i

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Bureau of Justice Statistics

Privacy, Technology and Criminal

Justice Information

Public Attitudes Toward Uses of

Criminal History Information

Summary of Survey Findings
U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Bureau of Justice Statistics

Public Attitudes Toward 

Uses of Criminal History

Information

A Privacy, Technology, and Criminal Justice

Information Report

July 2001, NCJ 187663
iii

U.S. Department of Justice

Bureau of Justice Statistics

Lawrence A. Greenfeld

Acting Director

This report was commissioned by SEARCH, The National Consortium for Justice Information

and Statistics, Kenneth E. Bischoff, Chairman, and Gary R. Cooper, Executive Director. The

project director was Sheila J. Barton, Deputy Executive Director. Opinion Research Corporation

International conducted the research and prepared the main report presenting the survey findings.

Dr. Alan F. Westin, Columbia University, wrote the Commentary section. Twyla R. Cunningham,

Manager, Corporate Communications, and Jane L. Bassett, Publishing Specialist, provided

editing, layout, and design assistance. The Federal project monitor was Carol G. Kaplan, Chief,

Criminal History Improvement Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics.

Report of work performed under BJS Cooperative Agreement No. 96-BJ-CX-K010 awarded to

SEARCH Group, Incorporated, 7311 Greenhaven Drive, Suite 145, Sacramento, California

95831. Contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Bureau of

Justice Statistics or the U.S. Department of Justice.

Copyright © SEARCH, The National Consortium for Justice Information and Statistics, 2001

The U.S. Department of Justice authorizes any person to reproduce, publish, translate, or

otherwise use all or any part of the copyrighted material in the publication with the exception of

those items indicating that they are copyrighted by or reprinted by permission of any source other

than SEARCH, The National Consortium for Justice Information and Statistics.
v

Contents

Background and purpose..........................................................................................................1

Methodology .................................................................................................................................2

Study design...............................................................................................................................2

Sampling ....................................................................................................................................2

Data collection ...........................................................................................................................3

Weighting...................................................................................................................................3

Executive summary.....................................................................................................................4

Overview....................................................................................................................................4

General privacy issues ...............................................................................................................4

Attitudes toward the criminal justice system.............................................................................4

Criminal history records.............................................................................................................5

Fair information practices..........................................................................................................5

The role of the private sector .....................................................................................................6

Juveniles, ex-offenders, and fingerprinting ...............................................................................6

Commentary: Balancing privacy and public uses of criminal history

 information — what the survey tells us..............................................................................7

The public’s concerns about privacy, 1970-1999 ......................................................................7

The privacy survey in context....................................................................................................7

Comparisons with other privacy surveys...................................................................................9

Patterns reflected in survey findings........................................................................................10

Detailed findings........................................................................................................................13

Reading notes...........................................................................................................................13

Foundations..............................................................................................................................15

Privacy concerns................................................................................................................16

Experience with invasions of privacy................................................................................17

Internet usage.....................................................................................................................18

Perceptions of personal information available on the Internet..........................................19

Experience with the American legal and criminal justice systems ...................................20

Knowledge of the criminal justice system.........................................................................23

Attitudes toward the criminal justice system.....................................................................25

Attitudes toward uses of criminal history record information

 outside the criminal justice system .......................................................................................29

Awareness and general attitudes .......................................................................................30

Access by employers and government licensing agencies................................................32

Access to criminal history records by organizations other

 than employers and licensing agencies...........................................................................36

Fair information practices..................................................................................................37

Use and distribution of criminal justice records by

 commercial enterprises and other organizations ............................................................38
vi

Juvenile records.................................................................................................................40

Sealing the records of ex-offenders...................................................................................42

Uses of fingerprinting........................................................................................................43

Posting of information on the Internet...............................................................................45

Summary of factors influencing attitudes toward the use of

 criminal history records ........................................................................................................47

Overview ...........................................................................................................................48

Experience/Attitudinal summary.......................................................................................49

Demographic profile..........................................................................................................57

Appendix 1: Sampling variations and tolerances.............................................................59

Reliability of survey percentages.............................................................................................60

Sampling tolerances when comparing two samples ................................................................61

Appendix 2: Questionnaire .....................................................................................................63
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 1

Background and purpose

This report presents the findings

of a telephone survey conducted

in February and March 2000

among a national probability

sample of 1,030 adults 18 years

of age and older, living in

private households in the

continental United States.

SEARCH, acting with Dr. Alan

Westin, a well-respected expert

on issues of privacy and the use

of personal information,

commissioned Opinion

Research Corporation

International (ORC

International) to conduct this

research. The primary purpose

of the study is to assess public

attitudes toward the availability

and use of individuals’ criminal

history records outside of the

criminal justice system.
Page 2 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

Methodology

This report presents the findings

of a telephone survey conducted

among a national probability

sample of 1,030 adults,

comprised of 520 men and 510

women, 18 years of age and

older, living in private

households in the continental

United States. Results based on

the total population have a

margin of sampling error of plus

or minus 3 percentage points at

the 95% confidence level.

Included in the Appendixes,

which follow the body of this

report, are tables of sampling

tolerances of survey results and

a copy of the survey

questionnaire.1

As required by the Code of

Standards of the Council of

American Survey Research

Organizations, we will maintain

the anonymity of our

respondents. No information

will be released that in any way

will reveal the identity of a

respondent. ORC International

has exercised its best efforts in

the preparation of this

information. In any event, ORC

International assumes no

responsibility for any use that is

made of this information or any

decisions based upon it.

 

1

 Appendix 1, which contains tables of

sampling variations and tolerances,

begins on Page 59. Appendix 2, which

contains the questionnaire, begins on

Page 63.

Study design

Dr. Westin, in consultation with

SEARCH, provided the basic

design for the research and for

the survey instrument itself.

ORC International, drawing on

its 6 decades of experience in

public opinion research,

provided input on methodology

and questionnaire design.

Sampling

Probability sampling techniques

were employed in the selection

of households for telephone

interviewing. ORC International

utilizes an unrestricted random

sampling procedure that

controls the amount of serial

bias found in systematic

sampling to generate its

random-digit-dial sample. The

sample was fully replicated and

stratified by region. Only one

interview is conducted per

household. All sample numbers

selected were subject to up to

four attempts to complete an

interview.

ORC International’s national

probability telephone sample is

an efficient form of randomdigit-dialing (RDD). The

sample is designed to be a

simple random sample of

telephone households. Unlike

published directories, ORC

International’s national

probability telephone sample

includes both unlisted numbers

and numbers issued after

publication of the directories.

The following procedure was

used to create the sample:

• ORC International has an

annual license for

GENESYS, a custom RDD

sample generation system

developed by Marketing

Systems Groups.

• The methodology for

generating RDD telephone

samples in the GENESYS

system provides for a single

stage, Equal Probability of

Selection Method (EPSEM)

sample of residential

telephone numbers. It is

updated twice a year.

• When a national probability

sample is needed, a random

selection is made from

approximately 40,000

exchanges in 2 million

working banks.

• Each telephone number is

transferred to a separate call

record. The record shows the

computer-generated

telephone number to be

called, as well as the county,

State, and time zone into

which the telephone number

falls. Our computer-assisted

telephone interviewing

system (CATI) uses this

information to keep track of

regional quotas. The CATI

interviewing program also

keeps track of the disposition

categories for each call

attempt.
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 3

Data collection

Interviewing for this survey was

completed during the period

February 22-March 9, 2000. All

data collection efforts took

place at ORC International’s

Central Telephone Facilities in

Tucson, Arizona, and Tampa,

Florida. All ORC International’s

interviewers complete an

intensive training and test

period. Additionally, they attend

follow-up training classes that

cover advanced screening

techniques, in-depth probing,

and the art of refusal avoidance.

Interviewers are continuously

supervised, monitored, and

reviewed in order to maintain

the highest quality interviewing

standards.

All interviews were conducted

using ORC International’s

CATI system. The system is

state-of-the-art and offers

several distinct advantages, such

as: full-screen control that

allows multi-question screens,

fully programmable help and

objection screens to aid

interviewing, an extremely

flexible telephone number

management system, and

powerful data-checking

facilities. CATI ensures that

interviews are conducted in the

most efficient manner and

allows interviewers easy

response recording. This

interviewing method also allows

for the most accurate form of

data entry by guiding the

interviewer through the

programmed question flow and

by providing on-screen

interviewer instructions.

Weighting

Completed interviews were

weighted by four variables: age,

sex, geographic region, and

race, to help ensure reliable and

accurate representation of the

total population, 18 years of age

and older. The raw data were

weighted by a proprietary

program that automatically

develops a weighting factor for

each respondent. In this

program, each respondent is

assigned a single weight derived

from the relationship between

the actual proportion of the

population with its specific

combination of age, sex,

geographic characteristics, and

race, and the proportion in the

sample. Proportional targets for

the population were based on

the 1998 Current Population

Survey (U.S. Census Bureau).

The tables included in this

report show unweighted bases.
Page 4 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

Executive summary

Overview

There is substantial public (that

is, adult) support for making

certain types of criminal justice

records available outside the

criminal justice system when

there is a perceived rationale of

public benefit and/or safety.

Support declines noticeably

when the goal is purely private.

In general, American adults tend

to favor making individual

conviction records available to

employers, governmental

licensing agencies, and other

entities. They are far more

reluctant, however, to support

access to arrest-only (or arrest

without conviction) records.

General privacy

issues

Turning first to underlying

attitudes toward privacy, the

results indicate that the misuse

of personal information is a

major concern. Nearly all (90%)

of adult Americans are

concerned about the possible

misuse of personal information,

with 64% expressing a high

level of concern (“very

concerned”) and 25% saying

they are “somewhat” or

moderately concerned. Ten

percent express either little or

no concern about possible

misuse of personal information.

When asked if they have ever

been victims of an improper

invasion of privacy by specific

types of organizations, a total of

38% say that they have been

victimized by at least one of the

following:

• a business collecting and

using information (25%)

• a charitable, political, or

nonprofit organization (13%)

• a law enforcement agency

(12%)

• a government tax, social

service, welfare, or license

agency (10%).

Fifty-two percent of adults

believe that anyone’s credit

reports or criminal

conviction record (49%) may be

purchased via the Internet.

Approximately 4 in 10 adults

believe that they can obtain

anyone’s Social Security

number (42%), credit card

number (39%), or arrest record

(38%). Thirty-six percent

believe that bank balances are

for sale on-line.

Attitudes toward the

criminal justice

system

Thirteen percent of the adult

public say that they “know a

great deal” about the American

criminal justice system —

defined as the way police,

prosecutors, courts, and defense

counsel work. Most adults

(57%) report that “they know

the basics.” The balance either

“don’t know very much”(23%)

or “don’t know anything at all”

(6%).

Overall, Americans give the

criminal justice system fair

grades in executing key

functions.

• Majorities rate the system as

“very or somewhat effective”

in:

—investigating and arresting

persons suspected of

committing crimes (79%)

—prosecuting accused

persons (73%)

—reaching a just outcome in

criminal trials (68%).

• However, fewer than 2 out of

10 adults rate the system as

very effective in any of these

areas, and a substantial group

of adults — approximately

one-quarter of the population

— sees the criminal justice

system as not very effective.

About one-half (53%) give

the system a “very or

somewhat effective” rating in

all three areas, 24% gave that

rating in two areas, while

another 24% said the system

is very or somewhat effective

in either only one (10%) or

none (14%) of these areas.

The proportions are similar

when it comes to perceptions

about how well the system

respects the civil liberties and

constitutional rights of suspects.

Seventy percent say the system

does either very well (24%) or

somewhat well (46%), while

about one-quarter say it does not

do very well (19%) or not well

at all (8%).
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 5

Six out of 10 adults report

having had their fingerprints

taken for some sort of

identification purpose, such as

military service or a job

application or government

license. Most (87%) felt that

fingerprinting was an

appropriate requirement.

Criminal history

records

Conviction records

Americans view individuals’

criminal history records as

confidential information and

favor some restriction in access.

• 47% prefer what was labeled

as a “partially open system,”

where only conviction

records are freely available to

everyone. Another 37% favor

a restricted system, where

access is limited only to

selected users. Only 12%

favor a completely open

system — one with both

arrest and conviction records

freely available.

• Most adults (90%) say they

prefer that State agencies not

use the Internet to post

criminal history information

that is already a matter of

public record.

A substantial majority of the

public supports access to

conviction records by various

organizations outside the

criminal justice system where

there is some public safety

and/or crime prevention interest.

Where private interests are at

stake, support for access to

conviction records drops to

about the 40% level.

• Approximately 9 out of 10

adults would allow some

access to conviction records

by potential employers or to

government occupational

licensing agencies. However,

a majority (11 out of 20)

believes that right of access

should be linked to whether

the position involves

sensitive work, such as

handling money, dealing with

children, or serving as

security guards.

• Large majorities favor at least

some access to conviction

records for private

organizations, such as the

Boy Scouts of America, that

work with children (88%),

for the military to evaluate

potential recruits (82%), and

for insurance companies

investigating fraud (76%).

Support drops for reporters

wanting to find out about

political candidates (44%),

banks deciding on personal

loan applications (41%),

individuals wanting to learn

if a neighbor has any criminal

record (38%), and companies

that issue credit cards (38%).

Arrest records

A large majority (66%) of

Americans distinguish between

access to conviction records and

access to records of persons

arrested but not convicted.

