If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. (j ",

, ,. () ~ Ii . "ft <, 00 , Iii ',::, iii , 'I

; i: Governor's

"'" " :' !" COlTIlllission on (,

; ': Violent CrilTIe I I rI "I .1 , ;, in ,. \:,

I::111 ,:;'"

Ii: 0 ;['1 Final Report II:! ) Prevention "'I , ~

~ i;1 , ;, 1R?JAc - '/ I'.i '. \() ~ lie Criminal Justice/ Law Enforcement

c I}

G " ,J ~ lanuary, 1994 & _::J tL, ,'" O~.--:_, " e ""' ~ , , ,. '_,",,'¥!i'>o..~~ ____~~~~-:1Ij. ;._...,~ '" "1' ..... ~, ,"",.=~..... ~~"*~~,..""\,~~.• ", .•.• ,~~_. __ ....,~., __ ~.,."",,.,,,,.,.,~.l-"-"""",",~-""> ~~ at. _.~~~.-.-..._ ...... =--

U.S. Department of Justice 146853 Natlona/lnstltute of Justice

This document has been reproduced exactly as received from the person or organization originating it. Points of view or opinions stated in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the 'lfficial position or policies of the National Institute of JUstice. Permissicn to reproduce this copyrighted material has been granted by ....C.DIillIJODwea J tb Of Vi rgi n j a

to------~------ihe National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS). FlJrther reproduction outside of the NCJRS system requires permission ~ of the copyright owner. o o ~ ~ = ~ .. & ~ ~ ~. SS ~ ;:: = o 1-1 ~ ~ rJ.l- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -. CIQ N an ~ -. (10 ~ ~ =... Q ~ = :t. = -.9 =... t'O rJ1 r:I1 jriIaIIo =Q ef:­ ~ \;J ransmittal Letter from Chair O. Randolph Rollins to Governor L. Douglas Wilder

COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA

O. Randolph Rollins Office of the Governor (a04) 796-5351 Secretary of Public Safely Richmond 23219 TOO (a04) 7a6-7765 December, 1993

The Honorable Lawrence Douglas Wilder Governor, Commonwealth of Richmond, Virginia 23219

Dear Governor Wilder:

I am pleased to present to you the Final Report of the Governor' s Commission on .

In creating the Commission, you asked that we make recommendations to reduce violent crime and the fear of crime in Virginia. You identified three primary strategies: (1) to prevent crime in the first place, (2) to solve crime when it occurs and to strengthen the criminal justice system, and (3) to reduce criminal recidivism.

Ov~r a period of 18 months, the Commission has been seriously engaged in this taSK. We heard from experts and from ordinary citizens, and we benefitted from a unique Anti-Crime ForUM held at Virginia Commonwealth University and keynoted by the Attorney General of the United states Janet Reno and by you.

In December 1992, we delivered an interim report containing 30 legislative recommendations. You adopted 14 of those proposals as your 1993 Violent Crime Legislative Initiative, and 13--including the historic one-ha.ndgun-per-month purchase limit--were adopted by the General Assembly. Without doubt, this is the most comprehensive criminal justice legislation ever adopted in the Commonwealth.

In addition to the legislative proposals, the Final Report presents 20 programmatic initiatives which addreEls the causes of violent crime in our society. Many of these programs are included in your 1994-96 executive budget.

While much remains to be done, the Commission believes this Final Report provides, in ~oncrete terms, a blueprint for the Commonwealth as it continues to perform the first mission of government: to preserve and protect the public safety.

Thank you for the opportunity to serve.

Respectful,~ submitted, f!~!~6n~ Chairman

I ___ ~ __ .______~~ ___ ~~ ______~ _____ ~ ______J

Transmittal Letter xecutive Order Authorizing the Establishlnent of the COlnmission on Violent Crilne

COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA Office of the Governor Lawrence Douglas Wilder Goy.rno, Richmond 23219

EXECUTIVE ORDER NUMBER FORTY-EIGHT (92)

CREATING GOVERNOR'S COMHISSION ON VIOLENT CRIME

By virtue of the authority vested in me as Governor under Article V of the and, including, but not limited to, Section 2.1-51.35 of the Code of Virginia, and subject to my continuIng and ultimate authority and responsibility to act in such matters, I hereby create the Governor's Commission on Violent Crime. The Commission is classified as a gubernatorial advisory commission in accordance with Sections 2.1-51.35 and 9-5.25 of the Code of Virginia. The Commission shall have the specific duty of advising the Governor on: how the Commonwealth could further address and reduce the escalating frequency "The Commonwealth call't and impact of violent crime, particular1y of , aggravated just stand still and take assault, rape and other serious sex offenses; the causes of and offenders responsible for violent crime; the role of firearms and firearms trafficking reactive steps. We must be in violent crime; and violent crime committed by juveniles. The Commission bold ifwe are to tum the tide shal' pay particular attention to violent crime, its causes an~ impacts for against criminality and large urban areas and the potential for violent crime to develop into mass violence. The Commission shall also explore opportunities for cooperation violence ill our state and 0111' among jurisdictions and between the public and the private sectors, nation .... Finding solutions to these problems will take In making its recommendations, the Commission shall consider the following strategies, among others, for the reduction of violent crime and the fear of courage and innovation. W2 crime in Virginia: (1) to prevent crime from occurring In the first place; (2) canllot legislate opportunity, to solve crime when it occurs and to strengthen the crIminal justice system through new laws, procedures, resources and techniques which will expedite nor hard work or responsi­ verdicts, provide meaningful sanctions and protect the rights of all persons; bility and the Jleed to restore and (3) to reduce criminal recidivism by eqUipping offenders with SKills and the family unit. " perspectives to return to society as productive citizens. The Commission shall make legislative and budget recommendations for the Governor's consideration for the 1993 and 1994 sessions of the General Assembly, having Govemor L. Douglas Wilder due regard for Virginia's financial projections. The Secretary of Public Safety shall serve as Chair of the Commission and the Governor's Special Assistant for Drug Policy will serve as Co-Chair. Members of the Commission shall be appointed by the Governor and shall serve at his pleasure. The Commission shall consist of no more than 15 members, including state and local representatives of criminal justice agencies and the courts, local officials, corrections officials, a legislative representative,

TODJ71·8015

Executive Order EXECUTIVE ORDER NUMBER FORTY-EIGHT (92) Page 2

the Office of the Governor, and others. My initial appointments are attached as Appendix I of this executive order. Such funding as is necessary for the fulfillment of the Commission's responsibilities during the term of its existence shall be provided by federal anti-crime grant funds and by the Secretary of Public Safety. Other support as Is necessary for the conduct of the Commission's business during the term of its existence may be provided by such executive branch public safety agencies as the Governor may from time to time designate. Total expenditures for the Commission's work are estimated to be $25,000. Such staff support as is necessary for the conduct of the Commission's business during the term of Its existence will be provided by the Office of the Secretary of Public Safety or provided by such executive branch agencies as the Governor may from time to time designate. An estimated 5,000 hours of staff support ;111 be required to assist the Commission. Members of the Commission shall be reimbursed only for reasonable and necessary expenses incurred In the performance of their official duties. Tn JUlle 1993, Govel7lor Wilder issued Executive The Commission shall complete Its examinations of these matters and report to the Governor no later than June, 1993. It may t~sue Interim reports and Order Number Seventy-olle make recommendations at any time It deems necessary. (93) continuing the This Executive Order shall become effective June 15, 1992, and shall Govel7lor's Commission Oil remain in full force and effect until June 14, 1993, unless amended or Violellt Crime Ulltil rescinded by further executive order. December 31, 1993. Given under my hand and under the Seal of the Commonwealth of Virginia this ~ day of June, 1992.

~rrt.~ Secretary of the Commonwealth

Executive Order overnor's Commission on Violent Crime Afembers

Governor Wilder with members ofthe Commission on Violent Crime. Seated from left to right: Helen Fahey; Robert Ball; Governor Wilder; Chair O. Randolph Rollills; Walter Feltoll. Standing, left to right: Charles Kehoe; J. Dean Lewis; Richard CuI/en; Buford Parsons, Jr.; Clarence Jackson; Jorman Granger; Vicechair, Robert Northern; Lindsay Dorrier and Edward Murray. Members not present: V. Stuart Cook; Carl Baker and Pat Minetti.

Chair and • The Honorable Ii Robert B. Northern O. Randolph Rollins Special Assistant for Drug Policy Vicechair Secretary of Public Safety Governor's Office Commission Chair Commission Vicechair

Commission The Honorable V. Stuart Cook • Robert B. Ball, Sr. • Sheriff Idembers Member Hanover County Virginia House of Delegates Colonel Carl R. Baker Jorman D. Granger • Superintendent • Deputy Chief of Staff Virginia State Police Governor's Office

El The Honorable II Clarence L. Jackson Lindsay G. Dorricil', Jr. Chair Director Virginia Parole Board Criminal Justice Services The Honorable Edward W. Murray • Helen F. Fahey • Director U. S. Attorney Corrections U. S. Department of Justice

II The Honorable Pat G. Minetti Buford M. Pa:rsons, Jr. • Chief of Police Circuit Court Judge City of Hampton Henrico County The Honorable Charles J. Kehoe • Richard Cullen • Director Attorney Youth and Family Services McGuire, Woods, Battle and Boothe The Honorable • J. Dean Lewis Juvenile Court Judge Fredericksburg, Virginia

Commission Members overnor's Commission on Violent Crime Staff

GOl'el'/lor Wilder with staffmelllbers 10 the Commission on Violent Crime. Seated from left 10 right: Eric Finkbeiner; staff director Richard Kern; Robert Ball; Governor Wilder; Chair O. Randolph Rollins; Kim HI/lit; Jim Davis. Standing. left to right: Linda Nablo; Dennis Waite; staff leader. Kirk Showalter; Forrest Powell; staff leader Pat Harris; Mellie Randall; James McDonough; staff leader Jeny COlineI'; CarUe Merritt and Walter Feltoll. Members not present: John Britton; GUllnar Kohlbeck; Dick Hall-Sizemor'!.

Staff Director III Dr. Richard P. Kern Criminal Justice Sen'ices Criminal Justice Research Center Staff Director to the Commission

Criminal Justice/ Crime Prevention Law Enforcement Innzate Productivity Subcommittee Subcolnmittee Subcolnmittee

III Pat Harris .. Major Jerry Connor Kirk Showalter Criminal Justice Services Virginia State Police • Planning and Budget Staff Leader Staff Leader Staff leader

II Mellie Randall John Britton III Dr. Dennis Waite Mental Health, Mental Retardation • Corrections Youth and Family Services and Substance Abuse Services Linda Nablo Jim Davis .. Gunnar Kohlbeck • Youth and Family Selvices • Correctional Education Virginia State Police .. Dick Hall-Sizemore I!III Dr. Kim Hunt Planning and Budget Criminal Justice Selvices

II Forrest Powell Corrections General Resource

The Honorable • TheophiIise Twitty Deputy Secretary of Public Safety Governor's Cabinet .. The Honorable This report was prepared by the Department of Crilllinal Justice se~ Walter Felton Administrative Coordinator Development and editing: Layout and design: Commonwealth's Attomeys' I f • Dr. James McDonough, • Carlie Merritt Services Council Project Coordinator Division of Information Systems and Eric Finkbeiner • Dr. Jim Creech Technology • Criminal Justice Services • Carolyn Williamson • Richard Cross III Kris Ragan Criminal Justice Research Center Criminal Justice Services

Commission Staff able of Contents Executive Summary ...... i

Section I: Violent Crime Trends and Issues ...... 1

Violent Crime Rates for The United States (1992) ...... 2 Violent Crime Rates for Virginia Localities (1990-1992) ...... 4 Violent Crime Rate Trends for Virginia (1980-1992) ...... 6 Violent Crime Trends for Murder, Rape, Robbery and Aggravated Assault in Virginia (1980-1992) ...... 6 Types of Weapons Used in Virginia (1992) ...... 8 Prior Criminal Record for Violent Felons in Virginia (1990-1992) ...... 8 Juvenile Violent Crime Arrests in Virginia (1980-1992) ...... 10 Schedule IIII Drug Arrests Involving Juveniles (1932-1992) ...... 10 Age Distribution for Murder Arrests in Virginia (1991) ...... 11 Virginia Population F<;timates for Persons Age 15 to 24 ...... 11 Summary of Violent Crime Trends and Issues ...... 12

Section II: The Governor's Commission on Violent Crime ...... 13

• Introduction ...... 14 Members of the Violent Crime Commission ...... ,...... 14 The Commission's Work ...... 15 Commission Meetings and Testimony ...... 16 Active Role of the Governor and Commission Members ...... 20

Section ill: Legislative Recommendations ...... 21

• Introduction to Recommendations Enacted by the 1993 General Assembly ...... 22 One Handgun Per Month Purchase Limit ...... 22 Firearms Dealers: Record KeepinglPenalty Enhancement...... 22 Juvenile Possession of Hall~guns ...... 23 Juvenile Criminal History Records ...... 23 Destruction of Seized Weapons ...... 24 Require Presentence Reports for Felony Convictions to Contain Juvenile Criminal History Record Information ...... 24 Increased Penalty for Obstruction of Justice ...... 24 Serious or Habitual Offender Comprehensive Action Programs ...... 25 Increased Maximum Penalty for Second-Degree Murder ...... 25 Amended Parole Eligibility for Violent Offenders ...... 26 Out-of-State Prison Commitments as Parole Eligibility Factor ...... 26 Provide Enhanced Prior Notice of Prisoner Releases ...... 27 Joint Preliminary Hearings and Tlials ...... 27 Purpose of Zoning Ordinances Amended to In.::lude Crime Prevention ...... 28 Study a Safer By Design Community Program ...... 28 Expanded Juvenile Work Programs ...... 29 Increased Inmate Work Programs ...... 29 Study the Effects of Cultural Insensitivity on Violent Crime ...... 30 Truth-In-Sentencing Commission Established ...... 30

• Introduction to Other Legislative Recommendations ...... 31 Increase the Penalty for Carrying a Concealed Firearm ...... 31 Enact a Three-Day Waiting Period for Handgun Purchases ...... 31 Allow Authority for Local Firearms Ordinances ...... 31 Authorize State Police to License Firearms Dealers ...... 31 Authorize State Police to Require State Pelmits for Gun Shows ...... 32 Allow Public Adjudication of Serious Juvenile Offenders ...... 32

Table ojContell{s able of Contents, continued Authorize Bifurcated Trials ...... 32 Amend Parole Eligibility Laws for Sex Offenders ...... 33 Authorize State Police to Run Witness Protection Program ...... 33 1993 Budget Initiatives ...... 34

