Search

Mass shootings in the U.S. elicit strong reactions and often are followed by demands for preventive or ameliorative policy action. Often, however, little change is made to policy, and the cycle of tragedy and passionate discourse is left to start anew. We assess the efficacy of a range of specific policies that may help to prevent mass shootings or mitigate their harms: we review empirical evidence on their effectiveness and consider arguments that both proponents and opponents of these policies bring to bear on the public discourse. We conclude that extant evidence and policy ideas that are on the table now can, in fact, point to a productive way forward: we argue for a proactive, layered approach to policy implementation that minimizes risks and impacts and capitalizes on effective interventions that enjoy broad public support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent advances in tests for the genotype for hemochromatosis and suggestions that the tests be used in mass screening programs for the disease raise the possibility of a large increase in the incidence of discrimination against people who are found to be homozygous for hemochromatosis. This paper presents cases of genetic discrimination drawn from a study of discrimination against people with a variety of genetic conditions. The cases discussed here involve employment and several types of insurance discrimination against people diagnosed with hemochromatosis who either are currently asymptomatic or whose condition is controlled by means of phiebotomies. There is no justification for these types of discrimination since people with controlled hemochromatosis suffer no excess mortality or morbidity. Our study suggests that genetic discrimination is already a serious problem and that any proposed screening program for hemochromatosis or other genetic condition must consider and attempt to mitigate its effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]