• Approximately 3 out of 10

adults would bar any access

to arrest-only records to any

employer or governmental

licensing agency. About onehalf would allow limited

access based on the

sensitivity of the position,

while only 15% would grant

all employers or government

licensing agencies access to

arrest-only records.

• Turning to nonemploymentrelated entities, only when it

comes to organizations that

work with children does a

majority (59%) favor any

access to arrest records.

About one-half (49%) would

allow the military to see

arrest-only records of

potential recruits, and 45%

would allow access to

insurance companies

investigating fraud. Fewer

than one-quarter of adults

favor access to arrest-only

records for reporters wanting

to find out about political

candidates (23%), banks

deciding on personal loan

applications (22%),

individuals wanting to learn

if a neighbor has any criminal

record (23%), and companies

that issue credit cards (21%).

Fair information

practices

The study reveals extremely

strong support for the

implementation of three “fair

information practices”

governing maintenance and use

of criminal history records.

• Eighty-nine percent of adults

consider it very important to

have a right to review their

records, coupled with the

right to have suspected errors

investigated and, if indeed

erroneous, corrected.

• Seventy-four percent see it as

very important that there be

an impartial procedure to

receive, investigate, and

resolve complaints
Page 6 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

concerning misuse of one’s

criminal history records,

and/or the failure of the

relevant agency to follow

appropriate policies.

• Fifty-five percent believe it

very important that each

person be informed when a

criminal history record is

created, how it will be used

within the criminal justice

system, and the policies

governing the record’s

availability outside the

system.

The role of the

private sector

Most adults (85%) feel that

commercial companies

maintaining and distributing

criminal history records should

follow the same rules and

procedures regarding fair

information practices as would

bind government criminal

history agencies. One out of 10

adults (11%) feels that “such

rules are not important for

private businesses.”

• There is a high level of

concern about the system of

collecting, maintaining, and

distributing criminal history

records by private companies.

Asked which statement best

reflects their own views:

—Sixty-nine percent of the

respondents chose, “It

worries me that this is

being done by commercial

organizations and I favor

this being done only by the

government.”

—Twenty-two percent said

their views are best

reflected by the statement,

“This commercial system

provides relevant

information from public

record sources for many

important business, social,

and governmental

purposes and is OK.”

—Nine percent declined to

choose between these two

points of view.

Juveniles, exoffenders, and

fingerprinting

Opinion is divided when it

comes to the access and

publication of juvenile court

records. About one-half of

adults (53%) favor keeping

disclosure restrictions, “because

giving juvenile offenders the

chance to overcome a bad

record is a sound approach.”

Four out of 10 (40%) favor

opening juvenile records to the

same entities that have access to

adult records, “since protecting

society and the public should be

the primary concern.”

In the case of ex-offenders, the

majority (52%) favors keeping

criminal records available to

employers and licensing

agencies regardless of the length

of time that has passed since the

individual’s conviction or

release. Forty-three percent

believe access should not be

granted if a person convicted of

a crime serves his or her

sentence and then does not

violate the law for a period,

such as 5 years.

Overall, American adults appear

to consider fingerprinting for

certain governmental purposes

acceptable. However, once

private-sector entities require

fingerprinting, attitudes become

more ambiguous.

• Approximately three-quarters

of adults find fingerprinting

“very acceptable” when a

person is arrested (78%) and

when someone is applying

for a sensitive job, such as

teacher, nursing home

worker, or security guard

(77%). Ninety-four percent

and 93%, respectively, think

these practices are either very

or somewhat acceptable.

• Six out of 10 think it a very

acceptable practice to

fingerprint welfare program

recipients (62%) or to require

a thumbprint on drivers’

licenses (60%), with 86% and

80%, respectively,

responding very or somewhat

acceptable.

• On the other hand, fewer than

one-half of adults find it very

acceptable to require

fingerprints to cash a check

(45%), buy an airline ticket

(45%), or apply for a job

(37%).
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 7

Commentary: Balancing privacy and public

uses of criminal history information —

what the survey tells us

Since 1978, I have been the

academic advisor to a steady

stream of national opinion

surveys dealing with the public

and privacy.2 Thirty of these

were done with Louis Harris

and Associates (now Harris

Interactive) and 15 with ORC

International. A major benefit of

such continuous surveying is

that, if you ask good questions

early on and then ask them year

after year, you get valuable data

on changing public perceptions

and attitudes. I can illustrate this

with two important privacy

trend lines we have tracked.

The public’s

concerns about

privacy, 1970-1999

 In 1970, Harris asked

respondents to one national

survey how concerned they

were about their personal

privacy, with “very concerned,”

“somewhat concerned,” “not

very concerned,” and “not

concerned at all” as the response

categories. Thirty-four percent

of the public in 1970 said it was

concerned (a combination of the

“very” and “somewhat”

respondents).

 

2

 This Commentary section was written

by Dr. Alan F. Westin, Professor

Emeritus, Public Law and Government,

Columbia University.

By the time I started doing

privacy surveys with Harris in

1978, Watergate had intervened,

along with social protest

movements on the Vietnam

War, racial justice, and gender

discrimination. Reflecting the

social mood, fall of confidence

in institutions, and fears about

technology abuse that marked

the 1970s, 66% of the American

public said in our 1978

“Dimensions of Privacy” survey

that they were concerned about

threats to privacy. By 1990, we

found that the same question

produced a 78% level of

concern. And at the end of the

1990s, a survey I advised,

conducted by Harris in 1999 and

sponsored by IBM, found that

94% of the American public

now said they were concerned

about privacy threats.

Equally important with the

dramatic 60% rise in overallprivacy-concern between 1970

and 1999 was the rise in the

“very concerned” responses. In

the 1999 IBM survey, 77% —

three-fourths of American adults

— said they were “very

concerned” about the misuse of

their personal information and

threats to their privacy.

A second major trend finding is

the shift from the 1970s to today

in terms of what the public

perceives as the principal threat

to its privacy. In the postWatergate era, the government

was overwhelmingly perceived

as the threat. About 75% of

survey respondents would

identify the government as

being the source for potential

threats to privacy. When we last

asked this question in the mid1990s, sentiment had already

shifted to the point where

roughly the same number of

respondents identified business

and government as equal threats

to privacy. The public was

divided roughly in half, with

half saying the government was

the greatest threat, and almost

half saying business poses the

greatest threat.

The privacy survey in

context

In this Commentary, I am not

going to repeat the main

findings, which are presented

quite thoroughly in the main

report. My goal is to put these in

a larger context, and to offer my

interpretation of their meaning. I

start by asking two questions.
Page 8 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

First, how representative is this

survey of other privacy surveys

conducted over the last 20 or 30

years? Second, what did those

surveys teach us about how the

public makes up its mind about

the balance between privacy and

public interest? Answers to

these questions should allow us

to project how the public is

likely to react to the developing

reconsideration of public

records in general, and to uses

of criminal history information

outside the criminal justice

system in particular.

At the outset, we should note

the environment in which this

survey took place. Our survey

reflects the public’s general

sense that there are major

changes in the uses of criminal

history information in our

society as a result of advanced

information technology.3 The

criminal justice system is

deepening the records it

collects, combining them inside

the criminal justice system, and

moving into deeper retrieval

capacities, for example in the

record systems of both civil and

criminal courts. Many of these

trends are driven by statutes that

require the production of

criminal history information for

various kinds of noncriminal

justice uses, such as for

providing licensing standards

 

3

 An overview of these “change

drivers” is documented in “Report of

the National Task Force on Privacy,

Technology and Criminal Justice

Information,” a companion report to

this survey that will be published in

Spring 2000 by the Bureau of Justice

Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice.

for people who deal with senior

citizens, children, school

systems, and so forth.

The Brady Handgun Violence

Prevention Act is a good

example.4 The mandatory

licensing and checks for firearm

purchases illustrates the public’s

passionate concern that criminal

history information be used in

this particular noncriminal

justice focus. We also see the

rise of commercial distribution

systems that have developed

into an industry of substantial

size, collecting database

information and making it

available to a wide set of users

— employers, government

agencies, lawyers, insurance

companies, and so forth. Some

of these services are now on the

Internet, advertising that you

can locate anyone and find out

all about them, including

checking for a criminal record.

When examining a survey, it is

also useful to ask whether it is

dealing with well-developed

policy questions — where the

public feels it understands the

issue, the players, and the

options — or is it a survey that

is trying to get people to think

about some new and unfamiliar

issues and to draw on their

experiences and attitudes in

order to express some broad

preferences? In that perspective,

our survey is clearly an

anticipative rather than a

reactive survey. That is, we

know from our survey results

that only 10% of the sample

says it has been arrested for a

 

4

 18 U.S.C. Sec. 922 et. seq.

nontraffic offense. This

represents about 20 million

adults. Of those arrestees, 57%

say their arrest resulted in a

conviction, which gives us a

database of 12.4 million persons

who would have personal

experiences with conviction

records in the criminal justice

system. While that is a big

number, it is still a very small

percentage of the total adult

population of the United States.

On the other hand, when you

deal with issues of employment

screening, occupational

licensing, and so forth, it is clear

that a majority of our

respondents can identify with

those situations and probably

have had experiences in having

record checks made for these

noncriminal justice purposes.

It is also important in

understanding our survey results

to note that use of criminal

history records outside the

criminal justice system is not as

salient a social issue today as it

was in the late 1960s and early

1970s. That was the period

many children of the Nation’s

economic and social elites were

being arrested — for social

protest, for racial

demonstrations, for anti-war

demonstrations. These were

often the children of

government officials, business

executives, and academics. The

idea that you could have an

arrest or a conviction record for

demonstrations or protests that

would stigmatize you — so that

you wouldn’t get into Princeton,

or get a job at the brokerage

house, or couldn’t be appointed

to Federal or State government
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 9

employment — was obviously a

great threat to the progress of

the children of the ruling class.

How large-scale arrest and

conviction records for social

protest were going to be used

became a political issue in the

late 1960s and early 1970s,

which it is not today.

But there are still populations

that feel adversely impacted by

the social uses of criminal

history information. Race is the

predominant factor here, as the

main report documents.

Minority populations feel that

the criminal justice record’s

stigmatizing effect on their

opportunities for employment,

credit, licensing, and other kinds

of functions in this society is

deeply impacted by what the

rules will be and the treatment

made of such information. This

race context should be

understood as an important

aspect of what the survey is

exploring.

Finally, our survey is

anticipative because members of

the public are not, as the phrase

goes, “policy wonks.” They do

not thrill to ideas such as

whether a legislative solution

would take an opt-in or an optout approach, or whether notice

has to be cast in a certain way.

Those issues are for the experts.

They are very important in

terms of policy, but we stayed

away from posing those kinds of

questions in our survey. Instead,

we tried to frame issues in terms

of broad attitudes, and broad

policy and social choices.

Comparisons with

other privacy

surveys

How did our sample compare

with the results of other privacy

surveys in this decade? We

clearly had a representative

sample in terms of how the

public approaches balancing

public interest and privacy.

There is high comparability in

the figures we compiled on

overall privacy concern, for

example. As in other surveys,

our sample judged information

technology uses as positive, but

also as threatening. We also

found heavy support for fair

information practices; the list of

rules that people want for the

handling of criminal history

information match the high

support for those kinds of

principles in many of the

surveys.

Of great importance was

confirmation of the

segmentation of the public on

privacy issues found over 2

decades of privacy survey

research. In looking at the

pattern of the public’s privacy

attitudes, this research shows

that the public broadly divides

into three continuing and

consistent segments:

• First are what we call the

“privacy fundamentalists.”

These people view privacy

as a passionate and deep

concern. They generally

will reject a consumer

benefit or social value as

being not as important as

protecting their privacy.

When it comes to consumer

privacy issues, they want

the government to pass

legislation or have

regulatory oversight,

because they think that is

the only way that consumer

privacy will be adequately

protected.

• At the opposite end are

what we call the “privacy

unconcerned.” These are the

folks who do not know what

the issue is all about, and

could not care less. As

consumers, if you give them

5 cents off, they will give

you their family histories

and anything else you want

to know. They also

generally feel that public

order and public safety is

far more important, because

they do not think they have

anything to hide.

• In between those two are

what we call the “privacy

pragmatists.” They go

through a very special

process. First, privacy

pragmatists ask themselves,

“What is the benefit to me

or to my society? What do I

get if you extract or require

me to give my personal

information?” The second

question they ask is, “What

are the privacy risks and

how serious are they? How

is my information going to

be used, and is it going to be

used in ways that I am

really very unhappy about

and that seem to be

excessive?” Third, they ask,

“What safeguards or

protections are being

offered for my privacy

against those privacy risks,

and how will they be

delivered?” Finally, there is
Page 10 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

the “Do You Want to be a

Millionaire?” question: Do

they trust the industry or the

sector to follow those

safeguards? And if they do,

that ends the discussion. If

they do not, the question

then becomes, “Do we need

legislation and regulatory

oversight before the privacy

pragmatists will be

comfortable with their

information being used in

this way?”

Our survey shows that the

percentages in each one of these

three categories varies

according to the privacy issue

involved. People do not have

one coherent, consistent view

across all the different

dimensions of privacy — such

as consumer, citizen, and

employee privacy issues. And

consumer issues subdivide into

many different sectors like

financial affairs, health and

medical affairs,

telecommunications, direct

marketing, and others. In

general, we found on consumer

issues that 25% of the public are

privacy fundamentalists, 20%

are privacy unconcerned, and

55% fall into the privacy

pragmatists category. Not

surprisingly, when you shift to

health and medical issues, the

privacy fundamentalists

category expands; in 1994 it

was roughly 35%. Today, it

might be up to 45%, in terms of

the increased sense of

sensitivity and risk involved in

health and medical records.

