A Critique of Findings on Gun Ownership, Use, and Imagined Use From the 2021 National Firearms Survey: Response to William English

Authors

Deborah Azrael, Harvard UniversityFollow
Joseph Blocher, Duke University School of LawFollow
Philip J. Cook, Duke University and NBERFollow
David Hemenway, Harvard UniversityFollow
Matthew Miller, Northeastern UniversityFollow

ORCID (Links to author’s additional scholarship at ORCID.org)

Deborah Azraek: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7177-0553

Joseph Blocher: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4618-9158

Philip J. Cook: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5094-9052

David Hemenway: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8125-1690

Matthew Miller: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5796-9339

Abstract

For a paper that has not yet been through peer review or even been formally published, William English’s “2021 National Firearms Survey” has been remarkably prominent in gun rights advocacy and scholarship. As of December 2024, it has been cited in roughly sixty-five briefs, invoked at oral argument in the Supreme Court and multiple courts of appeals, and regularly cited in public writings and published academic work.

This response is offered in the spirit of a peer review. Our focus is on methodological issues, questionable statistical results, and problematic conclusions. Because of serious methodological issues, English’s draft fails to provide a reliable estimate of the number of annual defensive gun uses, the stock of AR-15s, or the actual protective value of or frequency with which AR-15 type firearms have been used. The paper should not be used as an authoritative source.

This version of our paper has been updated to account for the response that Prof. English posted on October 23, 2024.

Recommended Citation

Deborah Azrael et al., A Critique of Findings on Gun Ownership, Use, and Imagined Use From the 2021 National Firearms Survey: Response to William English, 78 SMU L. Rev. 239 (2025)