When an abusive partner has access to a firearm, the risk of intimate partner homicide is 400% greater. That’s according to data from the Rockefeller Institute of Government presented to Bloomington’s Special Commission for Safe Communities at its October meeting.
The citywide commission charged with studying gun violence heard from domestic gun violence expert Dawn Beichner-Thomas, a professor of criminal justice studies at Illinois State University, last week. The volunteer group chaired by forensic pathologist Scott Denton agreed to look more closely at domestic violence in June, partially in response to a late May murder-suicide in Normal. Mayor Mboka Mwilambwe reinforced that aspect of its work during the commission’s Aug. 19 progress report to the Bloomington City Council.
In addition to Beichner-Thomas, veteran school administrator Kevin Jones spoke about his work implementing restorative justice practices in school and community settings. And Bloomington Police shared out monthly totals of gun incidents. The commission requested that future monthly reports from BPD include data on incidents of domestic violence.
Need for communication and collaboration
Among her top line recommendations, Beichner-Thomas said organizing a summit involving key stakeholders is a good place to start, noting the role such a group as the Special Commission for Safe Communities could play in facilitating communication between victims, community advocates and law enforcement.
“We have to understand from the survivor/victim perspective what it is like for them,” she said in an interview for WGLT’s Sound Ideas. “If a survivor/victim is willing to engage in this way, we could invite a panel of them to the conversation.”
Also key is understanding the perspectives of law enforcement and the structural barriers they face in preventing, responding to, charging and litigating domestic violence.
According to a 2021 research study by Vijetha Koppa and Jill Messing, more than 90% of women killed through intimate partner homicide had been in contact with police an average of 6 times in the three years prior to their death. Less than half of those police interventions resulted in an arrest.
“I can only imagine that it can be very frustrating when a call is made about an incident of intimate partner violence, the officer responds and a survivor/victim says, ‘I don’t want to press charges,’” said Beichner-Thomas. “We need to understand what it’s like for law enforcement. What do they need from us to enforce orders of protection? To be able to disarm abusers? What is it that they perceive to be some of the frustrating obstacles that they face?”
Enforcement is complicated
Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle advocate enforcement of existing federal gun laws preventing convicted abusers and those who are the subject of an order of protection from having or legally obtaining guns.
Jurisdiction is one challenge of enforcing the current gun laws, which falls to the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). Illinois State Police controls firearm identification cards. Illinois has failed three times to pass a similar statewide law, which would empower state police to confiscate firearms from abusers. Municipal police departments handle incidents of domestic violence. And orders of protection are delivered by the county sheriff.
McLean County alone issues about 300 orders of protection each year. Victims’ advocates refer to an order of protection as merely a piece of paper that is only enforceable when violated. And in order for federal gun laws to take effect, a hearing must take place.
“A temporary order of protection—one in which there is no hearing related to it—does not have the same kind of ramifications with firearms as one that involved an actual hearing with a judge does,” said Beichner-Thomas. “That’s something to consider and confusion is rampant across the community. Part of our movement forward has to involve some awareness building.”
Another complexity is the nature of domestic violence, which Beichner-Thomas said can unfold over months, years or decades.
“When we think of the order of protection itself, it’s not the solution. It’s something we can use as a tool to identify a person who might be engaging in behavior that on its face doesn’t look like intimate partner violence.”
That allows police to view seemingly isolated incidents, she said, within the framework of a potentially violent relationship.
“It has to be intervention that’s informed about the relationship that exists with this victim and this perpetrator,” Beichner-Thomas said.
What does intervention look like?
During its Oct. 24 meeting, commission chair Scott Denton questioned whether the restorative justice practices introduced by Jones could be a strategy for addressing escalations of domestic violence and intimate partner homicide.
Jones said the restorative justice model, involving mediated meetings between offenders and victims, is malleable to the nature and context of that relationship.
“A lot of the work starts with you as an individual,” said Jones. “How are you working with yourself? What does fairness look like when you’re making decisions for yourself? How do we give ourselves grace with the decisions we make and work through those things?”
Beichner-Thomas said some experts argue against restorative justice as an intervention for violent crime, but noted its effectiveness in Europe, New Zealand and among indigenous communities.
“Even in circumstances where we know it wouldn’t be safe for a survivor or a victim to be with the person who perpetrated the violence against her, we can still bring together surrogates,” said Beichner-Thomas. “We know that in intimate partner violence, it’s not going to end without an invested interest in the person who’s perpetrating the violence. If that person wants to change, we should be there to help them through that.”
In cases where a perpetrator is charged and convicted of violating an order of protection, domestic violence or domestic battery, the court may impose a sentence of probation combined with a domestic violence protocol aimed at counseling and deterrence from reoffending. Incarceration is another option.
Jones said a key difference between conventional punishment and restorative justice is “giving a voice to the person who was harmed.”
“That’s where it starts,” he said. “Punishment would be categorized as passive discipline. The person who you punish never has to acknowledge they caused harm. In order for it to move forward, the person who caused harm has to admit the harm and admit that they want to make it right.”
