Abstract

Gun deaths and injuries in Canada are a serious public health problem, claiming more than 1200 lives each year and resulting in over 1000 hospitalizations. While the issue has been hotly debated in recent years, considerable research in an international context suggests that there is a relationship between access to firearms and deaths and injuries caused by firearms. Interventions to reduce access to firearms include regulation, education and engineering. Legislative reforms aimed at reducing gun deaths and injuries have been introduced recently in Canada and in many other countries. Although domestic controls can affect the supply of guns, efforts are being co-ordinated increasingly on an interjurisdictional basis to decrease the illegal trafficking of firearms. As well, the United Nations Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Commission recently passed a resolution encouraging all countries who have not done so to strengthen their domestic gun controls since weak controls in one country can affect security in others.

Key words: Crime; firearms; guns; gunshot; injury; international; prevention; suicide

Gun Deaths and Injuries in Canada

Countries around the globe have begun to direct their attention to the problems of firearms death and injury, and many have introduced legislative reforms in recent years. Canada has historically had stricter controls on firearms than the United States as well as much lower rates of gun-related death, injury and crime. However, the international context provides a different perspective. Canada has much higher gun death rates than most other industrialized nations, and the new law passed in 1995 is consistent with approaches taken to regulate firearms in most industrialized countries.

From a public health perspective, firearms deaths and injuries, whether intentional or unintentional, are a serious threat to the health of Canadians. An average of more than 1200 Canadians have been killed and over 1000 have been injured with firearms each year during the past 10 years. For example, in 1995, 911 Canadians committed suicide with firearms, 145 were killed with firearms in homicides, 49 died in "accidents," 6 were killed in legal interventions and 14 deaths were undetermined, creating an overall firearms death rate of 3.8 per 100,000.¹ While some have suggested that firearms deaths and injuries are not serious problems compared to other causes of death such as cancer,² public health professionals have tended to set priorities based not only on the rate of death but on the extent to which many of the deaths were preventable.³

The economic costs of gun deaths and injuries in Canada have been estimated at $6 billion per year.⁴ The cost among young people is particularly high: firearms deaths are the third leading cause of death among young people aged 15-24.⁵ Canada is fifth among industrialized countries in the firearms death rate among children under the age of 14.⁶ The international context provides a useful perspective on the problem of firearms in Canada as well as on the approach to addressing the problem.

Methods

There are many methodological challenges in research on firearms regulation. Cross-cultural comparisons are difficult because of the variability of data and the inconsistencies among different reporting practices and data sources.^7,a Moreover, the complexity of other variables, such as cultural differences, socio-economic conditions or other factors, adds to the difficulty of demonstrating causal links. However, these methodological challenges are not unique to the firearms regulation issue, but affect many other complex issues in crime prevention, public safety and health care. There have been parallels drawn between political influences on research on the effects of guns and on the effects of tobacco.⁸

To ensure a wide range of sources, several different methods were used to collect material for this article. Searches were conducted on MEDLINE, Wilson and related databases for the period 1980-1997 using "firearms" and "gun" as the key words. International sources such as the Victimization Survey and the recent United Nations (UN) International Study on Firearm Regulation were consulted along with statistical sources from individual countries, such as Statistics Canada. In addition to the peer-reviewed literature, the records of recent government inquiries and proceedings were examined, including the Canadian House of Commons and Senate Committees and debates on Bill C-68, materials prepared for the Alberta Court of Appeal, the Lord Cullen Inquiry into Dunblane and the Review of Firearms Control in New Zealand. Additional materials were obtained from government and police sources in Great Britain, Japan, Australia and Switzerland.

Link Between Access and Death Rates

A number of researchers maintain that there is sufficient evidence to conclude that rates of firearms death and injury are linked to access to firearms.^9,10 Access to firearms may be defined in a number of ways, including the percentage of households where firearms are present (or various surrogate measures)¹¹ or the ease with which individuals can obtain firearms and ammunition^b in a given place at a given time.

The strategies to reduce gun injuries and deaths proposed by the public health community have tended to mirror the approaches taken with infectious diseases, combining education, regulation and engineering.