On citizen issues, we found in

several surveys we conducted

that about 32% were in the

privacy fundamentalists

category, 12% in privacy

unconcerned, and 50% in

privacy pragmatists. Our data in

this survey suggest that the

criminal justice balance pretty

much approximates the citizen

division.

We see this reflected in the

findings about attitudes toward

the criminal justice system.

From 68% to 79% rate the

criminal justice system as

effective in the different

dimensions that we offered, and

70% say they feel the system

respects civil liberties. But the

“very effective” and the “very

greatly respects civil liberties”

categories were not high. It is

only when you put “very” and

“somewhat” together, as is

traditional in this kind of survey

work, that you get the overall

positive numbers just cited.

However, it is also important to

note that only 12% say their

own privacy has been invaded

or has been lessened as a result

of a law enforcement agency

action, compared to 25% to

30% of the public who regularly

say on privacy surveys that they

feel their consumer privacy has

been violated by business

actions.

It is useful to compare our

findings with some

effectiveness or confidence

ratings that we get about other

institutions. Over the years, the

Harris organization has

maintained a “confidence in

institutions” index. Reading a

list of institutions, people have

been asked how much

confidence they have in “the

people running those

organizations.” The choices

given are: “a great deal of

confidence,” “only some

confidence,” or “hardly any

confidence.” The numbers in

our survey show that the

skepticism the American public

feels toward a number of other

government institutions makes

law enforcement shine by

comparison. Eighty-two percent

say they have “only some” or

“hardly any” confidence in the

U.S. Congress, 79% for the

Federal executive branch, 76%

for the White House, 64% for

the Supreme Court, and — the

big winner — 48% for the

military. These are the negative

levels about these institutions. If

that is a fair comparison to law

enforcement and the criminal

justice system, they are not

considered one of the bad boys

of the governmental process.

Patterns reflected in

survey findings

With these observations in

mind, then, we can look at some

of the specific findings and note

the general pattern reflected.

Only 12% of our sample favors

a completely open State

criminal history records system.

There is a sense that there are

too many privacy perils in

absolute, total access of this

public record system for more

than 12% of the public to feel

this is a good solution. Eightyfour percent want some kind of

limits on either the type of

criminal history record that is

disseminated or the type of user.

For example, 47% favor a

system that is completely open

for conviction records, while
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 11

37% favor a selected-user

system that could provide

access to both conviction and

arrest-only records.

What kind of access does the

public think is appropriate,

based upon relevance or

sensitivity criteria? There were

no majorities for open access to

all criminal history information

to all of the kinds of private

organizations that we listed,

again suggesting a public desire

to see modulated systems. Fiftyfive percent would let an

employer and 57% would let

government licensing agencies

have access to conviction

records, if there is a sensitive

job that makes access an

important criteria in protecting

the public. For arrest-only

records, the sensitivity of the

job just drew under a majority

for employers and 50% for

licensing agencies, while

respondents who would deny

access to arrest-only records

rose to 31% and 29% in that

category.

Another example is the way

access was dealt with in terms

of need and relevance. As far as

conviction records were

concerned, there was very high

support for groups that work

with children, the military, and

insurers fighting fraud. On the

other hand, there was not a

majority for giving access to the

media, to banks for loan

decisions, to neighbors checking

on criminal history conviction

records, and to credit card

issuers. When we shifted to

arrest-only records, the center of

gravity moved dramatically,

with only groups working with

children drawing majority

support, and no others getting a

majority for access being

provided.

Applying demographic analysis,

we can see that the groups that

favor more limited or less

access are younger respondents

who feel that they are still

coming up in the system, and

that there can be more harm

done to them from some of

these criminal history

information uses. AfricanAmericans, as compared to

Whites, are more critical of the

criminal justice system. Some of

these demographic readings are

not so much separate categories

as they may be describing

combinations of statuses or

attitudes. For example, if we

look at the attitudes of groups

with the lowest education,

lowest income, and minority

status, the same individual may

be represented in those three

different capacities. From 20%

to 35% of the total public shares

those demographic

characteristics and, therefore,

have those attitudes.

When we turned to

fingerprinting, heavy majorities

said that fingerprinting was

acceptable for all of the seven

uses that we tested. Not

surprisingly, we received very

high numbers — 80% to 94%

— of support for using

fingerprints to process arrests in

the criminal justice system, for

issuing occupational licenses for

sensitive jobs, and for policing

welfare fraud. Those issues

always draw heavy support

from the general public.

Because identity fraud has

become an enormous problem,

there is high support for using a

finger image on a driver’s

license to prevent fraudulent

use. We even received 68% to

71% support for using

fingerprinting for check

cashing. One response that

really struck me as astounding

was majority support for the use

of fingerprints for buying airline

tickets. We may have enhanced

that response by connecting

fingerprint use in this fashion to

fighting terrorism, but it reveals

the fragility of the “high privacy

position” to have a majority of

Americans say it is acceptable

to fingerprint people who buy

airline tickets.

A few other findings are worth

noting. Ninety percent of the

public say they would be

opposed to putting what were

called “open public records” on

the Internet. Experts have

recognized that putting open

records on-line would increase

access to the addresses of law

enforcement officers, judges,

mayors, and others in a

potentially harmful way, and

posting bankruptcy records

would reveal things like Social

Security numbers and risk

identity thefts, and so forth.

Whether members of the public

had these or other aspects in

mind, 9 in 10 Americans clearly

feel that there is a tremendous

difference between putting open

records on the Internet and

having them open only at their

source.
Page 12 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

We saw slim majorities in

support of keeping restrictions

on the disclosure of juvenile

records, and that records should

not be sealed but kept open for

employers and licensing

agencies. Two out of three

respondents believe it would be

better for the government to

provide criminal history

information for socially

valuable uses than it would be

to have this done by commercial

services.

When we turn to privacy

policies for organizations

collecting and using personal

information, it is clear that the

public well understands and

gives extraordinarily high

support to what are known as

fair information practices — the

right to have information

procedures explained and

policies followed; the right to

view records and have

corrections made; the right to

have an impartial dispute

resolution procedure; and so on.

That judgment was verified

here. The fair information

practices rules we presented for

uses of criminal history records

were overwhelmingly seen as

“very important” or “important”

(without the “somewhat”

category), and the public wants

commercial agencies to follow

the same kinds of practices.

To summarize, the findings here

are well supported by other

privacy surveys that are being

done and that have been done in

the past. The survey shows that

the majority of the public starts

out as privacy pragmatists. They

want to pick and choose what

uses seem to be legitimate or

where the privacy risks seem to

be too great. In no sense is there

a kind of carte blanche attitude

that “criminal history

information is okay; let’s use it

any place people want it.” The

process of looking at the value,

assessing the risk, checking for

safeguards, and deciding

whether they trust the people

running the system is the

process by which people make

up their minds.

This leads me to draw two

overarching conclusions from

the survey. First, the public is

indeed interested in these issues

and will support the

development of new rules for

societal uses of criminal history

information in an informationrich age when people are

actively seeking more

information on one hand, while

also being very worried about

inappropriate or dangerous uses

of information.

Second, where that debate will

go will depend on the process

by which these issues are tested

in legislative arenas, in

executive agencies, in the

media, and in public debate.

What you have in the survey

findings are some underlying

attitude sets. How they will be

focused depends on the play of

debate, and on whether horror

stories grip the public and drive

decisionmaking, or whether the

feeling is that there are

workable solutions. We will

have a major debate in this

decade over reshaping the rules

for criminal history information,

both inside the criminal justice

system and in social uses

outside. The survey offers a

baseline of understanding about

how the public will approach

these issues when the political

system and the media offer them

up for general public response.
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 13

Detailed findings

Reading notes

The following pages present

supporting tabulations of

survey results. The data are

percentaged vertically and,

therefore, should be read

from top-to-bottom. The total

number of unweighted

interviews appears at the top

in parentheses. Percentages,

however, are calculated on

the weighted bases.

Percentages may not add to

100% due to weighting

factors, rounding or multiple

responses. Where a double

asterisk (**) appears, it

signifies any value of less

than one-half of 1 percent.

Comparisons of independent

subgroups have been made

when those differences are

mathematically significant.

Significance testing is done

to the 95% confidence level.

Note that any statistical test

becomes less reliable when

the sample sizes are small.

Even though the test can be

mathematically performed on

samples as low as 30, the

reasonable lower boundary

on the size of the sample is

60 respondents.
Page 14 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 15

Foundations
Page 16 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

Privacy concerns

Nearly all (90%) of adult

Americans are concerned about

the possible misuse of personal

information. Almost two-thirds

(64%) say they are “very

concerned,” while another onequarter (25%) report being

“somewhat” or moderately

concerned. Ten percent express

either little or no concern about

possible misuse of personal

information.

___________________________

There are some variations of the

intensity of concern. Younger

adults, Whites, those who are

more affluent, and college

graduates are less likely to

report that they have a high

level of concern (“very

concerned”) about possible

misuse of personal information.

Q21 How concerned are you about the possible misuse of your personal information in America today?

Are you . . .

Total

(n) = (1030)

%

Very/Somewhat concerned (net) 90

Very concerned 64

Somewhat concerned 25

Not very/Not concerned at all (net) 10

Not very concerned 8

Not concerned at all 2

Don’t know 1

AGE RACE EDUCATION HH INCOME

Under 65 and African- College Non- $50K or LT

65 older White Amer. Grad Grad higher $50K

(n) = (899) (124) (836) (102)* (366) (651) (321) (516)

% % % % % % % %

Very/Somewhat concerned (net) 89 91 89 93 88 91 89 90

Very concerned 63 73^ 62 79^ 58 67^ 57 67^

Somewhat concerned 27^ 18 28^ 14 30^ 23 32^ 22

Not very/Not concerned at all (net) 10 7 10 5 12 8 11 9

^(^^) = Significantly higher than corresponding column(s) at the 95% confidence level

* = Small Base
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 17

Experience with invasions of privacy

The high level of concern about

privacy invasion is not,

however, totally based on

personal experience. To the

extent personal experience

influences concerns, perceived

privacy invasions by the private

sector are most frequent.

• When asked if they have ever

been victims of an improper

invasion of privacy by

specific types of

organizations, a total of 38%

say that they have been

victimized by at least one of

four entities.

—25% of respondents said that

they have been victimized by

a business collecting and

using information

—13% had been victimized by

a charitable, political, or

nonprofit organization

—12% by a law enforcement

agency

—10% by a government tax,

social service, welfare, or

licensing agency.

Not surprisingly, adults who

have a high level of concern

about the possible misuse of

personal information are more

likely to report having been

victims of an invasion.

African-Americans are nearly

twice as likely to feel that they

have been victimized by a law

enforcement agency (21% vs.

11%).

More men than women perceive

that they have been a “privacy

victim” of a law enforcement

agency (16% vs. 9%).

___________________________

Q22 Have you personally ever been the victim of what you felt was an improper invasion of privacy by any of the

following?

“Yes” summary

LEVEL OF CONCERN

ABOUT MISUSE OF

PERSONAL INFORMATION GENDER RACE

TOTAL High Medium Low Male Female White Afr.-Amer..

(n) = (1030) (666) (261) (97)* (520) (510) (836) (102)*

% % % % % % % %

Any invasion (net) 38 44^ 30 19 43^ 34 37 45

A business collecting and

using information about you

25 30^^ 19^ 8 27 22 24 28

A charitable, political, or

nonprofit organization

13 15^ 12^ 4 16^ 11 13 14

A law enforcement agency 12 14 10 7 16^ 9 11 21^

A government tax, social

service, welfare, or license

agency

10 12^^ 7 3 12 8 9 14

^(^^) = Significantly higher than corresponding column(s) at the 95% confidence level

* = Small Base
Page 18 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

Internet usage

Sixty percent of adults report

using the Internet from any

location (home, work, school, or

some other place).

• In general, Internet users are

more likely to be men,

younger, upper income,

White, and college graduates.

___________________________

Q27 Do you use the Internet today from home, work, school, or any other place?

GENDER RACE EDUCATION

TOTAL African- College Some No

Male Female White Amer. Grad College College

(n) = (1030) (520) (510) (836) (102)* (366) (241) (410)

% % % % % % % %

YES 60 66^ 54 61^ 50 82^^ 64^ 39

NO 40 34 46^ 39 49 18 36^ 60^^

DON’T KNOW/REFUSED ** 1   1 0 0 1

HH INCOME AGE

$25K-LT $50K or

LT $25K $50K higher 18-34 35-54 55+

(n) = (228) (288) (321) (326) (440) (257)

% % % % % %

YES 32 59^ 84^^ 76^^ 65^ 33

NO 68^^ 40^^ 16 24 35^ 66^^

DON’T KNOW/REFUSED 1 **  0 0 0 1

^(^^) = Significantly higher than corresponding column(s) at the 95% confidence level

* = Small Base

** = Less than one-half of 1%
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 19

Perceptions of personal information available on the Internet

About one-half of adults believe

that anyone’s credit reports

(52%) or criminal conviction

record (49%) may be purchased

via the Internet.

Approximately 4 in 10 adults

believe that they can obtain

anyone’s Social Security

number (42%), credit card

number (39%), or arrest record

(38%). Thirty-six percent

believe that bank balances are

for sale on line.

