This study was undertaken to obtain information on the characteristics of gun ownership, gun-carrying practices, and weapons-related incidents in the United States -- specifically, gun use and other weapons used in self-defense against humans and animals. Data were gathered using a national random-digit-dial telephone survey. The respondents were comprised of 1,905 randomly-selected adults aged 18 and older living in the 50 United States. All interviews were completed between May 28 and July 2, 1996. The sample was designed to be a representative sample of households, not of individuals, so researchers did not interview more than one adult from each household. To start the interview, six qualifying questions were asked, dealing with (1) gun ownership, (2) gun-carrying practices, (3) gun display against the respondent, (4) gun use in self-defense against animals, (5) gun use in self-defense against people, and (6) other weapons used in self-defense. A "yes" response to a qualifying question led to a series of additional questions on the same topic as the qualifying question. Part 1, Survey Data, contains the coded data obtained during the interviews, and Part 2, Open-Ended-Verbatim Responses, consists of the answers to open-ended questions provided by the respondents. Information collected for Part 1 covers how many firearms were owned by household members, types of firearms owned (handguns, revolvers, pistols, fully automatic weapons, and assault weapons), whether the respondent personally owned a gun, reasons for owning a gun, type of gun carried, whether the gun was ever kept loaded, kept concealed, used for personal protection, or used for work, and whether the respondent had a permit to carry the gun. Additional questions focused on incidents in which a gun was displayed in a hostile manner against the respondent, including the number of times such an incident took place, the location of the event in which the gun was displayed against the respondent, whether the police were contacted, whether the individual displaying the gun was known to the respondent, whether the incident was a burglary, robbery, or other planned assault, and the number of shots fired during the incident. Variables concerning gun use by the respondent in self-defense against an animal include the number of times the respondent used a gun in this manner and whether the respondent was hunting at the time of the incident. Other variables in Part 1 deal with gun use in self-defense against people, such as the location of the event, if the other individual knew the respondent had a gun, the type of gun used, any injuries to the respondent or to the individual that required medical attention or hospitalization, whether the incident was reported to the police, whether there were any arrests, whether other weapons were used in self-defense, the type of other weapon used, location of the incident in which the other weapon was used, and whether the respondent was working as a police officer or security guard or was in the military at the time of the event. Demographic variables in Part 1 include the gender, race, age, household income, and type of community (city, suburb, or rural) in which the respondent lived. Open-ended questions asked during the interview comprise the variables in Part 2. Responses include descriptions of where the respondent was when he or she displayed a gun (in self-defense or otherwise), specific reasons why the respondent displayed a gun, how the other individual reacted when the respondent displayed the gun, how the individual knew the respondent had a gun, whether the police were contacted for specific self-defense events, and if not, why not.

The share of American households owning at least one firearm has remained relatively steady since 1972, hovering between ** percent and ** percent. In 2024, about ** percent of U.S. households had at least one gun in their possession. Additional information on firearms in the United States Firearms command a higher degree of cultural significance in the United States than any other country in the world. Since the inclusion of the right to bear arms in the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, firearms have held symbolic power beyond their already obvious material power. Despite many Americans being proud gun-owners, a large movement exists within the country in opposition to the freedom afforded to those in possession of these potentially deadly weapons. Those opposed to current gun regulation have sourced their anger from the large number of deaths due to firearms in the country, as well as the high frequency of gun violence apparent in comparison to other developed countries. Furthermore, the United States has fallen victim to a number of mass shootings in the last two decades, most of which have raised questions over the ease at which a person can obtain a firearm. Although this movement holds a significant position in the public political discourse of the United States, meaningful change regarding the legislation dictating the ownership of firearms has not occurred. Critics have pointed to the influence possessed by the National Rifle Association through their lobbying of public officials. The National Rifle Association also lobbies for the interests of firearm manufacturing in the United States, which has continued to rise since a fall in the early 2000s.

