As part of the Gun Policy in America initiative, RAND developed a longitudinal data set of state and District of Columbia firearm laws from 1979 to 2019 to support improved analysis and understanding of the effects of gun laws.
Research evaluating the effectiveness of gun policies has surged over the past two years, providing information policymakers and the public need to make sound decisions on policies designed to reduce homicides and injuries while protecting individuals' rights.
RAND's Gun Policy in America initiative aims to establish a shared set of facts about gun policies. Recently, researchers completed an update and expansion of their synthesis of all available scientific evidence on the effects of 18 classes of gun laws.
Unbiased evidence about the likely effects of gun laws is critical to developing fair and effective gun policies. This report, part of the RAND Gun Policy in America initiative, updates the available evidence about the potential effects of 13 laws and adds analyses of five new classes of law.
Terrorism has become an internet-enabled abuse—incited, propagated, and sometimes organized and concealed by online activity. Who should be held accountable for abusive content, the author or the publisher? And what role should the government play in regulating it?
The First Amendment enables companies such as Facebook to publish what they choose. Arguing against this right could lead to government regulation over digital media. It could also further degrade the reliability of online information.
Both sides of the gun policy debate agree on what the objectives of any policy should be. But they disagree over which policies would best achieve those goals. Current evidence for or against most gun proposals is weak, contradictory, or nonexistent. Only research can show what does—and doesn't—work.
As debate continues to rage over the causes and prevention of gun violence, it's worth asking how science can help lawmakers and the public resolve longstanding disagreements that have stood in the way of solutions.
RAND's Gun Policy in America initiative provides information on what scientific research can tell us about the effects of gun laws. Our goal is to establish a shared set of facts that will improve public discussions and support the development of fair and effective gun policies.
One of the largest-ever studies of U.S. gun policy finds there is a shortage of evidence about the effects of most gun laws, although researchers from the RAND Corporation found there is some persuasive evidence about the effects of several common gun policies. RAND's sweeping Gun Policy in America initiative also evaluated the views of gun policy experts with opposing perspectives on the likely effects of gun laws to identify where compromise might be possible.
As part of the RAND Gun Policy in America initiative, experts with diverse gun policy views were surveyed on how they predicted specific gun laws would affect outcomes, such as violent crime, suicide, and participation in hunting and sport shooting. This comparison tool shows where these experts agree and disagree.
What does the scientific evidence tell us about the effects of gun policies? Part of the RAND Gun Policy in America initiative, this report assesses the available evidence for the effects of commonly proposed gun laws on firearm deaths, violent crime, suicide, the gun industry, hunting and sport shooting, and other outcomes.
As part of the RAND Gun Policy in America initiative, gun policy experts were surveyed on the likely effects of 15 gun-related policies on 12 societal outcomes. Analysis of their responses shows there are shared objectives on both sides of the debate, but experts disagree on which policies will achieve those objectives.
As Congress considers DHS reauthorization, having clear organizational realignment principles could help assess the degree to which expectations will be met. Those principles could examine whether mission effectiveness would improve and whether implemented changes would introduce new issues.
As part of the discussion about reauthorizing the Department of Homeland Security, Congress might want to consider how to improve acquisitions. Rather than focusing only on the steps in the acquisition process, that discussion could also include consideration of pre and post-acquisition activities.
One area of focus in the debate on reauthorizing the Department of Homeland Security should be its role in directing homeland security operations. The debate should include a comprehensive discussion of the future role for the department headquarters.
Reauthorization of the Department of Homeland Security is vital to clarifying responsibilities and setting expectations for the continued evolution of the department. Policymakers might also wish to conduct an external review, which could help inform a broader future reform bill.