U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics *************************************************************** This file is text only without graphics and many of the tables. A Zip archive of the tables in this report in spreadsheet format (.csv) and the full report including tables and graphics in .pdf format are available on BJS website at: http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=5664 *************************************************************** ************************************************************** This report is one in a series. More recent editions may be available. To view a list of all in the series go to http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbse&sid=13 ************************************************************ ********************* Statistical Tables ********************* ********************************************************* Background Checks for Firearm Transfers, 2013–14 – Statistical Tables ********************************************************* Jennifer C. Karberg Ronald J. Frandsen Joseph M. Durso Trent D. Buskirk, Ph.D. Regional Justice Information Service Allina D. Lee Bureau of Justice Statistics More than 180 million applications for firearm transfers or permits were subject to background checks since the effective date of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act on February 28, 1994, through December 31, 2014. During this period, about 2.8 million applications (1.6%) were denied. In 2014, nearly 15 million applications were subject to background checks, and 193,000 (1.3%) were denied, including about 91,000 denied by the FBI and about 102,000 denied by state and local agencies. Data in this report were obtained from the Bureau of Justice Statistics’ (BJS) Firearm Inquiry Statistics (FIST) program. The FIST program collects information on firearm applications and denials and combines this information with the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) transaction data to produce an estimated number of background checks for firearm transfers or permits since the effective date of the Brady Act. These statistical tables describe trends in background check activities that occurred in 2014 and include partial data for 2013. Data include the number of firearm transaction applications processed by the FBI and by state and local agencies, the number of applications denied, reasons for denial, and estimates of applications by jurisdiction and by each type of approval system. Summary findings ******************* * Since the effective date of the Brady Act on February 28, 1994, through December 31, 2014, more than 180 million applications for firearm transfers or permits were subject to background checks. More than 2.8 million applications (1.6%) were denied (table 1). * Nearly 15 million applications for firearm transfers were received in 2014, down from an estimated 17.6 million in 2013. * About 1.3% of the nearly 15 million applications for firearm transfers or permits in 2014 were denied--about 91,000 by the FBI and about 102,000 by state and local agencies. An estimated 193,000 applications for firearm transfers or permits in 2013 were denied--about 88,000 by the FBI and about 104,000 by state and local agencies (table 2). * Among state agencies, denial rates in 2014 were 3.1% for purchase permits, 1.5% for instant checks, 0.9% for other approval checks, and 1.0% for exempt carry permits. Denial rates in 2013 were estimated to be 1.9% for purchase permits, 1.2% for instant checks, 0.8% for other approval checks, and 0.9% for exempt carry permits (table 3). * Among local agencies, the denial rates in 2014 were 4% for purchase permit checks and 1.2% for exempt carry permit checks (table 4). * A felony conviction (42%) was the most common reason for the FBI to deny an application in 2014, followed by a fugitive from justice status (19%) (table 5). * Among the 18 state agencies that reported reasons for denial, a state law prohibition (26%) was the most common reason to deny an application in 2014, followed by a felony conviction (22%). * Excluding other prohibitions, of the approximately 330 local agencies that reported reasons for denial, a state law prohibition (20%) was the most common reason to deny an application in 2014. * Among all agencies that reported reasons for denial in 2014, denial of an application due to a felony conviction, indictment, charge, or arrest accounted for approximately 42% of denials (table 6). * Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) field offices investigated 7,978 NICS denials that were referred by the FBI in 2014—up from 6,257 in 2013. Among denials, a felony conviction was the most common reason for referral to a field office in 2014 (37%) and in 2013 (33%) (table 7). *********************************************************** *********** Tables ********** TABLE 1 Estimated number of firearm applications received and denied since the effective date of the Brady Act, 1994–2014 TABLE 2 Firearm applications received and denied, by type of agency and type of check, 2013 and 2014 TABLE 3 Firearm applications received and denied by state agencies, by type of check, 2013 and 2014 TABLE 4 Firearm applications received and denied by local agencies, by community size and type of permit, 2014 TABLE 5 Reasons for denial of firearm transfer and permit applications, by checking agencies, 2013 and 2014 TABLE 6 Percent change in the number of applications, denials, and reasons for denial, 1999–2014 TABLE 7 Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives investigation of National Instant Criminal Background Check System denials by the FBI, 2013 and 2014 TABLE 8 Number of checking agencies in the 2014 Firearm Inquiry Statistics survey ***************** Appendix tables ***************** APPENDIX TABLE 1 Estimated standard errors for firearm applications received and denied by local agencies, 2014 APPENDIX TABLE 2 Standard errors for table 4: Firearm applications received and denied by local agencies, by community size and type of permit, 2014 APPENDIX TABLE 3 Firearm applications received and denied by jurisdiction, 2014 APPENDIX TABLE 4 Firearm applications received and denied by jurisdiction, 2013 APPENDIX TABLE 5 Reasons for denial of firearm transfer and permit applications, by checking agencies, 2013 and 2014 APPENDIX TABLE 6 Prohibited person records in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System Index, 2014 APPENDIX TABLE 7 Prohibited person records in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System Index, 2013 APPENDIX TABLE 8 Reasons for denial of firearm transfer and permit applications, December 31, 2014 APPENDIX TABLE 9 Agencies conducting firearm background checks, December 31, 2014 APPENDIX TABLE 10 National Instant