Texas was the state with the highest number of registered weapons in the United States in 2024, with 1,136,732 firearms. Rhode Island, on the other hand, had the least, with 4,895 registered firearms. Gun laws in the United States Gun ownership in the U.S. is protected by the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution, which allows citizens to own firearms and form a militia if necessary. Outside of the 2nd Amendment, gun laws in the U.S. vary from state to state, and gun owners are subject to the laws of the state they are currently in, not necessarily the state they live in. For example, if concealed carry is allowed in a gun owner’s state of residence but not in the state they are traveling in, the owner is subject to the law of the state they are traveling in. Civilian-owned firearms The United States is estimated to have the highest rate of civilian-owned firearms in the world, more than double that of Yemen, which has the second-highest gun ownership rate. Unfortunately, along with high gun ownership rates comes a higher number of homicides by firearm, which was about 13,529 homicides in 2023.

This nationally representative, anonymous, household telephone survey was conducted to explore the distribution of privately owned firearms in the United States, as well as firearm acquisition, disposal, and storage in households with guns. The study updates an earlier (1994) study by Cook and Ludwig that examined household firearm ownership in the United States (Cook P.J., Ludwig J. Guns in America: Results of a comprehensive national survey of firearms ownership and use. Washington DC: Police Foundation 1997.) Other domains of the survey included (1) past year firearm use both by respondents with firearms in their households and those without (e.g., "In the past 12 months, have you handled any gun"); (2) guns and youth (e.g., "In the last 12 months, have you ever asked another parent whether their home contains guns?"); (3) awareness of and opinions regarding state and federal firearm laws (e.g., "To the best of your knowledge, does your state have a law that holds adults liable for misuse of their guns by children or minors"; "Do you favor or oppose the sale of military style firearms?"); (4) depression and suicide (e.g., "If the Golden Gate Bridge had a barrier to prevent suicide, about how many of the 1,000 jumpers (who have committed suicide by jumping off the bridge since 1937) do you think would have found some other way to kill themselves?") and (5) aggressive driving (e.g., "In the past 12 months, have you made obscene or rude gestures at another motorist"). The survey also included extensive demographic information about the respondent and his or her family. The demographic information that was collected includes respondents' sex, age, race, education level, household income, criminal arrest history, armed forces membership status, type of residential area (e.g., urban or rural), and political philosophy.

In the United States, gun laws vary from one state to the next; whether residents need a permit or a background check to purchase a firearm, whether residents must undergo firearm training before making this purchase, and whether residents can openly carry their guns in public is dependent upon state legislation. As of January 15, 2025, ** U.S. states required background checks and/or permits for the purchase of a handgun. A further ** states had regulations on openly carrying firearms in public; however, only California, Connecticut, Florida, and Illinois had completely prohibited open carry for all firearms. In comparison, Maryland, New Jersey, and New York prohibited open carry for handguns but either did not have regulations in place or required a permit for other types of guns. A constitutional right The Second Amendment of the Constitution, which states that citizens have the right to bear arms, has made it difficult for any gun control legislation to be passed on a national level in the United States. As a result, gun control laws in the U.S. are state-based, and often differ based on political perspectives. States with strong gun laws in place, such as Massachusetts, generally experience less gun violence, however, some states with strong gun laws, such as Maryland, continue to face high rates of gun violence, which has largely been attributed to gun trafficking activity found throughout the nation. A culture of gun owners In comparison to other high-income countries with stricter gun control laws, the United States has the highest gun homicide rate at **** gun homicides per 100,000 residents. However, despite increasing evidence that easy access to firearms, whether legal or illegal, encourages higher rates of gun violence, the United States continues to foster an environment in which owning a firearm is seen as personal freedom. Almost **** of U.S. households have reported owning at least one firearm and ** percent of registered voters in the U.S. were found to believe that it was more important to protect the right of Americans to own guns, compared to ** percent who said it was more important to limit gun ownership.

