Gun ownership is a highly consequential political behavior. It often signifies a belief about the inadequacy of state-provided security and leads to membership in a powerful political constituency. As a result, it is important to understand why people buy guns and how shifting purchasing patterns affect the composition of the broader gun-owning community. We address these topics by exploring the dynamics of the gun-buying spike that took place during the COVID-19 pandemic, which was one of the largest in American history. We find that feelings of diffuse threat prompted many individuals to buy guns. Moreover, we show that new gun owners, even more than buyers who already owned guns, exhibit strong conspiracy and anti-system beliefs. These findings have substantial consequences for the subsequent population of gun owners and provide insight into how social disruptions can alter the nature of political groups.
This content will become publicly available on May 16, 2025
The last decade has given rise to substantial concern about democratic backsliding in the U.S. Manifestations include decreased trust in government, conspiratorial beliefs, contentious protests, and support for political violence. Surprisingly, prior work has not explored how these attitudes and behaviors relate to gun-buying, an action that provides people with the means to challenge the state. We address this topic by focusing on the unprecedented gun-buying surge during the COVID-19 pandemic. Using a survey with over 32,000 respondents, we find that—relative to pre-existing gun owners (who did not buy during the pandemic) and the non-gun-owning public—pandemic gun-buyers are more likely to distrust government, believe in conspiracies, protest, and support political violence. These anti-government views and protest behaviors are especially likely among those who bought guns for political reasons. Our findings highlight a crucial dynamic underlying the recent spike in gun sales with consequences for American democracy.
more » « less- PAR ID:
- 10507637
- Publisher / Repository:
- SAGE Publications
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Political Research Quarterly
- Volume:
- 77
- Issue:
- 3
- ISSN:
- 1065-9129
- Format(s):
- Medium: X Size: p. 962-977
- Size(s):
- p. 962-977
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
-
Abstract The Tunisian government, which is deeply divided, especially along ideological lines, responded to growing concerns over increased violence against women during the Coronavirus pandemic by establishing a new domestic violence shelter and 24/7 hotline. This article asks: Why did the state respond to gender-based violence ( gbv ) concerns during the Coronavirus pandemic in Tunisia, despite ideological and political divisions? We argue that the state addressed some concerns around violence during the pandemic because combatting gbv has bipartisan support in Tunisia. Tunisian Islamist and secularist women’s rights organizations succeeded in building a bipartisan coalition of support on this issue because they worked either together in a short-lived coalition or in tandem with similar goals over the past decade during the democratic transition in Tunisia. Building on the existing coalition literature, we show that feminist coalition formation before a pandemic has implications for feminists’ success in times of crisis.more » « less
-
National rates of gun violence have risen during the COVID-19 pandemic. There are many contributing factors to this increase, including the compounding consequences of social isolation, unstable housing, decreased economic stability, and ineffective and violent policing of communities of color. The effects of these factors are exacerbated by the pandemic's impact on the provision and availability of psychosocial services for individuals in marginalized communities, particularly those who have been violently injured. Hospital-based violence intervention programs (HVIPs) have been identified as a crucial intervention strategy in reducing repeat violent injury. The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has engendered, significant barriers in HVIPs' attempts to assist program participants in achieving their health-related and social goals. This research offers insight into the complexities of providing social services during the convergence of two public health crises—COVID-19 and gun violence—at the HVIPs associated with the two busiest trauma centers in the state of Maryland. In considering the effects of inadequate financial support and resources, issues with staffing, and the shift to virtual programming due to restrictions on in-person care, we suggest possible changes to violence prevention programming to increase the quality of care provided to participants in a manner reflective of their unique structural positions.more » « less
-
more » « less
Focusing on a polarized issue—U.S. gun violence—this study examines agenda setting as an antecedent of political expression on social media. A state-of-the-art machine-learning model was used to analyze news coverage from 25 media outlets—mainstream and partisan. Those results were paired with a two-wave panel survey conducted during the 2018 U.S. midterm elections. Findings show mainstream media shape public opinion about gun violence, which then stimulates expression about the issue on social media. The study also reveals that partisan media’s gun violence coverage has significant cross-cutting effects. Notably, exposure to conservative media will decrease public salience of gun violence, pivot opinion in a more conservative direction, and discourage social media expression; and all of these effects are stronger among liberals.
-
more » « less
Abstract Gun violence is a major public health problem and costs the United States $280 billion annually (1). Although adolescents are disproportionately impacted (e.g. premature death), we know little about how close adolescents live to deadly gun violence incidents and whether such proximity impacts their socioemotional development (2, 3). Moreover, gun violence is likely to shape youth developmental outcomes through biological processes—including functional connectivity within regions of the brain that support emotion processing, salience detection, and physiological stress responses—though little work has examined this hypothesis. Lastly, it is unclear if strong neighborhood social ties can buffer youth from the neurobehavioral effects of gun violence. Within a nationwide birth cohort of 3,444 youth (56% Black, 24% Hispanic) born in large US cities, every additional deadly gun violence incident that occurred within 500 meters of home in the prior year was associated with an increase in behavioral problems by 9.6%, even after accounting for area-level crime and socioeconomic resources. Incidents that occurred closer to a child's home exerted larger effects, and stronger neighborhood social ties offset these associations. In a neuroimaging subsample (N = 164) of the larger cohort, living near more incidents of gun violence and reporting weaker neighborhood social ties were associated with weaker amygdala–prefrontal functional connectivity during socioemotional processing, a pattern previously linked to less effective emotion regulation. Results provide spatially sensitive evidence for gun violence effects on adolescent behavior, a potential mechanism through which risk is biologically embedded, and ways in which positive community factors offset ecological risk.
