The impact of spikes in handgun acquisitions on firearm-related harms

Firearm Ownership and Support for Political Violence in the United States

Importance

Little is known about support for and willingness to engage in political violence in the United States. Such violence would likely involve firearms.

Objective

To evaluate whether firearm owners' and nonowners' support for political violence differs and whether support among owners varies by type of firearms owned, recency of purchase, and frequency of carrying a loaded firearm in public.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cross-sectional nationally representative survey study was conducted from May 13 to June 2, 2022, among US adult members of the Ipsos KnowledgePanel, including an oversample of firearm owners.

Exposure

Firearm ownership vs nonownership.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Main outcomes concern (1) support for political violence, in general and to advance specific political objectives; (2) personal willingness to engage in political violence, by severity of violence and target population; and (3) perceived likelihood of firearm use in political violence. Outcomes are expressed as weighted proportions and adjusted prevalence differences, with P values adjusted for the false-discovery rate and reported as q values.

Results

The analytic sample comprised 12 851 respondents: 5820 (45.3%) firearm owners, 6132 (47.7%) nonowners without firearms at home, and 899 (7.0%) nonowners with firearms at home. After weighting, 51.0% (95% CI, 49.9%-52.1%) were female, 8.5% (95% CI, 7.5%-9.5%) Hispanic, 9.1% (95% CI, 8.1%-10.2%) non-Hispanic Black, and 62.6% (95% CI, 61.5%-63.8%) non-Hispanic White; the mean (SD) age was 48.5 (18.0) years. Owners were more likely than nonowners without firearms at home to consider violence usually or always justified to advance at least 1 of 17 specific political objectives (owners: 38.8%; 95% CI, 37.3%-40.4%; nonowners: 29.8%; 95% CI, 28.5%-31.2%; adjusted difference, 6.5 percentage points; 95% CI, 4.5-9.3 percentage points; q < .001) but were not more willing to engage in political violence. Recent purchasers, owners who always or nearly always carry loaded firearms in public, and to a lesser extent, owners of assault-type rifles were more supportive of and willing to engage in political violence than other subgroups of firearm owners.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study of support for political violence in the United States, differences between firearm owners and nonowners without firearms at home were small to moderate when present. Differences were greater among subsets of owners than between owners and nonowners. These findings can guide risk-based prevention efforts.

Increases in adolescent firearm injuries were associated with school closures during COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Mitigation measures, including school closures, were enacted to protect the public during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the negative effects of mitigation measures are not fully known. Adolescents are uniquely vulnerable to policy changes since many depend on schools for physical, mental, and/or nutritional support.  This study explores the statistical relationships between school closures and adolescent firearm injuries (AFI) during the pandemic.

METHODS

Data were drawn from a collaborative registry of 4 trauma centers in Atlanta, GA (2 adult and 2 pediatric). Firearm injuries affecting adolescents aged 11-21 years from 1/1/2016 to 6/30/2021 were evaluated. Local economic and COVID data were obtained from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Georgia Department of Health. Linear models of AFI were created based on COVID cases, school closure, unemployment, and wage changes.

RESULTS

There were 1,330 AFI at Atlanta trauma centers during the study period, 1,130 of whom resided in the 10 metro counties. A significant spike in injuries was observed during Spring 2020. A season-adjusted time series of AFI was found to be non- stationary (p = 0.60). After adjustment for unemployment, seasonal variation, wage changes, county baseline injury rate, and county-level COVID incidence, each additional day of unplanned school closure in Atlanta was associated with 0.69 (95% CI 0.34- 1.04, p < 0.001) additional AFIs across the city.

CONCLUSION

AFI increased during the COVID pandemic. This rise in violence is statistically attributable in part to school closures after adjustment for COVID cases, unemployment, and seasonal variation. These findings reinforce the need to consider the direct implications on public health and adolescent safety when implementing public policy.

