A Case Study of Maine's Risk-Based Firearm Removal Law.

Area of Science:

• Public Health
• Criminology
• Health Policy

Background:

• Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs) are legal tools to reduce firearm suicide by temporarily removing firearms from individuals exhibiting dangerous behavior.
• ERPOs focus on assessing future risk of harm, distinguishing them from status-based firearm restrictions.
• Separating individuals in crisis from lethal means is emerging as a key strategy to reduce firearm mortality.

Purpose of the Study:

• To evaluate Maine's unique risk-based firearm removal law.
• To compare Maine's approach with policies in Connecticut, Maryland, and Vermont.
• To identify barriers and facilitators for implementing and utilizing firearm removal policies.

Main Methods:

• Conducted semistructured interviews with diverse stakeholders in Maine and three comparison states.
• Interviewees included law enforcement, legal professionals, and healthcare providers.
• Utilized qualitative analysis to identify themes, concepts, and recommendations.

Main Results:

• Maine's law excludes individuals not deemed mentally ill from firearm removal, limiting its scope.
• Mandatory provider evaluations create friction between law enforcement and medical professionals.
• Maine's firearm removal efforts could be enhanced by adopting broader ERPO policies.

Conclusions:

• State laws authorizing temporary, civil court-ordered firearm removal can save lives.
• Maine's firearm removal law could be amended to align with more effective ERPO models used in other states.
• No single policy can eliminate gun violence, but ERPOs are a vital tool.