• Internet users are

significantly more likely than

nonusers to believe that it is

true that credit reports (56%

vs. 47%) and criminal

conviction records (53% vs.

45%) are available on-line.

___________________________

Q20 For each of the following types of personal records, please indicate whether you think it is true or false that

anyone using the Internet can PURCHASE this kind of record from PRIVATE SERVICES on any person they

are interested in, for any purpose that they have in mind.

“True” summary

USE THE INTERNET

TOTAL Yes No

(n) = (1030) (630) (397)

% % %

Anyone’s credit bureau report 52 56^ 47

Anyone’s criminal conviction record 49 53^ 45

Anyone’s Social Security number 42 44 38

Anyone’s credit card numbers 39 39 40

Anyone’s arrest record, even if not convicted 38 39 36

Anyone’s bank checking account balance 36 36 35

^(^^) = Significantly higher than corresponding column(s) at the 95% confidence level
Page 20 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

Experience with the American legal and criminal justice systems

Seven percent report that they

have had some sort of legal

training and/or exposure

(lawyers, work for a law firm or

legal department, or have had

some sort of legal training).

Nine percent of adults report

that they work or have worked

for some sort of criminal justice

agency — including police,

prosecutors, courts, or a

corrections agency.

• Nearly half (48%) of those

with legal training work or

have worked for some sort of

criminal justice agency.

___________________________

Q26 Are you a lawyer, do you work for a law firm or legal department, or have you had legal training?

TOTAL

(n) = (1030)

%

YES 7

NO 93

DON’T KNOW/REFUSED **

Q25 Do you now work or have you ever worked for any kind of criminal justice agency, such as the police,

prosecutors’ offices, courts, or corrections agency?

TOTAL LAW TRAINED

(n) = (1030) (70)*

% %

YES 9 48

NO 91 52

DON’T KNOW/REFUSED ** 0

* = Small Base

** = Less than one-half of 1%
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 21

Experience with the American legal and criminal justice systems

(continued)

Seven percent — 16% of those

working for a criminal justice

agency and 17% of those with

legal training — have ever

personally sought the criminal

conviction records of someone

else, excluding inquiries made

as part of their employment.

One out of 10 respondents

reports having been arrested for

a criminal offense (other than

driving convictions) — and of

those persons, 57% admit to

having been convicted.

___________________________

Q28 Have you personally ever sought to obtain the criminal conviction record about another person, for any reason,

apart from any such inquiry in your duties at work?

WORK(ED) IN CRIMINAL

TOTAL LAW TRAINED JUSTICE AGENCY

(n) = (1030) (70)* (98)*

% % %

YES 7 17 16

NO 93 83 84

DON’T KNOW/REFUSED ** 0 0

Q29 Have you ever been arrested for a criminal offense, other than driving violations?

TOTAL

(n) = (1030)

%

YES 10

NO 90

DON’T KNOW/REFUSED 1

Q30 Were you convicted for that offense or not?

Base = Have been arrested for a criminal offense

TOTAL

(n) = (101)

%

YES 57

NO 41

DON’T KNOW/REFUSED 3

* = Small Base

** = Less than one-half of 1%
Page 22 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

Experience with the American legal and criminal justice systems

(continued)

Six out of 10 adults report

having had their fingerprints

taken for some sort of

identification purpose, such as

military service or a job

application or government

license.

• Most (87%) felt that the

fingerprinting was an

appropriate requirement.

___________________________

Q23 Have you ever had your fingerprints taken, for example, for military service, applying for a job or a

government license, or for any other identification purpose?

TOTAL

(n) = (1030)

%

YES 61

NO 38

DON’T KNOW/REFUSED 1

Q24 Did you feel that doing this was an appropriate requirement or not an appropriate requirement?

Base = Ever had fingerprints taken for military service, applying for a job or a government license, or for any

other identification purpose?

TOTAL

(n) = (631)

%

APPROPRIATE 87

NOT APPROPRIATE 12

DON’T KNOW/REFUSED 1
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 23

Knowledge of the criminal justice system

Thirteen percent say that they

“know a great deal” about the

American criminal justice

system — defined as the way

police, prosecutors, courts, and

defense counsel work. Most

adults (57%) report that they

“know the basics.” The balance

either “don’t know very much”

(23%) or “don’t know about this

area at all” (6%).

• Men claim to be more

knowledgeable than do

women, with 17% of men

asserting a high degree of

knowledge, as compared to

9% of women.

• Although age, education, and

income clearly have a

relationship to knowledge

about the system, it is

interesting that the primary

difference lies between the

proportions claiming

“average” knowledge —

“knowing the basics” — and

those claiming little or no

knowledge.

___________________________

Q1 How much do you know about the American system of criminal justice — the way police, prosecutors, courts,

and defense counsel work? Would you say you know a great deal, know the basics, don’t know very much, or

don’t know about this area at all?

GENDER

TOTAL Male Female

(n) = (1030) (520) (510)

% % %

Know a great deal/Just the basics (net) 70 79^ 62

Know a great deal 13 17^ 9

Know the basics 57 62^ 53

Don’t know very much/Don’t know at all (net) 30 21 38^

Don’t know very much 23 16 30^

Don’t know about this area at all 6 5 8

Don’t know   ** 

HH INCOME AGE

$25K- $50K

LT LT or

$25K $50K higher 18-34 35-54 55+

(n) = (228) (288) (321) (326) (440) (257)

% % % % % %

Know a great deal/Just the basics (net) 58 69^ 81^^ 72^ 75^ 62

Know a great deal 12 12 13 14 14 11

Know the basics 46 56^ 68^^ 58^ 61^ 51

Don’t know very much/Don’t know at all (net) 41^^ 31^ 19 28 25 38^
Page 24 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

Knowledge of the criminal justice system (continued)

EDUCATION

College Some HS HS

Grad College Grad Inc.

(n) = (366) (241) (326) (84)*

% % % %

Know a great deal/Just the basics (net) 81^^ 76^^ 61^ 47

Know a great deal 17^ 12 9 13

Know the basics 64^^ 64^^ 52^ 34

Don’t know very much/Don’t know at all (net) 19 24 38^ 53^^

^(^^) = Significantly higher than corresponding column(s) at the 95% confidence level

* = Small Base

** = Less than one-half of 1%
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 25

Attitudes toward the criminal justice system

Overall, Americans give the

criminal justice system fair

grades in executing key

functions.

• Majorities rate the system as

“very or somewhat effective”

in:

—investigating and arresting

persons suspected of

committing crimes (79%)

—prosecuting accused

persons (73%)

—reaching a just outcome in

criminal trials (68%).

• Fewer than 2 out of 10 adults

rate the system as very

effective in any of these

areas.

A substantial group of adults —

approximately one-quarter of

the population — sees the

criminal justice system as not

very or not effective at all.

• About one-half (53%) give

the system a very or

somewhat effective rating in

all three areas; 24% gave that

rating in two areas, while

another 24% said the system

is very or somewhat effective

in either only one (10%) or

none (14%) of these areas.

___________________________

Q2 From what you have read or heard, or any personal experiences, how effective do you think the overall

American criminal justice system is in each of the following areas? Do you think it is very effective,

somewhat effective, not very effective, or not effective at all?

(n) = (1030)

In investigating and arresting persons

suspected of committing crimes

In prosecuting accused persons In reaching just outcomes at criminal

trials

% % %

Very/Somewhat effective (net) 79 Very/Somewhat effective (net) 73 Very/Somewhat effective (net) 68

Very effective 18 Very effective 15 Very effective 13

Somewhat effective 61 Somewhat effective 58 Somewhat effective 55

Not very/Not effective at all (net) 18 Not very/Not effective at all (net) 24 Not very/Not effective at all (net) 28

Not very effective 14 Not very effective 19 Not very effective 22

Not effective at all 4 Not effective at all 5 Not effective at all 5

Don’t know 3 Don’t know 4 Don’t know 5

Overall view of effectiveness of criminal justice system

%

High (all three elements very/somewhat effective) 53

Moderate (two out of three elements very/somewhat effective) 24

Low (one or none of the three elements very/somewhat effective) 24
Page 26 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

Attitudes toward the criminal justice system (continued)

As the accompanying table

illustrates, race and education

tend to impact one’s views on

the effectiveness of the criminal

justice system.

___________________________

Q2 From what you have read or heard, or any personal experiences, how effective do you think the overall

American criminal justice system is in each of the following areas? Do you think it is very effective,

somewhat effective, not very effective, or not effective at all?

Very/Somewhat effective summary

RACE EDUCATION

African- No Some

White Amer. College College

(836) (102)* (410) (607)

% % % %

In investigating and arresting persons suspected

of committing crimes

82^ 65 72 85^

In prosecuting accused persons 74 66 69 76^

In reaching just outcomes at criminal trials 69 65 64 70

Overall view of effectiveness of criminal justice system

RACE EDUCATION

African- No Some

White Amer. College College

(836) (102)* (410) (607)

% % % %

High (all three elements very/somewhat

effective)

55 45 50 55

Moderate (two out of three elements

very/somewhat effective)

24 21 20 27^

Low (one or none of the three elements

very/somewhat effective)

24 34^ 30^ 18

^(^^) = Significantly higher than corresponding column(s) at the 95% confidence level

* = Small Base
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 27

Attitudes toward the criminal justice system (continued)

The proportions are similar

when it comes to perceptions

about how well the system

respects the civil liberties and

constitutional rights of suspects.

• Seventy percent say the

system does either very well

(24%) or somewhat well

(46%), while about onequarter say it does not do

very well (19%) or not well

at all (8%).

• Race (most notably), income,

and education influence

views of how well rights and

liberties are respected.

___________________________

Q3 How well do you think the criminal justice system as a whole respects the civil liberties or constitutional rights

of persons who become involved as suspects? Would you say very well, somewhat well, not very well or not

well at all?

(n) = (1030)

%

Very/Somewhat well (net) 70

Very well 24

Somewhat well 46

Not very/Not well at all (net) 26

Not very well 19

Not well at all 8

Don’t know 4

RACE HH INCOME EDUCATION

African- LT $50K or No Some

White Amer. $50K higher College College

(n) = (836) (102)* (516) (321) (410) (607)

% % % % % %

Very/Somewhat well (net) 74^ 46 67 77^ 66 73^

Not very/Not well at all (net) 23 52^ 30^ 21 29 25

Don’t know 4 2 3 3 6^ 2

^(^^) = Significantly higher than corresponding column(s) at the 95% confidence level

* = Small Base
Page 28 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 29

Attitudes toward uses of

criminal history record information

outside the criminal justice system
Page 30 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

Awareness and general attitudes

Slightly fewer than one-half of

adults (45%) say that they have

read or heard about the criminal

history records system.

Overall, Americans view

government criminal history

records as confidential

information and favor some

restriction.

• When given a choice of three

systems, 47% prefer what

was labeled as a “partially

open system,” where

conviction records are freely

available to everyone.

Another 37% favor a

restricted system, where

access is limited only to

selected users.

• Only 12% favor a completely

open system — one with both

arrest and conviction records

freely available.

Race and education appear to be

significant demographic factors

in determining attitudes insofar

as preference for a partially

open system (open access to

conviction records) versus a

selected-user system.

• Whites favor a partially open

system over one limited to

select users by 49% to 35%,

while African-American

respondents favor the

selected user system by a

similar margin of 47% to

35%.

• Those with at least a high

school diploma favor the

partially open system, while

those who did not complete

high school favor a selecteduser system to a partially

open system by 48% to 30%.

___________________________

Q4 Government agencies collect and store the criminal history records of persons arrested, prosecuted, and

convicted or acquitted in the State and Federal criminal justice systems. They store these records in

computerized record systems. Police, prosecutors, defense counsel, and court officers use these records to

carry out their missions. Have you read or heard about this criminal history record system?

(n) = (1030) %

YES 45

NO 54

DON’T KNOW/REFUSED 1
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 31

Awareness and general attitudes (continued)

Q5 Under American law and practice, government criminal history records are made available to some

government and private users outside the criminal justice system. Please listen to three different policies for

making such government records available and indicate which ONE you would prefer.

RACE EDUCATION

African- College Some HS HS

TOTAL White Amer. Grad College Grad Inc.

(n) = (1030) (836) (102)* (366) (241) (326) (84)*

% % % % % % %

A COMPLETELY OPEN

SYSTEM, where anyone can

obtain either the conviction or the

arrest-without-conviction record

about an individual, because such

broad access helps protect society

12 12 11 9 13 12 18^

A PARTIALLY OPEN SYSTEM,

where anyone can obtain

CONVICTION records but NOT

records of arrests WITHOUT

CONVICTIONS, because persons

not convicted are presumed

innocent in our constitutional

system

47 49^ 35 52^ 49^ 45^ 30

A system OPEN ONLY TO

SELECTED USERS for either

conviction or nonconviction

records, such as employers or

government licensing authorities,

because society feels certain users

have a valid need but others do not

have a valid need

37 35 47^ 37 35 36 48^

DON’T KNOW/NONE OF

THESE

4 4 7 2 3 7^ 4

^(^^) = Significantly higher than corresponding column(s) at the 95% confidence level

* = Small Base
Page 32 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

Access by employers and government licensing agencies

Access to conviction records

Although most adults would

allow some employer access to

the conviction records of job

applicants, a majority (55%)

believes that right of access

should be linked to whether the

position involves sensitive

work, such as handling money,

dealing with children, or serving

as security guards. Four out of

10 (40%) would grant access to

all employers, regardless of the

position, while only 1 out of 20

(4%) would bar all employer

access.

