Disarming abusers: domestic violence protective order (DVPO) firearm restriction processes and dispositions

Research summary We investigated the degree to which legislatively mandated firearm restrictions for domestic violence protective orders (DVPOs) have been implemented in North Carolina. We used a representative sample of n = 406 DVPO hearings (2016-17) and found that defendant access to firearms was...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Authors: Kafka, Julie M. (Author) ; Hoffman, Claire G. (Author) ; Moracco, Kathryn E. (Author) ; Williams, Deanna S. (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Published: [2022]
In: Criminology & public policy
Year: 2022, Volume: 21, Issue: 2, Pages: 379-404
Online Access: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Keywords:
Description
Summary:Research summary We investigated the degree to which legislatively mandated firearm restrictions for domestic violence protective orders (DVPOs) have been implemented in North Carolina. We used a representative sample of n = 406 DVPO hearings (2016-17) and found that defendant access to firearms was seldom discussed (23.81%). Among granted orders (n = 303), 69.5% prohibited defendant firearm possession (n = 238) but only 38.61% ordered firearm surrender (n = 143). There were higher odds of restrictions when the defendant had threatened to kill the plaintiff (OR for prohibited possession: 2.25, CI: 1.02, 4.97; OR for firearm surrender: 1.93, CI: 1.09, 3.40); no other lethality indicators were significant. Judges verbally announced firearm restrictions only in one out of three cases (30.87% of DVPOs granted with prohibited possession; 33.02% of firearm surrender cases). Policy implications Protocol to assess firearm access, implement firearm restrictions, and communicate these provisions to litigants must be more clearly and consistently applied in the courtroom.
ISSN:1745-9133
DOI:10.1111/1745-9133.12581