ReportWire

Tag: Guns and Violence

  • Heavy drinking, handgun-carrying linked among rural youth

    Heavy drinking, handgun-carrying linked among rural youth

    [ad_1]

    Newswise — In the rural United States, an adolescent who drinks heavily has a 43% greater probability of carrying a handgun in the following year, according to a study published this month in The Journal of Rural Health.

    “While there has been a lot of research on this correlation in urban areas, little is known about the association between alcohol use, particularly heavy drinking, and handgun carrying in rural areas,” said lead author Alice Ellyson, an acting assistant professor of pediatrics at the University of Washington School of Medicine and investigator in UW Medicine’s  Firearm Injury & Policy Research Program.

    “Our study establishes a clear link between these two behaviors in rural areas, and there are evidence-based prevention programs to address both,” she said. Heavy drinking was defined as consuming five or more alcoholic drinks in a row at least once in the previous two weeks. 

    The study involved a longitudinal sample of 2,002 youth ages 12 to 26 in 12 rural communities in seven states, including Washington. Survey responses were collected annually from 2004 to 2019 starting with children who were in fifth/sixth grades.

    The authors say their findings can inform strategies to discourage drinking and thereby decrease the likelihood of handgun-carrying among youth and young adults in rural areas. The findings, coupled with existing evidence-based approaches, might also offer key tactics to lower the homicide and suicide rates among adolescents in rural areas, the study concluded.

    The association between heavy drinking and gun-carrying also was evident (38% greater) among young adults ages 19 to 26, noted senior author Dr. Ali Rowhani-Rahbar, a professor of epidemiology at the UW School of Public Health and pediatrics at the UW School of Medicine. He is also the UW Bartley Dobb Professor for the Study and Prevention of Violence and the interim director of the UW Medicine’s Firearm Injury & Policy Research Program at the University of Washington School of Medicine.

    The study did not break out the differences between male and female respondents nor did it address the respondents’ likelihood of firing the handgun, Rowhani-Rahbar said.

    He added that a major strength of the study was its longitudinal design, which allowed for the examination of handgun carrying after alcohol use.

    Understanding youth behaviors associated with carrying a firearm has significant safety implications. In 2020, suicide and homicide were among the leading causes of death among U.S. individuals ages 12-26 years. About 91% of homicides and 52% of suicides among this age group involved a firearm, the study noted.

    Recent evidence suggests that rural adolescents may start carrying a handgun earlier and carry with a higher frequency and duration than their urban counterparts. Handgun-carrying is associated with bullying, physical violence, and other risk factors for violence, the study notes.

    Preventing or delaying handgun-carrying among rural adolescents may be an important strategy for preventing firearm-related harm, authors noted.

    During young adulthood (ages 19-26), the association between alcohol use and heavy drinking were generally similar to adolescence.

    On this point, Ellyson said she was surprised that the association between heavy drinking and handgun-carrying was similar and sustained between adolescent and young adult respondents. She expected the association to weaken more or disappear with age.

    She identified Communities That Care as a key program for preventing these behaviors and their consequences in rural areas. The program helps communities take a broad approach to preventing problem behaviors among youth.

    “It has a good track record reducing alcohol consumption and violence in randomized controlled trials, and it is an evidence-based program designed for rural communities,” she said.

    For adolescents, the message is simple: Don’t drink alcohol or carry a handgun. Young adults, however, will need a more nuanced message, Ellyson said.

    “Both alcohol use and handgun-carrying become legal in young adulthood. We want to use a harm reduction approach for young adults who engage in both behaviors (drinking and handgun carrying) so they are done in a safe way,” she said.

    The study did not look into the why of this correlation, or whether the handgun was fired or crimes committed later. That will be for the next study, Rowhani-Rahbar said.

    An earlier study by Ellyson and colleagues found six distinct patterns of when and how often individuals in a rural area carry a handgun. In these communities, young people carry handguns at more than twice the rate of their counterparts in urban settings.  Because alcohol use is also more common among rural youth, prevention programs focusing on them are important.

    The studies were funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

    Category: 

    Research

    [ad_2]

    University of Washington School of Medicine and UW Medicine

    Source link

  • Higher risk of Type 2 Diabetes for victims of partner violence and child abuse

    Higher risk of Type 2 Diabetes for victims of partner violence and child abuse

    [ad_1]

    Newswise — Ann Arbor, August 17, 2023 – According to the results of a new study in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine, published by Elsevier, exposure to interpersonal violence throughout childhood or adulthood increases an individual’s chance of developing adult-onset diabetes by more than 20%. Data showed the risk level is similar among adult males and females and lower income Black and White Americans.

    Lead investigator Maureen Sanderson, PhD, Department of Family and Community Medicine, Meharry Medical College, explained, “While previous research has linked exposure to interpersonal violence with a higher risk for developing type 2 diabetes, our study is the first to confirm a consistent association among different genders and races within a large, diverse population. Moreover, we were able to establish the temporal sequence for experiencing violence and the subsequent risk of developing diabetes over time.”

    Previous research has linked lifetime exposure to interpersonal violence or abuse to an increased risk of chronic psychosocial stress, anxiety, depression, and obesity. The investigators took a deeper look at the relationship between these factors, particularly obesity, and the risk of developing adult-onset diabetes using data from the Southern Community Cohort Study, a large study of an economically and ethnically diverse population in the southeastern US. More than 25,000 participants were contacted multiple times from 2002 to 2015, answering questions about partner violence (including adult psychological harm, physical violence, and threats), child abuse and neglect (physical, sexual, or emotional abuse), and current health (including diagnoses for adult-onset diabetes).

    Co-investigator Ann Coker, PhD, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, College of Medicine and Center for Research on Violence Against Women, University of Kentucky,  noted, “From this uniquely diverse cohort of over 25,000 participants, we saw that two commonly occurring forms of interpersonal violence, partner violence and child abuse (36% and 32%, respectively, in the study group), increased the risk of developing adult-onset diabetes by 20-35% when compared to individuals in this same cohort who had not experienced interpersonal violence. These forms of violence increase the risk of trauma-associated stress disorders, which can cause adult-onset diabetes.”

    Experiencing both child abuse and adult violence increased the risk of developing diabetes by 35% for both Black and White participants and males and females.

    Rates of interpersonal violence, psychosocial distress, and obesity all increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. Dr. Sanderson commented, “Our finding that lifetime interpersonal violence was associated with a significantly increased risk of developing diabetes across race and gender before the additional social stress of the COVID-19 pandemic strongly suggests the need for helping professionals across disciplines to implement effective violence prevention and intervention strategies to reduce the short- and long-term social and health consequences of partner violence and child abuse.”

    Dr. Coker added, “The good news is that effective intervention and prevention resources exist that can help patients and communities prevent or reduce partner violence and child abuse/neglect and have an impact on health outcomes including type 2 diabetes.”

    The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Center for Injury Prevention and Control provides toolkits for clinicians’ and communities’ use to prevent violence. Key strategies include strengthening economic supports for families, promoting social norms to protect against adversity and violence, ensuring strong starts for children, teaching skills, connecting youth to caring adults, and intervening to lessen harm.

    In clinics, professionals can use safe, sensitive, trauma-informed approaches to ask patients about their current or lifetime experiences with child abuse or neglect and partner violence.

    Co-investigator L. Lauren Brown, PhD, Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences, Meharry Medical College, noted, “These violence prevention strategies can reduce and ultimately prevent the lifelong consequences of child abuse and partner violence — but only if we screen and engage people for care. Asking about past violence can begin to address the chronic stress response that leads to diabetes. Asking about current violence can interrupt the violence with skillful follow-up from clinical and community-based resources.”

    [ad_2]

    Elsevier

    Source link

  • People Are Falsely Denying Firearm Ownership, and It’s Not Who You Might Think

    People Are Falsely Denying Firearm Ownership, and It’s Not Who You Might Think

    [ad_1]

    Newswise — Some firearm owners may not want researchers to know they own firearms, according to a study by the New Jersey Gun Violence Research Center at Rutgers.

    In a study published in Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, researchers found that based on their answers to a variety of other questions, a group of individuals appeared as though they might be falsely denying firearm ownership when directly asked by researchers.

    While some of these individuals resemble what previous research indicated to be a typical American firearm owner (e.g., white, male), others looked quite different (racial or ethnic minority, female, living in urban environments), highlighting that the landscape of firearm ownership in the United States may be shifting.

    “Some individuals are falsely denying firearm ownership, resulting in research not accurately capturing the experiences of all firearm owners in the U.S.,” said Allison Bond, lead author of the study and a doctoral student with the New Jersey Gun Violence Research Center. “More concerningly, these individuals are not being reached with secure firearm storage messaging and firearm safety resources, which may result in them storing their firearms in an unsecure manner, which in turn increases the risk for firearm injury and death.”