Identity, experience, and threat: Assessing key correlates of firearm ownership and related behaviors in a representative sample of five US States

The purpose of this study was to examine psychosocial, experiential, and demographic correlates of firearm ownership, carrying, and storage methods. We used a representative survey of 3,510 people living in five US states (Colorado, Minnesota, Mississippi, New Jersey, and Texas) conducted in 2022. Individuals provided information on past experiences with firearms, perceptions of threat and neighborhood safety, discrimination, and tolerance of uncertainty alongside demographic items. The analysis was conducted in November 2022. Past experiences with firearms and prior victimization are associated with increased firearm ownership and carrying practices. Threat sensitivity is associated with owning more guns while poorer perceptions of neighborhood safety correspond with owning fewer guns but greater risk for unsafe storage practices like storing a loaded gun in a closet or drawer. Intolerance of uncertainty is associated with owning fewer guns and lower risk for carrying outside of the home but greater risk for unsafe storage. Prior experience of discrimination is associated with risk for carrying firearms outside of the home. Demographic characteristics related to sex, rurality, military service, and political conservatism predict risky firearm-related behaviors related to firearm ownership, carrying frequency, and unsecure storage. Taken together, we find firearm ownership and risky firearm behaviors (e.g. carrying, unsafe storage) are more prominent among groups such as politically conservative males living in rural areas while also being influenced by threatening experiences, uncertainty, and perceptions of safety.

Changes in suicide in California from 2017 to 2021: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

Suicide is a major public health problem with immediate and long-term effects on individuals, families, and communities. In 2020 and 2021, stressors wrought by the COVID-19 pandemic, stay-at-home mandates, economic turmoil, social unrest, and growing inequality likely modified risk for self-harm. The coinciding surge in firearm purchasing may have increased risk for firearm suicide. In this study, we examined changes in counts and rates of suicide in California across sociodemographic groups during the first two years of the COVID-19 pandemic relative to prior years.

METHODS

We used California-wide death data to summarize suicide and firearm suicide across race/ethnicity, age, education, gender, and urbanicity. We compared case counts and rates in 2020 and 2021 with 2017-2019 averages.

RESULTS

Suicide decreased overall in 2020 (4123 deaths; 10.5 per 100,000) and 2021 (4104; 10.4 per 100,000), compared to pre-pandemic (4484; 11.4 per 100,000). The decrease in counts was driven largely by males, white, and middle-aged Californians. Conversely, Black Californians and young people (age 10 to 19) experienced increased burden and rates of suicide. Firearm suicide also decreased following the onset of the pandemic, but relatively less than overall suicide; as a result, the proportion of suicides that involved a firearm increased (from 36.1% pre-pandemic to 37.6% in 2020 and 38.1% in 2021). Females, people aged 20 to 29, and Black Californians had the largest increase in the likelihood of using a firearm in suicide following the onset of the pandemic. The proportion of suicides that involved a firearm in 2020 and 2021 decreased in rural areas compared to prior years, while there were modest increases in urban areas.

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic and co-occurring stressors coincided with heterogeneous changes in risk of suicide across the California population. Marginalized racial groups and younger people experienced increased risk for suicide, particularly involving a firearm. Public health intervention and policy action are necessary to prevent fatal self-harm injuries and reduce related inequities.

Changes in self-harm and suicide in California from 2017-2021: a population-based study

Background : Self-harm and suicide are major public health problems with immediate and long-term effects on individuals, families, and communities. In 2020 and 2021, stressors wrought by the COVID-19 pandemic, stay-at-home mandates, economic turmoil, social unrest, and growing inequality likely modified risk for self-harm. The coinciding surge in firearm purchasing may have increased risk for firearm suicide. In this study, we examined changes in counts and rates of fatal and nonfatal intentional self-harm in California across sociodemographic groups during the first two years of the COVID-19 pandemic relative to prior years. Methods: We used California-wide death data and University of California (UC)-wide hospital data to summarize fatal and nonfatal instances of intentional self-harm across race/ethnicity, age, education, gender, region, and method of harm. We compared case counts and rates in 2020 and 2021 with 2017-2019 averages. Results : Suicide decreased overall in 2020 (4123 deaths; 10.5 per 100,000) and 2021 (4104; 10.4 per 100,000), compared to pre-pandemic (4484; 11.4 per 100,000). The decrease in counts was driven largely by males, white, and middle-aged Californians. Conversely, Black Californians and young people (age 10-19) experienced increased burden and rates of suicide. Firearm suicide also decreased following the onset of the pandemic, but relatively less than overall suicide; as a result, the proportion of suicides that involved a firearm increased (from 36.1% pre-pandemic to 37.6% in 2020 and 38.1% in 2021). Females, people aged 20-29, and Black Californians had the largest increase in the likelihood of using a firearm in suicide following the onset of the pandemic. Counts and rates of nonfatal, intentional self-harm in UC hospitals increased in 2020 (2160; 30.7 per 100,000) and 2021 (2175; 30.9 per 100,000) compared to pre-pandemic (2083; 29.6 per 100,000), especially among young people (age 10-19), females, and Hispanic Californians. Conclusions : The COVID-19 pandemic and co-occurring stressors coincided with heterogeneous changes in risk of self-harm and suicide across the California population. Marginalized racial groups, females, and younger people experienced increased risk for self-harm, particularly involving a firearm. Public health intervention and policy action are necessary to prevent fatal and nonfatal self-harm injuries and reduce related inequities.

