Skip Navigation



British Journal of Criminology Advance Access published online on October 18, 2006
British Journal of Criminology, doi:10.1093/bjc/azl084
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (Rapid PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
47/3/455    most recent
azl084v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Baker, J.
Right arrow Articles by Mcphedran, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies (ISTD). All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Article

Gun Laws and Sudden Death: Did the Australian Firearms Legislation of 1996 Make a Difference?

Jeanine Baker 1 * and Samara Mcphedran 2

1 Research and Policy Unit, Sporting Shooters Association of Australia, PO Box 166, Gumeracha, South Australia 5233, Australia
2 School of Psychology, University of Sydney, Camperdown, New South Wales 2006, Australia

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.
Jeanine Baker, E-mail: jb{at}ssaa.org.au


  Abstract

Mass murders in Dunblane, United Kingdom, and Port Arthur, Australia, provoked rapid responses from the governments of both countries. Major changes to Australian laws resulted in a controversial buy-back of longarms and tighter legislation. The Australian situation enables evaluation of the effect of a national buy-back, accompanied by tightened legislation in a country with relatively secure borders. AutoRegressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA) was used to predict future values of the time series for homicide, suicide and accidental death before and after the 1996 National Firearms Agreement (NFA). When compared with observed values, firearm suicide was the only parameter the NFA may have influenced, although societal factors could also have influenced observed changes. The findings have profound implications for future firearm legislation policy direction.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Med Sci LawHome page
S. Chapman
Firearm deaths in Australia after law reform
Med Sci Law, January 1, 2010; 50(1): 53 - 53.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.