A new study is being touted as the first comprehensive look at everyday firearm-related harm in New Zealand. Photo / 123rf
Firearms deaths in New Zealand are costing more than $300 million a year in lives lost, most of them by suicide, with most of those in rural areas involving older Pākehā men.
That’s according to a new study published today in the Annals of Internal Medicine, by Otago University public health researchers looking at firearms-related hospitalisations and deaths from assaults, accidents and suicide.
Lead researcher Dr Lucy Telfar-Barnard said between 2000 and 2018, more than 1000 people died and 2115 people were hospitalised as a result of firearms incidents.
Most of the deaths were from suicide (819 deaths), followed by assaults (147) and accidental deaths (48). Most of the injuries were from accidents, and because firearms have such a severe impact, more than 80% of those hospitalised needed surgery.
Using NZ Transport Agency Waka Kotahi’s measure for the value of a life year, the paper estimated the financial costs of the deaths (more than 2000 years of life lost; 75% from suicide) at $321m per year. The total cost of hospital care was $1.48m a year.
“A high cost per death and per event, and the deaths are preventable, the injuries are preventable,” Telfar-Barnard told the Herald.
“Firearms are placing an extensive health burden on the country, not only in life years lost, but also in years of life affected by disability.”
The paper is touted as the first comprehensive study of everyday firearm-related harm in New Zealand.
Māori had a threefold higher risk than Pākehā of being victims of firearms homicides. Māori and Pacific peoples had a two- to three-times-higher risk than Pākehā of being hospitalised as a result of assault with a firearm.
Hospitalisation rates rise steadily with deprivation, the paper said. People in the poorest communities are more than twice as likely to be admitted with firearm injuries as those in the wealthiest.
“The ones going to hospital are young men in their 20s, with a higher rate among Māori and Pacific, and it’s usually an accident,” Telfar-Barnard said.
Mortality rates in rural settlements were more than 140 deaths per million, 20 times higher than in the largest urban areas.
“The ones who are dying from suicide are living in rural areas, Pākehā men in their 50s, predominantly,” Telfar-Barnard said.
The “Years of Life Lost” cost is based on what the average person would have contributed to society, had they continued to live.
If most of the deaths are by suicide, is it arguable that they could have been a financial burden overall had they lived longer, including ongoing engagement with the public health system?
“No, really not,” Telfar-Barnard said.
“What we know about firearm suicide is that it’s an impulsive act. In that moment of impulse, they’re taking away that opportunity for things to improve.
“They improve their mental health, things do get better and they go on and live fulfilling lives.”
Preventing suicide, then, would have the greatest impact on the costs of firearms-related harm. Part of that equation is stronger gun controls, Telfar-Barnard said.
She noted the significant drop in firearm suicides following the response to the Aramoana massacre in 1992, when David Gray killed 13 people before being shot and killed by police.
“In 1992, the Arms Amendment Act brought [in] tighter rules on firearm licensing, photo ID, background checks and storage. After these changes were implemented, deaths by firearm suicide dropped from more than 30 per million in the early 1990s to fewer than 10 per million in 2018,” a summary of the paper said.
Further gun law reforms were made after the 2019 terror attack in Christchurch, including the banning of military-style semi-automatics (MSSAs).
Telfar-Barnard has only looked at provisional data since 2019, which show an increase in firearms deaths from assault.
Does that suggest the 2019/20 changes have failed to deliver on their intent, which was to reduce firearms-related harm?
“It’s too early to suggest they haven’t made a difference,” Telfar-Barnard said.
“We were already seeing a slow but steady increase in firearms homicide ... rising since 2014 or so. We don’t have enough data yet to be able to see the effect of the 2019 regulation – in those stats in particular.”
One of her previous collaborators in public health, Hera Cook, is a co-founder of Gun Control New Zealand, but Telfar-Barnard said pushing for stronger firearms controls wasn’t primarily about politics.
“It’s a public health position,” Telfar-Barnard said. “The fact that it’s also a political position is secondary to the public health position.”
She likened it to researchers recommending rental housing standards following a paper about the health costs of poor housing, or support for a sugar tax or higher tobacco prices as a way to reduce the harms of sugar or tobacco.
“We have enough data from the 1992 changes to see they had an impact on firearms harm, so we can see that regulation works. Therefore, it’s important we maintain regulation, and look at other ways to prevent harm, which is what public health is,” Telfar-Barnard said.
“The disappointment is that these are political questions. In an ideal world, we would look at the evidence and say, ‘Clearly this is what needs to be done to prevent these harms’.”
Telfar-Barnard pointed to other research from Annette Beautrais, one of the study’s co-authors, about access to firearms exacerbating the risk of farm suicides.
“If you can interrupt that impulsivity, you have a really good chance of preventing that death,” Telfar-Barnard said.
“You have the firearm locked, you keep the keys somewhere else, you have your ammunition somewhere else, you have the keys to the ammunition somewhere else again. The more steps that you have, the more time there is to think about whether maybe this isn’t the thing to do right now.”
A support network, including mental health support and firearms safety education, can also be the difference between life and death. It’s a fine regulatory balance, though, with some firearms licence holders not seeking help out of fear they’ll have their licences taken away.
The paper also recommended equity-focused responses, given the disproportionate levels of firearms assault injury experienced among Māori and Pasifika.
Firearms law reform has been one of the coalition commitments between Act and National, and Associate Justice Minister Nicole McKee is planning a rewrite of the Arms Act by the end of the parliamentary term.
A former gun lobbyist, McKee believes that the obligations on firearms owners can be eased without compromising public safety.
Her personal preference is for greater access to MSSAs under strict conditions, but this cannot be enabled without the support of both National and NZ First.
This is very unlikely to happen, as National has already reversed its position in 2019 to support the use of MSSAs for shooting competitions. If not for such competitions, how then could the party support MSSAs for, say, recreational pest control?
McKee was already unable to convince NZ First’s coalition partners to support her wish to axe the firearms registry, which she compared to having a registry for ovens and toasters.
The Government has already rolled back some regulatory obligations for gun clubs and shooting ranges, which was part of the coalition agreement, despite pushback from Ministry of Justice officials and the police.
Where to get help:
If it is an emergency and you feel like you or someone else is at risk, call 111
Derek Cheng is a senior journalist who started at the Herald in 2004. He has worked several stints in the press gallery team and is a former deputy political editor.