The dataset is sourced and edited from
data.world

Description is given as below:

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. Multiple Cause of Death with U.S. - Mexico Border Regions 1999-2019 on CDC WONDER Online Database, released in 2020. Data are from the Multiple Cause of Death Files, 1999-2019, as compiled from data provided by the 57 vital statistics jurisdictions through the Vital Statistics Cooperative Program. U.S. - Mexico border counties has been demarcated as the 44 counties that are located within 100 kilometers (62 miles) defined under the 1983 La Paz Agreement. Accessed at http://wonder.cdc.gov/ucd-border.html on Nov 6, 2021 12:22:30 AM

Query Parameters: Title: Gun Deaths by County MCD - ICD-10 Codes: W32 (Handgun discharge); W33 (Rifle, shotgun and larger firearm discharge); W34 (Discharge from other and unspecified firearms); X72 (Intentional self-harm by handgun discharge); X73 (Intentional self-harm by rifle, shotgun and larger firearm discharge); X74 (Intentional self-harm by other and unspecified firearm discharge); X93 (Assault by handgun discharge); X94 (Assault by rifle, shotgun and larger firearm discharge); X95 (Assault by other and unspecified firearm discharge); Y22 (Handgun discharge, undetermined intent); Y23 (Rifle, shotgun and larger firearm discharge, undetermined intent); Y24 (Other and unspecified firearm discharge, undetermined intent); Y35.0 (Legal intervention involving firearm discharge)

Group By: Year; County Show Totals: True Show Zero Values: False Show Suppressed: False Standard Population: 2000 U.S. Std. Population Calculate Rates Per: 100,000 Rate Options: Default intercensal populations for years 2001-2009 (except Infant Age Groups)

picture sourced from peterplit

The dataset consists of photos depicting individuals holding guns. It specifically focuses on the segmentation of guns within these images and the detection of people holding guns. Each image in the dataset presents a different scenario, capturing individuals from various backgrounds, genders, and age groups in different poses while holding guns. The dataset is an essential resource for the development and evaluation of computer vision models and algorithms in fields related to firearms recognition, security systems, law enforcement, and safety analysis.

Context:

The State Firearm Laws project aims to provide researchers with the data necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of various firearm laws. By carefully monitoring how gun legislation impacts firearm-related violence, we can provide policymakers with the evidence they need to make gun ownership safer for everyone.

Ammunition regulations establish rules for anyone in the business of buying or selling firearm ammunition. Federal regulation of firearm ammunition usually accompanies the regulation of firearms, rather than existing independently. For example, the federal age requirements for ammunition purchase, by type of firearm and type of dealer, are the same as those for the purchase of firearms, and the populations that are prohibited from possessing firearms are also prohibited from possessing firearm ammunition.

Content:

Data covers all 50 US States, 1991-2017 and includes:

• Vendor license required to sell ammunition.
• Records of ammunition sales must be retained by the dealer.
• Permit required to purchase ammunition.
• Background checks required for ammunition purchases.
• Sale of ammunition is restricted to the same categories of those who are legally allowed to purchase firearms.
• Purchase of any type of ammunition restricted to those ages 18 and older.
• Purchase of handgun ammunition restricted to those ages 21 and older.

Acknowledgements:

One-hundred of the 133 provisions were coded by Michael Siegel, MD, MPH, Boston University School of Public Health, with funding from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Evidence for Action: Investigator-Initiated Research to Build a Culture of Health program (grant #73337), using data derived from the Thomson Reuters Westlaw legislative database. The other 33 provisions were coded using a database created by Everytown for Gun Safety and Legal Science, LLC. Shared in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-4.0 International License, which is incorporated herein by this reference. No changes were made to the original coding, but the data were adapted for use in this database. See the codebook for a list of which provisions were coded by which source. Additional materials include an associated report and related publications.

Inspiration:

• Which states have seen the most increase in regulation? Any decrease?
• Can you correlate gun laws and homicides from this dataset?