Firearm-Related Injuries and Deaths in Children and Youth

Firearms are the leading cause of death in children and youth 0 to 24 years of age in the United States. In 2020, firearms resulted in 10,197 deaths (fatality rate 9.91/100,000 youth 0-24 years old). Firearms are the leading mechanism of death in pediatric suicides and homicides. Increased access to firearms is associated with increased rates of firearm deaths. Substantial disparities in firearm injuries and deaths exist by age, gender, race, ethnicity, and sexual orientation and gender identity and for deaths related to legal intervention. Barriers to firearm access can decrease the risk to youth for firearm suicide, homicide, or unintentional shooting injury and death. Given the high lethality of firearms and the impulsivity associated with suicidal ideation, removing firearms from the home or securely storing them-referred to as lethal means restriction of firearms-is critical, especially for youth at risk for suicide. Primary care-, emergency department-, mental health-, hospital-, and community-based intervention programs can effectively screen and intervene for individuals at risk for harming themselves or others. The delivery of anticipatory guidance coupled with safety equipment provision improves firearm safer storage. Strong state-level firearm legislation is associated with decreased rates of firearm injuries and death. This includes legislation focused on comprehensive firearm licensing strategies and extreme risk protection order laws. A firm commitment to confront this public health crisis with a multipronged approach engaging all stakeholders, including individuals, families, clinicians, health systems, communities, public health advocates, firearm owners and nonowners, and policy makers, is essential to address the worsening firearm crisis facing US youth today.

A Closer Look at the Rising Epidemic of Mass Shootings in the United States and Its Association With Gun Legislation, Laws, and Sales

INTRODUCTION

Mass shootings pose a considerable threat to public safety and significantly cost the United States in terms of lives and expenses. The following are the specific aims of this study: (1) to assess US mass shootings, firearm-related sales, laws, and regional differences from 2015 to 2021 and (2) to investigate changes in mass shootings and firearm sales before and during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 pandemic.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted of mass shootings, gun sales, and laws regarding the minimum age required to purchase a firearm within the United States from 2015 to 2021. The 10 states/regions with the greatest mean mass shootings/capita from 2015 to 2021 were selected for further analysis.

RESULTS

Mass shootings correlated significantly with firearm sales from 2015 to 2021 nationwide (P < 0.02 for all). The growth in mass shootings, the number killed/injured, and gun sales were greater in 2020 and 2021 compared to the years prior. The 10 states with the highest mean mass shooting/capita over the study period were Alabama, Arkansas, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Louisiana, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, South Carolina, and Tennessee. No significant correlation was found between the number of mass shootings/capita and the minimum age to purchase a firearm.

CONCLUSIONS

Firearm sales correlated significantly with mass shootings from 2015 to 2021. Mass shootings and gun sales increased at greater rates during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 pandemic compared to the years before the pandemic. Mass shootings exhibited inconsistent trends with state gun laws regarding the minimum age to purchase a firearm. Future studies may consider investigating the methods by which firearms used in mass shootings are obtained to further identify targets for prevention.

The association between gun shows and firearm injuries: An analysis of 259 gun shows across 23 US cities

Guns shows are estimated to account for 4-9% of firearm sales in the US. Increased regulation of firearm sales at gun shows has been proposed as one approach to reducing firearm injury rates. This study evaluated the association between gun shows and local firearm injury rates. Data regarding the date and location of gun shows from 2017 to 2019 were abstracted from the Big Show Journal. Firearm injury rates were estimated using discharges from trauma centers serving counties within a 25-mile radius of each gun show. Clinical data were derived from the National Trauma Databank (NTDB). We used Poisson regression modeling to adjust for potential confounders including seasonality. We evaluated injury rates before and after 259 gun shows in 23 US locations using firearm injury data from 36 trauma centers. There were 1513 hospitalizations for firearm injuries pre-gun show and 1526 post-gun show. The adjusted mean 2-week rate of all-cause firearm injury per 1,000,000 person-years was 1.79 (1.16-2.76) before and 1.82 (1.18-2.83) after a gun show, with an incident rate ratio of 1.02 (0.94, 1.08). The adjusted mean 2-week rate did not vary significantly by intent after a gun show, (p = 0.24). Within two weeks after a gun show, rates of hospitalization for all-cause firearm injury do not increase significantly within the surrounding communities. The relatively small increase in available firearms after a show and the short time horizon evaluated may account for the absence of an association between gun show firearm sales and local firearm injury rates.

