Petitions for Extreme Risk Protection Orders and Second Amendment Sanctuary Status in Colorado.

Importance: Extreme risk protection orders (ERPOs) temporarily bar individuals adjudicated as being at risk of violence (including suicide) from buying or possessing firearms. In protest, many US jurisdictions have declared themselves "Second Amendment sanctuaries" (2A sanctuaries). Many 2A sanctuaries continue to use ERPOs in low numbers, suggesting a poorly defined risk threshold at which they are acceptable. Objective: To characterize circumstances under which ERPOs are used in 2A sanctuaries, highlighting their most broadly acceptable applications. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study of civil court documents analyzed petitions for ERPOs filed in Colorado from January 2020 to December 2022. All petitions during the study period were included following de-duplication. These include petitions filed by law enforcement and family members against adults allegedly at risk of firearm violence across the state. Data were analyzed on a rolling basis between January 2020 and June 2023. Exposure: ERPO petition filed in Colorado. Main Outcomes and Measures: Seventy-seven data elements defined a priori were abstracted from all petitions and case files, including respondent demographics, petitioner types (family or law enforcement), types of threats (self, other, mass violence, combination), violence risk factors, and case outcomes (granted, denied). Results: Of a total 338 ERPOs filed in Colorado, 126 (37.3%) occurred in 2A sanctuaries. Sixty-one of these 2A petitions were granted emergency orders, and 40 were full 1-year ERPOs after a hearing. Forty ERPOs (31.7%) were petitioned for by law enforcement. Petitions in non-2A counties were more likely to have been filed by law enforcement (138 of 227 [64.9%] vs 40 of 126 [31.7%]; P < .001) and to have had an emergency order granted (177 of 227 [78.0%] vs 61 of 126 [48.4%]; P < .001) than in 2A sanctuaries. Qualitative analysis of cases in 2A sanctuaries revealed common aggravating risk characteristics, including respondents experiencing hallucinations, histories of police interaction, and substance misuse. ERPOs have been granted in 2A sanctuaries against individuals threatening all forms of violence we abstracted for (themselves, others, and mass violence). Conclusions and Relevance: In this examination of ERPO petitions across Colorado, more than a third of filings occurred in 2A sanctuaries. Nonetheless, law enforcement represent proportionately fewer petitions in these areas, and petitions are less likely to be granted. Serious mental illness, substance misuse, and prior interactions with law enforcement featured prominently in 2A sanctuary petitions. These case circumstances highlight dangerous situations in which ERPOs are an acceptable risk-prevention tool, even in areas politically predisposed to opposing them.

Examining the Impact of Layperson Rescuer Gender on the Receipt of Bystander CPR for Women in Cardiac Arrest.

BACKGROUND: Women who suffer a witnessed out-of-hospital cardiac arrest receive bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) less often than men. To understand this phenomenon, we queried whether there are differences in deterrents to providing CPR based on the rescuer's gender. METHODS: Participants were surveyed using a national crowdsourcing platform. Participants ranked the following 5 previously identified themes as reasons: rescuers are afraid to injure or hurt women; rescuers might have a misconception that women do not suffer cardiac arrest; rescuers are afraid to be accused of sexual assault or sexual harassment; rescuers have a fear of touching women or that their touch might be inappropriate; and rescuers think that women are faking it or being overdramatic. Participants were adult US residents able to correctly define CPR. Participants ranked the themes if the rescuer was gender unidentified, a man, and a woman, in variable order. RESULTS: In November 2018, 520 surveys were completed. The respondents identified as 42.3% women, 74.2% White, 10.4% Black, and 6.7% Hispanic. Approximately half (48.1%) of the cohort knew how to perform CPR, but only 7.9% had ever performed CPR. When the rescuer was identified as a man, survey participants ranked fear of sexual assault or sexual harassment and fear of touching women or that the touch might be inappropriate as the top reasons (36.2% and 34.0% of responses, respectively). Conversely, when the rescuer was identified as a woman, survey respondents reported fear of hurting or injuring as the top reason (41.2%). CONCLUSIONS: Public perceptions as to why women receive less bystander CPR than men were different based on the gender of the rescuer. Participants reported that men rescuers would potentially be hindered by fears of accusations of sexual assault/harassment or inappropriate touch, while women rescuers would be deterred due to fears of causing physical injury.

