Each new week brings more stories about high-profile shootings, prompting the predictable impassioned debates between gun-control advocates and gun-rights defenders. I would like to weigh in on this conversation.
Over the past ten years or so, I have been doing research on aggression, and some of this research has found its way into popular media outlets ranging from so called “liberal rags” like the New York Times to conservative columns written by people like Jonah Goldberg. Much of this coverage is sparked by the fact that my work is relevant to the very touchy subject of the role played by guns in American life.
Apparently, people see what they expect to see in media portrayals of what I have to say about guns. Individuals who have never actually read any of my papers confidently denounce my research as “junk science,” and I have been the target of criticism (and some not-so-thinly-veiled threats of violence!) from both the extreme right and left wings of the political spectrum by people who think that they know what my opinions about guns are. I have even seen allegations that my research has been funded by the anti-gun lobby in pursuit of its political goals, which, if true, means that I am owed a lot of money that I have yet to see. I am writing this essay to make my opinions about gun issues clear and public. Many will disagree with what I have to say, which is OK with me as long as they understand what I am in fact saying.
Let me start by saying that I do not hate guns. I am not a hunter, but I enjoyed any kind of target shooting when I was a kid and I took a marksmanship course as an adult, although I do not own a gun. In fact, I am one of the first to admit that shooting a gun is a lot of fun. I have been interviewed by publications such as Men’s Health Magazine and The Guardian (U.K.) about why men in particular get such a “bang” out of shooting guns, and I understand the biology behind this. In 2006, I published an article in Psychological Science with one of my students and one of my colleagues in which we demonstrated that men do in fact get a testosterone rush just from handling a gun and that this can be easily translated into an impulse toward aggressive behavior. In other words, just handling a gun makes men feel more powerful and aggressive.
Let’s quickly review some of the other things that we know. Psychologists long ago identified something called the weapons effect (Anderson, et al, 1998; Berkowitz, 1995); in a nutshell, the sight and feel of a weapon can serve as a cue and trigger for violence in men. However, I will admit that this is most true for men who are not accustomed to thinking about guns as recreational objects, since seeing a hunting rifle does not prime aggressive thoughts in hunters the way it does in nonhunters (Bartholow et al, 2004). In spite of political protests to the contrary, lower rates of gun ownership are associated everywhere with lower murder rates, which is unfortunate given that the rates of gun ownership in the United States dwarf ownership rates in any other country.
Do I believe that owning a gun will sometimes protect good people from bad people? Yes, of course. There will be times when the “bad guy” gets what is coming to him because a homeowner has a gun. However, data from the Center for Disease Control (CDC) indicate that this is offset by the fact that gun owners are 2.7 times more likely to be murdered (usually by someone they know) than people who do not own guns and that they are FIVE TIMES more likely to commit suicide than non gun-owners.
I would also like to chime in on the question of "background checks." In most states, there is more of a hassle for acquiring a dog or a driver's license than there is for acquiring a gun. I assume that most gun owners do not want terrorists, people with a history of mental illness, or those convicted of violent crimes to have easy access to high powered weaponry. And yet, many of these same individuals would vote against measures that would accomplish the goal of making it more difficult for such people to buy a gun.
My own research (McAndrew, 2009) indicates that such gun issues are primarily a male problem.
So, guns don’t kill people, people kill people; but people with guns kill a lot more people than people without guns.
From everything I have said so far, you may conclude that I am in favor of taking everyone’s guns away and banning handguns, but you are wrong. I am a pragmatist, and banning guns in America would work out about as well as the prohibition of alcohol in America did in the 1930s. There are simply too many guns in our country and too many people with strong emotional attachments to them to get rid of them. I believe that individuals are entitled to own handguns for protection and/or for recreational shooting, and people are also entitled to own rifles and shotguns for hunting. There are undeniable risks associated with this position, but given our political and cultural climate, it seems reasonable to me.
However, the gun-rights crowd loses credibility when they resist controls on almost any kind of weaponry. We do not allow people to keep nuclear devices in their basement, nor do we allow them to drive tanks around in the street, and for very good reason. Similarly, the only reason a person should want to own a weapon designed for the explicit purpose of killing a large number of people in a short time appears to be that they are planning at some point to kill a large number of people in a short time, and I would prefer that this not be possible. I understand that many people think that it is perfectly acceptable, desirable even, for private citizens to have access to firepower that outguns what is available to local law enforcement. I disagree with this position.
I realize that my essay is unlikely to change anyone’s mind about gun control issues, but I felt the need to contribute my two cents.