    Rutgers researchers surveyed a group of 3,500 English-speaking adults who are U.S. residents. Each participant was asked if they own a firearm as well as demographic factors and questions assessing perceived threats.

    The study indicates a percentage of firearm owners may not feel comfortable disclosing their ownership status. Among those identified as potentially falsely denying firearm ownership, many were women living alone in urban environments.

    Recent research shows that since 2019, half of all new firearm owners in the U.S. identify as female and more individuals from racial and ethnic minority backgrounds have purchased firearms.

    Although researchers can’t say with certainty that individuals in the study were lying about firearm ownership, the study nonetheless highlights the importance of considering that our understanding of who owns firearms and our efforts to reach firearm owners on issues, such as secure firearm storage, may be overlooking parts of the intended audience.

     “There are several reasons some firearm owners might feel uncomfortable disclosing that they own firearms,” said Michael Anestis, executive director of the New Jersey Gun Violence Research Center and senior author of the study. “These results serve as an important reminder that we should not assume we know everything about who owns firearms and that we should ensure that our efforts to reach firearm owners can resonate with broad audiences we might not realize would benefit from the message.”

    [ad_2]

    Rutgers University-New Brunswick

    Source link

  • Expert available to Discuss Handgun Study Ahead of National Gun Violence Awareness Day

    Expert available to Discuss Handgun Study Ahead of National Gun Violence Awareness Day

    [ad_1]

    Dr. Hasan Buker recently published an article, co-authored with two students, titled “Carrying a handgun in public vs. taking a handgun to school among youth: an exploration of the predicting power of risk factors related to delinquency, aggression, and victimization.” 

    Dr. Buker, and his co-authors examined data collected from 5,648 high school students to understand the risk factors for gun carrying among those youth. The results of the study indicated that the youth with increased anger, higher delinquent/anti-social behavior, and bullying behavior were significantly more likely to carry a handgun. On the other hand, youth who took a handgun to school mostly reported carrying a handgun in public as well.  Increased delinquent/anti-social behavior was another significant determinant of taking a handgun to school. The study has important implications for school safety as it indicates important risk factors for gun carrying among youth.

    Dr. Buker is very responsive and would be enthusiastic about coverage. 

     

    Biography :
    Dr. Buker joined UWF in 2019 as an Associate Professor and the Chair of the Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice. Before accepting his current position, he held faculty positions at Minot State University, Washington State University, and several other institutions in Turkey. Buker also served as a law enforcement officer at different roles and ranks prior to his academic career. Dr. Buker has been an innovative and engaged instructor, a vigorous researcher with a vibrant agenda responsive to contemporary and practical issues in his field, and a dedicated servant of his institutions, profession, and the community in different capacities. Degrees & Institutions: Dr. Buker received his Ph.D. from the Washington State University’s Program in Criminal Justice in 2007. He earned a masters degree from the Ankara University and a bachelor’s degree from the Turkish National Police Academy. He also attended criminal justice masters programs at the University of North Texas and the University of Arkansas at Little Rock. Research: Juvenile delinquency/justice, criminological theory, crimes against children, law enforcement, and the administration of criminal justice organizations are the primary research interests of Dr. Buker. He was the principal investigator, co-principal investigator, research fellow, and a consultant in numerous funded research endeavors. During these research activities, he corroborated with his students, fellow researchers, and practitioners from various countries, international organizations, such as UNICEF, governmental and non-governmental agencies, and academic disciplines. Classes Taught: Crimes against Children Criminological Theory Criminal Investigation Criminal Psychology and Profiling Policing Juvenile Delinquency / Justice Introduction to Criminal Justice Criminal Justice Administration Cybercrimes Terrorism and Homeland Security Research Methods Statistics Special Interests: Children and Society Criminal Justice Technology Publications: Peer Reviewed Journal Articles: Erbay, A., & Buker, H. (2019). Youth Who Kill in Turkey: A Study on Juvenile Homicide Offenders, Their Offenses, and Their Differences From Violent and Nonviolent Juvenile Delinquents. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260519834088 Buker, H., Gultekin, S. & Akgul, A*. (2018). Expected Functions of an Effective Child Justice System Administration? A Framework Developed through a Qualitative Study in Turkey. Journal of Human Sciences, 16, 87-101. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14687/jhs.v16i1.5452 Buker, H. & A. Erbay*. (2018). Is this kid a likely experimenter or a likely persister?: An Analysis of Individual-Level and Family-Level Risk Factors Predicting Multiple Offending Among a Group of Adjudicated Youth. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 63, 4024–4045. Dolu, O., Buker, H. & Uludağ, S. (2012). A Critical Assessment of the Deterrent Capacity of the Turkish Criminal Justice System, Journal of Ankara University Law School, 61, 69-106. Buker, H. (2011). Formation of Self-Control: Gottfredson & Hirschi’s General Theory of Crime and beyond. Aggressive and Violent Behavior: A Journal of Review, 16, 265-276. Dolu, O., Buker, H. & Uludağ, S. (2010). Effects of Violent Video Games on Children: An Assessment on Aggression, Violence and Delinquency. Turkish Journal of Forensic Sciences, 9, 54-75. Buker, H. & Dolu, O. (2010). Police Job Satisfaction in Turkey: Effects of Demographic, Organizational and Jurisdictional Factors. International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice, 34, 25-51. Buker, H. (2010). How important is it to Know “How a Police Officer Feels” for Police Supervisors? Assessing a Rare Police Supervisor Promotion System. Police Practice and Research: An International Journal, 11, 61-77. Dolu, O. & Buker, H. (2009). Limits of Deterrence: A Critical Approach to Deterrence-based Crime Prevention Policies. Turkish Journal of Police Studies, 11, 1-22. Ellis, L., Das, S., Buker, H. (2008). Androgen-promoted Bodily Traits and Criminality: A test of the Evolutionary Neuroandrogenic Theory. Personality and Indivıdual Differences, 44, 699-709. Buker, H. & F. Wiecko (2007). Are causes of Stress Global? Testing the Effects of Common Police Stressors on the Turkish National Police. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management, 30, 291-309. Books, Book Chapters, Entries, and Edited Volumes: Buker, H. (Eds.) (2014). Children and Violence: Children Under the Pressure of Social Violence, Volume 1: Children as the Victims of Violence. SAMER Scientific Publication Series: İstanbul – Turkey. Dolu, O.; Uludag, S. and Buker, H. (2012). Crime, Justice, and Children in Turkey: A Critical Assessment of the Turkish Juvenile Justice System. Netherlands Police Academy Publication (OBT): Den Haag, Netherlands. Buker, H. (2012). Fraudulent Forensic Evidence: Malpractice in Crime Laboratories. LFB Scholarly Publishing: El Paso, TX. Buker, H. & Herberholz, M. (2019). Sex offenders in Prisons. In Robert Worley & Vidisha Worley (Ed.). American Prisons and Jails: An Encyclopedia of Controversies and Trends. ABC-CLIO, Santa Barbara, CA. Buker, H. & Balcioglu, E. (2016). Domestic Violence. In A. Sozer and E. Balcioglu.. (Eds.) Criminology, pp. 373-400. Nobel Publications, Istanbul – Turkey. Buker, H. (2013). Accountability and Transparency in Organizations. In S. Gultekin (Eds.) Organization Theories: Classical and Modern Perspectives, pp. 131-170. Seckin Publications, Ankara – Turkey. Buker, H. (2012). Malpractice as an Administrative Problem: Individual or Organizational Level Failure? In H. Kavruk, Public Administration in Turkey from a Theoretical and Practical Perspective, pp. 699-724. Todaie-Türkiye Ve Orta Doğu Amme İdaresi Enstitüsü: Ankara – Turkey. Buker, H. & Dolu, O. (2010). Colvin, Mark, Francis T. Cullen, and Thomas Vander Ven: Coercion, Social Support, and Crime. In T. Cullen & Pamela Wilcox (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Criminological Theory, pp. 203-206. Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412959193.n56 Dolu, O. & Buker, H. (2010). Colvin, Mark: Coercion Theory. In T. Cullen & Pamela Wilcox (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Criminological Theory, pp. 194-197. Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781412959193.n54 Buker, H. (2010). Changing the Organization and Organizing the Change in the Context of Community Policing. In A. Sozer (Eds.), Community Oriented Policing: Society, Crime, and Security, pp. 115-135, Adalet Yayınevi: Ankara, Turkey.