THIS DATASET WAS LAST UPDATED AT 7:11 AM EASTERN ON DEC. 1

OVERVIEW

2019 had the most mass killings since at least the 1970s, according to the Associated Press/USA TODAY/Northeastern University Mass Killings Database.

In all, there were 45 mass killings, defined as when four or more people are killed excluding the perpetrator. Of those, 33 were mass shootings . This summer was especially violent, with three high-profile public mass shootings occurring in the span of just four weeks, leaving 38 killed and 66 injured.

A total of 229 people died in mass killings in 2019.

The AP's analysis found that more than 50% of the incidents were family annihilations, which is similar to prior years. Although they are far less common, the 9 public mass shootings during the year were the most deadly type of mass murder, resulting in 73 people's deaths, not including the assailants.

One-third of the offenders died at the scene of the killing or soon after, half from suicides.

About this Dataset

The Associated Press/USA TODAY/Northeastern University Mass Killings database tracks all U.S. homicides since 2006 involving four or more people killed (not including the offender) over a short period of time (24 hours) regardless of weapon, location, victim-offender relationship or motive. The database includes information on these and other characteristics concerning the incidents, offenders, and victims.

The AP/USA TODAY/Northeastern database represents the most complete tracking of mass murders by the above definition currently available. Other efforts, such as the Gun Violence Archive or Everytown for Gun Safety may include events that do not meet our criteria, but a review of these sites and others indicates that this database contains every event that matches the definition, including some not tracked by other organizations.

This data will be updated periodically and can be used as an ongoing resource to help cover these events.

Using this Dataset

To get basic counts of incidents of mass killings and mass shootings by year nationwide, use these queries:

Mass killings by year

Mass shootings by year

To get these counts just for your state:

Filter killings by state

Definition of "mass murder"

Mass murder is defined as the intentional killing of four or more victims by any means within a 24-hour period, excluding the deaths of unborn children and the offender(s). The standard of four or more dead was initially set by the FBI.

This definition does not exclude cases based on method (e.g., shootings only), type or motivation (e.g., public only), victim-offender relationship (e.g., strangers only), or number of locations (e.g., one). The time frame of 24 hours was chosen to eliminate conflation with spree killers, who kill multiple victims in quick succession in different locations or incidents, and to satisfy the traditional requirement of occurring in a “single incident.”

Offenders who commit mass murder during a spree (before or after committing additional homicides) are included in the database, and all victims within seven days of the mass murder are included in the victim count. Negligent homicides related to driving under the influence or accidental fires are excluded due to the lack of offender intent. Only incidents occurring within the 50 states and Washington D.C. are considered.

Methodology

Project researchers first identified potential incidents using the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Supplementary Homicide Reports (SHR). Homicide incidents in the SHR were flagged as potential mass murder cases if four or more victims were reported on the same record, and the type of death was murder or non-negligent manslaughter.

Cases were subsequently verified utilizing media accounts, court documents, academic journal articles, books, and local law enforcement records obtained through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. Each data point was corroborated by multiple sources, which were compiled into a single document to assess the quality of information.

In case(s) of contradiction among sources, official law enforcement or court records were used, when available, followed by the most recent media or academic source.

Case information was subsequently compared with every other known mass murder database to ensure reliability and validity. Incidents listed in the SHR that could not be independently verified were excluded from the database.

Project researchers also conducted extensive searches for incidents not reported in the SHR during the time period, utilizing internet search engines, Lexis-Nexis, and Newspapers.com. Search terms include: [number] dead, [number] killed, [number] slain, [number] murdered, [number] homicide, mass murder, mass shooting, massacre, rampage, family killing, familicide, and arson murder. Offender, victim, and location names were also directly searched when available.

This project started at USA TODAY in 2012.

Contacts

Contact AP Data Editor Justin Myers with questions, suggestions or comments about this dataset at jmyers@ap.org. The Northeastern University researcher working with AP and USA TODAY is Professor James Alan Fox, who can be reached at j.fox@northeastern.edu or 617-416-4400.