Firearm Violence Following the Implementation of California's Gun Violence Restraining Order Law

IMPORTANCE

California's gun violence restraining order (GVRO) law, implemented beginning in 2016, allows for people at high risk of harming themselves or others with a firearm to be temporarily disarmed and prevented from purchasing firearms for 3 weeks to 1 year; many states have recently enacted similar laws. The research to date is on older and more limited risk-warrant laws.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether implementation of the California GVRO law was associated with decreased rates of firearm assault or firearm self-harm in a large metropolitan county between 2016 and 2019.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This serial cross-sectional study including data from 28 counties used the synthetic control method to evaluate differences in firearm violence between San Diego County and its synthetic control following implementation of the California law from 2016 to 2019. San Diego County was used as the treated unit because it issued substantially more GVROs than any other county in California during the study period. A total of 27 California counties that issued no or very few gun violence restraining orders from 2016 to 2019 and that had stable rates of firearm violence between 2005 and 2015 were included in the control pool. Data were analyzed from February 2021 to July 2021.

EXPOSURES

Implementation of the statewide GVRO law in 2016 in San Diego County.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Annual rates of fatal and nonfatal firearm assault injuries and firearm self-harm injuries per 100 000 people.

RESULTS

In the study period, there were 355 GVROs in San Diego county, and a median (IQR) total of 8 (3-20) GVROs per donor county. The mean difference between the observed rate in San Diego County and the estimated rate in the synthetic San Diego County, 2016-2019, was -0.74 firearm assaults per 100 000 (-13% difference) and 0.13 firearm self-harm injuries per 100 000 (3% difference). Results from in-space placebo tests suggested that these differences cannot be distinguished from variation due to chance (pseudo-P values from a 1-sided test: P for assault = .35, P for self-harm = .67).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

To our knowledge, this study was the first to analyze the association between GVRO implementation and firearm violence in California and the first to evaluate the association between risk-based firearm removal laws and firearm assault in any state. GVROs were not associated with reduced population-level rates of firearm violence in San Diego County, but this may change as the number of orders increases over time; the association between GVROs and firearm violence at the individual level cannot be inferred from our findings and should be the subject of future studies.

Firearm purchasing and firearm violence during the coronavirus pandemic in the United States: a cross-sectional study

Background

Firearm violence is a significant public health problem in the United States. A surge in firearm purchasing following the onset of the coronavirus pandemic may have contributed to an increase in firearm violence. We sought to estimate the state-level association between firearm purchasing and interpersonal firearm violence during the pandemic.

Methods

Cross-sectional study of the 48 contiguous states and the District of Columbia from January 2018 through July 2020. Data were obtained from the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (a proxy for firearm purchasing) and the Gun Violence Archive. Using negative binomial regression models, we estimated the association between cumulative excess firearm purchases in March through July 2020 (measured as the difference between observed rates and those expected from autoregressive integrated moving average models) and injuries (including nonfatal and fatal) from intentional, interpersonal firearm violence (non-domestic and domestic violence).

Results

We estimated that there were 4.3 million excess firearm purchases nationally from March through July 2020 and a total of 4075 more firearm injuries than expected from April through July. We found no relationship between state-level excess purchasing and non-domestic firearm violence, e.g., each excess purchase per 100 population was associated with a rate ratio (RR) of firearm injury from non-domestic violence of 0.76 (95% CI: 0.50–1.02) in April; 0.99 (95% CI: 0.72–1.25) in May; 1.10 (95% CI: 0.93–1.32) in June; and 0.98 (95% CI: 0.85–1.12) in July. Excess firearm purchasing within states was associated with an increase in firearm injuries from domestic violence in April (RR: 2.60; 95% CI: 1.32–5.93) and May (RR: 1.79; 95% CI: 1.19–2.91), though estimates were sensitive to model specification.

