Date: Thu, 5 Jan 1995 01:01:26 -0500 From: alerts@gatekeeper.nra.org (NRA Alerts) To: firearms-alert@shell.portal.com Subject: INFO: Response to JAMA Firearm Training and Storage December 28, 1994 COMMENTS ON HEMENWAY ET AL., "FIREARM TRAINING AND STORAGE," JAMA 1995;273:46-50. Briefly: A CDC-sponsored survey of an apparently unrepresentative sample of gun owners (too many women; too many hours of firearms training claimed) found that a minority (one fifth) stored guns in a manner which might, under some circumstances but not others, be unsafe, and that firearms training was associated with more loaded/unlocked storage. Unfortunately, the survey did not determine whether the storage was unsafe for the families involved thus telling us nothing. The policy recommendations were based either on other studies or no studies at all. With more detail: This is a follow-up to Hemenway's earlier survey, co-authored with Weil and published in the June 1992 JAMA. Both studies were done at and for the Harvard School of Public Health and partially funded by the CDC. That earlier survey found no particular impact of firearms training on storage practices, but included military training. The study was criticized on the grounds that such training was not geared toward safe storage in the home. This study presumably corrects for that by asking the type of training, and asserting (without providing the data) no particular difference in the likelihood of storing guns unloaded and/or unlocked related to the type of training. However, since the whole issue is how training and storage are related, and there's no particular reason to be concerned with storage for most purposes, the exercise was largely pointless. The study found that about 10% of American households have a readily accessible loaded firearm, as roughly one-fifth of gun- owners have such guns. The survey is of the view that one-fifth is as very high figure, although the data indicate that the overwhelming majority of gun owners store all of their guns unloaded and/or locked -- and the likelihood of a gun being kept loaded and unlocked is only half as likely if there are "children" in the home. However, children is here anyone under the age of 18; had the survey asked about households with persons too young to have been taught firearms safety, the figure keeping a loaded unlocked gun around would probably be even lower, but we can't know since they didn't ask. The likelihood of a gun being kept loaded and unlocked increase with ownership for protection, handgun ownership, lack of children in the home, and education. The likelihood of having had formal training was higher for males, NRA members, multiple gun owners, protective gun owners, and college graduates. The authors hypothesize without basis that such storage increases the likelihood of domestic homicides, suicides, and accidents. Indeed, a key failing of the study is that its concern is with how guns are stored but without evidence the issue is significant. They cite other studies to support their fears that homicide, suicide and accidents are related to guns being kept loaded and unlocked, but none of the studies actually looked into the matter of loaded and unlocked guns as related to actual homicides or suicides. The authors assert, as does the press release, that two safety devices -- loaded indicator and passive safety device -- could reduce accidental deaths by over 30%. This is based on a study by the GAO where children's accidents were disproportionately involved. And it ignores the fact that the GAO acknowledged that the safety devices wouldn't work -- and, indeed, might be counterproductive -- unless retrofitted on all guns owned in America. The study's conclusion that training may not be the answer, of course, indicates lack of scientific support for the training provisions of Brady II and the recent California law. The survey was supposed to be of actual gun owners, but women made up a larger proportion of the sample than would have been expected (roughly three-eighths). Other results, too, seem to suggest the survey results were not typical of what should have been found in a random sample. Of those who received formal training, 45% reported over 80 hours of such training, with three-fourths reporting over 10 hours of training. (Most NRA and hunter safety courses would be in the 8-16 hour range.) Almost all of the courses seemed quite extensive, with 79-97% indicating the course covered: safe handling, safe storage, firearms operations, marksmanship, and firearm regulations. (Gun storage was the least likely of the five topics to be covered.) All of the concern is based on the undemonstrated assumption that loaded and unlocked firearms increase the risk of homicide, suicide, and accidents -- and on totally ignoring the impact on protective gun use of storage techniques which make it harder to get the gun in working order. Realistically, it is not clear society should have the goal of encouraging more persons to store their firearms unloaded and locked. Indeed, the study notes that some NRA training recognizes that guns are not necessarily always to be stored unloaded and locked, but that protective guns are always in use with access possibly desirable. -- This information is presented as a service to the Internet community by the NRA/ILA. Many files are available via anonymous ftp from ftp.nra.org, via WWW at http://www.nra.org, via gopher at gopher.nra.org, and via WAIS at wais.nra.org Be sure to subscribe to the NRA mailing lists. Send the word help as the body of a message to listproc@NRA.org Information can also be obtained by connecting to the NRA-ILA GUN-TALK BBS at (703) 934-2121.