Firearms background checks for the USA for 2012 (Jan-Nov) and since 1999.These statistics represent the number of firearm background checks initiated through the NICS. They do not represent the number of firearms sold. NICS is used by Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs) to instantly determine whether a prospective buyer is eligible to buy firearms or explosives. Before ringing up the sale, cashiers call in a check to the FBI or to other designated agencies to ensure that each customer does not have a criminal record or isn't otherwise ineligible to make a purchase. More than 100 million such checks have been made in the last decade, leading to more than 700,000 denials. More information on NICS - http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics Some really useful informations such as the rate of checks per 1000 people. All data is provided by state. Downloaded from the Guardian Datablog - http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2012/dec/17/how-many-guns-us and then joined to USA States data http://geocommons.com/overlays/21424. Gun data originally from FBI http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics. GIS vector data. This dataset was first accessioned in the EDINA ShareGeo Open repository on 2012-12-17 and migrated to Edinburgh DataShare on 2017-02-21.

These data were collected using the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS), the primary data system of the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). CPSC began operating NEISS in 1972 to monitor product-related injuries treated in United States hospital emergency departments (EDs). In June 1992, the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (NCIPC), within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, established an interagency agreement with CPSC to begin collecting data on nonfatal firearm-related injuries in order to monitor the incidents and the characteristics of persons with nonfatal firearm-related injuries treated in United States hospital EDs over time. This dataset represents all nonfatal firearm-related injuries (i.e., injuries associated with powder-charged guns) and all nonfatal BB and pellet gun-related injuries reported through NEISS from 1993 through 2003. The cases consist of initial ED visits for treatment of the injuries. Cases were reported even if the patients subsequently died. Secondary visits and transfers from other hospitals were excluded. Information is available on injury diagnosis, firearm type, use of drugs or alcohol, criminal incident, and locale of the incident. Demographic information includes age, sex, and race of the injured person.

Information from Bloomington Police Department regarding guns reported stolen. Key code for Race: A- Asian/Pacific Island, Non-Hispanic B- African American, Non-Hispanic C- Hawaiian/Other Pacific Island, Hispanic H- Hawaiian/Other Pacific Island, Non-Hispanic I- Indian/Alaskan Native, Non-Hispanic K- African American, Hispanic L- Caucasian, Hispanic N- Indian/Alaskan Native, Hispanic P- Asian/Pacific Island, Hispanic S- Asian, Non-Hispanic T- Asian, Hispanic U- Unknown W- Caucasian, Non-Hispanic Key Code for Reading Districts: Example: LB519 L for Law call or incident B stands for Bloomington 5 is the district or beat where incident occurred All numbers following represents a grid sector. Disclaimer: The Bloomington Police Department takes great effort in making open data as accurate as possible, but there is no avoiding the introduction of errors in this process, which relies on data provided by many people and that cannot always be verified. Information contained in this dataset may change over a period of time. The Bloomington Police Department is not responsible for any error or omission from this data, or for the use or interpretation of the results of any research conducted.

Context

Firearms sold in the United States must be licensed by the US Department of Justice Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. This dataset is a record of every firearm license which was still current as of July 2017.

Content

This dataset contains the names, license types, expiration dates, and locations of all Federal Firearms License (FFL) holders in the United States. The possible license types are:

• 01 Dealer in Firearms Other Than Destructive Devices (Includes Gunsmiths)
• 02 Pawnbroker in Firearms Other Than Destructive Devices
• 03 Collector of Curios and Relics
• 06 Manufacturer of Ammunition for Firearms
• 07 Manufacturer of Firearms Other Than Destructive Devices
• 08 Importer of Firearms Other Than Destructive Devices
• 09 Dealer in Destructive Devices
• 10 Manufacturer of Destructive Devices
• 11 Importer of Destructive Devices

Acknowledgements

This data is published online in a tab-separated format by the Department of Justice Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. It has been lightly retouched into a CSV file before publication here.

