Search results

Showing 1 – 14 of 14 results.

Curated

Examination of Crime Guns and Homicide in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 1987-1998 (ICPSR 2895)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30

Geographic coverage: United States, Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh

This study examined spatial and temporal features of crime guns in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, in order to ascertain how gun availability affected criminal behavior among youth, whether the effects differed between young adults and juveniles, and whether that relationship changed over time. Rather than investigating the general prevalence of guns, this study focused only on those firearms used in the commission of crimes. Crime guns were defined specifically as those used in murders, assaults, robberies, weapons offenses, and drug offenses. The emphasis of the project was on the attributes of crime guns and those who possess them, the geographic sources of those guns, the distribution of crime guns over neighborhoods in a city, and the relationship between the prevalence of crime guns and the incidence of homicide. Data for Part 1, Traced Guns Data, came from the City of Pittsburgh Bureau of Police. Gun trace data provided a detailed view of crime guns recovered by police during a two-year period, from 1995 to 1997. These data identified the original source of each crime gun (first sale to a non-FFL, i.e., a person not holding a Federal Firearms License) as well as attributes of the gun and the person possessing the gun at the time of the precipitating crime, and the ZIP-code location where the gun was recovered. For Part 2, Crime Laboratory Data, data were gathered from the local county crime laboratory on guns submitted by Pittsburgh police for forensic testing. These data were from 1993 to 1998 and provided a longer time series for examining changes in crime guns over time than the data in Part 1. In Parts 3 and 4, Stolen Guns by ZIP-Code Data and Stolen Guns by Census Tract Data, data on stolen guns came from the local police. These data included the attributes of the guns and residential neighborhoods of owners. Part 3 contains data from 1987 to 1996 organized by ZIP code, whereas Part 4 contains data from 1993 to 1996 organized by census tract. Part 5, Shots Fired Data, contains the final indicator of crime gun prevalence for this study, which was 911 calls of incidents involving shots fired. These data provided vital information on both the geographic location and timing of these incidents. Shots-fired incidents not only captured varying levels of access to crime guns, but also variations in the willingness to actually use crime guns in a criminal manner. Part 6, Homicide Data, contains homicide data for the city of Pittsburgh from 1990 to 1995. These data were used to examine the relationship between varying levels of crime gun prevalence and levels of homicide, especially youth homicide, in the same city. Part 7, Pilot Mapping Application, is a pilot application illustrating the potential uses of mapping tools in police investigations of crime guns traced back to original point of sale. NTC. It consists of two ArcView 3.1 project files and 90 supporting data and mapping files. Variables in Part 1 include date of manufacture and sale of the crime gun, weapon type, gun model, caliber, firing mechanism, dealer location (ZIP code and state), recovery date and location (ZIP code and state), age and state of residence of purchaser and possessor, and possessor role. Part 2 also contains gun type and model, as well as gun make, precipitating offense, police zone submitting the gun, and year the gun was submitted to the crime lab. Variables in Parts 3 and 4 include month and year the gun was stolen, gun type, make, and caliber, and owner residence. Residence locations are limited to owner ZIP code in Part 3, and 1990 Census tract number and neighborhood name in Part 4. Part 5 contains the date, time, census tract and police zone of 911 calls relating to shots fired. Part 6 contains the date and census tract of the homicide incident, drug involvement, gang involvement, weapon, and victim and offender ages. Data in Part 7 include state, county, and ZIP code of traced guns, population figures, and counts of crime guns recovered at various geographic locations (states, counties, and ZIP codes) where the traced guns first originated in sales by an FFL to a non-FFL individual. Data for individual guns are not provided in Part 7.

Curated

Firearm Legislation and Firearm Violence Across Space and Time, United States, 1970-2012 (ICPSR 36688)

Released/updated on: 2018-05-15

Geographic coverage: United States

Time period: 1970-01-01--2012-01-01

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

The study constructed a comprehensive, longitudinal dataset of all counties nested within U.S. States from 1970 to 2012. The study's main purpose was to facilitate research that would further understanding on firearm legislation and its impacts on violence. This comprehensive data collection effort included information on firearm legislation implemented across U.S. States over time in combination with multiple measures of firearm-related violence and injury. Moreover, to better understand the conditions under which firearm legislation is more or less effective, incorporation of county characteristics allowed for examination of whether the effectiveness of state-level firearm legislation depends upon particular characteristics of counties. The researchers conducted a secondary analysis utilizing a variety of archived external government and census sources.

