Gun violence in the United States has resulted in a tragic loss of life and is becoming more pervasive. Between 1968 and 2017, 1.5 million people were killed by guns (BBC News, 2022). This is more people than were killed in every U.S. war since the Revolutionary War in 1776. In 2020 alone, 45,222 Americans were killed by guns, a higher number than any other year in U.S. history (Pew Research Center, 2022). This represents a 14% increase over the previous year, a 25% increase over the previous five years, and a 43% over the previous decade. The U.S. gun death rate of 10.6 per 100,000 people in 2016 was 18 times higher than Spain, 12 times higher than Germany, 10 times higher than Australia, 5 times higher than Canada, and 4 times higher than France (Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, 2018).

Each year, the number of deaths due to gun violence increases, inflicting its toll in various forms and across different populations. As of July 17, there have been 24,018 gun deaths to date in 2022, of which 13,068 were suicides, 351 mass shootings, and 188 children between the ages of 0 and 11 (Gun Violence Archive, 2022). These numbers do not include the 20,827 gun-related injuries that occurred. The U.S. states with the highest rates of gun deaths are Mississippi (28.6 per 100,000 people), Louisiana (26.3), Wyoming (25.9), and Alabama (23.6; Pew Research Center, 2022). The increasing rate of gun violence is correlated with the U.S. having the highest and fastest growing per-capita gun ownership rate of all countries in the world, with U.S. citizens collectively owning more than 400 million guns. Today, there is more than one civilian-owned gun for every man, women, child, and infant in the United States (Pew Research Center, 2021).  

Despite public outrage over gun deaths, enacting gun laws in the U.S. is highly contentious. According to Gallup Inc. (2021), only 52% of Americans want stricter gun laws, 35% want no change to existing gun laws, and 11% want laxer gun laws. The issue is extremely partisan with 91% of democrats versus only 24% of Republicans supporting stricter regulation. Over the past 10 years, the National Rifle Association (NRA) and other gun rights groups have spent approximately $150 million lobbying congress to retain or relax gun laws as opposed to only $40 million spent by anti-gun lobbyists to tighten controls. Both Texas and Georgia have passed legislation that enables residents to carry handguns and firearms without a license or a permit. On June 29, 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court passed a ruling allowing citizens to carry concealed handguns in public spaces. These examples of loosening federal and state gun regulations are part of a trend that is likely to accelerate U.S. gun violence.

In contrast to the U.S., countries with strict gun control laws have dramatically fewer gun-related deaths and injuries (World Population Review, 2022; American Medical Association, 2018). Japan, for example, has a gun death rate of .02 per 100,000 people, meaning only 1 person dies from gun violence in Japan in the same amount of time that 500 people die from gun violence in the U.S. In Singapore, the gun death rate is only .01 per 100,000 people, one one-thousandth the rate of the U.S. In Japan, handguns are illegal; only shotguns and rifles can be purchased. In order to purchase a gun in Japan, an individual must attend an all-day class, pass a written examination, complete a shooting range test, have a comprehensive background check, and must undergo an extensive psychological evaluation.

Relevance to the Field of Psychology

The purpose of this blog is to examine the role of psychology in understanding the causes and effects of gun violence in the U.S., and to explore solutions to reduce it. Gun deaths and injuries, as tragic as they are, are only the tip of the iceberg. The psychological impact of gun violence, in the form of anxiety, trauma, and fear for individual safety, are pervasive (Lowe & Galea, 2008). Not only are immediate survivors and witnesses exposed to the possibility of trauma, but also family members, friends, community members, and the general population (Slovak, 2022; Parham-Payne, 2014). Adding to the issue is the ubiquitous twenty-four seven news cycle and Americans’ instant access to news from their cell phones and computing devices. Active shooter incidents and many mass shootings receive wide and persistent media attention, and annual active shooter incidents have increased almost fifteen-fold in the last two decades (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2020).   

