“Extreme risk protection orders are often talked about as a way to prevent suicide, but our findings show they may do more than that. People subject to these orders in California were less likely to be arrested for violence or other crimes while the orders were in effect and even after they ended, suggesting ERPOs have a meaningful role to play in preventing interpersonal violence.”
-Veronica Pear, assistant professor and lead author
The Background Check and Licensing Policies for Firearm Purchase Database includes state-level data from 1980-2019 on factors relevant to the design, implementation, and enforcement of background checks and licensing policies for firearm transfers. This includes policy details (e.g. fingerprinting required, license duration), information about related policies (e.g. state prohibiting criteria), and criminal history database details. Data are collated from multiple public sources.
To understand how the implementation and enforcement of universal background check (UBC) laws may influence the use of background checks during private party firearm transfers in the USA.
Following the Supreme Court’s decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, which ruled a New York concealed-carry permitting requirement unconstitutional, laws restricting the public carrying of firearms in “sensitive places,” like college campuses, have received increasing attention. However, there is little evidence for whether permissive campus carry policies increase firearm violence or, via deterrence, reduce general crime on campus.
Firearm violence is a major public health problem in the United States, yet most states lack a mechanism to temporarily remove firearms from individuals who are at high and imminent risk of harming themselves or others and are not otherwise prohibited. Extreme risk protection order (ERPO) laws are intended to close this gap. The current study examines the passage of California’s gun violence restraining order (GVRO) bill using Kingdon’s multiple streams framework.
To date, there have been no peer-reviewed studies in the United States estimating the impact of gun-free zone policies in alcohol-serving establishments on rates of firearm violence in and around such establishments. In this study, we utilized a crossectional design to estimate the impact of Texas’s 51% alcohol law, which prohibits the carrying of firearms in establishments that generate over half of their revenue from alcohol sales.
We study political violence as a public health issue, and in 2022, we launched an annual, nationally representative survey to explore personal willingness to engage in political violence. With strongly contested elections just weeks away, we’d like to share what we’ve learned.
Abstract BACKGROUNDMost Americans believe that gun-free zones make locations more vulnerable to violent crimes, particularly active shootings. However, there is no empirical evidence regarding the impact of gun-free zones on protecting locations from violence.
UC Davis Health News covered the publication of new CVP research that used a unique study design to compare the risk of active shootings in gun-free zones as compared to gun-allowing establishments. “After accounting for matched pairs, our analyses showed that active shootings were 62.5% less likely to occur in gun-free establishments than in gun-allowing places,” said Paul Reeping, lead author of the study and CVP postdoctoral scholar.
