New Second Amendment standards and suicide prevention: need for cross-disciplinary research and collaboration

Firearm-related suicides have increased substantially in the USA, but a growing body of research identifies safety policies that may reduce risk. These policies can raise Second Amendment concerns, however, especially given recent Supreme Court opinions (ie, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022) & United States v. Rahimi (2024)) that redefined constitutional standards. Specifically, modern firearm restrictions must now be analogous to historical regulation. Given uncertainty about how Bruen and Rahimi will be applied by courts, we argue that injury prevention researchers should collaborate with scholars in history, law and communication science to develop and defend policies that prevent firearm suicides. We outline four areas for interdisciplinary collaboration.First, developing a nuanced understanding of characteristics that enhance the effectiveness of existing policies can guide policymaking if courts take issue with some policy features but not others. Second, highlighting ways in which firearm policies link to historical suicide prevention efforts can demonstrate how modern policies are consistent with past practices. Meanwhile, exposing historical misunderstandings regarding mental health and suicide can explain differences between modern and historical policies. Third, educating the public about firearm suicide and the efficacy of policies to prevent suicide can increase support for these policies, especially if informed by dissemination research. Fourth, interdisciplinary researchers can work with stakeholders to develop policy solutions garnering broad support that are resilient to Second Amendment challenges. As Second Amendment law evolves, interdisciplinary research into suicide prevention policies, their historical context and strategies for disseminating this information is essential.