Research Reports

​Impact of Connecticut’s Risk-based Civil Gun Removal Law on Suicides

Impact of Connecticut’s risk-based civil gun removal law on suicides

A Duke University study[1] concludes that a Connecticut law allowing police to temporarily remove guns from individuals at risk of harming themselves or others has reduced gun suicides.

In 1999, Connecticut became the first state to authorize police to temporarily remove guns from at-risk individuals. Although the law was passed in response to a mass shooting, the study’s analysis of 762 gun-removal cases between 1999 and 2013 showed it has been used most often when an individual was at risk of self-harm. Lead researcher for the study was Jeffrey Swanson of the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at Duke University School of Medicine.

Almost half of the cases were reported to the police by an acquaintance of the subject. Police were required by the law to seek a risk warrant from a judge in order to execute gun removal. Of the 702 gun removal cases where risk-warrant petitions were available for review, suicide or self-injury threat was listed as a concern in 61 percent; risk of harm to others in 32 percent; and risk of harm to both self and others in 9 percent (percentages add up to more than 100 due to overlap in some categories).

Police removed an average of seven guns from each risk-warrant subject.

A match of gun removal cases to state death records revealed that 21 individuals committed suicide after the gun removal event. But based on national data on fatality ratios for suicides, the researchers estimated that the law prevented 71 suicides during the period of the study, or one suicide for every 10 gun seizures, suggesting that the gun removal was an effective intervention.

Researchers noted that the percentage of gun owners in Connecticut affected by the law was small (less than 1 percent), demonstrating a narrowly targeted approach.

Policy implications

Every U.S. study that has examined the relationship has found that access to firearms is a risk factor for suicides. Many suicide attempts are made with little planning during a short-term crisis period, and so effective solutions must take into consideration firearm access for those in crisis. By allowing police to temporarily remove guns from individuals at risk of harming themselves or others the Connecticut law is designed to restrict access to lethal means, a proven method to reduce rates of suicide.

Other states are beginning to consider similar laws that would permit temporary gun removals from owners at risk of harming themselves or others. Indiana has had a law on the books allowing police to remove guns from at-risk persons since 2006, and Texas has had such a law since 2013. Similar laws took effect in California in 2016 and in Washington in 2017, which also allow families and household members, as well as law enforcement officers, to petition a court to remove a person’s access to guns if he or she is in crisis. Ten other states are considering such laws this year.

In California, advocates recently launched an educational campaign called “Speak for Safety” to build awareness of the new law. Participants in the campaign include gun-violence prevention, domestic violence, and public health organizations; leaders in law enforcement; and social impact firm Revolve Impact, based in Los Angeles. The effort includes social media outreach and an education campaign aimed at law enforcement agencies and community organizations throughout the state.

Based on interviews conducted for the study, researchers noted that the Connecticut process could be improved by streamlining the process by requiring the presence of only one police officer in gun seizures (as opposed to the current requirement of two), and finding ways to relieve local police departments of the burden of storing seized firearms for long periods.

For more coverage of this study, see:

[1] Swanson, Jeffrey W. and Norko, Michael and Lin, Hsiu-Ju and Alanis-Hirsch, Kelly and Frisman, Linda and Baranoski, Madelon and Easter, Michele and Robertson, Allison G. and Swartz, Marvin and Bonnie, Richard J., Implementation and Effectiveness of Connecticut's Risk-Based Gun Removal Law: Does it Prevent Suicides? (August 24, 2016). Law and Contemporary Problems, Forthcoming. Available at SSRN:

About The Joyce Foundation

Joyce is a nonpartisan, private foundation that invests in evidence-informed public policies and strategies to advance racial equity and economic mobility for the next generation in the Great Lakes region.

Related Content


Two Great Lakes States Launch Data Dashboards to Report Violent Deaths & Develop Prevention Strategies

The Michigan Department of Health and Human Services and the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) recently launched MiDVRS and MNDVRS presenting data collected by the NVDRS, the most comprehensive source of data on violent deaths.

In The Media

How a Philanthropic Bet on Violence Intervention Is Winning Public Dollars

State, local, and city agencies are investing about $150 million this year in a variety of community violence-intervention strategies that philanthropy is road-testing. Read more about how the Joyce Foundation and others are stepping in to fund CVI work.

The Chronicle of Philanthropy


Poll Gauges Public Attitudes toward Political Violence in the United States

The Joyce Foundation, Trusted Elections Fund, and The Klarman Family Foundation initiated a public opinion research project exploring the public’s view of, and reaction to, political violence and extremism.

Research Report

Toward a Fair and Just Response to Gun Violence: Recommendations to Advance Policy, Practice and Research

Report with recommendations to advance policy, practice and research by a group of experts convened by the Joyce Foundation beginning in 2019 under the banner “Toward a Fair and Just Response to Gun Violence.”


Landmark Bipartisan Safer Communities Act to reduce gun violence

The Joyce Foundation applauds the bipartisan effort to pass the Safer Communities Act, which brings us closer to the safer America we all seek and deserve. 


The Foundation's statement on the Bruen case ruling

The Supreme Court’s ruling today in the Bruen case will make communities across America less safe. A large and growing body of evidence demonstrates that the mere presence of a firearm increases the risk of injury and death.


Checking the facts on “red flag laws”

The latest research into “red flag laws” and other gun safety measures was highlighted at a recent webinar series for journalists produced by the Poynter Institute for Media Studies and its PolitiFact fact-checking arm.


Examining the Rise of Armed Extremists and Militias in Michigan

Recent political violence issues have been on the rise in the U.S. During this webinar, panelists discussed these trends, their implications on democratic institutions specifically in Michigan, and what policy makers might be poised to do about it.