Section IV: Programmatic Recommendations ...... 35

• Introduction to Programmatic Recommendations ...... 35 • Introduction to Crime Prevention Subcommittee Programmatic Recommendations ...... 36 Fund Community Crime Prevention Services ...... 36 Fund the Incident-Based Crime Reporting System ...... 36 Fund One-To-One Mentoring Programs ...... 37 Implement Programs to Reduce Youth Violence ...... 37 Provide Funding to Expand Court Appointed Special Advocates ...... 37 Fund Community Policing Training ...... 38 Fund a Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design Curriculum ...... 38 Continue Funding the Governor's Anti-Crime Partnership ...... 39 Provide Funds to Improve Retail Store Employee Safety ...... 39 • Introduction to Criminal JusticelLaw Enforcement Subcommittee Programmatic Recommendations ...... 40 Increase Prosecutorial Resources ...... 40 Provide Increased Training for Commonwealth's Attorneys ...... 40 Create a Statewide Toll-Free Victim Assistance Telephone Line ...... 41 Fund Statewide Victim Assistance Programs ...... 41 Fund a Virginia Witness Protection Program ...... 42 Reallocate Undisbursed Crime Victims' Compensation Funds ...... 42 Include MunicipallViisdemeanors in Victims' Compensation Funding ...... 43 Create a Unified Criminal Justice Decision Support System Committee ...... 43 • Introduction to Inmate Productivity Subcommittee Programmatic Recommendations ...... 44 Provide Vocational Assessmen~ in Adult Institutions ...... 44 Expand Prison Work Release Facilities ...... 44 Provide Working Capital for Virginia Correctional Enterprises ...... 45 Pilot Test Work Release Programs for Local Jail Inmates ...... 45 Expand Correctional Substance Abuse Programs ...... 46 Expand and Coordinate Inmate Community Aftercare Services ...... 46 Expand Home Electronic Monitoring Programs ...... 47 Evaluate Alternative Sanction Programs ...... 47 Train Judges on Available Intermediate Sanctions ...... 48 Train Probation and Parole Officers in Sex Offender Supervision ...... 48 Pilot Test Intensive Supervision Program for Sex Offenders ...... 49 Evaluate the Effectiveness of Sex Offender Treatment ...... 49 Use Risk Assessment Scales for Intermediate Sanction Candidates ...... 50

Appendices A. Meeting Dates of the Governor's Commission on Violent Crime ...... 51 B. Participants in Programs to Combat Violent Crime: The COlnmunity Reacts ...... 52

Acknowledgements ...... 53

Sources ...... 54

Special Report: Guns and Violent Crime ...... 55

Table of Contents xecutive Summary

In June, 1992 Governor L. Douglas additional meetings in 1993, including a Wilder created the Governor's Commis­ public forum to discuss its programmatic sion on Violent Crime. The Commission and budgetary recommendations. Fol­ was given the task of providing the lowing the fomm, the Commission se­ ( Governor with recommendations on: lected its priority issues and presented 1/ Ii reducing and preventing violent crime, them for consideration in the Governor's strengthening the criminal justice budget for the upcoming biennium. system by improving laws, procedures and practices, expediting verdicts and providing meaningful sanctions for of­ The report is divided into five major fenders, and reducing inmate recidivism sections. The Commission recognized by improving their ability to success­ that any deliberations concerning violent fully return to society. crime must be based on an understanding of violent crime. Therefore, Section I contains the information presented to the The Governor directed the Commis­ Commission to define the problem ithad sion to develop legislative and budget­ to address: the extent and nature of vio­ ary recommendations for the General lent crime in Virginia, and the factors Assembly. This report examines the that contribute to the recent increases in findings and recommendations that violence. resulted from the Commission's work in the areas of crime prevention, criminal Although in 1992 Virginia ranked justice system improvements, and re­ only 36th nationally in violent crime, its ductions in recidivism. crime rate has risen dramatically in re­ cent years. Between 1987 and 1992, all categories of violent crime increased: The Commission was composed of murders by 20%, rapes by 22%, robber­ 15 members and chaired by Secretary of ies by 33% and aggravated assaults by Public Safety O. Randolph Rollins. 43 %. Contrary to some perceptions, these Members included state and local increases were not confined to the cities. representatives of criminal justice During this period, violent crime in­ agencies and the courts, local officials, creased by 18% in suburban areas, 22% correctional officials, a legislative rep­ in rural areas, and 29% in central cities. resentative, the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia, and a An ominous trend in Virginia's vio­ Commonwealth's Attorney. lent crime statistics is the sharp increase in juvenile involvement in these Climes. The rate of juvenile arrests for all violent The Commission's approach was to crimes increased more than 60% between gather facts regarding the problems fac­ 1980 and 1992; for murder arrests, the ing the Commonwealth and develop increase was more than 250%. Among strategies to address these problems. The persons arrested for murder in Virginia, Commission and its subcommittees held the most common age is 19. meetings during 1992, including three public hearings throughout the state. In January, 1993, the Commission's legis­ Section I emphasizes that increases lative recommendations were presented in violent crime come despite more than to the General Assembly. Following the a decade-long decrease in the number of legislati ve session, the Commission held Virginia's population in the "crime

Executive Summary xecutive Summary, continued

prone" age group of 15 to 24 year-olds. improving records on firearm purchases The fact that the number of persons in and on juveniles who commit serious this group is forecasted to begin lising offenses, increasing penalties and within several years may signal that even tightening parole eligibility for certain greater increases in violent clime will offenders, and other issues. Most of occur in the late 1990s. This forecast has these recommendations received led some to call for Virginia to begin bipartisan support in the General preparing to deal with this increase be­ Assembly. fore it occurs. The Commission's work is a major step in this preparation. Section IV of the report describes the programmatic recommendations de­ veloped by the Commission. These Section II provides a detailed look at initiatives do not require amending Vir­ how the Commission was created and ginia law but do require funding or other how it performed its duties. The Com­ action to create or expand programs mission di vided itself into three subcom­ aimed at dealing with violent crime. mittees, each addressing specifIc com­ ponents of the violent crime problem. The recommendations, developed The ~ommission and its subcommittees after extensive subcommittee delibera­ heard testimony from various climinal tions and with widepread citizen in­ justice specialists, representatives from volvement through healings and the plivate and public organizations, as well public forum, will be offered to the 1994 as concerned citizens. General Assembly. Major initiatives included in the Commission's recom­ In addition, the Commission included mendations involve expanded funding Democrats and Republicans a statewide survey of Virginia adults to for the Governor's Anti -Clime Partner­ together promoted the passage of the One-Handgun-a-Month determine their attitudes on violent crime ship, increased inmate work opportuni­ legislation proposed by the issues and a widely publicized public ties, added prosecutolialresources, new Governor's Commission on forum to elicit input and support from funding for mentoring programs for at­ Violent Crime. Pictured with diverse groups and individuals from Vir­ risk youth, and other programs. Governor Wilder are Secretary ginia. Drawing on this information, the O. Randolph Rollins, Lt. Commission first developed a package Governor Don Beyer, Commis­ of legislative recommendations, then Section V of the report is a special sion Member Richard Cullen budgetary and programmatic recom­ feature dealing with firearms and the and U.S. Senator John Warner. mendations for combatting violent role of firearms in violent crime. clime. Despite the growing attention being focused on gun violence, there has been limited information available to date on Section III describes the leg­ the link between guns and violent crime. islative recommendations the In order to better inform policy makers Commission developed. The regarding firearms and violent crime, Commission produced 14 rec­ this section of the report focuses on the ommendations for legislative prevalence of guns in crime, the in­ action by the 1993 General volvement of juveniles in crimes using Assembly. These recommen­ guns, the types of weapons used in crime, dations were aimed at reducing how criminals get their firearms, and the availability of handguns what firearms laws currently exist and to offenders and juveniles, how these laws are used.

ii Executive SlIlIllIlGI)' Section I:

Violent Crime Trends and Issues

" ... Poverty, breakdowns in families, drugs - nothing is an excuse for putting a gun up beside somebody's head."

u.s. Attorney General Janet Reno June, 1993 Governor's Forum on Violent Crime

Tr.!flds alld Issues Page 1 ,.. Violent Crime Rates for the United States (1992)

To understar..d Virginia's violent ranks are shown in darker colors, and crime problem, it helps to put the prob­ states with lower ranks are shown in lem in perspective by comparing violent lighter colors. crime rates in Virginia and other states. • Virginia's crime rate ranks lower Display 1 compares the overall than most U.S. states. Virginia's rate, violent crime rank for each of the 375 crimes per 100,000 population, continental states and the District of ranked 36th among the states. This Columbia in the year 1992 and Display compares to the nation's highest violent 2 presents the numerical violent crime crime rate of 2,833 in the District of rat0 for each state. Violent crime rates Columbia and the nation's lowest rate of include these offenses defined by the 83 in North Dakota. Uniform Crime Reporting system: mur­

More thall 1.9 millioll via/em crimes der/non-negligentmanslaughter, forcible • Virginia's violent crime rate also were reported to /a\V enforcemellt au­ rape, robbery, and aggravated assault. ranks lower than most other Southern thorities ill the U.S. during 1992. All of these offenses involve the use of states and states that border Virginia. As force or the threat of force. The overall aregion, the South had an overall violent violent crime rate for each state is ex­ crime rate of 810 - more than twice pressed as the number of violent crimes Virginia's rate. Among Southern states reported to law enforcement per 100,000 and states bordering Virginia, only West people in the states's population. Virginia (211) had a lower violent crime rate. On the map below, states are ranked in five categories based on their relative vio­ • Virginia's violent crime rate ranks lent crime rates. States with the higher near those of several Western and Mid­ western states such as Idaho (281), Display 1 Minnesota (338), Nebraska (349), Utah (290) and Wyoming (319). Virginja's Violent Crime Rankings for U.S. rank is also comparable to the Eastern 1992 states of Pennsylvania (427) and Rhode Island (394).

• States with the highest violent crime rates include those with the nation's largest urban areas: (1,120), Illinois (977), and (1,122). However, some predominantly rural states also had comparable high rates: Alabama (872), New Mexico (935) and (944).

• States with the lowest violent crime Violent Crime Rankings rates were predominantly rural states • 1-10 in the Midwest and New England:

• 11-20 Maine (131), Montana (170), New Hampshire (126), South Dakota (194) 21·30 o and Vermont (109). D 31·40 D 41·51

Page 2 Trends alld Issues •

Display 2 1992 Violent Crime in the United States

Number of Rate Per Number of Rate Per Rank State Violent Crimes 100,000 Rank State Violent Crimes 100,000 r 1 Washington D.C. 16,685 2,832.8 27 Washington 27,454 534.5 I _a ______~,_\l ______2 Florida 162,827 1,207.2 28 Ohio 57,935 525.9 During the past de(:alJei Virginia's 3 New York 203,311 1,122.1 29 Kansas 12,888 510.8 overall violent crime rate has never ranked greater than 34th among rhe 50 4 Califomia 345,624 1,119.7 30 Oregon 15,189 510.2 states ah1 the District of Colllmbia. 5 49,085 1,000.1 31 Indiana 28,791 508.5 ----~?r!------6 Louisana 42,209 984.6 32 Connecticut 16,252 495.3

7 Illinois 113,664 977.3 33 Pennsylvania 51,276 427.0

8 South Carolina 34,029 944.5 34 MississIppi 10,763 411.7

9 New Mexico 14,781 934.9 35 Rhode Island 3,965 394.5

10 Alabama 36,052 871.7 36 Virginia 23,907 374.9

11 Texas 142,369 806.3 37 Nebraska 5,598 348.6

)) 12 Massachusetts 46,727 779.0 38 Minnesota 15,144 338.0 17

13 Michigan 72,672 770.1 39 Wyoming 1,489 319.5 () 14 37,487 746.2 40 Utah 5,267 290.5

15 Missouri 38,448 740.4 41 Idaho 3,003 281.4

16 Georgia 49,496 733.2 42 Iowa 7,816 278.0 o 17 Nevada 9,247 696.8 43 Wisconsin 13,806 275.7 18 46,600 681.0 44 Hawaii 2,998 258.4 o 19 Arizona 25,706 670.8 45 West Virginia. 3,833 211.5 20 Alaska 3,877 660.5 46 South Dakota 1,383 194.5

21 48,745 625.8 47 Montana 1,400 169.9

22 Oklahoma 20,005 622.8 48 M1ine 1,616 130.9

23 Delaware 4,280 621.2 49 New Hampshire 1,397 125.7 24 Colorado 20,086 578.8 50 Vermont 624 109.5 o Arkansas 13,831 576.5 51 North Dakota 530 83.3 l"26 Kentucky 20,107 535.5

• Virginia's violent crime rate has average, Virginia's rate for specific types o consistently ranked below that of other of violent crimes is below the national U.S. states. During the last 10 years, average. In 1992, Virginia's rate per Virginia's rate has never ranked 100,000 people for murder/noll-negli­ greater than 34th among the 50 states gent manslaughter (8.8), forcible rape and District of Columbia. (31.5), robbery (138) and aggravated assault (197) were also below the In addition to having an overall national rate. violent crime rate below the national

Trends alld Issues Page 3 Ii

Display 3 Violent Crime Rate for Virginia Localities 3 Year Average

1990 -1992 Violent Crime Rates:

.788 -1604 III 258 - 687 0178 -236 0 129-174 023-124

Note: Numbers in map represent location codes shown in table.

Lccality Location Rank Locality Location Rank Locality Location Ra"J< Locality Locaul~n Rank Accomack I 72 Giles 35 III Pittsylvania 69 101 Colonial Heights 103 59 Albemarle 2 83 Gloucester 36 110 Powhatan 70 134 Covington 104 55 Alleghany 3 105 Goochland 37 133 Prince Edward 71 37 Danville 105 29 Amelia 4 68 Grayson 38 135 Prince George 72 69 Emporia 106 8 Amherst 5 35 Greene 39 62 Prince William 73 48 Fairfax 107 32 Appomattox 6 104 Greensville 40 50 Pulaski 74 54 Falls Church 108 17 Arlington 7 21 Halifax 41 76 Rappahannock 75 85 Franklin 109 11 Augusta 8 15 Hanover 42 106 Richmond County 76 109 Fredericksburg 110 16 Bath 9 I,,;) Henrico 43 36 Roanoke County 77 71 Galax III 67 Bedford 10 124 Henry 44 89 Rockbridge 78 112 Hampton 112 20 Bland 11 121 Highland 45 113 Rockingham 79 128 Harrisonburg 113 91 Botetourt 12 126 Isle of Wight 46 66 Russell 80 129 Hopewell 114 12 Brunswick 13 45 James City 47 28 Scott 81 81 Lexington il5 87 Buchanan 14 70 King and Queen 48 31 Shenandoah 82 123 Lynchburg 116 10 Buckingham 15 34 King George 49 92 Smyth 83 79 Manassas 117 39 Campbell 16 33 King William 50 43 Southampton 84 73 Manassas Park 118 77 Caroline 17 26 Lancaster 51 49 Spotsylvania 85 119 Martinsville 119 9 Carroll 18 117 Lee 52 78 Stafford !i6 75 Newport News 120 7 Charles City 19 86 Loudoun 53 65 Surry 87 23 Norfolk 121 4 Charlotte 20 22 Louisa 54 56 Sussex 88 19 Norton 122 30 Chesterfield 21 84 Lunenburg 55 44 Tazewell 89 40 Petersburg 123 2 Clarke 22 58 Madison 56 93 Warren 90 103 Poquoson 124 51 Craig 23 136 Mathews 57 115 Washington 91 94 Portsmouth 125 3 Culpep

LocatiollllulIlbers J through 95 represent COl/llty localities alld 96 through J36 represent City localities.

