]between short- and long-term unemployment. Future work will assess potential[/align] [align=left]relationships between unemployment and homicide rates in more detail. It will[/align] [align=left]also examine whether trends in nonfirearm homicide, as well as firearm[/align] [align=left]homicide, have differed between the three countries.[/align]McPhedran et al. 7
[align=left]The relationship of economic variables to the incidence of violent crime merits[/align] [align=left]further scrutiny. Although the three countries in this study have experienced[/align] [align=left]similar levels of economic growth as indexed by measures such as gross domestic[/align] [align=left]product (GDP), their comparative experiences of socioeconomic disadvantage[/align] [align=left]have not been explored. Although overall economic stability and growth may have[/align] [align=left]contributed to the observed declines in firearm homicides in each country, it is[/align] [align=left]increasingly recognized that there are inequalities in the distribution of wealth[/align] [align=left]within individual countries, evidenced by the elevated risk of social disadvantage[/align] [align=left]faced by certain groups in the community (e.g., unemployed young people, persons[/align] [align=left]with substance abuse or mental health issues). In this regard, broad measures such[/align] [align=left]as GDP may not provide a suitably nuanced reflection of social well-being and/or[/align] [align=left]injury mortality
[/align][align=left](Nasrullah, Laflamme, & Khan, 2008).[/align]
[align=left]The majority of firearms used to commit homicide in Canada and Australia[/align] [align=left]are not legally owned. More than 80% of firearm homicides in Canada[/align] [align=left](Dauvergne & De Socio, 2008) and more than 90% of firearm homicides in[/align] [align=left]Australia (Davies & Mouzos, 2007; Mouzos & Houliaris, 2006) are committed[/align] [align=left]by persons using illicitly owned firearms. Data on the licensing status of[/align] [align=left]homicide offenders could not be obtained for New Zealand; however, the[/align] [align=left]Australian and Canadian observations may indicate dissociation between firearm[/align] [align=left]violence and legislative approaches to firearms ownership, whereby legislative[/align] [align=left]reform does not influence the population of individuals who commit firearm[/align] [align=left]violence.
[/align][align=left]
[/align][align=left]Thus, broader changes in social policy and crime prevention policies[/align] [align=left]may explain the declines in firearm homicide.[/align]
**The new study makes similar conclusions as did the Kates and Centerwall Studies**
Key findings:
[align=left]1. Gun control does not affect criminal use of guns.[/align] [align=left]2. Gun crimes are committed with illegally owned guns[/align] [align=left]3. Socio economic factors explain levels of violent conduct in societies[/align] [align=left]--[/align] [align=left]Firearm Homicide in Australia, Canada,[/align] [align=left]and New Zealand:[/align]
[align=left]What Can We Learn From Long-Term International Comparisons?[/align]
[align=left]Samara McPhedran1, Jeanine Baker, and Pooja Singh[/align]Journal of Interpersonal Violence XX(X) 1 –12
© The Author(s) 2010Reprints and permission:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0886260510362893
SNIP
[align=left]It is pertinent to note that the level of legislative restriction surrounding[/align] [align=left]firearms ownership differs between the three countries. For example, Canada[/align] [align=left]and New Zealand permit the ownership and use of the types of firearms that[/align] [align=left]are banned in Australia. In addition, Canada, like Australia, mandates registration[/align] [align=left]of all firearms whereas New Zealand, unlike Canada and Australia, does not[/align] [align=left]require registration of all firearms.
