Researching the Impact of Gun Acquisition on Public Opinion Post-Mass Shootings
This essay explores a potential research idea aimed at understanding how the legality of a mass shooter’s gun acquisition influences public opinion on gun control. The manner in which a shooter obtains a firearm—whether legally or illegally—is often highlighted in news reports, reflecting public curiosity about how firearms end up in the hands of perpetrators. However, the implications of this information for public opinion are not straightforward, and understanding these effects could provide valuable insights into the gun control debate.
The legality of gun acquisition can lead to various interpretations by the public, which in turn might influence opinions on gun control. If a gun is acquired illegally, one might infer the need for stricter enforcement of existing gun laws or conclude that gun control measures are ineffective. Conversely, if a shooter legally acquires a gun, it might suggest to some that there should be more stringent restrictions on gun purchases or that current laws are inadequate in preventing dangerous individuals from obtaining firearms. While news articles report how the shooter acquired the gun(s) used in the mass shooting, stories don’t tell the reader what to make of it, and a range of inferences are possible.
To examine how these perceptions affect public attitudes, a survey experiment could be conducted. Participants would be presented with a vignette describing a mass shooting, with one key variable manipulated: whether the gun used was acquired legally or illegally. After reading the vignette, respondents would be asked about their opinions on gun control measures and enforcement. This approach would allow researchers to isolate the impact of gun acquisition legality on public attitudes toward gun regulation.
My guess would be that the reader’s prior beliefs about gun control and gun rights color whatever they read about how the shooter acquired gun(s) used in a mass shooter. That is, if someone thinks there needs to be stronger regulation of guns, they will interpret illegal or legal purchase as support for their position. If someone believes there should be less regulation of guns, they also will interpret illegal or legal purchase as support for their position. It may be situation where “facts don’t matter” which would be really troubling for those who support rational, evidence-based policies. I’m not sure how someone with moderate views on gun control would interpret the legal or illegal purchase though and would enjoy seeing the results of this research.