Page 4 Trends and [ssues Violent Crime Rates for Virginia Localities (1990-1992) I The map and accompanying table in rate localities lie within the "urban Display 3 present the overall violent crime crescent" which stretches from Northern rate and rank for each of Virginia's 136 Virginia southward to Richmond, then cities and counties. Rates are based on the east to the area. number of violent crimes reported to law enforcement per 100,000 people in the • Not all localities with high violent locality's populativn. Rates presented crime rates were large urban areas. For here are based on a three-year average of example, Winchester (923), Emporia violent crimes reported in the years 1990, (831) and Martinsville (800) have popu­ 1991 and 1992. A multi-year average lations less than 25,000, yet had violent provides a more stable indicator of violent crime rates comparable to some large crime in a locality than a rate based on a urban areas. o single year. This is especially important when comparing local-level crime rates • Localities with the lowest violent because localities with small populations crime rates tended to be in rural areas, and few violent crimes may have crime primarily in the western regions of the rates which vary dramatically from year state. Craig County, with 23 violent to year based on small changes in the crimes per 100,000 population, had the number of crimes. lowest violent crime rate in the Cor,1- monwealth. On the adjacent map, localities are ranked in five categories based on their • Violent crime rates can vary between relative violent crime rates. Localities localities for different reasons. There­ with the higher ranks are shown in fore, caution should be used when com­ darker colors, and localities with lower paring rates in different localities. For ranks are shown in lighter colors. The example, localities with large, tempo­ c D four lightest colors each represent about rary influxes of nonresidents such as 25 percent of the localities. The darkest tourists, commuters, military personnel burgundy color represents the 10 locali­ or students may have artificially high ties with highest violent crime rates in crime rates because these large numbers the state. The name, location and violent of people are potential crime victims (or crime rank for each locality is shown in perpetrators), but are not counted among the table below the map. the localities' population when crime rates are calculated. Rates may also • Generally, the more densely popu­ differ due to variations in victim lated urban areas of Virginia had the reporting practices in the localities. highest violent crime rates. The City of Localities with domestic violence Richmond had the highest violent crime centers, rape counseling centers and simi­ rate, with 1604 violent crimes per lar programs may report higher violf'nt 100,000population. Other localities with crime rates because there are more high violent crime rates were Peters­ opportunities for victims to come burg (1313), Portsmouth (1155), and forward and report such crimes. Norfolk(1108). Many of the high crime

Trends and Issues Page 5 Violent Crime Rate Trends for Virginia (1980 - 1992)

Violent crime can also be under­ and the rising number of juveniles stood by examining how crime rates becoming involved in violent crime. change over time. Display 4 presents a historical look at the overall violent Display 5 crime rate in Virginia for the period 1980 Growth in Violent Crime through 1992, and allows an examina­ by Location (1987 - 1992) tion of both short and long-term violent 29% crime trends. The violent crime rate is expressed as number of violent crimes 22% reported to law enforcement per 100,000 population.

• Virginia's violent crime rate increased by 23% from 1980to 1992. In Central City Suburbs Rural 1980, there were 307 violent crimes per 100,000 population. By 1992, this figure had risen to 378 violent crimes per 100,000. Nearly all of this increase oc­ Violent Crime Rate Trends curred between 1987 and 1992. for Murder, Rape, Robbery • The violent crime rate showed a and Aggravated Assault minor peak in 1981, then declined dur­ in Virginia (1980-1992) ing the early tomid-1980s. Violent crime reached its lowest point in 1983 (292 Virginia's overall violert crime rate violent crimes per 100,000). is composed of four types G,; violent crimes: murder/nonnegligent man­ Display 4 e The violent crime rate began slaughter, forcible rape, robbery and Virginia Violent Crime Rate torisein 1988, then rose sharply aggravated assault. Each of these of­ 400 (1980 - 1992) in 1990 and again in 1991. In fenses occur with different frequencies, 350 1991, violent crime reached its so it is impossible to describe the occur­ 300 higbest rate (379 violent crimes rence of each offense in Virginia using 250 per 100,000). the overall violent crime rate. Displays 200 6 - 9 present the violent crime rate for 150 • The increase in violent crime each of these offenses over the period 100 was not restricted to urban ar­ 1980 to 1992. When comparing rates in

50 eas. As seen in Display 5, vio­ lent crime increased in urban, o Display 6 suburban and rural areas. Virginia Murder Rate 10 (1980 - 1992) Criminologists and others have 9 attributed the rise in violent crime during the late 1980s and early 1990s to several different factors. One factor was an increase in the sale and use of "crack" 4 cocaine, which was accompanied by vio­ 3 lent turf wars between crack dealers 2 competing to distribute and sell the drug. o Other factors cited include the increasing availability and firepower of handguns

Page 6 Trends and Issues the four displays, note that the crime rate and reached its highest point (31.9 rapes scales differ on each graph. per 100,000) in 1992.

• Virginia's murder/nonnegligent Display 8 manslaughter rate showed the smallest Virginia Robbery Rate increase ofthe four types of violent crimes (1980 - 1992) from 1980 to 1992. The murder rate increased by less than four percent dur­ ing this period, from 8.6 per 100,000 population in 1980 to 8.9 iv 1992. 0- 0

• Although Virginia's murder rate in 1992 was similar to that in 1980, the rate varied during the years between 1980 and 1992. Compared to 1980 and 1981, the murder rate generally decreased from 1981 through 1986. The murder rate reached its lowest point in 1983 • Virginia's robbery rate increased by (7 murders per 100,000). 16% from 1980 to 1992. The robbery rate reached a minor peak in 1981, then • Beginning in 1987 the murder rate decreased to its lowest point (101 rob­ began to increase, and rose sharply in beries per 100,000) in 1985. 1990 and 1991. The murder rate reached its highest point in 1991 (9.4 murders • Beginning in 1986 the robbery rate per 100,000). The murder rate decreased began to increase. The robbery rate o in 1992 from its peak in 1991. increased sharply in 1990 and 1991, and reached its highest point (140 robberies Display 7 per 100,000) in 1991. In 1992, the rob­ Virginia Rape Rate 35 bery rate remained close to its high 1991 (1980 - 1992) rate. 30 25 • Virginia's aggravated assault rate 20 showed the greatest increase of the

15 violent crime types from 1980 to 1992. Aggravated assault increased by 33% 10 during this period, from 150 assaults 5 per 100,000 in 1980 to 200 r---....l------'-----, Display 9 0 0 N .., .,., .... 0 ;;; 00 00 ;1; 00 ~ 00 gg g; ;;; assaults per 100,000 in 1992. Virginia Aggravated Assault Rate ~ S!) S!) ~ S!) S!) ~ S!) ~ ~ '"~ ~ '"~ 200 (1980 - 1992) • The aggravated assault rate 180 • Virginia's forcible rape rate increased reached its lowest points (150 160 by 17% from 1980 to 1992. Like the assaults per 100,000) in 1980 and 140 murder rate, the rape rate decreased in 1983. 120 the early 1980s and reached its lowest 100 80 point (24.7 rapes per 100,000) in 1983. • The aggravated assault rate 60 increased sharply in 1989, 1990 4n • Beginning in 1988 the rape rate be­ and 1991, and reached its highest 20 gan to increase. This increase continued point (200 assaults per 100,000) o 0 on 00 0;:; &l '"00 ;1; 00 ~ during the late 1980s and early 1990s, in 1992. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Trellds alld issues Page 7 m ttt Types of Weapons Used in Prior Criminal Record for Virginia Murders (1992) Violent Felons in Virginia (1990-1992) In 1992, law enforcement agencies reported 563 murders and non-negligent An offender's prior criminal history homicides committed in Virginia. Dis­ is the single best predictor of future play 10 indicates the types of weapons crime activity. Previous Virginia research used to commit these murders. has shown that felons incarcerated by the Department of Corrections often • Firearms were used to commit nearly have criminal records showing offenses three-quarters of all the murders com­ committed prior to their incarceration. mitted in Virginia in 1992. Eighty-three percent of the firearms used to commit Display 12 presents the prior crimi­ Display 11 murders in Virginia were handguns. nal history of violent felons sentenced Murders Involving Handguns to Virginia prisons during the period 350 • Ten percent of the firearms used to 1990-1992. Prior records are shown for 3(1() commit murders in Virginia were shot­ offenders incarcerated for murder, rape/ 250 guns, and 5% were rifles. sodomy (victim less than 13 years old), 200 rape/sodomy (victim 13 years old or ISO .. Knives or other cutting instruments greater), robbery, and aggravated 100 were used to commit 12% of the mur­ assault. Prior record is also shown for SO ders committed in Virginia, hands or feet all violent offenders combined. Per­ were used to commit 6%, clubs or other 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 centages for each offense type do not blunt instruments were used to commit total to 100% because prior misdemean­ Three-quarters of the homicides 5 % and 5 % were committed with poison, ors are not included. in Virginia are committed with a explosives, fire, narcotics, drowning, firearm, and more than 80% of the strangulation, asphyxiation and other • Overall, about one in five violent firearms used are handguns. Much weapons or methods. offenders had a prior conviction for a ofthe increase in murders and other nonviolent felony. About one in five had violent crimes in Virginia and the Handguns were clearly the weapon nation has been linked to the a prior conviction for another violent of choice in homicides committed dur­ proliferation of handguns. This felony. Only about one in four offenders display presents the numberofmur­ ing 1992. Although the preference for had no prior felony conviction. ders committed with a handgun in handguns is not new, there has been a Virginia during the six-year period dramatic increase in the number of • Robbers were the most likely to have 1987 to 1992. The number ofmur­ handgun murders in recent years. Dis­ a prior nonviolent felony conviction and ders committed using a handgun play 11 illustrates the rise in the number the most likely to have a prior conviction during this period increased by more of handgun murders in Virginia between than 50%. for a felony similar to robbery. One in 1987 and 1992. four robbers had previously been con­ victed of another robbery. About one in Display 10 seven rapists (victim 13 years old or Weapons Used for MurderINonnegligent greater) had previously been convicted Manslaughter (1992) of a similar crime. Unknown 2% Rifle 5% Shotgun 10% • Murderers and rapists (victim less than 13 years old) were the violent Club 5% offenders least likely to have a prior Other 4% Firearms 72% felony conviction. About one-third of Handgun 83% these offenders had no prior felony conviction.

Page 8 Trends and Issues r~--"'------'-'------'-l

I i Display 12 Prior Criminal Record for Violent Felons in Virginia I j By Current Conviction (1990 - 1992) f I Murder I I, Rape/ Sodomy Greater Than 13 I ,i Years 38% Rape/ Sodomy I Less Than 13 Years

Robbery

I Aggravated ~ Assault !

Total I Violent

Crime;~~~~~~~~~~ ______-.______-.______-.

o 10 20 30 40

• No Prior Felonies • Prior Other Violent Felony 1 o Prior NonViolent Felony • Prior Similar Violent Felony I u

• Nearly one in five offenders incar­ porate one or more of the following (, II cerated for aggravated assault had a prior measures geared toward the habitual /.''-. nonviolent felony conviction. About one offender: (1) special police surveillance, I ') \,') in 10 had a conviction for a prior similar (2) preventative pretrial detention, felony. (3) selective prosecution, (4) strict or n ~~ I mandatory sentencing standards, and I I Criminological research has docu­ (5) denial of parole eligibility .These pro­ I, mented the existence of chronic repeat grams are designed to identify chronic 0 offenders-known as "career criminals"­ offenders early in their "careers" and i ! who account for an extraordinary incarcerate them during their peak years amount of the crimes in any given year. of criminal activity. Proponents of these 0 In response to these findings, many programs argue that their potential crime jurisdictions across the country have reduction benefitis maximized by incar­ instituted career criminal programs. In cerating for long periods of time only general, career criminal programs incor- the most hard-core offenders.

Trends alld Issl/es Page 9 ------

• Juvenile Violent Crime Schedule IIII Drug Arrests Arrests in Virginia Involving Juveniles (1980-1992) (1982-1992)

One aspect of violent crime that has Many people believe that increases particularly alarmed both government in violent crime among juveniles are officials and the public is the rapid tied to the increasing numbers of juve­ increase in violent crimes committed by niles entering the illegal drug trade. A juveniles. Juveniles are defined as per­ decade ago, nearly all of the offenders sons under 18 years old. arrested for drug sales in Virginia were adults. However, arrest data for the last DIsplay 13 depicts the arrest rate 10 years clearly shows this is no longer trends for juveniles involved in murder/ true. Display 14 shows the percentage of nonnegligent homicide, rape/forcible all Virginia arrests for the sale of Sched­ sodomy, robbery and aggravated assault ule IIII drugs that involved juveniles from between 1980 and 1992. Arrest rates are 1982 to 1992. Schedule IIII drugs in­ based on the number of arrests per clude "hard" drugs such as heroin, 100,000 juveniles in the population. cocaine, and crack cocaine.

• Overall, the juvenile arrest rate for Display 14 violent crime increased nearly 61 %. Percentage of Drug Sale Arrests 12% Involving Juveniles (1982 - 1992) • The juvenile arrest rate for murder 10%

increased nearly 280%. 8%

• The juvenile arrest rate for rape in­ 6%

creased about 89%. 4%

• The juvenile arrest rate for robbery 2% increased about 47%. 0%

• The juvenile arrest rate for aggra­ vated assault increased about 59%. • In 1982,juveniles accountedforless than 1% of all Schedule IIII drug sale arrests. Beginning in 1987, the percent­ Display 13 age of these arrests involving juveniles Juvenile Arrest Rates (1980 to 1992) rose dramatically. By 1992, juveniles accounted for about 13% of these ar­ rests. Murder Robbery • In 1982, only four juveniles were arrested for the sale of hard drugs. In 1992, 511 juveniles were arrested for ';: Assault these offenses, an increase of more than 125 times the number in 1982. Rape Possible explanations for the increase in juvenile drug sales arrests include recruiting of juveniles by adults to trans­ port and distribute drugs and large eco­ nomic rewards, coupled with relatively light penalties for juvenile offenders.

Page 10 Trends and Issues A Age DistributiC'D for Murder Virginia Population Arrests in Virginia Estimates for Persons (1991) Age 15 to 24

There is a strong relationship be­ Because young people are dispro­ tween age and crime. Prior research has portunately involved in crime, the pro­ shown that many criminal "careers" be­ portion of the population between the gin at around age 14, peak in the late ages of 15 to 24 is known to criminolo­ teens or early 20s, and then gradually gists as the "crime-prone" age group. decline until about age 30. After age 30, Given this strong relationship, some most offenders "retire" from an active criminologists have attempted to fore­ criminal life. Display 15 illustrates the cast general levels of violent crime by integral relationship between age and tracking the number of people in the (/ violent crime by mapping the age population who fall into the crime prone distribution of those anested for mur­ age group. Display 16 shows the number der/non-negligent manslaughter in Vir­ of persons age 15 to 24 in Virginia from ginia during 1991. 1970 to the present, and the number J projected in the population through the • The youngest assailant anested for year 2010. j murder was less than 13 years old. Display 16 "I • The number of 15 to 24 Virginia Population Estimates I • The number of persons arrested rose year-olds in Virginia's popula­ for Ages 15 to 24 years 1200000 sharply at age 14 and continued to rise tion has been declining since (1970 - 2010) until it peaked at age 19. about 1980. Part of the decrease 1000000

in the overall violent crime rate 800000 • After peaking at age 19, murder ar­ during the early 1980shas been 600000 rests declined sharply from age 21 attributed to this drop in the through age 24, then declined more size of Virginia's crime-prone 400000 slowly with increasing age. population. 200000

o The age distribution for murder ar­ • Given the cunent decline in rests is very similar to the age distribu­ the crime prone age group, the tion for persons anested for rape, rob­ recent record increases in vio- bery and aggravated assault. lent crime are unexpected. Some have suggested that even though the number of Display 15 young people has decreased, more of this Age Distribution for numberis prone to violence than in previ­ 45 Murder Arrests 40 (1991) ous generations. Two factors often men­ 35 tioned as contributors to tins violence are

30 the widespread sale and use of illegal

25 drugs and the proliferation of handguns.

