Mental illness and gun violence: lessons for the United States from Australia and Britain

In the United States, the nexus between mental illness and shootings has been the subject of heated argument. An extreme expression of one point of view is that “guns don't kill people, the mentally ill do.” This article seeks to demonstrate the falsehood of this argument, by examining the real-world experience of two comparable societies. Australia and Great Britain are both Anglophone nations with numerous points of commonality with the United States, including high rates of mental illness and significant exposure to popular culture that perpetuates the stigma of the mentally ill as a violent threat. However, in Australia, it is difficult to obtain firearms, and a mentally ill person behaving aggressively is unlikely to be able to harm others. On the contrary, police are almost the only people routinely armed in Australian communities and are often too ready to use firearms against the mentally ill. In Britain, guns are even more difficult to obtain, and operational police are not usually armed. The authors examine statistical data on mental illness, homicide, and civilian deaths caused by police in all three nations. They also consider media and popular opinion environments. They conclude that mental illness is prevalent in all three societies, as is the damaging stigma of “the dangerous madman.” However, the fewer people (including police officers) who have access to firearms, the safer that community is.

Stop jumping the gun : a call for evidence-based invasive predator management

Invasive mammalian predators are major drivers of species extinctions globally. To protect native prey, lethal control is often used with the aim of reducing or exterminating invasive predator populations. The efficacy of this practice, however, is often not considered despite multiple practical and ecological factors that can limit success. Here, we summarize contemporary knowledge regarding the use and challenges of both lethal control and alternative approaches for reducing invasive predator impacts. As the prevailing management approach, we outline four key issues that can compromise the effectiveness of lethal control: release of herbivore and mesopredator populations, disruption of predator social systems, compensatory predator immigration, and ethical concerns. We then discuss the relative merits and limitations of four alternative approaches that may enhance conservation practitioner's ability to effectively manage invasive predators: top-predator conservation or reintroduction, maintaining habitat complexity, exclusion fencing, and behavioral and evolutionary ecology. Considerable uncertainty remains regarding the effectiveness of management approaches in different environmental contexts. We propose that the deficiencies and uncertainties outlined here can be addressed through a combination of adaptive management, expert elicitation, and cost-benefit analyses. Improved management of invasive predators requires greater consideration and assessment of the full range of management approaches available.