Explore the vast range of titles available.

Why do some U.S. states have more permissive concealed carry weapons (CCW) laws than other states? To answer this question, this study tests several plausible social, political, and economic factors thought to affect the likelihood of this outcome over several decades. Models estimated using random-effects ordered logistic regression reveal that theoretical accounts based on partisan politics, gendered politics, economic threat, and racial threat largely explain variation in CCW laws over time. Tests for interactions, however, reveal that the influence of gubernatorial politics varies according to Republican strength in the legislature and by region. Also, the impact of racial threat on CCW laws is dependent on the crime rate. Overall, this research advances the literature by simultaneously assessing all plausible state-level CCW policies, incorporating novel threat and political predictors, and utilizing a larger sample size than prior studies.

This study examines the trend in gun-related trauma in Kansas before and after the enactment of a law nullifying the need for a concealed carry license. A retrospective chart review was conducted of all patients admitted to a level 1 trauma center with a traumatic injury secondary to a gunshot wound. Comparisons were between three time periods: baseline (T1), after concealed carry with limited exceptions (T2), and after the exceptions expired (T3). The average number of patients per year increased from T1 (54 patients/year) to T2 (83 patients/year) and T3 (87 patients/year). The proportion of injuries caused by handguns went from 24.6 ​% in T1 to 72.5 ​% in T2 and 63.4 ​% in T3 (p ​< ​.001). There was no difference between the time periods for injury severity, mortality, or discharge disposition. These findings could suggest a correlation in concealed carry law and availability of handguns in Kansas. •Literature on firearm injuries in “permitless” concealed carry states is limited.•Handgun-related injuries increased in the two post-law periods.•The length of ICU stay increased in the two post-law periods.

Liberalized concealed carry laws test how firearm legislation affects crime in the US. This study analyzes the relationship between these laws, total homicide, and firearm homicide using panel data from 1980 to 2018 across all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The analysis uses multivariate regression with state and time-fixed effects and applies a general-to-specific procedure to select control variables. Robustness checks, including a generalized synthetic control model, confirm the findings. The results show no statistically significant relationship between shall-issue or permitless carry laws and homicide rates, even at the 10% level. The findings remain consistent across alternative model specifications. If these effects are truly null, liberalized concealed carry laws may have positive social implications, offering valuable insights for policymakers.

Background Following the Supreme Court’s decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, which ruled a New York concealed-carry permitting requirement unconstitutional, laws restricting the public carrying of firearms in “sensitive places,” like college campuses, have received increasing attention. However, there is little evidence for whether permissive campus carry policies increase firearm violence or, via deterrence, reduce general crime on campus. We estimated the effect of implementing state laws allowing the carry of firearms on public college and university campuses on rates of violent crime and burglary. Methods Arkansas, Georgia, and Texas, containing 106 public institutions, implemented permissive campus carry laws in 2017, 2017, and 2016, respectively. Control institutions were all those in states that did not allow the carry of firearms on college campuses for the entire study period (2006–2019) (n = 324 institutions, 21 states). The rates of major violence and burglary per 1,000 enrolled students was obtained from the Office of Postsecondary Education Campus Safety and Security Statistics website. We use two-way fixed effects difference-in-differences models to estimate state-specific effects and a modified difference-in-differences approach that accounts for variation in treatment timing to generate an overall estimate. Results Differences in rates of major violence and burglary were not statistically distinguishable from zero in our main models and sensitivity analyses. The overall estimated difference in the rate of major violence following policy implementation was − 0.01 (− 0.113, 0.093). For burglary, we estimated a difference of − 0.02 (− 0.147, 0.106). Violence rates trended upward in treated states in the last exposure period, but differences were not consistently distinguished from the null. Conclusions This study does not find significant changes in crime rates following state implementation of permissive campus carrying laws. Decision-makers might therefore consider other factors such as the opinions of students, faculty, and staff regarding campus carry policies and feelings of safety, potential impacts on instructional quality and student engagement, and potential impacts on accidental or self-directed harm.