Attitudes are similar when it

comes to government

occupational licensing agencies

having access to conviction

records. A majority (57%)

believes that access should be

limited to occupations involving

sensitive work and 35% would

grant access to all agencies.

Again, only 4% would prohibit

access to all occupational

licensing agencies.

___________________________

Q6 How do you feel about EMPLOYERS being able to obtain from government agencies the conviction records

of persons applying to them for jobs? Do you feel ALL employers should be able to get such records, NO

employers should be able to get these, or it should DEPEND ON WHETHER THE JOB INVOLVES

SENSITIVE WORK, such as handling money, dealing with children, or serving as security guards?

Q7 How do you feel about GOVERNMENT AGENCIES THAT ISSUE OCCUPATIONAL LICENSES

obtaining CONVICTION records from the record agencies? Do you feel that ALL license agencies should

have access, NONE should have access, or it should DEPEND ON WHETHER THE LICENSE WILL BE

FOR JOBS INVOLVING SENSITIVE WORK?

GOVERNMENT

OCCUPATIONAL

 (n) = (1030) EMPLOYERS LICENSING AGENCIES

% %

All 40 35

None 4 4

Depends on job 55 57

Don’t know 1 3
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 33

Access by employers and government licensing agencies (continued)

Access to conviction records

(continued)

As the accompanying tables

illustrate, those most likely to

favor blanket access to either

employers or licensing agencies

are persons aged 25 years and

older, Whites, individuals in

more affluent households, those

with at least some college, those

who feel the criminal justice

system respects civil rights, and

those who report never having

been arrested.

___________________________

Q6 How do you feel about EMPLOYERS being able to obtain from government agencies the conviction records

of persons applying to them for jobs? Do you feel ALL employers should be able to get such records, NO

employers should be able to get these, or it should DEPEND ON WHETHER THE JOB INVOLVES

SENSITIVE WORK, such as handling money, dealing with children, or serving as security guards?

Q7 How do you feel about GOVERNMENT AGENCIES THAT ISSUE OCCUPATIONAL LICENSES

obtaining CONVICTION records from the record agencies? Do you feel that ALL license agencies should

have access, NONE should have access, or it should DEPEND ON WHETHER THE LICENSE WILL BE

FOR JOBS INVOLVING SENSITIVE WORK?

EMPLOYERS AGE RACE EDUCATION HH INCOME CIVIL RIGHTS ARRESTED

Under 25 and African- No Some LT $50K or Re- Not

25 Older White Amer. College College $50K higher spects Respect Yes No

(n) = (111) (912) (836) (102)* (410) (607) (516) (321) (726) (268) (101)* (923)

% % % % % % % % % % % %

All 29 41^ 43^ 27 33 45^ 35 47^ 43^ 34 30 41^

None 2 4 4 6 5 3 5 3 4 5 6 4

Depends on job 69^ 53 53 65^ 60^ 51 59^ 50 53 60 62 54

Don’t know 0 1 1 2 2 * 1 ** 1 1 2 1

LICENSING

AGENCIES AGE RACE EDUCATION HH INCOME CIVIL RIGHTS ARRESTED

Under 25 and African- No Some LT $50K or Re- Not

25 Older White Amer. College College $50K higher spects Respect Yes No

(n) = (111) (912) (836) (102)* (410) (607) (516) (321) (726) (268) (101)* (923)

% % % % % % % % % % % %

All 21 37 38^ 21 26 41 30 43^ 39^ 27 29 36

None 4 4 4 8^ 6 3 5 4 3 8^ 9^ 4

Depends on job 71^ 55 56 68^ 63 53 61^ 52 55 64^ 60 57

Don’t know 4 4 3 3 5 2 4 1 3 2 2 3

^(^^) = Significantly higher than corresponding column(s) at the 95% confidence level

* = Small Base

** = Less than one-half of 1%
Page 34 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

Access by employers and government licensing agencies (continued)

Access to arrest-only records

A large majority of Americans

distinguish between access to

conviction records and access to

records of persons arrested but

not convicted.

• Sixty-six percent say that

they would take a different

position regarding access to

arrest records than they do

conviction records.

• While there is some

fluctuation among

demographic groups

examined, that fluctuation

lies only in the strength of the

majority, ranging from a low

of 60% among those who did

not attend college and a high

of 73% among residents of

the Northeast.

___________________________

Q9 Now, please think about government records of persons ARRESTED BUT NOT CONVICTED. Would you

take the SAME position on groups having access to those records as you just did for CONVICTION records,

or would you take some DIFFERENT positions as to records of ARRESTS WITHOUT CONVICTIONS?

NO NORTHTOTAL COLLEGE EAST

(n) = (1030) (410) (201)

% % %

Same position 29 34 24

Different positions 66 60 73

Don’t know 4 6 3
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 35

Access by employers and government licensing agencies (continued)

Access to arrest-only records

(continued)

The shift in opinion when it

comes to arrest-only records is

clearly in favor of less access.

Approximately 3 out of 10

adults would bar any access to

arrest-only records to any

employer or governmental

licensing agency.

About one-half would allow

limited access based on the

sensitivity of the position, while

only 15% would grant all

employers or government

licensing agencies access to

arrest-only records.

___________________________

Q10 How do you feel about EMPLOYERS being able to obtain from government agencies the arrest-withoutconviction records of persons applying to them for jobs? Do you feel ALL employers should be able to get

such records, NO employers should be able to get these, or it should DEPEND ON WHETHER THE JOB

INVOLVES SENSITIVE WORK, such as handling money, dealing with children, or serving as security

guards? (Asked of those stating that they would take a different view of arrest records. Results combined with

those saying they view access to conviction and arrest records the same.)

Q11 How do you feel about GOVERNMENT AGENCIES THAT ISSUE OCCUPATIONAL LICENSES

obtaining the arrest-without-conviction records from the record agencies? Do you feel that ALL license

agencies should have access, NONE should have access, or it should DEPEND ON WHETHER THE

LICENSE WILL BE FOR JOBS INVOLVING SENSITIVE WORK? (Asked of those stating that they would

take a different view of arrest records. Results combined with those saying they view access to conviction and

arrest records the same.)

(n) = (1030) GOVERNMENT OCCUPATIONAL

EMPLOYERS LICENSING AGENCIES

Arrest w/o Arrest w/o

Conviction Conviction Conviction conviction

% % % %

All 40 15 35 15

None 4 31 4 29

Depends on job 55 49 57 50

Don’t know 1 5 3 6
Page 36 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

Access to criminal history records by organizations other than

employers and licensing agencies

Substantial majorities favor at

least some access to conviction

records for private

organizations, such as the Boy

Scouts of America, that work

with children (88%), for the

military to evaluate potential

recruits (82%), and for

insurance companies

investigating fraud (76%).

• Support drops below a

majority, however, for

reporters wanting to find out

about political candidates

(44%), banks deciding on

personal loan applications

(41%), individuals wanting to

learn if a neighbor has any

criminal record (38%), and

companies that issue credit

cards (38%).

When the subject turns to arrestonly records, however, support

for access again plummets. Only

when the interests of children

are involved does a majority

(59%) favor access. About onehalf (49%) would allow the

military to see arrest-only

records of potential recruits, and

45% would allow access to

insurance companies

investigating fraud.

• Fewer than one-quarter of

adults favor access to arrestonly records for reporters

wanting to find out about

political candidates (23%),

banks deciding on personal

loan applications (22%),

individuals wanting to learn

if a neighbor has any criminal

record (23%), and companies

that issue credit cards (21%).

___________________________

Q8 Here are some other groups that might want to get CONVICTION records. For each, would you favor them

having access or not?

Q12 Here are some other groups that might want to get ARREST-WITHOUT-CONVICTION records. For each,

would you favor them having access or not? (Asked of those stating that they would take a different view of

arrest records. Results combined with those saying they view access to conviction and arrest records the

same.)

FAVOR GROUPS HAVING ACCESS SUMMARY RECORD TYPE

ARREST

(n) = (1030) CONVICTION (W/O CONVICTION)

% %

Private organizations, like the Boy Scouts, that work with children 88 59

The military services, in screening persons seeking to enlist 82 49

Insurance companies investigating claims for possible fraud 76 45

Reporters wanting to find out about political candidates 44 23

Banks deciding on personal loan applications 41 22

Individuals wanting to learn if a neighbor has any criminal record 38 23

Companies that issue credit cards 38 21
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 37

Fair information practices

The study reveals extremely

strong support for the

implementation of three “fair

information practices”

governing maintenance and use

of criminal history records.

• Nearly 9 out of 10 adults

(89%) consider it very

important to have a right to

review their records, coupled

with the right to have

suspected errors investigated

and, if indeed erroneous,

corrected.

• Approximately three-quarters

(74%) see it as very

important that there be an

impartial procedure to

receive, investigate, and

resolve complaints

concerning misuse of one’s

criminal history records

and/or the failure of the

relevant agency to follow

appropriate policies.

• Over one-half (55%) believe

it very important that each

person be informed when a

criminal history record is

created, how it will be used

within the criminal justice

system, and the policies

governing the record’s

availability outside the

system.†

• Ninety percent or more

consider each of these

practices to be either very or

somewhat important.

___________________________

Q13 Here are some policies that could be set to protect individual rights of persons having a criminal history record

in government files. For each of these, indicate whether you think requiring such a policy is very important,

somewhat important, not too important, or not important at all.

VERY OR

VERY SOMEWHAT

(n) = (1030) IMPORTANT IMPORTANT

% %

Each person would have the right to see his or her record, and to have

items felt to be incorrect re-checked by the recordkeeping agency and

corrected, if in error

89 98

An impartial procedure would be available for receiving, investigating,

and resolving complaints by individuals about misuse of their records or

failure to follow agency policies

74 94

Each person would be informed when a record is created, what the

record is, how it will be used inside the criminal justice system, and what

policies will be followed in making the record available outside the

criminal justice system

55 90

† One should be cautious in interpreting the relatively low level of support as lessening the importance of making individuals

aware of the policy(ies) governing record use and availability outside the criminal justice system. In light of the higher support

for an impartial review system to investigate and correct the improper use of records, a reasonable conclusion is that some

respondents focused more on the first two components of this practice, which relate to record creation and their use within the

criminal justice system.
Page 38 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

Use and distribution of criminal justice records by commercial

enterprises and other organizations

A majority of adults are

concerned about the system of

collecting, maintaining, and

distributing criminal history

records by private companies

and would prefer that the

government maintain such a

system.

• Asked which statement best

reflects their own view:

—Sixty-nine percent of the

respondents chose, “It

worries me that this is

being done by commercial

organizations and I favor

this being done only by the

government.”

—Twenty-two percent said

their views are best

reflected by the statement,

“This commercial system

provides relevant

information from public

record sources for many

important business, social,

and governmental

purposes and is OK.”

—Nine percent declined to

choose between these two

points of view.

• Once again, while there are

some differences among

demographic groups that rise

to the level of statistical

significance, those

differences tend to be small

and at least partially

attributable to variations in

the proportions of those

unable to choose between the

two alternatives. Two of the

more notable variations —

between men and women and

between Whites and AfricanAmericans — are illustrated

in the following table.

___________________________

Q14 Turning from government record systems to the private sector, there are private companies that collect reports

of arrests and trial outcomes from newspaper stories and from various public records, such as criminal court

files. These companies sell this information to private parties, such as private employers, insurance companies

investigating fraud, or lawyers checking out parties or witnesses in civil litigation. The companies also provide

criminal history reports to government licensing agencies, government employers, and other government

agencies. Which ONE of the following judgments about this system of private information suppliers of

criminal history records would you agree with MOST?

GENDER RACE

AfricanTOTAL Male Female White Amer.

(n) = (1030) (520) (510) (836) (102)*

% % % % %

It worries me that this is being done by commercial

organizations and I favor this being done only by the

government

69 64 74^ 69 69

This commercial system provides relevant information from

public record sources for many important business, social,

and governmental purposes and is OK

22 25^ 19 23^ 13

Don’t know/None of these 9 11 7 8 17^

^(^^) = Significantly higher than corresponding column(s) at the 95% confidence level

* = Small Base
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 39

Use and distribution of criminal justice records by commercial

enterprises and other organizations (continued)

Eighty-five percent of adults

feel that commercial companies

maintaining and distributing

criminal history records should

follow the same rules and

procedures regarding fair

information practices as would

bind government criminal

history agencies.

One out of 10 adults (11%) feels

that “such rules are not

important for private

businesses.”

Again, the few demographic

differences that exist tend to be

small. In this instance, two of

the starkest differences

(illustrated below) are between

Internet users and nonusers and

(again) between Whites and

African-Americans.

___________________________

Q15 Do you feel that these commercial companies should follow the SAME rules and procedures for giving

individuals they report on fair information and fair procedure practices that government criminal history

agencies follow, or do you think such rules are NOT IMPORTANT where private businesses are involved?

INTERNET RACE

Don’t AfricanTOTAL Use Use White Amer.

