Overview
Title
Agency Information Collection Activities: Proposed Collection; Comments Requested; Resinstatment of a Previously Approved Collection: Firearm Inquiry Statistics (FIST) Program
Agencies
ELI5 AI
The Department of Justice wants to hear what people think about collecting information on background checks for people who want to buy guns. They'll ask over a thousand people questions, and it won't take long to answer. But some people are wondering exactly why this information is needed and how it will help people be safer.
Summary AI
The Department of Justice is inviting comments on the reinstatement of the Firearm Inquiry Statistics (FIST) Program, which collects data on background checks for firearm transfers. The program gathers information from state and local agencies about firearm applications, denials, and reasons for denials, and combines this data with national statistics from the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background Check System. This enables the production of comprehensive statistics on firearm applications and denials. The Bureau of Justice Statistics estimates that 1,091 respondents will take part in the survey, with each spending around 25 minutes to complete it, resulting in an estimated total public burden of 455 hours annually. Comments will be accepted until March 16, 2021.
Abstract
The Department of Justice (DOJ), Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics, will be submitting the following information collection request to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
Keywords AI
Sources
AnalysisAI
The document is a notice from the Department of Justice (DOJ) regarding the reinstatement of the Firearm Inquiry Statistics (FIST) Program. This program aims to collect and analyze data on background checks for firearm transfers and permits. By gathering information from state and local agencies on the number of firearm applications, denials, and reasons for those denials, the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) endeavors to create comprehensive national statistics. This information is synthesized with data from the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) to understand firearm application trends and compliance with state and federal laws.
Overview and Purpose
The primary purpose of the FIST Program is to provide a complete picture of firearm transfer processes, particularly the denial rates and reasons, under laws such as the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993. This is achieved by combining state and local data with federal statistics. The DOJ is accepting public comments until March 16, 2021, as part of the Paperwork Reduction Act process. The BJS anticipates around 1,091 respondents will take part, dedicating an estimated 25 minutes each, resulting in a total annual public burden of 455 hours.
Significant Issues and Concerns
Several issues arise from the document:
Necessity and Impact on Functions: The document does not clearly articulate how the data collected will improve the BJS’s functions or contribute to public safety. This lack of specific utility might concern stakeholders interested in understanding the program's practical implications.
Accuracy of Burden Estimates: The methodology used to estimate the public burden of 455 hours is not detailed in the document. This omission could lead to questions about the reliability of the time estimates and the associated administrative burden.
Use of Data for Public Safety: The document does not specify how the compiled data will directly enhance public safety or inform policy changes. Without this information, justifying the data collection might be challenging for stakeholders weighing privacy concerns against public interest benefits.
Public Participation and Feedback: There is no clear indication of how public comments will be incorporated into the decision-making process. This might suggest limited potential for public involvement in shaping the program, which could be of concern to those wishing for a more participative approach.
Potential Impact on the Public
The FIST Program could provide benefits by offering a clearer picture of firearm transfer practices and challenges, potentially informing policy makers and law enforcement. However, the lack of clarity on how exactly the information will be used could raise concerns among privacy advocates and those wary of increased governmental oversight of firearm transactions.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
Law Enforcement and Policy Makers: For these groups, the program offers valuable data for monitoring compliance with firearm-related laws and for adjusting policies to improve firearm safety. This enhances their ability to make informed decisions based on comprehensive data.
State and Local Agencies: Agencies tasked with providing data might face increased administrative responsibilities without clear benefits, depending on the perceived utility of the FIST Program’s findings.
Firearm Owners and Advocates: Stakeholders advocating for privacy and minimal governmental interference might view the program as encroachment, potentially intensifying debates on firearm regulation.
In conclusion, while the FIST Program seeks to compile crucial data on firearm transactions which could serve to inform policy and enhance public safety, its success hinges on transparent processes and meaningful public involvement to address the concerns raised by various stakeholders.
Issues
• The document does not provide specific details on how the information collected will directly improve the functions of the Bureau of Justice Statistics, which could be seen as a lack of clarity regarding its necessity.
• The methodology and assumptions used to estimate the public burden of 455 hours annually are not detailed in the document, which may leave room for questioning the accuracy of the estimates.
• The document lacks information on how the collected data will be used to enhance public safety or policy, which might be important for justifying the necessity of the data collection.
• It is not explicitly clear how the feedback from public comments will be incorporated into the process of the information collection, which might suggest limited public participation in the decision-making process.