Extreme Risk Protection Orders: Legislative Intent and Clinician Guidance.

In this second column of a 2-part series exploring extreme risk protections orders, we utilize recent events in Colorado, including legislative efforts to expand the list of eligible petitioners to include clinicians, as an opportunity to explore questions and challenges faced by mental health and medical professionals serving in this capacity. Clinicians are in need of more clear guidance, given an emerging role that comes without clear evidence or practice standards to inform individualized clinical decision-making, and which potentially pits public safety interests against patient care needs, especially those pertaining to therapeutic relationships. In the interim, clinicians will best serve their patients by continuing to practice in a fashion that is analogous to decision-making around other interventions with serious implications for patient autonomy such as involuntary hospitalization. Ongoing collaboration with legislators is needed to arrive at laws that are informed by the limitations inherent in clinical risk assessment and that can be translated into clinical practices that simultaneously support patient needs and community safety.

What Is Most Important to Family Caregivers When Helping Patients Make Treatment-Related Decisions: Findings from a National Survey.

Prioritizing patient values-who/what matters most-is central to palliative care and critical to treatment decision making. Yet which factors are most important to family caregivers in these decisions remains understudied. Using data from a U.S. national survey of cancer caregivers (N = 1661), we examined differences in factors considered very important by caregivers when partnering with patients in cancer treatment decision making by cancer stage and caregiver sociodemographics. Fifteen factors were rated on a 4-point Likert-scale from 'very unimportant' to 'very important.' Descriptive statistics were used to characterize caregiver factors and tabulate proportions of importance for each. Generalized linear mixed effect modeling was used to examine the importance of factors by cancer stage, and chi-square analyses were performed to determine associations between caregiver sociodemographics and the five most commonly endorsed factors: quality of life (69%), physical well-being (68%), length of life (66%), emotional well-being (63%), and opinions/feelings of oncology team (59%). Significant associations (all p's < 0.05) of small magnitude were found between the most endorsed factors and caregiver age, race, gender, and ethnicity, most especially 'opinions/feelings of the oncology team'. Future work is needed to determine the best timing and approach for eliciting and effectively incorporating caregiver values and preferences into shared treatment decision making.

Extreme Risk Protection Orders in Older Adults in Six U.S. States: A Descriptive Study.

OBJECTIVES: Extreme Risk Protection Orders (ERPOs) allow a court to restrict firearm access for individuals ("respondents") at imminent risk of harm to self/others. Little is known about ERPOs use for older adults, a population with higher rates of suicide and dementia. METHODS: We abstracted ERPO cases through June 30, 2020, from California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Maryland, and Washington. We restricted our analysis to petitions for older (≥65 years) respondents, stratified by documented cognitive impairment. RESULTS: Among 6,699 ERPO petitions, 672 (10.0%) were for older adults; 13.7% (n = 92) of these noted cognitive impairment. Most were white (75.7%) men (90.2%). Cognitively impaired (vs. non-impaired) respondents were older (mean age 78.2 vs 72.7 years) and more likely to have documented irrational/erratic behavior (30.4% vs 15.7%), but less likely to have documented suicidality (33.7% vs 55.0%). At the time of the petition, 56.2% of older adult respondents had documented firearm access (median accessible firearms = 3, range 1-160). CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 14% of ERPO petitions for older adults involved cognitive impairment; one-third of these noted suicide risk. Studies examining ERPO implementation across states may inform usage and awareness. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: ERPOs may reduce firearm access among older adults with cognitive impairment, suicidality, or risk of violence.

Integrating Palliative Care into the Management of Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction: A Practice Pearl.

Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction is a progressive, undulating syndrome with an unpredictable illness course featuring intermittent symptom exacerbations and periods of stability. The progressive, variable trajectory of the illness burdens patients with myriad threats to physical, emotional, and spiritual functioning, quality of life and complex treatment decisions. Integrating palliative care is a recommended best practice for heart failure management; however, confusion persists about what palliative care comprises in the context of heart failure.

