ArticleLancet regional health. Americas2024
Gun-free zones and active shootings in the United States: a matched case-control study.
Article in Lancet regional health. Americas, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Gun-Free Zones in Sensitive Places.American journal of public health · 2025Article
- Gun Free Zones in Alcohol-Serving Establishments and Risk for Firearm Violence: A Cross-Sectional, Geospatial Study in Texas.Journal of urban health : bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine · 2025Article
- Active shooters and gun-free zones: emotional versus legal motivations.Lancet regional health. Americas · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Most Americans believe that gun-free zones make locations more vulnerable to violent crimes, particularly active shootings. However, there is no empirical evidence regarding the impact of gun-free zones on protecting locations from violence. The objective of this study was to estimate the association between gun-free zones and active shootings. Methods: We used a pair-matched case-control study where cases were all US establishments where active shootings occurred between 2014 and 2020, and controls were randomly selected US establishments where active shootings could have but did not occur, pair-matched by establishment type, year, and county. Gun-free status of included establishments was determined via local laws, company policy, news reporting, Google Maps and posted signage, and calling establishments. Findings: Of 150 active shooting cases, 72 (48.0%) were determined to have occurred in a gun-free zone. Of 150 controls where no active shooting occurred, 92 (61.3%) were determined to be gun-free. After accounting for matched pairs, the conditional odds of an active shooting in gun-free establishments were 0.38 times those in non-gun-free establishments, with a 95% confidence interval of 0.19-0.73 (p-value = 0.0038). Several robustness analyses affirmed these findings. Interpretation: It is unlikely that gun-free zones attract active shooters; gun-free zones may be protective against active shootings. This study challenges the proposition of repealing gun-free zones based on safety concerns. Funding: This work was funded in part by the National Collaborative on Gun Violence Research and the Arnold Foundation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.