Interstate Identification Index: Is it an Effective Weapon in the War Against Violent Crime? Is it Interstate, Does it Identify, and is it an Index? : Hearing Before the Committee on Governmental Affairs, United States Senate, One Hundred Third Congress, Second Session, December 6, 1994

Front Cover
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1995 - Computers - 87 pages
 

Other editions - View all

Common terms and phrases

Popular passages

Page 25 - So you see that while we have come a long way, we still have a long way to go before we fully understand the solar wind.
Page 20 - ... for general audiences. For further information, call 202-786-0267. State Programs — Humanities committees in each of the 50 States, the Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico. and the District of Columbia receive annual grants from the Division of State Programs, which they then regrant to support humanities programs at the local level.
Page 22 - I and some of the states that are participating do so only at a rather minimal level; that is, they have not assumed responsibility for all of the offenders from their States whose records are maintained by the FBI. In order to participate, many of these States need to further automate their criminal records systems and meet those Triple I standards.
Page 76 - Index and the National Fingerprint File provide the means of conducting national criminal record searches (both name searches and fingerprint-based searches) and "pointing" the inquiring agency to the FBI and/or any participating state repository that maintains a criminal record on the subject.. Inquiring agencies are then able to obtain the records directly...
Page 76 - IW4. 2" state repositories are participating in the III system as direct record providers, which means that they are responding to criminal justice requests for their Illindexed records from local, state and federal criminal justice agencies nationwide. The group includes repositories in all of the targest population states.
Page 77 - For tliis reason, the FBI's files of state offenders must continue to be maintained and must be kept up-to-date. CHALLENGES FOR III The III is no longer merely an attractive concept. Ill has proven itself to be a successful and effective, operational system for the delivery of criminal history record information...
Page 57 - New York California North Carolina Colorado North Dakota Connecticut Ohio Delaware Oklahoma Florida Oregon Georgia Pennsylvania Idaho South Carolina Illinois South Dakota Michigan Texas Minnesota Utah Missouri Virginia Montana Washington Nevada Wyoming New Jersey 8 'i_ "3 Or o eg f -, . +3 3 Tf "f ? 0) O O...
Page 76 - At present, except for national security purposes and certain weapons licensing purposes and general noncriminal justice testing in Florida, New Jersey, North Carolina, and Oregon, the system is utilized for criminal justice purposes only. As of this date, 31 state repositories are participating in the III system as direct record providers, which means that they are responding to criminal justice requests for their Ill-indexed records from...
Page 79 - April 21. lWI and evaluation of the progress of the test has been favorable. The test in North Carolina began on February 15. 1993. in order to more fully assess III concept requirements. Oregon began participating in the test in the spring of 1994.
Page 73 - FBI's Advisory Policy Board ( APB). The APB is comprised of Mate and local criminal justice officials and provides a vital link between the FBI and state and local criminal justice information community.

Bibliographic information