IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/applec/v47y2015i38p4090-4101.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The effects of state and federal background checks on state-level gun-related murder rates

Author

Listed:
  • Mark Gius

Abstract

The purpose of the present study was to determine whether firearm background checks are significantly related to gun-related murder rates. The present study differs from prior research in several ways. First, a large longitudinal data-set is used; data for 50 states for the period 1980-2011 are examined. Second, the effects of both federal and state background checks, including state-mandated private sales background checks, are estimated. Finally, a fixed effects model that controls for both state-level and year-specific effects is used. Results suggest that states that require dealer background checks have lower gun-related murder rates than other states. In addition, after implementation of the Brady Act, gun-related murder rates fell. However, the results also suggest that, for the entire period in question, states with private sales background checks had higher gun-related murder rates than states with no such background checks. If one only looks the Brady Act period, however, then the private sales background check variable is insignificant. These results for private sales background checks are novel and contrary to the results of much prior research in this area.

Suggested Citation

  • Mark Gius, 2015. "The effects of state and federal background checks on state-level gun-related murder rates," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(38), pages 4090-4101, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:applec:v:47:y:2015:i:38:p:4090-4101
    DOI: 10.1080/00036846.2015.1023946
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/00036846.2015.1023946
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00036846.2015.1023946?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Davidson, Russell & MacKinnon, James G, 1981. "Several Tests for Model Specification in the Presence of Alternative Hypotheses," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(3), pages 781-793, May.
    2. Olson, David E & Maltz, Michael D, 2001. "Right-to-Carry Concealed Weapon Laws and Homicide in Large U.S. Counties: The Effect on Weapon Types, Victim Characteristics, and Victim-Offender Relationships," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 44(2), pages 747-770, October.
    3. Moody, Carlisle E, 2001. "Testing for the Effects of Concealed Weapons Laws: Specification Errors and Robustness," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 44(2), pages 799-813, October.
    4. Rubin, Paul H. & Dezhbakhsh, Hashem, 2003. "The effect of concealed handgun laws on crime: beyond the dummy variables," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(2), pages 199-216, June.
    5. Ruddell, Rick & Mays, G. Larry, 2005. "State background checks and firearms homicides," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 127-136.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gius, Mark, 2019. "Using the synthetic control method to determine the effects of concealed carry laws on state-level murder rates," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 1-11.
    2. Briggs Depew & Isaac D. Swensen, 2019. "The Decision to Carry: The Effect of Crime on Concealed-Carry Applications," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 54(4), pages 1121-1153.
    3. Daniel Cerqueira & João Manoel Pinho de Mello, 2013. "Evaluating a National Anti-Firearm Law and Estimating the Causal Effect of Guns on Crime," Textos para discussão 607, Department of Economics PUC-Rio (Brazil).
    4. Mark Gius, 2017. "Effects of Permit-to-Purchase Laws on State-Level Firearm Murder Rates," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 45(1), pages 73-80, March.
    5. Schaffer, Mark & Kleck, Gary & Kovandzic, Tomislav, 2005. "Gun Prevalence, Homicide Rates and Causality: A GMM Approach to Endogeneity Bias," CEPR Discussion Papers 5357, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Bilgel, Firat, 2020. "State Gun Control Laws, Gun Ownership and the Supply of Homicide Organ Donors," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    7. Venkatesh Shankar & Pablo Azar & Matthew Fuller, 2008. "—: A Multicategory Brand Equity Model and Its Application at Allstate," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(4), pages 567-584, 07-08.
    8. repec:rri:wpaper:201303 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Rao, Surekha & Ghali, Moheb & Krieg, John, 2008. "On the J-test for nonnested hypotheses and Bayesian extension," MPRA Paper 14637, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Garcia, Rene, 1998. "Asymptotic Null Distribution of the Likelihood Ratio Test in Markov Switching Models," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 39(3), pages 763-788, August.
    11. Burton, Diana M. & Love, H. Alan, 1996. "A Review of Alternative Expectations Regimes in Commodity Markets: Specification, Estimation, and Hypothesis Testing Using Structural Models," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 25(2), pages 213-231, October.
    12. Sebri, Maamar, 2009. "La Zone Méditerranéenne Face à la Pollution de L’air : Une Investigation Econométrique [The Mediterranean Zone in front of Air pollution: an Econometric Investigation]," MPRA Paper 32382, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Kapteyn, Arie & Kleinjans, Kristin J. & van Soest, Arthur, 2009. "Intertemporal consumption with directly measured welfare functions and subjective expectations," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 425-437, October.
    14. Dallas S. Batten & Daniel L. Thornton, 1985. "Weighted monetary aggregates as intermediate targets," Working Papers 1985-010, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
    15. Marc Lavoie & Gabriel Rodriguez & Mario Seccareccia, 2004. "Similitudes and Discrepancies in Post-Keynesian and Marxist Theories of Investment: A Theoretical and Empirical Investigation," International Review of Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(2), pages 127-149.
    16. Alvaro Pereira & João Jalles & Martin Andresen, 2012. "Structural change and foreign direct investment: globalization and regional economic integration," Portuguese Economic Journal, Springer;Instituto Superior de Economia e Gestao, vol. 11(1), pages 35-82, April.
    17. Abdullah Almansour & Margaret Insley, 2016. "The Impact of Stochastic Extraction Cost on the Value of an Exhaustible Resource: An Application to the Alberta Oil Sands," The Energy Journal, , vol. 37(2), pages 61-88, April.
    18. John J. Donohue & Abhay Aneja & Kyle D. Weber, 2019. "RTC Laws Increase Violent Crime: Moody and Marvell Have Missed the Target," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 16(1), pages 1-97–113, March.
    19. Mutuc, Maria Erlinda M. & Rejesus, Roderick M. & Pan, Suwen & Yorobe, Jose M., Jr., 2012. "Impact Assessment of Bt Corn Adoption in the Philippines," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Southern Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 44(1), pages 1-19, February.
    20. Xu, T.T., 2012. "The role of credit in international business cycles," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1202, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    21. Paul Collier & Anke Hoeffler, 2004. "Greed and grievance in civil war," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 56(4), pages 563-595, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:applec:v:47:y:2015:i:38:p:4090-4101. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RAEC20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.