Uniform Crime Reports
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33
34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50
51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67
68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84
85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101
102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115
Every month, local law enforcement agencies are asked to record for
their jurisdictions the total number of murders, rapes, robberies, aggravated
assaults, burglaries, larcenies, motor vehicle thefts, and arsons on a
form known as UCR Return A.2 For robberies and aggravated assaults,
counts broken down by type of weapon (firearms; knives or cutting instruments;
other weapons; and personal weapons, such as hands, feet, fists,
etc.) are requested. Participation in the UCR program is voluntary.
The UCR Return A data offer a relatively long monthly time series of
robberies and assaults by firearms and other weapons occurring in local
police jurisdictions across the country. However, administrative data such
as UCR have a different set of problems than the NCVS. Foremost among
them is that these data alone cannot be used to draw inferences about
firearms use or victimization in the general population.3 The UCR is a
sample of crimes reported to and recorded by local law enforcement agen-
2The UCR program excludes jurisdictions covered by federal law enforcement agencies.
3In fact, the NCVS was created to address this problem by capturing data on both reported
and unreported crimes, to develop a clearer picture of national crime trends.
cies in the United States. Ideally, they reveal the number of crimes per
month for each of the reporting jurisdictions. Of course, many crimes are
not reported to the police, so increases or decreases in reports for certain
offenses, such as burglary and auto theft, can result in large differences in
outcomes and misleading conclusions about crime trends.
Other reporting problems may further limit the usefulness of these
data. First, the accuracy of UCR data can be compromised by differences in
definitions of crimes and reporting protocols. Local authorities, for example,
might choose criminal charges to achieve certain objectives (e.g.,
increasing plea bargains by downgrading what might otherwise be a charge
of aggravated assault, armed robbery, or rape to a lesser charge that then
gets reported in the UCR).
Second, participation in the UCR program is voluntary, with smaller,
more rural police agencies less likely to submit reports than larger, urban
departments. A review of the preliminary 2000 UCR data posted on the FBI’s
web site indicates that in one large midwestern state, only six cities with
10,000 and over population reported arrest data between January and June.
In all, there were six states that could provide only limited data. For example,
rape data were unavailable for two states because the state reporting agencies
did not follow the national UCR guidelines (http://www.FBI.gov/ucr/
99cius.htm). The committee is not aware of research that details how this
nonresponse problem affects inferences in firearm-related research. Maltz
and Targonski (2002) argue that underreporting in the UCR data may bias
the results of research on right-to-carry laws, but they do not document the
magnitude of these biases (see Chapter 6 for further details).
Finally, because these data are based on monthly counts and not on
individual incidents, only limited detail is available regarding crime circumstances.
There is no information, for example, on the nature or severity of
the injuries inflicted. The Supplemental Homicide Report (which is part of
the UCR program) provides limited information on the relationship between
victim and offender and event circumstances (e.g., whether the homicide
is related to an argument or the commission of another felony).
National Incident-Based Reporting System
The National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS) is designed to
provide detailed incident-level information on crimes, including firearm-related
crimes. It is administered through the FBI’s UCR program and augments
the crime reports of local law enforcement agencies in several key
respects: offense categories are greatly expanded; attributes of individual
crime incidents (offenses, offenders, victims, property, and arrests) can be
collected and analyzed; arrests and clearances can be linked to specific inciMEASURING
dents or offenses; and all offenses in an incident can be recorded and
counted.4 NIBRS is intended to replace the UCR as the nation’s comprehensive,
standardized crime data source based on crimes known to the police.
However, since its blueprint was published in 1985 (Poggio et al.,
1985), only 16 percent of the U.S. population is covered by NIBRS data
(Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2001), with few large cities or urban areas
participating. Thus, at this time, NIBRS is not an effective data set for
studying firearms violence.