Extreme Risk Protection Orders Research Articles

Extreme Risk Protection Orders in the United States: A Systematic Review of the Research

Extreme risk protection orders (ERPOs) are designed to protect against firearm violence and are a relatively new policy tool in the United States. As of April 2024, 21 states and the District of Columbia have enacted ERPO laws. This article presents a systematic review of the literature concerning ERPO laws, their use, and their effectiveness. Four main domains are considered in relation to the literature landscape: (a) formulation and passage of ERPO laws, (b) legal analyses of ERPO laws, (c) ERPO implementation, and (d) evaluations of ERPO laws. Thirty-six articles met our inclusion criteria and were analyzed. This systematic review provides the existing evidence regarding ERPO implementation and effectiveness and carves a pathway forward for future research, policy, and practice.

“I know it when I see it”: Public opinion on removing guns from compromised owners

“Red flag” laws allow the government to remove firearms from someone if a judge is persuaded that the owner is a danger to self or others. We present the evolution of these laws and then develop and test a series of hypotheses using data from the Guns in American Life Survey (GALS), a nationwide online survey conducted in late 2018 to investigate public opinion. Findings show that adults who believe they know a “compromised” gun owner (e.g. dangerous, seriously mentally ill or suffering dementia) tend to be much more supportive of red flag laws, moderating the effects of immersion in gun culture. GALS reveals that political underpinnings are not determinative of the views of respondents. However, two sets of gun-related attitudes are strongly predictive of attitudes towards red flag laws–acceptance of scientific evidence that guns are “risky” and dangerous for civilians and principled rejection of gun control as a violation of the Second Amendment. Our results suggest that local circumstances (knowing someone who is a danger) can overwhelm macro-social attitude formation forces. We conclude by reviewing how firearm policy responses evolve, and how previously unpalatable options can become accepted by different groups such as legislators, law enforcement, registered voters and the general public.

A multi-state evaluation of extreme risk protection orders: a research protocol

BackgroundExtreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs) are civil court orders that prohibit firearm purchase and possession when someone is behaving dangerously and is at risk of harming themselves and/or others. As of June 2024, ERPOs are available in 21 states and the District of Columbia to prevent firearm violence. This paper describes the design and protocol of a six-state study of ERPO use.MethodsThe six states included are California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Maryland, and Washington. During the 3-year project period (2020–2023), ERPO case files were obtained through public records requests or through agreements with agencies with access to these data in each state. A team of over four dozen research assistants from seven institutions coded 6628 ERPO cases, abstracting 80 variables per case under domains related to respondent characteristics, events and behaviors leading to ERPO petitions, petitioner types, and court outcomes. Research assistants received didactic training through an online learning management system that included virtual training modules, quizzes, practice coding exercises, and two virtual synchronous sessions. A protocol for gaining strong interrater reliability was used. Research assistants also learned strategies for reducing the risk of experiencing secondary trauma through the coding process, identifying its occurrence, and obtaining help.DiscussionAddressing firearm violence in the U.S. is a priority. Understanding ERPO use in these six states can inform implementation planning and ERPO uptake, including promising opportunities to enhance safety and prevent firearm-related injuries and deaths. By publishing this protocol, we offer detailed insight into the methods underlying the papers published from these data, and the process of managing data abstraction from ERPO case files across the multi-state and multi-institution teams involved. Such information may also inform future analyses of this data, and future replication efforts.RegistrationThis protocol is registered on Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/kv4fc/).

