Explore The NRA Universe Of Websites

APPEARS IN News

Intrepid Journalist Tracks Down Truth About “Children” and Firearms, While Public Health Researchers Downplay Inconvenient Realities

Monday, June 16, 2025

Intrepid Journalist Tracks Down Truth About “Children” and Firearms, While Public Health Researchers Downplay Inconvenient Realities

For decades, gun control advocates and their allies in “public health” have pushed a misleading factoid about children and firearms.

This is how it works: Step one, acquire statistics on firearm-related deaths among children ages 0-14. Step two, combine that relatively low number with the far greater number of firearm-related deaths involving juveniles and young adults ages 15-17, 15-19, or even ages 15-24. Step three, present the resulting data as the shocking number of “children” (ages 0-17, 0-19 or 0-24) who are subjected to “gun violence” each day/week/month/year. Step four, use the disingenuous statistic to advocate for pre-determined gun control policies by claiming “gun violence is the leading cause of death of children.”

Consider the data on those who may be properly defined as children – ages 0-14. For this cohort, firearm-related injuries are not the leading causes of death and are not higher than motor vehicle deaths. The number of motor vehicle deaths in this age group was more than 40-percent higher than firearm-related deaths in 2023.

This does shift when examining the cohorts ages 15-17, 15-19, or 15-24. Roughly 70-percent of the firearm-related deaths that occur in the 0-17 age group happened among the juveniles ages 15-17 in 2023. This disparity shouldn’t be surprising. The 15-17 cohort is far more often engaged in the type of street crime that can give rise to firearm-related violence and that many jurisdictions have decided to address in a more lenient manner in recent years. The conflation of this age group with young children is even more absurd when one considers that, in the vast majority of jurisdictions, those aged 15 and older can be prosecuted as adults.

Recently, an intrepid journalist figured out this gun control industry tactic for himself.

On June 11, the Kansas City Star published the piece “I tried to solve the great gun mystery at the Bloomberg School of Public Health. It didn’t go well,” by David Mastio. Readers are encouraged to enjoy the item in its entirety.

The piece chronicles Mastio’s attempt to get a straight answer from the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health (named for billionaire gun control financier Michael Bloomberg) as to whether firearms are in fact the leading cause of death for children. The author explained:

While the school’s report, Gun Violence in the United States 2022, says over and over again that guns are the leading killer of children and teens age 1-17, it never says what the leading killer of children not including teens is.

The Bloomberg School of Public Health report itself defined “children” as ages 1-9 and “teens” as 10-17.

According to the item, Mastio’s pursuit was prompted by “the Ad Council… launching a multimillion-dollar, multiyear public service campaign telling parents that their kids are in danger because guns are the number one killer of children(!) and teens” and that the Ad Council website “cites the Bloomberg School of Public Health Center for Gun Violence Solutions over and over.”

After failing to receive an answer to his simple question from the Bloomberg school’s gun violence researchers via email, Mastio went to the Johns Hopkins campus in Baltimore for help. He was eventually escorted out by security.

Mastio eventually received an answer to his question when he contacted the public health school’s Center on Injury Research and Policy (which does not focus narrowly on gun policy). The author explained:

Surely there is somebody else at the Bloomberg School who knows what kills kids ages 1-9. Sure enough, there was another research group, The Center on Injury Research and Policy. I emailed them, and in a matter of hours, they gave me the answer.

I’ll give you one guess what that is. You’re right – not guns. Not even close. Mishaps with things other than guns, such as drownings, falls and car accidents, are the big killers.

Alternatively, on June 9, the Journal of the American Medical Association Pediatrics published a strange article giving the impression that the 2010 U.S. Supreme Court decision McDonald v. Chicago has something to do with firearm-related pediatric mortality. As is to be expected in research of this character, the very first sentence of the study repeated the tired factoid “firearm deaths are now the leading cause of death among US children and adolescents.”

