• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

The K-Var ArmoryThe K-Var Armory

The Largest Supplier of Firearms, Gun Parts, & Accessories Online

  • Shop K-Var
  • News
    • Industry
    • Politics
    • Second Amendment
    • Self Defense
    • Comics
  • Reviews
    • Anything AK
    • Anything AR
    • Gear
    • Pistols
    • Rifles
    • Shotguns
  • Newsletter

Johns Hopkins: California’s Background Check Law Had No Impact on Gun Deaths

December 21, 2018 by Blogger Blogger 4 Comments

A new academic study has found that, once again, gun laws are not having their desired effect. A joint study conducted by researchers at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and the University of California at Davis Violence Prevention Research Program, found that California’s much-touted mandated background checks had no impact on gun deaths, and researchers are puzzled as to why.

Johns Hopkins University logo
When they’re wrong, [experts are] rarely held accountable, and they rarely admit it, either. They insist that they were just off on timing, or blindsided by an improbable event, or almost right, or wrong for the right reasons. They have the same repertoire of self-justifications that everyone has, and are no more inclined than anyone else to revise their beliefs about the way the world works, or ought to work, just because they made a mistake.

California Gun Laws Are a Failure

In 1991, California simultaneously imposed comprehensive background checks for firearm sales and prohibited gun sales (and gun possession) to people convicted of misdemeanor violent crimes. The legislation mandated that all gun sales, including private transactions, would have to go through a California-licensed Federal Firearms License (FFL) dealer. Shotguns and rifles, like handguns, became subject to a 10-day waiting period to make certain all gun purchasers had undergone a thorough background check.

It was the most expansive state gun control legislation in America, affecting an estimated 1 million gun buyers in the first year alone. Though costly and cumbersome, politicians and law enforcement agreed the law was worth it.

The legislation was promised to “keep more guns out of the hands of the people who shouldn’t have them,” said then-Republican Gov. George Deukmejian.

“I think the new laws are going to help counter the violence,” said LAPD spokesman William D. Booth.

More than a quarter-century later, researchers at Johns Hopkins and UC Davis dug into the results of the sweeping legislation. Researchers compared yearly gun suicide and homicide rates over the 10 years following implementation of California’s law with 32 control states that did not have such laws.

They found “no change in the rates of either cause of death from firearms through 2000.”

The findings, which run counter to experiences in Missouri and Connecticut ,that showed a link between background checks and gun deaths, appear to have startled the researchers.

Garen Wintemute, a UC Davis professor of emergency medicine and senior author of the study, said incomplete data and flawed criminal record reporting might explain the results.

Wintemute noted:

FBI National Instant Criminal Background Check System
The data out is only as accurate os the data that goes in.

In 1990, only 25 percent of criminal records were accessible in the primary federal database used for background checks, and centralized records of mental health prohibitions were almost nonexistent. As a result, researchers said as many as one in four gun buyers may have purchased a firearm without undergoing a background check.

“We know at the individual level that comprehensive background check policies work, that they prevent future firearm violence at this level,” said Nicole Kravitz-Wirtz, a researcher who led the survey.

Everyone Has Confirmation Bias, Even Experts

Perhaps unsurprisingly, the findings—which run counter to the conventional wisdom that gun control saves lives—have received almost no media attention.

An exception was the Washington Post, which cited the study (buried 20 paragraphs down) in an article in which the American Medical Association calls for stronger gun control laws at the state level.

AMA President Barbara McAneny told the Post in an interview:

We see this as an epidemic and public health crisis and we think intervening as early as possible is smarter than just building more intensive care units for people who are either killed or damaged and badly hurt by the violence.

Bizarrely, the Post cited the Johns Hopkins-UC Davis study as evidence that what “the AMA is calling for may be needed.”

Apparently, to the Washington Post, California’s failure to effectively enforce background checks that had no discernible impact on gun deaths is evidence that more gun control laws are needed.

Essentially, the study’s authors, the AMA, and the Post appear incapable of seriously entertaining the possibility that sweeping gun control legislation might not have produced the results desired and expected—fewer deaths.

We Should Judge by Outcomes, Not Intentions

Handgun slide being racked to load a cartridge into the chamber
A new academic study has found that, once again, gun laws are not having their desired effect.

Alas, the experts are behaving exactly as expected.

More than a decade ago, the writer Louis Menand, in a New Yorker article, explained the rationalizations experts make when their theories fail to hold up in our real-world laboratory:

When they’re wrong, [experts are] rarely held accountable, and they rarely admit it, either. They insist that they were just off on timing, or blindsided by an improbable event, or almost right, or wrong for the right reasons. They have the same repertoire of self-justifications that everyone has, and are no more inclined than anyone else to revise their beliefs about the way the world works, or ought to work, just because they made a mistake.

