Over a three-year period beginning in 2021, 353 petitions were filed under Colorado’s red flag law, and 39% of those petitions led to firearms being relinquished, according to research our group published in Preventive Medicine Reports.

Red flag laws are also known as extreme risk protection orders. These orders temporarily bar individuals deemed by a judge to be at risk of violence from buying or possessing firearms.

We found that 54.6% of petitions across Colorado were filed by law enforcement. These petitions were granted 94.3% of the time.

Petitions filed by people outside of law enforcement were granted just 35% of the time.

When the petitions of either type are not granted, the individuals involved are allowed to keep their firearms.

Thirty-seven percent of all petitions in Colorado between 2020 and 2022 were filed in counties that made proclamations against red flag laws, calling themselves “Second Amendment sanctuaries.”

The name Second Amendment sanctuaries is modeled after the term “sanctuary cities,” a term used by local governments taking a stand against immigration enforcement.

These declarations are intended to send a political message against extreme risk protection orders. Supporters of the declarations are expressing concerns that the laws violate the U.S. Constitution, subvert due process and undermine residents’ ability to protect themselves. However, anecdotes have highlighted cases where protective orders have been sought and granted in many of the 37 sanctuaries. Our study provides data to back up those anecdotes.

In Colorado, fewer petitions are granted in sanctuaries possibly because the percentage of orders filed by police is significantly lower. But red flag laws are still being used – with some notable differences.

The petitions filed and granted in sanctuary jurisdictions are more serious than those filed in nonsanctuaries. Nearly 1 in 5 involved a shooter threatening to kill at least three other people in addition to themselves. More than 90% included threats to shoot specific people such as family members, partners or law enforcement officers.

In many of these cases, the sense of danger was heightened because the person was reportedly experiencing hallucinations, had a history of contact with the police or was misusing drugs or alcohol.

Given that 60% of firearm deaths are suicides, we were surprised that just 8% of the petitions included only threats of self-harm.

Why it matters

While red flag laws show promise as a way to prevent firearm suicides and other violence in the 21 states plus D.C. where they’re in effect, at least 1,200 jurisdictions across the U.S. have made political declarations against their use.

When Colorado passed the Deputy Zackari Parrish Violence Prevention Act in 2018, it immediately sparked controversy. The law went into effect on Jan. 1, 2020. It initially allowed only certain people to file petitions: law enforcement officers, plus relatives, roommates and co-parents of the respondent. In 2023, it was expanded to allow health care and behavioral health professionals, educators and district attorneys to petition.

How we did our work

Our group at the University of Colorado School of Medicine’s Firearm Injury Prevention Initiative has been gathering petitions and court documents associated with every extreme risk petition filed in Colorado since they became available.

This allowed us to describe the kinds of cases where the risk of violence was seen as so severe that filings were made. The law is not explicit, so this threshold has been fuzzy – leaving a lot of discretion to judges. Our data helps shade in when a petition is likely to be brought and when it is likely to be approved.

We were also able to compare the use of extreme risk petitions in sanctuary counties with their use in other counties.

What still isn’t known

The use of extreme risk petitions in counties where they’re politically unpopular raises further questions. For example, do judges in sanctuary counties set a higher bar for granting a petition than in other jurisdictions? Does a sanctuary designation discourage law enforcement from filing petitions even when they have merit?

Christopher Knoepke receives research funding from the National Institute of Justice, the National Collaborative for Gun VIolence Research, the Fund for a Safer Future, the American Heart Association, and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. The opinions expressed herein are Dr. Knoepke's alone, and not those of any funding organization.