Prohibiting domestic violence protective order (DVPO) respondents from firearms is an effective strategy to prevent intimate partner homicide. However, DVPO gun laws vary considerably across states, and the implementation of such laws is inconsistent across localities. Local context, such as resource availability, priorities, and politics, differs across types of communities and impacts the implementation of laws. We conducted in-depth key informant interviews with victim service and criminal justice professionals ( N = 27) working in urban communities, rural communities, and statewide organizations to better understand: (a) what communities need to effectively prohibit DVPO respondents from firearms (i.e., the DVPO gun law) and (b) strategies to help communities view domestic gun violence as a safety issue versus a second amendment issue. We used conventional content analysis to analyze the content of all interviews. Our results revealed a diverse range of community needs for implementing the DVPO gun law; some of which included tangible resources related to personnel, funding, and storage, and other more intangible resources related to community leadership and culture. We also observed competing ideas around strict state leadership directives for how to implement the DVPO gun law versus maintaining community-level autonomy. Finally, many participants stressed the importance of using more effective language to frame the issue of DVPO gun laws as central to addressing domestic violence more broadly, rather than gun control. Regardless of the political landscape and state legislation, communities of all types should be able to make concerted local efforts to limit abusers’ access to firearms, given the danger posed to victims and the broader community. Effective efforts require transdisciplinary collaboration, flexibility, ingenuity, leadership, and funding, thus benefiting from a combined criminal justice and public health approach.
Lynch et al. (Wed,) studied this question.