Views of voluntary, temporary out-of-home firearm storage among individuals living in a firearm-owning home: results from a qualitative study in two states.

INTRODUCTION: Firearms account for the majority of suicide deaths in the USA. A recommended approach for suicide prevention is reducing access to firearms by temporarily removing them from the home. We sought to understand how firearm owners and those who reside with them view and might use voluntary, temporary out-of-home firearm storage. METHODS: From July to November 2021, we interviewed English-speaking adults in Colorado and Washington who own firearms or reside with them, using semistructured interviews. We used a team-based mixed deductive and inductive approach to code transcripts and identify themes. RESULTS: Half of the 38 interviewees were men (53%) aged 35-54 years (40%); 92% identified as white. The average age that participants reported first having a firearm was 20.4 years; 16% reported never owning a firearm themselves, only living in homes with firearms. Qualitative findings fell into broad themes: (1) storage with family members/friends, (2) concerns/challenges with storing a firearm with a business/organization, (3) importance of trust (4) outreach methods for out-of-home storage programmes. CONCLUSION: Programmes for voluntary, temporary out-of-home firearm storage will not be impactful unless such storage is desired and used. Understanding views of potential storage users can help support development of acceptable and feasible programmes.

Mild Cognitive Impairment is Associated with Poorer Everyday Decision Making.

BACKGROUND: Older adults are faced with many unique and highly consequential decisions such as those related to finances, healthcare, and everyday functioning (e.g., driving cessation). Given the significant impact of these decisions on independence, wellbeing, and safety, an understanding of how cognitive impairment may impact decision making in older age is important. OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) on responses to a modified version of the Short Portable Assessment of Capacity for Everyday Decision making (SPACED). METHODS: Participants were community-dwelling, actively driving older adults (N = 301; M age = 77.1 years, SD = 5.1; 69.4% with a college degree or higher; 51.2% female; 95.3% White) enrolled in the Advancing Understanding of Transportation Options (AUTO) study. A generalized linear model adjusted for age, education, sex, randomization group, cognitive assessment method, and study site was used to examine the relationship between MCI status and decision making. RESULTS: MCI status was associated with poorer decision making; participants with MCI missed an average of 2.17 times more points on the SPACED than those without MCI (adjusted mean ratio: 2.17, 95% CI: 1.02, 4.61, p = 0.044). CONCLUSION: This finding supports the idea that older adults with MCI exhibit poorer decision-making abilities than cognitively normal older adults. It also suggests that older adults with MCI may exhibit poorer decision making across a wide range of decision contexts.

Long-term physical and mental health outcomes of pediatric firearm-injured victims: A prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Firearms are a leading cause of injury among US youth. There is little research describing outcomes after pediatric firearm injuries, particularly past 1 year. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess long-term physical and mental health outcomes among nonfatal firearm versus motor vehicle collision (MVC)-injured victims and versus a standard population. METHODS: We retrospectively identified firearm and MVC-injured pediatric patients seen at one of our four trauma centers (January 2008 to October 2020) and prospectively assessed outcomes using validated patient-reported outcome measures. Eligible patients were English speaking, injured ≥5 months before study start, younger than 18 years at time of injury, and 8 years or older at study start. All firearm patients were included; MVC patients were matched 1:1 with firearm patients for Injury Severity Score (dichotomized <15 or ≥15), age range (±1 year), and year of injury. We conducted structured interviews of patients and parents using validated tools (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System tools, Children's Impact of Event Scale for younger than 18 years and parent proxies). Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System scores are reported on a T score metric (mean [SD], 50 [10]); higher scores indicate more of the measured domain. We used paired t tests, Wilcoxon signed-rank tests, and McNemar's test to compare demographics, clinical characteristics, and outcomes. RESULTS: There were 24 participants in each of the MVC and firearm-injured groups. Compared with MVC-injured patients, firearm-injured patients younger than 18 years had similar scores, and firearm-injured patients 18 years or older had higher anxiety scores (59.4 [8.3] vs. 51.2 [9.4]). Compared with a standard population, patients younger than 18 years had worse global health scores (mean [SD], 43.4 [9.7]), and participants 18 years or older reported increased fatigue (mean [SD], 61.1 [3.3]) and anxiety (mean [SD], 59.4 [8.3]). CONCLUSION: Long-term effects of firearm-injured patients were poorer than matched MVC and the standard population in few domains. Further study in a larger, prospectively recruited cohort is warranted to better characterize physical and mental health outcomes.