To prevent an illness or injury, public health experts consider preventative action to control the agent and the vehicle to protect the host. In the case of injury due to gunshot wounds the agent is the force deployed by firing a gun, the vehicle is the gun or ammunition and the human host is the victim ... access constitutes the universal link-the one against which we can take action-in the chain of events leading to an injury with a firearm.¹²

Access to Guns in the Home

Many research projects examining the accessibility thesis have compared homes where firearms are present with those where they are not.¹³ Kellerman and his colleagues, for example, concluded that the homicide of a family member was 2.7 times more likely to occur in a home with a firearm than in homes without guns. After accounting for several independent risk factors, another study concluded that keeping one or more firearms was associated with a 4.8-fold increased risk of suicide in the home.¹⁴ The risks increased, particularly for adolescents, where the guns were kept loaded and unlocked.¹⁵

Comparisons Between Canada and the United States

Studies have also compared the rates of death from firearms in Canada with those in the United States. One of the most well-known studies was a comparison of Seattle, Washington, and Vancouver, British Columbia.¹⁶ More recently, the costs of firearms death and injury in the two countries were compared and estimated to be $495 (US) per resident in the United States and $195 per resident in Canada.¹⁰

Canada has always had stronger firearms regulation than the United States, particularly with respect to handguns. Handguns have required licensing and registration in Canada since the 1930s. Ownership of guns has never been regarded as a right, and several court rulings have reaffirmed the right of the government to protect citizens from guns.^17,18 Handgun ownership has been restricted to police, members of gun clubs or collectors. Very few people (about 50 in the country) have been given permits to carry handguns for "self-protection." This is only possible if an applicant can prove that his or her life is in danger and the police cannot protect the person. As a result, Canada has roughly 1 million handguns while the United States has more than 77 million. Although there are other factors affecting rates of murder, suicide and unintentional injury, a comparison of data in Canada with US data suggests that access to handguns may play a role. While the murder rate without guns in the US is slightly higher (1.7 times) than that in Canada, the murder rate with handguns is 15 times the Canadian rate (Table 1).

International Comparisons

One study examined the link between rates of gun ownership and firearms death within Canadian provinces, the US, England/Wales and Australia, concluding that 92% of the variance in death rates was explained by access to firearms in those areas.¹⁰

The international experience with firearms regulation and comparative mortality statistics tends to reinforce the thesis that there is a link between access to firearms and firearms death in industrialized nations, although there are issues concerning uniform reporting and other variables that must be addressed. For example, a review by Killias of 13 countries showed a strong correlation between gun ownership and both homicide with a gun and overall homicide rates (Northern Ireland was excluded from the analysis because of the level of civil unrest). In an analysis of 14 countries, the correlation between gun ownership and gun suicide was also significant as was the correlation of gun ownership with overall suicide rates. Killias found no evidence of a compensation process whereby other means were substituted for firearms.²¹

In another study based on a standardized survey of victimization in 54 countries, gun ownership was significantly related to both the level of robberies and the level of sexual assaults. The relationship between levels of gun ownership and threats/assaults with a gun was strong as well.^22,23 Van Dijk also concluded that high levels of gun ownership, such as those in the USA, the former Yugoslavia, South Africa and several Latin American countries, were strongly related to higher levels of violence generally. While more research could illuminate the interaction between a range of factors that influence firearms violence and suicide, there are strong suggestions of an important relationship between access to firearms and rates of firearms death and crime.

International Firearms Regulation

A review of international approaches to firearms regulation indicates that industrialized countries with lower rates of firearms ownership and lower rates of firearms death than Canada also tend to have higher levels of regulation. Most developed countries have strict laws governing licensing and registration of all firearms and very strict controls on handguns (see Table 2). These measures were included in Canada's 1995 gun control legislation.

The Effect of Legislation

Comparisons of regions with strong regulations to areas with weak regulations within the same country also tend to confirm that gun control works where other factors are more or less the same. For example, Australian states with firearms registration had significantly lower rates of homicide and suicide with firearms than states without registration of firearms.²⁷

The accessibility thesis has been supported by studies examining the effects of legislation on death and injury rates in Canada as well.²⁸ A more recent study suggests that changes to Canada's gun control law have had an effect on accidental firearm death rates, particularly in males.²⁹

Others have argued that there is little evidence of a link between access to firearms and rates of death and have disputed the studies proposing that stricter controls on firearms reduce gun death and injury.^30,31 Some have even suggested that increasing access to firearms through arming for self-protection saves lives and reduces injury.^2,32,33 Some of these studies have been criticized for methodological problems.^34,35

Although much has been written about the failures of gun control, on balance, peer-reviewed scientific literature tends to support the accessibility thesis and the efficacy of restrictions on access.^36,37 The positions held by major public health and safety groups certainly reflect this.

Although the complexity of factors influencing death rates and crime, particularly over time, makes longitudinal analysis particularly difficult, criminologist Neil Boyd concluded that there is more evidence to support the efficacy of gun control legislation in reducing death and injury than there is for most other legislative interventions. In reviewing the evaluations of the Canadian legislation, he wrote the following.