Recent incidents of mass shootings in schools have raised questions about the availability of “military-style” firearms and need for campus carry policies. Previous research that has measured students’ attitudes toward gun control has neglected the Northeastern Region of the United States and failed to include measures of students’ knowledge of current firearm legislation in prediction models. Using a sample of 1,518 students enrolled in 3 universities across two regions of the United States (e.g., Northeast and Midwest), the present study expands on prior literature by comparing regional variants in student gun owners, and perceptions of gun legislation. Results indicate that, with the exception of “military-style” rifles, students in the Northeast are more likely to have access to every other type of firearm assessed (e.g., rifle, shotgun, handgun), but significantly less likely to have completed a formal gun safety course. Knowledge of current gun legislation is a direct negative predictor of support for general gun control, and a direct positive predictor of support for faculty campus carry, however, race moderates the relationship between knowledge and support for gun control. These findings indicate that there may be a need for formal general gun safety education courses in the Northeast Region of the United States. Previous models that failed to control for knowledge of current gun legislation may have been misspecified.

This study examines factors predicting possession of a license to carry and plans to obtain a license to carry for the purpose of carrying a concealed handgun on campus after the passage of Texas Senate Bill 11 (SB11). Utilizing plans to obtain a license to carry we examine four models each with a more refined dependent variable to determine the factors specifically related to campus carry. The study uses a sample of university students at a midsize university in Texas to examine these relationships. Campus security concerns both before and after implementation of SB11 are discussed.

An increasing number of states have passed legislation allowing individuals to carry concealed weapons on university campuses. Past research has examined the perceptions of campus carry among college students, but most of the extant literature represents efforts occurring prior to these legislative changes and seldom explores the perceptions of minority populations. Current scholarship also lacks research on how faculty, staff, and administrators perceive campus carry policies. This study investigates all campus stakeholders’ knowledge of the campus carry policy and their support for it in a university located in a U.S.-Mexico border town. Results from the structural equation modeling indicate that campus members have limited knowledge of the campus carry policy and expressed low support for the policy. Assimilation of Hispanics significantly impacted their support for concealed carry on campus both directly and indirectly.

Right-to-carry (RTC) laws allow the legal carrying of concealed firearms for defense, in certain states in the United States. I used modern causal inference methodology from epidemiology to examine the effect of RTC laws on crime over a period from 1959 up to 2016. I fitted marginal structural models (MSMs), using inverse probability weighting (IPW) to correct for criminological, economic, political and demographic confounders. Results indicate that RTC laws significantly increase violent crime by 7.5% and property crime by 6.1%. RTC laws significantly increase murder and manslaughter, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny theft and motor vehicle theft rates. Applying this method to this topic for the first time addresses methodological shortcomings in previous studies such as conditioning away the effect, overfit and the inappropriate use of county level measurements. Data and analysis code for this article are available online.

By passing “Campus Carry” law in 2015, the Texas state legislature made it legal for licensed adults to bring concealed handguns onto public university premises, including the classroom. The result was a cascade of shifting power dynamics, from the state’s “power over” the sanctum of the Ivory Tower to the university administration’s defiance of faculty and student protestors. In the classroom itself, preexisting mechanisms of power were contested and even inverted, with ideological fractures reflected in rhetoric and pedagogy. This paper employs mixed-methods ethnography to expose the multiple lines of force at UT Austin after the law was implemented and highlight the historical significance of this case for universities elsewhere in the United States where similar laws are planned or currently being passed.

Gun violence at American colleges and universities has rekindled the debate surrounding concealed weapons on campus. This study examined college student and faculty opinions on two college campuses, focusing on their attitudes towards private citizens carrying concealed guns on campus. Data were collected during the fall 2008 and spring 2009, and over 2,100 students, staff, faculty, and administrators on the two campuses participated in the research. The results indicate over 70 % of respondents oppose the option of carrying concealed guns on campus. In addition, the idea of more guns on campus makes the majority of students and faculty feel less safe, and allowing concealed weapons serves to decrease the sense of campus safety. This study continues to empirically advance the argument that those who live, work, and study do not want more guns on campus. Further research in this area, including an expanded range of the nation’s college campuses, should be explored.