(n) = (1030) (630) (397) (836) (102)*

% % % % %

Commercial companies follow the same rules

and procedures as government agencies

85 90^ 78 87^ 74

Such rules are not important for private

businesses

11 8 15^ 9 19^

Don’t know 4 2 7^ 4 7

^(^^) = Significantly higher than corresponding column(s) at the 95% confidence level

* = Small Base
Page 40 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

Juvenile records

Opinion is more closely divided

when it comes to the access and

publication of juvenile court

records. About one-half of

adults (53%) favor keeping

disclosure restrictions, “because

giving juvenile offenders the

chance to overcome a bad

record is a sound approach.”

Four of 10 adults (40%) favor

opening juvenile records to the

same entities that have access to

adult records, “since protecting

society and the public should be

the primary concern.”

Differences based on education,

race, perceptions of the system’s

respect for civil rights, and

employment within the criminal

justice system appear to affect

views on juvenile records.

• Individuals with at least some

college education are more

likely to favor keeping

restricted access than those

who have not attended (56%

vs. 50%). In addition,

African-Americans are more

likely than Whites to favor

restrictions (69% vs. 51%).

• Similarly, individuals who

have ever worked for a

criminal justice agency and

those who feel the criminal

justice system does not do

well when it comes to

respecting the civil rights of

suspects are more likely to

favor the current policy of

keeping juvenile records

confidential (64% and 59%,

respectively).

___________________________

Q16 Today, many States limit the availability of records about juveniles charged and processed in juvenile courts;

for example, not allowing access to employers, government licensing agencies, or military enlistment offices.

This is based on a judgment that juveniles should be given an opportunity to overcome youthful criminal

behavior. Out of concern over current juvenile crimes, some people would open juvenile records to greater

access. Please listen to the following two policies and indicate which ONE you think would be BEST.

EDUCATION RACE

TOTAL No Some AfricanCollege College White Amer.

(n) = (1030) (410) (607) (836) (102)*

% % % % %

Keep restrictions on disclosure of juvenile

court records, because giving juvenile

offenders the chance to overcome a bad record

is a sound approach

53 50 56^ 51 69^

Open juvenile records to the same government

and private organizations that can get adult

criminal records, since protecting society and

the public should be the primary concern

40 44^ 37 43^ 22

Don’t know/None of these 6 6 7 6 8

^(^^) = Significantly higher than corresponding column(s) at the 95% confidence level

* = Small Base
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 41

Juvenile records (continued)

WORK(ED) IN CRIM.

CIVIL RIGHTS JUSTICE AGENCY

TOTAL Not

Respects Respect Yes No

(n) = (1030) (726) (268) (98)* (930)

% % % % %

Keep restrictions on disclosure of juvenile

court records, because giving juvenile

offenders the chance to overcome a bad

record is a sound approach

53 51 59^ 64^ 52

Open juvenile records to the same

government and private organizations that

can get adult criminal records, since

protecting society and the public should

be the primary concern

40 43^ 35 32 41

Don’t know/None of these 6 6 5 4 7

^(^^) = Significantly higher than corresponding column(s) at the 95% confidence level

* = Small Base
Page 42 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

Sealing the records of ex-offenders

Although a small majority

favors sealed juvenile records, a

comparable proportion (52%)

favors keeping criminal records

available to employers and

licensing agencies regardless of

the length of time that has

passed since the individual’s

conviction or release. Fortythree percent believe access

should not be granted if a

person convicted of a crime

serves his or her sentence and

then does not violate the law for

a period, such as 5 years.

• In this case, some of the

differences among subgroups

that do arise reverse the order

of preference. Favoring

sealed records are majorities

of African-Americans (60%),

of those ever arrested (55%),

and of those who feel the

criminal justice system does

not respect civil rights (52%).

• In addition, those residing in

less affluent households

(under $50,000 annual

income) are evenly split, with

48% favoring sealing the

records of ex-offenders and

47% favoring continued

access.

___________________________

Q17 Some people believe that if a person convicted of a crime serves his or her sentence and then does not violate

the law for a period, such as 5 years, government record agencies SHOULD NOT make that criminal record

available to employers or licensing agencies. Other people believe employers and government licensing

agencies SHOULD HAVE access to such government records, and be able to consider the fact of a conviction

in the hiring or licensing process. Overall, which of these two approaches do you prefer?

HH INCOME RACE

LT $50K or AfricanTOTAL $50K higher White Amer.

(n) = (1030) (516) (321) (836) (102)*

% % % % %

Should not make criminal records available

after period of time

43 48^ 37 40 60^

Should make criminal records available 52 47 58^ 55^ 33

Don’t know 6 5 5 5 7

CIVIL RIGHTS ARRESTED

Not

TOTAL Respects Respect Yes No

(n) = (1030) (726) (268) (101)* (923)

% % % % %

Should not make criminal records available

after period of time

43 39 52^ 55^ 41

Should make criminal records available 52 55^ 43 38 53^

Don’t know 6 5 5 7 5

^(^^) = Significantly higher than corresponding column(s) at the 95% confidence level

* = Small Base
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 43

Uses of fingerprinting

Overall, American adults appear

to consider fingerprinting for

certain governmental purposes

acceptable. However, once

private-sector entities require

fingerprinting, attitudes become

more ambiguous.

• Approximately three-quarters

of adults find fingerprinting

“very acceptable” when a

person is arrested (78%) and

when someone is applying

for a sensitive job, such as

teacher, nursing home

worker, or security guard

(77%). Ninety-four percent

and 93%, respectively, think

these practices are either very

or somewhat acceptable.

• Six out of 10 respondents

think it a very acceptable

practice to fingerprint welfare

program recipients (62%), or

to require a thumbprint on

drivers’ licenses (60%), with

86% and 80%, respectively,

responding very or somewhat

acceptable.

• On the other hand, fewer than

one-half of adults find it very

acceptable to require

fingerprints to cash a check

(45%), buy an airline ticket

(45%), or apply for a job

(37%).

There appears to be no

significant difference in

attitudes based on whether or

not someone has been

fingerprinted.

___________________________

Q18 Identifying a person accurately is a major concern in many areas of life today. In each of the following

situations, how acceptable is it to you that persons be required to give their FINGERPRINTS? Is it very

acceptable, somewhat acceptable, not very acceptable, or not acceptable at all?

VERY/ NOT VERY/

VERY SOMEWHAT NOT AT ALL

(N) = (1030) ACCEPTABLE ACCEPTABLE ACCEPTABLE

% % %

When individuals are arrested for a criminal offense, so

that a check can be made against criminal history and

wanted persons records

78 94 4

When applying for a government license for sensitive

jobs, such as teachers, nursing home workers, or security

guards

77 93 6

For government welfare program recipients, to detect

double registrations or ineligible persons

62 86 12

To put a thumbprint on drivers’ licenses, to make

successful counterfeiting of drivers’ licenses more

difficult

60 80 18

To cash a check, to help reduce check-cashing fraud 45 71 27

When buying an airline ticket, because of terrorism

threats

45 70 27

When applying for a job, so that the employer could

check for a criminal history record

37 68 31
Page 44 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

Uses of fingerprinting (continued)

As the following tables

illustrate, women tend to be

more favorable toward

fingerprinting requirements.

Similarly, the acceptability of

fingerprinting appears to

increase with age.

African-Americans are far less

inclined to see fingerprinting as

very acceptable in the context of

government welfare programs

(47% vs. 64% among Whites),

but are more likely to see the

requirement as very acceptable

step to reduce check-cashing

fraud (57% vs. 44%).

___________________________

Q18 Identifying a person accurately is a major concern in many areas of life today. In each of the following

situations, how acceptable is it to you that persons be required to give their FINGERPRINTS? Is it very

acceptable, somewhat acceptable, not very acceptable, or not acceptable at all?

VERY ACCEPTABLE SUMMARY

GENDER AGE RACE

Male Female 18-34 35-54 55+ White Afr.-Amer.

(n) = (520) (510) (326) (440) (257) (836) (102)*

% % % % % % %

When individuals are arrested for a

criminal offense, so that a check can be

made against criminal history and wanted

persons records

77 79 75 79 79 79^ 70

When applying for a government license

for sensitive jobs, such as teachers,

nursing home workers, or security guards

71 81^ 76 76 79 77 78

For government welfare program

recipients, to detect double registrations

or ineligible persons

59 65 58 63 66^ 64^ 47

To put a thumbprint on drivers’ licenses,

to make successful counterfeiting of

drivers’ licenses more difficult

55 65^ 53 61^ 68^ 60 66

To cash a check, to help reduce checkcashing fraud42 49^ 42 44 52^ 44 57^

When buying an airline ticket, because of

terrorism threats

40 50^ 36 46^ 56^^ 45 50

When applying for a job, so that the

employer could check for a criminal

history record

32 41^ 30 34 49^^ 37 35

^(^^) = Significantly higher than corresponding column(s) at the 95% confidence level

* = Small Base
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 45

Posting of information on the Internet

Most adults (90%) say that they

prefer that State agencies not

use the Internet to post criminal

history information that is

already a matter of public

record.

There is no indication that

attitudes toward Internet posting

will substantially change in the

near future. Even among

younger adults (under 35),

current Internet users, and those

with a low concern about the

misuse of personal information,

opposition exceeds 80%.

___________________________

Q19 Some people believe that State government agencies that maintain criminal history records that are open to the

general public under their State law should post these on the Internet, so that anyone who wanted to could

check whether someone had such a record. Other people feel that even though such records could be obtained

by applying to the government record agency for a copy, it isn’t a good idea to put all those records on the

Internet for anyone to obtain.

Which would you prefer: State agencies putting all these records on the Internet, or not doing that?

LEVEL OF

CONCERN ABOUT

MISUSE OF

PERSONAL

AGE INTERNET INFORMATION

Don’t

TOTAL 18-34 35-54 55+ Use Use High Med. Low

(n) = (1030) (326) (440) (257) (630) (397) (666) (261) (97)*

% % % % % % % % %

Putting records

on the Internet

9 13^^ 8^ 4 11^ 5 7 11 15^

Not putting

records on the

Internet

90 87 90 94^ 88 93^ 92^^ 88 82

Don’t know 1 ** 1 3 1 2 1 2 3^

^(^^) = Significantly higher than corresponding column(s) at the 95% confidence level

* = Small Base

** = Less than one-half of 1%
Page 46 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 47

Summary of factors influencing attitudes

toward the use of criminal history records
Page 48 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

Overview

The survey instrument was

designed to capture

demographic, experiential, and

attitudinal characteristics that

were thought likely to have an

impact on or a relationship to

respondents’ views on the use of

criminal history records outside

the criminal justice system.

Throughout the detailed

findings are references to key

differences where those

differences are statistically

significant at the 95%

confidence level.5 In many

cases, differences either do not

exist or were marginal.6

However, a few patterns do

emerge.

• Attitudes toward access to

criminal history records tend

to correlate somewhat to age,

income, education, and race.

—Younger adults, persons

with less education, and

those in lower-income

households tend to favor

less access to criminal

history records.

 

5

 See Appendix 1 for notes on

significance testing between

independent subgroups.

6

 Several groupings that would selfevidently seem to have a bearing on

attitudes (for example, legal and/or

criminal justice experience, whether the

individual was ever arrested, and so on)

yielded unweighted base sizes below

100. At that level, differences need to

be extremely great. Accordingly, these

groups are cited infrequently herein.

—African-Americans often

demonstrate a greater

preference for less access

compared to those who

identified themselves as

White.

• In terms of attitudes, the

perception of how well the

criminal justice system

respects the civil rights of

suspects and the general level

of concern about the misuse

of personal information also

shows some correlation with

attitudes toward criminal

history information.

—Those who feel the system

does not respect civil

rights very well and those

who have a high level of

concern about the misuse

of personal information

tend to show greater

likelihood of preference

for restrictions on access

to criminal history

information.

The following tables summarize

the experiential, attitudinal, and

demographic factors examined.
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 49

Experience/Attitudinal summary

The following tables summarize the experience and attitudinal factors examined.

GENDER RACE

TOTAL Male Female White Afr.-Amer.

(n) = (1030) (520) (510) (836) (102)*

% % % % %

KNOWLEDGE OF CRIMINAL

JUSTICE SYSTEM

High 13 17^ 9 14 7

Moderate 57 62^ 53 59^ 44

Low 30 21 38^ 27 47^

OVERALL EFFECTIVENESS OF

CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

High 53 52 54 55 45

Moderate 24 25 23 24 21

Low 24 23 24 22 34^

SYSTEM RESPECTS CIVIL RIGHTS

Respects 70 70 70 74^ 46

Doesn’t Respect 26 27 26 23 52^

LEVEL OF CONCERN ABOUT

MISUSE OF PERSONAL

INFORMATION

High 64 61 67 62 79^

Moderate 25 27 24 28^ 14

Low 10 11 8 10 5

^(^^) = Significantly higher than corresponding column(s) at the 95% confidence level

(Categories may not add to 100% due to either rounding or the option to decline to respond to some questions)

* = Small base
Page 50 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

Experience/Attitudinal summary (continued)

AGE

TOTAL 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+

(n) = (1030) (111) (215) (224) (216) (133) (124)

% % % % % % %

KNOWLEDGE OF CRIMINAL

JUSTICE SYSTEM

High 13 11 15 13 15 13 9

Moderate 57 57 59 63^ 57^ 62^ 43

Low 30 31 26 23 27 24 48^

OVERALL EFFECTIVENESS OF

CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

High 53 56 53 54 53 58 45

Moderate 24 29 25 22 23 21 22

Low 24 14 22 24 25 20 32

SYSTEM RESPECTS CIVIL RIGHTS

Respects 70 71 72 68 70 75 64

Doesn’t Respect 26 27 26 28 25 22 29

LEVEL OF CONCERN ABOUT

MISUSE OF PERSONAL

INFORMATION

High 64 57 64 60 65 69 73^

Moderate 25 27 26 30^ 26 24 18

Low 10 16^ 9 10 9 7 7

^(^^) = Significantly higher than corresponding column(s) at the 95% confidence level

(Categories may not add to 100% due to either rounding or the option to decline to respond to some questions)

* = Small base
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 51

Experience/Attitudinal summary (continued)

GENDER RACE

TOTAL Male Female White Afr.-Amer.

