“I Didn't Know He Had It in Him to Kill Me”: Nonlethal Firearms Use and Partner Violence Against Canadian Women

What is the role of firearms in nonfatal intimate partner violence? Findings from civil protective order case data

BACKGROUND

Perpetrators of intimate partner violence (IPV) use firearms to injure, scare, and manipulate their partners. Abusers who have a firearm in their homes are more likely to threaten and/or kill their partner. To date, however, limited research documents the nature of IPV perpetrator firearm access or the prevalence of nonfatal firearm abuse behaviors.

METHODS

Federal law restricts firearm access for IPV perpetrators in qualifying domestic violence protective order (DVPO) cases and information about firearms should be disclosed during the DVPO process. We used secondary data from civil DVPO cases (n = 406) in North Carolina that were collected using a representative sampling strategy. Data were from DVPO case files and structured DVPO hearing observations. We conducted a content analysis to record IPV perpetrator access to guns and reported firearm abuse behaviors. We used a linear regression analysis to determine whether IPV perpetrator gun access was associated with higher levels of reported abuse. We also examined factors associated with perpetration of nonfatal firearm abuse.

RESULTS

We found evidence of perpetrator firearm access in nearly half of all cases (46%, n = 108). Controlling for covariates, gun access was significantly associated with higher levels of reported IPV (b = 0.5, p < .001). Firearm abuse was reported in nearly one out of four cases (23.1%, n = 101), and often entailed spoken threats, displaying a gun, or holding a partner at gun point. The only factors associated with firearm abuse in the multivariate models were related to English language speaking/fluency.

CONCLUSIONS

Gun access should be considered an indicator for severe IPV. We must ensure that existing legal mechanisms to identify and restrict abuser access to firearms are fully implemented and enforced. Firearm abuse often manifests as non-physical coercive control which is traumatic and has the potential to escalate to homicide, even in the absence of past physical violence.

Nonfatal use of firearms in intimate partner violence: Results of a national survey

Research on intimate partner violence (IPV) and firearms has typically focused on homicide, so there is limited information on how firearms are used in nonfatal ways, particularly in community samples. We sought to estimate the prevalence of nonfatal firearm abuse in the context of IPV, understand how and against whom firearms are used, and examine consequences of this abuse. Using a national web-based survey of US adults who experienced IPV (n = 958), we asked respondents about experiences with nonfatal firearm abuse, including the frequency of firearm behaviors and consequences. Based on screening data weighted to be nationally representative, we estimated that 9.8% (95% CI: 9.0%, 10.6%) of US adults - or nearly 25 million - have experienced nonfatal firearm abuse by an intimate partner (i.e., were threatened with a firearm, had a firearm used on them, or were threatened by a partner who possessed or had easy access to a firearm). IPV victims who experienced nonfatal firearm abuse commonly reported experiencing other forms of IPV. The most common behaviors included the partner displaying a firearm (67.5%) and threatening to shoot the victim (63.0%). The majority (80.5%) of perpetrators were male, and 49.2% of respondents had a child at home at the time of abuse. The most common consequences of nonfatal firearm abuse were concerns for safety (86.2%) and feeling fearful (82.7%). Additionally, 43.1% of respondents reported physical injury, and 37.4% missed days of work or school. Practice and policy around firearm access for IPV perpetrators should attend to nonfatal firearm use against intimate partners.