In three separate forms of statistical analysis- exploratory, time-series and structural-researchers have found evidence to suggest that gun control has had an impact on homicides and firearms homicides. The finding that an amendment to criminal law can change behaviour in the direction desired is unusual. We have had many amendments to Canadian criminal law during the past 40 years: for example changes to the penalty structure for homicide in 1961, 1967, 1973, 1974, 1976 and 1985; changes for the penalty structure affecting illegal drug use and distribution in 1961, 1969 and 1974 .... In none of these circumstances has it been possible to establish that a change in law can impact behaviour in the direction that the law hopes for or anticipates. With gun control legislation, we have some preliminary evidence - some strong suggestions - that the criminal law is working. And it is working, not by manipulating penalty levels for specific forms of crime, but by putting a regulatory system in place that can limit access to firearms, enhance the safety of firearm use, and, in a more general sense, educate the public with respect to the dangers inherent in widespread availability of these potentially lethal commodities.³⁸

Approaches to Controlling Access

Most firearms control regimes are based on the assumption that controlling access will reduce death, injury and crime. Measures aimed at controlling access include outright prohibitions for firearms where the risk is considered to outweigh the utility.

In 1979 Canada prohibited fully automatic weapons; in 1991, semi-automatic weapons that could be converted to fully automatic fire; and in 1995, semi-automatic versions of military weapons. In almost all cases, current owners were "grandfathered" or allowed to keep their weapons under certain conditions.

Great Britain banned 90% of handguns in February 1997 and banned the remaining 10% with the change of government in June 1997. Owners were entitled to compensation, but possession of the prohibited guns became illegal. Similarly, Australia banned semi-automatic firearms and shotguns, except for individuals who could demonstrate "good reason" for owning them, and bought back more than 500,000 guns.

In most contexts, it is not possible to ban firearms except those that have little practical purpose. Regulation is a compromise approach to allow products that are inherently dangerous to be used under certain circumstances. Regulations reduce casual gun ownership by increasing the barriers to obtaining firearms. They are also intended to diminish the risks of firearms ownership by improving screening processes.³⁹ Approaches include criminal record checks, community checks and references, waiting periods, mandatory training programs, etc.

There are various ways of increasing barriers between individuals and firearms to prevent impulsive use and unauthorized access. Increasingly in the US, attention is being focused on technological changes to reduce unauthorized access.⁴⁰ Regulations that encourage safe storage practices, such as using locked containers and trigger locks, disabling firearms and separating ammunition from the gun, are standard in most industrialized countries but are the exception, not the rule, in the United States.⁴¹

Measures have also been taken to reduce demand for firearms by raising awareness of the risks they pose, particularly in the home,^c and by developing methods such as amnesties and "buy-backs" to encourage individuals to rid themselves of unwanted or unneeded firearms.^43,44 The impact of these methods has been questioned; however, they may have educational effects that have not been measured. Educational programs have focused on promoting awareness of safe firearms practices and compliance with them.⁴⁵

In addition, regulatory restrictions and litigation have been used to encourage suppliers of firearms to control sales and to be more responsible.⁴⁶

Reducing Primary Demand

Some have suggested that efforts to reduce gun death and injury must also consider primary demand. It has been proposed that "gun culture" is largely an American construct⁴⁷ that is reinforced by the absence of effective laws and the normalization of violence. Much of the demand for guns, particularly military weapons and handguns that serve little practical purpose, may be fuelled by violent movies and television, which tend to link heroism with guns and violence.

In passing their recent firearms regulation law, the British were explicit: they saw it as a rejection of American style "gun culture."⁴⁸ The suggestion that there is a link between values and gun violence is not new.

By our readiness to allow arms to be purchased at will and fired at whim; by allowing our movies and television screens to teach our children that the hero is one who masters the art of shooting and the technique of killing ... we have created an atmosphere in which violence and hatred have become popular pastimes.
-Martin Luther King, November 1963⁴⁹

Gartner has suggested that the effects of gun control laws are, therefore, both direct and indirect because of the important interaction between laws and values: countries with stricter controls send a signal about the acceptability of violence in the same way that legislation has been observed to have long-term effects on other behaviours such as smoking, driving while drunk and drug abuse.^50,51 Stricter controls on firearms both shape and reflect values.

The irony in this is that countries with strict controls, such as Great Britain, tend to be able to pass additional controls on firearms quickly and with relative ease. Countries without effective controls, such as the United States, have more guns and higher rates of gun death and injury. They also have effective opposition to stricter controls. This principle also operates within countries. For example, the strongest opposition to changes to the law in Canada came from Alberta, the province with the highest rate of gun ownership and one of the highest rates of gun-related death and injury.

Recent Developments in International Regulations

Efforts in the United States to understand the problem of firearms death and injury and measures to reduce it have been well documented.³⁶ However, relatively little has been published on international efforts to control firearms. The International Study on Firearm Regulation⁷ prepared for the UN Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice reported that more than half of the countries responding to the survey indicated being in the process of developing reforms to their firearms regulations. Australia, Canada, Czech Republic, Estonia and the United Kingdom have reforms in progress, and major legislative reform is under discussion in Brazil, Denmark, Finland, India, Jamaica, Poland, South Africa and New Zealand.

