Researchers have published a new article in the Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) titled “Bullets as Pathogen—The Need for Public Health and Policy Approaches.” The study suggests that bullet-specific regulations could help decrease firearm injuries in the United States. According to the authors, “It is past time to address the ultimate cause of injury and death, the bullet, and consider bullet-specific regulations to decrease the burden of firearm injuries in the U.S.”
The article’s authors argue that examining bullets through a public health lens similar to communicable diseases can prevent further injuries and loss of life. They wrote, “Through examination of the devastating damage of bullets to individuals and society and application of public health principles akin to communicable diseases, we can prevent further injuries, disability and unnecessary loss of life.”
The JAMA article also explores different cartridge sizes’ impact on damage caused by bullets. Researchers connected three tragedies involving 5.56 NATO ammunition with case fatality rates (CFR), stating, “Bullets matter. And so does age.” The researchers noted correlations between bullet type, age, and CFRs.
Policy suggestions from the study include additional taxes on ammunition similar to “sin taxes,” rationing ammunition purchases, and requiring background checks for ammunition sales. Dr. Laura Vargas, a psychiatry professor at the University of Colorado and co-author of the JAMA article, stated: “In our work, we talk about bullets as pathogens, and the guns as sort of vectors, similar to a mosquito carrying malaria.” She added that these policy suggestions are not new but have been proposed before.
Critics argue that treating firearms as a public health issue infringes on constitutional rights. They believe such approaches do not address criminal behavior effectively since criminals often obtain firearms illicitly without regard for laws or taxes.
Gun rights supporters warn against framing gun control as a public health emergency due to potential overreach in suspending constitutional rights. This perspective was highlighted during New Mexico Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham’s declaration during COVID-19 when she temporarily suspended Second Amendment rights under what she termed a “public health emergency.”
