By F. Lee Francis

This article is the culmination of a yearlong research project, and it is the first to address addiction and drug use in the area of Second Amendment Law. I argue that addicts may be disarmed, if they are dangerous. My dangerousness test centers on illicit use and imminent danger. That is, do the facts and circumstances prove that an individual is in fact a danger. To put it another way, disarmament is appropriate when there exists demonstrable evidence that a person poses a significant and imminent risk of causing public injury. The article develops and expands upon some themes and arguments that were first sketched out in my articles, Armed and Under the Influence: The Second Amendment and the Intoxicant Rule After Bruen (Forthcoming in the Marquette Law Review (2024) and Defining Dangerousness: When Disarmament is Appropriate (Forthcoming Texas Tech Law Review 2024).

There is growing confusion within the lower courts regarding when an individual, particularly those who have a history of drug use or addiction, may have their Second Amendment rights restricted. This paper intends to clarify the appropriate standard. The goal of this article is to aid in determining when an individual should be permanently disarmed.

Part I surveys the history of addiction. This section examines the commonness of addiction around the time of the founding to the early twentieth century. Furthermore, Part I also reviews the relevant legislative action relating to firearm possession, use, and control and addiction. The essential claim of Part I contends that modern laws restricting the possession of a firearm due to addiction are unconstitutional. Following an examination of the relevant history and legislation, Part II considers the arguments in favor of prohibiting addicts from possessing firearms. Part III focuses on the modern and developing controversies surrounding criminalizing the possession of firearms because of an individual’s history of addiction. Part IV, then, examines when an addict may be disarmed.

Francis, F. Lee, The Addiction Restriction: Addiction and the Right to Bear Arms. 2024, 48pg

By Caroline Logan, Randy Borum, and Paul Gill

Violent extremism has galvanized public fear and attention. Driven by their concerns, the public has pushed for law enforcement and mental health systems to prevent attacks rather than just respond to them after they occur. The prevention process requires guidance for practitioners and policymakers on how best to identify people who may be at risk, to understand and assess the nature and function of the harm they may cause, and to manage them to mitigate or prevent harm. Violent Extremism provides such guidance.

Over 10 chapters, prepared by leading experts, this handbook illuminates the nature of violent extremism and the evolution of prevention-driven practice. Authors draw on the literature and their experience to explain which factors might increase (risk factors) or decrease (protective factors) risk, how those factors might operate, and how practitioners can prepare risk formulations and scenario plans that inform risk management strategies to prevent violent extremist harm.

Each chapter is crafted to support thoughtful, evidence-based practice that is transparent, accountable and ultimately defensible. Written for an international audience, the volume will be of interest to law enforcement and mental health professionals, criminal justice and security personnel, as well as criminologists, policymakers and researchers.

London, UCL Press. 2023, 319pg