The Mysterious Gun Study That’s Advancing Gun Rights
On The Daily, host Mike McIntyre examines the legal impact of the Supreme Court's landmark 2022 Bruen decision, which established a new Second Amendment right to carry firearms outside the home. The episode explores a controversial 2021 study on defensive gun use conducted by Professor William English, whose findings—including estimates of millions of annual self-defense cases involving firearms—have been repeatedly cited in post-Bruen litigation challenging various gun laws across the U.S.
However, McIntyre raises concerns about the transparency and potential biases of English's research, which did not undergo peer review. The study also failed to disclose English's financial ties to pro-gun groups, leaving questions about his work's objectivity as it influences a wave of legal cases with major implications for firearm regulations.
This is a preview of the Shortform summary of the Jun 20, 2024 episode of the The Daily
Sign up for Shortform to access the whole episode summary along with additional materials like counterarguments and context.
1-Page Summary
The Legal Impact of the Bruen Decision
The Supreme Court's 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen established a Second Amendment right to carry firearms outside the home. As Mike McIntyre explains, this ruling set a new legal test making it harder to justify restrictions on firearms commonly used for self-defense.
The Bruen decision triggered a surge of litigation across the U.S. challenging various state and local gun laws on Second Amendment grounds. Notably, courts have repeatedly cited research by Professor William English on defensive gun use.
English's Study on Gun Ownership
Professor English conducted a large 2021 survey of over 16,000 gun owners. His study, as McIntyre outlines, found that gun owners report using firearms for self-defense around 1.7 million times per year. It also indicated AR-15 rifles and high-capacity magazines are widely owned.
Concerns About English's Research
However, McIntyre raises transparency concerns about English's study. It did not appear in a peer-reviewed journal, and English failed to disclose connections to pro-gun groups that may have funded the research, presenting potential bias.
McIntyre notes the survey's preambles and broad definitions could have skewed responses. He also uncovered $20,000 in prior payments from an NRA affiliate to English, plus $138,000 from the pro-gun Constitutional Defense Fund to English and a law firm citing his work—ties not previously disclosed.
1-Page Summary
Additional Materials
Counterarguments
- The Bruen Decision may be seen as an affirmation of constitutional rights rather than an expansion, with proponents arguing that the right to bear arms outside the home is implicit in the Second Amendment's original intent.
- The new legal test established by the Bruen Decision could be argued as necessary to prevent overly broad or arbitrary restrictions on Second Amendment rights.
- Litigation following the Bruen Decision might be viewed as a necessary process for the legal system to recalibrate and find a balance between public safety and constitutional rights.
- The use of Professor English's research in court cases could be defended if the courts find the data relevant and useful, regardless of the study's publication status.
- The figure of 1.7 million defensive gun uses per year could be contested on methodological grounds, but it could also be argued that even if the number is overestimated, the presence of defensive gun use is still a significant factor to consider in policy discussions.
- The widespread ownership of AR-15 rifles and high-capacity magazines could be defended as indicative of these firearms being in common use, which is a standard for protection under the Second Amendment as established in previous Supreme Court rulings.
- Concerns about the transparency of English's study could be met with the argument that funding sources do not necessarily invalidate the findings of research, especially if the methodology is sound.
- The lack of peer review for English's study could be countered by pointing out that peer review is not the only measure of research quality and that the findings could still be valid.
- The potential bias introduced by funding from pro-gun groups could be countered by arguing that many studies are funded by interest groups with specific interests, and the key is to assess the research on its merits.
- The survey's preambles and broad definitions could be seen as an attempt to capture a wide range of defensive gun uses, which can be difficult to quantify.
- The prior payments from pro-gun groups to English could be argued to be irrelevant to the quality of the research if the methodology and data analysis were conducted properly and transparently.
Actionables
- You can enhance your critical thinking by researching the methodology behind public surveys and studies to better assess their credibility. Start by looking up basic research methods online, focusing on understanding terms like "peer review," "funding disclosure," and "sampling techniques." This knowledge will help you critically evaluate studies you encounter in the news or social media, allowing you to form more informed opinions on controversial topics like gun ownership and use.
- Develop a habit of checking multiple sources when you come across significant statistics, like the frequency of defensive gun use. When you hear a statistic that impacts your view on a policy or social issue, take a moment to find at least two other sources that either support or contradict that number. This could involve looking at government crime data, reading academic articles, or checking fact-checking websites. This practice will give you a broader perspective and help prevent the spread of misinformation.