The Study's Dataset Include two Stata Files:

CJRC_firearms_research.dta (95 Variables, 129,027 Cases)
state_law_data.dta (19 Variables, 2,168 Cases)

Curated

Firearms, Violence, and Youth in California, Illinois, Louisiana, and New Jersey, 1991 (ICPSR 6484)

Released/updated on: 2005-11-04

Geographic coverage: United States, Illinois, Louisiana, California, New Jersey

Time period: 1991-01-01--1991-04-01

Violence committed by and against juveniles was the focus of this study. Two groups were examined: incarcerated (criminally active) juveniles and students in inner-city high schools, since these youths are popularly considered to engage in and experience violence (especially gun-related violence), to belong to urban street gangs, and to participate in the drug trafficking thought to lead to excessive gun violence. Self-administered questionnaires were completed by 835 male inmates in six correctional facilities and 1,663 male and female students from ten inner-city high schools in California, Illinois, Louisiana, and New Jersey. Data collection took place during January through April of 1991. To maximize response rates, inducements of five dollars were offered to the inmates, Spanish-language versions of the questionnaire were provided to inmates who preferred them, and personal interviews were conducted with inmates whose reading skills were less than sufficient to complete the questionnaire on their own. In four schools, principals permitted the inducements to be offered to students to participate in the study. As with the inmate survey, a Spanish-language version of the questionnaire was provided to students who preferred it. The questionnaires covered roughly the same core topics for both inmates and students. Items included questions on sociodemographic characteristics, school experiences, gun ownership, gun use for several types of firearms, gun acquisition patterns, gun-carrying habits, use of other weapons, gang membership and gang activities, self-reported criminal histories, victimization patterns, drug use, alcohol use, and attitudes concerning guns, crime, and violence. In both questionnaires, the majority of the items covered firearms knowledge, acquisition, and use. The remaining items in the inmate survey primarily covered criminal behavior and, secondarily, victimization histories. In the student survey, these priorities were reversed.

Curated

"Gotta Make Your Own Heaven": Guns, Safety, and the Edge of Adulthood in New York City, 2018-2019 (ICPSR 37858)

Released/updated on: 2021-05-26

Geographic coverage: New York City, United States, New York (state)

Time period: 2018-07-01--2019-08-01

This project investigated the experiences of New York City youth ages 16-24 who were at high risk for gun violence (e.g., carried a gun, been shot or shot at). Youth participants were recruited from three neighborhoods with historically high rates of gun violence when compared to the city as a whole--Brownsville (Brooklyn), Morrisania (Bronx), and East Harlem (Manhattan). This study explores the complex confluence of individual, situational, and environmental factors that influence youth gun acquisition and use. This study is part of a broader effort to build an evidence-based foundation for individual and community interventions, and policies that will more effectively support these young people and prevent youth gun violence. Through interviews with 330 youth, this study seeks to answer these questions:

What are the reasons young people carry guns?
How do young people talk about having and using guns?
What are young people's social networks like, and what roles do guns play in thesenetworks?

Interviews covered the following topics: neighborhood perceptions; perceptions of and experiences with the police, gangs, guns, and violence; substance use; criminal history; and demographics: race, gender, age, legal status, relationship status, living situation, location, number of children, drug use, and education.