Criminal Background Check System checking agencies, FBI, or state Point of Contact for firearm transfers, 2014 APPENDIX TABLE 11 Forums for appeals of firearm transfer and permit denials, 2014 *********************************************************** ************** Background ************* The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 (Pub. L. No. 103-159, 107 Stat. 1536 (1993), codified as amended at 18 U.S.C. § 921 et seq.) mandates that a criminal history background check be performed on any person who attempts to purchase a firearm from a Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL). The permanent provisions of the Brady Act established the NICS, which the FBI or a state Point of Contact (POC) accesses prior to approval or denial of a firearm transfer. The NICS is a system comprised of data on persons who are prohibited from purchasing or possessing a firearm under federal or state law. The Gun Control Act (18 U.S.C. § 922) prohibits transfer of a firearm to a person who-- * is under indictment for, or has been convicted of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for more than 1 year * is a fugitive from justice * is an unlawful user of, or addicted to, a controlled substance * has been adjudicated as a mental defective or committed to a mental institution * is an illegal alien or has been admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa * was dishonorably discharged from the U.S. Armed Forces * has renounced U.S. citizenship * is subject to a court order restraining him or her from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child * has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence * is under age 18 for long guns or under age 21 for handguns. An FFL contacts either the FBI or a state POC to determine whether a prospective purchaser is prohibited from receiving a firearm. During 2014, the FBI conducted all NICS checks for 30 states, the District of Columbia, and U.S. territories. POC agencies, which may be statewide or local, conducted all NICS checks for 13 other states. In the remaining 7 states, POC agencies conducted NICS checks on handgun transfer applicants, and the FBI conducted checks on long gun transfer applicants. Several states require an additional background check that does not access the NICS. State laws may require a check on a permit applicant or a person who seeks to receive a firearm from an unlicensed seller. For more information on the NICS, visit the FBI’s Criminal Justice Information Service (CJIS) website at http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics. BJS began the FIST program in 1995 to provide national estimates of the total number of firearm applications received and denied pursuant to the Brady Act and similar state laws. The FIST program collects counts of firearm transfers and permit checks conducted by state and local agencies and combines this information with the FBI’s NICS transaction data. In addition, FIST collects information on reasons for denials and law enforcement actions taken by the FBI and ATF against denied persons. ********************************************** Overview of the national firearm check system ********************************************** About 1,300 federal, state, and local agencies conduct background checks on persons who apply to purchase a firearm or for a permit that may be used to make a purchase. Prospective firearm applicants must either undergo a NICS background check that has been requested by a dealer or present a state permit that ATF has qualified as an alternative to the point-of-transfer check. ATF-qualified permits are those that-- * allow an applicant to possess, acquire, or carry a firearm * were issued not more than 5 years earlier by the state where the transfer is to take place, after an authorized government official verified that possession of a firearm by the applicant would not be a violation of law. All permits issued since November 29, 1998, must have included a NICS check. Many NICS-alternative permits may be used for multiple purchases while valid. State laws often provide that a permit will be revoked if the holder is convicted of an offense or otherwise becomes ineligible after receiving the permit. NICS-alternative permit changes occurred in two states during 2013 and 2014. Alaska reinstated processing of NICS-alternative permits (called NICS exempt carry permits within the state) in 2013. West Virginia carry permits were qualified by ATF as a NICS alternative in 2014, after amendments to state laws. Prior to transferring a firearm under the permanent Brady provisions, an FFL is required to obtain a completed Firearm Transaction Record (ATF form 4473) from the applicant. An FFL initiates a NICS check by contacting either the FBI or the state POC. Most inquiries are initiated by telephone. In 2002, the FBI added E-Check to allow FFLs to request a check electronically. The FBI or state POC queries available federal, state, local, and tribal systems and notifies the FFL that the transfer may proceed, may not proceed, or must be delayed pending further review of the applicant’s record. When an FFL initiates a NICS background check, a name and descriptor search is conducted to identify any matching records in three nationally held databases managed by the FBI’s CJIS. The following databases are searched during the background check process: * The Interstate Identification Index (III) maintains individual criminal history records. As of January 8, 2015, the NICS accessed and searched 85,909,018 III records during a background check. *** Footnote 1 Data are reported through January 8, 2015, because the FBI did not run data through December 31, 2014, in the 2014 report, National Instant Criminal Background Check System Operations, available at https://www.fbi. gov/about-us/cjis/nics/reports/2014- operations-report. See also Survey of State Criminal History Information Systems, 2014, available at https://www. ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/bjs/grants/249799.pdf.*** * The National Crime Information Center (NCIC) contains data on persons who are the subjects of protection orders or active criminal warrants, immigration violators, and others. As of December 31, 2014, the NICS searched 5,598,974 NCIC records during a background check. * The NICS Index, a database created specifically for the NICS, collects and maintains information contributed by federal, state, local, and tribal agencies pertaining to persons prohibited from receiving or possessing a firearm pursuant to federal and state law. Typically, the records maintained in the NICS Index are not available via the III or the NCIC. As of December 31, 2014, the NICS Index contained 12,881,223 records. * The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) databases contain information on non-U.S. citizens who attempt to receive firearms in the United States. In 2014, the NICS Section and POC states sent 104,828 such queries to ICE. From February 2002 to December 31, 2014, ICE conducted more than 622,771 queries for the NICS. *** Footnote 2 For more information about the NICS background check process, see the 2014 report, National Instant Criminal Background Check System Operations, available at https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics/reports/2014- operations-report.