How Values Are Discussed, Reflected Upon, and Acted On by Patients and Family Caregivers in the Context of Heart Failure: A Scoping Review.

PURPOSE: Values are critical to how individuals make decisions and cope, yet the values of heart failure (HF) patients and their family caregivers (FCGs) remain understudied. We sought to report the state of the science on how values are discussed, reflected upon, and acted on by patients with HF, their FCGs, or both related to health-related decision making and coping. METHOD: A scoping review was conducted of empirical studies using the following keywords: "heart failure," "values," "decision-making," and "coping." PubMed, PsycINFO, and Scopus were searched from inception to June 2022 in English. Included articles reported values as a key finding (outcome/theme) in their abstract. RESULTS: Of 448 articles screened for eligibility, 16 met the inclusion criteria. Twelve articles reported findings addressing patient values, 3 addressed patient and FCG values, and 1 addressed FCG values. Values were reported to influence patient self-care behaviors and left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation decisions, although their prioritization varied across time and contexts. When prioritized values conflicted with recommended self-care activities, some patients modified their approach to achieving the value. Others modified or abandoned tasks in favor of the value and accompanying goals. Low motivation and alignment between unhealthy behaviors and values often led to nonadherent decisions. Five of 8 articles focusing on cardiac devices reported patient survival as the most prioritized value during implantation decisions. FCG values were rarely reported or evaluated separately from patient values. Patients leveraged several coping strategies, although the processes through which values affected coping was not described. CONCLUSIONS: Prioritized values influenced HF-related decisions, including self-care and LVAD implantation. While several articles reported on coping and values, none described processes through which values affect coping, which highlights a research gap. HIGHLIGHTS: Family caregiver values were rarely reported or evaluated separately from patient values, highlighting a gap in the literature.

Practices, knowledge, and concerns for out-of-home firearm storage among those with access to firearms: results from a survey in two states.

BACKGROUND: Temporary, voluntary storage of firearms away from the home is a recommended option for individuals with risk of suicide, but it may also be used in other situations (e.g., long trips). Prior work has explored the availability of storage options and the views of storage locations. Little is known about out-of-home storage practices among those who live in homes with firearms (including owners). METHODS: We surveyed English-speaking adults (18 or older) in two states (Colorado and Washington) living in a home with a firearm (June-July 2021). RESULTS: Among the final sample of 1029, most respondents were white (88.1%) and non-Hispanic (85.0%); half were female (50.8%), and the most common age group was ages 35-44 (25.5%). Just over one quarter (27.3%) of respondents indicated they had stored a firearm away from their home/car/garage in the last 5 years. The place most respondents said they were somewhat or very likely to consider was at a family members home (62.7%) or at a self-storage facility (52.5%). CONCLUSION: Out-of-home firearm storage is a relatively common practice and endorsed by many gun-owners, suggesting out-of-home storage is feasible for firearm owners as an approach to suicide prevention.

Creation of online maps for voluntary out-of-home firearm storage: Experiences and opportunities.

Online maps showing locations for voluntary, temporary firearm storage are a novel approach in suicide and injury prevention. A study team from two states with maps (Colorado and Washington) interviewed leaders from six additional states with maps and six without. Key considerations for map creation were: trust and partnerships; legal issues; funding; and map maintenance. Addressing these considerations - through stronger networks, liability protection, or sustainable programming - may enhance dissemination and use of out-of-home firearm storage options.

