By Timothy Wheeler, MD
OK, it’s really the Harvard Injury Control Research Center. But the title of this post reflects the reality. It’s a division of the Harvard School of Public Health, which we described last week as one of the longtime gun control advocacy research factories. This page from their web site lists some of the Harvard team’s “research” findings. Let’s examine each item:
1. Across states, more guns = more unintentional firearm deaths
We analyzed data for 50 states over 19 years to investigate the relationship between gun prevalence and accidental gun deaths across different age groups. For every age group, where there are more guns there are more accidental deaths. The mortality rate was 7 times higher in the four states with the most guns compared to the four states with the fewest guns.
Miller, Matthew; Azrael, Deborah; Hemenway, David. Firearm availability and unintentional firearm deaths. Accident Analysis and Prevention. 2001; 33:477-84.
I read this several times, looking for some deep, hidden meaning. But no. That’s all there is. The authors are sharing the breathtaking revelation that accidental gun deaths are more likely to happen in states with more guns. I don’t see any mention that more violent crimes are prevented in the states with more gun carry permit holders, as criminologist John Lott has found. I wonder when we will see the Harvard study showing more outdoor swimming pool drownings in Florida than in North Dakota.
2. Across states, unsafe gun storage = more unintentional firearm deaths
We analyzed data from the 2002 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System that asked questions about guns and gun storage in the home, combined with information on deaths from the National Center for Health Statistics. Across states, both firearm prevalence AND questionable storage practices (i.e. storing firearms loaded and unlocked) were associated with higher rates of unintentional firearm deaths.
Miller, Matthew; Azrael, Deborah; Hemenway, David; Vriniotis, Mary. Firearm storage practices and rates of unintentional firearm deaths in the United States. Accident Analysis and Prevention. 2005; 37:661-67.
This is another stunningly obvious conclusion that reveals absolutely nothing new. The only value of this article is its ability to say something negative about firearms. Conspicuously missing from it is a truly remarkable fact: accidental firearm deaths have been decreasing for decades, even as the number of guns in private hands have greatly increased (CDC National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. See their Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System for filterable research throughout multiple years). Could it be that ongoing private gun safety education programs like those offered by the National Rifle Association and the National Shooting Sports Foundation can take some credit for these injuries prevented and lives saved? We’ll never hear it from the Harvard researchers, because that would involve saying something good about guns and gun owners.
3. Youth killed in gun accidents are shot by other youth
The majority of people killed in firearm accidents are under age 24, and most of these young people are being shot by someone else, usually someone their own age. The shooter is typically a friend or family member, often an older brother. By contrast, older adults are at far lower risk of accidental firearm death, and most often are shooting themselves. This article highlights one of the many benefits of the National Violent Death Reporting System. Before the NVDRS, data on the shooter in unintentional gun deaths were not readily available
Hemenway, David; Barber, Catherine; Miller, Matthew. Unintentional firearm deaths: a comparison of other-inflicted and self-inflicted shootings. Accident Analysis & Prevention.2010; 42:1184-8.
Again, exactly how is this information supposed to help us? We already know that kids need instruction in gun safety, just as they need safety instruction in swimming or driving or crossing the street. That’s why citizen gun owner organizations like the NRA and numerous state gun owner associations spend lots of money and volunteer time bringing gun safety education to kids and adults in every community across America. The rate of accidental gun deaths in children has been falling for decades, but again, we’ll never hear such good news about guns from Harvard researchers. We already know they hate guns and have no interest in learning about gun owners other than with the intention of slandering them under the guise of scientific research.
These three literature citations are classic examples of how public health gun control advocates chip away at American gun owners’ rights without contributing to science. I have written about this tactic before. They use the public health literature for pamphleteering against gun ownership. With each mention of “firearm death” in the same paragraph as “youth” or “children,” they plant a negative idea about gun owners in readers’ minds, but in the end they have said nothing substantial.
We are now seeing the most concerted attack on our gun rights in many years. The public health academic gun control faction is very much a part of that attack. It is our responsibility to expose the public health anti-gun agenda and educate the public about the true benefits of firearm ownership.
—Timothy Wheeler, MD is director of Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership, a project of the Second Amendment Foundation.