The researchers posited that the McDonald decision shifted the legal landscape around guns in the U.S., and therefore they sought “[t]o measure excess mortality due to firearms among US children aged 0 to 17 years after the McDonald v Chicago US Supreme Court decision (2010).” Specifically, the researchers examined 2011 through 2023 and tried to lump states into broad categories based on the supposed “permissiveness” of their gun laws. Unsurprisingly, the academics attribute worse outcomes to more permissive states based on their lack of gun control.

The choice of start date might strike gun owners as odd. As a scholarly matter, the McDonald decision was consequential in that it made clear that state and local governments, along with the federal government (District of Columbia v. Heller (2008)), are bound by the Second Amendment. As a practical matter, the effects of the decision were muted.

The decision struck down Chicago and a couple of nearby suburban jurisdictions’ total bans on handguns. However, federal judges largely found dubious ways to confine the decision to its specific facts rather than meaningfully grapple with the Second Amendment as a Constitutional right. The lower federal courts’ intransigence prompted several Supreme Court justices to issue scathing dissents from denial of certiorari in Second Amendment cases and culminated in the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022) decision, which rebuked the lower courts’ prevailing means of interpreting (undermining?) the Second Amendment.

Following the McDonald decision, governments mostly continued to do what they were doing before. Pro-Second Amendment jurisdictions made things better for law-abiding gun owners, while anti-rights jurisdictions piled on ever more infringements (short of outright handgun bans).

This is to say that using the McDonald decision as a starting point for any type of data analysis is bizarre and rather arbitrary. When dealing with social science, strange beginning and end dates for data should raise the utmost suspicion.

Of course, over the period the study examined (2011-2023) there was serious social upheaval that had nothing to do with firearm laws, and that deserves examination. Only the most obtuse observer would refuse to acknowledge that over the relevant period there was a severe and wide-ranging attack on law enforcement and the broader ability to administer effective criminal justice. From 2014 to riot-filled 2020, the murder rate went up 50-percent.

As previously noted, juveniles ages 15-17 account for the overwhelming majority of firearm-related mortality among youth. That’s because the 15-17 cohort is far more often engaged in the type of street crime that can give rise to firearm-related violence and that many jurisdictions decided to address in a more lenient manner starting in the late 2010s.

There are a few hints to this in the study, but the issue is largely unacknowledged.

For instance, the authors note that the increase in under 18 firearm mortality was “more concentrated among homicides.” This suggests a problem more criminal justice in nature than purely a matter of firearm access (much less broad firearm policy).

The authors also included the following passage:

In the most permissive firearm laws state grouping, we found that increases in pediatric firearm mortality occurred in all urbanicity categories, with a notable increase in large central metropolitan urbanicity, in particular during the COVID-19 era.

Increased firearm deaths among non-Hispanic Black populations exacerbated known disparities. This may reflect disproportionate increases in firearm ownership during the study. Inconsistent physician adherence (by patient race and ethnicity) and the effectiveness of received anticipatory guidance—related to safe storage, for example—could be an explanation; while this is speculative, a similar phenomenon has been previously observed regarding car safety recommendations.

Therefore, as others have suggested, anticipatory guidance may be effective and should be studied

Consider examining more recent changes in the overall murder rate from a different frame.

In 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. The decision made clear that the Second Amendment protects the Right-to-Carry a firearm outside the home for self-defense and outlawed discretionary carry permitting regimes.

The latest available Department of Justice Crime in the U.S. Annual Report data tables show that from 2022 to 2023 the murder rate (per 100,000) fell from 6.6 to 5.7, a 12 percent decrease. According to the FBI, through the first half of 2024, murders were down another 22.7 percent from the same period in 2023. Though it is still early, there is some evidence to suggest that 2025 could have the lowest murder rate on record.

