Public Awareness of and Personal Willingness to Use California's Extreme Risk Protection Order Law to Prevent Firearm-Related Harm.
Public Awareness of and Personal Willingness to Use California's Extreme Risk Protection Order Law to Prevent Firearm-Related Harm.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1001/jamahealthforum.2021.0975
复制
发表时间：
2021-06
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Wintemute GJ
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Kravitz-Wirtz N;Aubel AJ;Pallin R;Wintemute GJ
公众对极端风险保护令(ERPO)了解多少？人们是否愿意使用这些工具来防止与枪支有关的伤害，无论是在一般情况下还是在家庭成员面临风险时？如果他们不愿意，为何不愿意呢？在这项对加州2870名成年人进行的具有州代表性的横断面调查研究中，在选定的风险情景中，对至少在某些时间使用ERPO的适当性和意愿的支持率很高(70%)，特别是在枪支拥有者和与持枪者一起生活的非持枪者中。约三分之二的受访者表示，他们不愿使用ePRO的一个原因是缺乏对ePRO的认识，其次是认为风险情景是私人事务，以及不信任该系统将是公平的。这些关于公众认识和认识到电子防护服的适当性、是否愿意使用这些工具来防止与枪支有关的伤害、以及解决电子防护服使用障碍的重点领域的调查结果，可能会为加州和其他司法管辖区执行电子防护服提供参考。极端风险保护令(ERPO)法律暂时禁止法官认为有很大风险伤害自己或他人的个人获得枪支和弹药。尽管最近广泛通过了这些法律，但ERPO的使用一直受到限制。ERPO吸收的障碍仍然不清楚。评估公众对在各种风险情况下使用ERPO的认识和感知的适当性和意愿，并找出不愿意使用ERPO的原因，包括枪支所有权状况，为改进ERPO执行情况的努力提供信息。这是一项横断面研究，使用了2020年加州安全和福祉调查的数据，这是一项关于枪支拥有和暴力暴露及其后果的全州互联网调查，于2020年7月14日至7月27日进行。成年受访者是从Ipsos KnowledgePanel中招募的，使用基于概率的抽样方法。回答被加权，以代表加利福尼亚州的成年人口。对枪支暴力限制令的认识和感知的适当性(GVRO；加利福尼亚州对枪支暴力限制令的正式称呼)，对有伤害风险的家庭成员使用GVRO的意愿，以及在一种或多种风险情况下根本不愿意使用GVRO的理由，总体上和枪支拥有权状况。在受邀的5018名小组成员中，2870名(57%)完成了调查。在这些受访者(平均年龄：47.9[16.9]岁；52.3%的女性；41.9%的白人、34.7%的拉丁裔、14.4%的亚裔和5.8%的黑人)中，65.6%(95%的CI，63.0%-68.1)从未听说过GVRO或红旗法律。枪支拥有者(20.5%；95%CI，15.9%-26.0%)显著高于与枪支拥有者(6.1%；95%CI，3.7%-10.0%；P <； .001)和非所有者(9.6%；95%CI，7.8%-11.6%；P <； .001)一起生活的非枪支拥有者听说过GVRO和红旗法律。在阅读了加州GVRO法律的简要描述后，72.9%(95%CI，70.2%-75.4%)到78.4%(95%CI，75.9%-80.8%)的受访者表示，GVRO至少在一般情况下是适当的，而73.2%(95%CI，70.5%-75.6%)到83.6%(95%CI，95%CI，81.2%-85.8%)表示他们在一定程度上或非常愿意为有伤害风险的家庭成员使用GVRO。枪支拥有者在5种风险情景中有4种报告的GVRO适合性水平最高(根据情景的不同，80.0%[95%CI，73.6%-85.1%]到85.6%[95%CI，79.9%-89.8%])。与业主同住的非业主报告的个人愿意使用GVRO的水平最高(根据情况，83.7%[95%CI，74.7%-90.0%]到94.7%[95%CI，86.2%-98.1%])。不愿使用GVRO的最常见原因是对GVRO了解不足(44.9%；95%CI，39.7%-50.3%)，认为风险情景是个人或家庭问题(26.6%；95%CI，22.2%-31.6%)，以及不信任系统是否公平(23.1%；95%CI，19.1%-27.6%)。在这项横断面调查研究中，公众对全球志愿人员权利组织的认识很低，但对这些工具的适当性和使用意愿的感知却很高，至少在某些时候是这样。确定了在加利福尼亚州努力解决全球可再生能源使用障碍的重点；其他司法管辖区可能存在类似的挑战。这项横断面研究评估了公众对在各种风险情况下使用极端风险保护令的认识和感知的适当性，并找出了不情愿的原因、总体原因和枪支拥有权状况。
What does the public know about extreme risk protection orders (ERPOs) and are people willing to use these tools to prevent firearm-related harm, both in general and when a family member is at risk? If they are not willing, why not? In this state-representative cross-sectional survey study of 2870 adults in California, support for the appropriateness of and willingness to use an ERPO at least some of the time was high (>70%) across selected risk scenarios, particularly among firearm owners and nonowners who live with owners. Approximately two-thirds of respondents cited a lack of awareness of ERPOs as a reason why they were unwilling to use an EPRO, followed by a belief that the risk scenarios are private matters, and a distrust that the system will be fair. These findings on public awareness and perceived appropriateness of ERPOs, willingness to use these tools to prevent firearm-related harm, and areas of focus to address barriers to EPRO uptake may be informative for EPRO implementation in California and other jurisdictions. Extreme risk protection order (ERPO) laws temporarily suspend firearm and ammunition access by individuals whom a judge has deemed to be at substantial risk of harming themselves or others. Despite widespread recent adoption of these laws, use of ERPOs has been limited. Barriers to ERPO uptake remain unclear. To assess public awareness