Canada

Since the murder of 14 women on December 6, 1989, at l'École Polytechnique in Montreal, two pieces of gun control legislation were passed in Canada. Former Justice Minister Kim Campbell's Bill C-17 passed through the Senate on December 5, 1991, and included the following measures.

• A ban on semi-automatic firearms that could be converted to full automatic fire
• Improvements to screening for the Firearms Acquisition Certificate (FAC), including raising the age to 18, requiring two references, more detailed screening and a mandatory test
• Safe storage regulation requiring all guns to be stored unloaded and secured with a trigger lock, in a secure container or room, or by disabling the firearm
• A ban on large-capacity magazines, with some exemptions

Former Justice Minister Allan Rock's gun control law, which received Royal Assent on December 5, 1995, and is still in the process of being implemented, added these restrictions.

• A ban on semi-automatic military assault weapons
• A ban on short barrelled and small calibre (.25 and .32) handguns
• Licensing of all gun owners by 2001 (previously, the FAC was required to obtain guns, not to possess guns, and only 1/3 of gun owners had valid FACs)
• Registration of all guns by 2003
• Controls on the sale of ammunition

The law was supported by an unusual alliance of 350 groups, including the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police, the Canadian Public Health Association, the Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians, the Canadian Trauma Association, the YWCA of Canada, CAVEAT and Victims of Violence International.⁵²

Great Britain

Great Britain has long had strict controls on firearms. All gun owners are licensed and must provide a reason for owning guns. There are a wide range of grounds for refusal of licensing. In addition, all guns are registered and permits are required to purchase ammunition. The country has one of the lowest rates of gun violence in the world.

The firearms regulation debate was revived in Britain on March 13, 1996, when 16 primary-school children and their teacher were murdered by a member of a local gun club in tiny Dunblane, Scotland. Another 15 children were injured before the gunman killed himself. In response to the outcry, a public inquiry was called that examined many aspects of firearms regulation in an international context. In its submission to the Dunblane Inquiry into the Shootings at Dunblane Primary School, the British Home Office argued that strict licensing helped ensure that only suitable people could have a firearms licence, that there would be fewer guns in circulation and that it would be more difficult for criminals to get hold of guns. It also maintained that stricter controls had had a significant effect and contrasted crime patterns in Britain with those in the US, including the homicide rates as well as the significant use of guns in crime.⁵³

Subsequently, a new law was passed that banned 95% of handguns and required that the remainder (.22 calibre) be stored at gun clubs. When the Labour party took power, it introduced a total ban on handguns. Other regulatory changes are under consideration.⁵⁴

Australia

Gun legislation in Australia is state-controlled rather than federally controlled. Prior to 1996 all states licensed gun owners, but only five of eight Australian states registered firearms. The National Committee on Violence recommended a series of measures related to firearms regulation in its 1990 report, including registration of all firearms,⁵⁵ and the former Federal Justice Minister advocated a national system of gun registration as part of the crime prevention strategy announced in May 1995. While advocates of the Australian firearms regulation had been working since 1988 to strengthen Australia's laws, the movement was propelled forward by the murder of 35 people in Port Arthur, Tasmania, on April 28, 1996.

Public outcry was intense and the response was swift. Australian Prime Minister John Howard obtained an agreement from all eight Australian states and territories to pass consistent legislation that included the following.⁵⁶

• Registration of all firearms
• Stronger licensing provisions, including proof of genuine reason to own any firearm; uniform screening that included a five-year prohibition on owning firearms against anyone committing a domestic violence act or subject to a restraining order; a safety course requirement; a minimum age of 18 to purchase firearms; a 28-day waiting period; and strict uniform storage requirements
• A ban on semi-automatic rifles and shotguns, except for those farmers who could prove a genuine need (This was accomplished through a special tax levy to raise $500 million to buy back weapons from their owners.)
• Improved controls on the trading of firearms, including a separate permit for each firearm and a ban on private and mail order sales of firearms

By August 1997, over 500,000 weapons had been surrendered and $259.8 million (AUS) had been paid out.⁵⁷

New Zealand

New Zealand requires possession permits for all gun owners and registers all handguns and military weapons. It discontinued its manual, paper-based firearms registration system for long guns in 1983. In response to police and public concern, a comprehensive review of New Zealand's Firearms Regulations was undertaken and the results were released in the summer of 1997.