    [ad_2]

    University of West Florida

    Source link

  • Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions Hosting Panel Discussion On Alcohol Misuse and Gun Violence June 1 at Noon

    Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions Hosting Panel Discussion On Alcohol Misuse and Gun Violence June 1 at Noon

    [ad_1]

    The Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions, based at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, is hosting an online panel on Thursday, June 1 at noon EDT, to discuss a new report highlighting the dangerous intersection of alcohol misuse and gun violence. The report, “Alcohol Misuse and Gun Violence: An Evidence Based Approach,” was released earlier this month by the Consortium for Risk-Based Firearm Policy, a group of leading experts that advances evidence-based gun violence prevention policies, and the Center for Gun Violence Solutions. Alcohol misuse is a risk factor for all forms of gun violence, including homicides and suicides. The report includes policy recommendations aimed at reducing this risk. The panelists—experts in gun violence and public health—will discuss the report’s policy recommendations and research cited in the report. The briefing will be moderated by Silvia Villarreal, MPP director of research translation at the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions, with opening remarks from Josh Horwitz, JD, co-director of the Center for Gun Violence Solutions.

    ***Register for the Briefing*** 

    Panelists include: 

    • Rose Kagawa, PhD, MPH, University of California, Davis
      • Assistant professor, Department of Emergency Medicine.
      • Faculty member, the Violence Prevention Research Program.
    • Michelle Spencer, MS, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
      • Associate director, the Bloomberg American Health Initiative.
      • Deputy Director of Equity and Community Partnerships, Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions.
      • Associate scientist, Department of Health Policy and Management. 
    • Jeff Swanson, PhD, MA, Duke University
      • Professor in Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University School of Medicine.
      • Faculty affiliate, Wilson Center for Science and Justice at Duke Law School, the Center for Firearms Law at Duke Law School, and the Center for Child and Family Policy at Duke Sanford School of Public Policy.


    WHEN:
    Thursday, June 1, 2023, at 12:00 p.m. – 1:00 p.m. EDT


    REGISTER:
    Media must register in advance here.

    # # #

    [ad_2]

    Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health

    Source link

  • Immigration experts on Title 42, analysis of immigration policies, and other migrant news in the Immigration Channel

    Immigration experts on Title 42, analysis of immigration policies, and other migrant news in the Immigration Channel

    [ad_1]

    Title 42, the United States pandemic rule that had been used to immediately deport hundreds of thousands of migrants who crossed the border illegally over the last three years, has expired. Those migrants will have the opportunity to apply for asylum. President Biden’s new rules to replace Title 42 are facing legal challenges. The US Homeland Security Department announced a rule to make it extremely difficult for anyone who travels through another country, like Mexico, to qualify for asylum. Border crossings have already risen sharply, as many migrants attempted to cross before the measure expired on Thursday night. Some have said they worry about tighter controls and uncertainty ahead. Immigration is once again a major focus of the media as we examine the humanitarian, political, and public health issues migrants must face. 

    Below are some of the latest headlines in the Immigration channel on Newswise.

    Expert Commentary

    Experts Available on Ending of Title 42

    George Washington University Experts on End of Title 42

    ‘No one wins when immigrants cannot readily access healthcare’

    URI professor discusses worsening child labor in the United States

    Biden ‘between a rock and a hard place’ on immigration

    University of Notre Dame Expert Available to Comment on House Bill Regarding Immigration Legislation, Border Safety and Security Act

    American University Experts Available to Discuss President Biden’s Visit to U.S.-Mexico Border

    Title 42 termination ‘overdue’, not ‘effective’ to manage migration

    Research and Features

    Study: Survey Methodology Should Be Calibrated to Account for Negative Attitudes About Immigrants and Asylum-Seekers

    A study analyses racial discrimination in job recruitment in Europe

    DACA has not had a negative impact on the U.S. job market

    ASBMB cautions against drastic immigration fee increases

    Study compares NGO communication around migration

    Collaboration, support structures needed to address ‘polycrisis’ in the Americas

    TTUHSC El Paso Faculty Teach Students While Caring for Migrants

    Immigrants Report Declining Alcohol Use during First Two Years after Arriving in U.S.

    How asylum seeker credibility is assessed by authorities

    Speeding up and simplifying immigration claims urgently needed to help with dire situation for migrants experiencing homelessness

    Training Individuals to Work in their Communities to Reduce Health Disparities

    ‘Regulation by reputation’: Rating program can help combat migrant abuse in the Gulf

    Migration of academics: Economic development does not necessarily lead to brain drain

    How has the COVID-19 pandemic affected immigration?

    Immigrants with Darker Skin Tones Perceive More Discrimination

     

    [ad_2]

    Newswise

    Source link

  • Gun violence spills into new neighborhoods as gentrification displaces drug crime

    Gun violence spills into new neighborhoods as gentrification displaces drug crime

    [ad_1]

    Newswise — Gentrification doesn’t erase drug crime and gun violence. Instead, research from West Virginia University economist Zachary Porreca shows that when one urban block becomes upwardly mobile, organized criminal activity surges outward to surrounding blocks, escalating the violence in the process.

    Porreca, a WVU doctoral student in the John Chambers College of Business and Economics, analyzed 2011-2020 data on shootings and real estate across various Philadelphia neighborhoods. His paper presenting the findings, published in the Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, is one of the first of its kind to study the impact of gentrification on crime displacement.

    “Over the 10-year window of the study, Philadelphia experienced some 5,800 shootings that can be attributed to gentrification,” Porreca said. “That means that of the 27,000 shootings that occurred across the city during that decade, almost a quarter may have been spillover effects of gentrification.

    “Gentrification increases levels of gun violence in neighbor blocks, even more so when the gentrified block itself has a history of drug crime. There’s an average increase of nearly nine shootings in the surrounding neighborhood, or an 18% increase in gun violence on blocks linked to gentrified blocks, as drug crime that existed on a block pre-gentrification is pushed into the surrounding neighborhood by the new development.”

    The gentrification of drug blocks specifically, as opposed to all gentrifying blocks in Philadelphia, accounted for roughly 2,400 additional shootings during the 10 years of his study. This suggests that some 8% of Philadelphia’s gun violence can be attributed to gentrification destabilizing the city’s illicit drug markets.

    “Those numbers are a striking representation of why it’s crucial that urban development occur responsibly and intentionally,” Porreca said. “Forced displacement of priced-out residents has very real effects on the surrounding neighborhoods.”

    Porreca described gentrification as a “destabilizing force that happens when new residents of higher socioeconomic standing move to a traditionally lower-income neighborhood. Gentrified neighborhoods grow wealthier, more educated, exhibit higher rates of home ownership and experience significant racial demographic changes. This process involves replacing many of the original residents, and that makes it more difficult for a criminal organization to operate openly. Gentrification also leads to increased policing and more punitive policing practices, and overall makes a block less suitable for drug competition.”

    Porreca emphasized that a criminal organization displaced in this way won’t want to go far. Those with that organization will look for new territory within the immediate surrounding blocks that have not yet begun gentrifying, because the local area is proven to be capable of sustaining drug activity and “because the organization has the requisite local knowledge, some level of community support and access to a proven clientele.”

    His research uses data related to shootings, income, housing, home sales and building, zoning and renovation permits to examine gentrification’s effect on crime rates on a city’s “frontiers,” blocks that are newly gentrifying. It shows how gentrification and rapid urban development change the urban landscape of a city, as the emergence of new amenities and residents in traditionally neglected neighborhoods causes the shrinking and reshaping of drug markets’ boundaries, escalating competition and violence.

    Gentrification not only constitutes a “shock” to the total viable territory available to rival criminal organizations, bringing them into closer proximity with each other, but it also spurs gun violence by forcing intracity migration — “displacing residents from their long-term homes and forcing them into the remaining viable tracts of affordable housing,” Porreca said. 

    “As an anecdotal example, a friend whose neighborhood became one of Philadelphia’s trendiest areas told me that his family now lives on the same blocks with families from neighborhoods his original neighborhood once feuded with. These sorts of situations, where disaffected low-income residents are forced to live in unfamiliar neighborhoods surrounded by similarly disaffected and displaced neighbors, have the potential to cause excessive tension. That that can give rise to explosions in gun violence isn’t surprising.”

    Porreca suggested that police resources could be utilized in the neighborhoods surrounding newly developed blocks.

    “City policy may benefit from efforts to stave off the violent spillover effect through deployment of officers and social workers in areas experiencing significant population displacements,” Porreca said. “Those displacements give rise to volatility and violence, and if we want to prevent community violence, then resources should be deployed proactively alongside the forces of development.”

    [ad_2]

    West Virginia University

    Source link

  • Health Care Providers Rarely Ask Patients About Access to Firearms

    Health Care Providers Rarely Ask Patients About Access to Firearms

    [ad_1]

    Newswise — Health care providers rarely ask patients if they have access to firearms in their home – a question that could diminish the risk of serious injury or death and encourage conversations about secure firearm storage, according to a Rutgers study.