- Engage in community discussions on topics like gun control and self-defense rights to better understand diverse perspectives. Find local forums, social media groups, or town hall meetings where these issues are discussed. Listen actively and share your thoughts, ensuring you bring up points about the importance of transparency in research and the potential influence of funding on study outcomes. This engagement will not only broaden your understanding but also encourage a more nuanced community dialogue.
Related Shortform Content
Get access to the context and additional materials
The legal and policy context around gun rights, particularly the impact of the Supreme Court's Bruen decision
The implications of the Supreme Court's 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen have significantly changed the legal landscape for gun regulations in the United States. The ruling and the accompanying legal tests have ushered in an era of increased litigation challenging state and local gun laws.
The Supreme Court's 2022 Bruen decision significantly altered the legal landscape for gun regulations
The Bruen case brought a wealth of legal argumentation, supported by several amicus briefs, to the fore. Notably, one of the briefs was backed by a law firm that helped fund Professor William English's influential survey.
The Bruen decision found a Second Amendment right to carry firearms outside the home and established a new legal test for evaluating gun restrictions
The Supreme Court's Bruen decision marked the first time the Court found a Second Amendment right to carry a gun outside the home. It also established a pivotal test for future cases: if a firearm is commonly used for self-defense, then regulations seeking to restrict it face a higher bar for justification under the Second Amendment.
Justice Stephen Breyer, during oral arguments, expressed concerns about an increase in violence if firearm restrictions were eliminated. The plaintiff's attorney, in response, directed him to Professor English's amicus brief, presuming it would [restricted term] such ...
Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary
The legal and policy context around gun rights, particularly the impact of the Supreme Court's Bruen decision
Additional Materials
Counterarguments
- The Bruen decision's interpretation of the Second Amendment may be seen as too expansive by those who believe in more restrictive gun control measures, arguing that the decision does not adequately consider public safety concerns.
- Critics might argue that the historical context in which the Second Amendment was written is vastly different from today's context, and thus the decision does not account for the changes in society and technology.
- The new legal test established by the Bruen decision could be criticized for potentially undermining state and local autonomy to enact gun regulations that reflect the values and safety needs of their communities.
- There may be concerns that the wave of litigation following the Bruen decision could lead to inconsistent application of gun laws across the country, creating confusion and a patchwork of regulations that are difficult to navigate.
- Some may argue that the decision does not sufficiently consider the potential negative impact on law enforcement's ability to maintain public orde ...
Actionables
- You can educate yourself on the current gun laws in your state by visiting government websites or contacting local law enforcement agencies to understand how the Bruen decision may affect your community. By doing this, you'll be better informed about your rights and responsibilities when it comes to firearm ownership and carrying.
- Engage in constructive dialogue with friends and family about gun safety and responsible ownership, using the Bruen decision as a starting point to discuss how laws are changing and what that means for individuals. This can help create a community that is more aware and respectful of differing opinions on ...
Related Shortform Content
Get access to the context and additional materials
The details and key findings of the gun ownership study conducted by Professor William English
Professor William English's study on gun ownership provides insight that has influenced ongoing legal debates on firearms regulation.
Professor William English's large-scale survey of gun owners generated data that has been widely cited in legal challenges to gun laws
Professor William English conducted a comprehensive survey in 2021, targeting gun owners to collect data on firearm use and ownership. This study, which surveyed a significant sample of over 16,000 individuals, has been repeatedly cited in lawsuits pertaining to gun laws.
The survey found that gun owners report using their firearms for self-defense approximately 1.7 million times per year
A primary component of the survey was to gather data on the prevalence of firearms used for self-defense purposes. Results from the survey indicate that gun owners use their guns for self-defense around 1.7 million times each year. This figure has been discussed by Mike McIntyre, highlighting its relevance to the debates around the practicality and necessity of gun ownership for personal protection.
The survey also indicated that AR-15 rifles and ...
Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary
The details and key findings of the gun ownership study conducted by Professor William English
Additional Materials
Counterarguments
- The sample size of over 16,000 individuals, while significant, may not be representative of the entire gun-owning population, which could affect the generalizability of the findings.
- Self-reported data on the use of firearms for self-defense can be subject to recall bias or exaggeration, potentially inflating the 1.7 million figure.
- The study's findings on the prevalence of AR-15 rifles and high-capacity magazines among gun owners do not address the implications for public safety or the potential for misuse.
- The study's influence on legal debates might be disproportionate if the data is not balanced with research on the negative impacts of gun ownership and the societal costs of gun violence.
- The citation of the study in ...
Actionables
- You can deepen your understanding of firearm usage by starting a journal to track local news stories involving guns, noting the context in which they are used and the outcomes. This personal research can give you a clearer picture of how firearms are used in your community compared to the national statistics presented in studies.
