Gun Laws Effective in Deterring Criminals, Report Finds

WASHINGTON —  Laws requiring the licensing and registration of firearms make it much tougher for criminals to get guns and often force them to go out of state to secure weapons, according to a federally funded study that could fuel a gun control debate raging in Sacramento.

The study, which will be released today by Johns Hopkins University researchers, found a dramatic difference in how difficult it is for criminals to get their hands on weapons within states that require gun licensing and registration versus those that do not.

Funded by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the study lends credence to advocacy groups who argue that tougher gun control cuts down on the supply of guns to criminals and forces them to rely on a black market of interstate trafficking from less heavily regulated states.

But the National Rifle Assn., long an opponent of licensing and registration, maintained that the study’s release may have been politically timed to influence the debate in Sacramento over whether California should require the licensing of handgun owners.

The two-year Johns Hopkins study sought to examine for the first time how gun trafficking is influenced by state laws. It looked at data from the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms in 23 states, including California, and analyzed how more than 35,000 guns that were confiscated in crimes had gotten into the hands of criminals.

In the five states examined that required both gun registration and owner licensing, fewer than 34% of the guns used in crimes were originally purchased in state, meaning that the majority were imported across state lines, Johns Hopkins researchers found.

In California and five other states that require only registration or licensing but not both, the proportion of “crime guns” originally sold within the state was more than twice as high--73%. And in the 12 states that have neither licensing nor registration, the figure was an even higher 84%.

While researchers did not address the question of whether heavier restrictions actually caused a decline in gun ownership, their study concluded that the regulations in states with licensing and registration made it much more difficult for criminals to get their hands on guns.

“We were very surprised at how dramatic the differences were. The numbers were really striking,” said Daniel Webster, co-director of Johns Hopkins’ Center for Gun Policy and Research and the lead author of the study.

“If the ultimate objective of gun laws is to make it difficult for criminals to get guns, this study shows quite persuasively that a combination of licensing and registration is a very effective way to do that,” Webster said in an interview.

Enacting either licensing or registration requirements, but not both, “is clearly not as effective,” he said.

The findings could play a part in an intense debate in California over a landmark legislative proposal that would require the licensing of state firearms owners.

California, regarded as one of the toughest states in the country for gun control, already requires the registration of firearms through records of gun purchases, which are kept by police agencies. The new measure also would require anyone who wants to purchase a handgun to pass a written test and demonstrate his or her ability to safely handle a weapon.

Some gun control advocates are worried that California Gov. Gray Davis, who has not yet taken a position on the licensing measure, may veto it because he has indicated that he wants to see whether recently enacted gun laws are working before approving new ones.

Davis “hasn’t closed the door completely” on new gun laws, spokesman Roger Salazar said Wednesday. “But he is against having more gun laws just for the sake of more gun laws.”

A statewide police association earlier this week threw its support behind a compromise licensing plan, a move that could boost the chances of Davis signing the measure.

Leaders in the state House and Senate were working Wednesday to iron out a compromise measure that Davis might be willing to sign, and Salazar said the governor will be interested in reading the Johns Hopkins report to help him reach a decision on the issue.

The study found that all three California cities included in the sample had relatively high rates of in-state purchases for guns used in crimes. The rate was 78% in Los Angeles, 70% in Inglewood and 82% in Salinas.

Webster said that researchers also studied crime trends, migration patterns and other factors that might explain the numbers, but they found no other factor to fully explain the huge gap in gun-trafficking patterns in the different states.

Gun control advocates said the study adds important new evidence to the gun debate.

“This is the first time we have good, solid data showing that stronger licensing and registration laws in this country can have a real impact in limiting criminals’ access to guns in this country,” said Eric Gorevitz, western policy director for the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence.

But the NRA, which has attacked licensing and registration as an unnecessary encroachment on the rights of law-abiding gun owners, immediately voiced skepticism about the study.

Spokesman Andrew Arulanandam said that while the group’s researchers had not had time to analyze the report, “we do think that the timing of the release is certainly highly suspect because it coincides with the introduction of [the California] bill.”

Webster at Johns Hopkins denied the contention, saying researchers had no control over the timing of the report, which will be published today in the scientific journal Injury Report.