Like the Dunblane Inquiry, the Review of Firearms Control in New Zealand considered a broad range of evidence and examined international experiences with gun control. Its principal conclusions were that "the Arms Act 1983 and its subsequent amendments do not provide an effective code for the control of firearms in New Zealand .... There is a need for radical reform of the firearms laws." Among the reforms proposed were the ones listed below.⁵⁸

• Stricter controls on handguns
• A buy-back of military style semi-automatic weapons
• Amnesty programs
• Stricter licensing and vetting processes
• Training of shooters
• Sanctions for the misuse of firearms
• Controls on the sale of ammunition
• Limits to the size of collections
• A return to the registration of all firearms
• Education

The recommendation related to registration of firearms was of particular significance because the decision of New Zealand to discontinue its paper-based system in 1983 has been used by opponents of registration to demonstrate that firearms registration does not work.² Thorp made the following conclusion.

The reasons which led to the abandonment of firearm registration in 1983 no longer present compelling obstacles in 1997. Not only have the technology and methods of administration moved forward since then, but experience has shown that the alternative of total reliance on personal vetting does not meet the reasonable needs of our society.⁵⁸

Japan

Japan has a level of community safety that is unmatched by most of the world and reinforced by strong cultural norms. During all of 1995, fewer gun deaths occurred in Japan than occur in an average day in the United States. There were a total of 168 firearms shootings, in which 34 people were killed and 33 were injured.⁵⁹ However, the Japanese are concerned about what they perceive as an escalation in violence.

Gun-related crimes have threatened to undermine the fabric of Japan's peaceful society. A peaceful and safe society is a common desire of the people. In order to stop the spread of firearms and prevent the tragedy of gun-related crimes, it is imperative that each person understands the danger and the anti-social nature of firearms and resolves to eliminate gun-related crimes.⁶⁰

Awareness of the issue of firearms regulation in Japan was influenced by the murder of Japanese citizens travelling in the US. Exchange student Yoshira Hattori was shot and killed on October 31, 1992, in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, when he made the fatal error of knocking on the wrong door. Kei Sunade was killed in 1994 in New York City. Yoshi's father, Masaichi Hattori, presented a petition requesting a ban on guns signed by 1.72 million people, the largest in history, to US President Clinton. Mr Hattori works with Kei's father, Koichi Sunade (of the Association to End Gun Violence), and has donated the proceeds of the civil case against his son's killer to support community firearms regulation initiatives.⁶⁰

Japanese police are concerned about the increasing proportion of firearms incidents involving individuals not associated with organized crime. In 1991, 93% of guns seized in Japan were from organized crime (Borykudan), but this had decreased to 74% in 1995. Police are also concerned about the problem of gun smuggling. The US was the leading source (32.9%) of smuggled guns, followed by China (20.9%).

Also of significance was the assassination attempt on the life of the Commissioner General of the Japanese Police Agency in March 1995.⁵⁹ Takaji Kunimatsu was shot four times with hollow point ammunition. He has since recovered and resumed his duties.

Despite the relatively low level of gun violence in Japan, the Japanese government has taken a leadership role in the United Nations' efforts to stem gun violence internationally.

Switzerland

Opponents of gun control often use Switzerland as evidence that access to guns is not linked to crime or violence. They argue that, since virtually all adult males are members of the army and have military weapons, there is nearly universal access to deadly weapons yet few gun-related problems in Switzerland.²

However, Swiss criminologist Martin Killias, of the Université de Lausanne, argues that the Swiss rate of households with firearms is actually comparable to that of Canada (27.2%). There is strict screening of army officers, and ammunition is stored in sealed boxes and inspected regularly. Despite these controls, Switzerland has rates of gun suicide second only to the US among the countries Killias surveyed.⁶¹

While firearms regulations in Switzerland are fragmented and controlled at the regional level, wide-ranging reforms are now under way to establish national standards.⁷

International Resolutions and Agreements

Although the evidence suggests that domestic controls on firearms have a significant impact, the absence of controls in other jurisdictions creates problems worldwide. For example, most of the firearms recovered from crime in Canada are rifles and shotguns, not smuggled handguns.⁶² In addition, most of the firearms used to kill in Canada are rifles and shotguns.¹ The rate of handgun use in homicides, suicides and unintentional deaths in Canada is far lower than in the US, but handguns are more commonly used in murders in large cities whereas rifles and shotguns are more commonly used in smaller, more rural areas.^d,63

Despite Canada's strict domestic controls on firearms, many of the handguns used in crime and to kill are smuggled in from countries with less rigorous controls, notably the US.⁶² Even in Japan, fully 30% of the firearms used in crimes originate in the US.⁵⁹ Within the United States, where firearms control is a state responsibility, there is some evidence that guns tend to flow from unregulated areas to more regulated areas.⁶⁴

