[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Is this statement accurate: > > "Helmke said that 1.3 million people who tried to buy handguns since the > Brady Bill was enacted have been rejected after background checks." > > Note the comment of reader LE. > > "Actually, the 1.3 million figure is correct, and furthermore, from a 2004 > DOJ report, we know that 7,000 individuals who were PROHIBITED from buying a > gun in 2002 and 2003 were able to do so. ATF used to retrieve those guns to > ensure public safety, but since former-Attorney General John Ashcroft > codified the destruction of background check records after 24 hours, that is > now impossible. That means that criminals now get to keep their guns after > faulty background checks. Thank you NRA for pushing for that 'reform.' > http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A16265-2004Jul26.html"; > ...
Since I distrust newspaper interpretations of reports almost as much as I distrust interpretations from biased individuals, I wanted to see for myself - so I did some searching: http://www.fbi.gov/pressrel/pressrel06/nics2005report_082406.htm FBI Releases Annual Report Highlighting 2005 Accomplishments of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) This press release says, "From NICS inception on November 30, 1998, through December 31, 2005, a total of 62,060,717 background checks have been conducted." Wow! Note that with that many, even a small % can be a large number. The Annual Report is at: http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cjisd/nics/ops_report2005/ops_report2005.pdf Here is some information from this report (in quotes) and my comments: "From November 30, 1998, through December 31, 2005, the NICS Section has denied a total of 473,433 firearm transfers. The NICS Section denial rate for 2005 (1.35 percent) remained approximately the same as that for 2004 (1.36 percent)" (p i) Well - this says the denial rats is *much* smaller than the quote above. Note that the 473,433 includes two additional years of denials! It's only 343,053 through 2003. That's only a quarter of what's claimed! "In 2005, there were 3,771 firearm retrieval cases referred to the ATF. The percentage of firearm retrievals referred to the ATF in 2005 decreased in spite of an almost 6 percent increase in the NICS Section's workload in 2005." (p iv) This number is consistent with the number given above - but the main point is inconsistent. If the "firearm retrievals" were referred to the ATF, then clearly those records were not destroyed. Anyhow, IIRC, the 24 hour destruction was only for records in which there was no criminal violation found. Anybody remember? It is clear that some of the denials were unjustified- otherwise the report wouldn't state, "... those individuals who believe they were wrongfully denied the transfer of a firearm based on a record returned in response to a NICS background check may submit a request to appeal their denial decision ..." (p 3) Table 3 (p 32) gives figures on the overturning of denials - about 15% of denials are appealed, and about 25% of the denials are overturned. That's a fairly large number of individuals - but doesn't greatly decrease the final number of denials (it reduces the annual 60,000+ denials by 2,000-3,000.) I wonder how many unjustified denials are not appealed? What is the source of the difference between the claimed 1.3million rejections and the 343,053 denials? One possibility that be is that there is a difference between a failure to have an Immediate approval, and a denial (which can occur after the 3 business days that may be taken.) I can't find figures on how much of this happens. However it does appear that the newspaper article's figures are quite different than the FBI's. --henry schaffer > ... _______________________________________________ To post, send message to [email protected] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
