Presale Handgun Checks, 1996

A National Estimate

This report is one in a series.  
More recent editions may be available.  
To view a list of all in the series go to 
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs//pubalp2.htm#phc

Highlights

Presale handgun checks:  Estimates of inquiries and rejections,
1996

Presale checks for handguns, 1/1/96-12/31/96

                                   Original Brady
                         All       Brady    States
                         States    States*  during 1996

Inquiries and rejections
Inquiries/applications  2,593,000  1,213,000    816,000
Rejected                   70,000     44,000     25,000

Rejection rate               2.7%        3.6%      3.1%

Reasons for rejection

Felony indictment/
 conviction               47,000    35,000       15,000
Other                     23,000     9,000       10,000

Note:  All estimated counts are rounded.  Percentages were
calculated from unrounded data.  Detail may not add to total
because of rounding.

*Original Brady States are the 32 States required to follow
presale review procedures set out in the Brady Act when it
became effective on February 28, 1994.  At the end of 1996,
23 of the 32 were still Brady State (See table 2.)

*During 1996 about 70,000 out of an estimated 2,593,000
applications for the purchase of a handgun were rejected due to
presale background checks of the potential purchasers.

*From the inception of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act
until the end of 1996, an estimated 7,782,000 applications for
handgun purchases resulted in 173,000 rejections through
background checks.

*The estimates of applications and rejections for handgun
purchases include States operating under the Brady Act (Brady
States) and States with comparable statutes preventing handgun
sales to prohibited persons (Brady-alternative States).

*Overall, 2.7% of all handgun purchasers had their application
for purchase rejected during 1996.  About 68% of the rejections
were for a prior felony conviction or a current felony
indictment.

*This Bulletin reports only estimates of attempted handgun
purchases, and does not include rifles or other long guns. 

*A previous BJS Bulletin, Presale Firearms Checks (NCJ-162787,
February 1997), included all attempted firearm purchases from
March 1, 1994, to December 31, 1995, and potential handgun
purchases during the first 6 months of 1996.  It estimated that
over the period, on average  6,600 firearm applications were
rejected each month.

By Donald A. Manson
BJS Program Manager

Darrell K. Gilliard
BJS Statistician

During 1996, about 2,593,000 background checks of potential
handgun buyers prevented an estimated 70,000 purchases.  The
inquiries revealed purchasers' ineligibility to buy a handgun
under State or Federal laws, particularly the Brady Handgun
Violence Prevention Act (Pub. L. No. 103-159, 107 Stat. 1536
(1993)) that became effective on February 28, 1994.  Nearly 68%
of those rejected had been convicted of a felony or were under
felony indictment.

From March 1, 1994, through 1996, handgun sellers submitted an
estimated 7.8 million inquiries about potential handgun buyers
and received about 173,000 rejections.  These estimates, drawn
from published estimates of inquiries about potential purchasers
of firearms, include about 62,000 rejections of handgun purchase
applications in the 9 months of 1994 and about 41,000 rejections
for all of 1995.

The Firearm Inquiries Statistics (FIST) program administered by
the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) collected the 1996 data. 
FIST was initiated in 1994 to describe presale background checks
of applicants to buy a handgun from a Federal firearm licensee. 
Chief law enforcement officers made the checks in accordance
with the Brady Act or comparable State legislation.

The estimates of applications and rejections for handgun
purchases include States operating under the Brady Act (Brady
States) and States with comparable statutes preventing handgun
sales to prohibited persons (Brady-alternative States).  The
original 32 Brady States started following the Brady Act review
procedures on February 28, 1994.  There were 18 original
Brady-alternative States.  At the end of 1996, because of
changed statutes, there were fewer Brady States (23) and more 
Brady-alternative States (27) than originally.

Rates of rejection of potential handgun purchases in 1996 can be
compared for these sets of States--the original or current
grouping of Brady and Brady-alternative States.