Psychology research has shown that there are significant mental health consequences of being exposed to gun-related violence and assaults (Price et al., 2004). The consequences of experiencing gun violence can be long-lasting, and in some cases life-long. Breslau et al. (1996) and Lowe et al. (2015) have shown that individuals experiencing assault are often diagnosed with major depressive disorder (MDD) and/or posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

Role and Responsibility of Psychology to Reduce Gun Violence

Given the psychological impact of gun violence, psychologists have a responsibility to obtain the knowledge, skills, and experiences needed to effectively treat individuals who have either directly or indirectly experienced gun violence. By engaging in these activities, psychologists are in a better position to effectively help their clients and patients recover from the deleterious psychological consequences of gun violence.

In addition to treating the symptoms resulting from gun violence, psychologists also have a role to play in understanding why individuals commit gun violence. Although research has been conducted analyzing the motivations of individuals to commit gun violence, more research is needed. Further insights from research might enable peers, teachers, parents, therapists, and authorities to better identify and predict the possibility of an individual considering gun violence and to prevent it. In this way, psychologists can go beyond their traditional role of addressing symptoms and assume a more socially proactive role in helping to formulate solutions.

Linsky (1988) found that gun violence is correlated with gun ownership. He identified a destructive feedback loop whereby U.S. societal values have legitimized gun ownership and the use of guns for protection. As a result, gun ownership has become pervasive. The pervasive presence of guns, in turn, increases the likelihood of gun-related violence.

Peterson et al. (2022) found that mass shootings are often motivated by employment issues, interpersonal conflict, relationship problems, hate, and a desire for fame. Psychologists are trained to help their clients with each of these issues, and are therefore well-positioned to identify, help, or report individuals who may be considering gun violence. According to these researchers, however, only 20% of mass shooters suffer from either moderate or major psychotic symptoms, and therefore early interventions providing access to psychological health care may not prevent the majority of mass shootings.

Other research has shown that individuals who have had previous exposure to violence often have long-term symptoms of posttraumatic stress. These individuals have been found to have an increased propensity to advocate for greater gun rights and less gun control (Wamser-Nanney et al., 2021). This finding is in line with the theory that a destructive feedback cycle exists where previous exposure to violence may precipitate gun ownership which, in turn, leads to a higher likelihood of future violence (Lane et al., 2017; Linsky, 1988).

Psychologists can play a role in reducing gun violence by defining and recommending community-based interventions. Richardson (2019) conducted a meta-analysis of 13 psychology and sociology research articles, and concluded that successful community based efforts effectively encourage broad community engagement. Interventions with increased community engagement had the following characteristics: (1) recruitment of individual promoters who made themselves available for problem resolution, (2) enlistment of volunteer high school peer advocates, (3) creation of a drop-in center with mental support services, and (4) hosting of community events that reenforce positive mental health habits. 

Psychologists can also play a valuable role in helping legislators formulate gun control laws that are based upon sound research and evidence. Specifically, they can help in the creation of thorough background check procedures that efficiently and effectively detect risk factors for gun violence. Because the field of psychology has a long history developing evidence-based personality assessment instruments, there is extensive material to draw from in creating such background checks.

Theoretical Frameworks that Shape Actions and Behaviors

Identifying effective interventions to analyze and reduce gun violence requires that psychologists leverage relevant theoretical frameworks that have been proven with extensive evidence. One such theoretical framework is functionalism. The sociologist Emile Durkheim conceived of functionalism in the early 19^th century. Functionalism posts that societies are motivated to maintain their equilibrium in order to satisfy their need for survival (McClelland, 2000). Equilibrium is achieved by creating a consensus or conformity among individuals through the socialization of values that are based upon societal norms. Social control mechanisms are used to either maintain or re-establish equilibrium when it is out of balance. These control mechanisms typically employ negative interpersonal feedback in the form of sanctions, or the constraints of social institutions such as schools, prisons, or workplaces. Another key tenet of functionalism is that society can be examined from a positivist perspective, meaning that its various aspects can be measured objectively, free from subjective bias. These measurements can take the form of questionnaires, polls, and direct observations and are generally employed in statistical analysis.

The relationship of the social change theory of functionalism to gun violence can be understood by applying both the positivist and the social aspects of functionalism. First, the positivist aspect of functionalism allows psychologists and sociologists to take statistical measurements of psychological and social states of individuals who own and use guns to commit violence. This enables various forms of analyses based upon hypotheses and theories to determine correlation or causality between the beliefs and behaviors of gun violence perpetrators and social norms and values.