Conclusions

Nationwide, firearm purchasing and firearm violence increased substantially during the first months of the coronavirus pandemic. At the state level, the magnitude of the increase in purchasing was not associated with the magnitude of the increase in firearm violence. Increases in purchasing may have contributed to additional firearm injuries from domestic violence in April and May. Results suggest much of the rise in firearm violence during our study period was attributable to other factors, indicating a need for additional research.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40621-021-00339-5.

Firearm purchasing and firearm violence during the coronavirus pandemic in the United States: a cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Firearm violence is a significant public health problem in the United States. A surge in firearm purchasing following the onset of the coronavirus pandemic may have contributed to an increase in firearm violence. We sought to estimate the state-level association between firearm purchasing and interpersonal firearm violence during the pandemic.

METHODS

Cross-sectional study of the 48 contiguous states and the District of Columbia from January 2018 through July 2020. Data were obtained from the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (a proxy for firearm purchasing) and the Gun Violence Archive. Using negative binomial regression models, we estimated the association between cumulative excess firearm purchases in March through July 2020 (measured as the difference between observed rates and those expected from autoregressive integrated moving average models) and injuries (including nonfatal and fatal) from intentional, interpersonal firearm violence (non-domestic and domestic violence).

RESULTS

We estimated that there were 4.3 million excess firearm purchases nationally from March through July 2020 and a total of 4075 more firearm injuries than expected from April through July. We found no relationship between state-level excess purchasing and non-domestic firearm violence, e.g., each excess purchase per 100 population was associated with a rate ratio (RR) of firearm injury from non-domestic violence of 0.76 (95% CI: 0.50-1.02) in April; 0.99 (95% CI: 0.72-1.25) in May; 1.10 (95% CI: 0.93-1.32) in June; and 0.98 (95% CI: 0.85-1.12) in July. Excess firearm purchasing within states was associated with an increase in firearm injuries from domestic violence in April (RR: 2.60; 95% CI: 1.32-5.93) and May (RR: 1.79; 95% CI: 1.19-2.91), though estimates were sensitive to model specification.

CONCLUSIONS

Nationwide, firearm purchasing and firearm violence increased substantially during the first months of the coronavirus pandemic. At the state level, the magnitude of the increase in purchasing was not associated with the magnitude of the increase in firearm violence. Increases in purchasing may have contributed to additional firearm injuries from domestic violence in April and May. Results suggest much of the rise in firearm violence during our study period was attributable to other factors, indicating a need for additional research.

The association between the rise of gun violence in popular US primetime television dramas and homicides attributable to firearms, 2000-2018

Injuries and fatalities due to firearms are a major burden on public health in the US. The rise in gun violence in popular movies has been suggested as a potential cultural influence on this behavior. Nevertheless, homicide rates have not increased over recent decades in the US, suggesting that media portrayals have had little influence on gun violence. Here we challenge this interpretation by examining trends in the proportion of violence that are attributable to firearms, a measure that should be more sensitive to media violence. In addition, we examine trends in the portrayal of guns in popular television (TV) dramas, which are viewed more frequently than movies. We ask (a) whether gun violence has increased in these TV shows not only on an absolute basis but also as a proportion of violent scenes and (b) whether trends in gun portrayal on these shows are associated with corresponding trends in the proportion of real-world violence attributable to firearms in the US from 2000 to 2018. To answer these questions, we coded annual instances of violence, gun violence, and proportion of violence involving guns for each 5-minute segment of 33 popular TV dramas in the police, medical, and legal genres from 2000 to 2018. Trends in annual rates of violence, gun violence and proportion of violence involving guns were determined over the study period and were compared to annual rates of homicide attributable to firearms in three age groups: 15–24, 25–34 and 35 and older. Although violence on TV dramas peaked in 2011, gun use steadily increased over the study period both in absolute terms and in relation to other violent methods. The latter metric paralleled trends in homicides attributable to firearms for all three age groups, with the strongest relationship for youth ages 15–24 (R² = .40, P = .003). The positive relation between relative amount of TV violence involving guns and actual homicides due to firearms, especially among youth, is consistent with the hypothesis that entertainment media are contributing to the normative acceptance of guns for violent purposes. Future research is needed to study the influence of media violence on gun acquisition at the individual level.