In 1996 the original Brady States processed 1,213,000
applications and rejected about 44,000, a rejection rate of
3.6%.  The original Brady-alternative States processed 1,380,000
applications and rejected 26,000--1.9%, which differed
significantly from the rate for the original Brady States. 

The current Brady States in 1996 processed 816,000 applications,
of which they rejected 25,000, a rejection rate of 3.1%.  The
current Brady-alternative States processed 1,778,000 and
rejected 45,000--2.5%, a rate that was not significantly
different from the rejection rate of current Brady States.
Brady States
For all States, the most prevalent reason for rejection was that
the applicant either was under felony indictment or had a felony
conviction (67.8%).

Table 1. Reasons for rejection of handgun purchase 
applications, national estimates, 1996

Reasons                    Orginal       Brady States
for rejection  All States  Brady States  during 1996   

Total           100%0.0%       100.0%      100.0

Felony 
(indictment/
conviction/no
disposition)       67.8        78.9        61.0

Fugitive            6.0         7.5        13.0
State law 
prohibition         5.5          .9          --

Restraining 
order               3.9         2.8         3.5

Mental illness 
or disability       1.5          .4          .8

Drug addiction      1.2         1.8         4.4

Local law 
prohibition          .7          .3          .7

Other*             13.4        7.4         16.6

--Less than .05%.
*Includes illegal aliens, juveniles, persons discharged from the
armed services dishonorably, persons who have renounced their
U.S. citizenship, domestic violence, and other unspecified
persons. At the end of 1996, 23 of the 32 were still Brady State 
(See table 2.)

Being a fugitive from justice (6.0%) or a violator of a State
law prohibition (5.5%) were the next most prevalent reasons for
rejection of a handgun purchase, followed by being under a
restraining order (3.9%).

Almost all States are able to check computer databases to
determine past criminal convictions.  Some States are able to
refer to other databases to check additional characteristics
that may make a person ineligible to purchase a
handgun--fugitive status, court restraining orders, and mental 
illness.

In the 45 States that reported checking a database for fugitive
status, 6% of handgun application rejections were for such a
status.  In the 32 States checking for restraining orders,
potential purchasers under court order accounted for 6% of
application rejections. Sixteen States reported searching
databases for applicants with mental illness; in these States
mental illness accounted for 3% of the handgun application
rejections. 
                                   

                        Percent of rejections
                        in States which search
Nonfelony               records for specific 
reason                  nonfelony reasons       

Fugitive                        6% 
Court restraining orders        6
Mental illness                  3

These categories are defined in the Federal Gun Control Act of
1968, as amended, or related State legislation.  During 1996
background checks were made on almost 2.6 million applicants for
handgun purchases.  Since the inception of the Brady Act, nearly
7.8 million background checks have been made.  Through the end
of 1996 about 173,000 of these applicants were prevented from
legally purchasing a handgun.

Statewide reporting of handgun 
applications and rejections

State governments, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI),
and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) have
cooperated to identify about 5,400 law enforcement agencies and
their heads as chief law enforcement officers (CLEOs)
nationwide.  Data for 1996 were collected from 311 CLEOs out of
a sample of 600.

Among the responding CLEOs, 21 served as the only CLEO for the
State and provided statewide totals.

Table 3. Number of applications to buy handguns received or
rejected in 21 States reporting complete data, 1996

                 Number of  applications

                                       Rejection
State         Received    Rejected     rate

     Total   1 ,513,129    36,030        2.4%

Arizona          72,715     2,203        3.0%
Arkansas   25,742       506        2.0
California       215,80    42,111        1.0
Colorado   51,450     3,518        6.8
Delaware   11,826       639        5.4
Florida         213,133     6,236        2.9
Georgia          89,786     8,463        9.4

Idaho            24,604       791        3.2%
Illinois        178,168     1,997        1.1
Indiana          81,974       907        1.1
Kentucky         67,830     1,600        2.4
Maryland         31,362       344        1.1
Nevada           28,253       574        2.0
New Hampshire    12,997       161        1.2

New Jersey       24,672       280        1.1%
Ohio             60,037       330         .5
South Carolina   53,153     2,467        4.6
Utah             34,073       595        1.7
Virginia        182,384     1,896        1.0
West Virginia    20,538       224        1.1
Wisconsin        32,628       188         .6

Note:  Each State had 1 CLEO that reported complete State-wide
data for applications and rejections for 1996.

