IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v101y2020i2p893-908.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does “Politicizing” Gun Violence Increase Support for Gun Control? Experimental Evidence from the Las Vegas Shooting

Author

Listed:
  • Benjamin R. Kantack
  • Collin E. Paschall

Abstract

Objective Gun control advocacy regularly escalates in the aftermath of a mass shooting. But is the American public more susceptible to pro‐gun‐control arguments in the wake of mass gun violence? Methods We analyze a survey experiment fielded immediately before and after the 2017 Las Vegas shooting. Results Pro‐gun‐control arguments were not effective at increasing support for or confidence in expanded background checks before or after the Las Vegas shooting. Anti‐gun‐control arguments were less effective at reducing support for expanded background checks after the Las Vegas shooting. Conclusion Even the largest mass shooting in American history was insufficient to mobilize public opinion on gun control in a way that would affect federal policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Benjamin R. Kantack & Collin E. Paschall, 2020. "Does “Politicizing” Gun Violence Increase Support for Gun Control? Experimental Evidence from the Las Vegas Shooting," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 101(2), pages 893-908, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:101:y:2020:i:2:p:893-908
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.12754
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12754
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.12754?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:101:y:2020:i:2:p:893-908. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.