When COVID-19 and guns meet: A rise in shootings

OBJECTIVE

The present study examines the impact of the COVID-19 stay-at-home order on gun violence in Buffalo, New York: fatal shootings, all non-fatal shootings, non-fatal shootings with injury, and non-fatal shootings without injury. It also estimated its impact on gang and non-gang related shootings.

METHODS

Weekly crime data are analyzed at the city level using ARIMA and poisson models. Forecasting is used to verify the validity of both ARIMA and poisson models.

RESULTS

The effect of the pandemic was conditional upon the types of gun violence and impact models of intervention. The pandemic caused a temporary increase in fatal shootings while leading to a long-term increase in all non-fatal shootings, non-fatal shootings with injury, non-fatal shootings without injury, and gang related shootings.

CONCLUSIONS

The pandemic has changed the volume of gun violence possibly due to increased strain and/or changed routine activities. This study not only promotes further research but also has policy implications for public health and safety. From a public policy perspective, criminal justice agencies should focus more attention and resources on gun violence resulting from a sense of strain and fear among individuals during the pandemic.

Public Concern About Violence, Firearms, and the COVID-19 Pandemic in California

IMPORTANCE

Violence is a significant public health problem that has become entwined with the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic.

OBJECTIVE

To describe individuals' concerns regarding violence in the context of the pandemic, experiences of pandemic-related unfair treatment, prevalence of and reasons for firearm acquisition, and changes in firearm storage practices due to the pandemic.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This survey study used data from the 2020 California Safety and Well-being Survey, a probability-based internet survey of California adults conducted from July 14 to 27, 2020. Respondents came from the Ipsos KnowledgePanel, an online research panel with members selected using address-based sampling methods. Responses were weighted to be representative of the adult population of California.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Topics included worry about violence for oneself before and during the pandemic; concern about violence for someone else due to a pandemic-related loss; experiences of unfair treatment attributed to the pandemic; firearm and ammunition acquisition due to the pandemic; and changes in firearm storage practices due to the pandemic.

RESULTS

Of 5018 invited panel members, 2870 completed the survey (completion rate, 57%). Among respondents (52.3% [95% CI, 49.5%-55.0%] women; mean [SD] age, 47.9 [16.9] years; 41.9% [95% CI, 39.3%-44.6%] White individuals), self-reported worry about violence for oneself was significantly higher during the pandemic for all violence types except mass shootings, ranging from a 2.8 percentage point increase for robbery (from 65.5% [95% CI, 62.8%-68.0%] to 68.2% [95% CI, 65.6%-70.7%]; P = .008) to a 5.6 percentage point increase for stray bullet shootings (from 44.5% [95% CI, 41.7%-47.3%] to 50.0% [47.3%-52.8%]; P < .001). The percentage of respondents concerned that someone they know might intentionally harm themselves was 13.1% (95% CI, 11.5%-15.3%). Of those, 7.5% (95% CI, 4.5%-12.2%) said it was because the other person had experienced a pandemic-related loss. An estimated 110 000 individuals (2.4% [95% CI, 1.1%-5.0%] of firearm owners in the state) acquired a firearm due to the pandemic, including 47 000 new owners (43.0% [95% CI, 14.8%-76.6%] of those who had acquired a firearm). Of owners who stored at least 1 firearm in the least secure way, 6.7% (95% CI, 2.7%-15.6%) said they had adopted this unsecure storage practice in response to the pandemic.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this analysis of findings from the 2020 California Safety and Well-being Survey, the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with increases in self-reported worry about violence for oneself and others, increased firearm acquisition, and changes in firearm storage practices. Given the impulsive nature of many types of violence, short-term crisis interventions may be critical for reducing violence-related harm.

Firearm ownership and perceived risk of personal firearm injury

Despite evidence that firearm access in the home is a strong risk factor for firearm injury, firearms are owned more often for self-protection than for any other reason. In this cross-sectional study, we describe the association between firearm ownership and perceived risk of personal firearm injury using logistic regressions applied to data from the 2018 California Safety and Well-being Survey. Most respondents (57.7%) reported being very/somewhat worried about gun violence happening to them. Compared with non-owners in households without firearms, firearm owners were 60% (adjusted OR (aOR) 0.40, 95% CI: 0.27 to 0.58) less likely to be worried about gun violence happening to them; non-owners living in homes with firearms were 46% (aOR 0.54, 95% CI: 0.33 to 0.88) less likely. This suggests an underestimation of actuarial risk that conflicts with the available evidence, with important implications for public health messaging.