Violence, worry and trust in the emergence of weapon-carrying

This paper identifies longitudinal predictors of weapon-carrying in a sample of 10–25 year olds in England and Wales. It conceptualises weapon-carrying as anticipation of an adverse event and proposes hypotheses about the origins of weapon-carrying derived from the field of risk analysis. Specifically, it tests if worry about victimisation and experience of violence predict later weapon-carrying and assesses the moderating influence of trust in the police. The results indicate that worry about victimisation does not predict weapon-carrying, but experience of violence does. Distrust of police and peer criminality were also identified as important precursors to weapon-carrying. The study provides further evidence that, at least over longer periods, weapon-carrying is a product of experience of violence and criminogenic factors rather than a response to concern about victimisation.

Bullying Victimization and Weapon Carrying: A Partial Test of General Strain Theory

Much of the existing research on adolescent firearm and weapon carrying lacks a theoretical framework. Relatedly, few studies have examined the relationship between weapon carrying and bullying victimization experienced at school, which has been established as a key strain in adolescence. The present study seeks to provide a partial test of general strain theory as a theoretical framework to explain adolescent weapon carrying. Using a large U.S. sample of 7th through 10th grade students ( n = 8,867), I find qualified support for general strain theory. While an index measure of bullying victimization was positively associated with weapon carrying as expected, two measures assessing specific forms of bullying victimization had nonlinear effects that are inconsistent with the theory. The proportion of one’s friends who carry weapons was consistently one of the strongest predictors of a respondent’s own weapon carrying. Implications and directions for future research are discussed.

Childhood Adversity Trajectories and Violent Behaviors in Adolescence and Early Adulthood

Violence and other antisocial behaviors, including fighting and weapon carrying, are highly prevalent among adolescents but usually decrease in young adulthood. Childhood adversities, including exposure to abuse, intimate partner violence, and household substance use and mental health problems, have been linked to violent behaviors in adolescence and adulthood. However, few studies of childhood adversity as determinants of persistent violent behavior among community-based samples have been conducted. Furthermore, the effects of adversity timing and duration on subsequent violent behaviors are unclear. We examined the association between five childhood adversity trajectories (representing stable-low, stable-mild, decreasing, increasing, and stable-high adversity from birth through age 11.5 years) and physical fighting and weapon carrying at ages 13-20 years among a sample of young adults followed continuously since birth from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children ( n = 9,665). The prevalence of violent behaviors declined sharply as participants aged (e.g., whereas 42.8% reported engaging in physical fighting in the past year at ages 13-15 years, this dropped to 10.4% at ages 17-20 years). Childhood adversity trajectories exhibited a strong dose-response relation with physical fighting and weapon carrying, with particularly pronounced relations for violent behaviors persisting across both adolescence and early adulthood (e.g., for physical fighting at both ages 13-15 years and 17-20 years compared to no fighting at either period, adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.62, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.31-2.00 for stable-mild; aOR = 2.33, 95% CI = 1.64-3.33 for decreasing; aOR = 3.18, 95% CI = 2.20-4.60 for increasing; and aOR = 3.73, 95% CI = 2.13-6.52 for stable-high adversity, compared to stable-low adversity). This work highlights the substantial implications of exposure to childhood adversity for youth violence prevention.

Public fear of protesters and support for protest policing: An experimental study

As protests erupted across the United States in recent years over politically polarized issues (e.g., Black Lives Matter, COVID-19 restrictions), so too did questions about when and how police should respond. The context of these protests and how police reacted to them varied substantially, with limited understanding of relevant public attitudes. Public opinion is double-edged; it is critical for police legitimacy and influences criminal justice policy, but it also often reflects racial animus. We hypothesized that disruptive, dangerous, or unlawful protest tactics would increase support for police control, by elevating public fear, but also that support for repression would be higher when protest goals conflict with preexisting racial beliefs. To test our hypotheses, we embedded an experiment in a nationwide survey fielded in 2020, after George Floyd’s killing sparked the broadest protests in U.S. history. We randomized protest tactics (e.g., weapon carrying, violence) and goals, as well as other contextual characteristics (e.g., protest size). We found that the public generally opposed repressive protest policing. However, certain protest tactics increased support for repression by increasing public fear. Protest goals (e.g., pro-Black Lives Matter, anti-COVID-19 restrictions, or pro-confederate monuments) also impacted support for repression, but the effect depended on respondents’ racial beliefs.