ArticleInjury epidemiology2020
The color of risk protection orders: gun violence, gun laws, and racial justice.
Article in Injury epidemiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- State-Level Extreme-Risk Protection Order Policies, Mental Health, and Gun Carrying: Demographic and Racial Disparities in U.S. Youth.Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research · 2026Article
- Weighing Medical and Legal Interventions and Potential Harms for Clients at Risk of Firearm Injuries and Deaths.Social work research · 2025Article
- Extreme risk protection order use in six US states: a descriptive study.Injury epidemiology · 2025Article
- Association of Client and Provider Race with Approaches Pursued by Social Workers for Reducing Firearm Access.Journal of racial and ethnic health disparities · 2025Article
- "Has this been tested? Who has it helped? Who has it hurt?": Public perceptions about California's extreme risk protection order law.PloS one · 2025Article
- Cohort Study of Downgraded Misdemeanor Convictions and Subsequent Violent Crime: Differences by Defendant Race and Ethnicity.AJPM focus · 2024Article
- Gun violence restraining orders in California, 2016-2018: case details and respondent mortality.Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention · 2022Article
- Survey of Washington clinicians' willingness to use and preferences related to extreme risk protection orders.Preventive medicine reports · 2022Article
- Public Awareness of and Personal Willingness to Use California's Extreme Risk Protection Order Law to Prevent Firearm-Related Harm.JAMA health forum · 2021Article
- Civilian Use of Deadly Force in Self-Defense: Public Health, Stand Your Ground.American journal of public health · 2021Article
- Correction to: The color of risk protection orders: gun violence, gun laws, and racial justice.Injury epidemiology · 2020Article
- Arrests Among Extreme Risk Protection Order Respondents in Washington State: A Statewide Retrospective Cohort Study.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingArticle
- Mental Illness, Mass Shootings, and the Future of Psychiatric Research into American Gun Violence.Harvard review of psychiatryArticle
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundExtreme risk protection order (ERPO) laws give municipal police officers new authority, through a civil restraining order, to remove firearms from people who are deemed to pose an imminent risk of causing serious harm to others or themselves. Despite the expected public safety benefit of ERPOs, it is possible that implicit racial bias could infect ERPO petitions, the court processes that authorize and extend the gun removal orders, or the behavior of the police in serving and enforcing them. How might potential racial disparities in ERPO implementation qualify the evidence that this intervention saves lives? What should gun violence prevention researchers and stakeholders do to promote racial justice? MAIN TEXT: This commentary reflects upon an innovative and promising legal tool for gun violence prevention through the lens of racial justice concerns. Emerging research, guided by a public health paradigm, asks whether ERPOs save lives. But now is the time to pose other important questions as well. Preventing gun violence and mitigating the disproportionate impact of arrests and incarceration in communities of color are two important goals that may collide. The origin story of many U.S. firearm restrictions, and the continuing disparities in their enforcement and implementation, are intertwined with the legacy of systemic racial discrimination in policing and criminal justice in the United States. The public policy challenge of balancing risk and rights is increasingly fraught, especially as constituencies with a different interest in one or the other concern find themselves standing on opposite sides of a privilege chasm.
conclusionSaving lives from gun violence matters, but ensuring that the lives saved are also respected--free from racial oppression, afforded equal justice--also matters. This commentary is a call to include racial disparities impact as an essential outcome of interest for ERPO studies specifically, but more broadly for all public health law research studies at the intersection of firearm injury prevention, law enforcement, and criminal justice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.