These States, which represented 50% of U.S. resident population
and over half of the total applications for handgun purchases
during 1996, processed 1,513,129 applications and rejected
36,030--a rejection rate of 2.4%.  Seventy-three percent of
rejections were for a past felony conviction or felony
indictment.

Reason for rejection
by 21 Statewide CLEOs

Felony (indictment/ 
conviction/no disposition)            73%
Fugitive                               6
State law prohibition                  4
Restraining order                      4
Mental illness or disability           1
Drug addiction                         1
Other*                                11

*Includes illegal aliens, juveniles, persons discharged from the
armed services dishonorably, persons who have renounced their
U.S. citizenship, domestic violence, and other unspecified
persons.

Background

Thirty-two States and Puerto Rico were required to follow the
review procedures set forth in the Brady Act when it became
effective (identified in this Bulletin as original Brady States).

By the end of 1996, the number of States following the Brady Act
review procedures rather than alternative State statutes had
dropped to 23 (identified as current Brady States; see table 2
for each State's Brady status.)

Pursuant to the Federal Gun Control Act of 1968, as codified at
18 U.S.C. ' 922, the sale of firearms is prohibited if the
prospective purchaser-- 

*is a juvenile;
*is a fugitive from justice;
*is under indictment for, or has been convicted of, a Crime
punishable by   imprisonment for more than 1 year;
*is an unlawful user of a controlled   substance;
*has been adjudicated as a mental defective or committed to a
mental institution;
*is an alien unlawfully in the United States;
*was discharged from the armed forces under dishonorable
conditions;
*has renounced U.S. citizenship;
*is subject to a court order restraining him or her from
harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or
child; or 
*is a person convicted of domestic violence.

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms estimates of inquiries
and rejections, March 1, 1994, to December 31, 1995

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms estimates _ 
may include handguns, long guns, and carry permitsa

              3/1/94 to 12/31/94    1/1/95 to 12/31/95

                                                 
                       Original              Original
                All    Brady        All       Brady
             States    Statesb      States    Statesb

Inquiries and 
rejections
Inquiries/
applications 3,679,000 1,696,000  4,009,000 1,884,000
Rejected        92,000    42,000     60,000    28,000

Rejection rate           2.5%       2.5%      1.5%      1.5%

Reasons for 
 rejection

Felony indictment/
conviction      65,000    30,000     43,000    20,000
Other           26,000    12,000     17,000     8,000

Note:   All estimated counts are rounded.  Percentages were
calculated from unrounded data.  Detail may not add to total
because of rounding.

aData for 1994 and 1995 from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and
Firearms are based on inquiries to the FBI's National Crime
Information Center.

bOriginal Brady States are the 32 States required to follow
presale review procedures set out in the Brady Act when it
became effective on February 28, 1994.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms has calculated the
number of applications for firearm purchases from March of 1994
to the end of 1995.  (See Presale Firearm Checks, BJS Bulletin,
NCJ-162787, February 1997.)  In the first 9 months of 1994 there
were an estimated 3,679,000 inquiries to the FBI's National
Crime Information Center (NCIC); in 1995, an estimated
4,009,000. 

The ATF estimates were calculated using the number of
firearm-coded inquiries to the NCIC.  The percentage of denials
used for these estimates was based on the experiences of
jurisdictions that had implemented presale firearms check
procedures prior to the Brady Act. 