*** An applicant who is denied a firearm transfer or permit may appeal to the FBI or a POC. Some jurisdictions allow a further appeal to a court. A denied person who submitted a false application or has an outstanding warrant may be subject to arrest and prosecution under federal or state laws. ************************************ State and local NICS participation ************************************ Each state government determines the extent of its involvement in the NICS process. Three levels of state involvement currently exist: * A full POC requests a NICS check on all firearm transfers originating in the state. * A partial POC requests a NICS check on all handgun transfers. FFLs in the state are required to contact the FBI for NICS checks for long gun transfers. * The state does not maintain a POC. FFLs are required to contact the FBI for NICS checks on all firearm transfers originating in the state. ************************ Other uses of the NICS ************************ In addition to NICS background checks required by the Brady Act, use of the NICS is limited to providing information to criminal justice agencies in connection with the issuance of a firearm- or explosives-related permit or license, or responding to an inquiry from ATF in connection with a civil or criminal law enforcement activity relating to federal firearm laws (28 CFR § 25.6). Firearm-related permits include ATF-qualified alternative permits and other permits issued by state or local agencies. In addition to checks on new and renewed applications, rechecks may be conducted on current permit holders. ************** Methodology ************** Data used for this report were prepared by the Regional Justice Information Service (REJIS) through a cooperative agreement with the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) under the Firearm Inquiry Statistics (FIST) program. The FIST program collects information on background checks for firearm transfers or permits from federal, state, and local agencies. *********************** FIST frame generation ************************ State statutes determine which agencies conduct background checks for a firearm permit or transfer. To generate the FIST sampling frame for the 2014 collection, REJIS, under the direction of BJS, used multiple data sources combined with a large known pool of past FIST responders. First, REJIS included local agencies from the 2012 FIST frame that were known to have responded to the FIST survey at least once in the previous 3 years and had a verified status of conducting background checks or processing applications for firearm transfers or permits. REJIS used other data sources and resources to verify the frame, including the 2008 Census of State and Local Law Enforcement and a 2011 Originating Agency Identifier file of law enforcement agencies obtained from the FBI. The 2014 FIST universe was composed of the following: * FBI--30 states and the District of Columbia rely on the FBI’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) to conduct firearm background check activities for handguns and long gun transfers. In seven other states, the FBI’s NICS conducts checks for long gun transfers only. * State reporting agencies--31 state agencies and the District of Columbia police provide complete statewide counts of applications for firearm transfers or permits, denials of applications, and (when reported) reasons for denial for at least one type of check. * Local reporting agencies--1,287 local checking agencies in 11 states issue permits, track applications and denials, or conduct background checks for various types of firearm permit or transfer systems.***Footnote 3 The FIST program obtains data from local law enforcement agencies that conduct background checks and issue permits as well as from other types of local agencies that conduct these activities, such as probate courts (in Georgia) and county clerks or other types of administrative offices (in New York). In such cases, the agency surveyed may not actually conduct a background check but rather issue a permit, track a permit that was issued, or track a transfer check. For the FIST program, collecting application and denial data from agencies that conduct background checks or track permit or transfer applications is considered to be the most accurate and sometimes the only means available to assess background check activity. Additionally, populations covered by local agencies (for basic NICS checks and permits, not including other types of checks and permits, such as separate state-level checks and ATF-exempt carry permits) account for only 7% of the total U.S. population.*** For the FIST program, it is important to distinguish between local agencies that are authorized by statute to conduct background checks and those that actually conduct the checks. Although local agencies in certain states are legally authorized to conduct background checks for firearm transfers or permits, these agencies are not required to do so. When developing the 2014 FIST frame, REJIS identified a few instances where a local agency (usually a municipal police department) that was legally authorized by state statute to conduct a background check had never actually conducted background check activities and was unlikely to ever do so. Instead, transfer or permit applicants who might use such a local agency are directed to another local authority (usually the county sheriff) with jurisdiction to conduct a transfer check or issue a permit. Agencies that did not conduct background check activities were considered to be out of scope for the 2014 data collection. For the FIST data collection, BJS determined that eligible agencies in the frame should be those that are authorized to conduct and are known to conduct or maintain information on background checks. Such agencies collect or maintain data on the critical FIST data elements: applications, denials, and (when reported) the reasons for denial. Agencies that only have delegated background check functions are considered out of scope because they do not actually conduct firearm background check activities nor track information on such activities, which are the critical data collection items on the survey. Smaller law enforcement agencies that