The authors assessed the prevalence of gun availability for elderly patients to determine whether gun availability is related to the presence of suicidal or depressive symptoms.
This is a cross-sectional epidemiologic survey of firearm availability and safety practices. A random sample of older adults with a scheduled primary-care clinic appointment was selected and screened with the General Health Questionnaire and questions about suicidality and alcohol use. Participants were also asked about the availability of firearms in their home and about safe gun practices.
Of 1,023 patients screened, 285 (27.9%) reported having some type of firearm in the home, and 202 (19.7%) reported having a handgun in the home. Patients with suicidal ideation or high levels of depression or psychological distress were not significantly more or less likely to have a gun in the home than those without these emotional stressors. The strongest predictors of firearm availability were being male and being married.
These preliminary data suggest that a significant proportion of elderly people have firearms available to them in their homes. Those patients with emotional distress did not differ from those without distress with respect to having firearms available to them. These data strongly suggest the need for screening for firearm availability and education about the safe storage of firearms as a potential means of prevention of suicide among elderly patients suffering from emotional distress or suicidal ideation.But whether or not some of Lott’s questionable practices in support of his “more guns, less crime” hypothesis are unethical,” he has still raised a serious academic question that needs to be resolved: What is the effect of a state’s adoption of so called “right to carry” (“RTC”) laws? While I completely agree with Cook and Ludwig that “the best empirical evidence does not support” the “more guns, less crime hypothesis,” I thought it might be useful to highlight some of the issues in this debate and provide some new evidence that further strengthens the Cook and Ludwig conclusion. I therefore begin with a few comments that illuminate some of the key theoretical points involving an evaluation of RTC laws, and then demonstrate the fragility of some of the econometric models used to support Lott’s thesis, before offering an alternative econometric approach that may yield better estimates of the impact of RTC laws.