Understanding the circumstances and stakeholder perceptions of gun violence restraining order use in California: A qualitative study

Rocco Pallin, Elizabeth Tomsich, Julia P. Schleimer, Veronica A. Pear, Amanda Charbonneau, Garen J. Wintemute, Christopher E. Knoepke

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Research Summary: Risk-based firearm removal policies are relatively new, and research on their implementation and effectiveness is limited. Using an interpretive phenomenological approach, we interviewed stakeholders in California's gun violence restraining order (GVRO) process to learn about circumstances in which GVROs are appropriate. Two primary themes emerged: (1) GVROs are most useful when there is acute risk of harm with a firearm, in the context of cognitive decline, or as related cases proceed through the courts, and (2) GVROs fill a gap in the policy landscape. Perceptions varied regarding the role of GVROs among preexisting violence prevention tools. Several informants perceived racial/ethnic disparities in GVRO use. Policy Implications: Understanding practitioners’ perceptions of GVRO utility may help inform implementation and ensure that these policies equitably improve public health and safety. These results highlight the need for additional research on the impact of GVROs and possible disparities in use.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalCriminology and Public Policy
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - 2021

Keywords

  • ERPO
  • extreme risk protection order
  • firearm injury prevention
  • gun violence
  • gun violence restraining order
  • GVRO
  • interpretive phenomenological approach
  • policy
  • qualitative research

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Administration
  • Law

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Understanding the circumstances and stakeholder perceptions of gun violence restraining order use in California: A qualitative study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this