Voter Support for Policies Associated With Child Health as National Campaign Priorities

Policies that are associated with child health are rarely included in platforms of candidates for national political office. Candidates may underrecognize voter support for such priorities or perceive that such policy issues are not sufficiently divisive to appeal to partisan voters. Key policy questions associated with child health may be considered by the next Congress, including the consistency of Medicaid coverage across states and restoring the recently lapsed refundable child tax credit. To examine voter support for candidates regarding policies that are associated with child health. This nationally representative survey of registered US voters 18 years or older was conducted from March to April 2024 and included a survey-based randomized experiment to evaluate the association of message framing with voter support. Messages conveying distinct rationales for Medicaid reform and refundable child tax credit. Likely or definite support for candidates. In this sample (unweighted N = 2014; 1015 women [51.0%]), most respondents indicated they would likely or definitely vote for candidates who expressed strong support for all tested policies: extreme risk protection order (79.5%), school threat assessment (73.1%), expanded childcare (69.6%), refundable child tax credit (66.6%), federalization of Medicaid (66.0%), paid parental leave (65.5%), free school meals (65.6%), safe firearm storage and enforcement (62.9%), preventing Medicaid disenrollment for children younger than 6 years (61.9%), universal free preschool (61.6%), and summer nutrition programs (57.9%). More women than men expressed support for all tested policies. Strong majorities of Democrat and Independent voters would support candidates who endorsed child-focused policies; fewer than 50% of Republican voters expressed such support, except for the extreme risk protection order and school threat assessment. Variations in framing language regarding consistent Medicaid coverage across states were not associated with amplified or diminished voter support. Framing the refundable child tax credit as benefiting "hard-working" vs "low-income" families garnered significantly more support among men (67.0% vs 59.0%), privately insured individuals (72.0% vs 64.4%), and Republicans (54.6% vs 43.0%; all P < .05). The study results suggest that most voters favor candidates who strongly support policies that are associated with child health. Voter support differs substantively by gender and political party affiliation and may be associated with language choices in messaging about policy change.

Suicide Prevention Effects of Extreme Risk Protection Order Laws in Four States.

More than half of suicide deaths in the United States result from self-inflicted firearm injuries. Extreme risk protection order (ERPO) laws in 21 states and the District of Columbia temporarily limit access to firearms for individuals found in a civil court process to pose an imminent risk of harm to themselves or others. Research with large multistate study populations has been lacking to determine effectiveness of these laws. This study assembled records pertaining to 4,583 ERPO respondents in California, Connecticut, Maryland, and Washington. Matched records identified suicide decedents and self-injury method. Researchers applied case fatality rates for each suicide method to estimate nonfatal suicide attempts corresponding to observed deaths. Comparison of counterfactual to observed data patterns yielded estimates of the number of lives saved and number of ERPOs needed to avert one suicide. Estimates varied depending on the assumed probability that a gun owner who attempts suicide will use a gun. Two evidence-based approaches yielded estimates of 17 and 23 ERPOs needed to prevent one suicide. For the subset of 2,850 ERPO respondents with documented suicide concern, comparable estimates were 13 and 18, respectively. This study's findings add to growing evidence that ERPOs can be an effective and important suicide prevention tool.

Nurses as Petitioners: A Legal Mapping of State Extreme Risk Protection Order Laws.

Gun violence is a leading public health concern in the US; subsequently, firearm-related violence prevention is a top priority for policymakers. Extreme risk protection order (ERPO) laws are a state-level attempt to reduce gun-related injuries and deaths. These court-issued orders prohibit people found to be dangerous to themselves or others from temporarily purchasing or possessing a firearm. Six states (Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maryland, Michigan, New York) and the District of Columbia have passed or amended their laws to include nurses as ERPO petitioners. The study's purpose was to conduct a review of state ERPO laws that included nurses as petitioners. Using a legal mapping approach, information on nurse ERPO petitioning was extracted from the seven jurisdictions. ERPO laws with nurse petitioners were passed between 1999 and 2023. Nurse petitioners included advanced practice registered nurse (n = 3), clinical nurse specialists (n = 3), nurse practitioner (n = 3), professional nurse (n = 2), and register nurse (n = 1). Psychiatric/mental health (n = 2) and school nurses (n = 2) were specified. Statutes differed in the handling of disclosed health information as part of the ERPO petition, as well as how health information would be handled by the court (e.g. sealed by the court, confidential by the court, returned to provider/disposed of post-hearing/order.) Three statutes exempted petitioners from civil and/or criminal liability, if petitions were submitted in good faith. Two of these states extended protection from liability to all petitioners, while one only referenced petitioners who were healthcare providers. The study findings have important policy, clinical, and research implications.