20 15 • The cunent decline in the number of 10 15 to 24 year-olds is expected to end 5 around 1995. Beginning in about 1996, it o is forecast that Virginia will see a steady 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 Age increase in the number of young people in its population as the children of the baby boomers (the "baby boom echo genera­

tion") mature into the 15-24 year age o group. It is also forecast that this increase willievel off around the year 2010.

Trellds and issues Page II Summary of Violent Crime Trends and Issues

This analysis of violent crime showed firearm, and more than 80% of these that Virginia has some reason to be opti­ firearms were handguns. The number mistic, but also has reason to be con­ of murders by handgun increased by cerned about violent crime trends. First, more than 50% between 1987 and 1992. Virginia's overall violent crime rate is lower than that in 35 other states and the Two populations in particular were District of Columbia. Furthermore, cited for their contributions to the in­ Virginia's violent crime rate is lower creasing violent crime rates: previously than most other Southern states and imprisoned offenders and juveniles. A lower than four of the five states that look at the prior criminal records of border Virginia. Virginia's violent crime violent felons sentenced to Virginia pris­ rate has ranked well below the national ons in 1990-1992 showed that about one average for more than a decade. in four had a prior felony conviction for a nonviolent offense, and one in ten had Despite this favorable comparison a prior felony conviction for a violent to other states, Virginia's violent crime offense. Alookat Virginia's violent crime problem has increased dramatically in statistics also showed a sharp increase in recent years. A look at Virginia's over­ juvenile involvement in these crimes. all violent crime rate trends showed that The rate ofjuvenile arrests for all violent violent crime increased by 23 % between crimes increased more than 60% be­ 1980 and 1992, with the most dramatic tween 1980 and 1992; for murder ar­ increases occurring between 1987 and rests, the increase was more than 250%. 1992. All major categories of violent Among persons arrested for murder in crime have increased since 1987: mur­ Virginia, the most common age is 19. ders increased by about 20%, rapes by 22%, robberies by 33% and aggravated All of these increases in violent crime assaults by 43%. come despite more than a decade-long decrease in the number of Virginia's Generally, urban areas of the state population in the "crime-prone" age had higher violent crime rates than group of 15 to 24 year-olds. The fact that suburban and rural areas. However, the the number of persons in this group is comparatively lower rates in these areas forecasted to begin rising within several did not mean that violent crime was not years may signal that even greater in­ increasing outside the cities. Between creases in violent crime will occur in the 1987 and 1992, violent crime increased late 1990s. by 18% in suburban areas and 22% in rural areas. This forecast has prompted calls for Virginia to begin preparing to deal with These increases in violent crime this increase before it occurs. The recog­ have coincided with a proliferation in nition that violent crime has increased rap­ firearms in society. Virginia crime idly in the recent past, and has the potential statistics clearly show the role of these to increase even more rapidly in the near firearms in violent crime. Nearly three­ future, was a major impetus for Governor quarters of the murders in Virginia Wilders' creation of the Governor's during 1992 were committed using a Commission on Violent Crime.

Page 12 Trends lind Issues Section II:

The Governor's Commission on Violent Crime

"This Commission did not hesitate to take on controversial, politically unpopular issues like gun control. But we also insisted that every proposal responded to a specific problem, and we looked for reasonableness - not pelfection - in the solutions.

I believe Virginians il1 the future will point to the Commission's comprehensive strategy as the essentialfoundationfor how to reduce violent crime and the fear of crime in our communities. The one-handgun-per-month purchase limit alld programs like SHnCAP and mentoring for juveniles, for example, are but a start.

Of greater significance is the widespread, bipartisan acceptance of the Commission's work. To me, that evidences a change in the climate of public opinion which will support new, active efforts to rid Ollr soc:iety of the scourge of crime. "

O. Randolph Rollins Secretary of Public Safety

Govemor's COlllmission Oil Violent Crime Page 13 Introduction -

On June 15, 1992, Governor L. The Commission was asked to make Douglas Wilder created the Governor's legislative and budgetary recommen­ Commission on Violent Crime. The dations for the Governor's consideration Commission was given the task of for the 1993 and 1994 sessions of the advising the Governor on the following General Assembly. issues:

o How the Commonwealth can reduce the escalating frequency and impact of violent crime, particularly mur­ der, aggravated assault, rape and other serious sex offenses; • The causes of violent crime and the offenders responsible for commit­ ting violent crimes; • The role of firearms and firearms trafficking in violent crime; Members of the • Violent crime committed by juve­ niles; Violent Crime Commission • The causes and impacts of violent The Governor appointed 15 indi­ crime in large urban areas and the viduals to the Commission. Secretary of potential for violent crime to de­ Public Safety O. Randolph Rollins was velop into mass violence; and, appointed as Chair and Robert B. • Opportunities for reducing violent Northern, the Governor's Special Assis­ crime through cooperation among tant for Drug Policy, was appointed as jurisdictions and between the pub­ Vice-chair. Other appointments included lic and private sectors. state and local representatives of criminal justice agencies and the courts, local offi­ The Governor instructed the cials, corrections: officials, a legislative Commission to consider the following representative, the U.S. Attorney forthe strategies in making its recommenda­ Eastern District of Virginia, and a tions for the reduction of violent crime Commonwealth's Attorney. and the fear of crime in Virginia: • Preventing the occurrence of violent The Violent Crime Commission held crime; its first meeting on June 18,1992. Tnhis opening remarks, Secretary Rollins • Solving violent crimes and stressed to the members that the Com­ strengthening the criminal justice mission was expected to deal with system through new laws, proce­ difficult,and sometimes controversial, dures, resources and techniques issues. He emphasized that violent crime which expedite verdicts, provide is a problem that concerns all Virginians, meaningful sanctions and protect the and that solutions to the problem must rights of all persons; and, be developed at all levels of government. • Reducing recidivism by equipping He, like Governor Wilder, cited the need offenders with skills and perspec­ for a bipartisan approach to developing tives needed to return to society as recommendations and initiatives for productive citizens. dealing with violent crime.

Page 14 Govemor's Commission 0/1 Violent Crime ------,...,. -~-----

.vv...... II The Commission's Work 7 l' ( 1992 Activities During 1992, the full Commission held four more meetings. Additionally, At its first meeting, the Commission the Crime Prevention Subcommittee met divided itself into three subcommittees, three times, including a public hearing each of which would address a specific held in Hampton in October. The Crimi­ component ofthe violent crime problem: nal JusticeiLaw Enforcement Subcom­ mittee met three times, including a pub­ lic hearing in Arlington in September. To ensure citizen participation, The Crime Prevention Subcommittee The Inmate Productivity Subcommittee the Commission subcommittees Chair, Pat G. Minetti met four times, including a public hear­ held three public hearings in different regions of Virginia Members include ing in Roanoke in October. The public during 1992. Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr. hearings were designed to gather input J orman D. Granger from citizens throughout the Common­ J. Dean Lewis wealth and various public and private Edward W. Munay organizations. Some of the organizations or agencies that addressed the Commis­ sionincluded the Virginia State Sheriff's' The Criminai JusticeiLaw Enforcement Association, Commission on Youth, Subcommittee Commission on Poverty, Virginia Chair, Helen F. Fahey Municipal League and the Virginia State Members include Crime Commission. A complete list of Carl R. Baker the meeting dates for the full Commis­ V. Stuart Cook sion and the Subcommittees is shownin Richard Cullen the Appendix. Robert B. Northern During their June through Decem­ ber meetings, the Commission heard The Inmate Productivity Subcommittee testimony from various criminal justice Chair, Robert B. Ball specialists, representati ves of public and Members include private organizations, as well as con­ Clarence L. Jackson cerned citizens. Drawing on this and Charles J. Kehoe other information, the Commission dis­ Buford M. Parsons cussed, debated and finally developed a O. Randolph Rollins package oflegislative recommendations for combating violent crime. The Commission recognized that some of the issues before it would have to be addressed through recommenda­ tions for legislative action, while other issue,1\ would have to be addressed through recommendations for program­ matic initiatives. Because the Governor had requested legislative proposals for the 1993 General Assembly, the Com­ mission decided that its initial meetings would focus on violent crime issues that required legislative action.

Govemor's COlllmission Oil Violent Crime Page 15 *; Commission Meetings and Testimony

The Commission's legislative rec­ The Commission sought to gather as ommendations were reviewed by the much information as possible on the Secretary of Public Safety, then sent to nature, scope and causes of violent crime the Governor and the General Assembly to guide its deiiberations and recom­ for consideration and action. The mendations. The Commission sought Commission's legislative recommen­ advice from experts on violent crime, as dations are described in Section III of well as input from Virginia citizens on this report. their concerns about violent crime.

1993 Act\vities Expert Testimon~

Following the General Assembly's At its August 1992 meeting, the action on its legislative recommenda­ Commission heard presentations from tions, the Commission on Violent Crime two intemationally J ecognized criminolo­ turned its attention in 1993 to develop­ gists, Dr. AlfredBlumstein ofCamegie­ ing a series of programmatic recom­ Mellon University and Professor mendations for combating violent Franklin Zimring of the University of crime. California at Berkeley.

The full Commission met three times during 1993, in April, June and August. The three Commission subcommittees also met several times during 1993. The Crime Prevention Subcommittee met four times, the Criminal JusticelLaw Enforcement Subcommittee met three times, and the Inmate Productivity Sub­ committee met six times. The Commission's final meeting was held in August, 1993. Dr. Blumstein is an expert on career The Commission's prognllTlmatic criminals, prison populations, sentenc­ initiatives were developed in concert ing and parole, and habitual criminal­ with the state agencies that would be ity. He presented the Commission with responsible for implementing the initia­ evidence that criminaia commit crimes tives, as well as with affected public and at dramatically different rates and that private organizations. The final version many stop committing crimes as they of the programmatic recommendations mature. He recommended devoting was completed during the fall of 1993. prison resources to incapacitating vio­ The recommendations were then re­ lent offenders who commit many crimes viewed by the Secretary of Public Safety and who show no sign of matming out of before being sent to the Governor. The crime. He recommended against devot­ Commission's programmatic recom­ ing scarce prison resources to locking up mendations are described in detail in drug offenders on long sentences. Section IV of this report. Dr. Blumstein asserted that incarcerating drug offenders has little effect on drug crime. He described the

Page 16 Govemor's Commission on Violent Critllf r------'-' --l I that Virginia look at what types of fire­ I' arms laws "give you the most effect for c the least cost." He suggested to the Commission that it consider:

" 0 (1) evaluating the effectiveness of Virginia's instant firearms pur­ chaser background check;

(2) allowing localities to enact their -J, 0 own firearms laws; and, replacement theory of criminal activity, which contends that locking up a drug (3) supporting local firearms control , " dealer for a long time is unlikely to re­ initiatives with statewide enforce­ "The prQpensity toward duce drug crime because the dealer's ment if local laws require enforce­ "violent crime makes the activity is quickly replaced by another ment in areas outside of local gun pro~lem worse. The dealer. Crimes such as serial rape are control. easy av(lilability of firearm~ makes the crime more effectively addressed through problelk worse. 11 lengthy prison sentences because it is j 11 '\ unlikely that a serial rapist's activity Citizen Survey of Violent Crime Issues ,. Profess~Franklin will quickly be replaced by another Zimring serial rapist. To provide the Commission with data on the concerns that Virginia Dr. Blumstein emphasized preven­ citizens have about violent crime, the tion and treatment options, noting that Department of Criminal Justice Ser­ too many resources are devoted to unsuc­ vices' Criminal Justice Research Ccnter cessful incarceration strategies for drug and the Virginia Commonwealth Uni­ ,-, :i offenders. A reduction in demand for versity Survey Research Laboratory con­ illegal drugs through treatment and pre­ ducted a statewide survey of Virginia vention would not only reduce drug crime, adults to determine their attitudes on but also other crime since drug use is violent crime issues. The Research Cen­ associated with other crimes. ter and the Survey Research Laboratory

developed a series of survey questions {I Professor Franklin Zimring is an based on violent crime issues currently auth 'Dly on firearms and violence and being examined by the Commission. onyouth violer:ce. ProfessorZimring These issues included gun control, challenged the Commission to look juvenile crime, and sentencing and beyond the extreme positions in the gun parole practices. control debate. He stated that the United States is both a violent society and a society with many guns, and that these factors compound one another. He told the Commission that the th!-eat of death in assaults and robberies in the U.S. is increased by the prevalence of guns, and that an assault with a gun is five times more likely to result in a death than an assault using another type of weapon.

Professor Zimring reviewed several types of firearms laws, and suggested

Govemor's Commission 011 Violent Crime Page 17 w

The public opinion survey was con­ Commun~ty Forum on Violent Crime ducted by telephone between December 17, 1992 and January 4, 1993. The On June 22, 1993, the Commission scientifically designed random-digit held a widely publicized public forum dialing technique provided a statistically entitled Proposed Programs to Combat representative sample of the State' s adult Violent Crime: The Community Reacts population. The 815 completed inter­ at Virginia Commonwealth University views provided a 73 % response rate, and in Richmond. The Forum was conducted a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5%. to highlight the Commission's program­ matic initiatives and elicit input and To aid in the analysis and interpreta­ support from government and private tion of the data, all of the survey respon­ organizations, businesses, and private dents were grouped according to stan­ citizens concerned about violent crime. dard demographic characteristics such as age, race, sex, geographical region of More than 50 citizens with informed the State, educational level, and house­ opinions and perspectives on Virginia's "I think that Virginia has led hold income level. violent crime problem participated in the nation in terms ofletting all the Forum. Participants heard ideas from leaders know that people are Results of the survey showed wide the Commission and asked questions of sick and fed-up with guns. " public support for many of the Commission members. Teachers, police Commission's legislative recommen­ officers, clergy, community activists, U.S. Attorney General dations. For example, a large majority business executives, media representa­ Janet Reno of Virginians, including handgun own­ tives, criminologists and social service ers, supported a limit on the number of providers came together to build on the handguns an individual can purchase in work already done by the Commission one month. A large majority of survey and add information to develop a more respondents also supported prohibiting comprehensive plan. juveniles from possessing handguns, and providing juries with prior criminal Keynote speakers at the Community history information about convicted Forum were Govemor Wilder and U.S. offenders before the jury imposes a Attorney General J anetReno. Inhi8 open­ sentence. ing remarks, Govemor Wilder told the Forum that Virginia ranks only 36th in the nation in violent crime - better than most states. But, he said, Virginia citizens still will not tolerate brutality inflicted on fellow citizens. He said Vir­ ginia cannot be content to merely react to violent crime after it occurs. Instead, Virginia must take bold steps to brea..~ the cycle of crime in our communities.

To illustrate how violent crime and the fear of crime affects the lives of Virginian citizens, the Govemor cited the case of a Richmond resident who had recently appeared on the television program "48 Hours." The female resi­ dent described to viewers the anxiety

Page 18 Govemor's Commission OJ! Violent Crime created by violent crime, and how she was forced to peep out of her windows and live in fear that drug dealers would approach her children. After her televi­ sion appearance, the woman's home was sprayed with bullets, the inside of her home was vandalized, and her bed­ room was set on fire. Other residents of the neighborhood remarked that the woman should have known better than to stand up and speak out about crime.

