Eric L. Piza, David N. Hatten, George O. Mohler, Jeremy G. Carter, Jisoo Cho
{"title":"枪击探测技术对密苏里州堪萨斯城枪支暴力的影响:微合成控制评估","authors":"Eric L. Piza, David N. Hatten, George O. Mohler, Jeremy G. Carter, Jisoo Cho","doi":"10.1111/1745-9133.12648","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Research Summary</h3>\n \n <p>We apply the microsynthetic control method to evaluate the gun violence prevention effect of gunshot detection technology (GDT) in Kansas City, MO. We measure the influence of GDT on process measures (ballistic evidence collection and gun recoveries) and outcome measures (shots fired calls for service, non-fatal shootings, fatal shootings, and aggravated assaults and robberies committed with a firearm). The GDT system was associated with higher levels of ballistic evidence collection in the GDT target area and surrounding catchment area, higher levels of gun recoveries in the surrounding catchment area, and lower levels of shots fired calls for service in the GDT target area. The GDT system did not influence any of the gun violence categories involving confirmed victims (non-fatal shootings, fatal shootings, and aggravated assaults and robberies committed with a firearm).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Policy Implications</h3>\n \n <p>Agencies that highly prioritize increasing evidence collection and reducing unauthorized firearm discharges may consider dedicating necessary resources to acquire GDT. Agencies that prioritize the reduction of gun violence victimization, however, should consider whether resources are better used for solutions other than GDT. Moving forward, violence prevention scholars should strive to identify contextual factors that facilitate or mitigate the GDT system effect, in an attempt to better understand how to deploy GDT in a manner that maximizes the likelihood of success. This would provide additional guidance to public safety agencies looking to maximize return on investment. Continued adoption of GDT should perhaps be contingent upon the development of such research, given the high cost of the technology.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47902,"journal":{"name":"Criminology & Public Policy","volume":"23 4","pages":"863-892"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1745-9133.12648","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Gunshot detection technology effect on gun violence in Kansas City, Missouri: A microsynthetic control evaluation\",\"authors\":\"Eric L. Piza, David N. Hatten, George O. Mohler, Jeremy G. Carter, Jisoo Cho\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1745-9133.12648\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Research Summary</h3>\\n \\n <p>We apply the microsynthetic control method to evaluate the gun violence prevention effect of gunshot detection technology (GDT) in Kansas City, MO. We measure the influence of GDT on process measures (ballistic evidence collection and gun recoveries) and outcome measures (shots fired calls for service, non-fatal shootings, fatal shootings, and aggravated assaults and robberies committed with a firearm). The GDT system was associated with higher levels of ballistic evidence collection in the GDT target area and surrounding catchment area, higher levels of gun recoveries in the surrounding catchment area, and lower levels of shots fired calls for service in the GDT target area. The GDT system did not influence any of the gun violence categories involving confirmed victims (non-fatal shootings, fatal shootings, and aggravated assaults and robberies committed with a firearm).</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Policy Implications</h3>\\n \\n <p>Agencies that highly prioritize increasing evidence collection and reducing unauthorized firearm discharges may consider dedicating necessary resources to acquire GDT. Agencies that prioritize the reduction of gun violence victimization, however, should consider whether resources are better used for solutions other than GDT. Moving forward, violence prevention scholars should strive to identify contextual factors that facilitate or mitigate the GDT system effect, in an attempt to better understand how to deploy GDT in a manner that maximizes the likelihood of success. This would provide additional guidance to public safety agencies looking to maximize return on investment. Continued adoption of GDT should perhaps be contingent upon the development of such research, given the high cost of the technology.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47902,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Criminology & Public Policy\",\"volume\":\"23 4\",\"pages\":\"863-892\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1745-9133.12648\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Criminology & Public Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1745-9133.12648\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Criminology & Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1745-9133.12648","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Gunshot detection technology effect on gun violence in Kansas City, Missouri: A microsynthetic control evaluation
Research Summary
We apply the microsynthetic control method to evaluate the gun violence prevention effect of gunshot detection technology (GDT) in Kansas City, MO. We measure the influence of GDT on process measures (ballistic evidence collection and gun recoveries) and outcome measures (shots fired calls for service, non-fatal shootings, fatal shootings, and aggravated assaults and robberies committed with a firearm). The GDT system was associated with higher levels of ballistic evidence collection in the GDT target area and surrounding catchment area, higher levels of gun recoveries in the surrounding catchment area, and lower levels of shots fired calls for service in the GDT target area. The GDT system did not influence any of the gun violence categories involving confirmed victims (non-fatal shootings, fatal shootings, and aggravated assaults and robberies committed with a firearm).
Policy Implications
Agencies that highly prioritize increasing evidence collection and reducing unauthorized firearm discharges may consider dedicating necessary resources to acquire GDT. Agencies that prioritize the reduction of gun violence victimization, however, should consider whether resources are better used for solutions other than GDT. Moving forward, violence prevention scholars should strive to identify contextual factors that facilitate or mitigate the GDT system effect, in an attempt to better understand how to deploy GDT in a manner that maximizes the likelihood of success. This would provide additional guidance to public safety agencies looking to maximize return on investment. Continued adoption of GDT should perhaps be contingent upon the development of such research, given the high cost of the technology.
期刊介绍:
Criminology & Public Policy is interdisciplinary in nature, devoted to policy discussions of criminology research findings. Focusing on the study of criminal justice policy and practice, the central objective of the journal is to strengthen the role of research findings in the formulation of crime and justice policy by publishing empirically based, policy focused articles.