Prediction of the mechanism of suicide among Minnesota residents using data from the Minnesota violent death reporting system (MNVDRS)

BackgroundSuicide remains a major public health problem, and firearms are used in approximately half of all such incidents. This study sought to predict the occurrence of suicide specifically by firearm,...

Healthcare Professionals and Extreme Risk Protection Orders: A Concise Review.

Extreme risk protection orders (ERPOs) are one policy mechanism to address the critical public health problem of gun violence. The inclusion of healthcare professionals with ERPOs is a promising approach to expanding ERPO utilization, yet early evidence has not been examined. The purpose of this study was to synthesize the current research on healthcare professionals and ERPOs. Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PubMed, Academic Search Complete, and Web of Science were searched. Studies examined healthcare professionals' role and function within the context of ERPOs. Relevant studies were reviewed and included through consensus of the authors. Data extracted included authors, objective, design, states, healthcare professional type, mental health professional type, healthcare professional roles/involvement and key outcomes. There is unfamiliarity with ERPOs among healthcare professionals. Healthcare professionals lack ERPO knowledge and are unclear about ethical and legal ERPO liability. The available evidence suggests that healthcare professionals have an important role in ERPOs, but critical gaps in ERPO knowledge, training/resources, and liability will limit use and effectiveness of healthcare professionals, including nurses, in the role of ERPO petitioner.

Implementation of Extreme Risk Protection Orders in Colorado from 2020 to 2022: Firearm relinquishment and return and petitioner characteristics

IntroductionFirearm injury remains a public health problem, with nearly 50,000 firearm-related deaths in the US in 2021. Extreme risk protection orders (ERPOs) are civil restraining orders that intend to reduce firearm deaths by temporarily removing firearms from individuals who are threatening violence to themselves or others. We described ERPO use by petitioner type and implementation including firearm removal. MethodsAll ERPO petitions filed in Colorado (1/1/2020–12/31/2022) were analyzed using an established abstraction tool and team-based approach. Case data abstracted from petitions and court documents were analyzed descriptively. ResultsOver three years, there were 353 ERPO petitions filed in Colorado. Only 39 % percent of granted petitions had documentation of firearms being relinquished. The average number firearms relinquished was 1.8 with a range of 1 to 31 firearms. One third (37.7 %) of petitions mentioned a mental health issue, 10 % had a renewal request, and half (54.6 %) of petitions were filed by law enforcement (LE). LE petitions filed were more likely to be granted temporary ERPOs (94.3 % vs 35.0 %, p < 0.0001) and full year ERPOs (79.7 % vs 39.3 %, p < 0.0001) compared to non-LE petitions. ConclusionResults from these analyses shed light on data gaps surrounding ERPO use and implementation. Differences in LE vs others’ ERPO outcomes suggest a need for additional research and training. ERPOs’ efficacy hinges on removing access to firearms among those at risk, and a lack of documentation limits the ability to evaluate these policies. This suggests a need to standardize reporting to ensure ERPO utilization and impact can be evaluated.Mini abstract: This descriptive study assessed use, implementation and data gaps surrounding Extreme Risk Protection Orders in Colorado.Abbreviations: Extreme risk protection orders (ERPOs) are civil restraining orders that intend to reduce firearm deaths by temporarily removing firearms from individuals who are threatening violence to themselves or others.

