Resource Document on Risk-Based Gun Removal Laws

Kapoor, Reena; Benedek, Elissa P.; Bonnie, Richard J.; Gandhi, Tanuja; Gold, Liza H.; Judd, Seth; Pinals, Debra A.

doi:10.1176/appi.focus.17403

Cited by 6 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In California in 2016, 86 orders were served; in Washington in 2018, 48 were served. Between 2006 and 2013, 58 ERPOs were served per year in Indiana; between 1999 and 2013, 51 orders were served per year in Connecticut (Kapoor et al, 2018;Miletich, 2018;Koseff, 2017). In contrast, in the first six months since Maryland's ERPO law went into effect in October 2018, the state granted 258 ERPOs (Yablon, 2019).…”

Section: Extreme Risk Protection Ordersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Additionally, although high-profile homicide incidents have precipitated the passage of ERPOs in several states (Kapoor et al, 2018;Swanson et al, 2017), available data suggest that petitions for ERPOs most commonly cite concerns about self-harm or suicide as the reason for removal. Data from Connecticut suggest that about 61 percent of requests for gun removal involve a concern about self-harm (Swanson et al, 2017), which is similar to the percentage of firearm deaths that are suicides (60 percent) (Kochanek et al, 2019).…”

Section: Extreme Risk Protection Ordersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…ERPOs, in contrast, can be served against anyone, regardless of current gun ownership, and can block the subject of the order from purchasing firearms. However, available evidence suggests that both types of laws are largely used in the same way, which is why we include both in our ERPO definition(Kapoor et al, 2018).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Science of Gun Policy: A Critical Synthesis of Research Evidence on the Effects of Gun Policies in the United States, Second Edition

Smart¹,

Morral²,

Smucker³

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

INITIATIVE Limited Print and Electronic Distribution RightsThis document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.

show abstract

Section: Extreme Risk Protection Ordersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Extreme Risk Protection Ordersmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Science of Gun Policy: A Critical Synthesis of Research Evidence on the Effects of Gun Policies in the United States, Second Edition

Smart¹,

Morral²,

Smucker³

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In King County, Washington, 146 petitions were served in 2018, up from 40 in 2017 (Rowhani-Rahbar et al, 2020); 93 petitions were filed in the first 15 months of Oregon's 2018 ERPO law (Zeoli et al, 2021); and 110 petitions were granted in the first year of Colorado's 2020 ERPO law (Barnard et al, 2021). Between 2006 and2013, 58 ERPOs were served per year in Indiana; between 1999 and 2013, 51 orders were served per year in Connecticut (Kapoor et al, 2018). In contrast, in the first six months since Maryland's ERPO law went into effect in October 2018, the state granted 258 ERPOs (Yablon, 2019); more-recent data suggest that about 400 ERPOs are granted per year in Maryland (Engel, 2022).…”

Section: Extreme Risk Protection Ordersmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Science of Gun Policy: A Critical Synthesis of Research Evidence on the Effects of Gun Policies in the United States, Third Edition

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effective gun policies in the United States must balance Second Amendment rights and public interest in gun ownership with concerns about public health and safety. However, efforts to craft legislation related to guns are hampered by a paucity of reliable information about the effects of such policies. To help address this problem, the RAND Corporation launched the Gun Policy in America initiative. Throughout RAND's 70-year history, in multiple projects, in many policy arenas, and on topics that are sensitive and controversial, researchers have conducted analyses, built tools, and developed resources to help policy makers and the public make effective decisions. The primary goal of the Gun Policy in America project is to create resources where policymakers and the general public can access unbiased information that facilitates the development of fair and effective firearm policies.This initiative has yielded several research products, such as a state firearm law database; surveys of policy experts that identified where access to reliable data would be most useful in resolving policy debates; various tools and methodological reports for researchers; and the first and second editions of this report, which synthesized the available scientific data on the effects of 18 types of firearm policies on a variety of outcomes related to gun ownership. This third edition builds on the second edition by updating the literature review to include studies published through October 2020. The result is a substantially updated synthesis of the available evidence concerning the effects of 18 types of gun policies.The Gun Policy in America initiative did not attempt to evaluate the merits of different values or principles that sometimes drive policy disagreements. Rather, our focus is strictly on the empirical effects of policies on the eight outcomes specified in this report. All of our resources are publicly available on the project website at www.rand.org/gunpolicy.The work should be of interest to policymakers and other stakeholders considering decisions related to firearm policy. Furthermore, this report may be of interest to the research community and to the general public. Justice Policy ProgramRAND Social and Economic Well-Being is a division of the RAND Corporation that seeks to actively improve the health and social and economic well-being of populations and communities throughout the world. This research was conducted in the Justice Policy Program within RAND Social and Economic Well-Being. The program focuses on such topics as access to justice, policing, corrections, drug policy, and court system reform, as well as other policy concerns pertaining to public safety and criminal and civil justice. For more information, email

show abstract

“…Several states have recently passed laws related to gun violence restraining orders, or "red flag laws," which allow for the removal of a firearm from an individual who is thought by others (not necessarily clinicians) to be a risk of harm to themselves or others and for whom access to a firearm might present an elevated risk. Guidance on these laws is available through an APA resource document recently made available (26).…”

Section: Firearms and Suicidementioning

confidence: 99%