Inspiration

• Can you geocode this data to determine where licensed gun shops are distributed?
• What is the distribution of gun licenses across different types?

Cleaned and Consolidated Weapon Detection Dataset

This dataset is a cleaned, consolidated, and training-ready version of the Subh775/WeaponDetection dataset. The original 29 ambiguous and redundant classes have been merged into 3 distinct, high-level categories: GUN, KNIFE, and PERSON. This cleaning process makes the dataset significantly more effective for training robust object detection models by removing label ambiguity and creating stronger class definitions. Images that… See the full description on the dataset page: https://huggingface.co/datasets/Subh775/WeaponDetection_Grouped.

Simuletic Weapon Detection Dataset Overview This is an open-source synthetic dataset for computer vision (CV) object detection tasks, focusing on people holding weapons in public areas viewed from CCTV camera perspectives. The dataset consists of high-quality, realistic synthetic images. Key features: Classes: "person" and "weapon" (e.g., guns, knives in various poses and scenarios). Annotations: Bounding boxes (rectangles) in YOLO format for easy integration with models like YOLOv8.… See the full description on the dataset page: https://huggingface.co/datasets/Simuletic/cctv-weapon-dataset.

This dataset contains all gun death incidents between 2012 and 2014 in the US collected by the CDC.

Thanks to FiveThirtyEight for creating the GitHub repository.

Acknowlegement

Foto von Mitya Ivanov auf Unsplash

The data on mass shootings is from https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/ . This dataset on mass shootings for the period 2014-2023 was provided on Feb 19, 2024 by the Data Manager (Ms. Sharon Williams) at the Gun Violence Archive (https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/) on a data request. Minimal curation was done on this data – the date variable was split into year, month and day. See the codebook for full details.A mass shooting is defined as four or more people injured or killed, because of firearms, excluding the shooter.The curated datasets are included here along with a research question and guiding questions.For information of how this data is collected, go to: https://www.gunviolencearchive.org/explainerDefinition for mass shooting and mass murder from the above website is given verbatim below:Mass Shooting Methodology and Reasoning: Mass Shootings are, for the most part an American phenomenon. While they are generally grouped together as one type of incident they are several different types including public shootings, bar/club incidents, family annihilations, drive-by, workplace and those which defy description but with the established foundation definition being that they have a minimum of four victims shot, either injured or killed, not including any shooter who may also have been killed or injured in the incident. GVA also presents the count of Mass Murder which, like the FBI's definition is four or more victims, killed, not including the shooter. Mass Murder by gun is a subset of the Mass Shooting count.

Number of homicide victims, by method used to commit the homicide (total methods used; shooting; stabbing; beating; strangulation; fire (burns or suffocation); other methods used; methods used unknown), Canada, 1974 to 2024.

These data were collected using the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS), the primary data system of the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). CPSC began operating NEISS in 1972 to monitor product-related injuries treated in United States hospital emergency departments (EDs). In June 1992, the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (NCIPC), within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, established an interagency agreement with CPSC to begin collecting data on nonfatal firearm-related injuries in order to monitor the incidents and the characteristics of persons with nonfatal firearm-related injuries treated in United States hospital EDs over time. This dataset represents all nonfatal firearm-related injuries (i.e., injuries associated with powder-charged guns) and all nonfatal BB and pellet gun-related injuries reported through NEISS from 1993 through 2019. The cases consist of initial ED visits for treatment of the injuries. Cases were reported even if the patients subsequently died. Secondary visits and transfers from other hospitals were excluded. Information is available on injury diagnosis, firearm type, use of drugs or alcohol, criminal incident, and locale of the incident. Demographic information includes age, sex, and race of the injured person.

