Research SummaryAlthough federal law prohibits firearm possession by individuals who have been convicted of a disqualifying offense and those who are subject to certain domestic violence protective orders (DVPOs), it does not provide a mechanism for enforcing firearm dispossession. Some states have adopted relinquishment laws to enforce firearm possession restrictions among prohibited persons following a disqualifying status or conviction. To date, limited research has assessed the statutory characteristics of firearm relinquishment laws related to DVPOs. We build on this work by assessing DVPO and conviction‐based relinquishment statutes, including legislative changes through time, to identify gaps in policy.Policy ImplicationsOur analysis revealed that many states still lack statutory elements that are expected to increase the likelihood of firearm dispossession, such as requiring the court to order relinquishment, strict standards for providing proof of firearm transfer or some form of compliance verification, and provisions that authorize law enforcement to recover unrelinquished firearms. The absence of such elements may facilitate unlawful firearm retention by those who become prohibited possessors. States might consider adopting relinquishment provisions that outline clear requirements for actors (i.e., judges, prohibited possessors, law enforcement) at each stage of the process to ensure that firearms are relinquished following a disqualifying conviction or DVPO.

中文翻译：

---

各州通过放弃法律强制执行枪支没收的努力


研究摘要尽管联邦法律禁止被判犯有取消资格罪行的个人和受某些家庭暴力保护令 （DVPO） 约束的个人持有枪支，但它并没有提供强制执行枪支剥夺的机制。一些州已经通过了放弃法律，对被取消资格或定罪后的被禁止人员实施持有枪支的限制。迄今为止，有限的研究评估了与 DVPO 相关的枪支放弃法律的法定特征。我们通过评估 DVPO 和基于定罪的放弃法规（包括随着时间的推移的立法变化）来建立这项工作，以确定政策中的差距。政策影响我们的分析显示，许多州仍然缺乏预计会增加枪支被剥夺可能性的法定要素，例如要求法院下令放弃枪支、提供枪支转移证明或某种形式的合规验证的严格标准，以及授权执法部门追回未放弃枪支的规定。缺乏这些要素可能会为成为被禁止持有者的人非法持有枪支提供便利。各州可以考虑采用放弃条款，在程序的每个阶段对行为者（即法官、违禁持有者、执法人员）提出明确要求，以确保在取消资格定罪或 DVPO 后放弃枪支。