Concern about the flow of guns from unregulated areas to regulated areas is one of the reasons for the recent resolution passed by the UN Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice. At the May 1997 meeting of this UN Commission, a resolution sponsored by 33 countries was endorsed, explicitly linking access to firearms with death and injury and identifying the problem of guns flowing from less regulated areas to regulated ones. The resolution included the following points.⁶⁵

4. Requests the Secretary-General to promote, within existing resources, technical co-operation projects that recognize the relevance of firearm regulation in addressing violence against women, in promoting justice for victims of crime, in addressing the problem of children and youth as victims and perpetrators of crime and in re-establishing or strengthening the rule of law in post-conflict peacekeeping projects

5. Encourages Member States to consider, where they have not yet done so, regulatory approaches to the civilian use of firearms that include the following common elements:

1. Regulations relating to firearm safety and storage
2. Appropriate penalties and/or administrative sanctions for offences involving the misuse or unlawful possession of firearms
3. Mitigation of, or exemption from, criminal responsibility, amnesty or similar programs that individual Member States determine to be appropriate to encourage citizens to surrender illegal, unsafe or unwanted firearms
4. A licensing system, inter alia, including the licensing of firearm businesses, to ensure that firearms are not distributed to persons convicted of serious crimes or other persons who are prohibited under the laws of respective Member States from owning or possessing firearms
5. A record-keeping system for firearms, inter alia, including a system for the commercial distribution of firearms and a requirement for appropriate marking of firearms at manufacture and at import, to assist criminal investigations, discourage theft and ensure that firearms are distributed only to persons who may lawfully own or possess firearms under the laws of the respective Member States

These elements are already components in Canada's new gun control law.

More recently an agreement signed by the Organization of American States (OAS) identified the need to develop additional methods to secure borders in order to fight transnational crime, drug-trafficking and terrorism.⁶⁶

To this end we will combat illegal firearms trafficking, by considering a new international instrument. We will seek to adopt standard systems for firearms identification and a stronger international regime for import and export licensing of firearms.

The OAS convention was signed in November 1997.

Conclusions

Gun deaths and injuries in Canada pose a serious problem that many researchers and practitioners believe can be reduced through effective public health strategies that combine legislation with education and enforcement. While Canada's problem with guns pales compared with that of the United States, many other countries have significantly lower rates of gun death and injury.

Several researchers have identified strong relationships between access to firearms and death rates in a variety of contexts. Although some maintain that there is no evidence of such a link or even maintain that the presence of guns helps reduce crime and violence, the bulk of the scientific literature tends to support the accessibility thesis.

Canada's recently passed legislation, which requires licensing of all firearms owners and registration of all guns, brings the country in line with regulations in most industrialized countries. In fact, many other countries have recently introduced legislative reforms aimed at tightening domestic controls over guns even further.

Although domestic controls can affect the supply of guns, efforts are being co-ordinated increasingly on an interjurisdictional basis to reduce the illegal trafficking of firearms. For example, the UN Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Commission recently adopted a resolution encouraging all countries who have not done so to strengthen firearms controls, and the Organization of American States adopted a convention and model regulations restricting the import and export of firearms.

Much of the research on firearms controls has originated in and focused on the United States, where the problem is particularly acute. More research on the international context would be helpful both to understand better the shape of the problem and to explore potential solutions.

^b Accessibility in terms of ease of acquisition may be measured by the rigour of processes in controlling the licensing of gun owners. An analogous situation exists with other forms of licensing where processes are designed to allow only well-qualified individuals to acquire access to potentially dangerous goods, such as automobiles. Licensing regimes may identify risk factors and raise the standards to reduce access by those at risk. For example, in 1991, the age for a Firearms Acquisition Certificate in Canada was raised to 18, although minors' permits were allowed under particular circumstances. The legislation passed in 1995 requires screening of all current owners of firearms for records of criminal behaviour or other risk factors. In cases where individuals wish to acquire guns, screening is more rigorous and includes notification of current and previous spouses to reduce the risks that individuals with a history of domestic violence will have access to firearms.

^c Public programs to discourage keeping guns in the home have been extensive in the US. For example, Project Lifeline is a public service campaign of the HELP Network, Physicians for Social Responsibility and the Center to Prevent Handgun Violence. The advertisements show a handgun pointed out from a picture with the caption "The person most likely to kill you with a handgun already has the keys to your house."⁴²

^d Since 1991, handguns were responsible for three quarters of all firearm homicides in Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver-Canada's largest Census Metropolitan Areas (CMAs). Conversely, in smaller, non-CMA areas with population under 100,000, rifles and shotguns were most prevalent in firearm homicides (62%).

References

1. Hung K, Firearm statistics. Ottawa: Research and Statistics Division, Department of Justice Canada; 1997 Oct.

2. Mauser G. Gun control is not crime control. Fraser Forum (Vancouver): The Fraser Institute, 1995.

3. McKeown D (Medical Officer of Health, Toronto). Affidavit to the Alberta Court of Appeal for hearing and consideration of the questions set out in Order in Council 461/196 respecting the Firearms Act SC 1995. 1997 Apr 17.