A Web-Based Decision Aid for Caregivers of Persons With Dementia With Firearm Access (Safe at Home Study): Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Firearm safety among individuals with Alzheimer disease and related dementias (ADRD) is an underdiscussed and underresearched concern in the United States, especially given the growing population of community-dwelling adults with ADRD. The "Safety in Dementia" (SiD) web-based decision aid was developed to support caregivers in addressing firearm access; the efficacy of SiD is unknown. OBJECTIVE: Through the SiD decision aid, the Safe at Home (S@H) study aims to support caregivers in making decisions about home safety that align with their goals and values, and behaviors regarding firearm access for persons with ADRD and firearm access. METHODS: The S@H study is a 2-armed randomized controlled trial to test the effect of the SiD decision aid on caregivers of community-dwelling adults with ADRD who have firearm access. S@H aims to recruit 500 ADRD caregivers (age ≥18 years, fluent in English or Spanish, and in the United States) through online or social media advertisements and through relevant organizations. Participants are randomized to view SiD or a control website at their own pace; all participants complete web-based questionnaires at baseline, 2 weeks, 2 months, and 6 months. The primary outcome is immediate preparation for decision-making; secondary outcomes include longitudinal decision outcomes and self-reported modifications to firearm access. The relative reach and effectiveness of each recruitment method (online/social media and through relevant organizations) will be assessed by examining differences in caregiver participation, retention rates, and relative cost. RESULTS: The study enrollment began in May 2022. As of December 2022, a total of 117 participants had enrolled. CONCLUSIONS: The S@H study is the first randomized trial of a firearm safety decision aid for ADRD caregivers. The results from this study will inform how best to support caregivers in decision-making regarding firearm safety. Further, results may guide approaches for recruiting caregivers and for dissemination of resources. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05173922; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05173922. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/43702.

Cars, Guns, Aging, and "Giving Up the Keys".

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Age-associated changes can impair abilities for safe driving and the use of firearms. We sought to examine multiple perspectives on reducing access to firearms, including similarities and differences compared to reducing driving. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Online focus groups and 1-on-1 interviews were conducted (November 2020 to May 2021) in the United States with: older adults who drove and owned firearms; family members of older adult firearm owners/drivers; professionals in aging-related agencies; and firearm retailers/instructors. Recorded sessions were transcribed, coded, and analyzed following a mixed inductive-deductive thematic analysis process. RESULTS: Among 104 participants (81 in focus groups, 23 in interviews), 50 (48%) were female, and 92 (88%) White. Key similarities: decisions are emotional and challenging; needs change over time; safety concerns are heightened by new impairments; prior experiences prompt future planning; tension between autonomy and reliance on trusted others; and strategies like reframing may ease transitions and avoid confrontations. Key differences: "retirement" was not an acceptable term for firearms; reducing driving may affect daily independence more, but there are few alternatives for the psychological safety conferred by firearms; and there are specific firearm-related legal concerns but more driving-related regulations, policies, and resources. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: The similarities and differences in the processes and preferences related to reducing driving or firearm access have implications for the development of resources to support planning and action. Such resources for the public and providers might empower older adults and their families to make voluntary, shared decisions, and reduce injuries and deaths.

Older adults and planning for firearm safety: A qualitative study of healthcare providers.

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND: Firearm injury, particularly self-directed, is a major source of preventable morbidity and mortality among older adults. Older adults are at elevated risk of serious illness, cognitive impairment, and depression-all known risk factors for suicide and/or unintentional injury. Healthcare providers are often the first to identify these conditions and, although they commonly deliver safety guidance to such patients, little is known about how they approach firearm safety conversations with older adults. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with healthcare providers who care for older adults (November 2020-May 2021). We used inductive and deductive thematic analyses to develop themes. We present themes and representative quotes from our analysis. RESULTS: We interviewed 13 healthcare providers who regularly care for older adult firearm owners. Emergent themes were: circumstances that prompt firearm safety conversations; strategies for addressing firearm safety in routine and acute circumstances; barriers to addressing firearm safety; and available or desired resources. CONCLUSION: Planning for firearm safety should occur "early and often" as part of a longitudinal relationship with older adult patients. Age-related safety issues such as driving are regularly addressed with older adult patients, likely because there are standard processes and established pathways. Establishing processes and provider/ patient resources would help improve provider efficacy to address firearm safety and relinquishment for older adult firearm owners. Integrating firearm safety conversations into routine encounters (e.g., Medicare Annual Wellness Visit, problem-focused visits) templates could be a promising initial step but resources for follow-up to the firearm screening must be available to both provider and patient.

