IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ejw/journl/v16y2019i1p37-68.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is the United States an Outlier in Public Mass Shootings? A Comment on Adam Lankford

Author

Listed:
  • John R. Lott, Jr.
  • Carlisle E. Moody

Abstract

In 2016 Adam Lankford published a widely propagated article purporting to show that during a 47-year period the United States represented 31 percent of worldwide public mass shooters, and claiming that the outsized U.S. percentage is a result of gun prevalence. We examined the data from 1998 to 2012 and found that, although the U.S. has 4.5 percent of the world’s population, the U.S. represents less than three percent of worldwide mass shooting incidents or mass shooting deaths and less than one percent of mass shooters. What explains this incredible difference? While Lankford claims he is using the conventional definitions of public mass shootings from the FBI and NYPD, it turns out that Lankford’s 31-percent claim is an artifact of his having stripped out much from conventional definitions of ‘public mass shooter,’ notably excluding almost all incidents of terrorism outside the U.S. and most of the cases where more than one shooter is involved. We compare U.S. and non-U.S. public mass shootings using the official definitions from the FBI and NYPD that Lankford claims he is using. We also suggest a reasonable explanation for the fact that, while the U.S. has a relatively large number of lone-wolf shooters compared to the rest of the world, it does not have a relatively large number of public mass shooters.

Suggested Citation

  • John R. Lott, Jr. & Carlisle E. Moody, 2019. "Is the United States an Outlier in Public Mass Shootings? A Comment on Adam Lankford," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 16(1), pages 1-37–68, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:ejw:journl:v:16:y:2019:i:1:p:37-68
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econjwatch.org/File+download/1106/LottMoodyMar2019.pdf?mimetype=pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://econjwatch.org/1162
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lott, Jr., John R., 2010. "More Guns, Less Crime," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 3, number 9780226493664.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Abdul Munasib & Genti Kostandini & Jeffrey L. Jordan, 2018. "Impact of the Stand Your Ground law on gun deaths: evidence of a rural urban dichotomy," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 527-554, June.
    2. Durlauf, Steven N. & Navarro, Salvador & Rivers, David A., 2016. "Model uncertainty and the effect of shall-issue right-to-carry laws on crime," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 32-67.
    3. John J. Donohue & Abhay Aneja & Kyle D. Weber, 2019. "RTC Laws Increase Violent Crime: Moody and Marvell Have Missed the Target," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 16(1), pages 1-97–113, March.
    4. Dominik Wodarz & Natalia L Komarova, 2013. "Dependence of the Firearm-Related Homicide Rate on Gun Availability: A Mathematical Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(7), pages 1-13, July.
    5. Zimmerman, Paul R., 2014. "The deterrence of crime through private security efforts: Theory and evidence," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 66-75.
    6. Cheng Cheng & Mark Hoekstra, 2013. "Does Strengthening Self-Defense Law Deter Crime or Escalate Violence?:Evidence from Expansions to Castle Doctrine," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 48(3), pages 821-854.
    7. Jonathan M. Metzl, 2019. "What guns mean: the symbolic lives of firearms," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-5, December.
    8. John J. Donohue & Abhay Aneja & Kyle D. Weber, 2019. "Right‐to‐Carry Laws and Violent Crime: A Comprehensive Assessment Using Panel Data and a State‐Level Synthetic Control Analysis," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(2), pages 198-247, June.
    9. Carlisle E. Moody & Thomas B. Marvell, 2018. "The Impact of Right-to-Carry Laws: A Critique of the 2014 Version of Aneja, Donohue, and Zhang," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 15(1), pages 1-51–66, January.
    10. Abhay Aneja & John J. Donohue & Alexandria Zhang, 2013. "Substance vs. Sideshows in the More Guns, Less Crime Debate: A Comment on Moody, Lott, and Marvell," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 10(1), pages 32-39, January.
    11. John J. Donohue, 2022. "The Effect of Permissive Gun Laws on Crime," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 704(1), pages 92-117, November.
    12. Matthew Lang, 2016. "State Firearm Sales and Criminal Activity: Evidence from Firearm Background Checks," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 83(1), pages 45-68, July.
    13. Oliveira Cristiano & Balbinotto Neto Giácomo, 2015. "The Deterrence Effects of Gun Laws in Games with Asymmetric Skills and Information," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 11(3), pages 435-452, November.
    14. Catalina Gómez & Hermilson Velásquez & Andrés Julián Rendón & Santiago Bohórquez, 2014. "Crime in Colombia: More law enforcement or more justice?," Documentos de Trabajo de Valor Público 11998, Universidad EAFIT.
    15. Kerry O’Brien & Walter Forrest & Dermot Lynott & Michael Daly, 2013. "Racism, Gun Ownership and Gun Control: Biased Attitudes in US Whites May Influence Policy Decisions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(10), pages 1-10, October.
    16. Zimmerman, Paul R., 2010. "Deterrence from self-protection measures in the ‘market model’ of crime: dynamic panel data estimates from employment in private security occupations," MPRA Paper 26187, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Steffen Hurka & Christoph Knill, 2020. "Does regulation matter? A cross‐national analysis of the impact of gun policies on homicide and suicide rates," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(4), pages 787-803, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    terrorism; Global Terrorism Database; gun control;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K14 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Criminal Law
    • K42 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Illegal Behavior and the Enforcement of Law

    Lists

    This item is featured on the following reading lists, Wikipedia, or ReplicationWiki pages:
    1. Is the United States an Outlier in Public Mass Shootings? A Comment on Adam Lankford (EJW 2019) in ReplicationWiki

    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:ejw:journl:v:16:y:2019:i:1:p:37-68. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Jason Briggeman (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/edgmuus.html .

    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.