Race, structural racism and racial disparities in firearm homicide victimisation.

OBJECTIVES: To identify an approach in measuring the association between structural racism and racial disparities in firearm homicide victimisation focusing on racism, rather than race. METHODS: We examined associations of six measures of structural racism (Black/white disparity ratios in poverty, education, labour force participation, rental housing, single-parent households and index crime arrests) with state-level Black-white disparities in US age-adjusted firearm homicide victimisation rates 2010-2019. We regressed firearm homicide victimisation disparities on four specifications of independent variables: (1) absolute measure only; (2) absolute measure and per cent Black; (3) absolute measure and Black-white disparity ratio and (4) absolute measure, per cent Black and disparity ratio. RESULTS: For all six measures of structural racism the optimal specification included the absolute measure and Black-white disparity ratio and did not include per cent Black. Coefficients for the Black-white disparity were statistically significant, while per cent Black was not. CONCLUSIONS: In the presence of structural racism measures, the inclusion of per cent Black did not contribute to the explanation of firearm homicide disparities in this study. Findings provide empiric evidence for the preferred use of structural racism measures instead of race.

Association of state-level intoxicated driving laws with firearm homicide and suicide.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if an association exists between the number of driving under the influence (DUI) convictions required to activate federal firearms prohibitions and annual firearm homicide and suicide rates by state. METHODS: Ecological cross-sectional study of all US states from 2013 to 2017. We collected DUI law data from Thomson Reuters Westlaw database and firearm mortality data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Vital Statistics programme. RESULTS: Five states had laws such that one or two DUI convictions could result in prohibitions to firearms access according to federal law. Four states had no legal framework that would restrict firearms access because of DUI convictions; the remaining states could activate federal restrictions at three or more DUI convictions. Firearm-specific homicide (victimisations) rates were 19% lower among women in states where federal restrictions of firearms access occurred after one or two DUI offences (incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.81; 95% CI 0.64 to 1.01) and 18% lower in states with firearm prohibitions after three or more offences (IRR 0.82; 95% CI 0.71 to 0.95) compared with the states with no legal framework for prohibiting firearms after DUI convictions. There was no association between number of DUI activations and overall, or firearm-specific, suicide among the entire population (men and women) or among only women, or only men. CONCLUSIONS: DUI penalties that activate federal firearms prohibitions may be one pathway to reduce firearm homicide of female victims.

Perceptions of firearm-related harm among US adults living in firearm-owning households: a nationally representative study.

Decision-making on having firearms at home may be contingent on perceptions of the likelihood of their negative and positive outcomes. Using data from a nationally representative survey (n=4030) conducted during 30 July 2019 to 11 August 2019, we described how US adults living in firearm-owning households perceived the relative likelihood of firearm-related harm by injury intent ('accidentally harm self or someone else with a gun', 'injure self on purpose with a gun' and 'injure someone else on purpose with a gun') for groups at risk of compromised decision-making (children; adolescents and individuals with mental health issues, substance use disorders or cognitive impairment). We found that US adults living in firearm-owning households believe that unintentional firearm injuries are more likely than intentional self-inflicted or assault-related firearm injuries, despite evidence to the contrary. Prior evidence indicates that communicating risk in relative terms can motivate behaviour change; therefore, findings from this study might helpfully inform health communications around firearm safety.