Curated

Gun Density, Gun Type, and the Dallas Homicide Rate, 1980-1992 (ICPSR 3145)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30

Geographic coverage: United States, Texas, Dallas

Time period: 1980-01-01--1992-01-01

This study examined the relationships among trends in deadly gun violence, overall gun availability, and the availability of more lethal types of guns. Using firearms confiscated by the Dallas, Texas, police department from 1980 to 1992 as indicators of the types of guns circulating among criminal/high-risk groups, the project examined changes over time in Dallas' street gun arsenal and assessed the impact these changes had upon gun violence mortality in Dallas. The focus of the project was on the characteristics of the guns rather than their numbers. All confiscated firearms were analyzed and characterized according to basic weapon type and caliber groupings. Dates of confiscation were missing from the majority of the pre-1988 records, but by aggregating the gun data into bimonthly (Part 1) and quarterly (Part 2) time series databases, it was possible to estimate the bimonthly and quarterly periods of confiscation for most of the 1980-1992 records. Records that could not be assigned to bimonthly or quarterly periods were dropped. Confiscated firearms were grouped into basic categories based on stopping power (i.e., wounding potential), rate of fire, and ammunition capacity. The following measures were created for each bimonthly and quarterly period: (1) weapons with high stopping power (large guns), (2) semiautomatic weaponry (semis), (3) weapons combining high stopping power and a semiautomatic firing mechanism (large semis), (4) handguns with high stopping power (large handguns), (5) semiautomatic handguns (semi handguns), and (6) handguns combining high stopping power and semiautomatic firing (large semi handguns). Several violence measures were obtained from the Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI) Uniform Crime Reports Supplemental Homicide Reports and Return A (or Offenses Known and Clearances by Arrest) data files (see UNIFORM CRIME REPORTING PROGRAM DATA [UNITED STATES]: 1975-1997 [ICPSR 9028]). These measures were also aggregated at bimonthly and quarterly levels. Data from the Dallas Police Department master gun property file include total handguns, total semiautomatic handguns, total large-caliber handguns, total large-caliber semiautomatic handguns, total shotguns, total semiautomatic shotguns, total rifles, total semiautomatic rifles, and total counts and total semiautomatic counts for various calibers of handguns, shotguns, and rifles. Data that were aggregated using the FBI data include total homicides, gun homicides, total robberies, gun robberies, and gun aggravated assaults. The data file also includes the year and the bimonthly or quarterly period counter.

Curated

National Firearms Survey, 1999 (ICPSR 4552)

Released/updated on: 2007-07-06

Geographic coverage: United States

This survey was undertaken to obtain information on the characteristics of gun ownership, gun storage and gun carrying practices, and weapons-related incidents in the United States--specifically, use of guns and other weapons in self-defense against other people. Data were collected using national random-digit dial telephone surveys completed between March 19, 1999 and July 13, 1999. Sampling was suspended after the school shooting in Littleton, Colorado on April 20, 1999, and resumed after a cool-down period. Part 1, Survey Data, contains the coded data obtained during the interviews, and Part 2, Open-Ended Verbatim Responses, consists of open-ended answers provided by the respondents. Four qualifying questions were asked, dealing with: (1) gun ownership, (2) gun display against the respondent, (3) gun use in self-defense against another person, and (4) the use of a weapon other than a gun in self-defense against another person. A "yes" response to a qualifying question led to a series of additional questions on the same topic as the qualifying question. Information was collected from all respondents on the perceived safety of their neighborhood, whether they would feel safer if more people owned guns, whether guns should be allowed in public places, whether gun injuries were a problem in their community, whether they would favor or oppose a program to reduce gun injuries, and whether they had ever been shot with a gun. Respondents living in households that currently contained a gun were asked how many and what type of guns were present, the main reasons for owning a gun, whether any of the guns were loaded and unlocked, and whether they had received formal firearms training. Questions about incidents in which a gun was displayed in a hostile manner against the respondent included the number of times it took place, how long ago it had occurred, whether the respondent was in the military or police force at the time, the location of the incident, whether the individual displaying the gun was known to the respondent, whether the respondent had a gun, and whether the police were contacted. Respondents who had used a gun or other weapon in self-defense in the last five years were asked about the number of times it took place, the location of the incident, whether they were in the military or police force at the time, the type of weapon used, whether they knew the other person, whether this individual also had a weapon, whether the police were contacted and arrests made, and what crime was committed. Additional questions asked respondents whether they smoked cigarettes, drank alcohol, whether they had gotten married, had had a fire in their home, and had been hospitalized for a fracture in the past year, and whether they had ever had contact with extraterrestrial life. Demographic variables include sex, age, race, education level, household income, type of residential area (e.g., urban, rural, etc.), and age and number of children in the household.

