Leslie M Barnard , Nisha Batta , Megan McCarthy , Kimberly Thies , Caitlin Robinson , Marcus Schultze , Marian E. Betz , Christopher E. Knoepke
{"title":"Implementation of Extreme Risk Protection Orders in Colorado from 2020 to 2022: Firearm relinquishment and return and petitioner characteristics","authors":"Leslie M Barnard , Nisha Batta , Megan McCarthy , Kimberly Thies , Caitlin Robinson , Marcus Schultze , Marian E. Betz , Christopher E. Knoepke","doi":"10.1016/j.pmedr.2024.102800","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Firearm 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.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>All 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.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Over 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.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Results 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.</p><p>Mini abstract: This descriptive study assessed use, implementation and data gaps surrounding Extreme Risk Protection Orders in Colorado.</p><p>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.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211335524002158/pdfft?md5=92552cfe97dbf017bb93344a59d6842f&pid=1-s2.0-S2211335524002158-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2211335524002158","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction
Firearm 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.
Methods
All 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.
Results
Over 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.
Conclusion
Results 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.