The Firearm Inquiries Statistics (FIST) program administered by
BJS receives data from a sample of chief law enforcement
officers responsible for background checks of firearm
purchasers.  The FIST data describe only applications for
handgun purchases, a fraction of the larger number of potential
firearm purchases.  (The Brady Act as well covers only
applications for a handgun purchase.)

FIST began in January 1996. The estimated number of inquiries
for handgun purchases during the year was 67% of the total
number of firearm inquiries to the NCIC (3,842,000).  To
estimate the number of inquiries for handgun purchase
applications before 1996, the ATF estimates were multiplied by
67%.  

In the last 9 months of 1994 there were an estimated 2,483,000
inquiries for handgun purchases and an estimated 62,000
rejections.  In 1995 the estimated number of inquiries was
2,706,000, with an estimated 41,000 rejections.

Estimated number of handgun inquiries (applications to purchase)
and rejections, March 1, 1994, to December 31, 1996

                  3/1/94-       1/1/95-         1/1/96-
                     12/31/94  12/31/95  12/31/96

Estimated number 
of handgun inquiries 2,483,000   2,706,000  2,593,000

Estimated number 
of rejections           62,000      41,000     70,000

Rejection rate             2.5%        1.5%       2.7%

Brady Act

The Brady Act was enacted in November 1993 and became effective
in February 1994.  The interim provisions of the Act require
that Federally licensed firearm dealers request a presale check
on all potential handgun purchasers.  The requests are made to
CLEOs in the jurisdictions where the prospective purchasers
reside.  The Federal firearms licensee must wait 5 business days
before transferring the handgun to the buyer, unless earlier
approval is received from the CLEO.  These interim procedures
will terminate no later than November 30, 1998.

The "interim provision" also permits States to follow a variety
of alternative State procedures.  (See Survey of State
Procedures Related to Firearm Sales, 1996, BJS report,
NCJ-163918, September 1997.)  To qualify under these
alternatives, State law must require that before any licensee
completes the transfer of a handgun to a nonlicensee, a
government official must verify that possession of a handgun by
the transferee would not be a violation of law.  Examples of
Brady-alternative States include California ("point-of-sale
check"), Virginia ("instant check"), and Missouri (permit).

After November 1998 a Federal firearms licensee will be required
to perform background checks on potential purchasers of all
firearms.  These inquiries will be made through the National
Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) which the FBI
will operate and maintain.  

Under the provisions of the Brady Act, the NICS must be
established no later than November 1998, at which time the
procedures related to the 5-day waiting period of the interim
system will be eliminated. These "instant" background checks
will determine, based on available records, if an individual is
prohibited under the Federal Gun Control Act or State law from
receiving or possessing firearms.  

Under the FBI's proposed NICS configuration, State criminal
history records will be provided in the majority of cases
through each State's central repository and the Interstate
Identification Index (III).  The index, maintained by the FBI,
points instantly to criminal records that States hold.  In
addition, the FBI will provide records of Federal offenses,
Federally maintained State data, and Federal data on nonfelony
disqualifications.  

States responding to NICS inquiries for nonfelony prohibitions
will provide their records directly.  Federal firearms licensees
in States that do not serve as a point of contact to the system
will make inquiries directly to NICS.

The National Criminal History 
Improvement Program (NCHIP)

To ensure immediate availability of complete and accurate State
records, the Brady Act established a grant program authorized at
$200 million.  An additional authorization of $20 million was
made available through the National Child Protection Act of 1993
(Pub. L. No. 103-209, 107 Stat. 2490 (1993)).  Both
authorizations were designed to assist States to develop or
improve existing criminal history records systems and  to
establish an interface with the NICS.  

Over $112 million was given in direct awards to the States
during fiscal years 1995 and 1996.  The appropriation for 1997
is $50 million.  NCHIP funds have supported direct technical
assistance to States, evaluation, and research related to
improving criminal and other nonfelony records within the States.