Governor Wilder noted that every­ rather than respond to it. She suggested one wants to "talk tough" about crime, that many of the problems in society­ but that continuing to rely on building youth violence, gangs, drug abuse, more prisons costs "tough money." drop-outs-are symptoms of a deeper He cited the need to examine other problem. The problem is that children alternatives to reducing and preventing have been forgotten and neglected. She o violent crime. The Governor identified said that the best crime prevention innovative strategies such as mentoring strategy is to strengthen the role of the programs to provide guidance to famil y and the community in children's children and young adults, the Anti­ lives, and use these institutions to guide Crime Partnership Program, and job young people toward productive lives training and work release programs for and away from violence. She noled that prison inmates to improve their unless society invests more in its mem­ chances of successfully returning to bers when they are children, it will never o society. be able to build enough prisons for them by the time they are 18. U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno began her remarks by telling the Forum Following the keynote speakers, that it's time to stop paying lip service to each of the Commission's three sub­ crime and actually start doing something committees presented its preliminary about it. She praised the Governor and repOlts and programmatic recommen­ the Commission for their comprehensive dations to the Forum. Secretary Rollins effort and noted that this is what is asked the Forum participants to evaluate needed if America is really going to deal the recommendations and offer their own with the violent crime problem. She opinions, ideas and suggestions. He asked reflected the concern often heard by mem­ that the focus of the discussion be on the bers of the Commission that people are soundness of the concepts presented frustrated when they see violent crimi­ rather than on the details or the cost nals sentenced to long prison terms and involved. The Secretary also asked that b then released after serving only one­ the members identify the recommenda­ o 0 half of the sentence. She stressed the tions that were considered priorities and need to make it clear to criminals that which would form the basis for further punishment will be swift and it will be work by the Commission. celtain. The Commission's programmatic The Attorney General also spoke at recommendations are described in length about the need to prevent crime detail in Section IV of this report.

Govel7lor's Commission 011 Violent Crime Page 19 tt Active Role of the Governor and Commission Members

Throughout the work of the Despite the political risks involved Commission, Governor Wilder and the in opposing the "gun lobby," Governor members of the Commission worked to Wilder and Secretary Rollins made ap­ promote and support the Commission's pearGnces on several state and national work. Much of this work involved television news programs to support the bringing the violent crime issues before Commission's recommendation to limit the Commission to the public to involve handgun sales. Both also supported the the public in the discussions and pro­ Commission's recommendations by vide citizen support for the initiatives making public appearances throughout recommended by the Commission. the Commonwealth. The Governor and the Secretary continuously pointed out The Commission's charge by the that limiting multiple purchases of Governor meant that the Commission handguns was the only effective way to members had to deal with several con­ eliminate Virginia's dubious reputation troversial topics: tireanns regulations, as the gun-running capitol of the East violent juvenile offenders, and sentenc­ Coast. ing and parole practices. Of all the issues addressed by the Commission in 1992, Then-U.S. Attorney Richard Cullen none sparked as much public discussion worked to secure public support for the "Today we will be discllss­ and controversy as the Commission's proposed handgun legislation. He pro­ ing innovative programs to reduce violence, to recommendation to the General Assem­ moted the creation of Virginians Against address the cycle of crime bly to limit the number of handguns that Gun Trafficking, a citizens and business in our communities, and to an individual can purchase to one per group that worked for the proposed allow our cities to develop month. Throughout the winter of 1992- handgun legislation, and actively and implement comprehen­ 1993, the discussions anddebate among solicited support from Virginia's major sive community approaches members of the Commission and the business leaders. to fighting violence. " General Assembly were mirrored by Gove17l0r L. Douglas Wilder extensive public relations campaigns The work by the Governor and mem­ supporting and opposing the proposed bers of the Commission to build support legislation. for the Commission's recommendations succeeded in building a consensus of public and legislative backing for the proposal to limit handgun sales, as well as for other Commission recommenda­ tions aimed at reducing violent crime. Twenty-four Virginia newspapers, as well as the Washington Post and the New York Times, printed editorials supporting the recommendation to limit handgun purchases.

Aftel' much controversy and debate, the 1993 General Assembly ultimately passed legislation enacting all but one of the recommendations put forth by Governor Wilder's Commission on Violent Crime.

Page 20 Governor's Commission on Violent Crime Section III:

Legislative Recommendations

"The overwhelming success of the legislative recommendations of the Governor's Commission on Violent Crime is a tribute not only to the quality and expertise of its members, but also to their ability to mobilize support from a broad cross-section of Virginians. "

Delegate James Almand Chair, House Courts of Justice Committee

"What we are doing with this legislation is moving forward with significant steps to combat violent crime. And we need to keep moving forward, to sustain the momentum. "

Senator Edward Holland Chair, Senate Courts ofJustice Committee

Legislative Recommendations Page 21 One Handgun Per Month Firearms Dealers: Record Purchase Limit KeepinglPenalty Enhancenlent This bill changed Virginia law to limit to one the number of handguns This law requires firearms dealers to that may be purchased by an individual report to the State Police the number in any 30-day period. Exceptions are and category (handgun or long gun) of made for licensed firearms dealers, law firearms sold in any transaction. This enforcement and con-ectional agencies, information must be reported along private security companies, for pur­ with the consent form required for the chasing antique handguns, and for criminal history background check. The replacing lost or stolen handguns. law also increases the amount of time that mUltiple handgun transaction The one-handgun-a-month law was information can be retained by State Introduction to designed to curtail gun traffickers who buy Police from 30 days to 12 months. The Recommendations E1lacted large numbers of handguns in Virginia law reduces the amount of time that by the and then illegally sell them elsewhere. 1993 Ge1leral Assembly firearms dealers must retain records on Gun trace data has shown that Virginia has transactions from ten years to two years. The Commission produced 14 become a major source of guns for crimi­ The law also increases the penalty for recommendations for legislative nals in large eastern cities. action by the 1993 General firearms dealers found gUilty of ille­ Assembly. These recommendations r------~---, gally selling, renting, trading or trans­ addressed handgun sales and Display 17 fen-ing firearms from a Class 1 misde­ possession, better records on Handgun Retail Price Versus meanor to a Class 6 felony. jireal711S purchases and Oil juveniles who commit serious New York City Street Price offenses, increasing penalties and 1000 1000 Allowing the State Police to collect tightening parole eligibility for 1000 and maintain this information will im­ certain offenders, and other issues. 800 prove their ability to develop cases against Most of these recommenda­ 600 straw purchasers and gun-runners. Prior tions received bipartisan support in 400 law requiring State Police to destroy the General Assembly. The principal patrons of the 200 information on approved transactions Commission's recommendations o within 30 days made it difficult to iden­ were Senator Edward Holland, tify and track persons serving as straw Chair of the Senate Courts of Justice Committee, and Delegate purchasers. Information about the types James Almand, Chair of the HOllse II Source State Retail Price (1) New York City Street Price of firearms being sold is needed to en­ Courts ofJustice Committee. force the one handgun per month pur­ The General Assembly enacted chase limit law. most of the Commission's recom­ This law will be enforced using mendations. In some instances, it Virginia's computerized "instant" record This law amended and reenacted enacted laws based on other bills check system to screen handgun purchases. which contained substantially the §18.2-308.2:2 and §S4.1-4201 of the same provisions as the Ifan indi vidual tries to purchase a handgun Commission's recommendations. within 30 days of an earlier handgun pur­ chase, the firearms dealer would be noti­ This section of the report describes the laws enacted by the fied notto make the sale. Persons making 1993 General Assembly that were pennissible multiple handgun purchases based on, or substantially similar may do so by following procedures devel­ to, the recommendations of the oped by the State Police. Commission.

This law amended and reenacted § 18.2-308.2:2 of the Code of Virginia.

Page 22 Legislative Recommendations % - Juvenile Possession Juvenile Criminal History of Handguns Records

This law made it illegal for persons This law requires the Central under the age of 18 to possess or Criminal History Records Exchange transport a handgun or assault firearm (CCRE) to maintain fingerprints and case anywhere in Virginia, with certain le­ disposition information for juveniles 15 gitimate exceptions. Violation of this years or older charged with a felony, and law is a Class 1 misdemeanor. Under for juveniles 13 years or older charged prior law, juveniles could openly pos­ with certain serious felonies. sess and carry firearms in all but places of worship, courthouses and schools. This information will be used only to This law was passed to reduce Virginia's determine eligibility to possess or pur­ surge in violent crime being committed chase firearms; to prepare pre- and by juveniles using firearms. post-sentence investigation reports; aid In a statewide survey; 82% of court service units serving juvenile Virginians said that criminal The juvenile murder arrest rate has courts; and for fingerprint comparison justiae officials should have (!\ , ' climbed over 275% since 1987. In with fingerprints in the Automated access to an adult offender's 1987, only 19 juveniles were arrested for FingerprintInformation System (AFIS). prior juvenile record. " murder in Virginia. In 1992, there were The fingerprints maintained at CCRE 72 murder arrests involving juveniles. will be destroyed when the juvenile Many criminologists attribute this surge turns 29, provided the juvenile is not in violence to the proliferating use of convicted of another felony while be­ Ii handguns by youth. tween the ages of 18 and 29. «

This law also prohibits persons The Ilumber ofjuveniles arrested ill under age 29 from possessing a firearm Virginia for murder using a hand­ if the person was adjudicated delinquent gUll more than quadrupled between as a juvenile based on a felony commit­ 1987 and 1990. ted while between the ages of 15 and 18. D U nderprior law ,juvenile fingerprints Exceptions are made for juveniles were voluntarily submitted to CCRE. to legally possess firearms: while in Although juvenile fingerprints consti­ one's home or on one's property, while tuted less than 1% of all AFIS prints, in the home or on the property of a over 20% of all AFIS matches or identi­ parent, grandparent or legal guardian, on fications were made with juvenile the propelty of another with that person's fingerprints. Law enforcement investi­ written permission, while engaged in gations are hampered because the prints lawful hunting, while engaged in target of many juvenile suspects are not shooting at an established shooting range available in a database such as AFIS. and while carrying out one's duties as a This capability will also aid circuit court member of the armed forces or National judges and juvenile probation officers Guard. by providing better access to juvenile D records. This law amended and reenacted §16.1-228 and §18.2-308.2:1, added This law amended and reenacted §18.2-308.7, and repealed §18.2-287.3 Sections 16.1-299, 16.1-301, 16.1-306, of the Code of 'Virginia 18.2-308.2,18.2-308.2:1,19.2-388 and (/ 19.2-390, and added §19.2-389.1 to the Code of Virginia.

Legislative Recommendations Page 23 " Destruction of Require Presentence Reports Seized Weapons for Felony Convictions to Contain Juvenile Criminal This law amended the Code of Vir­ History Information ginia to allow courts to order the de­ struction of weapons seized by sheriffs This bill changed Virginia law to ., or police chiefs if the weapons have require that each presentence investiga­ I • minimal sales or law enforcement value. ! I~ tion report prepared on an individual convicted of a felony will include a

4~ • , • • It is estimated that Virginia law report on the individual' s criminal record enforcement officers seized 20,000 fire­ as an adult and as a juvenile. The arms in 1991. Currently, law enforce­ juvenile record information will be ob­ ment agencies have the option of selling tained from a review of available juve­ their seized firearms. Selling these fire­ nile court records. arms creates the potential for some of these weapons to be used in violent Prior law required that only the adult crimes. Although many law enforce­ criminal record be included in the crimi­ ment agencies do destroy firearms they nal history information contained in the seize, it is not known how many agen­ presentence investigation report. With­ cies destroy them and do not destroy out juvenile record information, judges them. Allowing courts to order the do not receive facts that are essential to destruction of seized weapons which have determine an appropriate sentence for little sales or law enforcement value will offenders. help to reduce the stockpile of fireanns which may be used to commit crimes. This law amended and reenacted §19.2-299 of the Code of Virginia. This law amended and reenacted §19.2-286.11 of the Code of Virginia. The law passed by the General Assembly was not the specific bill developed by the Increased Penalty for Commission, however it did contain Obstruction of Justice some of the same provisions. This law increased the statutory pen­ alty for obstructing a judge, magistrate, justice, juror, witness, or law enforce­ ment officer in the performance of their duties from a Class 4 misdemeanor to a Class 3 misdemeanor. The law also adds Commonwealth's Attorneys to the list of criminal justice officials accorded protection under the obstruction of jus­ tice provisions.

Threatening or using force against participants in a trial undermines the integrity of the trial process. By increas­ ing this penalty, the Commonwealth is making it clear that efforts to obstruct justice will not be tolerated.

This law amended and reenacted § 18.2-460 of the Code of Virginia.

Page 24 Legislative Recommendations ______------·---.. -··------l

Serious or Habitual Increased Maximum Penalty Offender Comprehensive for Second-Degree Murder Action Programs This law increased the penalty for This law allows city and county second-degree murder from a Class 3 governments to establish multiagency felony (five to 20 years and/or a fine of Serious or Habitual Offender Compre­ $100,000) to an unclassified felony, hensive Action Programs (SHOCAPs) which carries a range of incarceration to share information about certain from five to 40 years. serious juvenile offenders. SHOCAP committees, made up of representatives from law enforcement, courts, correc­ tions, schools, health, youth and family services, and Commonwealths Attorneys, will be able to share information about juveniles who are convicted of certain felonies (murder, rape, armed robbery, sexual abuse and malicious wounding) or who have been convicted atleast three times for offenses which would be felonies or Class 1 misdemeanors if committed by an adult.

Confidential data may be shared by ---~~<------participating agencies, but each person Under the prior statutory penalty for "The maximum penalty for who receives this information must sign second-degree murder, the malicious, robbery and rape is life in a statement acknowledging their statu­ intentional taking of a human life canied prison. But the maximum tory duty to preserve confidentiality. the same maximum penalty as grand penalty for second"degree Individuals who knowingly allow unau­ larceny and commercial burglary, and murder-the malicious killing thorized disclosure of this information only half the maximum penalty as the ofa human being-was only 20 are guilty of a Class 3 misdemeanor. sale of cocaine. The sanctity of human years. The 40-year maximum SHOCAP agencies and their personnel life and the level of violence in society .noW'gives judges a sentenc- are granted immunity for any good faith require a penalty for second-degree >ing option proportional to the gravity of the crime. " disclosure of information. murder commensurate with the gravity " of the crime. Judge Bu[ord Parsons Offenders convicted of second­ degree murder typically receive long prison terms. Therefore, this penalty en­ hancement should have little effect on the demand for prison bed space. It is conservatively estimated that if the same numberofoffenders who have received the previous 20 year maximum penalty were to receive a 40 year sentence in the future, it would increase the required number of prison beds by less than 60 per year by the year 2000.

This law added §16.1-330.1 and This law amended and reenacted § 16.1-330.2 to the Code of Virflinia. § 18.2-32 of the Code of Virginia.