(n) = (1030) (520) (510) (836) (102)*

% % % % %

PRIVACY VICTIM OF LAW

ENFORCEMENT

Yes 12 16^ 9 11 21^

No 87 83 90^ 88^ 78

EVER BEEN FINGERPRINTED

Yes 61 72^ 51 60 67

No 38 27 48^ 39 32

WORK(ED) FOR CRIMINAL

JUSTICE AGENCY

Yes 9 12^ 7 10 4

No 91 88 93^ 90 94

LAW TRAINED

Yes 7 8 6 7^ 2

No 93 92 94 93 97

EVER ARRESTED

Yes 10 15^ 5 9 16^

No 90 84 95^ 91^ 83

^(^^) = Significantly higher than corresponding column(s) at the 95% confidence level

(Categories may not add to 100% due to either rounding or the option to decline to respond to some questions)

* = Small base
Page 52 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

Experience/Attitudinal summary (continued)

AGE

TOTAL 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+

(n) = (1030) (111) (215) (224) (216) (133) (124)

% % % % % % %

PRIVACY VICTIM OF LAW

ENFORCEMENT

Yes 12 23^^ 13^ 15^ 11^ 8 3

No 87 77 87^ 84 88^ 90^ 94^

EVER BEEN FINGERPRINTED

Yes 61 58 63 63 60 56 64

No 38 42 36 37 37 43 35

WORK(ED) FOR CRIMINAL

JUSTICE AGENCY

Yes 9 3 13^ 10^ 13^ 7 6

No 91 97^ 87 90 87 93 93

LAW TRAINED

Yes 7 6 8 8 5 6 8

No 93 94 92 92 95 94 91

EVER ARRESTED

Yes 10 15^ 14^ 15^ 5 5 2

No 90 85 86 85 94^ 95^ 98^

^(^^) = Significantly higher than corresponding column(s) at the 95% confidence level

(Categories may not add to 100% due to either rounding or the option to decline to respond to some questions)

* = Small base
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 53

Experience/Attitudinal summary (continued)

HH INCOME

LT $15K-LT $25K-LT $35K-LT $50K or

TOTAL $15K $25K $35K $50K Higher

(n) = (1030) (102)* (126) (144) (144) (321)

% % % % % %

KNOWLEDGE OF CRIMINAL

JUSTICE SYSTEM

High 13 11 14 14 11 13

Moderate 57 49 43 51 62^ 68^^

Low 30 39^ 43^ 35^ 27^ 19

OVERALL EFFECTIVENESS OF

CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

High 53 51 56 49 52 59

Moderate 24 17 19 30 26 23

Low 24 32 25 21 22 17

SYSTEM RESPECTS CIVIL RIGHTS

Respects 70 61 68 71 66 77^

Doesn’t Respect 26 33 28 24 33 21

LEVEL OF CONCERN ABOUT

MISUSE OF PERSONAL

INFORMATION

High 64 72^ 69^ 65 63 57

Moderate 25 15 23 24 27^ 32^

Low 10 9 7 11 10 11

^(^^) = Significantly higher than corresponding column(s) at the 95% confidence level

(Categories may not add to 100% due to either rounding or the option to decline to respond to some questions)

* = Small base
Page 54 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

Experience/Attitudinal summary (continued)

EDUCATION

HS HS Some College

TOTAL Incomplete Grad College Grad

(n) = (1030) (84)* (326) (241) (366)

% % % % %

KNOWLEDGE OF CRIMINAL

JUSTICE SYSTEM

High 13 13 9 12 17^

Moderate 57 34 52^ 64^^ 64^^

Low 30 53^^ 38^ 24 19

OVERALL EFFECTIVENESS OF

CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM

High 53 43 52 54 57

Moderate 24 24 18 28^ 26^

Low 24 33 30^ 19 17

SYSTEM RESPECTS CIVIL RIGHTS

Respects 70 57 68 70^ 76^

Doesn’t Respect 26 35^ 27 28 22

LEVEL OF CONCERN ABOUT

MISUSE OF PERSONAL

INFORMATION

High 64 68 66^ 70^ 58

Moderate 25 20 25 23 30

Low 10 10 8 8 12

^(^^) = Significantly higher than corresponding column(s) at the 95% confidence level

(Categories may not add to 100% due to either rounding or the option to decline to respond to some questions)

* = Small base
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 55

Experience/Attitudinal summary (continued)

HH INCOME

LT $15K-LT $25K-LT $35K-LT $50K or

TOTAL $15K $25K $35K $50K Higher

(n) = (1030) (102)* (126) (144) (144) (321)

% % % % % %

PRIVACY VICTIM OF LAW

ENFORCEMENT

Yes 12 19^ 9 14 20^ 9

No 87 78 88 84 80 91^

EVER BEEN FINGERPRINTED

Yes 61 54 57 63 66 63

No 38 44 43 37 34 36

WORK(ED) FOR CRIMINAL

JUSTICE AGENCY

Yes 9 3 4 8 10^ 13^

No 91 96^ 96^ 92 90 87

LAW TRAINED

Yes 7 2 2 5 7 9^

No 93 96 98^ 95 93 91

EVER ARRESTED

Yes 10 21^ 12 7 12 8

No 90 77 88^ 93^ 88^ 92^

^(^^) = Significantly higher than corresponding column(s) at the 95% confidence level

(Categories may not add to 100% due to either rounding or the option to decline to respond to some questions)

* = Small base
Page 56 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

Experience/Attitudinal summary (continued)

EDUCATION

HS HS Some College

TOTAL Incomplete Grad College Grad

(n) = (1030) (84)* (326) (241) (366)

% % % % %

PRIVACY VICTIM OF LAW

ENFORCEMENT

Yes 12 18^ 12 17^ 8

No 87 79 86 82 92^

EVER BEEN FINGERPRINTED

Yes 61 64 56 65 62

No 38 34 43^ 34 36

WORK(ED) FOR CRIMINAL

JUSTICE AGENCY

Yes 9 3 6 11^ 13^

No 91 96^ 94^ 89 87

LAW TRAINED

Yes 7 1 2 7^ 13^^

No 93 97 98^ 93^ 87

EVER ARRESTED

Yes 10 19^ 10 11^ 6

No 90 80^ 89^ 89 93^

^(^^) = Significantly higher than corresponding column(s) at the 95% confidence level

(Categories may not add to 100% due to either rounding or the option to decline to respond to some questions)

* = Small base
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 57

Demographic profile

The following table summarizes the demographic factors examined

(n) = (1030)

% %

GENDER HOUSEHOLD INCOME

Male 48 Less than $25,000 24

Female 52 $25,000 to less than $50,000 28

$50,000 or higher 30

AGE

18-24 13 EDUCATION

25-34 20 High School Incomplete 9

35-44 22 High School Graduate 32

45-54 17 Some College 23

55-64 11 College Graduate 34

65 and older 16

GEOGRAPHIC REGION

RACE/ETHNICITY Northeast 20

White 83 North Central (Midwest) 23

Black/African-American 12 South 36

Asian/Asian-American 1 West 22

Some other race 4

Hispanic household (any race) 7

INTERNET

Users 60

Non-users 40

 (Categories may not add to 100% due to either rounding or the option to decline to respond to some questions)
Page 58 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 59

Appendix 1:

Sampling variations and tolerances
Page 60 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

Reliability of survey percentages

Results of any sample are

subject to sampling variation.

The magnitude of the variation

is measurable and is affected by

the number of interviews and

the level of the percentages

expressing the results.

The table below shows the

possible sample variation that

applies to percentage results

reported herein. The chances are

95 in 100 that a survey result

does not vary, plus or minus, by

more than the indicated number

of percentage points from the

result that would be obtained if

interviews had been conducted

with all persons in the universe

represented by the sample.

Size of Sample on which

Survey Results

Approximate Sampling Tolerances Applicable

to Percentages At or Near These Levels

are Based 10% or 90% 20% or 80% 30% or 70% 40% or 60% 50%

1,000 interviews 2% 2% 3% 3% 3%

500 interviews 3% 4% 4% 4% 4%

250 interviews 4% 5% 6% 6% 6%

100 interviews 6% 8% 9% 10% 10%

Additional Sampling Tolerances for Samples of 1,000 Interviews

9% or 91% 8% or 92% 7% or 93% 6% or 94% 5% or 95%

2% 2% 2% 1% 1%

4% or 96% 3% or 97% 2% or 98% 1% or 99%

1% 1% 1% .2%
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 61

Sampling tolerances when comparing two samples

Tolerances are also involved in

the comparison of results from

independent parts of the sample.

A difference, in other words,

must be of at least a certain

number of percentage points to

be considered statistically

significant — that is, not due to

random chance. The table below

is a guide to the sampling

tolerances in percentage points

applicable to such comparisons,

based on a 95% confidence

level.

Size of Samples

Differences Required for Significance At

or Near These Percentage Levels

Compared 10% or 90% 20% or 80% 30% or 70% 40% or 60% 50%

1,000 and 1,000 3% 4% 4% 4% 4%

1,000 and 500 3% 4% 5% 5% 5%

1,000 and 250 4% 6% 6% 7% 7%

1,000 and 100 6% 8% 9% 10% 10%

500 and 500 4% 5% 6% 6% 6%

500 and 250 5% 6% 7% 7% 8%

500 and 100 6% 9% 10% 11% 11%

250 and 250 5% 7% 8% 9% 9%

250 and 100 7% 9% 11% 11% 12%

100 and 100 8% 11% 13% 14% 14%
Page 62 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 63

Appendix 2:

Questionnaire
Page 64 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

OPINION RESEARCH CORPORATION INTERNATIONAL

FEBRUARY 22, 2000

PRIVACY & CRIMINAL JUSTICE

32632

BALLOT #

TELEPHONE #

STATE

COUNTY

METRO

SURVEY # (LAST 3 DIGITS)

CALL

TELEPHONE NUMBER: ( _______ ) _____________TIME ENDED:____________________________

TIME STARTED: _________________________

349-352 LENGTH: ______________________ (MINUTES)

SEX OF RESPONDENT: DATE: __________________________________

372 1 MALE INTERVIEWER: __________________________

2 FEMALE I.D.:_____________________________________

Hello, I’m _________________________ calling from Opinion Research Corporation International of Princeton,

New Jersey. We’re conducting a national survey of people’s opinions on privacy and criminal justice and would like

to have your household participate. We are not selling any products or services. We are only asking your opinions.

Now, may I please speak to a (male/female) 18 years of age or older who lives in this household?
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 65

PRIVACY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE Q FEBRUARY 22, 2000

32632

1

First of all . . .

Q1 How much do you know about the American system of criminal justice — the way police, prosecutors,

courts, and defense counsel work? Would you say you know a great deal, know the basics, don’t know very

much, or don’t know about this area at all?

1 KNOW A GREAT DEAL

2 KNOW THE BASICS

3 DON’T KNOW VERY MUCH

4 DON’T KNOW ABOUT THIS AREA AT ALL

5 DON’T KNOW

Q2 From what you have read or heard, or any personal experiences, how effective do you think the overall

American criminal justice system is in each of the following areas? Do you think it is very effective,

somewhat effective, not very effective, or not effective at all? (READ LIST)

1 Very effective

2 Somewhat effective

3 Not very effective

4 Not effective at all

5 DON’T KNOW

In investigating and arresting persons suspected of committing crimes

In prosecuting accused persons

In reaching just outcomes at criminal trials

Q3 How well do you think the criminal justice system as a whole respects the civil liberties or constitutional

rights of persons who become involved as suspects? Would you say . . . (READ LIST)

1 Very well

2 Somewhat well

3 Not very well

4 Not well at all

5 DON’T KNOW

Q4 Government agencies collect and store the criminal history records of persons arrested, prosecuted, and

convicted or acquitted in the State and Federal criminal justice systems. They store these records in

computerized record systems. Police, prosecutors, defense counsel, and court officers use these records to

carry out their missions. Have you read or heard about this criminal history record system?

1 YES

2 NO

3 DON’T KNOW/REFUSED
Page 66 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

PRIVACY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE Q FEBRUARY 22, 2000

32632

2

Q5 Under American law and practice, government criminal history records are made available to some

government and private users outside the criminal justice system. Please listen to three different policies for

making such government records available and indicate which ONE you would prefer. (READ ENTIRE

LIST BEFORE RECORDING ONE ANSWER)

1 A COMPLETELY OPEN SYSTEM, where anyone can obtain either the conviction or the arrestwithout-conviction record about an individual, because such broad access helps protect society

2 A PARTIALLY OPEN SYSTEM, where anyone can obtain CONVICTION records but NOT

records of arrests WITHOUT CONVICTIONS, because persons not convicted are presumed

innocent in our constitutional system

3 A system OPEN ONLY TO SELECTED USERS for either conviction or nonconviction records,

such as employers or government licensing authorities, because society feels certain users have a

valid need but others do not have a valid need

4 DON’T KNOW/NONE OF THESE

Regardless of the view you just expressed, we’d like to explore some issues of criminal history record use in greater

detail, starting with CONVICTION records.