The FIST program was established under NCHIP.  Information
requested for the initial survey does not include data traceable
to an applicant, and the computer program that was subsequently
developed and used by some agencies for both operational
purchases and to collect FIST data transmits only the
appropriately aggregated or categorized responses.  None of the
FIST information provided from agencies to BJS contains or
reveals the identity of individual applicants.  Moreover, the
computer program also assists agencies to purge records after
the delay times specified by law.

Methodology

The following presents the approach used to derive the 1996
estimates from a sample of chief law enforcement officers
charged with determining eligibility to purchase a handgun.The
data were stratified by size of the population served. 
Information collected included: 

*handgun applications made to the  CLEO; 
*handgun applications rejected by the CLEO; and 
*the reasons for rejection.  

Sample Design

The sample for the survey was selected from a population of
5,400 CLEOs.  These CLEOs ranged from State agencies which
served an entire State population (category X); local CLEOs
which served a population greater than 100,000 (category C);
local CLEOs  which served a population between 10,000 and
100,000 (category B); and local CLEOs  which served a population
of less than 10,000 (category A).  Population size was based on
1990 Census information.  The population categories were chosen
to be consistent with those commonly used by the FBI when
conducting similar studies.  A total of 600 CLEOs were randomly 
selected for inclusion in the study.

Since the start of this study two States have implemented
operation of state- wide CLEOs, and one State has begun
reporting data for local jurisdictions.  These changes have
reduced the total number of CLEOs selected to 579.

The sample universe includes all 25 statewide CLEOs (category
X), all 118 CLEOs who service populations in excess of 100,000
persons (category C), 189 CLEOs from category B, and 247 from
category A.  For each State 4% or a minimum of five CLEOs were s
elected in their respective A and B categories.

Overall, 311 CLEOs provided data for a response rate of 54%. 
Respondents included 21 statewide CLEOs, 2 agencies providing
statewide totals (see below), 49 local CLEOs in category C, 95
local CLEOs in category B, and 144 local CLEOs in category A. 
The 311 agencies that submitted data serviced 160,198,309 people
or 65% of the 248,102,973 people who were identified in the 1990
Census.

Based on data provided by these CLEOs, national estimates were
developed using weighting factors derived from the original
stratification.  When a CLEO did not provide data for all
months, a simple linear extrapolation was used to generate a
12-month total.

Information for two States required further analysis.  Oregon
switched from local CLEOs to a statewide CLEO during 1996. 
Estimates for the year for number of applications and number of
rejections were based on the data from the newly established
statewide CLEO.  New Jersey provided data on the number of
applications and the number of rejections for the whole State,
but did not provide reasons for rejections.  Local CLEOs that
had been sampled in Oregon and New Jersey provided data on the
reasons for rejection.

For purposes of applications, rejections and rejection rates,
information from the statewide CLEOs was used.  The descriptive
information about reasons for rejections used the data from both
the local and State CLEOs.

Maine is one of several States that use both local CLEOs and the
State police in areas not serviced by a local CLEO.  In the
other States' data from the State police were classified as
category A data because of the rural area that is normally being
served.  However, Maine, because of the large portion of the
State that the State police service (40%) and the wide range of
population classifications they serve, State police data were
classified as category X data.

Definition of outliers

Five agencies with a rejection rate over four standard
deviations above the total standard rejection rate were
classified as outliers and their data were not used for
projection of estimates.  In addition, one agency was classified
as an outlier because it had changed its record keeping
procedures during the year and its final rejection rate could
not be determined with sufficient accuracy.  The data provided
by the outliers were added to the total estimated counts to get
the final national totals.

Accuracy of the estimates

The accuracy of the estimates presented in this report depends
on two types of errors: non-sampling and sampling.  In this
study, nonsampling error may be occur from the following: 
non-response; differences in the ways CLEOs process, code, store
and retrieve their information; differences in interpretation of
the survey questions; and even activities which delay personnel
from doing paperwork.

