By Sara Haylock, Talia Boshari, Emma C. Alexander, Ameeta Kumar , Logan Manikam and Richard Pinder

Background: Since 2013, the number of violent crimes and offences by sharp instruments have increased continually, following a previous decrease, with the majority of cases occurring among young people and in London. There is limited understanding surrounding the drivers influencing this change in trends, with mostly American-based research identifying risk factors. Methods: The aim of this review is to identify and synthesise evidence from a range of literature to identify risk factors associated with weapon-related crime, for young people (aged 10–24 years) within the UK. A search strategy was generated to conduct a systematic search of published and grey literature within four databases (EMBASE, Medline, PsycINFO, and OpenGrey), identifying papers within a UK-context. Abstracts and full texts were screened by two independent reviewers to assess eligibility for inclusion, namely study focus in line with the objectives of the review. Weight of Evidence approach was utilised to assess paper quality, resulting in inclusion of 16 papers. Thematic analysis was conducted for studies to identity and categorise risk factors according to the WHO ecological model. Results: No association was found between gender or ethnicity and youth violence, contrasting current understanding shown within media. Multiple research papers identified adverse childhood experiences and poor mental health as positively associated with youth and gang violence. It was suggested that community and societal risk factors, such as discrimination and economic inequality, were frequently linked to youth violence. A small number of studies were included within the review as this is a growing field of research, which may have led to a constrained number of risk factors identified. Due to heterogeneity of studies, a meta-analysis could not be conducted. As many studies displayed positive results, publication bias may be present. Conclusions: Several risk factors were identified, with evidence currently heterogeneous with minimal high-quality studies. However, findings highlight key areas for future research, including the link between poor mental health and knife-crime, and the trajectory into gangs. Risk factors should help identify high-risk individuals, targeting them within mitigation strategies to prevent involvement within crime. This should contribute to efforts aimed at reducing the rising crime rates within UK.

BMC Public Health (2020) 20:1451

By Lava R. Timsina, PhD; Nan Qiao, MPH; Alejandro C. Mongalo, BS; Ashley N. Vetor, MPH; Aaron E. Carroll, MD, MS; Teresa M. Bell,

Despite being unable to purchase firearms directly, many adolescents have access to guns, leading to increased risk of injury and death. We sought to determine if the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) changed adolescents’ gun-carrying behavior. We performed a repeated cross-sectional study using National Youth Risk Behavior Survey data from years 1993 to 2017. We used a survey-weighted multivariable logistic regression model to determine if the NICS had an effect on adolescent gun carrying, controlling for state respondent characteristics, state laws, state characteristics, the interaction between the NICS and state gun laws, and time. On average, 5.8% of the cohort reported carrying a gun. Approximately 17% of respondents who carried guns were from states with a universal background check (U/BC) provision at the point of sale, whereas 83% were from states that did not have such laws (P < .001). The model indicated that the NICS together with U/BCs significantly reduced gun carrying by 25% (adjusted relative risk = 0.75 [95% confidence interval: 0.566–0.995]; P = .046), whereas the NICS independently did not (P = .516). Conclusions: Adolescents in states that require U/BCs on all prospective gun buyers are less likely to carry guns compared with those in states that only require background checks on sales through federally licensed firearms dealers. The NICS was only effective in reducing adolescent gun carrying in the presence of state laws requiring U/BCs on all prospective gun buyers. However, state U/BC laws had no effect on adolescent gun carrying until after the NICS was implemented.carrying in the presence of state laws requiring U/BCs on all prospective gun buyers.

Pediatrics. 2020;145(1):e20191071

By Julie Emmelkamp, Jessica J. Asscher, Inge B. Wissink, Geert Jan J.M. Stams

Juveniles who become radicalized pose a great threat for society. Although research on radicalization is accumulating, a quantitative review of risk factors for youth radicalization is lacking. Therefore, a series of metaanalyses were conducted on k = 30 studies (247 effect sizes) to examine risk factors for radicalization in youth, yielding significant effects for 15 out of 17 risk domains, ranging in magnitude from r = 0.080 to r = 0.482. Medium positive effects were found for activism, perceived in-group superiority and perceived distance to other people, while small effects were found for gender, personality, delinquency and aggression, lower educational level, negative peers, in-group identification, perceived discrimination, perceived group threat, perceived procedural injustice, perceived illegitimacy of authorities, and other, whereas the effect for poverty was very small. Moderator analyses showed that the risks of negative parenting and societal disconnection were smaller for right-wing radicalization than for religious or unspecified radicalization. The risks of personality and perceived group threat were greater for willingness to carry out extremist acts and extremist behavior than for attitude towards radicalization. Further, when the percentage of ethnic minorities in the sample increased, the risks of personality, negative parenting, and societal disconnection for radicalization were larger.

Aggression and Violent Behavior, 55, [101489].

This guide addresses serious youth gun violence, describing the problem and reviewing factors that increase the risks of it. It then identifies a series of questions that might help you analyze your local problem. Finally, it reviews responses to the problem, and what is known about them from evaluative research and police practice. Criminal misuse of guns kills or injures tens of thousands of Americans every year. In 2000, more than 10,000 Americans were killed with guns, and guns are much more likely to be used in homicides of teens and young adults than in homicides of people of other ages.

Read more at the Center for Problem Oriented Policing