Recent mass shootings have prompted a national dialogue around mental illness and gun policy. To advance an evidence-informed policy agenda on this controversial issue, we formed a consortium of national gun violence prevention and mental health experts. The consortium agreed on a guiding principle for future policy recommendations: restricting firearm access on the basis of certain dangerous behaviors is supported by the evidence; restricting access on the basis of mental illness diagnoses is not. We describe the group’s process and recommendations.
Paul S. Appelbaum et al., Using Research Evidence to Reframe the Policy Debate around Mental Illness and Guns: Process and Recommendations, 104 American Journal of Public Health e22-e26 (2014).
More in This Category
Constraining prosecutors and other advocates who become judges: A commentary on Berryessa et al. (2022)
Do Federal or State Prosecutors Get To Go First in Trying Trump? A Law Professor Untangles The Conflict
S. A. Zottola
S. L. Desmarais
D. K. Stewart...
We examined how the presentation of risk assessment results and the race of the person charged affected pretrial court actors’ recommendations to...More
An obscure 1800s law is shaping up to be the center of the next abortion battle – legal scholars explain what’s behind the Victorian-era Comstock Act
The Supreme Court rules mifepristone can remain available – here’s how 2 conflicting federal court decisions led to this point
Life tenure for the federal judiciary doesn’t promote judicial independence or the development of law as the Framers expected, and should be repealed...More