Violence, firearms, and the coronavirus pandemic: Findings from the 2020 California Safety and Wellbeing Survey

INTRODUCTION

In the United States (US), in 2018, there were nearly 68,000 violence-related deaths.¹ An additional 3.3 million people reported having been victims of nonfatal violent crime.² Most deaths (57%) and nearly 471,000 nonfatal violent victimizations involved a firearm.^1,2 Black, Indigenous, and people of color endure a disproportionate share of this burden.^3-5 It is reasonable to expect that the emergence and progression of the coronavirus pandemic—with nearly 7.2 million confirmed cases and over 205,000 deaths nationally as of September 30, 2020⁶—combined with the social, psychological, and economic fallout associated with efforts to lessen its spread, are intensifying violence-related harms and inequities therein.

The pandemic has exacerbated longstanding injustices rooted in systemic racism and other oppressive systems of power that contribute to the underlying conditions (e.g., poverty, unemployment, lack of available resources) that elevate risk for, and compound the consequences of, community violence.^7-10 Recent, largely peaceful,¹¹ protests decrying structural inequities, which simultaneously allow police violence and the uneven burden of disease to persist, have been met, at times, by law enforcement use of crowd-control weapons¹² and heavily armed white supremacist and far-right vigilantes.¹³ Pandemic-induced social isolation, hopelessness, and loss, particularly for people with existing mental health problems such as depression, may result in thoughts of suicide. Violence in the home may increase in frequency and severity as household members, including intimate partners, children, and vulnerable elders, spend more time at home together under high-stress conditions. Having a firearm readily available in these situations creates additional risk.^14-17

While most major news sources reported initial decreases in violent crime, as measured by local police calls for service, following pandemic-related lockdowns and stay-at-home orders, the latest indications are that more serious acts of violence, particularly those involving firearms, have remained the same or increased.¹⁸ In addition to a marked rise in shootings in several big cities across the country,¹⁹ the pandemic appears to have fueled a surge in firearm background checks, an established proxy for firearm sales. Previous spikes in purchasing, such as those following mass shootings and political elections, have been associated with increased firearm violence.²⁰ Similarly, recent research suggests an excess of 2.1 million firearm purchases during the first three months of the pandemic, corresponding with an additional 216 to 1,335 fatal and nonfatal firearm-related injuries nationwide.²¹

However, the lack of self-report data capturing individuals’ lived experiences of violence in the context of the pandemic has limited our understanding of the intersection of these coinciding public health problems. One of the only studies to survey individuals who purchased a firearm due to the pandemic relied on a non-representative sample of respondents who did not reflect the socio-demographic profile of most firearm owners.²² The current study provides what is to our knowledge the first population-representative estimates of individuals’ worry about violence for themselves, before and during the pandemic; concern someone they know might harm themselves or others due to a pandemic-related loss; experiences of unfair treatment related to the pandemic; firearm and ammunition purchasing and changes in firearm storage practices due to the pandemic; and civic or political activities undertaken “in response to gun violence” during the pandemic.

METHODS

Data for this cross-sectional survey study come from the 2020 California Safety and Wellbeing Survey, a statewide survey designed by the University of California Firearm Violence Research Center and the Violence Prevention Research Program, both at the University of California Davis, and administered online from July 14 to July 27, 2020 by Ipsos Public Affairs, LLC (Ipsos). The survey was approved by the University of California Davis Institutional Review Board.

Respondents were drawn from KnowledgePanel, an online survey research panel with approximately 60,000 members who are randomly recruited on an ongoing basis through probability-based sampling. Panel members who were aged 18 years and older and residents of California, except those currently serving in the US Armed Forces, were eligible to participate.

Invitations were sent by e-mail; automatic reminders were e-mailed to non-responders three days later. Of 5,018 panel members invited to participate, 2,870 completed the survey, yielding a 57% completion rate. The median survey completion time was 26 minutes.

A final survey weight variable provided by Ipsos adjusts for the initial probability of selection into KnowledgePanel and for survey-specific non-response and over- or under-coverage using post-stratification raking ratio adjustments based on cross-classifications of age, gender, race-ethnicity, education, household income, language proficiency, and California region. The weighted sample is representative of the noninstitutionalized adult population of California as reflected in the 2018 American Community Survey.