Linksy (1988) presumed this positivist stance of functionalism in his research using psychological test instruments to understand the motivations behind gun violence in the U.S. By employing a multiple regression analysis using questionnaire data, he found that individuals who (a) perceived a high degree of social stress, (b) were exposed to institutional and normalized forms of violence, and (c) had ready access to guns, were at higher risk of committing gun violence. Linsky’s research also illustrates the social aspect of functionalism in that he showed that individuals who were exposed to normalized forms of violence were more likely to internalize those values and were more likely to engage in violent behaviors.

Duque et al. (2019) found in their research that the high degree of gun availability, which leads to increased gun violence, is influenced by socialized beliefs that gun ownership represents not only personal security, but also freedom. Violence can be seen at the societal level as a means to independence and preservation in the world order, but at the individual level within society it is almost always perceived as a threat to social order. Therefore, in line with functionalist theory, institutional forms of social control are brought to bear on violent individuals in the form of gun control laws, law enforcement, the judicial system, and prisons. These forms of social control seek to bring society back into homeostasis to address its need for survival. 

Using the theory of functionalism to understand and reduce gun violence has certain strengths and limitations. Its strengths are that it enables the statistical measurement of psychological and social phenomena and can use system theory to make predictions. Its strength also stems from empirical evidence showing the links of individual beliefs and behaviors to the characteristics and values of society as a whole, and vice versa. One of its limitations is that establishing causality when using real world data is difficult due to the presence of confounding variables and the lack of a tightly regulated control group. Another limitation, according to McClelland (2000), is that not all behavior can be understood or predicted using functionalistic explanations, and therefore other theories are often employed in conjunction with functionalism to perform more robust research.

Psychology’s Role in Advocating for the Greater Society

Psychology has a role in advocating for the greater society by helping to understand and reduce gun violence. Gun violence results in loss life and mental suffering, which are in direct opposition to the responsibility of psychologists to promote mental health and well-being. Psychologists have a responsibility to take a leadership role in defining and promoting a vision for a healthier, non-violent society in which individuals can exercise their freedoms without infringing on the rights of others. In order to effectively promote this vision, psychologists must first raise awareness of the devastating psychological consequences of today’s gun violence.

Psychologists can become more active in raising awareness and driving social change by improving their skills in treating victims of gun violence, participating in public protests, presenting at forums, lobbying their government representatives, and raising and discussing the issue of gun violence with their peers. Psychologists can donate their time, effort, and financial resources to community efforts, charities, and causes that reduce gun violence. Psychologists can also get involved in conducting research regarding gun violence.

 Because gun violence disproportionately impacts minorities and low-SES individuals, it is a social justice issue (Bernstein et al., 2019). Blacks have the highest likelihood of experiencing gun violence, followed by Latinos. As a consequence, Blacks and Latinos have the highest probability of suffering anxiety due to fear of gun violence (Correll, 2005; Payton et al., 2015). Therefore, psychologists also have the opportunity to provide their multicultural insights, skills, and experience to advocate for minorities and marginalized individuals who do not have adequate representation, financial means, or community resources.

Psychology research has shown that multi-level interventions that address multiple social determinants and cultural factors are needed to drive the most impact (Richardson, 2019). Such upstream interventions can involve early identification of signs that an individual is at risk for gun violence, informing procedures for how to conduct background checks, providing insights to legislative control efforts, and working with parents, teachers, and community members to identify and enact community-based interventions and social support mechanisms. The time for action among psychologists on the issue of gun violence is now. Psychologists will not only need to be knowledgeable regarding gun violence issues, but will need to have the multicultural skills and experience to effectively address this important social issue.

References

American Medical Association. (2018). Global mortality from firearms, 1990-2016, original investigation of the Global Burden of Disease 2016 Injury Collaborators. Journal of the American Medical Association, 320(8), 792-814.

Bernstein, M., McMillan, J., & Charash, E. (2019). Once in Parkland, a year in Hartford, a weekend in Chicago: Race and resistance in the gun violence prevention movement. Sociological Forum 34(1), 1153-1173.

BBC News. (2022, May 25). America’s gun culture – in seven charts. BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41488081.

