Contextualizing Homicide-Suicide: Examining How Ecological Gun Availability Affects Homicide-Suicide at Multiple Levels of Analysis

• Author: Gregory M. Zimmerman,Emma E. Fridel
• DOI: 10.1177/1088767919878478
• Published date: 01 May 2020
• Date: 01 May 2020
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/1088767919878478

Homicide Studies

2020, Vol. 24(2) 151 –177

© 2019 SAGE Publications

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/1088767919878478

journals.sagepub.com/home/hsx

Article

Contextualizing Homicide-

Suicide: Examining How

Ecological Gun Availability

Affects Homicide-Suicide at

Multiple Levels of Analysis

Gregory M. Zimmerman1 and Emma E. Fridel1

Abstract

There is virtually no information on the relevance of contextual gun availability for

homicide-suicide, or on whether ecological gun availability distinguishes homicide-

suicide from homicide-only and suicide-only. This study addresses these gaps in the

literature. Data from the National Violent Death Reporting System includes 2,535

homicide-suicides, 28,027 homicides, and 138,948 suicides across 1,584 counties and

50 U.S. states from 2003 to 2015. Results indicated that ecological gun ownership

increased state rates of homicide-suicide and amplified the odds of firearm violence

against two persons (other and self) relative to one (other or self). The results suggest

that limiting gun availability can significantly reduce homicide-suicide.

Keywords

homicide-suicide, homicide, suicide, firearms, gun availability, social context

Introduction

Homicide-suicide is generally defined as homicide followed immediately by suicide

of the perpetrator (Liem, 2010). A rare form of interpersonal violence, homicide-sui-

cide has an estimated rate of 0.22 per 100,000 U.S. persons, representing 4.0% of

annual homicides and 1.5% of annual suicides (Large, Smith, & Nielssen, 2009).

Despite its rarity, homicide-suicide is a significant social and public health concern.

1Northeastern University, Boston, MA, USA

Corresponding Author:

Gregory M. Zimmerman, School of Criminology & Criminal Justice, Northeastern University, 431

Churchill Hall, 360 Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA 02115, USA.

Email: g.zimmerman@neu.edu

878478HSXXXX10.1177/1088767919878478Homicide StudiesZimmerman and Fridel

research-article2019

152 Homicide Studies 24(2)

Homicide-suicide involves multiple deaths often among tight-knit kin, friendship, and

neighborhood networks, leading to secondary victimization, mental and emotional

trauma, and the disruption of social networks (Liem, 2010). In addition, homicide-

suicide has the ability to attract media attention and generate national discussion,

thereby inciting moral panic (McPhedran et al., 2018), inspiring copycat mass murders

and school shootings (Towers, Gomez-Lievano, Khan, Mubayi, & Castillo-Chávez,

2015), and promoting violence-reducing measures on and outside of school campuses

(Fox & Burstein, 2010). These responses may be amplified when multiple victims and

children are involved (Roma et al., 2012). Homicide-suicide is thus influential beyond

the incidents themselves to the public health sphere and sociopolitical landscape.

Much of the empirical work on homicide-suicide has focused on examining whether

homicide-suicide is primarily suicide-driven, primarily homicide-driven, or a different

form of violence entirely (Eliason, 2009; Liem & Nieuwbeertaa, 2010; Logan et al.,

2008). Some researchers argue that homicide-suicide is rooted in suicide, citing the

planned nature of the attack, the use of a suicide note, depressive symptomology, and

a history of suicidal thoughts or actions (Liem & Roberts, 2009; Roma et al., 2012), or

in homicide, noting a shared history of domestic and interpersonal violence, and rela-

tionship stressors (Logan et al., 2008; McPhedran et al., 2018). There are also several

factors common to all three phenomena, including substance abuse and economic

stressors (Eliason, 2009; Large et al., 2009; Logan et al., 2008; Marzuk, Tardiff, &

Hirsch, 1992). Other scholars consider homicide-suicide a unique phenomenon with

distinct etiology (Liem, 2010). In particular, homicide-suicide occurs primarily in sub-

urban contexts (Panczak et al., 2013), disproportionately involves domestic violence

(McPhedran et al., 2018), and includes a distinct population of offenders—middle-

aged, White men targeting women and children (Panczak et al., 2013). Another distin-

guishing factor is the prevalence of firearm as weapon (McPhedran et al., 2018).

The rate of firearm use in homicide and suicide is just more than two thirds and one

half, respectively, and trends in homicide and suicide are driven by temporal variation

in firearm homicide and suicide (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC],

2019). Research has also demonstrated that the presence of a gun in the home is

strongly associated with an increased risk of gun-assisted suicide and gun-related

homicide, both in the United States (Johnson, Barber, Azrael, Clark, & Hemenway,

2010; Kellermann et al., 1993; Kellermann et al., 1992) and internationally (Killias,

van Kesteren, & Rindlisbacher, 2001). Furthermore, there is a healthy literature on the

relationship between contextual gun availability and homicide (Hepburn & Hemenway,

2004), including homicide of children (Miller, Azrael, & Hemenway, 2013) and law

enforcement (LE) officers (Swedler, Simmons, Dominici, & Hemenway, 2015). And,

the relationships between city (Miller, Warren, Azrael, & Hemenway, 2015) and state

(Miller, Azrael, & Barber, 2012) firearm availability and suicide are well-documented.

Yet, we have virtually no information on the relevance of gun availability in the

broader social context for homicide-suicide, or on whether contextual gun availability

distinguishes homicide-suicide from homicide-only and suicide-only.

Theoretically, this is surprising, given (a) that firearms are the most common

method of both homicide and suicide in dyadic death, and (b) that the presence of