2006
DOI: 10.1177/0193841x06287307
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Do Laws Restricting Access to Firearms by Domestic Violence Offenders Prevent Intimate Partner Homicide?

Abstract: Domestic violence imposes a large cost on society. The authors exploit state variation in timing to examine the impact of three types of law on intimate partner homicides. These laws restrict access to firearms by individuals who are subject to a restraining order or have been convicted of a domestic violence misdemeanor or allow law enforcement officers to confiscate firearms at a domestic violence scene. The authors find that female intimate partner homicide rates decline 7% after a state passes a restrainin… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

7
143
0
2

Year Published

2008
2008
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 160 publications
(160 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
7
143
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…State laws are required, and a substantial number of states have yet to pass enabling legislation. 7,11 The passage of legislation to ensure that federal law more fully reaches its potential to reduce gun-related threats and fatal and nonfatal injuries by intimate partners merits effort.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…State laws are required, and a substantial number of states have yet to pass enabling legislation. 7,11 The passage of legislation to ensure that federal law more fully reaches its potential to reduce gun-related threats and fatal and nonfatal injuries by intimate partners merits effort.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A recent ecological study documented a 7% reduction in intimate partner homicides in states with domestic violence restraining order firearm prohibitions. 7 The authors, unable to assess how well the laws were implemented and enforced, cautioned that the full effect of the law may not be evident.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…6 In recognition of the inherent danger posed by IPV offenders with ready access to firearms, as of 2002, federal law and 24 states prohibited firearm possession by individuals who are subject to certain court orders of protection for victims of IPV. 7 An evaluation of these laws found that firearm restrictions for defendants of protection orders for domestic violence (PODV) were associated with an 8% reduction in the rate of intimate partner homicide. 7 In an attempt to ensure that IPV offenders are disarmed once prohibited from owning firearms, 16 states have passed laws that either allow or require judges issuing PODVs to order defendants to surrender any firearms in their possession.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…7 An evaluation of these laws found that firearm restrictions for defendants of protection orders for domestic violence (PODV) were associated with an 8% reduction in the rate of intimate partner homicide. 7 In an attempt to ensure that IPV offenders are disarmed once prohibited from owning firearms, 16 states have passed laws that either allow or require judges issuing PODVs to order defendants to surrender any firearms in their possession. 8 The impact of these laws is likely to depend on effective enforcement.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In 1994, the Violent Crime Control Act made it illegal for anyone to possess or purchase a firearm while subject to a restraining order that protects a spouse, former spouse, cohabitating partner or the child of an intimate partner (Vigdor and Mercy, 2006). Under the 1996 expansion of the Gun Control Act, people with a misdemeanor conviction for domestic violence are also prohibited from owning or purchasing a gun.…”
Section: Firearms Access and Disqualificationsmentioning
confidence: 99%