Scholarlink

Introduction <p>This study examines the relationship between both historical and modern-day redlining and contemporary firearm homicide, assessing how structural racism embedded in 1930s mortgage lending practices and continued racial discrimination in lending contribute to current violence in marginalized communities.</p> Methods <p>In this paper, we employed a three-level hierarchical negative binomial regression model to assess associations while accounting for clustering at the Census tract, city, and state levels. Key predictors included historical redlining (HOLC) and contemporary mortgage lending discrimination (HMDA). Tract-level demographic and socioeconomic data were drawn from the 2021 American Community Survey (2017–2021). Models also incorporated city-level violent crime rates and state-level firearm policy. “May-issue” concealed carry laws were included for their demonstrated association with reduced homicide rates. To account for firearm access, models controlled for household firearm ownership and federally licensed firearm dealer density.</p> Results <p>We found a significant relationship between historical redlining and modern firearm homicide rates. Firearm homicide rates increased fivefold from HOLC zone 1 to 4 and eightfold from HMDA quartile 1 to 4. Tracts with improved mortgage access (moving from higher to lower redlining categories) had nearly fourfold lower firearm homicide rates, and may-issue laws were associated with a 56% reduction. Of the top 25 high-rate tracts, all but one were at the highest level of modern-day redlining and had rates up to 75 times the national average.</p> Conclusion <p>These findings underscore the persistent influence of structural racism on firearm violence and suggest that coordinated housing and firearm policy reforms may mitigate enduring disparities.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

The Impact of Historical and Modern-Day Redlining on Firearm Violence: A Decade-Long Multilevel Study of 38 States

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年12月20日

查看全文
  • Omar Abduljaleel,
  • Cleo Davidowitz,
  • Gary Dong,
  • Aadi Ghildiyal,
  • Benjamin Greenfield,
  • Mahdin Hossain,
  • Adina Mistry,
  • Megan Sousa,
  • Swapnil Vallecha,
  • Zach Yung,
  • Cindy Zhu,
  • Michael Siegel

摘要

Introduction

This study examines the relationship between both historical and modern-day redlining and contemporary firearm homicide, assessing how structural racism embedded in 1930s mortgage lending practices and continued racial discrimination in lending contribute to current violence in marginalized communities.

Methods

In this paper, we employed a three-level hierarchical negative binomial regression model to assess associations while accounting for clustering at the Census tract, city, and state levels. Key predictors included historical redlining (HOLC) and contemporary mortgage lending discrimination (HMDA). Tract-level demographic and socioeconomic data were drawn from the 2021 American Community Survey (2017–2021). Models also incorporated city-level violent crime rates and state-level firearm policy. “May-issue” concealed carry laws were included for their demonstrated association with reduced homicide rates. To account for firearm access, models controlled for household firearm ownership and federally licensed firearm dealer density.

Results

We found a significant relationship between historical redlining and modern firearm homicide rates. Firearm homicide rates increased fivefold from HOLC zone 1 to 4 and eightfold from HMDA quartile 1 to 4. Tracts with improved mortgage access (moving from higher to lower redlining categories) had nearly fourfold lower firearm homicide rates, and may-issue laws were associated with a 56% reduction. Of the top 25 high-rate tracts, all but one were at the highest level of modern-day redlining and had rates up to 75 times the national average.

Conclusion

These findings underscore the persistent influence of structural racism on firearm violence and suggest that coordinated housing and firearm policy reforms may mitigate enduring disparities.