    However, according to a study in Preventive Medicine, led by the New Jersey Gun Violence Research Center at Rutgers, health care providers rarely screen their patients for firearm access.

    Researchers surveyed 3,510 English-speaking adults in five states: Colorado, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Jersey and Texas, asking if a health care provider had ever asked them whether they have access to firearms.

    They found that 17.1 percent of participants had been asked by a health care provider about firearm access. This number was largely consistent across groups, with 20.1 percent of those with children 17 years old or younger, 25.5 percent of those with a history of mental health treatment and 21.4 percent of firearm owners ever having been screened for firearm access.

    “Although we know that firearm access increases the risk for fatal injury for everyone in the home, health care providers are rarely asking about firearm access,” said Allison Bond, a doctoral student at the New Jersey Gun Violence Research Center and the lead author of the study. “In order to prevent these injuries and deaths, healthcare providers need consider adding screening for firearm access into standard practice so that they are better positioned to then provide resources on secure firearm storage to the families that would most benefit from that information.”

    Researchers also examined which factors were associated with greater odds of having been screened by a health care provider for firearm access.

    They found that individuals with a lifetime history of suicidal thoughts, men, those who identified as white, parents with children 17 years old or younger living in the home, those with a history of mental health treatment and firearm owners were more likely to have been screened.

    Among firearm owners, those with children in the home ages 17 or younger and those with a history of mental health treatment were more likely to have been screened. Even among groups with greater odds of having been screened, the majority of individuals had never been asked about firearm access.

    “Given these results, it appears that screening is more likely among certain health care providers, like pediatricians and mental health care providers,” said Michael Anestis, executive director of the New Jersey Gun Violence Research Center, an associate professor in the Rutgers School of Public Health and senior author of the study. “It may also be that health care providers are often relying upon their sense of who is most likely to own a firearm when making a decision whether or not to ask.”

    “The problem with that, however, is that the demographics of firearm ownership have changed in the past few years and many of those at greatest risk for firearm injury or death never present in specialized mental health care settings,” said Anestis. “We need health care providers to broaden their vision of the role of firearm access to ensure they can help the greatest number of people.”

    [ad_2]

    Rutgers University-New Brunswick

    Source link

  • Addressing social isolation may be key in preventing mass shootings, study finds

    Addressing social isolation may be key in preventing mass shootings, study finds

    [ad_1]

    Newswise — RICHMOND, Va. (Feb. 17, 2023) — An analysis of the psychological crises exhibited by 177 mass shooters has identified social isolation as the most important external indicator leading up to the attacks. The finding, which is based on research conducted at Virginia Commonwealth University, suggests that social isolation is an ideal candidate for acquaintances and communities of would-be shooters to intervene.

    “When we are isolated from our social circles, we lose that functional component of our loved ones being frank with us when our behavior might become inappropriate,” said Samuel West, Ph.D., an assistant professor of psychology at Virginia State University who led the study while he was a postdoctoral researcher at the Injury and Violence Prevention Research Lab at VCU Health.

    The study also found that the “mood swings” crisis indicator was one of the strongest predictors of a mass shooting’s severity. However, the authors concluded that social isolation was the most important because it acted as a “crisis multiplier” in that it allowed crises to increase the risk of other crises. For example, mood swings also increased the likelihood of paranoia, breaks with reality, and difficulties with daily tasks due to its connection with isolation.

    “It is easy to see how this perfect storm of multiple crises in someone who has isolated themselves could coalesce into more harmful thoughts and ultimately actions without the perspectives of others to act as a protective factor,” said West, who received his doctorate from the Department of Psychology in the College of Humanities and Sciences at Virginia Commonwealth University.

    West and co-author Nicholas Thomson, Ph.D., director of research and a forensic psychologist at the Injury and Violence Prevention Program, analyzed the data using psychometric network analysis, a new machine learning-based approach to exploring and visualizing complex relationships. They approached the study by focusing on psychological crises that nonexpert third parties — such as friends, family and co-workers — could observe and subsequently intervene.

    “Research on mass shootings is scarce, which limits our ability to develop targeted risk assessments and prevention strategies for mass shootings,” said Thomson, an associate professor in the Department of Surgery in the School of Medicine and the Department of Psychology in the College of Humanities and Sciences. “What Dr. West has achieved with the data is a step in the right direction for understanding the warning signs of people who commit mass shootings.”

    The study is novel in that the data collected is based on others’ perceptions of a mass shooter, Thomson said.

    “In many ways, this is the data that we need because others’ perceptions are integral to identifying and reporting at-risk individuals, and the community is critical to preventing violence,” he said. “Equipped with the right knowledge we can develop risk awareness strategies that can prevent mass shootings from occurring. Of course, this is only one piece of the puzzle, but it is an important piece.”

    The researchers see social isolation as an ideal target for intervention because it can be addressed both at the individual level and the societal level.

    “Although most people who experience isolation do not go on to commit such acts of violence, intervening on that isolation only holds benefits for the individual,” West said. “This can be as simple as a friend stopping by in person to say hello and catch up — something that we could all benefit from. Although this seems like it may not have such an impact, prior research makes clear that isolation is a necessary component of planning and carrying out a mass shooting as many of the behaviors involved (e.g., stockpiling guns and ammunition) are readily observable.”

    At the societal level, interventions could focus on building social ties and addressing isolation in communities.

    “One example could be to require students at public high schools to participate in civic events and organizations as part of their compulsory education,” West said. “On the other side of this coin, we also must consider that many of these individuals end up isolated for other reasons initially (i.e., social rejection). As such, working on the inclusivity of others overall while continuing to address bullying behavior in young people could be a fruitful avenue to improve the mental and social health of students and society at large.”

    Social isolation is also a good target for intervention because it was typically noticed significantly sooner, such as months or years before an attack, than other psychological crises, which tended to be observed days to weeks before an attack.

    “Although scientifically validated interventions for isolation exist, they have all been developed to address isolation in those who are seeking relief,” West said. “Such interventions would necessarily look different with would-be mass shooters as it is likely they would not willfully seek out such help on their own. Our work doesn’t speak to causality or any specific intervention that could be applied in this context.”

    The study, “Exploring Personal Crises Observed in Mass Shooters as Targets for Detection and Intervention Using Psychometric Network Analysis,” will be published in a forthcoming issue of the journal Psychology of Violence.

    The research was funded, in part, by a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention grant (1R01CE003296; PI Thomson) that was among 10 awarded nationally in 2020 to find ways to address gun violence.  

    ###

    [ad_2]

    Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU)

    Source link

  • Life in a violent country can be years shorter and much less predictable – even for those not involved in conflict

    Life in a violent country can be years shorter and much less predictable – even for those not involved in conflict

    [ad_1]

    Newswise — How long people live is less predictable and life expectancy for young people can be as much as 14 years shorter in violent countries compared to peaceful countries, according to a new study today [3/2] from an international team, led by Oxford’s Leverhulme Centre for Demographic Science. It reveals a direct link between the uncertainty of living in a violent setting, even for those not directly involved in the violence, and a ‘double burden’ of shorter and less predictable lives.

    According to the research, violent deaths are responsible for a high proportion of the differences in lifetime uncertainty between violent and peaceful countries. But, the study says, ‘The impact of violence on mortality goes beyond cutting lives short. When lives are routinely lost to violence, those left behind face uncertainty as to who will be next.’

    Lead author Dr José Manuel Aburto from Oxford’s Leverhulme Centre for Demographic Science and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, adds, ‘What we found most striking is that lifetime uncertainty has a greater association with violence than life expectancy. Lifetime uncertainty, therefore, should not be overlooked when analysing changes in mortality patterns.’

    Using mortality data from 162 countries, and the Internal Peace Index between 2008-2017, the study shows the most violent countries are also those with the highest lifetime uncertainty. In the Middle East, conflict-related deaths at young ages are the biggest contributor to this, while in Latin America, a similar pattern results from homicides and interpersonal violence.

    But lifetime uncertainty was ‘remarkably low’ between 2008-2017, in most Northern and Southern European countries. Although Europe has been the most peaceful region over the period, the Russian invasion of Ukraine will impact this.

    In high-income countries, reduced cancer mortality has recently helped to reduce lifetime uncertainty. But, in the most violent societies, lifetime uncertainty is even experienced by those not directly involved in violence. The report states, ‘Poverty-insecurity-violence cycles magnify pre-existing structural patterns of disadvantage for women and fundamental imbalances in gender relations at young ages. In some Latin American countries, female homicides have increased over the last decades and exposure to violent environments brings health and social burdens, particularly for children and women.’

    Study co-author Professor Ridhi Kashyapfrom the Leverhulme Centre, says, ‘Whilst men are the major direct victims of violence, women are more likely to experience non-fatal consequences in violent contexts. These indirect effects of violence should not be ignored as they fuel gender inequalities, and can trigger other forms of vulnerability and causes of death.’