Legislative Recommendations Page 25 Amended Parole Eligibility Out-Of-State Prison for Violent Offenders Commitments as Parole Eligibility Factor This law increased the amount of time violent offenders must serve in This law amended Virginia parole prison before being eligible for parole. eligibility laws to increase the list of Individuals committed to prison for the felony offenses for which commitments · , .. first time for first-degree murder, rape, to out-of-statecorrectionalfacilities must forcible sodomy, inanimate object sexual be included when calculating an , . ,,.' penetration, or aggravated sexual bat­ offender's parole eligibility date. tery must now serve aminimum of two­

thirds of their sentence, or 14 years, Under Virginia ~arole eligibility whichever is less, before becoming statutes, one factor that determines the eligible for parole. Individuals commit­ parole eligibility date for certain violent ted a second or subsequent time for these offenders is the number of prior commit­ crimes must now serve a minimum of ments to prison. The greater the number three-fourths of their sentence, or 15 of prior prison commitments, the longer years, whichever is less, before becom­ an inmate must serve on a sentence ing eligible for parole. These offenders before becoming eligible for parole. also are now limited to earning no more Prior prison commitments include com­ than 10 days of "good conduct" credits mitments in other states. per 30 days served. Under the fOlmer statute, prior prison With certain exceptions, previous commitments were a factor in parole parole eligibility statutes allowed vio­ In a statewide survey, 77% eligibility for inmates incarcerated for of Virginians said that lent felons to be eligible for parole after murder, rape, robbery, and certain drug violent offenders should serving less than 20% of their sentences. offenses. This law expands this list of not be eligible for early Although most violent offenders do not offenses to include inmates committed release based on their get paroled this early, the Commission for forcible sodomy, animate or inani­ behavior while in prison. did find that most violent offenders mate object sexual penetration, aggra­ serve only about 33% to 45% of their vated sexual battery, abduction, kidnap­ court-imposed sentence. Also, even if ping, burglary, felonious assault, wound.. denied parole, under previous law a ing or manufacturing, selling, giving, prisoner earning the maximum amount distributing or possessing a controlled of "good conduct" credits could SJtisfy substance with the intent to sell, manu­ his sentence and be mandatorily re­ facture, give or distribute a controlled leased after serving less than 50% of his substance. sentence. This law also clarifies the present The impact of this law on prison bed statute so that "out-of-state" commit­ space is projected to be minimal through ments clearly includes any correctional the year 2000. Using the highest esti­ facility in any U.S. state or territory and mated range, about 210 more prison the District of Columbia. Previous beds would be needed by the year 2000 commitment information is no longer to accommodate increased prison time required on official court orders com­ created by this legislation. mitting inmates to the Department of Corrections. This law amended and reenacted §53.1-151 and §53.1-199 of the Code This law amended and reenacted of Virginia. §53.1-151 of the Code of Virginia.

Page 26 Legislative Recommendations Provide Enhanced Prior Joint Preliminary Notice of Prisoner Releases Hearings and Trials

This law increased the amount of This bill changed Virginia law to information that the Department of Cor­ allow joint preliminary hearings and rections (DOC) must deliver to local jc~nt indictments and trials for certain criminal justice officials prior to the defendants. Joint indictments and hear­ release or discharge of a prisoner. Under ings are permitted when defendants the previous statute, DOC was required participated in contemporaneous or to provide advance notice of a prisoner's related acts involving the same victim(s) release to: and if the joint procedures would not cause manifest injustice to the Com­ "As a reslflt of the 1) the court which sentenced the indi­ monwealth or the defendant. The trial Commission's work, Rrosecu­ vidual to prison; judge retains the right to determine tors will now.' be able to try whether a joint trial is in the publlc all of the individuals involved 2) the victim of the offense for which interest and preserves the rights of each in a crime at once. This will the individual was committed (if of th~~' defendants. make criminal proceedings requested by the victim); more efficient and efJ:ective. It Under previous law, when multiple will have a significant impact on the Commonwealth's 3) the law enforcement agency and defendants were charged with the same ability to prosecute violent Commonwealth's Attorney in thelo­ crime, each was entitled to demand a criminals. " cality in which the offense occurred separate trial. Usually, each defendant and (if different) the locality in did demand a separate trial. Courtrooms, Heier! Fahey, [;hair, which the individual intends to re­ judges, prosecutors and juries were then CriminatJusticelLaw. side following release; and, tied up as the same case was repeatedly Enit?rcemerit Subcommittee· heard. In these cases victims and wit­ " 4) if there was a significant time lapse nesses were sometimes reluctant to since the offense, officials in the continue appearing and recount the same o other jurisdictions would also need facts. Victims were sometimes forced some minimal information concern­ to repeatedly describe unpleasant expe­ ing the individual. riences, and both victims and witnesses were forced to take time from work to This bill requires that, in addition to attend multiple trials. Court officials, the previously required information, with already heavy case loads, were DOC provides identification of the spe­ forced to repeatedly try the same case. cific offense or offenses for which the prisoner was committed, the tenn or terms This law added §19.2-183.1 and of imprisonment imposed as well as the §19.2-262.1, and repealed §19.2-263, of date the prisoner was committed to DOC. the Code of Virginia. o

Every notice shall include the name, address and criminal history of the par­ ticipating prisoner, and other informa­ tion upon request. If criminal justice of­ ficials in the locality where the prisoner intends to reside are not familiar with the individual, they may not know about the types of offenses for which the prisoner was sentenced.

This law amended and reenacted §53.1-160 of the Code of Virginia.

Legislative Recommendations Page 27 Purpose of Zoning Study a Safer By Design Ordinances Amended to Community Program Include Crime Prevention House Joint Resolution 617 This bill changed Virginia law to directed the Virginia State Crime include safety from crime as one of the Commission to oversee a study by the purposes of zoning ordinances. Assigning Department of Criminal Justice · - a crime prevention mission to zoning will Services concerning community safer by design programs. The study will \, '­ give localities greater ±1exibility to use local zoning ordinances to prohibit, determine a method of recognizing restrict or eliminate uses ofproperty which communities that use crime prevention attract or generate criminal behavior. strategies tG improve the quality of community life. Zoning ordinances were designed to give reasonabk ,:!onsideration to each of the following purposes, where applicable: Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design 1) to provide for adequate light, air, convenience of access and safety from fire, flood, crime and other dan­ gers;

2) to reduce or prevent congestion in the public streets;

3) to facilitate the creation of a conve­ nient, attractive and harmonious com­ munity;

4) to facilitate the provision of adequate The resolution specifically directed police and fire protection, disaster the study to determine 1) the standards evacuation, civil defense, transpor­ for recognition and the criteria and pro­ tation, water, sewage, flood protec­ cedure for certifying communities as a tion, Gchools, parks, forests, play "Safer by Design Virginia Community," grounds, recreational facilities, air­ 2) a mechanism for applying for certifi­ ports and other requirements; cation and reviewing the applications, and 3) methods to encourage communi­ 5) protect against destruction of or ties to participate in the program. encroachment upon historic areas; and, A Safer by Design Community Program will help localities develop 6) facilitate other en vironmental devel­ comprehensive crime prevention opments. initiatives to combat violence. These initiatives may include crime prevention This law amended and reenacted planning committees, the collection §15.1-489 of the Code of Virginia. The and analysis of crime data, neighbor­ law passed by the General Assembly was hood watch programs, physical and not based on the specific bill developed environmental security assessments of by the Commission, but it contained neighborhoods, the locations of schools substantially the same provisions as the and businesses, and the incorporation Commission's recommendation. of environmental security in the community planning process.

Page 28 Legislative Recommendations Expanded Juvenile Increased Inmate Work Programs Work Programs

This law allows the Director of the This law allows the Department of Department of Youth and Family Ser­ Corrections (DOC) to establish agree­ vices (DYFS) to enter into agreements ments with public or private entities for with public or private entities for the operating inmate work programs in DOC operation of work programs for juveniles facilities. Goods and services produced committed to DYFS. These agreements by these programs may be sold like other must receive: approval from the Gover­ inmate products, and on the open market nor; review by a committee of business, through public or private entities. labor and governmental officials ap­ "There are some really violent pointed by the Governor; and review This law increases DOC work criminals inprtson that ought to pursuant to regulations promulgated by program opportunities for inmates. In never be released. At the sCf;le fiscal year 1990-91, only 12% of the the Board of Youth and Family Services. time we have t6' recognize that Goods and services produced by such inmates employed in DOC held correc­ o the rest of the people there will work programs can be sold to units of tional enterprise, work release, or capi­ eventually get out. We oWe it to local governments, to nonprofit com­ tal construction jobs. One factor limit­ the citizens of this state to make munity service organizations, and on the ing these jobs was the prohibition on the ,sure that (inmates) ~~e ready to open market through participating pub­ sale of prison industry products to the be productive members ofsociety lic or private entities. private sector. Increasing correctional whe,n they do. Treatment; enterprise work opportunities will give education and work are the keys Prior to passage of this law, the Code more inmates the skills they need to to getting these people all that of Virginia did not specifically address reenter society after release from prison. Q traEk." work programs for juvenile offenders. Some construed this as prohibiting such New programs established under The Honorable Robert B. Ball, Sr. Mf!mber, Virginia House of programs. This law clarified that such this law will require increased funding \",,) enterprises are allowable when appropri­ for both start-up costs and continued , Delegates ately reviewed and authorized. operation. Some, or all, of these costs may be offset by revenues generated by Such enterprises will allow DYFS the program, or the financial participa­ to expose youths to work experiences tion of the venture partner. similar to those they will encounter when they return to the community. Prior This law amended and reenacted studies have shown that juveniles com­ §53.1-45 and §53.1-47, and added o mitted to institutions such as those found §53.1-45.1, of the Code of Virginia. in DYFS usually have a long history of delinquency, poor academic preparation, little or no work experience and low self esteem. Juvenile corrections industries blend business standards with basic edu­ cation, vocational training and on-the­ job experience which can significantly improve a youth's chance of succeeding in the community.

This law amended and reenacted §66-3, and added §66-25.1, of the Code of Virginia.

Legislative Recomme1ldations Page 29 Study the Effects of Truth-In-Sentencing Cultural Insensitivity on Commission Established Violent Crime House Joint Resolution 464 estab­ This resolution directed the Council lished a Commission to study Virginia's on Human Rights, assisted by Virginia sentencing and parole policies and the Commonwealth University and Norfolk need to establish "truth in sentencing." State University, to conduct a study to The Commission, made up of legisla­ assess the impact of racial and cultural tors, judges, and law enforcement insensitivity on violent crime. TheCoun­ personnel, will examine sanctions and cil is to have its work complete and make sentence lengths, parole, information for its recommendations on education and juries on the parole process, whether to implementation strategies to alleviate retain discretionary parole, and the cost racism to the Governor and the 1994 of a "no discretionary parole" system General Assembly. on our corrections budget. "Violent criminals should not have The study will include, but not be the possibility of release from the limited to, the determination of: penitentimy after serving only 20% of their sentence. ,4s a result of the 1) the extent of the impact of race and Governor's Commission, violent On March 23,1993, the bills its effects on violent crime such as proposed by the Governor's crimillals will now sel1'e a substan­ hate crime, Commission on Violent tially larger portion of their sentence Crime and passed by the before being eligible for release. " General Assembly were 2) differences in the criminal justice signed into law by Governor response to victims and offenders Helen Fahey, Chai/~ Criminal Justice! Wilder in a bill signing based on race or ethnic origin, and Law Enforcement Subcommittee ceremony. Seated from left to right at the table in the 3) the impacts of racism on access to Many believe the current sentencing picture below are chief housing, education, health care, job system undermines the credibility of House patron Delegate James opportunities, and economic devel­ the criminal justice system by letting Almand, Governor Wilder, opment and the resulting impact on offenders serve only small portions of aJld chief Senate patron violent crime. their sentences. Currently, state inmates Senator Edward Holland incarcerated for felonies are statutorily eligible for parole after serving as little as 25% of their imposed sentences. These inmates may aho earn "good time" credit while incarcerated, which is counted toward satisfying their sen­ tences. The combination of these pro­ visions make many inmates eligible for parole after serving less than 20% of their sentence.

Others believe Virginia's sentenc­ ing process is distorted by early release mechanisms. For example, prosecutors may request, and judges may set, sen­ tences greater than what they feel a crime actually warrants because they antici­ pate that the convicted offender will be released on parole after serving only a small portion of the imposed sentence.

Page 30 Legislative Recommendations r------I Introduction to Other Legislative Allow Authority for Local I I Recomme1ldations Firearms Ordinances I j I () I III addition to the legislation enacted by the 1993 General Assembly, the Commission devel­ The Commission recommends that I 6~'ll oped other legislative recommendations for Virginia remove the existing pre-emptive I combating violent crime. These recommendations statutory language and give all localities are offered to the 1994 session of the General Assembly. the authority to enact/adopt local ordi­ nances governing the sale or transfer of ' J This section of the report describes each of firearms. Governments are created to j the Commission's other legislative recommenda­ tions. secure a safe environment for their citizens. The misuse offirearms has made it impossible for officials in some Increase the Penalty For Virginia localities to secure such an environment. In many communities, Carrying a citizens are afraid to move about for fear Concealed Firearrn of being accosted by persons with guns or of being struck "iY incidental gun fire. The Commission recommends that Local governments should have the au­ Virginia increase the penalty for carry­ thority to enact ordinances regUlating ing concealed weapons by establishing the use and availability offirearms within [) 0 a separate and more severe penalty their jurisdictions. for carrying a concealed firearm. Concealed firearms pose a serious threat to the general public as well as to law enforcement officers. The current misdemeanor-level penalty for this offense does not provide sufficient deterrence to discourage individuals from Authorize State Police to carrying concealed firearms. License Firearms Dealers

The Commission recommends that the General Assembly enact legislation authorizing the Department of State Po­ o I Enact a Three-Day lice to require that all firearms dealers in Waiting Period for Virginia be licensed. State licensing is needed to give state and local police the Handgun Purchases state-level enforcement authority to ad­ dress the illegal sale and transfer of fire­ The Commission recommends that arms by federally licensed and unlicensed Virginia enact a three-day waiting period dealers attending Virginia gun shows. from the date a prospective buyer applies to purchase a handgun until the day it Currently, firearms dealers are li­ may be sold by the firearms dealer. A censed only by the Federal Bureau of three-day waiting period may reduce fire­ Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF). arms violence committed by individu­ However, federal mandates severely als who purchase and use their firearms restrict BATF's enforcement activities impulsively out of temporary anger, fear at gun shows. Many illegal firearms or emotional distress. The three-day transactions which occur at gun shows o period would provide a "cooling-off' involve either federally licensed fire­ o period for these individuals, while not arms dealers whose businesses are imposing an undue burden on law abid­ located outside of Virginia, or involve ing firearms purchasers. unlicensed individuals.

Legislali)':! Recomme1ldations Page 31 Authorize State Police to Allow Public Require State Permits for Adjudication of Serious Gun Shows Juvenile Offenders

The Commission recommends that The Commission recommends that the General Assembly enact legislation Virginia require that any juvenile adju­ authorizing the Department of State Po­ dication hearing in which ajuvenile age lice to require that gun show promoters fifLeen years or older is charged with obtain a state permit for shows, and that murder, forcible rape, forcible sodomy, promoters provide the State Police with a armed robbery, aggravated assault, list of all individuals and dealers, includ­ arson of a dwelling place, or the illegal ing out-of-state dealers, selling firearms sale, distribution, or manufacture of at these shows. Schedule I or II drugs, shall be open to the general public. Present law gives Virginia gun show promoters are juvenile court judges the option of open­ now required ()jlly to notify the State ing or closing hearings. Police whenever a gun show is to be held. There is no requirement to obtain Requiring that juvenile adjudication In a statewide survey, 88% of permits for shows or provide lists of the hearings for the enumerated serious Virginians said that juries dealers and individuals that will be sell­ offenses be open to the public will alle­ considering sentences for ing firearms at these events. viate much of the "mystery" surround­ convicted offenders should be ing juvenile court proceedings and en­ told about the offender's Requiring state permits for these courage public participation in the juve­ eligibility for parole, and shows and listings of dealers at these nile court process. States that have 85% said that juries shuuld shows will allow state and local law already passed similar legislation have be given information about the enforcement officials to address the found that the open hearings have not offender'S prior criminal illegal sale and transfer of firearms that led to abuse by the media as some had record. routinely occurs at these shows. Current feared. Openjuvenile heruings will serve enforcement of firearms law at these to reaffirm the credibility of the juvenile shows, conducted by the Federal Bureau justice system. of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, is severely limited.