Breslau, N., Kessler, R., Chilcoat, H., Schultz, L., Davis, G., & Andreski, P. (1996). Trauma and posttraumatic stress disorder in the community: The 1996 Detroit Area Survey of Trauma. Archives of General Psychiatry, 55, 626–632. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.55.7.626

Correll, J., Park, B., Judd, C. M., & Wittenbrink, B. (2002). The police officer’s dilemma: Using ethnicity to disambiguate potentially threatening individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(6), 1314–1329.

Duque, R., LeBlanc, E., & Rivera, R. (2019). Predicting active shooter events: Are regional homogeneity, intolerance, dull lives, and more guns enough deterrence? Crime & Delinquency, 65(9), 1218-1261.

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2019). Active shooter incidents 20-year review, 2000-2019. Office of Partner Engagement.https://www.fbi.gov/file-repository/active-shooter-incidents-20-year-review-2000-2019-060121.pdf/view.

Gallup Inc. (2021). Stricter gun laws less popular in U.S., November 17, 2021. https://news.gallup.com/poll/357317/stricter-gun-laws-less-popular.aspx.

Gun Violence Archive. (2022). Gun violence archive 2022. Library of Congress. https://www.gunviolencearchive.org.

Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. (2018, August 28). Six countries in the Americas account for half of all firearm deaths. University of Washington Study of Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries and Risk Factors. https://www.healthdata.org/news-release/six-countries-americas-account-half-all-firearm-deaths.

Lane, S., Rubinstein, R., Bergen-Cico, D., Jennings-Bey, T., Fish, L., Larsen, D., & Robinson, J. (2017). Neighborhood trauma due to violence: A multilevel analysis. Journal of Health Care for the Poor and Underserved, 28(1), 446–462.

Linsky, A. (1988). Social stress, legitimate violence, and gun availability: Links to weapon-specific homicides. Annual Meeting of the Society for the Study of Social Problems, Atlanta, GA.

Lowe, S., & Galea, S. (2017). The mental health consequences of mass shootings. Trauma, Violence, and Abuse, 18(1), 62–82.

Lowe, S., Blachman-Forshay, J., & Koenen, K. (2015). Epidemiology of trauma and trauma-related disorders: Trauma as a public health issue. In U. Schnyder & M. Cloitre (Eds.), Evidence-based treatments for trauma-related psychological disorders: A practical guide for clinicians (pp. 11–40). Springer.

McClelland, K. (2000). Functionalism. Retrieved from http://web.grinnell.edu/courses/soc/s00/soc111-01/IntroTheories/Functionalism.html.

Parham-Payne, W. (2014). The role of the media in the disparate response to gun violence in America. Journal of Black Studies, 45(8), 752-768.

Payton, E., Thompson, A., Price, J., Sheu, J., & Dake, J. (2015). African American legislators’ perceptions of firearm violence prevention legislation. Journal of Community Health, 40, 439-447.

Peterson, J., Densley, J., Knapp, K., Higgins, S., & Jensen, A. (2022). Psychosis and mass shootings: A systematic examination using publicly available data. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 28(2), 280-291.

Pew Research Center. (2021). Key facts about Americans and guns. 13 Sept 2021. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/09/13/key-facts-about-americans-and-guns/.

Pew Research Center. (2022). What the data says about gun deaths in the U.S. 3 Feb 2022. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/02/03/what-the-data-says-about-gun-deaths-in-the-u-s/.

Price, J., Thompson, A., & Dake, J. (2004). Factors associated with state variations in homicide, suicide, and unintentional firearm deaths. Journal of Community Health, 29(4), 271–283.

Richardson, M. (2019). Framing community-based interventions for gun violence: A review of the literature. Health & Social Work, 44(4), 259- 270.

Slovak, K. (2002). Gun violence and children: Factors related to exposure and trauma. National Association of Social Workers, Health & Social Work, 27(2), 104-113.

Wamser-Nanney, R., Nanney, J., & Constans, J. (2021). Trauma exposure, posttraumatic stress symptoms, and attitudes toward guns. Psychology of Violence, 11(4), 376-384.

World Population Review. (2022). Gun deaths by country 2022. Retrieved July 17, 2022, from https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/gun-deaths-by-country.