    According to the report, lower life expectancy is usually associated with greater lifetime uncertainty. In addition, living in a violent society creates vulnerability and uncertainty – and that, in turn, can lead to more violent behaviour. 

    Countries with high levels of violence experience lower levels of life expectancy than more peaceful ones, ‘We estimate a gap of around 14 years in remaining life expectancy at age 10 between the least and most violent countries…In El Salvador, Honduras, Guatemala and Colombia the gap in life expectancy with high income countries is predominantly explained by excess mortality due to homicides.’

    Study co-author Vanessa di Lego, from the Wittgenstein Centre for Demography and Global Human Capital, adds, ‘It is striking how violence alone is a major driver of disparities in lifetime uncertainty. One thing is for certain, global violence is a public health crisis, with tremendous implications for population health, and should not be taken lightly.’

     

    About the Leverhulme Centre for Demographic Science

    This major new interdisciplinary research centre, funded by the Leverhulme Trust and directed by Professor Melinda Mills, is tackling the most challenging demographic problems of our time. Based at the University of Oxford, the Centre is at the forefront of demographic research that impacts academia, society and policy. Together with academic and industry partners, our researchers use new types of data, methods and unconventional approaches to disrupt conventional thinking across important issues such as COVID-19, climate change, and life expectancy. More information on the Centre can be found here.

    About the University of Oxford

    Oxford University has been placed number one in the Times Higher Education World University Rankings for the seventh year running, and ​number two in the QS World Rankings 2022. At the heart of this success are the twin-pillars of our ground-breaking research and innovation and our distinctive educational offer.

    Oxford is world-famous for research and teaching excellence and home to some of the most talented people from across the globe. Our work helps the lives of millions, solving real-world problems through a huge network of partnerships and collaborations. The breadth and interdisciplinary nature of our research alongside our personalised approach to teaching sparks imaginative and inventive insights and solutions.

    [ad_2]

    University of Oxford

    Source link

  • Β-blocker use associated with lower rates of violence

    Β-blocker use associated with lower rates of violence

    [ad_1]

    Newswise — Reductions in violence are seen in individuals using Beta adrenergic-blocking agents (β-blockers) compared with periods that they are not taking the medication, in a study published January 31st in the open access journal PLOS Medicine. If the findings are confirmed by other studies, β-blockers could be considered as a way to manage aggression and hostility in individuals with psychiatric conditions.

    β-blockers are used to treat hypertension, angina and acute cardiovascular events, heart failure and arrhythmias as well as, migraine, symptoms of hyperthyroidism and glaucoma. They are often used for anxiety and have been suggested for clinical depression and aggression, but evidence is conflicting. They have been linked to an increased risk of suicidal behavior though evidence is inconclusive.

    Seena Fazel of the University of Oxford, UK, and colleagues at the Karolinska Institute in Sweden investigated psychiatric and behavioral outcomes: hospitalizations for psychiatric disorders; suicidal behavior and deaths from suicide; and charges of violent crime. They compared 1.4 million β-blocker users in Sweden to themselves during medicated and non-medicated periods over an eight-year period from 2006-2013.

    Periods on β-blocker treatment were associated with a 13% lower risk of being charged with a violent crime by the police, which remained consistent across the analyses. Additionally, an 8% lower risk of hospitalization due to a psychiatric disorder was reported as well as an 8% increased association of being treated for suicidal behavior. However, these associations varied depending on psychiatric diagnosis, past psychiatric problems, as well as the severity and type of the cardiac condition the β-blockers were being used to treat.

    Previous research has linked severe cardiac events to an increased risk of depression and suicide, and these results might suggest that the psychological distress and other disabilities associated with serious cardiac problems, rather than the β-blocker treatment, increases the risk of serious psychiatric events. In secondary analyses, associations with hospitalization were lower for major depressive but not for anxiety disorders.

    In order to understand the role of β-blockers in the management of aggression and violence, further studies including randomized controlled trials are needed. If these confirm the results of this study, β-blockers could be considered to manage aggression and violence in some individuals.

    Fazel adds, “In a real-world study of 1.4 million persons, β-blockers were associated with reduced violent criminal charges in individuals with psychiatric disorders. Repurposing their use to manage aggression and violence could improve patient outcomes.”

    #####

    In your coverage, please use this URL to provide access to the freely available paper in PLOS Medicine:

    http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1004164

    Press-only preview: https://plos.io/3XFCyJF

    Citation: Molero Y, Kaddoura S, Kuja-Halkola R, Larsson H, Lichtenstein P, D’Onofrio BM, et al. (2023) Associations between β-blockers and psychiatric and behavioural outcomes: A population-based cohort study of 1.4 million individuals in Sweden. PLoS Med 20(1): e1004164. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1004164

    Author Countries: Sweden, United Kingdom, United States of America

    Funding: This study was supported by the Wellcome Trust (No 202836/Z/16/Z): https://wellcome.org/grant-funding (SF), the Swedish Research Council for Health Working Life and Welfare (2015-0028): https://forte.se/en/ (PL and HL), the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention (DIG-1-037-19): https://afsp.org/research-grant-information (BMD), and Karolinska Institutet Funds (2016fobi50581): https://staff.ki.se/ki-foundations-funds-list-of-grants (YM). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

    Competing interests: I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: HL reports receiving grants from Shire Pharmaceuticals; personal fees from and serving as a speaker for Medice, Shire/Takeda Pharmaceuticals and Evolan Pharma AB; and sponsorship for a conference on attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder from Shire/Takeda Pharmaceuticals and Evolan Pharma AB, all outside the submitted work. All other authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

    [ad_2]

    PLOS

    Source link

  • Terror under lockdown: Pandemic restrictions reduce ISIS violence

    Terror under lockdown: Pandemic restrictions reduce ISIS violence

    [ad_1]

    Newswise — New Haven, Conn. — Lockdown measures aimed at slowing the spread of COVID-19 had the unintended benefit of curtailing violence by the insurgent group ISIS, according to a new study led by Yale political scientist Dawn Brancati.

    The study, published on Jan. 30 in the journal American Political Science Review, found that government-imposed curfews and travel bans instituted to protect public health in Iraq, Syria, and Egypt were significantly associated with a reduction in ISIS attacks, especially in urban areas and locations outside the militant organization’s base of operations.

    “Although ISIS leaders vowed to ramp up attacks during the pandemic, our analysis found that pandemic lockdown measures likely reduced the group’s attacks by depleting its financial resources, reducing high-value civilian targets, and making it logistically more difficult for ISIS to conduct attacks by reducing its cover,” said Brancati, a senior lecturer in the Department of Political Science in Yale’s Faculty of Arts and Sciences. “Our findings provide important insights into the effects of public health measures on violence by non-state actors like ISIS, al-Qaeda, and Boko Haram, as well as the general effectiveness of curfews and travel restrictions as counterinsurgency tools.”

    In examining the effects of the lockdown measures on violence by non-state actors, Brancati — along with coauthors Jóhanna Birnir of the University of Maryland-College Park and Qutaiba Idlbi of the Atlantic Council — focused on ISIS due to the group’s explicit pledge to accelerate violence during the pandemic and because its large financial reserves, rural base, and preference for targeting government installations over civilians make it less vulnerable to the effects of curfews and travel restrictions.

    The researchers analyzed data on more than 1,500 ISIS-initiated violent events in Iraq, Syria, and Egypt — the countries where the group launches most of its attacks — compiled by the Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project covering a 78-week period between Dec. 31, 2018, and June 28, 2020. In March 2020, pandemic-related curfews and travel bans were imposed in all three countries and were in place for three to four months. The researchers also mapped the number and location of ISIS attacks within and across Iraq’s governorates using geographic information system (GIS).

    The public health measures significantly reduced violence, especially in cities and areas outside of the militant group’s rural bases, the study showed. For example, the number of violent events was about 30% lower in Iraq and 15% lower in Syria when COVID-19 related curfews were in place in these countries.

    The researchers found that the higher a governorate’s population, the more effective curfews were in reducing violence. For example, the number of ISIS-initiated violent events in the governorate of Baghdad, which has a population of 8.1 million, was 11% lower when the curfews were in place. There was no change in the Iraqi governorate of Najaf (a center of Muslim pilgrimage, surpassed by only Mecca and Medina), which has a population of 1.5 million people.

    Based on interviews with government officials, military leaders, policy experts, and residents of places covered in the study, the researchers concluded that the curfews and travel restrictions reduced the number of high-value civilian targets and made it more difficult for ISIS militants to move about without being noticed. While there is evidence that the public health measures also strained the group’s financial resources — for instance, by limiting its ability to collect money from locals or operate its commercial businesses — the group’s financial reserves, which amount to hundreds of millions of dollars by most estimates, likely allowed it to keep funding its cells, the researchers concluded.

