| Intimate partner violence results in nearly two million injuries and 1,590 deaths annually in the U.S. A majority of intimate partner homicide victims are women, and most such homicides are committed with a firearm. A woman is more than twice as likely to be killed by an intimate partner with a firearm than to be shot, stabbed, bludgeoned, strangled, or killed in any way by a stranger. Acknowledging the threat of gun-wielding batterers, the federal 1994 Violence Against Women Act made it illegal for persons under a domestic violence restraining order, in which the defendant was given the opportunity to appear in court, to legally purchase or possess a firearm. In California, these restrictions extend to all domestic violence restraining orders. The utilization of, implementation of, compliance with, and outcome of the California policies that restrict the purchase and possession of firearms among restrained persons is the focus of this study.;Four large administrative databases provided the study data. Prospective cohort, retrospective cohort, and cross-sectional study designs were used. Univariate, bivariate, and multivariate statistical analyses were performed to address the research questions.;One in six (16.0%) restraining order applicants mentioned the use or threatened use of a firearm against them by the defendant. Most (89.2%) applicants were issued a Temporary Restraining Order; nearly half (44.6%) proceeded to obtain a final order. Few variables, including mention of a firearm, were associated with restraining order issuance, which suggests that judges issued such orders without bias. Similar to all California adults, 324 of 100,000 persons each year who are subsequently placed under a restraining order purchased a handgun in California. A total of 420 restrained persons illegally attempted to purchase a handgun from a licensed firearms dealer; 46.0% were approved for purchase. Finally, only 11.3% of intimate partner homicide victims in California had been issued a restraining order.;Implications for future research and policy are discussed. Key among them is the need to expand the definition of intimate partner, to replicate this study in other locales, and for adequate implementation and compliance with the law to protect the health of the population. |