Experiences Implementing a Suite of Decision Aids for Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillators: Qualitative Insights From the DECIDE-ICD Trial.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision making (SDM) is gaining importance in cardiology, including Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) reimbursement policies requiring documented SDM for patients considering primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillators. The DECIDE-ICD Trial (Decision Support Intervention for Patients offered implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators) assessed the implementation and effectiveness of patient decision aids (DAs) using a stepped-wedge design at 7 sites. The purpose of this subanalysis was to qualitatively describe electrophysiology clinicians' experience implementing and using the DAs. METHODS: This included semi-structured individual interviews with electrophysiology clinicians at participating sites across the US, at least 6 months following conversion into the implementation phase of the trial (from June 2020 through February 2022). The interview guide was structured according to the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance [implementation evaluation model]) framework, assessing clinician experiences, which can impact implementation domains, and was qualitatively assessed using a mixed inductive/deductive method. RESULTS: We completed 22 interviews post-implementation across all 7 sites. Participants included both physicians (n=16) and other clinicians who counsel patients regarding treatment options (n=6). While perception of SDM and the DA were positive, participants highlighted reasons for uneven delivery of DAs to appropriate patients. The CMS mandate for SDM was not universally viewed as associating with patients receiving DA's, but rather (1) logistics of DA delivery, (2) perceived effectiveness in improving patient decision-making, and (3) match of DA content to current patient populations. Remaining tensions include the specific trial data used in DAs and reconciling timing of delivery with when patients are actively making decisions. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians charged with delivering DAs to patients considering primary prevention implantable cardioverter defibrillators were generally supportive of the tenets of SDM, and of the DA tools themselves, but noted several opportunities to improve the reach and continued use of them in routine care. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique Identifier: NCT03374891.

Extreme risk protection orders in response to threats of multiple victim/mass shooting in six U.S. states: A descriptive study.

Extreme risk protection orders (ERPOs), also known as red flag laws, are a potential tool to prevent firearm violence, including mass shootings, but little is currently known about the extent of their use in cases of mass shooting threats or about the threats themselves. We collected and abstracted information from ERPO cases from six states (California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Maryland, and Washington). Ten percent (N = 662) of all ERPO cases (N = 6787) were in response to a threat of killing at least 3 people. Using these cases, we created a typology of multiple victim/mass shooting threats, the most common of which was the maximum casualty threat. The most common target for a multiple victim/mass shooting threat was a K-12 school, followed by businesses, then intimate partners and their children and families. Judges granted 93% of petitions that involved these threats at the temporary ERPO stage and, of those cases in which a final hearing was held, judges granted 84% of final ERPOs. While we cannot know how many of the 662 ERPO cases precipitated by a threat would have resulted in a multiple victim/mass shooting event had ERPO laws not been used to prohibit the purchase and possession of firearms, the study provides evidence at least that ERPOs are being used in six states in a substantial number of these kinds of cases that could have ended in tragedy.

Voluntary, temporary out-of-home firearm storage: A survey of firearm retailers and ranges in two states.

Out-of-home storage of personal firearms is one recommended option for individuals at risk of suicide, and statewide online maps of storage locations have been created in multiple states, including Colorado and Washington. We sought to examine both the extent to which firearm retailers and ranges offer temporary, voluntary firearm storage and the perceived barriers to providing this service. We invited all firearm retailers and ranges in Colorado and Washington to complete an online or mailed survey; eligible sites had to have a physical location where they could provide storage. Between June-July 2021, 137 retailers/ranges completed the survey (response rate = 25.1%). Nearly half (44.5%) of responding firearm retailers/ranges in Colorado and Washington State indicated they had ever provided firearm storage. Among those who had ever offered storage, 80.3% currently offered storage while 19.7% no longer did. The majority (68.6%) of participants had not heard of the Colorado/Washington gun storage maps and 82.5% did not believe they were currently listed on the maps. Respondents indicated liability waivers would most influence their decision about whether to start or continue providing temporary, voluntary storage of firearms. Understanding current practices, barriers, and concerns about providing out-of-home storage by retailers and ranges may support development of more feasible approaches for out-of-home firearm storage during times of suicide risk.