Updated Estimate of the Number of Extreme Risk Protection Orders Needed to Prevent 1 Suicide

Extreme risk protection orders (ERPOs)-also known as red flag, risk warrant, and gun violence restraining orders-authorize law enforcement, family members, and sometimes others to petition a court to remove firearms from and prevent the acquisition of new firearms by a person judged to pose an immediate danger to themselves or others. Previous estimates suggest that 1 suicide is prevented for every 10 ERPOs issued, a number needed to treat that depends critically on the counterfactual estimate of the proportion of suicidal acts by ERPO respondents that would have involved firearms in the absence of ERPOs. To empirically inform updated estimates of the number of ERPOs needed to prevent 1 suicide. This cohort study used data from California for method-specific suicides by handgun ownership (October 18, 2004, to December 31, 2015). Handgun-owning suicide decedents in California were identified using individual-level registry data about lawful handgun ownership linked to cause-specific mortality for a cohort of more than 25 million adults. The study also used data from Connecticut for method-specific suicides among ERPO respondents who died by suicide, extracted from published data (October 1999 to June 2013). Data analysis was performed in December 2023. Handgun ownership. The primary outcomes were the number and distribution of suicidal acts by handgun owners in California, estimated using method-specific suicide mortality data and published case fatality ratios, and the counterfactual number and distribution of suicidal acts and deaths among ERPO respondents in Connecticut had no ERPOs been issued. A total of 1216 handgun owners (mean [SD] age, 50 [18] years; 1019 male [83.8%]) died by suicide during the study period. Among male handgun owners in California, 28% of suicidal acts involved firearms, 54% involved drug poisoning, 9% involved cutting or piercing, 3% involved hanging or suffocation, 2% involved poisoning with solids and/or liquids, and the remaining 4% involved other methods. Assuming this distribution approximates the counterfactual distribution among ERPO respondents in Connecticut in the absence of ERPOs, 1 suicide death was prevented for every 22 ERPOs issued. The estimates produced by this cohort study of California handgun owners suggest that ERPOs can play an important role in averting deaths among high-risk individuals.

Extreme Risk Protection Orders in Connecticut, 2013-2020.

Twenty-one states and the District of Columbia have enacted Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO) statutes, which allow temporary removal of firearms from individuals who pose an imminent risk of harm to themselves or others. Connecticut was the first state to enact such a law in 1999. The law's implementation and use between 1999 and 2013 were previously described, finding that ERPOs were pursued rarely for the first decade and that most orders were issued in response to concerns about suicide or self-harm rather than about interpersonal violence. The current study analyzes over 1,400 ERPOs in Connecticut between 2013 and 2020 in several domains: respondent demographics, circumstances leading to ERPO filing, type of threat (suicide, violence to others, or both), number and type of firearms removed, prevalence of mental illness and drug and alcohol use, and legal outcomes. Results are similar to the earlier study, indicating that ERPO respondents in Connecticut are primarily White, male, middle-aged residents of small towns and suburbs who pose a risk of harm to themselves (67.9%) more often than to others (42.8%). Significant gender differences between ERPO respondents are discussed, as are state-specific trends over time and differences between Connecticut and other states with published ERPO data.

A Common Ground Gun Violence Prevention Policy Package.

In 2022 we conducted a literature review, surveyed 1078 gun owners, and conducted post-survey focus groups and interviews of gun owners and non-gun owners, to determine a common ground gun violence prevention (GVP) policy package. This allowed us to see policies that would save lives and be widely accepted: (1) violent misdemeanor laws, (2) state permit laws, combined with universal background checks; (3) red flag laws. Based on our review of relevant research, we conservatively estimate that in states without any of the policy package components, implementing this package would result in a 27.9% reduction in firearm deaths. We believe that polarization between firearm owners and non-firearm owners, which has thwarted a widely supported response to the problem of gun violence, is largely a harmful myth that can be overcome by including gun owners in the process of fashioning an effective policy approach.

Five Years of Extreme Risk Protection Orders in Oregon: A Descriptive Analysis.

Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO) laws have received increasing attention as a tool to prevent firearm suicide and homicide, including mass shootings. However, important gaps remain in our understanding of ERPO usage and implementation. Using the Oregon Judicial Case Information Network database, we abstracted data from all ERPO petitions filed in Oregon from 2018 to 2022, the first five years after the law took effect (N = 649). ERPO petitions were filed in 29 of 36 counties (81%, range 0-105 per county, median 11), against respondents 17-96 years of age (median: 42). Of ERPOs filed, 78% were initially granted. While only 22% of respondents in initially-granted ERPOs requested a hearing, when a hearing was held, nearly half (44%) of ERPOs were dismissed. The majority of ERPO petitions were motivated by threats of harm to respondents and others (n = 327, 50%), followed by threats of harm to others-only (n = 220, 34%) or respondents-only (n = 81, 12%). During the 5-year period, 72 (11%) ERPO petitions cited threats of mass violence as a motivating factor, including 24 (4%) petitions citing threats to schools or college campuses. The majority of ERPOs were filed by law enforcement officers (60%), and these petitions were significantly more often granted than those filed by family/household members (96% vs. 67%, p < .0001). We also found evidence of important gaps in documentation, including of respondent race (unavailable for 191 respondents, 29%) and of weapon removal or disposition after the ERPO was granted (unavailable in 350 cases, 69%). This study of long-term patterns of ERPO petitions highlights trends in usage and suggests areas where improvement may be possible, with implications for other states that have adopted or are considering similar ERPO laws.

Petitions for Extreme Risk Protection Orders and Second Amendment Sanctuary Status in Colorado

ImportanceExtreme risk protection orders (ERPOs) temporarily bar individuals adjudicated as being at risk of violence (including suicide) from buying or possessing firearms. In protest, many US jurisdictions have declared themselves “Second Amendment sanctuaries” (2A sanctuaries). Many 2A sanctuaries continue to use ERPOs in low numbers, suggesting a poorly defined risk threshold at which they are acceptable.ObjectiveTo characterize circumstances under which ERPOs are used in 2A sanctuaries, highlighting their most broadly acceptable applications.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis cross-sectional study of civil court documents analyzed petitions for ERPOs filed in Colorado from January 2020 to December 2022. All petitions during the study period were included following de-duplication. These include petitions filed by law enforcement and family members against adults allegedly at risk of firearm violence across the state. Data were analyzed on a rolling basis between January 2020 and June 2023.ExposureERPO petition filed in Colorado.Main Outcomes and MeasuresSeventy-seven data elements defined a priori were abstracted from all petitions and case files, including respondent demographics, petitioner types (family or law enforcement), types of threats (self, other, mass violence, combination), violence risk factors, and case outcomes (granted, denied).ResultsOf a total 338 ERPOs filed in Colorado, 126 (37.3%) occurred in 2A sanctuaries. Sixty-one of these 2A petitions were granted emergency orders, and 40 were full 1-year ERPOs after a hearing. Forty ERPOs (31.7%) were petitioned for by law enforcement. Petitions in non-2A counties were more likely to have been filed by law enforcement (138 of 227 [64.9%] vs 40 of 126 [31.7%]; P < .001) and to have had an emergency order granted (177 of 227 [78.0%] vs 61 of 126 [48.4%]; P < .001) than in 2A sanctuaries. Qualitative analysis of cases in 2A sanctuaries revealed common aggravating risk characteristics, including respondents experiencing hallucinations, histories of police interaction, and substance misuse. ERPOs have been granted in 2A sanctuaries against individuals threatening all forms of violence we abstracted for (themselves, others, and mass violence).Conclusions and RelevanceIn this examination of ERPO petitions across Colorado, more than a third of filings occurred in 2A sanctuaries. Nonetheless, law enforcement represent proportionately fewer petitions in these areas, and petitions are less likely to be granted. Serious mental illness, substance misuse, and prior interactions with law enforcement featured prominently in 2A sanctuary petitions. These case circumstances highlight dangerous situations in which ERPOs are an acceptable risk-prevention tool, even in areas politically predisposed to opposing them.