Survey questions for this study covered five broad domains: (1) worry about violence happening to oneself, by type of violence (homicide, suicide, mass shooting, assault, robbery, police violence, accidental shooting, and stray bullet shooting) and incident location, before and during the pandemic; (2) concern that someone else might physically harm another person or themselves in response to a pandemic-related loss; (3) experiences of unfair treatment related to the pandemic; (4) firearm and ammunition acquisition and firearm storage practices (among current firearm owners) in response to the pandemic; and (5) participation in civic and political activities “in response to gun violence” during the pandemic. Detailed survey items and response options are in Appendix 1. Sociodemographic information was collected as part of ongoing panel membership and merged with survey responses.

RESULTS

Approximately two in five respondents (39.8%: 95% CI: 37.1-42.6) reported that they personally know someone who had tested positive for coronavirus, and 1.3% (95% CI: 0.9-2.0) reported that they themselves had tested positive, while 4.2% (95% CI: 3.2-5.3) reported that they had been sick with coronavirus but had not been tested. Additional sociodemographic and firearm ownership-related characteristics of respondents are in Appendix 2.

DISCUSSION

Violence is a significant public health problem which touches the lives of far more people than is typically recognized; violence affects people not only through direct involvement, but also through indirect and vicarious experiences that ripple across individuals, families, and entire communities. Our findings from this first-of-its-kind population-representative survey of California adults add support to a growing body of research suggesting that the coronavirus pandemic and efforts to lessen its spread have compounded the burden of violence-related harms.

Our respondents expressed increased levels of worry about violence during compared with before the pandemic, ranging from 2.8 to 5.6 percentage point increases in the estimated statewide prevalence of adults who reported that they were somewhat or very worried about multiple types of interpersonal violence (i.e., robbery, assault, homicide, police violence), suicide, and unintentional firearm injury happening to them. Pandemic-related experiences of unfair treatment were also reported and disproportionately common among Asian Americans. In addition, more than one in ten respondents were concerned that someone they know might physically harm another person (12.1%) or themselves (13.3%) on purpose. The role of the pandemic was particularly pronounced for those concerned about self-harm for someone else: 7.5% said their concern was at least in part because the person had suffered a pandemic-related loss. In 6.0% of these cases, the person had known access to a firearm.

Emerging research also indicates a surge in firearm background checks in the months coinciding with the pandemic,²¹ though we are among the first to estimate the prevalence of and motivations for ammunition and firearm acquisition in direct response to the pandemic. We found that approximately 1 in 12 (8.5%) firearm owners in California purchased ammunition in response to the pandemic, including roughly 110,000 individuals who also acquired firearms (2.4% of owners in the state). Of those, an estimated 47,000 were new owners, who may have little past experience or training with firearms. Previous spikes in firearm purchasing have been associated with increased firearm violence,²⁰ and recent evidence suggests a similar relationship exists during the pandemic.²¹

Consistent with the most common reasons for firearm ownership generally,^23,24 respondents who acquired firearms in response to the pandemic usually did so for self-protection: three-quarters (75.9%) indicated worry about lawlessness and more than half (56.1%) endorsed worry about prisoner releases. Although the perceived need for self-protection continues to motivate firearm ownership amid the pandemic, an extensive body of evidence suggests instead that the presence of a firearm in the home elevates risk for firearm-related harm, particularly unintentional shootings (often involving children), female homicide victimization, and completed suicide.^14-17 More concerning, perhaps, is that people who own firearms primarily for protection are more likely to store firearms in the home loaded and/or not locked up,²⁵ an independent risk factor for firearm injury and death. Our findings suggest the pandemic may contribute to this risk: an estimated 55,000 people (1.2% of owners in the state) who currently store at least one firearm loaded and not locked up reported adopting this unsecure storage practice in response to the pandemic.

Taken together, our findings add support to long-term public health-oriented prevention and intervention strategies designed to address the enduring psychological trauma associated with exposure to and worry about violence, as well as the intermediary (e.g., firearm ownership and storage) and upstream (e.g., socioeconomics, education, the environment) determinants of violence risk. More immediately, given the impulsive nature of many types of violence, and the multiple acute disruptions associated with the pandemic, short-term crisis interventions, such as options for temporary firearm storage outside the home, extreme risk protection orders, and efforts involving community-based violence intervention workers, may be particularly critical for reducing the burden of violence. As underscored in our results, many respondents (52.4%) have already taken action in response to this prevailing public health problem.

CONCLUSIONS

The coronavirus pandemic has exacerbated persistent structural, economic, and social inequities in the conditions that contribute to violence and its consequences. Findings from this study assessing the near-term effects of the pandemic on individual perceptions, motivations, and behaviors related to violence and firearm ownership can inform prevention and intervention efforts now and following other societal shocks, as well as lay the groundwork for more comprehensive research and prevention efforts in the future.