["Criminology & Public Policy, Volume 20, Issue 4, Page 755-773, November 2021. ", "\nAbstract\n\nResearch Summary\nRisk‐based firearm removal policies are relatively new, and research on their implementation and effectiveness is limited. Using an interpretive phenomenological approach, we interviewed stakeholders in California's gun violence restraining order (GVRO) process to learn about circumstances in which GVROs are appropriate. Two primary themes emerged: (1) GVROs are most useful when there is acute risk of harm with a firearm, in the context of cognitive decline, or as related cases proceed through the courts, and (2) GVROs fill a gap in the policy landscape. Perceptions varied regarding the role of GVROs among preexisting violence prevention tools. Several informants perceived racial/ethnic disparities in GVRO use.\n\n\nPolicy Implications\nUnderstanding practitioners’ perceptions of GVRO utility may help inform implementation and ensure that these policies equitably improve public health and safety. These results highlight the need for additional research on the impact of GVROs and possible disparities in use.\n\n"]