The article "Gun Laws and Sudden Death: Did the Australian Firearms Legislation of 1996 Make a Difference?" is available on the web
Gun Laws and Sudden Death: Did the Australian Firearms Legislation of 1996 Make a Difference?
British Journal of Criminology Advance Access published on October 18, 2006
Br J Criminol 2007 47: 455-469; doi:10.1093/bjc/azl084 [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] [Request Permissions]
Gun Laws and Sudden Death
Did the Australian Firearms Legislation of 1996 Make a Difference?
Jeanine Baker and Samara McPhedran*
Samara McPhedran, School of Psychology, University of Sydney, Camperdown, New South Wales 2006, Australia and International Coalition for Women in Shooting and Hunting (WiSH), PO Box 184, Ballarat, Victoria 3353, Australia
* Correspondence to J. Baker, Research and Policy Unit, Sporting Shooters Association of Australia, PO Box 166, Gumeracha, South Australia 5233, Australia; firstname.lastname@example.org.
Mass murders in Dunblane, United Kingdom, and Port Arthur, Australia, provoked rapid responses from the governments of both countries. Major changes to Australian laws resulted in a controversial buy-back of longarms and tighter legislation. The Australian situation enables evaluation of the effect of a national buy-back, accompanied by tightened legislation in a country with relatively secure borders. AutoRegressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA) was used to predict future values of the time series for homicide, suicide and accidental death before and after the 1996 National Firearms Agreement (NFA). When compared with observed values, firearm suicide was the only parameter the NFA may have influenced, although societal factors could also have influenced observed changes. The findings have profound implications for future firearm legislation policy direction.
Thanks to Rich for sending this to me.