4. Miller T. Costs associated with gunshots in Canada in 1991. Can Med Assoc J 1995;153(9):1261-8.

5. Leonard KA. Firearm deaths in Canadian adolescents and young adults. Can J Public Health 1994;85(2):128.

6. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Rates of homicide, suicide, and firearm-related death among children - 26 industrialized countries. Morbid Mortal Wkly Rep 1997;46(5):101-5.

7. United Nations Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice. International study on firearm regulation (revised). Vienna: United Nations, 1997.

8. Kellerman AL. Comment: gunsmoke - changing public attitudes toward smoking and firearms. Am J Public Health 1997;87(6):910-3.

9. Kellerman AL, Lee RK, Mercey JA, Banton J. The epidemiologic basis for the prevention of firearms injuries. Annu Rev Public Health 1991;12:17-40.

10. Gabor T. The impact of the availability of firearms on violent crime, suicide, and accidental death. Ottawa: Department of Justice Canada, 1994.

11. Miller T, Cohen M. Costs of gunshot and cut/stab wounds in the United States, with some Canadian comparisons. Accid Anal Prev 1997;29(3):329-41.

12. Chapdelaine A, Maurice P. Firearms injury prevention and gun control in Canada. Can Med Assoc J 1996;155(9):1285-9.

13. Kellerman AL, et al. Gun ownership as a risk factor for homicide in the home. New Engl J Med 1993;329:1084-91.

14. Kellerman AL, et al. Suicide in the home in relation to gun ownership. New Engl J Med 1992;327:467-72.

15. Brent DA, et al. The presence and accessibility of firearms in the homes of adolescent suicides. JAMA 1991;266:2989-95.

16. Sloan JH, Kellerman AL, et al. Handgun regulations, crime, assaults and homicide: a tale of two cities. New Engl J Med 1985;319:1256-62.

17. Jacob S. Toward a more reasonable approach to gun control: Canada as a model. NY Law School: J Internat Comparative Law 1995;15(2&3):315-43.

18. Ram CD. Living next to the United States: recent developments in Canadian gun control policy, politics and law. NY Law School: J Internat Comparative Law 1995;15(2&3):279-313.

19. Anderson RN, Kocvhanek KD, Murphy SL. Report of final mortality statistics, 1995. Monthly Vital Stat Rep 1997;45(11) Suppl 2.

20. Federal Bureau of Investigation. Uniform crime reports for the United States: 1995. Washington (DC): US Dept of Justice, 1996.

21. Killias M. International correlations between gun ownership and rates of homicide and suicide. Can Med Assoc J 1993;148(10):1721-5.

22. van Dijk JJM. Criminal victimisation and victim empowerment in an international perspective. Presented at the Ninth International Symposium on Victimology; 1997 Aug 25-29; Amsterdam (the Netherlands).

23. Mayhew P, van Dijk JJM. Criminal victimization in eleven industrialized countries. Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek-en Documentatiecentrum (WODC), 1997.

24. Savelsberg JJ. International perspectives on gun control. NY Law School: J Internat Comparative Law 1995;15(2&3):259-63.

25. Cukier W. Bill C-68: Brief to the Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs. Toronto, 1995.

26. Department of Justice Canada. A review of firearms statistics and regulations in selected countries. Ottawa: 1995 Apr.

27. Mukherjee S, Carcach C. Violent deaths and firearms in Australia. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, 1996.

28. Carrington PJ, Moyer S. Gun control and suicide in Ontario. Am J Psychiatry 1994;151:606-8.

29. Leenaars AA, Lester D. The effects of gun control on the accidental death rate from firearms in Canada. J Safety Research 1997;28(3):119-22.

30. Mauser G. Are firearms a threat to public health? The misuse of science in medical research. Presented to the Canadian Law Society Association, Brock University, 1996 Jun 1-4.

31. Kleck G. Point blank, guns and violence in America. Hawthorne (NY): Aldine de Gruyter, 1991.

32. Lott JR, Mustard DB. Crime deterrence and the right to carry concealed handguns. J Legal Studies 1997;xxvi:1-68.

33. Kleck G, Gertz M. Armed resistance to crime: the prevalence and nature of self defense with a handgun. J Criminal Law Criminology 1995;86(1):150-87.

34. Webster DW, Vernick JS, Ludwig J, Lester KJ. Flawed gun policy research could endanger public safety. Am J Public Health 1997;87(6):918-21.

35. Hemenway D. Survey research and self defense gun use: an exploration of extreme over estimates. J Criminal Law Criminology. In press.

