This research stems from the notion that the United States has no universal national warning method concerning all hazards. Rather, governments and private organizations have varying strategies to warn the public, depending on the hazard of concern. The author argues that this is not effective and may lead to future inequalities and losses of life. This paper addresses four main questions. It addresses any improvements made in prediction and forecasting, warning integration and warning dissemination, and ends with a discussion on what is known about response to warnings. Results show that there have been improvements in prediction and forecasts since 1975, with some hazard warning strategies improving more than others, including strategies for floods, hurricanes and volcanic eruptions. However, not all hazards have improved dissemination practices and there is no hazard that has an entirely efficient warning system. The author calls for more research on a national warning strategy, improvements to current warning systems, and advancements in warning technologies. Lindell and Perry’s (1992) and Mileti and Sorenson’s (1990) warning response processes are discussed.