Authorize Bifurcated Trials

The Commission recommends that Virginia law authorize bifurcated trials in which a separate jury proceeding is used to determine sentencing. This will pemlitjuries to have the same kind of information when recommending sen­ tences that judges have-prior criminal records, special mitigating and aggra­ vating circumstances, etc. Juries will not be operating "in the dark," as they are at pres·~nt. House Bill 759, carried over to the 1993 General Assembly, would establish such a bifurcated jury proceeding.

Page 32 Legislative Recommendations Amend Parole Eligibility Authorize State Police to Laws for Sex Offenders Run Witness Protection Program The Commission recommends that Virginia's parole eligibility laws be The Commission recommends that amended to require repeat sex offenders the General Assembly authorize the De­ to remain in prison for longer periods partmentof State Police to operate a state of time. Specifically, any sex offender witness protection program. The State should be ineligible for parole if con­ Police would make this program avail­ (I victed of any two of the following able to law enfcrcement and criminal offenses: rape, forcible sodomy, aggra­ justice agencies in all Virginia counties, vated sexual battery, and animate or cities and towns. inanimate object sexual penetration. () {:;5 This proposal would apply to offenders Currently, witness protection for who commit two separate acts where individuals involved in state and local the offender was at liberty between the criminal cases is provided only on a two convictions. limited, ad hoc basis. In some cases, witnesses who cannot be provided such Paroled sex offenders present a sig­ protection are afraid to voluntarily come nificant risk to the community due to forward to testify. In some cases, wit­ their high level of recidivism. Convicted nesses have been murdered and cases rapists are 10 times more likely to com­ not prosecuted because witnesses were mit another rape than are other types of intimidated and failed to testify. offenders. Some adult sex offenders have claimed to have had hundreds of Providing such protection for crime victims over the course of their criminal witnesses, victims of violent crimes, and careers. Treatment programs may offer informants who provide information some alternatives to long-term incar­ about criminal activities will increase ceration for some offenders, but concern their willingness to testify for the pros­ for public safety demands that sex of­ ecution and increase the chances of fenders who fail to respond to treatment successfully convicting criminals. a be kept separated from society.

Making these offenders ineligible for parole should have a minimal impact on prison and jail overcrowding because these offenders already remain incar­ cerated for long periods of time. The parole grant rate for sex offenders is already lower than that for any other group of offenders.

Additionally, recently enacted leg­ islation requires any person convicted two or more times of rape, forcible sodomy, animate or inanimate object sexual penetration, or aggravated sexual battery to serve a minimum of three quar­ ters of their imposed sentence and earn minimum good conduct allowance.

Legislative Recommendations Page 33 1993 Budget Initiatives

In recognition of the limited rev- beds. Currently, the Department of Cor­ enue available to the Commonwealth rections has only 167 work release beds. for initiating new and costly programs, the Commission limited its 1993 budget recommendations to a few modest Budget Initiative 2: The Commission programs. The Commission felt that recommends that the General Assembly these initiatives would provide a useful provide funding for expansion of the start toward meeting the objectives Department of Corrections (DOC) identified by the Inmate Productivity agribusiness operations. Currently, about Subcommittee. 200 inmates are engaged in agricultural work. The number of inmates in these operations can be significantly expanded (by up to 150 additional inmates) if more supervisors are provided and sawmill, greenhouse and irrigation equipment is provided. The additional food produced through this expansion will reduce DOC' s need to purchase food for inmates.

Budget Initiative 1: The Commission recommends that the General Assembly provide funding for construction of an additional Department of Corrections (DOC) work release facility with 24

Budget Initiative 3: The Commission recommends that the General Assembly provide funding for a natural resources work program. This new program will provide jobs to about 20 inmates for re­ pairing and restoring several state parks.

Page 34 Legislative Recommendations Sef:tion IV:

Programmatic Recommendations

"If we don 'f act now with a strong prevention approach, today's problems will seem smallIO years from now.. .It is critical that we concentrate our rescmrces on attacking the causes of crime, before it occurs. "

Chief Pat Minetti, Chair Crime Prevention Subcommittee

INTRODUCTION TO PROGRAMMATIC RECOMMENDATIONS

After completing its legislative recommendations, the Commission turned its attention to developing recommendations for programmatic initiatives to combat violent crime. These initiatives do not require amending Virgin ia law, but do require funding or othe r action to create or expand programs aimed at dealing with violent crime. Each of the three Commission subcommittees developed recommendations specific to the issues before it.

This section of the report describes each of the Commission's programmatic recommendations. Recommendations from each sub­ committee are grouped together. Recommendations are not listed in any particular order ofpriority.

Programmatic Recommendations Page 35 Fund Community Crime Fund the Incident-Based Prevention Services Crime Reporting System

Law enforcement agencies are the Virginia's current system of collect­ primary source of crime prevention ing and reporting crime data provides programs 1n localities throughout Vir­ little information about the occurrence ginia. These crime prevention programs and the nature of crime in the State. include Neighborhood Watch, DARE, Recent studies of convenience store school safety, business security, crime crime, carjacking and firearms violence prevenfon through environmental de­ were hampered by the lack of detailed, sign, and many others. uniform crime data. The current Uni­ form Crime Reporting sJstem is a Although they act as the primary summary data report format developed source of crime prevention programs, nearly 60 years ago. Computer technol­ law enforcement agencies assign just ogy now provides the ability to collect over one percent of their sworn staff to more detailed and uniform crime data. full time crime prevention duties. Crime A new system, called Incident-Based prevention is recognized as an important Crime Reporting, will replace the cur­ INTRODUCTION TO CRIME function by most police and sheriff rent summary-based system. PREVENTION SUBCOMMIT­ departments, but they are unable to win TEE PROGRAMMATIC the necessary budget support to initiate "A new generation of improved police or expand crime prevention services. RECOMMENDATIONS information systems that provide a rich source of data for law enforcement The most effective way to The Commission recommends that and criminal justice policy analysts is control violent crime is to funds be provided to the Department of emerging across the countly... State prevent it from happening in Criminal Justice Services to implement and local criminal justice analysts the first place. Strategies to a Community Crime Prevention Grant stand to benefit immensely from this prevent violent crime must new source ofdata. " eliminate situations which lead program. The purpose of the program would be to provide grants to local to criminal behavior and Futures in Crime Analysis: Exploring remove opportunities for governments to reduce the opportunity Applications oflncident-based Crime committing crimes. for crime. Fundable activities would Data. U.S. Department ofJustice (1991) include establishing crime prevention The Commonwealth must officers, school liaison officers and crime develop programs that will help prevention planners. The grants would The Commission recommends that give young people the guid­ be offered to localities with particularly funding be provided to allow Virginia ance, attitudes and skills they high violent crime rates. to develop and solicit bid proposals to need to reject violence and bring about the full-scale implementa­ criminal activity and instead pursue productive lives. It must Law enforcement crime prevention tion ofIncident-Based Crime Reporting work in partnership with programs are effective in reducing home as soon as possible. localities to coordinate burglaries, business robberies, and other responses to violent crime, to crimes of 0ppOliunity. Increased fund­ To understand and combat violent strengthen community and law ing of these programs will expand these crime, more data is needed about crime enforcement ties, alld to crime prevention services and increase situations, crime locations, and the vic­ integrate crime prevention into the involvement of government and pri­ tims and offenders involved in crimes. the design of communities. vate organizations in crime prevention This data will allow criminal justice, activities. Expanded involvement in social services, education, community This section of the report crime prevention is key to addressing planning,and other specialists to take describes each of the program­ matic recommendations crime as more than just a law enforce­ steps to address the causes of crime, developed by the Crime Preven­ ment problem. reduce the opportunity for crime, and tion Subcommittee to achieve ensure the timely arrest of people who these goals. commit crime.

Page 36 Programmatic Recommendations a Fund One-To-One Provide Funding to Expand Mentoring Programs Court Appointed Special Advocates The Commission recommends that the General Assembly provide funds to Nearly 50,000 children were the the Department of Criminal Justice Ser­ subject of child abuse investigations in vices to establlsh a grant-funded state­ Virginia during fiscal year 1989-1990. wide mentoring program through One­ Because childhood victimization is to-One Partnership, Inc. This program often a precursor to youth or adult will coordinate and assist the broad violence, many of these same children array of mentoring programs in Virginia. may later appear in court as juvenile One-to Qne is a public/private partner­ delinquents. ship which mobilizes people, organiza­ tions and communities to use mentoring One approach to breaking this cycle as an intervention strategy for the needs of violence is the Court Appointed of at-lisk youth. A strong public/private Special Advocate (CASA). CASA vol­ partnership has established the One-to­ unteers assist the court and the guardian One Program in Richmond, and Virginia ad litem (appointed by the court) in Commonwealth University has estab­ providing effective representation of lished a centralized Mentor Training the child's needs and interests, whether Center. the child is a victim or offender. CASA volunteers advocate assessment and Implement Programs to treatment, health and educational ser­ vices, and, as requested by the court, Reduce Youth Violence make recommendations concerning the : i) child's welfare. Violence among youth has signifi­ cantly increased during the past decade. Currently there arc 15 CASA pro­ Between 1983 and 1992, Virginia's ju­ grams servicing 24 Virginia localities. venile arrest rate for murder increased The Commission recommends that the by 186%, aggravated assault by 97%, General Assembly provide funds to the and rape by 98%. Homicide is the Department of Criminal Justice Services leading cause of death for young black (DCJS) to enable an additional nine to males and the second leading cause of twelve localities to obtain grants to death for all youth between 15 and 24. participate in the CASA program.

The Commission recommends that Virginia provide funds to the Depart­ ment of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS) to implement model programs designed to reduce youth violence and to support these programs with training and techni­ cal assistance. These programs would provide grants to local governments for model programs which would include mentoring, conflict resolution, anger management, law related education, and others. Each locality would be required to establish a collaborative publici private partnership advisory group to develop and implement the selected model programs.

Programmatic Recolllmendations Page 37 Fund Community Policing Fund a Crime Prevention Training Through Environmental DesigJl Curriculum Community policing is changing law enforcement from an emphasis on In many violent crime areas the enforcing the law to one of policing the physical environment enhances oppor­ community to solve problems and tunities for crime. Crime prevention of­ prevent crimes. However, current law ficers often find it difficult to make enforcement training in Virginia is based useful crime prevention recommenda­ on the law enforcement model. This tions for these areas because it is too training must be updated to incorporate costly to change the environment. De­ the philosophy of community policing. signs that contribute to crime may occur because students in architecture, engi­ The Commission recommends that neering, urban planning and public the General Assembly provide funds to administration receive little or no the Department of Criminal Justice Ser­ training in methods for designing envi­ vices to develop basic law enforcement ronments to prevent crime. Teaching training outlines which incorporate com­ designers how to incorporate crime munity policing. Last year, funds were prevention into planning, design and provided for the necessary job task construction will help ensure that Vir­ analysis reviews. Now a curriculum ginia builds environments which do not specialist is needed to translate the contribute to crime. work of these reviews into training materials. These materials will be shared The proper design and effective use of with law enforcement agencies and acad­ the built envirollment can lead to a emies, and program updates and enhance­ reduction in the fear of crime and the ments will be made as experience is incidence of crime, and to all im­ gained with each program. provement in the quality of life.

Each year, about 975 individuals com­ Dr. C. Ray Jeffrey pleteentry-levellaw enforcement train­ Crime Prevention Through ing, and about one-half of Virginia's Envi ronl11ental Design (1971) 13,000 law enforcement officers take 40 hours of mandatory in-service basic The Com.'1llssion recommends that training. Updated training materials will funding be provided to appropriate Vir­ help ensure that both new and experi­ ginia colleges or universities to develop a enced law enforcement personnel are curriculum for architecture, engineering, trained in community policing. urban planning and public administration students which incorporates crime preven­ tion through environmental design (CPTED). The Governor's Task Force on Substance Abuse and Sexual Assault on College Campuses recommended that all campuses incorporate CPTED into their campus master plan and the architectural design of new facilities and planned renovations. Teaching students in these professions the principles of CPTED is a long-term but ultimately very cost effective way to help reduce crime on colleges campuses, in neighborhoods and communities, and throughout the state.

Page 38 Programmatic Recommendations - Continue Funding the Provide Funds to Improve Governor's Anti-Crime Retail Store Employee Partnership Safety

Governor Wilder and the 1992 The National Center for Disease General Assembly established the Control and Prevention has identified Governor's Anti-Crime Partnership to murder as the leading cause of death for focus the resources of the state and women in the workplace. Most of these selected localities in a high-priority strat­ homicides occur inhigh-11skretail stores. egy to reduce violent crime, drug­ In 1992, five Virginia convenience store related crime and the fear of crime. workers were murdered at work. By com­ Currently, the state is participating in a parison, no Virginia police officers were partnership with the city of Newport murdered in the line of duty in 1991 or "It is"interesting to note that News which directs the combined use of 1992. only 37% of all robberies personnel, technical expertise, resources, st~tewide involve a jireaml. information, and intelligence gathering The growth of small retail busi­ Yet, in convenience store rob­ capabilities of state agencies and their nesses with few employees that work beries, the rate jumps to local counterparts into a cohesive and late hours will likely mean more attacks 65%." comprehensive anti-crime strategy. on retail workers. These attacks present a significant danger to retail employees Report to the Virginia State The strategy involves housing, eco­ and a potential threat to store customers. Crime Commission on nomic development, education, mental Violent Crime and health, social services, law enforce­ The Commission recommends that Worker's Safety In Virginia Convenience Stores (1991) ment, as well as citizens, community funds be provided to the Department of groups and organizations. The goal is to Labor and Industry to provide safety and reduce violent crime and the fear of security training to retail businesses at crime in the community through the high risk of being victimized by violent combined resources of the state and se­ crime. Labor and Industry currently pro­ lected localities. vides training to a variety of occupa­ tional groups to reduce work-related The Commission recommends to deaths and injuries. The training would the General Assembly that funding for be offered to small retail businesses the Governor's Anti-Crime Partnership that are open late at night as well as be continued and that funding be ex­ stores with high rates of violent crime. panded to include additional localities This training would be offered on a during fiscal years 1994 through 1996. voluntary basis.

Preliminary results from the Anti­ Crime Partnership in Newport News are encouraging. The police are em­ phasizing community policing and in­ creasing their presence in target areas, the number of juvenile and social work­ ers in target areas has increased, citizen groups are forming educational programs for parents and youths, building codes are being enforced, and abandoned houses are being demolished.