had closed since the construction of the FIST frame were determined to be out of scope for the 2014 data collection. ************** FIST sample ************** The 2014 FIST survey was designed to provide state-level estimates of background check activity. BJS produced a national estimate of the number of applications for firearms received and denied pursuant to the Brady Act by combining data obtained from state agencies and local checking agencies with FBI’s NICS transaction data obtained from the FBI’s NICS Section. ***Footnote 4 The FBI reports on NICS transaction data in its annual NICS Operations Report. The FBI tracks the number of applications and denials processed by the NICS system. However, the FBI only reports reasons for denials made by the NICS Section and does not include reasons for denials issued at the state and local levels (information that FIST collects). In 2014, the FBI reported more than 12.7 million state Point of Contact transactions, compared to the approximately 6 million reported by FIST. This variation can be attributed to several factors, notably within the category of state firearm permits. The FIST counts include applications for two types of state firearm permits: (1) permits required for a transfer (purchase permits) and (2) concealed carry permits that may be used to exempt the holder from a background check at the time of transfer (exempt carry permits). At yearend 2014, 21 states had an exempt carry permit, and 29 other states had concealed carry permits that were not exempt and were not included in FIST. At least some of those 29 states used NICS for checks on applicants, and those checks have been included in the FBI statistics. The largest difference within the state firearm permit category was caused by periodic rechecks that at least two state agencies ran on all current carry permit holders. The rechecks were included in FBI transaction counts but not in FIST counts because they were not connected to a firearm transfer, and the FIST reporting agency was able to separately report new and renewed permit applications.*** REJIS collected state-level data from the state reporting agencies via survey or extracted publicly available online reports from the state website. Except for one state (Pennsylvania) in which denials were estimated, all data collected by state agencies are considered to be complete counts. To obtain FIST data in 2014, REJIS surveyed local agencies in 11 states with local checking agencies that were authorized to conduct firearm background check activities or process applications. Totals were estimated for states where the reporters were local agencies. Local agencies in 8 (Idaho, Iowa, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, Nevada, New York, and West Virginia) of the 11 states were enumerated, and local agencies in 3 (Georgia, Minnesota, and Washington) of the states were sampled in 2 of the 4 sample strata due to the large number of potential reporters. REJIS created a stratified random sample proportionate to state and stratum size in each of the 3 states sampled based on population size that roughly equates to-- * Stratum 1: rural--places of less than 10,000 population * Stratum 2: small cities--places of between 10,000 and 99,999 population * Stratum 3: small metropolitan areas--places of between 100,000 and 199,999 population * Stratum 4: large metropolitan areas--places of 200,000 or more population. BJS created a reserve sample to account for potential low response rates for the 2014 collection. In total, a 30% reserve sample was drawn for each of the three sampled states; it was split into two reserve samples yielding a 15% sample per reserve sample. Because all agencies in strata 3 and 4 were surveyed, the reserve sample only affected strata 1 and 2 of the sampled agencies. The first reserve sample was to be used if one of the sampled states had a response rate of less than 85% for the initial data collection period. The second reserve sample was to be used if one of the sampled states had a response rate of less than 75% after the first reserve sample was collected. REJIS used the first and second reserve samples for Georgia in 2014. No reserve samples were used for the sampled agencies in Minnesota and Washington. The final designated sample included 561 enumerated (self- representing or SR) local agencies and 274 sampled (non-self- representing or NSR) local agencies. After adjusting for agencies that were ineligible to participate in the survey, the final sample consisted of 845 state and local agencies. The overall response rate was 80%. All (100%) state agencies and 80% of local agencies responded to the survey (table 8). BJS and REJIS updated the 2013–14 FIST survey form. To minimize respondent burden, the form was changed to provide clearer instructions tailored to terminology used by individual state agencies to describe the permit or permits of interest. BJS removed questions from the 2014 FIST survey on arrests, appeals, and reversals of denied applications because only a small number of agencies historically reported these data, which significantly limited the ability to draw reliable conclusions about the data. To increase survey response, REJIS used multiple survey modes (e.g., online form, paper survey, and fax) and a rigorous nonresponse follow-up contact strategy. ************ Estimation ************ Data obtained from state and local agencies were combined with the FBI’s federal NICS transaction data to create an estimate of the total number of firearm transfer and permit applications received and denied nationally. REJIS applied design weights and nonresponse adjustment factors for enumerated and sampled local agencies to generate estimates of the number of applications and denials at the state level. The 2014 FIST data collection provides for two basic weighting structures for local respondent agencies: a weight applied to SR agencies and a weight applied to NSR agencies. ************************* SR agencies (enumerated) ************************* Each local checking agency within the eight states in which all known eligible agencies were contacted received a design weight of 1 (w1 = 1). In addition to the design weight, a nonresponse adjustment (w2) was applied to responding agencies to compensate for the agencies that did not respond. *********************** NSR agencies (sampled) *********************** The process for calculating weights for NSR agencies was similar to that for SR agencies, except these agencies (the small agencies in strata 1 and 2 of the sampled states) received a design weight of greater than 1 (w1 > 1) according to the population-based stratum and the state in which they reside. This weight reflects the inverse of the probability of selection for the state and stratum size (cell) in which the agency resides. The reserve samples for Minnesota and Washington were not released. In these cases, the design weights were further adjusted to compensate for the reserve subsampling. Agencies in strata 3 and 4 (large agencies) were selected with certainty and were therefore given a weight of 1. Weights were adjusted for any agencies that were out of scope in the sampled states. ************************* Nonresponse adjustment ************************* The nonresponse adjustment accounts for agencies that were ineligible (out of scope) and for nonrespondents. It consists of a ratio adjustment of the sum of the weighted eligible agencies (per state and population size stratum) to the sum of weighted respondent agencies (also per state and population size stratum). A nonresponse adjustment was applied to each cell (stratum within state) if there was any nonresponse. This created a specific adjustment for each cell that applies to all states, whether enumerated or sampled. ************************************ Partial-year reporting adjustment ************************************ A weight (w3), consisting of a small ratio adjustment to account for missing months of data, was applied to adjust for any agency that reported only partial-year data. This adjustment to account for missing months was necessary for six local agencies and to calculate reasons for denial from Pennsylvania. **************** Final weights **************** The final weights (Fw) applied to each FIST case are the product of a design weight applied to each agency, a nonresponse adjustment weight, and the partial-year reporting weight (Fw = w1 × w2 × w3). *********************************************** Item nonresponse imputation for local agencies *********************************************** For the 2014 FIST collection, REJIS determined that there were very few cases in which information on applications for firearm transfers or permits was missing. There were more cases of missing data for denials, but this was a small number compared to other missing data (e.g., reasons for denial). To count partial responses, agencies were required to report either the number of applications received or the number of denials issued. If neither was present, the agency was considered a nonrespondent. Fifteen agencies provided denials but not applications. Twenty-eight agencies provided the number of applications but not denials. In the instances of missing data on applications or denials, REJIS used a conditional mean imputation to estimate the number of applications and denials. To yield the most reliable estimates, REJIS replaced missing values with the mean number of applications of other agencies in the same state that were in the same population category. In population stratum 1, this approach was deemed sufficient because all agencies served a population of less than 10,000. In population stratum 2, the population size covered a broad range (10,000 to 99,999). As such, a traditional group-mean replacement would have produced unacceptably imprecise approximations. To address this, for agencies with complete data, REJIS employed a basic multiple imputation strategy that took into account the number of denials, the actual population size served, and the number of applications to calculate the estimated number of applications in instances of missing data. The result was a within-state and stratum group-based sum of imputed values, but it was proportionate to the population allocation of imputed applications or denials per agency. ************************* Estimates for 2013 data ************************* BJS collected 2013 and 2014 data from federal agencies and from the 31 state agency reporters and the District of Columbia. Due to various factors, including time spent revising the survey to incorporate more accurate terminology familiar to respondents, complexities associated with trying to collect multiple years of data from local jurisdictions, and BJS’s objective to report more timely FIST data, BJS collected only 2014 data from local checking agencies. ***Footnote 5 To mitigate reporting burden, BJS collected only 2014 data from local checking agencies. While state agencies are more likely to maintain the requested data in an automated format (e.g., a database), local agencies, especially those in smaller jurisdictions, may not have access to these same resources. These agencies may need to gather FIST data from files or other sources that require manual counts, and requesting multiple years of data could result in an unnecessary increase in respondent burden when reliable estimates can be produced in a different way.*** To account for the missing 2013 local agency data in the national estimate, REJIS used available FIST 2012, 2013, and 2014 state data to estimate the number of applications and denials from local agencies. ***Footnote 6 Data were also estimated for the state agency reporter from Illinois, as data were not provided for 2013.*** Specifically, REJIS used a random intercept linear regression spline model with one knot at 2013 to incorporate the hierarchical structure of the data (multiple time points and total application and denials estimates per state) to separately model total applications and total denials. The spline models were selected over conditional growth models (linear or quadratic) to allow for nonlinearity in the trends in total applications (and denials) over time across all states. To improve the overall imputations, these models also incorporated either a fixed or time varying covariate shown to be highly correlated with the FIST applications and denials totals over time. ********************* Adjustments to data ********************* REJIS obtained concealed carry permit data from Michigan by fiscal year, which were used to provide estimates for calendar years 2013 and 2014. Mississippi reported applications for 2013 and 2014 but did not report denials for either year. Because sufficient data from prior years were unavailable to calculate an estimate using a linear trend, the ratio of denials to applications reported by Mississippi in 2012 was used to calculate a simple ratio that was applied to the number of applications to estimate the number of denials. Pennsylvania reported the number of instant checks for 2013 and 2014, which are included in the FIST national estimate. The proportion of all Pennsylvania transactions that were instant checks was used to estimate the number of denials of instant checks and reasons for denials. **************** Standard errors **************** Standard error calculations were computed for the estimates of total applications, total denials, and the ratio of denials to total applications for three types: purchase, transfer and concealed carry permits