Curated

National Study of Private Ownership of Firearms in the United States, 1994 (ICPSR 6955)

Released/updated on: 1998-10-08

Geographic coverage: United States

This data collection consists of a survey of private ownership of firearms by adults in the United States. Respondents who both did and did not own firearms were included. The variables cover topics such as the number and type of guns owned privately, methods of, and reasons for, firearms acquisition, the storage and carrying of guns, the defensive use of firearms against criminal attackers, and reasons for and against firearm ownership. Basic demographic variables include sex, age, education, and employment.

Curated

Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN): Fear and Guns, Wave 3, 2000-2002 (ICPSR 13701)

Released/updated on: 2007-02-06

Geographic coverage: United States, Chicago, Illinois

Time period: 2000-01-01--2002-01-01

The Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN) was a large-scale, interdisciplinary study of how families, schools, and neighborhoods affect child and adolescent development. One component of the PHDCN was the Longitudinal Cohort Study, which was a series of coordinated longitudinal studies that followed over 6,000 randomly selected children, adolescents, and young adults, and their primary caregivers over time to examine the changing circumstances of their lives, as well as the personal characteristics, that might lead them toward or away from a variety of antisocial behaviors. Numerous measures were administered to respondents to gauge various aspects of human development, including individual differences, as well as family, peer, and school influences. One such measure was the Fear and Guns instrument. It was administered to subjects in Cohorts 6, 9, and 12 and obtained information regarding the subject's fear in certain situations and the accessibility and use of guns. This instrument combined elements from PROJECT ON HUMAN DEVELOPMENT IN CHICAGO NEIGHBORHOODS (PHDCN): WHERE ARE YOU AFRAID? (FEAR), WAVE 2, 1997-2000 (ICPSR 13621) and PROJECT ON HUMAN DEVELOPMENT IN CHICAGO NEIGHBORHOODS (PHDCN): GUN OWNERSHIP, WAVE 2, 1997-2000 (ICPSR 13626). It is closely related to PROJECT ON HUMAN DEVELOPMENT IN CHICAGO NEIGHBORHOODS (PHDCN): GUN OWNERSHIP, WAVE 3, 2000-2002 (ICPSR 13711).

Curated

Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN): Gun Ownership, Wave 2, 1997-2000 (ICPSR 13626)

Released/updated on: 2006-04-24

Geographic coverage: United States, Chicago, Illinois

Time period: 1997-01-01--2000-01-01

Curated

Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN): Gun Ownership, Wave 3, 2000-2002 (ICPSR 13711)

Released/updated on: 2007-02-06

Geographic coverage: United States, Chicago, Illinois

Time period: 2000-01-01--2002-01-01

The Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (PHDCN) was a large-scale, interdisciplinary study of how families, schools, and neighborhoods affect child and adolescent development. One component of the PHDCN was the Longitudinal Cohort Study, which was a series of coordinated longitudinal studies that followed over 6,000 randomly selected children, adolescents, and young adults, and their primary caregivers over time to examine the changing circumstances of their lives, as well as the personal characteristics, that might lead them toward or away from a variety of antisocial behaviors. Numerous measures were administered to respondents to gauge various aspects of human development, including individual differences, as well as family, peer, and school influences. One such measure was the Gun Ownership instrument. It was administered to subjects in Cohorts 15 and 18 and obtained information related to the accessibility and use of guns. It is related to PROJECT ON HUMAN DEVELOPMENT IN CHICAGO NEIGHBORHOODS (PHDCN): GUN OWNERSHIP, WAVE 2, 1997-2000 (ICPSR 13626) and PROJECT ON HUMAN DEVELOPMENT IN CHICAGO NEIGHBORHOODS (PHDCN): FEAR AND GUNS, WAVE 3, 2000-2002 (ICPSR 13701).

