Estimating the causal effect of gun prevalence on homicide rates: a local average treatment effect approach

Tomislav Kovandzic, Mark Edwin Schaffer, Gary Kleck

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    25 Citations (SciVal)

    Abstract

    This paper uses a “local average treatment effect” (LATE) framework in an attempt to disentangle the separate effects of criminal and noncriminal gun prevalence on violence rates. We first show that a number of previous studies have failed to properly address the problems of endogeneity, proxy validity, and heterogeneity in criminality. We demonstrate that the time series proxy problem is severe; previous panel data studies have used proxies that are essentially uncorrelated in time series with direct measures of gun relevance. We adopt instead a cross-section approach: we use U.S. county-level data for 1990, and we proxy gun prevalence levels by the percent of suicides committed with guns, which recent research indicates is the best measure of gun levels for cross-sectional research. We instrument gun levels with three plausibly exogenous instruments: subscriptions to outdoor sports magazines, voting preferences in the 1988 Presidential election, and numbers of military veterans. In our LATE framework, the estimated impact of gun prevalence is a weighted average of a possibly negative impact of noncriminal gun prevalence on homicide and a presumed positive impact of criminal gun prevalence. We find evidence of a significant negative impact, and interpret it as primarily “local to noncriminals”, i.e., primarily determined by a negative deterrent effect of noncriminal gun prevalence.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)477-541
    JournalJournal of Quantitative Criminology
    Volume29
    Issue number4
    Early online date11 Oct 2012
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2013

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Estimating the causal effect of gun prevalence on homicide rates: a local average treatment effect approach'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this