across states, and size of region for local agencies. The standard error computations take into account several aspects of the FIST design, including stratification of data collection by a combination of state and population served categories and finite population sampling (without replacement) across the states and population categories of interest. REJIS approximated the FIST design by generating 68 final strata defined as combinations of state and population categories. Data from SR agencies were treated as certainty samples with an initial selection probability of one. For these states and population category combinations, complete responses would have a negligible contribution to the overall standard errors for a given estimate. To account for this and the fact that finite population correction (FPC) factors for the samples generated by the FIST design were very small, FPCs were directly incorporated into the standard error computations. Finally, estimates for local agencies included one additional subdomain of agency type: local or state (centralized reporting). All computations were generated using the FIST final sampling weight, which incorporated adjustments for missing values, nonresponse, and an overall population eligibility or coverage adjustment. In some cases, standard error computations were not possible, as only one agency reported information from a given type of application in areas where more than one agency was queried (via sample or census). In these cases, no standard error computations were provided. ********************* Reasons for denial ********************* BJS has collected information about reasons for denial since the FIST program’s inception in 1996. The FIST survey includes 12 categories that reflect the most common reasons for denial and closely match the categories of federal prohibitors. NICS POC agencies enforce federal prohibitors and state law prohibitors that may vary from the federal categories (see appendix table 6 for a list of federal and state prohibitors). Agencies that responded to the FIST survey were asked to record their denials in the most appropriate categories. When REJIS obtained data from an agency’s website or internal report that did not match with an existing FIST denial category, REJIS determined which denial category best matched the reported reason and verified the classification with the responding agency. In 2014, the FBI, 18 state agencies, and approximately 330 local agencies reported reasons for denials. There are two major difficulties in reporting reasons for denial. First, among reporting agencies there was a high degree of nonresponse on items that asked about reasons for denial. Among local agencies, nonresponse was high in most states and population strata. Local agencies in one state (New York) did not report any reasons for denial. In 2014, the FBI and some state agencies provided a reason for each denial. Other state agencies provided reasons only for some denials, and some state agencies did not provide any reasons for denials. Second, the method by which agencies record or track reasons for a denial varies among state and local agencies. Of those that report any reasons for a denial, approximately three- quarters of local agencies report all of the reasons found on a background check that disqualify a permit or transfer seeker from obtaining a firearm, while a quarter of agencies report only one reason for a denial. This proportion is reversed among state agencies, for which a third report all of the reasons a permit or transfer was denied and two-thirds report only one reason. Another difficulty among some state and local agencies that report one reason for a denial is that some report only the most serious charge listed on a background check, others list the first reason found, and others do not indicate how they determined which reason to report. Due to the high nonresponse and variation in the way reasons for denial are reported, a simple estimation for the number of reasons for denial by local agencies was calculated. Estimates used only the agency base weight rather than the final weight that was applied to all other local agency estimates. (See Final weights section.) This was done to bring the representation of responses from sampled agencies in line with those from states in which a census of agencies was conducted. The FBI and state agency reasons for denial counts are reported, and no estimation on these counts was conducted. ************** Definitions ************** Application for firearm transfer is information submitted by a person to a state or local checking agency to purchase a firearm or obtain a permit that can be used for a purchase. Information may be submitted directly to a checking agency or forwarded by a prospective seller. Denial occurs when an applicant is prohibited from receiving a firearm or a permit that can be used to receive a firearm because a disqualifying factor was found during a background check. Exempt carry permit is a state carry permit (issued after a background check) that exempts the holder from a check at the time of purchase under an ATF regulation or state law. Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL) is also known as a federally licensed firearms dealer. A dealer must be licensed by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to be classified as an FFL and must be enrolled with the FBI’s NICS to request a NICS check. Firearm is any weapon that is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive. Handgun is a firearm that has a short stock and is designed to be held and fired using a single hand, such as a pistol or revolver. Instant check (instant approval) systems require a seller to transmit a purchaser’s application to a checking agency by telephone or computer, after which the agency is required to respond as quickly as possible. Long gun is a firearm with a barrel extended to about 30 inches to improve accuracy and range, commonly with a shoulder butt, and designed to be fired with two hands, such as a rifle or shotgun. National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) is a national system that checks available records to determine if prospective transferees are disqualified from receiving firearms. Other approval systems require a seller to transmit a purchaser’s application to a checking agency by telephone or other means. The agency is not required to respond immediately but must respond before the end of the statutory time limit. Purchase permit systems require a prospective firearm purchaser to obtain, after a background check, a government-issued document (called a permit, license, or identification card) that must be presented to a seller to receive a firearm. Transactions are inquiries to the federal NICS system and may