Bisakha Sen

Sorry, I had meant to post my above comment as a reply to Roger. I think the biggest misconception is that studying gun laws involve taking AWAY guns from everyone :) We have also done substantial research on drunk driving laws, texting while driving laws, seat belt laws etc -- and they have resulted in safer driving policies and saved many many lives, but none of them have taken away cars from US citizens! So I think there is little reason to fear objective research. And congratulations on teaching your daughter about self-defense, I am sure she is an excellent shot and also follows common sense safety precautions on guns.

I think the biggest misconception is that studying gun laws involve taking AWAY guns from everyone :) We have also done substantial research on drunk driving laws, texting while driving laws, seat belt laws etc -- and they have resulted in safer driving policies and saved many many lives, but none of them have taken away cars from US citizens! So I think there is little reason to fear objective research. And congratulations on teaching your daughter about self-defense, I am sure she is an excellent shot and also follows common sense safety precautions on guns.

Sadly, no research will change that :(

We'd have to do it in every single state, and then they'd have to be willing to talk to us and show us their historical records (because we'd need sales over past several years). Probably won't work,

So what always happens in such multivariate statistical models (and we did it last time and intend to do this time) is include a 'time effect' in this model that can capture what his happening 'in general', and then use thevariation in gun laws across states and over time to capture if they have an 'additional effect'. Its a standard approach used, say in motor vehicle studies, to see if a particular law like GDL is having any possible effect over and beyond general declining trend in crashes.

Fair question :). This project aims to do good scientific data analysis, after compiling publicly available data, using statistical methods that have been extensively vetted in the literature. As a scientist, my aim is to produce work that will both stand up to peer-review scrutiny at time of review, and when other researchers attempt to replicate my work with similar data. Personal ideology has *zero* room in that kind of research. My objection (as 'Access Denied' points out) is that the funding ban on gun violence research has effectively shut down RESEARCH on the topic (last year the Congressman who was NRA's point person in getting the funding ban passed wrote an op-ed in Washington Post publicly regretting what he had done and saying that, regardless of ideology, RESEARCH was needed to understand what would be most effective in preventing gun violence).

Hi Sara Our outcomes data for firearm homicides and suicides will come from CDC WISQAR, those continue to be reported annually. They will be supplemented by FBI Uniform Crime reports expanded data, whihc has data on the other crimes we mention, and also data on whether homicides were justifiable, and victim knew perpetrator. Our outcome of youths' access to guns will use CDC Youth Risk Behavior data. This contonues to be collected biennially. Hope that helps!