Curated

Rochester Intergenerational Study (RIGS), New York, United States, 1999-2019 (ICPSR 37920)

Released/updated on: 2021-10-26

Geographic coverage: United States, Rochester (New York), New York (state)

Time period: 1999-01-01--2019-01-01

The Rochester Intergenerational Study (RIGS), is an extension of the Rochester Youth Development Study (RYDS). RIGS investigates intergenerational continuity and discontinuity of drug use in a three-generation prospective design. The focal participant is the oldest biological child (G3) of the original participant in the RYDS study. The project contains developmental data collected since 1988 on the G2 parents and G1 grandparents; combining those data with the prospective data collected from 1999 to 2019 allows examination of how the parent's own developmental course influences their transition to adulthood and their behavior as parents which, in turn, can be used to explain the onset and development of the G3 child's drug use.

Variables included pertain to the parent's stressors, drug use and problem behaviors, prosocial bonds, peer networks, gang affiliation, family context, major family events, and parenting behaviors. G3 assessments include their general psychosocial development, with detailed information on the onset and course of their drug use, problem behaviors, school behavior, and prosocial behavior.

Curated

Substance Use Among Violently Injured Youth in an Urban Emergency Department: Services and Outcomes in Flint, Michigan, 2009-2013 (ICPSR 36558)

Released/updated on: 2016-09-23

Geographic coverage: Flint, United States, Michigan

Time period: 2009-12-01--2013-09-01

This project was an investigation into the natural course of service needs, use, and trajectories among high-risk youth and young adults with drug use who presented to an inner-city Emergency Department with multiple risk behaviors (with and without acute violent injury). Eligible participants included youth/young adults (ages 14-24) who sought care at the Hurley Medical Center (HMC) Emergency Department (ED) located in Flint, Michigan between December 19, 2009 and September 7, 2011. Consenting youth completed a self-administered computerized screening survey. All participants who self-reported past year drug use were recruited for the longitudinal study. For a comparison group, a randomly selected sample of drug using youth seeking ED care for other reasons (e.g. abdominal pain, motor vehicle crash) were selected for longitudinal study (equilibrated monthly proportionally for age/gender with the acute violent injury group). Participants in the violent injury and comparison group completed a baseline assessment during their ED visit.

Dataset 1 (DS1) contains the Baseline Screener Data of both young adults and youth. This data file has 1,448 cases and 314 variables. Each case represents an individual seeking treatment in the emergency department.

Dataset 2 (DS2) contains the Baseline Youth Data. This data file has 89 cases and 531 variables. Of these 89 cases, 51 of the youths (ages 14-17) presented to the Emergency Department with a violent injury. The remaining 38 respondents reported to the Emergency Department for non-violent injury and are part of the comparison group.

Dataset 3 (DS3) contains the Baseline Young Adult Data. This file contains 511 cases and 483 variables. Of these 511 cases, 299 of the young adults (ages 18-24) presented to the Emergency Department with a violent injury. The remaining 212 respondents reported to the Emergency Department for non-violent injury and are part of the comparison group.

The Baseline Screener Data includes demographics and information about public assistance, income, work, marital status, insurance, the injury visit, school/grades, retaliation attitudes, fights, violence, gang affiliation, weapons, partner violence, nicotine use, alcohol use, drug use, HIV risk-taking behaviors, needle use, sexual behavior, STD/HIV, past adolescent injuries, age on onset of drug use, and current conflict and aggression.

The Baseline Youth and Young Adult Data include sexual behavior, threat of retaliation, brief symptom inventory/suicide risk, drug and alcohol refusal efficacy, drinking and driving (DUI), community involvement, peer influences, non-partner aggression, parental support, parent influence on drug and alcohol use, family conflict, mentors, fight self-efficacy, community violence, sexual risk behaviors, medical care, alcohol dependence/abuse, drug dependence/abuse, substance abuse service utilization, post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), conduct disorder (youth) or antisocial personality disorder (young adult), legal system involvement, major depressive episodes, and mental health service utilization.

Curated

Simple Crosstabs

Substance Use Among Violently Injured Youth in an Urban Emergency Department: Services and Outcomes in Flint, Michigan, 2009-2013 (Public-Use) (ICPSR 36769)

Released/updated on: 2017-03-31

Geographic coverage: Flint, United States, Michigan

Time period: 2009-12-01--2013-09-01

Dataset 1 (DS1) contains the Baseline Screener Data of both young adults and youth. This data file has 1,448 cases and 253 variables. Each case represents an individual seeking treatment in the emergency department.