include more than one inquiry per application. ******************* Jurisdiction notes ******************* The following notes provide additional information about changes in jurisdictions that occurred and about the types of firearms included in a jurisdiction’s instant checks, purchase permits, exempt carry permits, or other approval checks in 2013 and 2014. Jurisdiction statutes should be consulted for complete details on a jurisdiction’s firearm laws. Alaska-- A state agency conducted background checks on applicants for exempt carry permits that may have been used for handgun or long gun transfers. Arizona-- A state agency conducted background checks on applicants for exempt carry permits that may have been used for handgun or long gun transfers. Arkansas-- A state agency conducted background checks on applicants for exempt carry permits that may have been used for handgun or long gun transfers. California-- A state agency conducted other approval checks on applicants for handgun and long gun transfers. Colorado-- A state agency conducted instant checks on applicants for handgun and long gun transfers. Connecticut-- The state authorized two types of purchase permits, and every handgun transferee was required to obtain one of the permits. Beginning April 1, 2014, a purchase permit was also required for a long gun. In addition, a state agency conducted instant checks at the point of transfer on applicants for handgun and long gun transfers. District of Columbia-- The chief of police conducted checks on applicants for a registration certificate (categorized by the FIST as a purchase permit), which was required to obtain a handgun or a long gun. In addition, the FBI conducted NICS checks requested by dealers who transferred a firearm after receiving a buyer’s registration certificate. Florida-- A state agency conducted instant checks on applicants for handgun and long gun transfers. Georgia-- Local agencies issued exempt carry permits that may have been used for handgun or long gun transfers. Hawaii-- A purchase permit was required to obtain a handgun or a long gun. Local agencies conducted checks on purchase permit applicants. Idaho-- Local agencies issued exempt carry permits that may have been used for handgun or long gun transfers. Illinois-- A purchase permit was required to obtain a handgun or a long gun. In addition, a state agency conducted instant checks at the point of transfer on applicants for handgun and long gun transfers. Iowa-- A purchase permit was required to obtain a handgun. An exempt carry permit may have been substituted for the purchase permit. Both types of permits may have been used to acquire a long gun. Local agencies conducted checks on applicants for purchase and exempt carry permits. Kansas-- A state agency conducted background checks on applicants for exempt carry permits that may have been used for handgun or long gun transfers. Kentucky-- A state agency conducted background checks on applicants for exempt carry permits that may have been used for handgun or long gun transfers. Maryland-- A purchase permit issued by a state agency was required to obtain a handgun after October 1, 2013. In addition, a state agency conducted other approval checks on applicants for transfers of handguns and assault weapons, which were designated by state law as regulated firearms. Massachusetts-- A purchase permit was required to obtain a handgun or a long gun. Three types of purchase permits were included in the FIST survey data. Local agencies conducted checks on permit applicants. Michigan-- A purchase permit was required for a handgun transfer between two individuals who were not licensed dealers. An exempt carry permit may have been substituted for the purchase permit and may have also been used to acquire a long gun. Local agencies conducted checks on purchase permit and exempt carry permit applicants. Minnesota-- A purchase permit was required to obtain a handgun or an assault weapon. An exempt carry permit may have been substituted for the purchase permit. Local agencies conducted checks on purchase and exempt carry permit applicants. Mississippi-- A state agency conducted background checks on applicants for exempt carry permits that may have been used for handgun or long gun transfers. Montana-- Local agencies issued exempt carry permits that may have been used for handgun or long gun transfers. Nebraska-- Local agencies conducted checks on applicants for a purchase permit, which was required to obtain a handgun. An exempt carry permit issued by a state agency may have been substituted for the purchase permit. Both types of permits may have been used to acquire a long gun. Nevada-- A state agency conducted instant checks on applicants for handgun and long gun transfers. Local agencies issued exempt carry permits that may have been used for handgun or long gun transfers. New Hampshire-- A state agency conducted instant checks on applicants for handgun transfers. New Jersey-- A purchase permit was required to obtain a handgun or a long gun. Local agencies and the state police conducted checks on purchase permit applicants. In addition, the state police conducted instant checks at the point of transfer on applicants for handgun and long gun transfers. New York-- The state’s purchase permit was required to obtain a handgun and certain types of long guns. Local agencies conducted checks on purchase permit applicants. North Carolina-- A purchase permit was required to obtain a handgun. An exempt carry permit may have been substituted for the purchase permit. Both types of permits may have been used to acquire a long gun. Local agencies conducted checks on applicants for purchase and exempt carry permits. North Dakota-- A state agency conducted background checks on applicants for exempt carry permits that may have been used for handgun or long gun transfers. Oregon-- A state agency conducted instant checks on applicants for handgun and long gun transfers. Pennsylvania-- A state agency conducted instant checks on applicants for handgun and long gun transfers. Rhode Island-- Local agencies conducted other approval checks on applicants for handgun and long gun transfers. South Carolina-- A state agency conducted background checks on applicants for exempt carry permits that may have been used for handgun or long gun transfers. Tennessee-- A state agency conducted instant checks on applicants for handgun and long gun transfers. Texas-- A state agency conducted background checks on applicants for exempt carry permits that may have been used for handgun or long gun transfers. Utah-- A state agency conducted instant checks on applicants for handgun and long gun transfers, and conducted background checks on applicants for exempt carry permits. Virginia-- A state agency conducted instant checks