Replacement thinking, status threat, and the endorsement of political violence among non-Hispanic white individuals in the US: A cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: This study investigates the association between replacement thinking, status threat perceptions, and the endorsement of political violence among non-Hispanic white adults in the United States. It explores how perceived threats to social status can drive support for extreme measures aimed at preserving white hegemony, addressing a gap in research on factors contributing to political violence, a public health concern. METHODS: The 2022 Life in America Survey provided data for this cross-sectional study, focusing on status threat and replacement thinking among non-Hispanic white respondents. Status threat was inferred from relative income, education level, and racial segregation in residential census tracts, while replacement thinking was derived through agreement with the statement in America, native-born white people are being replaced by immigrants. The outcome was the endorsement of political violence. Analysis utilized a survey-weighted robust modified Poisson model. RESULTS: Among 5,976 non-Hispanic white respondents, 18.7 % supported political violence in at least one scenario. A U-shaped relationship was observed between racial segregation and political violence endorsement: respondents from more diverse communities were less likely to support political violence. Those endorsing replacement thinking were 233 %-229 % more likely to endorse political violence than those who did not, dependent on income levels. White respondents without a high school degree were 29 % more likely to endorse political violence. CONCLUSION: The study found a positive association between replacement thinking, markers of status threat, and political violence endorsements among non-Hispanic white Americans. These findings emphasize the need for research and interventions to mitigate these perceptions and prevent political violence

Firearm Violence Following the Implementation of California's Gun Violence Restraining Order Law.

Importance: California's gun violence restraining order (GVRO) law, implemented beginning in 2016, allows for people at high risk of harming themselves or others with a firearm to be temporarily disarmed and prevented from purchasing firearms for 3 weeks to 1 year; many states have recently enacted similar laws. The research to date is on older and more limited risk-warrant laws. Objective: To determine whether implementation of the California GVRO law was associated with decreased rates of firearm assault or firearm self-harm in a large metropolitan county between 2016 and 2019. Design, Setting, and Participants: This serial cross-sectional study including data from 28 counties used the synthetic control method to evaluate differences in firearm violence between San Diego County and its synthetic control following implementation of the California law from 2016 to 2019. San Diego County was used as the treated unit because it issued substantially more GVROs than any other county in California during the study period. A total of 27 California counties that issued no or very few gun violence restraining orders from 2016 to 2019 and that had stable rates of firearm violence between 2005 and 2015 were included in the control pool. Data were analyzed from February 2021 to July 2021. Exposures: Implementation of the statewide GVRO law in 2016 in San Diego County. Main Outcomes and Measures: Annual rates of fatal and nonfatal firearm assault injuries and firearm self-harm injuries per 100 000 people. Results: In the study period, there were 355 GVROs in San Diego county, and a median (IQR) total of 8 (3-20) GVROs per donor county. The mean difference between the observed rate in San Diego County and the estimated rate in the synthetic San Diego County, 2016-2019, was -0.74 firearm assaults per 100 000 (-13% difference) and 0.13 firearm self-harm injuries per 100 000 (3% difference). Results from in-space placebo tests suggested that these differences cannot be distinguished from variation due to chance (pseudo-P values from a 1-sided test: P for assault = .35, P for self-harm = .67). Conclusions and Relevance: To our knowledge, this study was the first to analyze the association between GVRO implementation and firearm violence in California and the first to evaluate the association between risk-based firearm removal laws and firearm assault in any state. GVROs were not associated with reduced population-level rates of firearm violence in San Diego County, but this may change as the number of orders increases over time; the association between GVROs and firearm violence at the individual level cannot be inferred from our findings and should be the subject of future studies

The role of firearm and alcohol availability in firearm suicide: A population-based weighted case-control study

Firearm availability has been linked to firearm self-harm, but the joint relationship with alcohol availability, while supported by theory, has not been examined. This study sought to quantify the separate and joint relations of community firearm and alcohol availability with individual-level risk of (fatal and nonfatal) firearm self-harm. We conducted a case-control study of California residents, 2005-2015, using statewide mortality, hospital, firearm transfer, and alcohol license data. We estimated monthly marginal risk differences per 100,000 in the overall population and in white men aged 50+ under various hypothetical changes to firearm and alcohol availability and assessed additive interactions using case-control-weighted g-computation. In the overall population, non-pawn shop firearm dealer density was associated with firearm self-harm (RD: 0.02, 95% CI: 0.003, 0.04) but pawn shop firearm dealer and alcohol outlet densities were not. Secondary analyses revealed a relationship between firearm sales density and firearm self-harm (RD: 0.07, 95% CI: 0.04, 0.10). There were no additive interactions between measures of firearm and alcohol availability. Among older white men, generally the same exposures were related to self-harm as in the overall population, but point estimates were substantially larger. Findings suggest community-level approaches to reducing firearm sales may help mitigate suicide risk

A multi-state evaluation of extreme risk protection orders: a research protocol.

