The social costs of gun ownership: a reply to Hayo, Neumeier, and Westphal
- 106 Downloads
We respond to the new article by Hayo, Neumeier, and Westphal (HNW), which is a critique of our 2006 article. The principal contribution of that article was to use a greatly improved proxy for gun prevalence to estimate the effect of gun prevalence on homicide rates. While the best available, our proxy, the ratio of firearms suicides to total suicides in a jurisdiction (FSS), is subject to measurement error which limits its use to larger jurisdictions that have enough suicides to stabilize the ratio. In this response, we report estimates for four different specifications and two data sets, the 200-county data and the data for the 50 states. We develop the claim that measurement error in FSS helps explain the observed pattern of results. Adopting the assumption that FSS follows a binomial process with a number of trials equal to the number of suicides, we characterize the relationship between measurement error and size of the jurisdiction, and thereby justify our conclusion that restricting the estimation to large jurisdictions reduces measurement error in FSS and hence the attenuation bias in the key coefficient estimate. We conclude that for the county-level data, the measurement error in FSS is of greater concern than using a specification that is flexible with respect to population. HNW focus on the latter but at the cost of increasing the effects of the former. We then demonstrate that the state-level data provide a robust case that more guns lead to more homicides.
KeywordsMeasurement error Crime Guns Homicide Panel regression
JEL ClassificationC23 C43 K42
Thanks to Lauren Speigel for outstanding assistance with the data analysis, to Dan Black and Seth Sanders for helpful conversations. Any errors and all opinions are of course our own.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
- Cook PJ, Goss KA (2014) The gun debate: what everyone needs to know. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Hayo B, Neumeier F, Westphal C (forthcoming) The social costs of gun ownership revisited. Empir EconGoogle Scholar
- Kleck G (1997) Targeting guns: firearms and their control. Aldine de Gruyter, New YorkGoogle Scholar
- Levitt SD (1997) Using electoral cycles in police hiring to estimate the effect of police on crime. Am Econ Rev 87(3):270–290Google Scholar
- Lott JR (2000) More guns, less crime, 2nd edn. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
- Smith TW, Son J (2015) Trends in gun ownership in the United States, 1972–2014 (General Social Survey Final Report). NORC at the University of Chicago, Chicago. http://www.norc.org/PDFs/GSS%20Reports/GSS_Trends%20in%20Gun%20Ownership_US_1972-2014.pdf. Downloaded 28 Oct 2017