Article Text

PDF
Gunshot victimisations resulting from high-volume gunfire incidents in Minneapolis: findings and policy implications
  1. Christopher S Koper1,
  2. William D Johnson1,
  3. Kenneth Stesin2,
  4. Jeffery Egge3
  1. 1Department of Criminology, Law and Society, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, USA
  2. 2Elliott School of International Affairs, George Washington University, Washington, DC, USA
  3. 3Minneapolis Police Department, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA
  1. Correspondence to Dr Christopher S Koper, Department of Criminology, Law and Society, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA 22030, USA; ckoper2{at}gmu.edu

Abstract

Laws restricting large ammunition magazines for semiautomatic weapons are intended to reduce firearm deaths and injuries by preventing gun attacks involving high numbers of shots. However, data on shootings from high-volume gunfire (HVG) incidents are extremely limited. This study examined gunshot victimisations resulting from HVG attacks (>10 shots fired) using police data on shootings in Minneapolis, Minnesota from January through August 2014 (n=135 to 167). Shots fired estimates were generated from police reports based on physical evidence recovered, reported gunshot victims, and accounts of witnesses and actors. HVG incidents accounted for 20%–28% of victims and were more likely to involve multiple victims. Most HVG cases seemed likely to have involved a gun with a large capacity magazine though these data were limited. Restricting large ammunition magazines may have greater potential for preventing shootings than previously estimated, but further studies of this issue are needed.

  • firearm
  • violence
  • descriptive epidemiology

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Footnotes

  • Contributors CSK led the project design and wrote the manuscript. WDJ conducted the analyses and worked with CSK on interpretation of results. KS (formerly of the Minneapolis Police Department) and JE contributed to the project design and compiled the project data. WDJ, KS and JE contributed to revising the final manuscript.

  • Funding This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Ethics approval George Mason University Institutional Review Board.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.