AOA Critical Issues Symposium: Gun Violence as a Public Health Crisis.

Gun violence is an epidemic throughout the United States and is increasing around the world-it is a public health crisis. The impact of gun violence is not limited to the victims (our patients); it also extends to the physicians and caregivers who are taking care of these patients every day. Even more broadly, gun violence affects those living and going to work in potentially dangerous environments. The "vicarious trauma" that is experienced in these situations can have long-term effects on physicians, nurses, and communities. Importantly, socioeconomic disparities and community deprivation strongly correlate with gun violence. Systemic factors that are deeply ingrained in our society can increase concerns for these underrepresented patient populations and cause increased stressors with substantial health consequences, including delayed fracture-healing and poorer overall health outcomes. It is incumbent on us as physicians to take an active role in speaking up for our patients. The importance of advocacy efforts to change policy (not politics) and continue to push for improvement in the increasingly challenging environments in which patients and physicians find themselves cannot be overstated. Multiple national organizations, including many orthopaedic and general surgery associations, have made statements advocating for change. The American College of Surgeons, in collaboration with many other medical organizations, has supported background checks, registration, licensure, firearm education and training, safe storage practices, red flag laws, addressing mental health issues, and more research to better inform an approach going forward and to address the root causes of violence. We encourage the orthopaedic surgery community to stand together to protect each other and our patients, both physically and mentally, with agreement on these principles.

Association of Client and Provider Race with Approaches Pursued by Social Workers for Reducing Firearm Access.

Social workers assess and intervene to prevent harm among clients at risk of harm to self (HTS) and harm to others (HTO) with a firearm. This study sought to assess the impact of client race on social workers' approaches to reduce firearm access when they weighed voluntary (e.g., store out-of-home) and involuntary (e.g., extreme risk protection order) removal methods. We considered the role of social workers' self-identified race as a moderator of this relationship, comparing white (single race) and Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) social workers. A survey was distributed to Washington state social workers (n = 9073) who were presented with two case vignettes, each randomized to view the client's race as Black or white. Logistic regression was used to assess the association between the client's race and the pursuit of voluntary or involuntary methods, stratified by social workers' race. Among the participants (n = 1306), 26% pursued at least one involuntary care plan option for the HTS client, and 59% for the HTO client. The Black client at risk of HTS had lower odds of an involuntary care plan option compared to the white client (OR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.54-0.88), while the Black client at risk of HTO had higher odds of an involuntary care plan options (OR = 1.13, 95% CI 1.07-1.66). These associations were not statistically significantly different between white (single race selected) and BIPOC social workers. This study contributes to the growing understanding of potential racial disparities in social workers' decision-making regarding firearm access reduction strategies.

Integration of extreme risk protection orders into the clinical workflow: Qualitative comparison of clinician perspectives.

Extreme risk protection orders (ERPO) seek to temporarily reduce access to firearms for individuals at imminent risk of harming themselves and/or others. Clinicians, including physicians, nurse practitioners, and social workers regularly assess circumstances related to patients' risk of firearm-related harm in the context of providing routine and acute clinical care. While clinicians cannot independently file ERPOs in most states, they can counsel patients or contact law enforcement about filing ERPOs. This study sought to understand clinicians' perspectives about integrating ERPO counseling and contacting law enforcement about ERPOs into their clinical workflow. We analyzed responses to open-ended questions from an online survey distributed May-July of 2021 to all licensed physicians (n = 23,051), nurse practitioners (n = 8,049), and social workers (n = 6,910) in Washington state. Of the 4,242 survey participants, 1,126 (26.5%) responded to at least one of ten open-ended questions. Two coders conducted content analysis. Clinicians identified barriers and facilitators to integrating ERPOs into the clinical workflow; these influenced their preferences on who should counsel or contact law enforcement about ERPOs. Barriers included perceptions of professional scope, knowledge gaps, institutional barriers, perceived ERPO effectiveness and constitutionality, concern for safety (clinician and patient), and potential for damaging provider-patient therapeutic relationship. Facilitators to address these barriers included trainings and resources, dedicated time for counseling and remuneration for time spent counseling, education on voluntary removal options, and ability to refer patients to another clinician. Participants who were hesitant to be the primary clinician to counsel patients or contact law enforcement about ERPOs requested the ability to refer patients to a specialist, such as social workers or a designated ERPO specialist. Results highlight the complex perspectives across clinician types regarding the integration of ERPO counseling into the clinical workflow. We highlight areas to be addressed for clinicians to engage with ERPOs.

