State-Level Firearm Transfer Policy

• Author: Qiang Fu,Ronald Frandsen,David G. Mueller,Jennifer Karberg,Evan Anderson
• Published date: 01 December 2017
• Date: 01 December 2017
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/1525107118801301
• Subject Matter: Research Articles

Research Article

State-Level Firearm

Transfer Policy: A

Latent Class Analysis

David G. Mueller

1

, Qiang Fu

2

, Ronald Frandsen

1

,

Jennifer Karberg

1

and Evan Anderson

3

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to determine whether latent class analysis (LCA)

could obtain a measure of the aggregate firearm transfer law environment. LCA,

analysis of variance, and multinomial logistic regression were used to analyze state-

level firearm transfer laws. Results indicated that a three-class solution fit the data

better than a two- or four-class solution. These classes were associated with the two

covariates in patterns consistent with hypotheses. Results suggest that LCA is a useful

technique for classifying states based on the restrictiveness of firearm transfer laws.

This classification may be useful in intervention and prevention planning.

Keywords

firearms, policy, mortality

Reducing firearm injury and mortality remains an important public safety and health

priority. However, legal restrictions on access to firearms are politically controversial.

At least part of the controversy revolves around uncertainty about the effects of

different federal and state laws. One persistent challenge in identifying the effect of

legal restrictions is their complexity. Multiple state laws regulate access to firearms,

and these different laws vary in many ways. Quantifying the legal environment is

essential to identifying the effect of individual laws and to understanding how com-

binations of different state laws relate to injury and mortality. However, such

1

Regional Justice Information Service, St. Louis, MO, USA

2

College for Public Health and Social Justice, Saint Louis University, St. Louis, MO, USA

3

Center for Public Health Initiatives, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA

Corresponding Author:

David G. Mueller, Regional Justice Information Service, 4255 W. Pine Blvd., St. Louis, MO 63108, USA.

Email: dmueller@rejis.org

Justice Research and Policy

2017, Vol. 18(2) 79-97

ªThe Author(s) 2018

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/1525107118801301

journals.sagepub.com/home/jrx

quantification is practically and conceptually difficult. Until recently, detailed, accu-

rate, and rigorously derived data about state gun laws have been unavailable (Siegel

et al., 2017). This is a welcome development, but it does not address a continuing

challenge. How does one understand the holistic aspect of state firearm laws? Under-

standing this may enable exploration of the aggregate state firearm law environment.

Without the ability to describe such complex variation, the role of states as labora-

tories in the policy learning process for guns will remain limited and contested.

Previous work has used variable-centered approaches such as regression to capture

the relationship between one or two laws and an outcome like homicide. These

approaches are not able to capture underlying heterogeneity of states in firearm

transfer laws. The present study seeks a holistic analysis of firearm transfer law rather

than a reductionist one. To this end, latent class analysis (LCA) is applied for the first

time in the area of firearm policy analysis.

Background

The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (Brady Act; 18 U.S.C. 922(t)) provides

a nationwide mechanism, a background check for licensed dealer transfers, to enforce

the provisions of the federal Gun Control Act (GCA; 18 U.S.C. 922). The GCA’s

prohibitions on receipt of a firearm may be caused by felony indictments and convic-

tions, fugitive warrants, controlled substance use or addiction, adjudications of incom-

petence, involuntary mental hospital commitments, restraining orders or misdemeanor

convictions based on domestic violence, and other events. Although a GCA violation

in any state may be federally prosecuted, many state laws identify other regulated

classes and states have considerable latitude in determining when and how these legal

restrictions apply. For example, some states define the felony indictment/conviction,

domestic violence, and controlled substance use prohibitors more broadly than the

GCA (see below for an example of what states have done). Some states have also

extended universal background checks to private (i.e., unlicensed dealer) transfers,

mandated purchase permits, and imposed waiting periods for handgun transfers, none

of which are federally required.

Research evaluating the effects of laws seldom incorporates randomization for

ethical and practical reasons. Evaluation ha s instead primarily relied on variable-

centered, quasi-experimental designs that aim to create equal comparisons between

a group that is exposed to a specific law and a group that is not similarly exposed,

while controlling for known confounding variables. This approach is capable of gen-

erating rigorous evidence. A look at the field of public health is instructive. Motor

vehicle safety researchers exploited interstate variation in early safety belt laws,

including whether they applied to passengers in the front versus the back seat and

to children below and above age 4, to establish the benefits of different legal variants.

The sharp distinctions between the laws and the availability of detailed crash data

from the Fatal Accident Reporting System (FARS) enabled strong inferences

that divergences in injury trends for different classes of individuals could be

attributed to the ways they were regulated under state motor vehicle safety law

80 Justice Research and Policy 18(2)