and perceived appropriateness of and willingness to use ERPOs in various risk scenarios, and to identify reasons for being unwilling, overall and by firearm ownership status, to inform efforts to improve ERPO implementation. This was a cross-sectional study using data from the 2020 California Safety and Wellbeing Survey, a statewide internet survey on firearm ownership and exposure to violence and its consequences, conducted from July 14 to July 27, 2020. Adult respondents were recruited from the Ipsos KnowledgePanel using probability-based sampling methods. Responses were weighted to be representative of the adult population of California. Awareness and perceived appropriateness of gun violence restraining orders (GVROs; California’s official term for ERPOs), willingness to use a GVRO for a family member at risk of harm, and reasons for being not at all willing to use a GVRO in 1 or more risk scenarios, overall and by firearm ownership status. Of the 5018 panel members invited, 2870 (57%) completed the survey. Of these respondents (mean [SD] age: 47.9 [16.9] years; 52.3% women; 41.9% White, 34.7% Latinx, 14.4% Asian, and 5.8% Black individuals), 65.6% (95% CI, 63.0%-68.1) had never heard of a GVRO or a red flag law. Firearm owners were significantly more likely (20.5%; 95% CI, 15.9%-26.0%) than nonowners who live with owners (6.1%; 95% CI, 3.7%-10.0%; P < .001) and nonowners (9.6%; 95% CI, 7.8%-11.6%; P < .001) to have heard of both a GVRO and a red flag law. After reading a brief description of California’s GVRO law, 72.9% (95% CI, 70.2%-75.4%) to 78.4% (95% CI, 75.9%-80.8%) of respondents, depending on the risk scenario, indicated that GVROs were in general at least sometimes appropriate, while 73.2% (95% CI, 70.5%-75.6%) to 83.6% (95% CI, 81.2%-85.8%) said they would be somewhat or very willing to use a GVRO for a family member at risk of harm. Firearm owners reported the highest levels of GVRO appropriateness in 4 of 5 risk scenarios (depending on the scenario, 80.0% [95% CI, 73.6%-85.1%] to 85.6% [95% CI, 79.9%-89.8%]). Nonowners who live with owners reported the highest levels of personal willingness to use a GVRO (depending on the scenario, 83.7% [95% CI, 74.7%-90.0%] to 94.7% [95% CI, 86.2%-98.1%]). The most frequently cited reasons for being unwilling to use a GVRO were not knowing enough about GVROs (44.9%; 95% CI, 39.7%-50.3%), believing the risk scenarios are personal or family matters (26.6%; 95% CI, 22.2%-31.6%), and distrust that the system will be fair (23.1%; 95% CI, 19.1%-27.6%). In this cross-sectional survey study, public awareness of GVROs was low, but perceived appropriateness of and willingness to use these tools at least some of the time was high. Foci for efforts to address barriers to GVRO use in California were identified; similar challenges likely exist in other jurisdictions. This cross-sectional study assesses public awareness and perceived appropriateness of using extreme risk protection orders in various risk scenarios and identifies reasons behind reluctance, overall and by firearm ownership status.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
39.2
作者：
Wintemute, Garen J.;Pear, Veronica A.;Tomsich, Elizabeth A.
通讯作者：
Tomsich, Elizabeth A.
影响因子：
12.7
作者：
Barry, Colleen L.;Webster, Daniel W.;McGinty, Emma E.
通讯作者：
McGinty, Emma E.
影响因子：
13.8
作者：
Pallin, Rocco;Schleimer, Julia P.;Wintemute, Garen J.
通讯作者：
Wintemute, Garen J.
影响因子：
5.7
作者：
Pham-Kanter, Genevieve;Mello, Michelle M.;Carpenter, Daniel
通讯作者：
Carpenter, Daniel
影响因子：
4.6
作者：
Laqueur, Hannah S.;Wintemute, Garen J.
通讯作者：
Wintemute, Garen J.