Also, the process of a researcher receiving data and storing it
in the computer for analysis can introduce non-sampling error. 
In any sample survey, the full extent of non-sampling error is
never fully known.  However, steps were taken to minimize the
potential for error.  Extensive telephone follow-ups were made
to encourage responses, answer questions about misunderstood
requests, and generally help CLEOs in assembling the information
in a form useable by FIST.  Extensive verification of the data
ensured the accuracy of the numbers.

All confidence intervals discussed in this report were set at a
95-percent confidence level.  Because of the sampling design,
State comparisons cannot be made.  The estimates are only for
the 50 States and do not include U.S. territories or the
District of Columbia.  Sales of all firearms are prohibited in
the District of Columbia except to law enforcement officers.

Data collection procedures

The Regional Justice Information Service (REJIS), through a
cooperative agreement with BJS under the Firearms Inquiries
Statistics program (FIST), collected the data.  

The CLEOs supplied data on either paper or diskette.  Several
different forms were provided to meet the varying office
procedures of the CLEOs.  In addition REJIS wrote and provided
special software that was distributed free of charge to
requesting CLEOs.  This software was designed to simplify the
record tabulating functions of the CLEO.  It also helped to
reduce the burden of keeping the statistical data since one of
the capabilities of the software was to automatically collect
the data needed for the study.  In all cases the data that the
CLEO sent to REJIS contained only statistical information and
would not allow the identification of an individual.

Determining populations 

For local CLEOs, a State may choose to have county officials
(usually the sheriff) as the CLEO or municipal officials (police
departments) or a combination of the two.  To evaluate properly
the application and rejection rates for purchasing handguns
within a given area, the appropriate CLEO population was needed
and was determined as follows:

*The classification of the county was based on the size of the
largest city within the county.

*If cities within a participating county CLEO were acting as
their own CLEOs, their populations were subtracted from the
county population.

*If a municipal CLEO was discovered to be providing services for
other selected municipalities, then populations for those
municipalities were added to the populations of the city having
the CLEO.

*Those CLEOs selected to participate in the study but found to
be relying on other jurisdictions to conduct background checks
were replaced by those other jurisdictions (for example, a town
being replaced by a county).

Connecticut did not submit any data in time for this study. 
Connecticut has a dual system that uses both local and State
agencies.  For the purposes of this study, Connecticut was
classified as a having a State CLEO.

The Bureau of Justice Statistics 
is the statistical agency of the 
U.S. Department of Justice.  

Jan M. Chaiken, Ph.D., is Director.

BJS Bulletins present the first release of findings from
permanent data collection programs such as the Firearm Inquiry
Statistics program.  State and local officials have cooperated
in reporting the data presented.

Don Manson, BJS Program Manager, and Darrell K. Gilliard, BJS
Statistician, wrote this Bulletin under the supervision of Carol
Kaplan, Chief, National Criminal History Improvement Programs,
BJS.  Gene Lauver, manager of the Firearm Inquiries Statistics
program, Regional Justice Information Service (REJIS of St.
Louis, MO), collected and analyzed the FIST data presented. 
Terry Tomazic, Ph.D., professor of research methodology at St.
Louis University, provided statistical consultation.  Tom Hester
produced and edited the report.  Marilyn Marbrook, assisted by
Yvonne Boston and Jayne Robinson, administered final report
production.

Further information on the FIST 
program may be obtained from:

Carol G. Kaplan, Chief Criminal History 
Improvement Program
U.S. Department of Justice
Bureau of Justice Statistics
Washington, DC  20531

Gene Lauver, Project Manager
Regional Justice Information Service
4255 West Pine Blvd.
St. Louis, MO  63108. 

September 1997, NCJ-165704

This report and others from the 
Bureau of Justice Statistics 
are available through the Internet--

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/

END OF FILE