on applicants for handgun and long gun transfers. Washington-- Local agencies conducted other approval checks on applicants for handgun transfers. West Virginia-- Local agencies issued exempt carry permits that may have been used for handgun or long gun transfers on or after June 4, 2014, when the permit was qualified by ATF as an alternative to the NICS transfer check. Wisconsin-- A state agency conducted instant checks on applicants for handgun transfers. Wyoming-- A state agency conducted background checks on applicants for exempt carry permits that may have been used for handgun or long gun transfers. ********************** Related Publications *********************** Background Checks for Firearm Transfers - Statistical Tables, 2012 (NCJ 247815, December 2014) Background Checks for Firearm Transfers - Statistical Tables, 2010 (NCJ 238226, February 2013) Background Checks for Firearm Transfers - Statistical Tables, 2009 (NCJ 231679, October 2010) Background Checks for Firearm Transfers - Statistical Tables, 2008 (NCJ 227471, August 2009) Background Checks for Firearm Transfers - Statistical Tables, 2007 (NCJ 223197, July 2008) Background Checks for Firearm Transfers - Statistical Tables, 2006 (NCJ 221786, March 2008) Background Checks for Firearm Transfers, 2005 (NCJ 214256, November 2006) Background Checks for Firearm Transfers, 2004 (NCJ 210117, October 2005) Background Checks for Firearm Transfers, 2003: Trends for the Permanent Brady Period, 1999–2003 (NCJ 204428, September 2004) Background Checks for Firearm Transfers, 2002 (NCJ 200116, September 2003) Background Checks for Firearm Transfers, 2001 (NCJ 195235, September 2002) Background Checks for Firearm Transfers, 2000 (NCJ 187985, July 2001) Background Checks for Firearm Transfers, 1999 (NCJ 180882, June 2000) Data on this subject for the Brady Interim period prior to the permanent provisions are available in Presale Handgun Checks, the Brady Interim Period, 1994–98 (NCJ 175034, June 1999) Enforcement of the Brady Act, 2010: Federal and State Investigations and Prosecutions of Firearm Applicants Denied by a NICS Check in 2011 https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/bjs/grants/239272.pdf Enforcement of the Brady Act, 2009: Federal and State Investigations and Prosecutions of Firearm Applicants Denied by a NICS Check in 2009 https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/bjs/grants/234173.pdf Enforcement of the Brady Act, 2008: Federal and State Investigations and Prosecutions of Firearm Applicants Denied by a NICS Check in 2008 http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/bjs/231052.pdf Enforcement of the Brady Act, 2007: Federal and State Investigations and Prosecutions of Firearm Applicants Denied by a NICS Check in 2007 http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/bjs/grants/227604.pdf Enforcement of the Brady Act, 2006 http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/bjs/grants/222474.pdf Federal Firearms Cases, FY 2008 http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/bjs/grants/229420.pdf Federal Firearms Cases, FY 2007 http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/bjs/grants/224890.pdf Summary of State Firearm Transfer Laws, December 31, 2013 https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/bjs/grants/248657.pdf The following BJS surveys provide an overview of the firearm check procedures in each of the states and the states’ interaction with NICS: Survey of State Procedures Related to Firearm Sales, 2005 (NCJ 214645, November 2006) Survey of State Procedures Related to Firearm Sales, Midyear 2004 (NCJ 209288, August 2005) Survey of State Procedures Related to Firearm Sales, Midyear 2003 (NCJ 203701, August 2004) Survey of State Procedures Related to Firearm Sales, Midyear 2002 (NCJ 198830, April 2003) Survey of State Procedures Related to Firearm Sales, Midyear 2001 (NCJ 192065, April 2002) Survey of State Procedures Related to Firearm Sales, Midyear 2000 (NCJ 186766, April 2001) Survey of State Procedures Related to Firearm Sales, Midyear 1999 (NCJ 179022, March 2000) Survey of State Procedures Related to Firearm Sales, 1997 (NCJ 173942, December 1998) Survey of State Procedures Related to Firearm Sales, 1996 (NCJ 160705, September 1997) Survey of State Procedures Related to Firearm Sales (NCJ 160763, May 1996) The following BJS survey examines the quality and accessibility of certain criminal and noncriminal records when states conduct a firearm presale background check: Survey of State Records Included in Presale Background Checks: Mental Health Records, Domestic Violence Misdemeanor Records, and Restraining Orders, 2003 (NCJ 206042, August 2004) Trends for Background Checks for Firearm Transfers, 1999–2008 http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/bjs/grants/231187.pdf ************************************************************** The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) of the U.S. Department of Justice is the principal federal agency responsible for measuring crime, criminal victimization, criminal offenders, victims of crime, correlates of crime, and the operation of criminal and civil justice systems at the federal, state, tribal, and local levels. BJS collects, analyzes, and disseminates reliable and valid statistics on crime and justice systems in the United States, supports improvements to state and local criminal justice information systems, and participates with national and international organizations to develop and recommend national standards for justice statistics. Jeri M. Mulrow is acting director. The Regional Justice Information Service (REJIS) prepared these tables under the supervision of Allina D. Lee of BJS. Allen Beck, Ph.D., of BJS provided statistical consultation. Trent D. Buskirk, Ph.D., of REJIS provided statistical and sample design consultation. The tables were prepared under BJS cooperative agreement #2011-BJCX- K017. The BJS-sponsored Firearm Inquiry Statistics program collects information on firearm background checks conducted by state and local agencies and combines this information with Federal Bureau of Investigation National Instant Criminal Background Check System transaction data to create a national estimate of the number of applications received and denied annually pursuant to the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 and similar state laws. Morgan Young edited the report. Barbara Quinn produced the report. June 2016, NCJ 249849 ************************************************************** ************************************************* Office of Justice Programs Innovation * Partnerships * Safer Neighborhoods www.ojp.usdoj.gov ************************************************* ********************** 6/22/2016 2:08pm JER **********************