ArticleInjury epidemiology2021
Colorado's first year of extreme risk protection orders.
Article in Injury epidemiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Extreme Risk Protection Orders Among Military Service Members and Veterans.JAMA network open · 2026Article
- Using extreme risk protection orders to prevent violence among people experiencing homelessness in California and Colorado: a case series.Injury epidemiology · 2026Article
- Article
- "Police have more standing" vs. "I don't need the cops to stand in for me": public perspectives on police-initiated ERPO petitions in California.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Extreme risk protection order use in six US states: a descriptive study.Injury epidemiology · 2025Article
- A multi-state evaluation of extreme risk protection orders: a research protocol.Injury epidemiology · 2024Article
- Implementation of Extreme Risk Protection Orders in Colorado from 2020 to 2022: Firearm relinquishment and return and petitioner characteristics.Preventive medicine reports · 2024Article
- Petitions for Extreme Risk Protection Orders and Second Amendment Sanctuary Status in Colorado.JAMA network open · 2024Article
- Law Enforcement Officer Knowledge of, Attitudes Toward, and Willingness to Use Extreme Risk Protection Orders.JAMA network open · 2023Article
- 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
- Professional Training and Public Education Can Support Extreme Risk Protection Order Utilization: A Qualitative Study of Professionals in Oregon.Inquiry : a journal of medical care organization, provision and financingArticle
- Extreme Risk Protection Orders in Older Adults in Six U.S. States: A Descriptive Study.Clinical gerontologistArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundExtreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs) are a relatively new type of law that are being considered or implemented in many states in the United States. Colorado's law went into effect on January 1, 2020, after significant controversy and concern over potential misuse of the law to confiscate weapons; many (n = 37 of 64) counties declared themselves "2nd Amendment (2A) sanctuaries" and said they would not enforce the law. Here, reviewed the patterns of use of the law during its first year.
methodsWe obtained all court records for ERPO petitions filed between January 1 and December 31, 2020. Data elements were abstracted by trained staff using a standardized guide. We calculated the proportion of petitions that were approved or denied/dismissed, identified cases of obvious misuse, and examined patterns by 2A county status. FINDING AND
resultsIn 2020, 109 ERPO petitions were filed in Colorado; of these, 61 were granted for a temporary ERPO and 49 for a full (year-long) ERPO. Most petitions filed by law enforcement officers were granted (85%), compared to only 15% of petitions filed by family or household members. Of the 37 2A sanctuary counties, 24% had at least one petition filed, versus 48% of non-2A sanctuary counties. Across the 2A counties, there were 1.52 ERPOs filed per 100,000 population, compared to 2.05 ERPOs filed per 100,000 in non-2A counties. There were 4 cases of obvious law misuse; none of those petitions resulted in an ERPO or firearm confiscation.
conclusionState-level studies suggest ERPOs may prevent firearm injuries. Robust implementation, however, is critical for maximal effect. Understanding ERPO experiences and challenges can inform policy creation and enaction in other states, including identifying how best to address concerns and facilitate evaluation.
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.