What Gun Violence Actually Looks Like In Alabama

Following the Valentine’s Day shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, many Americans and news organizations have tried to shine a light on the AR-15 assault-style rifle. An analysis by The New York Times found the weapon was used to slaughter at least 173 people in mass shootings since 2007. Included were mass shootings in Newtown, Connecticut; Las Vegas and San Bernardino, California.

As America delves into yet another heated gun debate in Congress and on the internet, Patch turned to federal data and an expert to get a clearer picture of what gun violence actually looks like in America. Here’s what we found.

When it comes to AR-15 rifles versus handguns, Dr. Cassandra Kercher Crifasi, an assistant professor at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore, tells Patch there are two key differences.

First, bullets fired out of an AR-15 rifle travel much faster than those from handguns, therefore the damage is significantly more devastating. Second, the assault-style weapon can be easily equipped with large capacity magazines that allow shooters to continue firing for much longer periods of time without needing to reload.

“Particularly when they’re used in mass casualty shootings, you see people are able to get off a lot of those rounds and do an extreme amount of damage compared to other types of firearms,” Crifasi says.

That being said, a handgun is generally easier to hide, she concedes.

America must weigh the risks of being able to fight public tyranny — meaning fighting against a tyrannical government, if need be — against those of what she calls “private tyranny” — the ability of citizens to own “weapons of war,” walk into a school or church and open fire on innocent people.

There were 15,070 murders in the United States in 2016, the most recent year that FBI data and gun trace information from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms were available. That includes 407 murders in Alabama.

Nearly 75 percent of the country’s murders were committed using a gun, but rifles — meaning any rifle, not just AR-15s — were used in just 374 of them. That’s about 2 percent of all murders and 3 percent of all murders in which a gun was used.

Overall, more than 38,000 people died from gunshot wounds in the United States in 2016, according to preliminary mortality data from the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Nearly two-thirds of those were suicides.

According to the CDC, Alabama ranked second highest in the country in gun death rate with 21.5 such deaths per 100,000 residents. Only Alaska ranked higher with a gun death rate of 23.3. Louisiana ranked third at 21.3.

Data from the ATF showed there were 5,948 total guns recovered in Alabama in 2016. The vast majority were handguns: 4,661. Rifles accounted for 736 rifles and 437 shotguns.

The recovered guns were used in 187 killings that year and 281 property crimes. They were by far recovered most often in gun cases, such as unlawful possession of a weapon.

Nationwide, the vast majority of murderers who used a gun — 64 percent — wielded a handgun. And far more murderers used knives or their own hands, fists and feet than any rifle, including — and in particular — the AR-15 rifle.

Knives and other sharp objects were used in 1604 murders that year, FBI data indicated. That’s more than four times higher than rifles. Hands, fists, feet and other body parts accounted for 656 murders — nearly double that of rifles.

Vermont and North Dakota had the highest percentage of all murders committed using a rifle at roughly 14 percent, though there were just 14 murders total in both states.

Texas had the highest overall number of murders that used a rifle at 51. But that accounted for just 3 percent of the 1,459 murders in the state and just under 5 percent of murders in which a gun was the weapon used.

Crifasi, who has studied gun violence at Johns Hopkins since 2010, tells Patch evidence shows gun deaths — both suicides and homicides — could be drastically curbed if states more rigorously screened potential gun-buyers to prevent banned individuals from getting their hands on firearms.

Some states require prospective handgun buyers to submit fingerprints and photographs. Typically the buyer applies through local law enforcement — often in-person or online — and local law enforcement officials have about 30 days to complete a background check on that individual.

“The reason that's important is that in the federal system, if the results of your background check don't come back within three days, the gun dealer has the option of proceeding with the sale,” she says. “And then if it comes back later that you are prohibited, then someone has to go and get those guns back from you.”

This was particularly relevant in the case of Dylann Roof, the white man who was sentenced to die for fatally shooting nine black church members during a Bible study session in Charleston, South Carolina.

“He was prohibited, but they couldn't locate the files in time,” Crifasi says.

When a gun-buyer goes to a federally licensed firearm dealer and undergoes a background check, if nothing prohibitive is found within three days, the system won’t technically say the buyer is approved. It simply says the person is “not disapproved.”

“Even though Dylann Roof was prohibited, he came back not disapproved after three days, or at least unable to complete, and he was able to gain access to firearms,” Crifasi says.

That might not have happened if law enforcement officials had longer than three days to complete his background check, she says. If, instead, law enforcement officials are allowed at least 30 days to complete the check, they’re much more likely to find prohibitive characteristics, she says. This includes mental health issues, criminal history and substance abuse.

Crifasi notes that states often fail to report mental health conditions to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

Such law changes allowing more time for background checks at the state level have had a major impact, she says.

In 1995, Connecticut passed legislation giving law enforcement more time to complete a background check. Conversely, Missouri in 2007 repealed similar legislation. The results were what you might expect.

“When you look at the effect of those policies, you see a reduction in homicides and suicides in Connecticut, and you see increases in homicides and suicides in Missouri,” she says.

After Missouri repealed its law, she said there was also a 70 percent spike in the diversion of guns to criminals.

“That says to us that when Missouri repealed the law, they made it a little bit easier for criminals to obtain guns in the state,” she says. “These are guns that are originating in the state, rather than crossing state lines.

There was also an increase in guns coming into Missouri from other states, Crifasi says.

Meanwhile, the opposite seems to be happening in Maryland, which became the most recent state to pass the so-called “prohibitive purchase law” in 2013. While it’s too early to draw any definitive conclusions, she says the state has seen a 70 percent drop in gun diversions to criminals.

Furthermore, parolees and individuals on probation in Maryland told researchers the law is working. They’ve discussed with the researchers about their experiences in the underground market and said the new law has made it harder for them to access guns.

“Several of them specifically cited this new law making it more difficult,” Crifasi says. “They said people won’t buy a gun for you now because they have to go to law enforcement, so they won’t engage in a straw purchase and they won’t sell to you if you don’t have a permit.”

Patch reporters Colin Miner and Dan Hampton contributed to this report.

Image via Shutterstock