- Engage in a constructive dialogue with gun owners and non-owners alike by organizing informal, small group discussions to share perspectives on gun ownership and usage. This can help bridge the gap between different viewpoints and promote a more nuanced understanding of the issues surrounding firearms.
- ...
Related Shortform Content
Get access to the context and additional materials
The investigation into the origins, methodology, and potential biases of the English study
The transparency and objectivity of Professor English's research have come under scrutiny, raising important questions about the integrity of academic studies, especially when they influence public policy debates.
Concerns were raised about the transparency and objectivity of Professor English's research methods
Mike McIntyre points out that Professor English's survey did not appear in a peer-reviewed journal, and he did not disclose his source of funding, which, while not obligatory, is considered a standard practice in academia. McIntyre observed that the survey's questions included preambles that were not outlined in English’s papers. These preambles could potentially influence how respondents answered by mentioning policymakers' skepticism about defensive gun use and the popularity of high-capacity magazines.
Additionally, the study used a broad definition of what constitutes a defense with a gun, including situations where the firearm was merely mentioned or not shown. The lack of a specified timeframe for when an individual defended themselves with a gun, or for owning an AR-15, could potentially inflate numbers by considering any defensive use throughout a respondent's lifetime.
The wording of the survey questions appeared to be structured in a way that could skew the results
There is no direct information provided from the sources about the specific wording of the survey questions. However, the described structure of the preambles and broad definitions in the survey raises concerns about how the wording could skew the results toward a specific narrative.
Professor English had previously served as a paid expert witness for pro-gun rights plaintiffs in court cases, raising questions about his impartiality
McIntyre’s investigation revealed that Dr. English had been paid $20,000 to conduct a survey for an NRA-backed case in Vermont, used later as a proof of concept for his national survey. This information was not disclosed, raising concerns about his connections to pro-gun advocacy groups and potential bias.
The funding sources for Professor English's national survey were not fully disclosed, with evidence suggesting connections to pro-gun advocacy groups
Payments from a pro-gun organization called the Constitutional Defense Fund to Professor English and related parties were uncovered
McIntyre uncovered payments to Dr. English from an organization known as the Constitutional Defense Fund around the time of his national survey. The group had delivered $58,000 to English and made an $80,000 payment to a law firm involved in drafti ...
Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary
The investigation into the origins, methodology, and potential biases of the English study
Additional Materials
Clarifications
- Not disclosing funding sources in academic research can raise concerns about potential bias or influence on the research process. It can lead to suspicions regarding the integrity and objectivity of the study. Transparency in funding is crucial to maintain the credibility and trustworthiness of academic research. Lack of disclosure can impact how the research is perceived and may call into question the validity of the findings.
- The potential biases introduced by the wording of survey questions can influence how respondents answer, shaping the results towards a specific narrative. In this case, the structure of the survey questions, including preambles and broad definitions, could lead respondents to provide answers that align with certain viewpoints. This can impact the overall findings of the study and potentially skew the results in favor of a particular perspective. The wording of survey questions is crucial as it can subtly guide respondents' interpretations and responses, affecting the objectivity and reliability of the research outcomes.
- Serving as a paid expert witness for pro-gun rights plaintiffs means providing specialized knowledge or opinions in legal cases that support the arguments of individuals or groups advocating for gun rights. This role can involve presenting evidence, analysis, or testimony to help bolster the legal position of those seeking to defend or expand gun rights. Expert witnesses are typically compensated for their time and expertise in assisting with legal proce ...
Counterarguments
- The peer-review process is not the only indicator of research quality; other forms of scrutiny and validation can be applied.
- Preambles in survey questions can provide context that helps respondents understand the questions better, potentially leading to more accurate responses.
- Broad definitions in studies can capture a wider range of relevant data, which can be useful for exploratory research purposes.
- A lifetime timeframe for defensive gun use may be appropriate for understanding the full scope of an individual's experiences with firearms.
- Non-disclosure of funding sources does not necessarily indicate bias; it could be an oversight or deemed irrelevant by the researcher.
- Previous work as an expert witness does not inherently bias a researcher; it could also provide them with in-depth knowledge of the subject m ...
Related Shortform Content
Get access to the context and additional materials
1-Page Summary- The legal and policy context around gun rights, particularly the impact of the Supreme Court's Bruen decision
- The details and key findings of the gun ownership study conducted by Professor William English
- The investigation into the origins, methodology, and potential biases of the English study
Create Summaries for anything on the web
Download the Shortform Chrome extension for your browser