Dataset 2 (DS2) contains the Baseline Youth Data. This data file has 89 cases and 363 variables. Of these 89 cases, 51 of the youths (ages 14-17) presented to the Emergency Department with a violent injury. The remaining 38 respondents reported to the Emergency Department for non-violent injury and are part of the comparison group.

Dataset 3 (DS3) contains the Baseline Young Adult Data. This file contains 511 cases and 380 variables. Of these 511 cases, 299 of the young adults (ages 18-24) presented to the Emergency Department with a violent injury. The remaining 212 respondents reported to the Emergency Department for non-violent injury and are part of the comparison group.

The Baseline Youth and Young Adult Data include brief sexual behavior, threat of retaliation, brief symptom inventory, drug and alcohol refusal efficacy, drinking and driving (DUI), community involvement, peer influences, non-partner aggression, parental support, parent influence on drug and alcohol use, family conflict, mentors, fight self-efficacy, community violence, medical care, alcohol dependence/abuse, drug dependence/abuse, substance abuse service utilization, post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), conduct disorder (youth) or antisocial personality disorder (young adult), legal system involvement, major depressive episodes, and mental health service utilization.

Curated

Survey of Gun Owners in the United States, 1996 (ICPSR 2750)

Released/updated on: 2006-03-30

Geographic coverage: United States

This study was undertaken to obtain information on the characteristics of gun ownership, gun-carrying practices, and weapons-related incidents in the United States -- specifically, gun use and other weapons used in self-defense against humans and animals. Data were gathered using a national random-digit-dial telephone survey. The respondents were comprised of 1,905 randomly-selected adults aged 18 and older living in the 50 United States. All interviews were completed between May 28 and July 2, 1996. The sample was designed to be a representative sample of households, not of individuals, so researchers did not interview more than one adult from each household. To start the interview, six qualifying questions were asked, dealing with (1) gun ownership, (2) gun-carrying practices, (3) gun display against the respondent, (4) gun use in self-defense against animals, (5) gun use in self-defense against people, and (6) other weapons used in self-defense. A "yes" response to a qualifying question led to a series of additional questions on the same topic as the qualifying question. Part 1, Survey Data, contains the coded data obtained during the interviews, and Part 2, Open-Ended-Verbatim Responses, consists of the answers to open-ended questions provided by the respondents. Information collected for Part 1 covers how many firearms were owned by household members, types of firearms owned (handguns, revolvers, pistols, fully automatic weapons, and assault weapons), whether the respondent personally owned a gun, reasons for owning a gun, type of gun carried, whether the gun was ever kept loaded, kept concealed, used for personal protection, or used for work, and whether the respondent had a permit to carry the gun. Additional questions focused on incidents in which a gun was displayed in a hostile manner against the respondent, including the number of times such an incident took place, the location of the event in which the gun was displayed against the respondent, whether the police were contacted, whether the individual displaying the gun was known to the respondent, whether the incident was a burglary, robbery, or other planned assault, and the number of shots fired during the incident. Variables concerning gun use by the respondent in self-defense against an animal include the number of times the respondent used a gun in this manner and whether the respondent was hunting at the time of the incident. Other variables in Part 1 deal with gun use in self-defense against people, such as the location of the event, if the other individual knew the respondent had a gun, the type of gun used, any injuries to the respondent or to the individual that required medical attention or hospitalization, whether the incident was reported to the police, whether there were any arrests, whether other weapons were used in self-defense, the type of other weapon used, location of the incident in which the other weapon was used, and whether the respondent was working as a police officer or security guard or was in the military at the time of the event. Demographic variables in Part 1 include the gender, race, age, household income, and type of community (city, suburb, or rural) in which the respondent lived. Open-ended questions asked during the interview comprise the variables in Part 2. Responses include descriptions of where the respondent was when he or she displayed a gun (in self-defense or otherwise), specific reasons why the respondent displayed a gun, how the other individual reacted when the respondent displayed the gun, how the individual knew the respondent had a gun, whether the police were contacted for specific self-defense events, and if not, why not.