Current News

/

ArcaMax

A judge in Texas is using a recent Supreme Court ruling to say domestic abusers can keep their guns

April M. Zeoli, Associate Professor of Public Health, University of Michigan, Shannon Frattaroli, Professor of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins University, and Lisa Geller, Director of State Affairs, Johns Hopkins University, The Conversation on

Published in News & Features

Specifically, there are statistically significant reductions in intimate partner homicide when the firearm restriction covers both dating partners and those subjected to temporary orders. This decrease is seen in total intimate partner homicide, not just intimate partner homicide committed with guns, nullifying the argument that abusers will use other weapons to kill.

Moreover, these laws have broad support across the country – more than 80% of respondents to two national polls in 2017 and 2019 said they favor them.

Americans – whether male or female, gun owner or non-gun owner – tend to agree that domestic abusers should not be able to purchase or possess firearms while they are subject to a domestic violence protection order. Most seem to realize that such reasonable restrictions serve the greater good of keeping families and communities safe.

The ruling in Texas was based on an originalist legal argument rather than the data. Under the judge’s interpretation of the Bruen decision, because colonial law – written before a time when women could vote, let alone be protected in law from violent spouses – didn’t restrict domestic abusers’ gun rights, then it simply isn’t constitutional to do so now. In effect, the ruling, should it stand, would mean the U.S. is unable to escape the nation’s historic legal disregard for domestic violence.

It also disregards the harm that allowing domestic abusers to keep hold of guns does. Multiple studies demonstrate that domestic violence firearm restriction laws are effective and save lives.

That research shows that, should the Texas ruling stand, people who suffer abuse at the hands of an intimate partner are at greater risk of that abuse being deadly.

 

Lisa Geller, director of state affairs at the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, contributed to this article.

This article is republished from The Conversation, an independent nonprofit news site dedicated to sharing ideas from academic experts. It was written by: April M. Zeoli, University of Michigan and Shannon Frattaroli, Johns Hopkins University. News from experts, from an independent nonprofit. Try our free newsletters.

Read more:
Will closing the ‘boyfriend loophole’ in gun legislation save lives? Here’s what the research says

First bipartisan gun control bill in a generation signed into law: 3 essential reads on what it means

The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.


Comments

blog comments powered by Disqus