Beginning in July 2000, the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (NCIPC), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in collaboration with the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) expanded the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) to collect data on all types and causes of injuries treated in a representative sample of United States hospitals with emergency departments (EDs). This system is called the NEISS-All Injury Program (NEISS-AIP). The NEISS-AIP is designed to provide national incidence estimates of all types and external causes of nonfatal injuries and poisonings treated in U.S. hospital EDs. Data on injury-related visits are being obtained from a national sample of U.S. NEISS hospitals, which were selected as a stratified probability sample of hospitals in the United States and its territories with a minimum of six beds and a 24-hour ED. The sample includes separate strata for very large, large, medium, and small hospitals, defined by the number of annual ED visits per hospital, and children's hospitals. The scope of reporting goes beyond routine reporting of injuries associated with consumer-related products in CPSC's jurisdiction to include all injuries and poisonings. The data can be used to (1) measure the magnitude and distribution of nonfatal injuries in the United States; (2) monitor unintentional and violence-related nonfatal injuries over time; (3) identify emerging injury problems; (4) identify specific cases for follow-up investigations of particular injury-related problems; and (5) set national priorities. A fundamental principle of this expansion effort is that preliminary surveillance data will be made available in a timely manner to a number of different federal agencies with unique and overlapping public health responsibilities and concerns. Also, annually, the final edited data will be released as public use data files for use by other public health professionals and researchers. NEISS-AIP data on nonfatal injuries were collected from January through December each year except the year 2000 when data were collected from July through December (ICPSR 3582). NEISS AIP is providing data on approximately over 500,000 cases annually. Data obtained on each case include age, race/ethnicity, gender, principal diagnosis, primary body part affected, consumer products involved, disposition at ED discharge (i.e., hospitalized, transferred, treated and released, observation, died), locale where the injury occurred, work-relatedness, and a narrative description of the injury circumstances. Also, major categories of external cause of injury (e.g., motor vehicle, falls, cut/pierce, poisoning, fire/burn) and of intent of injury (e.g., unintentional, assault, intentional self-harm, legal intervention) are being coded for each case in a manner consistent with the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) coding rules and guidelines. NEISS has been managed and operated by the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission since 1972 and is used by the Commission for identifying and monitoring consumer product-related injuries and for assessing risk to all United States residents. These product-related injury data are used for educating consumers about hazardous products and for identifying injury-related cases used in detailed studies of specific products and associated hazard patterns. These studies set the stage for developing both voluntary and mandatory safety standards. Since the early 1980s, CPSC has assisted other federal agencies by using NEISS to collect injury- related data of special interest to them. In 1990, an interagency agreement was established between NCIPC and CPSC to (1) collect NEISS data on nonfatal firearm-related injuries for the CDC Firearm Injury Surveillance Study; (2) publish NEISS data on a variety of injury-related topics, such as in-line skating, firearms, BB and pellet guns, bicycles, boat propellers, personal water craft, and playground injuries; and (3) to address common concerns. CPSC also uses NEISS to collect data on work-related injuries for the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), CDC. In 1997, the interagency agreement was modified to conduct the three-month NEISS All Injury Pilot Study at 21 NEISS hospitals (see Quinlan KP, Thompson MP, Annest JL, et al. Expanding the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System to Monitor All Nonfatal Injuries Treated in US Hospital Emergency Departments. Annals Emerg. Med. 1999;34:637-643.) This study demonstrated the feasibility of expanding NEISS to collect data on all injuries. National estimates based on this study indicated product-related injuries that fall into CPSC's jurisdiction accounted for approximately 50 percent of injuries treated in U.S. hospital EDs. The study also indicated that NEISS is a cost-effective system for capturing data on all injuries treated in U.S. hospital EDs. The NEISS-AIP provides an excellent data source for monitoring national estimates of nonfatal injuries over time. Analysis and dissemination of these surveillance data through the ICPSR, and Internet publications will help support NCIPC's mission of reducing all types and causes of injuries in the United States, as well as assist other federal agencies with responsibilities for injury prevention and control.