BACKGROUND: Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs) are civil court orders that prohibit firearm purchase and possession when someone is behaving dangerously and is at risk of harming themselves and/or others. As of June 2024, ERPOs are available in 21 states and the District of Columbia to prevent firearm violence. This paper describes the design and protocol of a six-state study of ERPO use. METHODS: The six states included are California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Maryland, and Washington. During the 3-year project period (2020-2023), ERPO case files were obtained through public records requests or through agreements with agencies with access to these data in each state. A team of over four dozen research assistants from seven institutions coded 6628 ERPO cases, abstracting 80 variables per case under domains related to respondent characteristics, events and behaviors leading to ERPO petitions, petitioner types, and court outcomes. Research assistants received didactic training through an online learning management system that included virtual training modules, quizzes, practice coding exercises, and two virtual synchronous sessions. A protocol for gaining strong interrater reliability was used. Research assistants also learned strategies for reducing the risk of experiencing secondary trauma through the coding process, identifying its occurrence, and obtaining help. DISCUSSION: Addressing firearm violence in the U.S. is a priority. Understanding ERPO use in these six states can inform implementation planning and ERPO uptake, including promising opportunities to enhance safety and prevent firearm-related injuries and deaths. By publishing this protocol, we offer detailed insight into the methods underlying the papers published from these data, and the process of managing data abstraction from ERPO case files across the multi-state and multi-institution teams involved. Such information may also inform future analyses of this data, and future replication efforts. REGISTRATION: This protocol is registered on Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/kv4fc/ )

Investing in the Future: An Evaluation of Local Government Spending as a Modifiable Structural Determinant of Interpersonal Youth Violence

CDC Award Number K01CE00340

The Role of Community and Individual Firearm Accessibility in Intentional Firearm Injury: Identifying Risk Factors and Assessing Interventions

Firearm violence is responsible for a substantial amount of morbidity and mortality in the United States, particularly among young Black men (via assault) and older white men (via self-harm). Successful prevention efforts rely on the identification of modifiable risk factors, which can inform new interventions, as well as the evaluation of existent interventions. Individual-level and ecologic studies have found firearm ownership to be a strong risk factor for firearm mortality, but ownership itself can be difficult to intervene on. However, firearm access may be subject to community-level interventions through zoning regulations on firearm dealers and to individual-level intervention via targeted prohibitions among those at high risk of harming others or themselves. Despite general acceptance of the social-ecological model in violence and injury epidemiology, the cross-level risks associated with firearm availability have rarely been explored.The objective of this dissertation was to identify modifiable risk factors and to evaluate a firearm violence intervention, focusing particularly on cross-level impacts of firearm availability (i.e., how community firearm availability impacts individual risk and vice versa). To do this, we first examined whether community firearm and alcohol availability were independently or jointly associated with individual-level risk of (fatal and nonfatal) firearm assault or self-harm. We conducted two population-based case-control studies of California residents, 2005-2015, drawing on statewide hospitalization, emergency department, firearm transfer, and alcohol license data. The first of these studies focused on firearm assault and homicide and the second focused on firearm self-harm and suicide. We use case-control-weighted g-computation to assess marginal risk differences under various scenarios of interest and to assess additive interactions between measures of firearm and alcohol availability.Second, we explored whether removal of firearms from high-risk individuals via gun violence restraining orders (GVROs) was associated with the rate of firearm violence in San Diego County, which issued a plurality of orders in the state. California’s GVRO law, enacted in 2016, permits the temporary removal of firearms from people at high risk of committing firearm violence. Using statewide hospitalization and emergency department data, we conducted a quasi-experimental study using the synthetic control method to determine whether GVRO implementation was associated with decreased rates of (fatal and nonfatal) overall firearm violence, firearm assault, or firearm self-harm in San Diego County during the first four years of implementation. Overall, we found weak cross-level associations between firearm availability and firearm violence. Non-pawn firearm dealer and off-premise alcohol outlet density were associated with modest increases in the individual-level risk of firearm assault, but pawn dealer and off-premise alcohol outlet density were null. Firearm sales density (but not firearm dealer density) was associated with elevated risk of firearm self-harm, but alcohol availability was null or of negligible magnitude. Finally, we found that GVRO implementation was not associated with a reduction in firearm violence of any kind in San Diego County from 2016-2019. This project will be of interest to policymakers and researchers interested in understanding and preventing firearm violence. Despite our modest findings, this study could inform local interventions relating to community firearm availability. It also provides the first quantitative evaluation of the GVRO law in California, which served as a template for similar laws in 16 other states. Risk factors for firearm violence come from multiple social-ecological levels, including the surrounding social, physical, and policy environments. Successful strategies for prevention will therefore include individual-level interventions, such as GVROs (which may be effective at the individual-level), as well as broad measures that reduce environmental risk. This work adds to the limited literature on cross-level risk associated with firearm availability, but additional research into modifiable risk factors and interventions to prevent firearm violence is needed