Scholarlink

Background <p>Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO) laws allow civil courts to authorize orders to temporarily prevent a person from purchasing or possessing firearms upon finding that they pose a significant risk of harm to themselves or others. In Louisiana, a state with one of the highest rates of firearm homicide of women in the nation, multiple attempts to pass ERPO legislation have failed despite evidence of their effectiveness. We sought to identify places of common ground on the matter of domestic violence against women in Louisiana and to understand how perspectives on politics and policy solutions – including ERPOs – diverged from there.</p> Methods <p>We interviewed 16 key informants purposefully recruited to ensure diversity in political ideology, professional roles, and regions of Louisiana. All held active roles in gun rights or gun regulation advocacy and lobbying; law enforcement and judicial systems; public health and domestic violence prevention; and state policymaking. Verbatim transcripts were analyzed via thematic analysis with deductive coding following the Multiple Streams Framework.</p> Results <p>Among key informants, there was nearly universal agreement on the matter of domestic violence as a problem. However, there was ambiguity around the role of firearms in domestic violence and the utility of targeting their removal for the prevention of fatal violence against women. Concerns specific to ERPO law as one such approach included anticipated misuse of the law, uncertainty about its relationship to existing firearm transfer laws, undue burdens on gun owners, and due process. Aspects of the political and cultural context were identified as barriers to the passage of ERPO, including concentrated political polarity, entrenched patriarchy, and lack of connectedness with growing distrust and dehumanization of politicians and of each other. Suggested strategies for overcoming barriers to an ERPO law in Louisiana included broader education about the law and provisions, long-term relationship building outside of legislative sessions, and aisle-bridging collaboration on the drafting of legislation.</p> Conclusions <p>Understanding the factors that have constrained ERPO legislation in Louisiana can inform research and advocacy efforts to promote evidence-based policy decisions that promote the health and safety of all people.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

In search of common ground: Louisiana’s resistance to an extreme risk protection order law for domestic violence prevention

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年7月18日

查看全文
  • Maeve E. Wallace,
  • Dovile Vilda,
  • Veronica A. Pear,
  • Jocelyn Pinkerton,
  • Jennifer A. Hunt,
  • Jaquelyn L. Jahn

摘要

Background

Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO) laws allow civil courts to authorize orders to temporarily prevent a person from purchasing or possessing firearms upon finding that they pose a significant risk of harm to themselves or others. In Louisiana, a state with one of the highest rates of firearm homicide of women in the nation, multiple attempts to pass ERPO legislation have failed despite evidence of their effectiveness. We sought to identify places of common ground on the matter of domestic violence against women in Louisiana and to understand how perspectives on politics and policy solutions – including ERPOs – diverged from there.

Methods

We interviewed 16 key informants purposefully recruited to ensure diversity in political ideology, professional roles, and regions of Louisiana. All held active roles in gun rights or gun regulation advocacy and lobbying; law enforcement and judicial systems; public health and domestic violence prevention; and state policymaking. Verbatim transcripts were analyzed via thematic analysis with deductive coding following the Multiple Streams Framework.

Results

Among key informants, there was nearly universal agreement on the matter of domestic violence as a problem. However, there was ambiguity around the role of firearms in domestic violence and the utility of targeting their removal for the prevention of fatal violence against women. Concerns specific to ERPO law as one such approach included anticipated misuse of the law, uncertainty about its relationship to existing firearm transfer laws, undue burdens on gun owners, and due process. Aspects of the political and cultural context were identified as barriers to the passage of ERPO, including concentrated political polarity, entrenched patriarchy, and lack of connectedness with growing distrust and dehumanization of politicians and of each other. Suggested strategies for overcoming barriers to an ERPO law in Louisiana included broader education about the law and provisions, long-term relationship building outside of legislative sessions, and aisle-bridging collaboration on the drafting of legislation.

Conclusions

Understanding the factors that have constrained ERPO legislation in Louisiana can inform research and advocacy efforts to promote evidence-based policy decisions that promote the health and safety of all people.