Effective November 30, 1998, under the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (Brady Act), licensed gun dealers are required to obtain background checks on purchasers before transferring (i.e., selling) a firearm. These background checks generally are to be conducted using NICS, a computerized system which is managed by the FBI. Under NICS, firearms are not to be transferred until a background check determines that the transfer will not violate applicable federal and state laws. However, if the background check is not completed within 3 business days, the transfer is allowed to proceed by default. A NICS background check provides an automated search of criminal and noncriminal records—including records in both state and national databases—to determine a person’s eligibility to purchase a firearm. Specifically, a NICS check queries the following three information sources: (1) the National Crime Information Center, which provides access to fugitive arrest warrants and protective orders and information about deported felons; (2) the Interstate Identification Index, an index-pointer system that provides access to state criminal history records and FBI criminal history databases; and (3) the NICS Index, which maintains records about other persons’ ineligible to possess firearms, including mental defectives, illegal and unlawful aliens, and persons dishonorably discharged from the military. In practice, however, most NICS decisions about eligibility to purchase firearms are based on state criminal history records. During the first 3 years of NICS operations, over 90 percent of all firearms purchase denials were due to a disqualifying criminal history— primarily felony convictions (64 percent) and domestic violence misdemeanor convictions (14 percent). Because the vast majority—about 95 percent—of all criminal history records are state records, the capability of NICS to effectively screen firearms purchasers depends largely on the ability to access and interpret these state records. As part of interpreting state criminal history records, NICS background check examiners consider post-conviction actions that may affect gun ownership rights. For example, persons prohibited from possessing firearms due to state criminal convictions may subsequently apply to the states for relief from these disabilities, and state actions to provide such relief may be recognized under federal law as restoring gun ownership rights. This avenue of relief arises out of the meaning of the term “conviction,” which is found within the federal definitions of felony and domestic violence misdemeanor. Federal firearms law generally provides that a conviction will not be considered for purposes of determining firearms eligibility if the conviction “has been expunged, or set aside or [is an offense] for which a person has been pardoned or has had civil rights restored … unless such pardon, expungement, or restoration of civil rights expressly provides that the person may not … possess, or receive firearms.” Prior to October 1992, relief from firearms disabilities imposed by federal laws could be granted, based on a petition to the Treasury Department, under provisions enacted at 18 U.S.C. § 925(c). However, beginning with the fiscal year 1993 Treasury appropriations act, Congress has prohibited Treasury from expending any appropriated funds to act upon such applications for relief. The Brady Act, in general, provides that any transaction in which a person presents to a licensed gun dealer a valid state permit that allows the purchaser to possess or acquire a firearm is exempt from a NICS check when purchasing firearms. Specifically, a firearms purchase is exempt from NICS if the purchaser presents a state permit that (1) allows the permit holder to possess or acquire a firearm and (2) was issued not more than 5 years earlier by the state in which the transfer is to take place. NICS regulations specify further that the purchaser must present a valid permit that was issued only after verifying that the permit holder was not ineligible to possess firearms under federal, state, and local law. In addition, after November 30, 1998, permits would qualify as exempt only if the information available to the state authority that issued the permit included NICS. In developing the NICS regulations, ATF concluded that a “permit to possess” a firearm would include a permit to carry concealed weapons. Thus, if a concealed carry permit meets the criteria described above, the permit holder would be exempt from a NICS background check when purchasing firearms, unless state law otherwise required such a check. As noted previously, NICS denials are based largely on criminal history records—not only felonies but certain misdemeanors as well. Most notably, in the so-called Lautenberg amendment, Congress banned the possession of firearms by individuals convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence. As defined in the law, a domestic violence misdemeanor involves the use or attempted use of physical force or the threatened use of a deadly weapon by any of the following: a current or former spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim; a person with whom the victim shares a child in common; a person who is cohabiting with or has cohabited with the victim as a spouse, parent, or guardian; or a person similarly situated to a spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim. Implementing regulations provide that such definition includes any federal, state, or local misdemeanor that meets the criteria, irrespective of whether it is defined or labeled as “domestic violence.” Federal law further provides that a person generally is not considered convicted of a domestic violence misdemeanor under the following circumstances: (1) if the person was not represented at trial by counsel (unless he or she waived the right to counsel); (2) if the person was entitled to a jury trial, but the case was not tried by jury (unless he or she waived the right to a jury trial); or (3) if the conviction was expunged or set-aside, or the person was pardoned or had civil rights restored; and the person is not otherwise prohibited from possessing firearms. Appendix II presents more information about the categories of persons ineligible to purchase firearms and the extent to which criminal history records are used to determine an individual’s eligibility to purchase firearms. Also, more details on NICS implementation and operation may be found in our February and April 2000 reports. As mentioned previously, while federal restoration of firearms rights is no longer readily available, persons who are ineligible to possess firearms because of state criminal convictions may be able to have their gun ownership rights restored by the state. Following a state restoration action, such persons would generally be recognized by the states and the federal government as once again being eligible to possess firearms. Each of the four restoration methods recognized in federal firearms law can have a different effect on the underlying disqualifying record and the extent to which rights are restored. For example: Pardon – A pardon is, in general, an executive action that typically mitigates the punishment the law demands for an offense and restores any or all of the rights and privileges forfeited on account of the offense. Generally, the original criminal record is to be retained, with the pardon being noted on the record. Expungement – An expungement is a procedure in which the record of a criminal offense or conviction is typically destroyed or sealed. For example, arrest records may be expunged where the arrested person is acquitted at trial or the arrest is found to be unlawful; or expungement may be allowed after the passage of time. In some cases, expunged records may be retained and used by the state for certain limited purposes. Set-aside – A set-aside is an action that annuls or revokes a previously issued court judgment or order—such as a criminal conviction. To set aside a judgment is to make it void or of no effect and to deprive it of all force and operation as to future transactions. Set-asides are generally noted in the criminal record, which is retained. Restoration of civil rights – States may have procedures to restore any civil rights or other privileges that were lost upon a criminal conviction. These rights may be restored automatically upon completion of sentence or the passage of time; or restoration of rights may require an administrative or judicial process. Generally, restorations of civil rights are noted in the criminal record, which is retained. Each of the six states we visited provided for one or more of the four methods described above for restoring gun ownership rights lost as a result of a state criminal conviction. Differences among the states primarily involved the number of such methods available, the conditions under which a person would be eligible for relief, and the process of applying for and receiving relief. Pardons were universally available in all six of the states we visited, while expungements were readily available in only one state—Utah. The states’ criteria for restoration typically required a certain waiting period before being eligible to apply for relief. In Florida, for example, applicants had to wait 10 years following completion of sentence to apply for a full pardon or 8 years to apply for a restoration of firearms authority. Also, persons convicted of some prior offenses— felonies involving a firearm, for example, in California—were not eligible for any restoration at all. In some states—such as Florida and Michigan— certain individuals are required to petition the state or a county agency for relief; other states—such as California and Massachusetts—have laws that automatically restore certain lost firearms rights after completion of sentence. Appendix III presents more information about the states’ laws and procedures dealing with restoration of gun ownership rights. To determine if persons who had their gun ownership rights restored subsequently committed crimes, we obtained and analyzed available data on restoration actions in the six selected states. Our analysis was largely dependent on the availability of state data for each method of restoration and, as such, was generally based on limited data or data on small numbers of cases. On the basis of our limited review, we found that few persons whose gun ownership rights had been restored by the states were later convicted of additional crimes. Summary information for the six states is as follows. (See table 1.) In California, 71 persons received pardons between 1990 and 2000 that restored gun ownership rights. Of these, none had subsequently been convicted of a crime.