California’s failed gun control law appears to be yet another example of experts, to paraphrase the great Milton Friedman, judging “policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results.”

Despite the dismal record of gun control, expect the media and “experts” to use a repertoire of self-justifications rather than modify their beliefs—regardless of what the evidence shows.

The original article can be read here.

Are you surprised by the Johns Hopkins study’s findings? How can the firearms community better communicate or expose the myths of gun control? Share your answers in the comment section.


Sign up for K-Var’s weekly newsletter and discounts here.

Filed Under: News, Op-ed, Second Amendment Tagged With: Background Checks, California, Gun Control, Johns Hopkins

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. DAVE C. says

    December 22, 2018 at 2:25 am

    WHEN GUNS ARE OUTLAWED ONLY OUTLAWS WILL HAVE GUNS.
    VERY BAD NEWS FOR LAW ABIDING AMERICANS.

    Reply
  2. Mark says

    December 22, 2018 at 7:38 am

    What a shot of reality. Criminals, crazies, and terrorists don’t obey gun laws or find ways around the laws. The gun community has been saying it for years and shouting it from the mountain tops. Culture, society, civility, education, and morality have more effect on gun violence than the inanimate object (the gun) that everyone likes to blame. It’s a convenient object that politicians like to blame, but it feels no shame, has no conscience, and doesn’t care about feelings. It’s a tool used for good or bad depending on who’s using it. 99 percent of the guns in US are and have never used for anything bad, but are blamed for humans doing bad and that won’t change no matter how shrill the cries for banning this gun and that gun.

    Reply
  3. Scotty Gunn says

    December 22, 2018 at 9:09 am

    Background checks are nothing more than registration. You think they are honestly dumping that information in several weeks after getting it? Ha!
    Every handgun “background check” gets a copy sent in to the state police in most all states. If they approved you, why do they need a copy listing all of your info and the gun specifics, including serial number?

    Reply
  4. stephen r brown says

    December 22, 2018 at 11:11 am

    OH, TELL US SOMETHING WE DON’T KNOW !! DUH. Keep guns out of the hands of people who should have them WHAT B.S. We can keep the A- HOLES out of offices who shouldn’t be there. BUT WE ARE WHAT’S WRONG WITH AMERICA.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


The reCAPTCHA verification period has expired. Please reload the page.

Primary Sidebar

Subscribe to the Muzzle Flash – The K-Var Armory Official Newsletter!

* Required field
Marketing permission: I give my consent to to be in touch with me via email using the information I have provided in this form for the purpose of news, updates and marketing.

Recent Posts

  • Long Range Shooting 3
  • K-Var’s 180-Day Layaway Program: Own Your Dream Firearm, Interest-Free!
  • Inside FAIR: Why Arsenal Inc. Supports the Trade Group That Keeps Our Industry on Track
  • Bug Out Bag!
  • The Clock is Ticking: Why Imported Rifles Deserve Your Attention Now
Gun Broker Auctions

Archives

  • April 2025
  • March 2025
  • February 2025
  • January 2025
  • December 2024
  • November 2024
  • October 2024
  • September 2024
  • August 2024
  • July 2024
  • April 2024
  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • December 2023
  • November 2023
  • October 2023
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017

Categories

  • 1911
  • Accessories
  • Ammunition
  • Anything AK
  • Anything AR
  • Arex
  • Arsenal
  • Blades
  • Browning
  • Cartridges
  • Charter Arms
  • Colt
  • Comics
  • Conservation
  • Dan Wesson
  • Deer
  • Derringer
  • Gear
  • Glock
  • Hearing Protection
  • Holsters
  • How To
  • How-To
  • Hunting
  • Industry
  • Kahr
  • Kel-Tec
  • Lasers
  • News
  • NFA
  • Night Vision
  • North American Arms
  • Op-ed
  • Optics
  • Optics
  • Pistols
  • Politics
  • Predator
  • Product Recall Notice
  • Red Dot
  • Reloading
  • Reviews
  • Revolvers
  • Rifles
  • Rimfire
  • Rock Island Armory
  • Rossi
  • Ruger
  • Ruger
  • Savage
  • Second Amendment
  • Self Defense
  • Shotguns
  • SIG Sauer
  • Small Game
  • Smith and Wesson
  • Springfield
  • Tactics
  • Taurus
  • Thermal
  • Turkey
  • Uncategorized
  • Video
  • Walther
  • Waterfowling
  • Comics
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • About
  • Newsletter

Copyright © 2025 · K-Var Corp · Log in