Search

Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs) allow a court to restrict firearm access for individuals ("respondents") at imminent risk of harm to self/others. Little is known about ERPOs use for older adults, a population with higher rates of suicide and dementia. We abstracted ERPO cases through June 30, 2020, from California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Maryland, and Washington. We restricted our analysis to petitions for older (≥65 years) respondents, stratified by documented cognitive impairment. Among 6,699 ERPO petitions, 672 (10.0%) were for older adults; 13.7% (n = 92) of these noted cognitive impairment. Most were white (75.7%) men (90.2%). Cognitively impaired (vs. non-impaired) respondents were older (mean age 78.2 vs 72.7 years) and more likely to have documented irrational/erratic behavior (30.4% vs 15.7%), but less likely to have documented suicidality (33.7% vs 55.0%). At the time of the petition, 56.2% of older adult respondents had documented firearm access (median accessible firearms = 3, range 1–160). Approximately 14% of ERPO petitions for older adults involved cognitive impairment; one-third of these noted suicide risk. Studies examining ERPO implementation across states may inform usage and awareness. ERPOs may reduce firearm access among older adults with cognitive impairment, suicidality, or risk of violence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This study sought to determine the association between changes in state-level beer excise tax and firearm homicide rates among individuals aged 15-34years.Methods: A time series analysis with synthetic controls was conducted for the years 2003-2015. Exposed states changed the beer excise tax during the study period. Synthetic controls were weighted mimics that combined portions of unexposed states using state-year specific demographic and firearm covariates. Average annual incidence rate differences were calculated between each exposed state and its synthetic control. Alcohol taxes were available through the National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism and firearm homicide rates were obtained from theCenters for Disease Control and Prevention. States that changed the beer excise tax but forwhich <2years of pre-exposure data were available were excluded. Data were collected in 2017 and analyzedin 2018.Results: Five states met inclusion criteria, and all raised the beer excise tax: Illinois (2009), New York (2009), North Carolina (2009), Connecticut (2011), and Rhode Island (2013). The percentage increase in beer excise tax ranged from 10% to 27%. Differences in pre-exposure firearm homicide rates between exposed states and synthetic controls were minimal. The increase in beer excise tax was associated with a lower average annual firearm homicide rate in all states except Illinois (Rhode Island: incidence rate difference= -2.48, Connecticut: incidence rate difference= -2.57, New York: incidence rate difference= -1.45, North Carolina: incidence rate difference= -0.45, and Illinois: incidence rate difference=1.54 per 100,000 population).Conclusions: Among individuals aged 15-34years, price-sensitive consumption of beer may representone feasible tool for policymakers seeking to reduce rates of firearm homicide. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Extreme risk protection orders (ERPOs), also known as red flag laws, are a potential tool to prevent firearm violence, including mass shootings, but little is currently known about the extent of their use in cases of mass shooting threats or about the threats themselves. We collected and abstracted information from ERPO cases from six states (California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Maryland, and Washington). Ten percent (N = 662) of all ERPO cases (N = 6787) were in response to a threat of killing at least 3 people. Using these cases, we created a typology of multiple victim/mass shooting threats, the most common of which was the maximum casualty threat. The most common target for a multiple victim/mass shooting threat was a K-12 school, followed by businesses, then intimate partners and their children and families. Judges granted 93% of petitions that involved these threats at the temporary ERPO stage and, of those cases in which a final hearing was held, judges granted 84% of final ERPOs. While we cannot know how many of the 662 ERPO cases precipitated by a threat would have resulted in a multiple victim/mass shooting event had ERPO laws not been used to prohibit the purchase and possession of firearms, the study provides evidence at least that ERPOs are being used in six states in a substantial number of these kinds of cases that could have ended in tragedy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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., (© 2024 American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law.)