Q6 How do you feel about EMPLOYERS being able to obtain from government agencies the conviction

records of persons applying to them for jobs? Do you feel ALL employers should be able to get such

records, NO employers should be able to get these, or it should DEPEND ON WHETHER THE JOB

INVOLVES SENSITIVE WORK, such as handling money, dealing with children, or serving as security

guards?

1 ALL

2 NONE

3 DEPENDS ON JOB

4 DON’T KNOW

Q7 How do you feel about GOVERNMENT AGENCIES THAT ISSUE OCCUPATIONAL LICENSES

obtaining CONVICTION records from the record agencies? Do you feel that ALL license agencies should

have access, NONE should have access, or it should DEPEND ON WHETHER THE LICENSE WILL BE

FOR JOBS INVOLVING SENSITIVE WORK?

1 ALL

2 NONE

3 DEPENDS ON JOB

4 DON’T KNOW
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 67

PRIVACY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE Q FEBRUARY 22, 2000

32632

3

Q8 Here are some other groups that might want to get CONVICTION records. For each, would you favor them

having access or not? (READ AND ROTATE ITEMS)

1 Favor groups having access to CONVICTION records

2 Do not favor groups having access to CONVICTION records

3 DON’T KNOW

Banks deciding on personal loan applications

Reporters wanting to find out about political candidates

Individuals wanting to learn if a neighbor has any criminal record

Insurance companies investigating claims for possible fraud

Private organizations, like the Boy Scouts, that work with children

The military services, in screening persons seeking to enlist

Companies that issue credit cards

Q9 Now, please think about government records of persons ARRESTED BUT NOT CONVICTED. Would

you take the SAME position on groups having access to those records as you just did for CONVICTION

records, or would you take some DIFFERENT positions as to records of ARRESTS WITHOUT

CONVICTIONS?

1 SAME POSITION -->SKIP TO Q13

2 DIFFERENT POSITIONS -->CONTINUE

3 DON’T KNOW -->SKIP TO Q13

Q10 How do you feel about EMPLOYERS being able to obtain from government agencies the arrest-withoutconviction records of persons applying to them for jobs? Do you feel ALL employers should be able to get

such records, NO employers should be able to get these, or it should DEPEND ON WHETHER THE JOB

INVOLVES SENSITIVE WORK, such as handling money, dealing with children, or serving as security

guards?

1 ALL

2 NONE

3 DEPENDS ON JOB

4 DON’T KNOW

Q11 How do you feel about GOVERNMENT AGENCIES THAT ISSUE OCCUPATIONAL LICENSES

obtaining the arrest-without-conviction records from the record agencies? Do you feel that ALL license

agencies should have access, NONE should have access, or it should DEPEND ON WHETHER THE

LICENSE WILL BE FOR JOBS INVOLVING SENSITIVE WORK?

1 ALL

2 NONE

3 DEPENDS ON JOB

4 DON’T KNOW
Page 68 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

PRIVACY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE Q FEBRUARY 22, 2000

32632

4

Q12 Here are some other groups that might want to get ARREST-WITHOUT-CONVICTION records. For each,

would you favor them having access or not? (READ AND ROTATE ITEMS)

1 Favor groups having access to ARREST-WITHOUT-CONVICTION records

2 Do not favor groups having access to ARREST-WITHOUT-CONVICTION records

3 DON’T KNOW

Banks deciding on personal loan applications

Reporters wanting to find out about political candidates

Individuals wanting to learn if a neighbor has any criminal record

Insurance companies investigating claims for possible fraud

Private organizations, like the Boy Scouts, that work with children

The military services, in screening persons seeking to enlist

Companies that issue credit cards

(ASK EVERYONE)

Q13 Here are some policies that could be set to protect individual rights of persons having a criminal history

record in government files. For each of these, indicate whether you think requiring such a policy is very

important, somewhat important, not too important, or not important at all. (READ LIST)

1 Very important

2 Somewhat important

3 Not too important

4 Not important at all

5 DON’T KNOW

Each person would be informed when a record is created what the record is, how it will be used inside the

criminal justice system, and what policies will be followed in making the record available outside the

criminal justice system

Each person would have the right to see his or her record, and to have items felt to be incorrect re-checked

by the recordkeeping agency and corrected, if in error

An impartial procedure would be available for receiving, investigating, and resolving complaints by

individuals about misuse of their records or failure to follow agency policies
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 69

PRIVACY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE Q FEBRUARY 22, 2000

32632

5

Q14 Turning from government record systems to the private sector, there are private companies that collect

reports of arrests and trial outcomes from newspaper stories and from various public records, such as

criminal court files. These companies sell this information to private parties, such as private employers,

insurance companies investigating fraud, or lawyers checking out parties or witnesses in civil litigation.

The companies also provide criminal history reports to government licensing agencies, government

employers, and other government agencies. Which ONE of the following judgments about this system of

private information suppliers of criminal history records would you agree with MOST? (READ LIST)

1 This commercial system provides relevant information from public record sources for many

important business, social, and governmental purposes and is OK

2 It worries me that this is being done by commercial organizations and I favor this being done only

by the government

3 DON’T KNOW/NONE OF THESE

Q15 Do you feel that these commercial companies should follow the SAME rules and procedures for giving

individuals they report on fair information and fair procedure practices that government criminal history

agencies follow, or do you think such rules are NOT IMPORTANT where private businesses are involved?

1 COMMERCIAL COMPANIES FOLLOW THE SAME RULES AND PROCEDURES AS

GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

2 SUCH RULES ARE NOT IMPORTANT FOR PRIVATE BUSINESSES

3 DON’T KNOW

Q16 Today, many States limit the availability of records about juveniles charged and processed in juvenile

courts; for example, not allowing access to employers, government licensing agencies, or military

enlistment offices. This is based on a judgment that juveniles should be given an opportunity to overcome

youthful criminal behavior. Out of concern over current juvenile crimes, some people would open juvenile

records to greater access. Please listen to the following two policies and indicate which ONE you think

would be BEST. (READ LIST)

1 Keep restrictions on disclosure of juvenile court records, because giving juvenile offenders the

chance to overcome a bad record is a sound approach

2 Open juvenile records to the same government and private organizations that can get adult

criminal records, since protecting society and the public should be the primary concern

3 DON’T KNOW/NONE OF THESE
Page 70 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

PRIVACY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE Q FEBRUARY 22, 2000

32632

6

Q17 Some people believe that if a person convicted of a crime serves his or her sentence and then does not

violate the law for a period, such as 5 years, government record agencies SHOULD NOT make that

criminal record available to employers or licensing agencies.

Other people believe employers and government licensing agencies SHOULD HAVE access to such

government records, and be able to consider the fact of a conviction in the hiring or licensing process.

Overall, which of these two approaches do you prefer?

1 SHOULD NOT MAKE CRIMINAL RECORDS AVAILABLE AFTER PERIOD OF TIME

2 SHOULD MAKE CRIMINAL RECORDS AVAILABLE

3 DON’T KNOW

Q18 Identifying a person accurately is a major concern in many areas of life today. In each of the following

situations, how acceptable is it to you that persons be required to give their FINGERPRINTS? Is it very

acceptable, somewhat acceptable, not very acceptable, or not acceptable at all? (READ AND ROTATE

ITEMS)

1 Very acceptable

2 Somewhat acceptable

3 Not very acceptable

4 Not acceptable at all

5 DON’T KNOW

When individuals are arrested for a criminal offense, so that a check can be made against criminal history

and wanted persons records

To put a thumbprint on drivers’ licenses, to make successful counterfeiting of drivers’ licenses more

difficult

To cash a check, to help reduce check-cashing fraud

When applying for a job, so that the employer could check for a criminal history record

When applying for a government license for sensitive jobs, such as teachers, nursing home workers, or

security guards

When buying an airline ticket, because of terrorism threats

For government welfare program recipients, to detect double registrations or ineligible persons
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 71

PRIVACY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE Q FEBRUARY 22, 2000

32632

7

Q19 Some people believe that State government agencies that maintain criminal history records that are open to

the general public under their State law should post these on the Internet, so that anyone who wanted to

could check whether someone had such a record.

Other people feel that even though such records could be obtained by applying to the government record

agency for a copy, it isn’t a good idea to put all those records on the Internet for anyone to obtain.

Which would you prefer: State agencies putting all these records on the Internet, or not doing that?

1 PUTTING RECORDS ON THE INTERNET

2 NOT PUTTING RECORDS ON THE INTERNET

3 DON’T KNOW

Q20 For each of the following types of personal records, please indicate whether you think it is true or false that

anyone using the Internet can PURCHASE this kind of record from PRIVATE SERVICES on any person

they are interested in, for any purpose that they have in mind. (READ AND ROTATE ITEMS)

1 True

2 False

3 DON’T KNOW

Anyone’s criminal conviction record

Anyone’s arrest record, even if not convicted

Anyone’s credit bureau report

Anyone’s Social Security number

Anyone’s bank checking account balance

Anyone’s credit card numbers

Q21 How concerned are you about the possible misuse of your personal information in America today? Are

you...(READ LIST)

1 Very concerned

2 Somewhat concerned

3 Not very concerned

4 Not concerned at all

5 DON’T KNOW
Page 72 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

PRIVACY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE Q FEBRUARY 22, 2000

32632

8

Q22 Have you personally ever been the victim of what you felt was an improper invasion of privacy by any of

the following? (READ AND ROTATE ITEMS)

1 Yes

2 No

3 DON’T KNOW

A business collecting and using information about you

A law enforcement agency

A government tax, social service, welfare, or license agency

A charitable, political, or nonprofit organization

Q23 Have you ever had your fingerprints taken, for example, for military service, applying for a job or a

government license, or for any other identification purpose?

1 YES -->CONTINUE

2 NO

3 DON’T KNOW/REFUSED -->SKIP TO Q25

Q24 Did you feel that doing this was an appropriate requirement or not an appropriate requirement?

1 APPROPRIATE

2 NOT APPROPRIATE

3 DON’T KNOW/REFUSED

Just for background purposes, please answer the following questions about yourself.

Q25 Do you now work or have you ever worked for any kind of criminal justice agency, such as the police,

prosecutor’s offices, courts, or corrections agency?

1 YES

2 NO

3 DON’T KNOW/REFUSED

Q26 Are you a lawyer, do you work for a law firm or legal department, or have you had legal training?

1 YES

2 NO

3 DON’T KNOW/REFUSED

Q27 Do you use the Internet today from home, work, school, or any other place?

1 YES

2 NO

3 DON’T KNOW/REFUSED
Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information Page 73

PRIVACY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE Q FEBRUARY 22, 2000

32632

9

Q28 Have you personally ever sought to obtain the criminal conviction record about another person, for any

reason, apart from any such inquiry in your duties at work?

1 YES

2 NO

3 DON’T KNOW/REFUSED

Q29 Have you ever been arrested for a criminal offense, other than driving violations?

1 YES -->CONTINUE

2 NO

3 DON’T KNOW/REFUSED -->SKIP TO S7

Q30 Were you convicted for that offense or not?

1 YES

2 NO

3 DON’T KNOW/REFUSED

S7 What was the last grade in school you completed?

1 8TH GRADE OR LESS

2 HIGH SCHOOL INCOMPLETE (GRADES 9, 10, 11)

3 HIGH SCHOOL COMPLETE (GRADE 12)

4 SOME COLLEGE

5 COLLEGE GRADUATE

6 POSTGRADUATE WORK/DEGREE

7 TECHNICAL SCHOOL/PROFESSIONAL BUSINESS SCHOOL

8 REFUSED/NR

S8 What is your age?

1 18-20

2 21-24

3 25-29

4 30-34

5 35-39

6 40-44

7 45-49

8 50-54

9 55-59

10 60-64

11 65 OR OLDER

12 REFUSED/NR
Page 74 Public Attitudes Toward Uses of Criminal History Information

PRIVACY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE Q FEBRUARY 22, 2000

32632

10

S9 Which of the following best describes your race? (READ LIST)

1 White/Caucasian

2 Black/African-American

3 Asian/Asian-American, or

4 Some other race

5 REFUSED/NR

S9A Are you, or is anyone else in your household Hispanic? That is, from a Spanish-speaking country, or the

descendent of someone from a Spanish-speaking country.

1 YES

2 NO

3 REFUSED/NR

S10 Was your TOTAL household income BEFORE taxes for 1999 less than $25,000 or $25,000 or more?

1 LESS THAN $25,000 --> Was that . . . ? (READ CHOICES.)

1 Under $10,000

2 $10,000 but less than $15,000

3 $15,000 but less than $20,000

4 $20,000 but less than $25,000

5 REFUSED

2 $25,000 OR MORE --> Was that . . . ? (READ CHOICES.)

1 $25,000 but less than $30,000

2 $30,000 but less than $35,000

3 $35,000 but less than $40,000

4 $40,000 but less than $50,000

5 $50,000 but less than $75,000

6 $75,000 but less than $100,000

7 $100,000 or more

8 REFUSED (UNSPECIFIED AFTER $25,000 LESS OR MORE)

3 DON’T KNOW/REFUSED/NR

Thank you very much for your time. May I please verify that I reached you by dialing . .

______________ __________________________

 (AREA CODE) (TELEPHONE NUMBER)