Should this welcome trend be attributed to the Bruen decision, the legal landscape it’s ushered in, and a renewed respect for carrying firearms outside the home? Somehow, we doubt the “scientific experts” in America’s “public health” sector would be quick to apply the same logic here as did the authors of the June 9 study in supposedly examining McDonald’s impact.

TRENDING NOW
North Carolina: Update on Permitless Carry

Tuesday, September 30, 2025

North Carolina: Update on Permitless Carry

Last week the North Carolina General Assembly briefly returned from recess and re-referred Senate Bill 50, Freedom to Carry NC, to the House Rules Committee.

Federal Court Strikes Down Biden Administration’s “Engaged in the Business” Rule in NRA Case

Thursday, October 2, 2025

Federal Court Strikes Down Biden Administration’s “Engaged in the Business” Rule in NRA Case

Yesterday, in Butler v. Bondi, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama held that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives exceeded its statutory authority by issuing its 2024 Final Rule expanding ...

First Affirmative Lawsuit in Support of Gun Owners Filed by Trump’s DOJ

News  

Monday, October 6, 2025

First Affirmative Lawsuit in Support of Gun Owners Filed by Trump’s DOJ

California officials’ egregious foot-dragging over the issuance of carry permits has finally attracted the ire of the federal Department of Justice (DOJ). 

President Trump’s GOP Leads Polling on Crime and Guns, To No Surprise

News  

Monday, October 6, 2025

President Trump’s GOP Leads Polling on Crime and Guns, To No Surprise

A recent Reuters/Ipsos poll revealed that Americans know the President Donald Trump-led Republican Party has a better plan than their Democratic Party opponents on crime and gun control.

NRA Files Amicus Brief in Fifth Circuit Case Challenging the Federal Switchblade Act

Friday, October 3, 2025

NRA Files Amicus Brief in Fifth Circuit Case Challenging the Federal Switchblade Act

Yesterday, the National Rifle Association filed an amicus brief in Knife Rights, Inc. v. Bondi, urging the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals to reverse the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas’s decision upholding the Federal ...

Trump Administration Repeals Biden Era Firearms Export Crackdown

News  

Monday, October 6, 2025

Trump Administration Repeals Biden Era Firearms Export Crackdown

Last Monday, the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) at the U.S. Department of Commerce published a final rule that reversed a crackdown on the commercial export of firearms from the U.S. to other countries.

Trust in Mass Media Craters to New Lows, in Single Digits With Republicans

News  

Monday, October 6, 2025

Trust in Mass Media Craters to New Lows, in Single Digits With Republicans

There’s an old saying that rings especially true to Second Amendment supporters: If you don’t read the news, you’re uninformed.

Alphabet Eases the Reins on Censorship; Will Gun Content Eventually Benefit?

News  

Tuesday, September 30, 2025

Alphabet Eases the Reins on Censorship; Will Gun Content Eventually Benefit?

With the free speech debate recently co-opted by one TV host’s use of false and incendiary remarks about his political opponents, it might have been easy to miss another important First Amendment story last week. 

Canada’s Public Safety Minister on Gun Ban & Confiscation: “Don’t Ask Me to Explain the Logic”

News  

Monday, September 29, 2025

Canada’s Public Safety Minister on Gun Ban & Confiscation: “Don’t Ask Me to Explain the Logic”

There have been multiple developments on the Canadian gun grab and ban in the last few days, but the most astounding has got to be a leaked bombshell recording of the Liberal Public Safety Minister, ...

U.S. Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Challenge to Hawaii’s Private Property Default Carry Ban

Friday, October 3, 2025

U.S. Supreme Court Agrees to Hear Challenge to Hawaii’s Private Property Default Carry Ban

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court granted the petition for certiorari in Wolford v. Lopez, a challenge to Hawaii’s law forbidding carry on private property open to the public (such as restaurants, gas stations, and grocery stores) ...

MORE TRENDING +
LESS TRENDING -

More Like This From Around The NRA

NRA ILA

Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the "lobbying" arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.