    Given that pandemic lockdown measures seem to have hindered ISIS’s ability to initiate violence, they likely have similar or greater effects on other violent non-state organizations, the researchers said.

    “Most non-state actors lack ISIS’s financial resources, tend to target civilians more heavily, and operate in urban areas, which suggests they would be more vulnerable to the effects of lockdown measures than ISIS is,” Brancati said. “This does not suggest that lockdown measures are a magic bullet in fighting insurgencies since they have harsh side effects on society, especially in developing countries where militant groups operate.”

    [ad_2]

    Yale University

    Source link

  • Crime expert: Mass shootings show Asian Americans’ vulnerability to inter- and intra-racial violence

    Crime expert: Mass shootings show Asian Americans’ vulnerability to inter- and intra-racial violence

    [ad_1]

    University of Delaware professor Ivan Sun can comment on the recent mass shootings in California, including the Jan. 21 attack that took the lives of 11 people and left Asian American communities reeling just as they were celebrating the start of the Lunar New Year. 

    Sun, who studies crime and justice in Asian societies, said the following about the shootings:

    – “They are shocking as Asian Americans’ involvement in violent offending is low – whereas their victimization is high, particularly during the pandemic – and seniors in general are less likely to engage in violent crime.”

    – “They are exceptional events, signaling Asian Americans’ vulnerability to both inter- and intra-racial violence.”

    [ad_2]

    University of Delaware

    Source link

  • American University Experts Share Insights on 2nd Anniversary of January 6th Insurrection

    American University Experts Share Insights on 2nd Anniversary of January 6th Insurrection

    [ad_1]

    What:  As we reach the 2nd anniversary of the January 6th insurrection, American University has various scholars who are experts in extremism, far-right ideologies, white supremacy, militias and organized political violence. Below please find their insights on last year and their outlook for 2023. They are also available to comment on the January 6th hearings and the anniversary.

    When: Thursday, January 5, 2022 – ongoing

    Background:  American University experts who are available for interviews are:

    Kurt Braddock is an Assistant Professor of Public Communication in the School of Communication. His research focuses on the persuasive strategies used by violent extremist groups to recruit and radicalize audiences targeted by their propaganda. He is the author of Weaponized Words: The Strategic Role of Persuasion in Violent Radicalization and Counter-Radicalization.

    2022 saw an intensification of far-right extremism in the United States, with motivations for violence evolving as the year progressed. In parallel with increased rhetoric by some far-right politicians and pundits about so-called “grooming”, attacks against LGBTQIA+ individuals grew over the course of the year. I expect this trend to continue through at least the first part of 2023, as some far-right politicians and pundits show no signs of abating their rhetoric in this regard. 

    White supremacy, white nationalism, and related topics are also likely to continue being key motivators of political violence, as communication surrounding these topics — by both extremists and some elected officials — shows no signs of abating. As these trends continue, I expect we will see continued — and possibly increasing — incidents of lone-actor plots and attacks against those they perceive as viable targets (e.g., the attack on Paul Pelosi).”


    Carolyn Gallaher
    is an expert on extremism and the right-wing, organized violence by non-state actors and urban politics, including the politics, internal dynamics, and patterns of violence of militias, paramilitaries, and private military contractors, among others. Gallaher is the author of On the Fault Line: Race, Class, and the American Patriot Movement.

    Prof. Gallaher said: “In 2022, the January 6th Committee revealed how President Donald Trump inspired a failed insurrection that almost toppled 245 years of American democracy. Much of 2022 was spent on holding insurrectionists and other participants to account. The Department of Justice has arrested more than 900 people who participated in the assault and recently successfully prosecuted several members of the violent Oathkeepers militia, including two for seditious conspiracy. As 2023 begins, Trump’s star may be growing dimmer, but right-wing conspiracy theories, online disinformation, and a distressing lack of trust in the basic institutions of democracy continue apace. In particular, it will be important to see whether the Republican Party will reject those within its ranks who have embrace election disinformation and spread false claims about the so-called ‘deep state.’  The fate of the party, and American democracy may hinge on whether the party embraces or rejects right wing extremists within its ranks.”  


    Brian Hughes
    is the Co-Founder and Associate Director of the Polarization and Extremism Research and Innovation Lab (PERIL), where he develops studies and interventions to reduce the risk of radicalization to extremism. His scholarly research explores the impact of communication technology on political and religious extremism, terrorism, and fringe culture.

    Prof. Hughes said: “2022 saw a troubling continuation of ongoing trends in the radicalization of mainstream American politics. Anti-LGBTQ violence and antisemitism were on the rise, while racism, male supremacy, and other forms of extremism have not abated. Unfortunately, these trends are spurred on and exploited for profit and power by a large cohort of media and political figures. It is even more crucial that in 2023 we continue our work inoculating the public against their divisive, hateful, and manipulative rhetoric.”


    Janice Iwama
    is an assistant professor in AU’s School of Public Affairs. Her research focuses on examining local conditions and social processes that influence hate crimes, gun violence, racial profiling, and the victimization of immigrants. Iwama has served as a co-principal investigator and lead researcher in projects funded by the Department of Justice Civil Rights Unit and the National Institute of Justice.

    Prof. Iwama said: “Following the recent spike in hate crimes, I expect federal and state legislators to introduce new legislation in 2023 that will actively seek to improve our data collection on hate crimes, develop better preventative measures against bias incidents, and improve law enforcement responses to hate crimes.”

     

    About American University

    American University leverages the power and purpose of scholarship, learning, and community to impact our changing world. From sustainability to social justice to the sciences, AU’s faculty, students, staff, and alumni are changemakers. Building on our 129-year history of education and research in the public interest, we say ‘Challenge Accepted’ to addressing the world’s pressing issues. Our Change Can’t Wait comprehensive campaign creates transformative educational opportunities, advances research with impact, and builds stronger communities.

     

    [ad_2]

    American University

    Source link

  • In some US zip codes, young men face more risk of firearm death than those deployed in recent wars

    In some US zip codes, young men face more risk of firearm death than those deployed in recent wars

    [ad_1]

    Newswise — PROVIDENCE, R.I. [Brown University] — The risk of firearm death in the U.S. is on the rise: in 2020, firearms became the leading cause of death for children, adolescents and young adults. Yet the risk is far from even — young men in some U.S. zip codes face disproportionately higher risks of firearm-related injuries and deaths.

    To better understand the magnitude of the gun violence crisis and put it in perspective, researchers at Brown University and the University of Pennsylvania compared the risk of firearm-related death for young adult men living in the most violent areas in four major U.S. cities with the risks of combat death and injury faced by U.S. military personnel who served in Afghanistan and Iraq during active periods of war.

    The results were mixed: The study, published in JAMA Network Open, found that young men from zip codes with the most firearm violence in Chicago and Philadelphia faced a notably higher risk of firearm-related death than U.S. military personnel deployed to wartime service in Afghanistan and Iraq. But the opposite was true in two other cities: The most violent areas in New York and Los Angeles were associated with much less risk for young men than those in the two wars.

    In all zip codes studied, risks were overwhelmingly borne by young men from minority racial and ethnic groups, the study found.

    “These results are an urgent wake-up call for understanding, appreciating and responding to the risks and attendant traumas faced by this demographic of young men,” said Brandon del Pozo, an assistant professor of medicine (research) at Brown’s Warren Alpert Medical School and an assistant professor of health services, policy and practice (research) at the University’s School of Public Health.

    Del Pozo conducts research at the intersection of public health, public safety and justice, focusing on substance use, the overdose crisis, and violence. His recently released book, “The Police and the State: Security, Social Cooperation, and the Public Good,” is based on his academic research as well as his 23 years of experience as a police officer in New York City and as chief of police of Burlington, Vermont.

    “Working as a police officer, I witnessed the toll of gun violence, and how disruptive it was for families and communities,” del Pozo said. “It stood out to me that the burden was not distributed evenly by geography or demographic. Some communities felt the brunt of gun violence much more acutely than others. By analyzing publicly available data on firearm fatalities in cities and in war, we sought to place that burden in sharp relief.”

    At the same time, del Pozo said, he and the other study authors were responding to oft-repeated inflammatory claims about gun violence in American cities.  

    “We often hear opposing claims about gun violence that fall along partisan lines: One is that big cities are war zones that require a severe crackdown on crime, and the other is that our fears about homicides are greatly exaggerated and don’t require drastic action,” del Pozo said. “We wanted to use data to explore these claims — and it turns out both are wrong. While most city residents are relatively safe from gun violence, the risks are more severe than war for some demographics.”