36. Robinson K, et al. Firearm violence: an annotated bibliography. John Hopkins University: Center for Gun Policy and Research; 1997 Aug.

37. Thomas G. Firearms and public safety. Can Fam Physician 1996;42 Jun:1060-2.

38. Boyd N. A statistical analysis of the impacts of the 1977 firearms control legislation: critique and discussion. Department of Justice Canada, 1996 Aug.

39. Culross P. Legislative strategies to address firearm violence and injury. J Family Practice 1996;42:15-7.

40. Wintemute GJ. The relationship between firearm design and firearm violence: handguns in the 1990's. JAMA 1996;225:1749-53.

41. Cummings P, Grossman DC, Rivara FP, Koepsell TD. State gun safe storage laws and child mortality due to firearms. JAMA 1997;278(13):1084-6.

42. The Nation's Health, 1996 Nov:49.

43. Callahan CM, Rivara FP, Koepsell TD. Money for guns: evaluation of the Seattle buy-back program. Public Health Rep 1994;109:472-7.

44. Plotkin MT, editor. Under fire: gun buy-backs, exchanges and amnesty programs. Washington: Police Executive Research Forum, 1996.

45. Flinn RJ, Allen LG. Trigger locks and firearm safety: one trauma centre's prevention campaign. J Emergency Nursing 1995;21:296-8.

46. Center to Prevent Handgun Violence Legal Action Project. Outline of gun manufacture and seller liability issues. Washington (DC), 1995.

47. Herz AD. Gun crazy: constitutional false consciousness and the dereliction of dialogic responsibility. Boston University Law Review 1995 Jan; 75(1).

48. Schiller B. Britain plans to loan majority of handguns. Toronto Star 1996 Oct 17:A20.

49. King ML. 1963 Nov. Cited in: Violence Prevention Task Force. Firearm violence in America: an annotated bibliography. Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma, 1994 Spring.

50. Archer D, Gartner R, et al. Homicide and the death penalty: a cross national test of a deterrence hypothesis. J Criminal Law Criminology 1984;75:991-1013.

51. Gartner R. Affidavit to the Court of Appeal of Alberta for hearing and consideration of the questions set out in Order in Council 461/96 respecting the Firearms Act SC 1995. 1997 Feb 6.

52. Coalition for Gun Control. Endorsers. 1997 Oct.

53. Lord Cullen. The public inquiry into the shootings at Dunblane Primary School on March 13, 1996. 1996 Oct.

54. Total handgun ban fails by 25 votes. The Guardian Weekly 1996 Nov 24.

55. National Committee on Violence. Violence: directions for Australia (rec. 55.3:173-7.) Canberra: Australian Institute for Criminology, 1990.

56. Australasian Police Ministers' Council. Consolidated resolutions relating to legislative issues. 1996 May 10 and 1996 Jul 17.

57. Attorney-General and Minister for Justice (Australia). Thanks to participants in Firearms Buyback [press release]. 1997 Aug 26. [See also http://www.gun.law.gov.au.]

58. Thorp Sir T. Review of firearms control in New Zealand. Report of an independent inquiry commissioned by the Minister of Police. Wellington, 1997 Jun.

59. National Police Agency (Firearms Division). Firearms control in Japan. Tokyo: NPA, 1997.

60. National Symposium to End Gun Violence; 1996 Nov 30; Tokyo, Japan.

61. Killias M. Gun ownership and violent crime: the Swiss experience in international perspective. Security J 1990;1(3):169-74.

62. Firearms Smuggling Working Group. The illegal movement of firearms in Canada: report of the Firearms Smuggling Working Group. Ottawa: Department of Justice Canada, 1995.

63. Leesti T. Weapons and violent crime. Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics 1997;17(7).

64. Kennedy DM, Piehl AM, Braga AA. Youth violence in Boston: gun markets, serious youth offenders and a use reduction strategy. Law and Contemporary Problems 1996;59(1):147-96.

65. UN Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice. Sixth Session, Criminal Justice Reform and Strengthening of Legal Institutions Measures to Regulate Firearms. Resolution L.19 (E/CN.15/1997/L.19/Rev.1). Vienna: United Nations, 1997 May 9.

66. Organization of American States (Inter-American Drug Abuse Control Commission). Model regulations for the control of the international movement of firearms, their parts and components and ammunition. 1997 Sep 15.  

Author References

Wendy Cukier, Professor, Administration and Information Management, Ryerson Polytechnic University, Toronto, Ontario  M5B 2K3; Fax: (416) 979-5249; E-mail: wcukier@acs.ryerson.ca

Professor Cukier specializes in information systems and teaches in Ryerson's Justice Studies Program. She is President of the Coalition for Gun Control, an organization endorsed by 350 health, policing and community groups.

[Previous][Table of Contents] [Next]