Firearm purchasing patterns can shift in response to specific events, including presidential elections, according to Rutgers Health researchers.
A study by researchers with the New Jersey Gun Violence Research Center examined what extent specific groups changed their intentions and behaviors related to firearms directly in response to the 2024 presidential election by assessing a nationally representative sample of 1,530 adults in the two weeks before the election and then again in the first two weeks of 2025.
In the study, published in Injury Epidemiology, the authors found survey participants identifying as Black reported increased intentions to purchase firearms in the coming year as well as an increased desire to carry firearms because of the results of the presidential election.
Additionally, liberal beliefs were associated with greater increases in impulses to carry firearms and to store firearms in a more quickly accessible manner because of the results of the presidential election.
“These findings highlight that communities that feel directly threatened by the policies and actions of the second Trump administration are reporting a greater drive to purchase firearms, carry them outside their home, and store them in a way that allows quick access and that these urges are a direct result of the presidential election,” said Michael Anestis, executive director of the New Jersey Gun Violence Research Center at Rutgers and lead author of the study. “It may be that individuals feel that the government will not protect them or – worse yet – represents a direct threat to their safety, so they are trying to prepare themselves for self-defense.”
The authors also found survey participants who perceive less of a threat to democracy and who view crime as a more substantial problem in the United States reported a decreased urge to carry firearms because of the results of the presidential election. Such results indicate that individuals who view the Trump administration as invested in community safety felt less of a need to be armed outside the home.
“Ultimately, it seems that groups less typically associated with firearm ownership – Black adults and those with liberal political beliefs, for instance – are feeling unsafe in the current environment and trying to find ways to protect themselves and their loved ones,” Anestis said.
“Although those beliefs are rooted in a drive for safety, firearm acquisition, carrying, and unsecure storage are all associated with the risk for suicide and unintentional injury, so I fear that the current environment is actually increasing the risk of harm,” he said. “Indeed, recent events in Minneapolis make me nervous that the environment fostered by the federal government is putting the safety of Americans in peril.”
Journal
Injury Epidemiology
Subject of Research
People
Article Title
Changes in firearm intentions and behaviors after the 2024 United States presidential election
Article Publication Date
30-Jan-2026
COI Statement
Author Michael Anestis reports personal income in the form of book royalties, consulting fees, and speaking fees related to the topic of secure firearm storage. Anestis also reports grant funding related to the topic of secure firearm storage.
US Laws to keep guns away from distressed individuals reduce suicides
New research led by UC Berkeley shows that the passage of "red flag" laws meaningfully reduced the number of firearm suicides.
University of California - Berkeley
In 2023, more than half of all suicide deaths in the United States involved firearms. “Red flag” laws—also called Extreme Risk Protection Orders or ERPOs—are designed to reduce these deaths by authorizing temporary firearm removal from individuals deemed at high risk of harming themselves or others. ERPO laws had been implemented in 21 states and the District of Columbia as of February 2025.
But the laws’ effectiveness in preventing suicides was still unclear.
However, a new analysis led by UC Berkeley School of Public Health Research Professor of Health Policy and Management Timothy T. Brown, published today in JAMA Health Forum, shows that the passage of ERPO laws does reduce suicides by gun.
The researchers looked at data from four states that passed ERPO laws and eight that did not, and concluded that the laws reduced firearm suicides by a mean of 3.79 incidences per 100,000 population, with an estimated 675 suicides prevented across these four states between the year the law was passed and following year. Non-firearm suicide rates did not change. “We found no evidence of individuals switching to other methods of suicide once firearms were restricted,” said Dr. Brown.
“For years, policymakers have debated whether removing firearms from individuals in crisis truly prevents suicide deaths or simply shifts people toward other methods. Our findings provide rigorous evidence that ERPO laws can prevent firearm suicides without measurable increases in suicides by other means. With only 21 states currently having these protections, there is significant opportunity for other states to adopt similar legislation and save lives," said paper co-author Yunyu Xiao, assistant professor of population health sciences at Weill Cornell Medicine.
“I hope that policymakers will make arguments to implement this type of restriction [in other states]. It’s minimally intrusive and it definitely saves lives,” said Brown.
Co-author Mark S. Kaplan, professor emeritus of social welfare at UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs agrees. “Resistance often comes from gun rights organizations and conservative lawmakers, who argue that such measures threaten Second Amendment rights. It's time to prioritize community safety by adopting these vital protections,” he says.
Additional authors include Zhimeng Yan of Weill Cornell Medicine and Mark S. Kaplan of UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs.
Method of Research
Observational study
Article Title
Extreme Risk Protection Orders and Firearm and Nonfirearm Suicides in the US
Article Publication Date
30-Jan-2026