    Illustrating the magnitude of the firearm crisis

    To conduct their analysis, the researchers obtained information on all fatal and nonfatal shootings of 18- to 29-year-old men recorded as crimes in 2020 and 2021 in Chicago; Los Angeles; New York; and Philadelphia — the four largest U.S. cities for which public data on those who were shot were available. For New York, Chicago and Philadelphia, they used shooting death and injury data sets made public by each city; for Los Angeles, they extracted firearm death and injury data from a larger public data set of recorded crimes. Data were aggregated to the zip code level and linked to corresponding demographic characteristics from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2019 American Community Survey.

    The researchers acquired wartime combat-related mortality and injury counts for the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan from peer-reviewed analyses of U.S. military data covering the years 2001 to 2014 for the war in Afghanistan and 2003 to 2009 for the war in Iraq, both of which were periods of active combat. Because there is limited data about the risks of serving in different military units at different times during the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, the researchers considered the mortality and injury data of a single, de-identified Army brigade combat team engaged in combat during a 15-month period of the Iraq War that involved notably above-average combat death and injury rates at a time considered to be the height of the conflict.

    The analysis included 129,826 young men residing in the four cities considered in the study.

    The researchers found that compared to the risk of combat death faced by U.S. soldiers who were deployed to Afghanistan, the more dangerous of the two wars, young men living in the most violent zip code of Chicago (2,585 individuals) had a 3.23 times higher average risk of firearm-related homicide, and those in Philadelphia (2,448 people) faced a 1.9 times higher average risk of firearm-related homicide. Singling out the elevated dangers faced by the U.S. Army combat brigade in Iraq, the young men studied in Chicago still faced notably greater risks, and the ones faced in Philadelphia were comparable.

    However, these findings were not observed in the most violent zip codes of Los Angeles and New York, where young men faced a 70% to 91% lower risk than soldiers in the Afghanistan war across fatal and nonfatal categories.

    When the researchers looked at the demographics of the young men in the zip codes studied, they determined that the risk of violent death and injury observed in the zip codes studied was almost entirely borne by individuals from minority racial and ethnic groups: Black and Hispanic males represented 96.2% of those who were fatally shot and 97.3% of those who experienced nonfatal injury across all four cities.

    In the study, the researchers make the point that the risk of firearm death is not the only thing that young men living in violent U.S. zip codes have in common with young men at war.

    “Exposure to combat has been associated with stress-inducing hypervigilance and elevated rates of homelessness, alcohol use, mental illness and substance use, which, in turn, are associated with a steep discounting of future rewards,” they write. “Our findings — which show that young men in some of the communities we studied were subject to annual firearm homicide and violent injury rates in excess of 3.0% and as high as 5.8% — lend support to the hypothesis that beyond the deaths and injuries of firearm violence, ongoing exposure to these violent events and their risks are a significant contributor to other health problems and risk behaviors in many U.S. communities.”

    Del Pozo added that the health risks are likely even higher for people in cities, because they need to face their “battles” every day over a lifetime, as opposed to military personnel in a tour of duty in Afghanistan, which typically lasted 12 months. The study results, del Pozo said, help illustrate the magnitude of the firearms crisis, a necessary understanding to municipalities seeking to formulate an effective public health response.

    “The findings suggest that urban health strategies should prioritize violence reduction and take a trauma-informed approach to addressing the health needs of these communities,” del Pozo said.

    Other Brown contributors included Dr. Michael J. Mello, a physician and researcher at the Warren Alpert Medical School and the Injury Prevention Center at Rhode Island Hospital.

    The study was supported by the National Institute on Drug Abuse (K01DA056654) and the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (P20GM139664).

    [ad_2]

    Brown University

    Source link

  • Tailored approach makes inroads in rural firearm safe storage

    Tailored approach makes inroads in rural firearm safe storage

    [ad_1]

    Newswise — A new study shows early promise for an approach that seeks to reduce the risk of firearm injury and death in rural areas, while respecting rural culture and firearm ownership.

    The effort tailors messages about safe firearm storage and teen firearm suicide to a rural audience, and shares specific tips for improving safety.

    Early data presented at a national conference show that in 45 rural Michigan families with both children and firearms in their home, the vast majority of parents reported strong engagement with the prevention materials, finding the content useful and reflective of their rural community values.

    Three weeks after completing the intervention, 86% of the parents said they completed a firearm home safety checklist suggested by the program, and 88% talked about firearm safety with another adult in their home.

    Nearly two-thirds also went on to discuss firearm safety with children who live with them, and 40% reported that they made a change to how they store firearms in their home.

    The findings, from the pilot study of the Store Safely project, were presented on December 1 at the 2022 National Research Conference on Firearm Injury Prevention by Cynthia Ewell Foster, Ph.D., who leads the University of Michigan-based team behind the project. The presentation won one of the conference’s top awards.

    “We are excited by these findings, and by the variety of actions that these families took including changing to unloaded and locked storage and moving hunting rifles to another location less accessible to children,” says Ewell Foster, a clinical psychologist in the Michigan Medicine Department of Psychiatry and member of the U-M Institute for Firearm Injury Prevention. “While we have much more work to do to assess the impact of the tools we’ve developed, our findings show the value of partnering with the community in order to develop a culturally tailored safety message.”

    The Store Safely website includes a video featuring trusted community messengers, an infographic of local data, a decision aid to help families consider different storage options, and downloadable resources, including a home safety checklist.

    The Store Safely project grew out of a partnership with the Marquette County Health Department, Marquette County Suicide Prevention Alliance and the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services. It involved an extensive community advisory board representing local business owners; law enforcement officials; veteran navigators; medical, behavioral, and public health professionals; and K-12 school personnel.

    Rural America has the highest per capita death toll from firearms, higher than suburban and urban areas, and the main reason for this difference is firearm suicides.

    Putting time and distance between individuals who are at risk for suicide and highly lethal means like firearms is a critical part of a comprehensive suicide prevention strategy, Ewell Foster said.

    Store Safely focuses its messaging on the importance of preventing all firearm injury as well as teen firearm-related suicide e by storing firearms in ways that reduce the chances that a teen who is upset, angry, depressed, or experiencing other kinds of risk factors will be able to access a loaded firearm.

    The program’s materials emphasize the range of options that rural families have for reducing risk within the context of their lifestyle,which includes firearm ownership for both hunting and protection. .

    Ewell Foster and her colleagues plan to increase the availability of the Store Safely intervention while continuing to evaluate its impact in other rural communities both within and beyond Michigan’s Upper Peninsula.  

    In addition to Ewell Foster, the study’s authors are Christina Magness LMSW, Tayla Smith M.P.H., and Cheryl King Ph.D. of the U-M Department of Psychiatry, Sarah Derwin of the Marquette County Health Department, and Eskira Kahsay, M.P.H., of the U-M School of Public Health.

     

    The Store Safely project is funded by the Firearm Safety Among Children and Teens Consortium based at U-M. FACTS is funded by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (HD087149).

    [ad_2]

    Michigan Medicine – University of Michigan

    Source link

  • Executive Director of the NJ Gun Violence Research Center Comments on Recent Mass Shootings

    Executive Director of the NJ Gun Violence Research Center Comments on Recent Mass Shootings

    [ad_1]

    Newswise — Michael D. Anestis, Executive Director – New Jersey Gun Violence Research Center and Associate Professor – Urban-Global Public Health at Rutgers University, comments on the recent mass shootings:

    “The New Jersey Gun Violence Research Center at Rutgers mourns the losses of life in the hateful mass shootings of this past week. Public mass shootings represent a small percentage of American gun violence, but they occur all too often and the victims and their families deserve far more than our thoughts and prayers.”

    [ad_2]

    Rutgers University-New Brunswick

    Source link

  • More U.S. adults carrying loaded handguns daily, study finds

    More U.S. adults carrying loaded handguns daily, study finds

    [ad_1]

     

    Newswise — The number of U.S. adult handgun owners carrying a loaded handgun on their person doubled from 2015 to 2019, according to new research led by the University of Washington.

    Data come from the 2019 National Firearms Survey (NFS), an online survey of U.S. adults living in households with firearms, including nearly 2,400 handgun owners. Compared to estimates from prior UW-led research, the new study suggests that in 2019 approximately 16 million adult handgun owners had carried a loaded handgun on their person in the past month (up from 9 million in 2015) and 6 million carried every day (twice as many as carried daily in 2015).

    Published Nov. 16 in the American Journal of Public Health, the study also found that a larger proportion of handgun owners carried handguns in states with less restrictive carrying regulations: In these states, approximately one-third of handgun owners reported carrying in the past month, whereas in states with more restrictive regulations, only about one-fifth did.

