The Open Access Publisher and Free Library
12-weapons.jpg

WEAPONS

WEAPONS-TRAFFICKING-CRIME-MASS SHOOTINGS

Posts tagged background checks
Background Checks for Firearm Transfers, 2019–2020

By Connor Brooks

This report is the 18th in a series produced by the Bureau of Justice Statistics. It details the number of applications for background checks for firearm transfers and permits received by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and state and local checking agencies. It also describes the types of permits or checks used by each state, the number of denials issued by these agencies, and the reasons for denial.

Highlights

  • The FBI and state and local checking agencies received about 16.7 million applications for firearm transfers and permits in 2019 and 25.0 million applications in 2020.

  • About 243,000 (1.5%) applications for firearm transfers and permits were denied in 2019, and 398,000 (1.6%) were denied in 2020.

  • The FBI received about 12.8 million applications in 2020 and denied 185,000 (1.5%), while state and local checking agencies received more than 12.2 million applications and denied about 212,000 (1.7%).

  • In 2020, state checking agencies denied 2.7% of purchase permits, 1.8% of instant checks, 1.2% of exempt carry permits, and 0.2% of other approvals.

Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2023. 33p.

National Criminal Background Check and Youth Gun Carrying

By Lava R. Timsina, PhD; Nan Qiao, MPH; Alejandro C. Mongalo, BS; Ashley N. Vetor, MPH; Aaron E. Carroll, MD, MS; Teresa M. Bell,

Despite being unable to purchase firearms directly, many adolescents have access to guns, leading to increased risk of injury and death. We sought to determine if the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) changed adolescents’ gun-carrying behavior. We performed a repeated cross-sectional study using National Youth Risk Behavior Survey data from years 1993 to 2017. We used a survey-weighted multivariable logistic regression model to determine if the NICS had an effect on adolescent gun carrying, controlling for state respondent characteristics, state laws, state characteristics, the interaction between the NICS and state gun laws, and time. On average, 5.8% of the cohort reported carrying a gun. Approximately 17% of respondents who carried guns were from states with a universal background check (U/BC) provision at the point of sale, whereas 83% were from states that did not have such laws (P < .001). The model indicated that the NICS together with U/BCs significantly reduced gun carrying by 25% (adjusted relative risk = 0.75 [95% confidence interval: 0.566–0.995]; P = .046), whereas the NICS independently did not (P = .516). Conclusions: Adolescents in states that require U/BCs on all prospective gun buyers are less likely to carry guns compared with those in states that only require background checks on sales through federally licensed firearms dealers. The NICS was only effective in reducing adolescent gun carrying in the presence of state laws requiring U/BCs on all prospective gun buyers. However, state U/BC laws had no effect on adolescent gun carrying until after the NICS was implemented.carrying in the presence of state laws requiring U/BCs on all prospective gun buyers.

Pediatrics. 2020;145(1):e20191071

The mitigating effect of low firearm background check requirements on firearm homicides in border states

By Todd R Ashworth , Claudia A Kozinetz

Background: Firearm-related violence is a significant public health issue in the US. Research has found an increase in guns used in crimes sourced from low gun law states into high gun law states. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of distance from states without universal background checks (UBC), background checks at shows (BCS), or permit to purchase (PTP) laws on firearm homicide rates in states with them. Methods: States were identified based on their enactment of laws that are designed to prevent the private sale of firearms to criminals. Demographic data for each county were obtained for the years 2014 through 2017. The border distance from a county in a state with the evaluated gun laws to the nearest border state without the gun laws was obtained using Google Maps. Multiple regression analyses were performed to test the relationship between border distance and firearm homicide rates. Results: The regression model evaluating all formats found the border distance was negatively associated with firearm homicides (p=.009). The parameter estimate indicated as border distance increased, the firearm homicide rate decreased. When counties with UBC or PTP on all guns were evaluated separately from all formats model, the statistical significance was lost (p=.62). In counties where all handgun sales either require a background check or a PTP is required, the distance was also not statistically significant (p=.11).

Conclusions: This study provides evidence that there may be a mitigating effect on the reduction of firearm homicides in states that require background checks or PTP on private sales when there is a state in close proximity that did not have these laws. Limited counties at certain distances may have contributed to the insignificant findings in other models.

J Inj Violence Res. 2021 July; 13(2): 111-116. doi: 10.5249/ jivr.v13i2.1555

Using National Instant Criminal Background Check Data for Gun Policy Analysis A Discussion of Available Data and Their Limitations

by Sierra SmuckerMax GriswoldAmanda CharbonneauRose KerberTerry L. SchellAndrew R. Morral

Among researchers, policymakers, and advocates, momentum is growing to better understand the impact of firearm laws on a variety of outcomes (e.g., suicide, crime, defensive gun use, homicide). There is also a growing interest in data that can shed light on these relationships. One source of these data is the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). This system includes information used in background checks, the number and type of background checks processed, and details on the number of and reason for denials when NICS finds that an individual is prohibited from purchasing a firearm. In this tool, researchers provide detailed information about data associated with NICS and discuss the data's strengths and weaknesses for various gun policy evaluation objectives. The researchers also outline the substantial limitations to interpreting these data to assist researchers in this field. Finally, they provide these data to researchers to encourage further exploration and evaluation of how NICS data might be used for policy analysis.

Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2022. 65p.

Background Checks for Firearms Transfers: Assessment and Recommendations

By Garen Wintemute

Firearm-related criminal violence remains an important threat to the nation’s health and safety. To help prevent firearm violence, federal statute prohibits felons, those convicted of domestic violence misdemeanors, and certain others from acquiring or possessing firearms. Persons who acquire firearms from licensed gun dealers and pawnbrokers must provide identification and undergo a background check to verify that they are not prohibited persons. A permanent record is kept, in case the firearm is later used in a crime. But perhaps 40% of all firearm acquisitions, and at least 80% of those made with criminal intent, are made from private parties. No identification need be shown; no background check is conducted; no record is kept. Identifying prohibited persons through background checks and denying their firearm acquisitions has been shown to reduce their risk of committing new firearm-related or violent crimes by approximately 25%. Policies that require all firearm transfers to be routed through licensed retailers, so that background checks are completed and records are kept, are in effect in six states. Their feasibility is proved. At gun shows in states where such policies are in effect, direct private-party firearm transfers rarely occur. Comprehensive background check policies have been shown to disrupt firearm trafficking and to yield more accurate, up-to-date firearm tracing information for law enforcement. The impact of state-level policies, however, is blunted by firearm trafficking from states where such policies are not in effect.

Davis, CA: Violence Prevention Research Program, University of California, Davis. 2013. 58p.