Do firearms restrictions prevent violence in people with mental illness? New research evidence

Acts of gun violence by mentally disordered individuals attract intense media coverage and cause great public concern. However, scientific evidence is lacking to support the generalized assumption of increased risk of gun violence among persons with mental illness, and little is known about whether existing legal restrictions actually protect the public. A 3-state study is underway to empirically examine the effectiveness of federal and state laws that restrict persons with mental illness from purchasing or possessing firearms. Preliminary results from Connecticut will be presented. A sample of N=137,355 persons with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, or major depression was selected from state mental health services recipient records, 2002-2009. Matching records on gun-disqualifying mental health adjudications—involuntary civil commitments, findings of incompetency to stand trial, and not-guilty-by-reason-of-insanity (NGRI)—were obtained. Matching records were also obtained on dates of arrest, statutory charges, and convictions. The effects of gun laws will be estimated by comparing trends in gun violence for persons disqualified vs. not disqualified from gun purchase due to mental health history, and during the period before vs. after the state's implementation of reporting to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System. The data will help answer two important, policy-relevant questions: Are persons with history of mental health adjudication at higher risk of firearm violence than the general population or than other persons with mental illness? Do laws and policies that base gun restrictions on mental health history confer additional public safety benefit beyond the effect of restrictions based on criminal history?