    “Between increases in the number of people who own handguns and the number of people who carry every day, there has been a striking increase in handgun carrying in the U.S.,” said lead author Dr. Ali Rowhani-Rahbar, a professor of epidemiology and Bartley Dobb Professor for the Study and Prevention of Violence at the UW.

    Among the other findings reported in the new study:

    • About 7 in 10 handgun owners said they carried a loaded handgun as protection against another person, dwarfing the number who said they carried as protection against an animal, for example, or for work
    • 4 in 5 handgun owners who reported carrying were male, 3 in 4 were white, and a majority were between the ages of 18 and 44

    Researchers pointed to some limitations of the study: Respondents were asked if they carried, and how often, but not where. It is possible that a person residing in a state with one type of permitting restrictions (or none) could have carried their handgun in another state with different laws. The study also did not ask whether the respondent carried a handgun openly or concealed.

    While the data are from 2019, researchers say the findings are timely, following the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in June that struck down a New York state handgun-carrying law. States, in general, have become less restrictive over the years regarding handgun carrying — more than 20 do not require permits to carry today, compared to only one such state in 1990. The differences highlighted in this study suggest that this behavior may be responsive to the types of laws governing carrying that pertain in a state.

    “The Supreme Court ruling has already resulted in some states’ loosening of laws related to handgun carrying,” Rowhani-Rahbar said. “In light of that ruling, our study reinforces the importance of studying the implications of handgun carrying for public health and public safety.”

    The study was funded by the Joyce Foundation and the New Venture Fund. Co-authors were Amy Gallagher, now of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, previously of the Firearm Injury & Policy Research Program at the UW; Deborah Azrael of Harvard University; and Matthew Miller of Northeastern University.

    [ad_2]

    University of Washington

    Source link

  • Study reveals economic burden of gun violence

    Study reveals economic burden of gun violence

    [ad_1]

    Newswise — New Orleans, LA – A study led by Christopher Marrero, MD, Associate Professor of Clinical Orthopaedic Surgery at LSU Health New Orleans School of Medicine, reports that the net loss for treating acute firearm injuries at one Level I Trauma Center was $20.3 million over a four-year period. The results are published online in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine, available here.

                “Firearm injuries continue to plague the US as a serious public health problem, causing preventable death, illness, and disability,” notes Dr. Marrero. “They also continue to result in a major economic burden.”

                The research team conducted a retrospective study of patients with acute gunshot wounds admitted to the LSU Health New Orleans Affiliate Level 1 Trauma Center, University Medical Center New Orleans, from January 2016 to December 2019. A total of 2,094 patients met the criteria of acute firearm injury and were included in the analysis. Injuries included those caused by accidents, intentional self-harm, assault, legal intervention, and undetermined causes.

    The researchers tabulated the estimated costs and losses using the hospital cost-to-charge ratio. The estimated cost associated with treatment was $37,602,667. The total payment collected by the hospital was $17,293,655, resulting in a net loss of $20,309,012 over the four years.

    “When victims of firearm-related injuries are unable to pay their medical expenses, the hospitals write off unpaid medical bills as medical losses,” Dr. Marrero explains. “In this study, Medicaid dominated the payer makeup. This can also result in losses because Medicaid reimbursement does not fully cover costs. Per the American Hospital Association, Medicaid paid hospitals, on average, 90 cents for every dollar spent by hospitals caring for Medicaid patients in 2019. Because taxpayers fund Medicaid as well as Medicare, they bear the economic burden of these firearm injuries.”

                The authors observe that nonfatal firearm injuries are highest in the South, and Louisiana leads the US in the nonfatal firearm injury rate.

                They stress that when examining the financial impact of gun violence, it is important to also consider the costs associated with nonacute care such as follow-up visits, rehabilitation, secondary outpatient surgeries, home health, and durable medical equipment, which increase the total cost exponentially. The authors also point out economic burdens to society beyond medical expenses, including criminal justice expenditures, employer and work-loss costs, as well as intangible losses, such as diminished quality of life.

                “The estimated costs presented in this study show only a fraction of the economic burden associated with gun violence,” Dr. Marrero concludes. “In actuality, the financial impact of firearm injuries is much greater, and further research is necessary to find solutions for this public health issue.”

     

    LSU Health Sciences Center New Orleans educates Louisiana’s health care professionals. The state’s flagship health sciences university, LSU Health New Orleans includes a School of Medicine with campuses in Baton Rouge and Lafayette, the state’s only School of Dentistry, Louisiana’s only public School of Public Health, and Schools of Allied Health Professions, Nursing, and Graduate Studies. LSU Health New Orleans faculty take care of patients in public and private hospitals and clinics throughout the region. In the vanguard of biosciences research in a number of areas in a worldwide arena, the LSU Health New Orleans research enterprise generates jobs and enormous economic impact. LSU Health New Orleans faculty have made lifesaving discoveries and continue to work to prevent, advance treatment, or cure disease. To learn more, visit http://www.lsuhsc.eduhttp://www.twitter.com/LSUHealthNO, or http://www.facebook.com/LSUHSC.                                                   

                                                             

    [ad_2]

    Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center – New Orleans

    Source link

  • Abe assassination is a rare act of gun violence in Japan

    Abe assassination is a rare act of gun violence in Japan

    [ad_1]

    Following the horrific mass shootings in the United States, social media is rife with discussions on gun laws and regulations. Friday morning’s news of the assassination of former Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe by a gunman has brought the issue of strict laws on gun ownership to light. How could this happen in a country with only one firearm-related death in all of 2021? Since 2017, there have been 14 gun-related deaths in Japan, a remarkably low figure for a country of 125 million people. Compare that to the 45,222 people who died from gun-related injuries in the U.S. in just one year (2021).1

    Republican Congressional candidate Lavern Spicer has chimed in on this shocking assassination by tweeting, “How did Shinzo Abe get assassinated when guns are banned in Japan? Liberals, care to explain?” Her tweet was shared by thousands. We find this claim to be misleading and inaccurate.

    Firstly, guns are not banned in Japan but are regulated by very strict gun ownership laws. 

    This backgrounder by the Council on Foreign Relations explains how guns are regulated in Japan…

    Gun control advocates regularly cite Japan’s highly restrictive firearm regulations in tandem with its extraordinarily low gun death rate. Most years, fewer than one hundred Japanese die from gun violence in a country of 125 million people. Most guns are illegal in the country and ownership rates, which are quite low, reflect this.

    Under Japan’s firearm and sword law [PDF], the only guns permitted are shotguns, air guns, guns with specific research or industrial purposes, or those used for competitions. However, before access to these specialty weapons is granted, one must obtain formal instruction and pass a battery of written, mental, and drug tests and a rigorous background check. Furthermore, owners must inform the authorities of how their weapons and ammunition are stored and provide their firearms for annual inspection.

    Some analysts link Japan’s aversion to firearms with its demilitarization in the aftermath of World War II. Others say that because the overall crime rate in the country is so low, most Japanese see no need for firearms.

    Secondly, by asking “liberals” to explain, Spicer is suggesting that gun laws don’t prevent gun violence, since those who identify with “liberal” political beliefs tend to support stricter gun control measures. However, the simple fact that this act of violence is so rare in Japan supports the idea that gun control in Japan is working. Yes, culture is one reason for the low rate, but gun regulation is a major one, too. The result is a situation where citizens and police seldom use guns. The fact that the shooter of Shinzo Abe most likely used a “homemade gun”2 to get past laws restricting the sales of firearms and ammunition, proves that guns are harder to obtain in Japan. 

    According to a recently published article on Vox, gun regulations in other countries reflect a significant difference in recorded instances of gun violence. 

    No other high-income country has suffered such a high death toll from gun violence. Every day, more than 110 Americans die at the end of a gun, including suicides and homicides, an average of 40,620 per year. Since 2009, there has been an annual average of 19 mass shootings, when defined as shootings in which at least four people are killed. The US gun homicide rate is as much as 26 times that of other high-income countries; its gun suicide rate is nearly 12 times higher.

    The following excerpt published in The Guardian by reporters Cait Kelly and Justin McCurry compares gun violence in U.S. and Japan and other high-income countries.

    A 2022 report from the University of Washington revealed that, while the US had more than four firearm homicides per 100,000 people in 2019, Japan had almost zero. Comparing high-income countries in the World Bank with the rate of firearm homicide per 100,000 people, the US had 4.2, Australia had 0.18 and Japan 0.02, the report found.

    In 2013, the country hit a record high for gun crime, with 40 criminal cases of guns being fired, but it has followed a downward trend since.

    There are also strict laws about how many gun shops are allowed to open – in most of the countries’ 47 prefectures, a total of three gun shops can operate in each prefecture.

     

    https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/02/03/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/07/08/japan-shinzo-abe-shooting-gun-laws/

    [ad_2]

    Newswise

    Source link