Fatal Firearm Violence Among American Indians and Alaska Natives.

There is a dearth of population-based studies regarding firearm-related deaths and years of potential life lost among American Indians and Alaska Natives (AI/AN). Using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) We Based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System (WISQARS) data for the three most recent years (2018-2020), we analyzed the demographic characteristics of AI/ANs who succumbed to firearm violence. AI/ANs averaged almost 500 firearm-related deaths per year. The majority of these deaths were observed among individuals 20-39 years of age (53%), males (84.4%), and in the West (55.3%). A plurality of these firearm-related deaths were suicides (48.9%) followed by homicides (43.5%). During the 3-year study period, the age-adjusted firearm death rate increased almost 5 times the growth of the AI/AN population. Also, a staggering 67,050 years of potential life were lost before the age of 80 years (YPLL80) during this period. Firearm suicides were responsible for the largest proportion of YPLL80s (48.5%). Traditional legal interventions [e.g., child access prevention (CAP) laws and extreme risk protection orders (ERPO)], if expanded to more states could potentially help reduce AI/AN firearm mortality. None of the 10 states with the highest firearm mortality of AI/AN have ERPOs and 8 of the 10 do not have CAP laws. Also, a renewed focus on cultural continuity and indigenous protective factors is essential to ameliorate the level of firearm violence in AI/ANs.

Refreshing the Tree of Liberty: An Introduction to the Case Against Gun Control

This paper analyzes the Second Amendment regarding whether or not it affirms an individual the right to own firearms by looking at previous Supreme Court rulings and the historical context in which the Second Amendment was written: coming to the conclusion that it does support an individual’s right to bear arms. Gun control measures, including but not limited to assault weapon bans, red-flag laws, and licensing, are reviewed by looking at how the policies work and what the effects of each are. The data on these measures were ultimately found to have no conclusive evidence supporting an inverse relationship between gun control measures and violent crime. Ethical concerns relating to gun control measures were analyzed by establishing an ethical framework of natural rights. This framework leads to the conclusion that gun control measures such as assault weapons bans, red-flag laws, and licensing are unethical on the grounds of violating natural rights. This paper also looks at the effectiveness of bans and restrictions advocated by gun control advoactes and compares them to bans and restrictions that were previously and or currently in effect in American history. Concerns on gun policy such as public safety, the defensive usage of firearms, and common arguments for gun control are analyzed and critiqued in this paper.

Extreme Risk Protection Orders: Legislative Intent and Clinician Guidance.

In this second column of a 2-part series exploring extreme risk protections orders, we utilize recent events in Colorado, including legislative efforts to expand the list of eligible petitioners to include clinicians, as an opportunity to explore questions and challenges faced by mental health and medical professionals serving in this capacity. Clinicians are in need of more clear guidance, given an emerging role that comes without clear evidence or practice standards to inform individualized clinical decision-making, and which potentially pits public safety interests against patient care needs, especially those pertaining to therapeutic relationships. In the interim, clinicians will best serve their patients by continuing to practice in a fashion that is analogous to decision-making around other interventions with serious implications for patient autonomy such as involuntary hospitalization. Ongoing collaboration with legislators is needed to arrive at laws that are informed by the limitations inherent in clinical risk assessment and that can be translated into clinical practices that simultaneously support patient needs and community safety.