[/align][align=left]
[/align][align=left]However, these differences do not appear[/align] [align=left]to be reflected in the long-term declines in homicide rates, suggesting the[/align] [align=left]need to consider other explanations for the trends.[/align]
[align=left]Existing literature highlights relationships between social disadvantage[/align] [align=left]and crime (Jones-Webb & Wall, 2008; Phillips, 2002; Wilson, 1987), and[/align] [align=left]there is a degree of empirical support for the hypothesis that homicide rates are[/align] [align=left]associated with economic indices such as unemployment
[/align] [align=left](Bellair & Roscigno, 2000; Krivo & Peterson, 2004; Lee & Slack, 2008).[/align][align=left]
[/align][align=left] Although a great deal of[/align] [align=left]study in this field comes from the United States and may not be wholly[/align] [align=left]applicable to other countries, Australian research, too, has found associations[/align] [align=left]between male youth unemployment and rates of lethal violence
[/align] [align=left] (Narayan & Smyth, 2004).[/align][align=left]
[/align][align=left] In the current context, it is worthwhile considering socioeconomic[/align] [align=left]correlates of crime in relation to the three countries of interest.[/align] [align=left]There are a range of socioeconomic indicators on which New Zealand has[/align] [align=left]varied from Australia and Canada over the past years, and some of these may[/align] [align=left]offer insight into the apparent differences in firearm homicide trends between[/align] [align=left]countries. Of particular note is that unemployment rates in Australia, New[/align] [align=left]Zealand, and Canada have consistently differed.
[/align][align=left]
[/align][align=left]According to Labor Force[/align] [align=left]Survey results from each country, after passing through the economic downturn[/align] [align=left]of the early 1990s and experiencing unemployment rates in the order of 10%,[/align] [align=left]all three countries have experienced declining rates of unemployment.[/align]
[align=left]However, unemployment rates in New Zealand have consistently been[/align] [align=left]lower than Australian unemployment rates, which have in turn been lower than[/align] [align=left]Canadian unemployment rates (ABS, 2008; Statistics Canada, 2008; Statistics[/align] [align=left]New Zealand, 2008). It should be noted that these figures do not differentiate[/align] [align=left]between short- and long-term unemployment. Future work will assess potential[/align] [align=left]relationships between unemployment and homicide rates in more detail. It will[/align] [align=left]also examine whether trends in nonfirearm homicide, as well as firearm[/align] [align=left]homicide, have differed between the three countries.[/align]McPhedran et al. 7
[align=left]The relationship of economic variables to the incidence of violent crime merits[/align] [align=left]further scrutiny. Although the three countries in this study have experienced[/align] [align=left]similar levels of economic growth as indexed by measures such as gross domestic[/align] [align=left]product (GDP), their comparative experiences of socioeconomic disadvantage[/align] [align=left]have not been explored. Although overall economic stability and growth may have[/align] [align=left]contributed to the observed declines in firearm homicides in each country, it is[/align] [align=left]increasingly recognized that there are inequalities in the distribution of wealth[/align] [align=left]within individual countries, evidenced by the elevated risk of social disadvantage[/align] [align=left]faced by certain groups in the community (e.g., unemployed young people, persons[/align] [align=left]with substance abuse or mental health issues). In this regard, broad measures such[/align] [align=left]as GDP may not provide a suitably nuanced reflection of social well-being and/or[/align] [align=left]injury mortality
[/align][align=left](Nasrullah, Laflamme, & Khan, 2008).[/align]
[align=left]The majority of firearms used to commit homicide in Canada and Australia[/align] [align=left]are not legally owned. More than 80% of firearm homicides in Canada[/align] [align=left](Dauvergne & De Socio, 2008) and more than 90% of firearm homicides in[/align] [align=left]Australia (Davies & Mouzos, 2007; Mouzos & Houliaris, 2006) are committed[/align] [align=left]by persons using illicitly owned firearms. Data on the licensing status of[/align] [align=left]homicide offenders could not be obtained for New Zealand; however, the[/align] [align=left]Australian and Canadian observations may indicate dissociation between firearm[/align] [align=left]violence and legislative approaches to firearms ownership, whereby legislative[/align] [align=left]reform does not influence the population of individuals who commit firearm[/align] [align=left]violence.
[/align][align=left]
[/align][align=left]Thus, broader changes in social policy and crime prevention policies[/align] [align=left]may explain the declines in firearm homicide.[/align]