Programmatic Recommendations Page 39 1M Increase Prosecutorial Provide Increased Training Resources for Commonwealth's Attorneys Commonwealth's Attorneys per­ form a vital role in the criminal justice Virginia and its localities provide system. To properly assist the adminis­ extensive training to most members of tration of justice and protect the public, the criminal justice system, including Commonwealth's Attorneys need an state and local police officers, sheriffs, adequate number of staff assistants and and judges. However, little training is they need to be able to retain those staff available to Commonwealth's Attorneys members to maintain a group of experi­ and their assistants. A new Assistant enced attorneys. As seen in the table Commonwealth's Attorney typically has below, increases in serious crime have had only basic courses in criminal law INTRODUCTION TO outpaced the increases in Assistant and procedure in law school. Acase that CRIMINAL JUSTICE/ Commonwealth's Attorney positions has been carefully developed over months LA W ENFORCEMENT authorized by the state. While atTests SUBCOMMITTEE by law enforcement officers well trained PROGRAMMATIC increased by almost 24% between 1988 in criminal investigations can be lost RECOMMENDATIONS and 1992, the number of Assistant beyond retrieval by an inexperienced Commonwealth's Attorneys positions prosecutor who has not been adequately Violent crime has increased increased by only 15%. faster than the resources, trained. personnel and information Display 18 which are available to the Comparsion of Growth in Arrests and Assistant Commonwealth's Attor­ Commonwealth for fighting this Increases in Number of Prosecutors Statewide, 1988-1992 neys need extensive training in criminal crime. The Commonwealth must litigation, case preparation, interviewing provide its prosecutors with the personnel and training needed to of witnesses, jury selection, and other ArreSlS* 21.012 25,995 23.7 deal with the growing number of No. Ass!. CA's" 227 261 15.0 topics. Additionally, because criminal arrests and case loads. Cascload/ Ass!. CA 92.6 99.6 7.6 law rapidly changes, veteran "Arrests: Murder. Rape. Robbery. Aggravated Assault, Burglary, and Drug sales. Commonwealth's Attorneys and assist­ Arresting violent offenders is "'State-funded only. ants need specialized training in addition futile unless these offenders are to the current minimum mandatory successfully prosecuted and Additional Assistant Common­ convicted. The Commonwealth continuing legal education courses. The must provide security and wealth's Attorney positions should be Commonwealth's Attorneys' Services assistance to citizens who witness created and funded, and the general Council has only enough resources to or are victimized by violent salary scales for assistant prosecutors provide the bare minimum to meet basic crime. Otherwise, citizens will should be increased. If Commonwealth 's license continuation requirements. not come f0l1h to provide law Attorneys do not receive additional enforcement officials and prosecutors with the information assistants commensurate with increases The Commission recommends that they need to arrest, prosecute and in the number of arrests for serious the General Assembly provide suffi­ convict violent offenders. Finally, offenses, their offices will be forced to cient general funds to enable the the Commonwealth must create a spend less time on individual cases or Commonwealth's Attorneys' Services unified data system to collect, limit the types of cases to which the coordinate and analyze the Council to provide week-long training irifol7llation needed to develop Commonwealth's Attorney will assign sessions at least once a quarter. These and evaluate programs to reduce personnel. funds will compensate instructors, pay violent crime. the lodging and meal expenses of Furthermore, if salary ranges for Commonwealth's Attorneys and assist­ This section ofthe report assistants are not increased, Common­ describes each of the program­ ants who attend, and cover materials and matic recommendatiollS devel­ wealth's Attorneys will be unable to com­ other expenses of the sessions. Each oped by the Criminal JusticelLaw pete for attorneys who wish to enter newly appointed or elected prosecutor Eliforcement Subcommittee to public service. The result may be a should be able to obtain basic criminal achieve these goals. reduction in the quality of legal skill trial advocacy training within three available to Commonwealth's Attorneys. months of taking oftice.

Page 40 Programmatic Recommendations Create a Statewide Toll-Free Fund Statewide Victim Victim Assistance Telephone Assistance Programs Line The Department of Criminal Jus­ tice Services (DCJS) provides grants Studies show that providing crime for 36 victim and witness assistance pro­ victims with immediate basic victim grams throughout Virginia. These pro­ assistance and services increases their grams help victims and witnesses deal confidence in and satisfaction with the with the complexities of the criminal criminal justice system, improves their justice system, provide information and ~'-' willingness to cooperate with the system, direction in applying for victims' com­ "Victim-witness personnel and aids their recovery from the trauma are the bridges between the pensation, and provide specialized coun­ of victimization. victims amLtJ;e criminal seling or social services for victims or justice system. The healing referral to such services. During fiscal and understanding proc­ year1992,DCJS grant-funded programs I esseS begin on these bridges. assisted 36,624 victims and witnesses. Please find funds for the However, 84% of Virginia's population additional needed victim live in underserved localities. A state­ witness programs across the wide needs assessment, based on crime ' Commonwealth. They are ~ and court statistics, has identified a need vital to the healthy survival for additional victim!witness programs ofvictims of crime." and staff members. Mother ofa homicide victim in letter to Secretary of The Commission recommends that Public Safety funding be provided for 13 new victim! witness programs in localities with no The Commission recommends that programs, that 28 regional programs be ,. i the Geneml Assembly fund a statewide funded to provide services to crime vic­ toll-free crime victim assistance tele­ tims in 63 rural and lOwer crime areas, phone line to provide services such as: and that funding be provided to 18 crisis intervention, assistance in filing existing programs for additional staff. for victims' compensation, information These increases would provide all of about the criminal justice system, and Virginia's population with access to vic­ information about and referrals to com­ tim assistance programs. munity resources. Victims living il1 areas with existing victim assistance services who call the toll-free number will be referred to appropriate commu­ Display 19 nity resources, such as victim/witness programs, sexual assault crisis centers, domestic violence shelters, social services, mental health, and ctiminal justice agencies.

To ensure that crime victims living in areas without victims services pro­ grams have access to basic information and services, staff and volunteers would assist callers. An examination of crime statistics and victim assistance program data indicates that the telephone line Note: Light burgundy color represents localities withollt victim-witness would serve about 1,000 clients in the programs. first year of operation.

Programmatic Recolllmendatiolls Page 41 itt Fund a Virginia Witness Reallocate Undisbursed Protection Program Crime Victims' Compensation Funds The federal Witness Protection Program is the only organized program The Criminal Injury Compensation to protect an individual who is a witness Fund (CICF) was established in 1976 to in a criminal proceeding. This program pay unreimbursed expenses and wage is generally used for witnesses losses for victims who are injured by in vol ved in federal crimes and is crime. Revenue for the fund is provided expensive. by costs imposed against felons and misLiemeanants and by federal grants. Currently, witness protection for No taxpayer funds are used to support individuals involved in state and local the CICF or the Division of Crime criminal proceedings is provided only Victims' Compensation, which admin­ on a limited, ad hoc basis. In state isters the CICF. In recent ye~.!'s re­ cases, some witnesses who cannot be sources have been limited and some­ afforded such protection are too intimi­ times the Division of Crime Victims' dated or afraid to voluntarily come for­ Compensation has had to delay awards ward to testify. In some cases, witnesses to victims. During the last five years the have been murdered and cases not number of claims filed by victims has prosecuted because witnesses were increased about 300%, although depos­ intimidated and failed to testify. Unless its to the CICF have only increased mod­ witnesses can be offerred some measure estly. of protection, such as temporary relocation, cases will be lost because testimony crucial to successful prosecu­ tion is lacking.

The Commission recommends that funds be appropriated to allow the Department of State Police to establish and maintain a state witness protection program to temporarily relocate wit­ "One o/the most heartbreak­ nesses or otherwise protect witnesses ing things that can happen to a and their families who may be in danger prosecutor is to have someone because of their cooperation with the say: No, I'm scared and I just investigation and prosecution of seri­ In some cases victims or businesses won't come/orward. H ous violent crimes. that are owed restitution cannot be located because they have moved, gone U.S. Att017ley General The Superintendent of State Police Janet Reno out of business or have not provided the shall make the services of the program court with a current address. If efforts to available tolaw enforcement and crimi­ locate these individual or business are naljustice agencies of all counties, cities unsuccessful, tllese funds are returned to and towns in Virginia. Providing such the Commonwealth and do not directly protection for crime witnesses, victims benefit crime victims. of violent crimes, and informants who provide information about criminal ac­ The Commission recommends that tivities will increase their Willingness to these undisbursed funds be deposited in testify for the prosecution and increase the CICFratherthan returned to the Com­ the chances of successfully convicting monwealth. This would help the CICF criminals. ensure thatthere are adequate funds avail­ able for crime victim's compensation.

Page 42 Programmatic Recommendations ------

Include Municipal Create a Unified Criminal Misdemeanors in Victims' Justice Decision Support Compensation Funding System Committee

The Criminal Injury Compensation Criminal justice policy makers need Fund (CICF) helps pay unreimbursed to know how decisions made in one part expenses and wage losses for victims of the criminal justice system affect who are injured by crime. Revenue for decisions and practices throughout the the fund is provided by costs imposed criminal justice process. For example, against felons and misdemeanants and how does the use of community policing by federal grants. No taxpayer funds are affect court caseloads? How does the :) used to support the CICF or the Division court's use of intermediate sentencing of Crime Victims' Compensation, which programs affect prison and jail popula­ administers the CICF. Inrecent years re­ tions? How do correctional treatment sources have been limited and caused programs affect recidivism rates? delay for awards to victims. During the last five years the number of claims filed Policy makers must have answers by victims has increased about 300%, i.o these questions to decide which although deposits to the CICF have only programs offer workable, cost-effec­ increased modestly. tive approaches to reducing crime and enhancing public safety. Existing crimi­ "A 'pajor drawback with Under current state law. a $20 cost naljustice data systems cannot provide both current systems and is assessed on all convictions for misde­ the data needed to answer these ques­ new initiatives is that there meanor offenses defined in the Code of tions. These systems support individual is little or no coordination Virginia, except for public drunkenness. components of the criminal justice between state agencies and This revenue is deposited in the CICF. system, but restrict efforts to produce individual data systems. About 80% of all funds deposited in the system-wide information. The numer­ This lack oj coordination o CICF are collected as a result of convic­ ous different ways t.hat offenders and affects both the consistency and qU(llity ojavailable tions for these offenses. offenses are identitied in law (mfurce­ data ... Past studies have ment, courts and corrections data sys­ suggested that a separate, Individuals convicted of municipal tems makes it impossible to track and comprehensive data ordinance misdemeanors are not assessed analyze information about offenders collection system be the $20 cost. Many localities charge and cases as they progress through the developed to accommodate misdemeanor offenses under municipal criminal justice system. requirements jor policy­ ordinances rather than under the Code of related analysis. " Virginia. Some of the most frequently The Commission recommends that charged misdemeanor offenses, such as Virginia establish a standing commit­ Report to the Secretary of, DUIJDWI, are routinely charged under tee of top-level criminal justice policy Public Sajety, (1990) local ordinances. In such cases, the 10- makers to identify what information ------~------o calitiea collect fine revenues, but no policy makers need to develop, imple­ deposits are made to the CICF. ment and evaluate criminal justice poli­ cies and programs with a system-wide The Commission recommend} that perspective. The Governor's Commis­ the $20 cost be imposed on all mis­ sion on Prison and Jail Overcrowding // demeanants, incl uding those charged and (COPJO) recommended creating a convicted under municipal ordinances unified criminal justice data system to also identified in the Code of Virginia provide this type of infonnation. A (except public drunkenness). The $20 feasibility study now underway has al­ assessment should be imposed in ready identified the need for such top addition to any costs imposed by the level involvement as a necessary first localities to avoid reducing fine step to planning and developing a uni­ revenues collected by the localities. fied system.

Programmatic Recommelldations Page 43 A Wi Provide Vocational Expand Prison Work Assessment in Release Facilities Adult Institutions The Department of Corrections The Department of Corrections (DOC) Work Release program offers provides inmates in adult correctional skills assessment, life skill training, and facilities with vocational education pro­ work oppOltunities to less than 200 grams that are intended to improve inmates who are within six months of inmates' skills and make them more their parole release date. The work employable when they are released. release program is designed to improve When inmates are assigned to a prison, an inmate's ability to find employment they receive an orientation which in­ following release on parole. National cludes information about the vocational research has demonstrated that unem­ programs available. However, inmates ployment is a key predictor of recidi­ vism. Currently, DOC's work release INTRODUCTION TO do not receive any type of vocational program is primarily operated out of a INMATE PRODUCTIVITY assessment to identify their occupa­ SUBCOMMITTEE tional interests and abilities. Because single facility and is available to less PROGRAMMATIC there is no vocational assessment, in­ than one percent of the total DOC RECOMMEND4.TJONS mates enroll in programs that they know inmate population. little about or in which they have little Virginia's jail and prison interest. As a result, many inmates The Commission recommends a populations attest to the fact substantial expansion of DOC wmk that many of those who are begin programs, find out they do not reLeased will commit other like them or are poorly suiteD for them, release facilities. An expansion of crimes and be returned to and drop out. work release opportunities, including a incarceration. In a recent count, geographic dispersion of these facilities, repeat felony offenders made The Commission recommends that offers a means of reducing unemploy­ up over 30% of our incarcer­ ment and recidivism among parolees. It ated population. vocational assessment be provided for adult inmates entering the correctional is recommended that facilities and beds The CommonweaLth must system. Without vocational assess­ devoted to work release be expanded to develop programs that will re­ ment, valuable vocational education accommodate as many as 500 inmates duce recidivism. The Subcom­ resources will be wasted as inmates by 1998. The Commission also recom­ mittee believes that recidivism mends that future parolees become eli­ can be reduced by providing participate in programs that provide offenders with the skills and per­ minimal benefit. Such assessment will gible for work release programs as early spectives needed to return to also provide information needed to as 24 months prior to their likely parole society as productive citizens. place inmates in institutions which offer date, rather than the current six months. Vocational assessment and in­ training or work assignments that best Such eligibility would be coordinated mate work programs should be with the Virginia Parole Board. expanded, as should programs match their interests and abilities. to reduce substance abuse by offenders and coordinate COlll­ munityaftercarefollowing their Display 20 release. Finally, the Common­ Types of DOC Inmate Employment wealth must examine and evalu­ August 1992 ate offender treatmelltprograms ~.... _"'" Capital Construction 46 and programs that provide Unfit or Unavailable f----IWork Release 124 sanctiolls which offer alterna­ Road Gangs 610 tives to the high costs of incar­ ceratioll. Agribusiness 200

17zis sectioll describes each of the programmatic recom­ Correctional mendations developed by the Unemployed Enterprises 1,417 Inmate Productivity Subcom­ Inititutional Inmates Employment mittee to achieve these goals. 1643 10,302

-----~---~-.-

Page 44 Programmatic Recommendations Provide Working Capital Pilot Test Work Release for Virginia Correctional Programs for Local Jail Enterprises Inmates

Virginia Correctional Enterprises Item Number 74 of the 1993 Appro­ (VCE) serves a market which includes priations Act provides funding to local all State agencies, State-supported insti­ jails for &tate-responsible inmates tutions, and local governments. Re .. diverted from jail to approved alterna­ cently, this market was expanded to in­ tive programs on a limited basis. This clude all non-profit organizations in the funding is intended to provide incen­ state, such as schools, hospitals, chari­ tives for diverting inmates to selected ties, and associations. Although VCE is alternative programs and reduce over­ comparable in scope to other public and crowding in local jails and prisons. private business operations, veE is un­ Inmates will also benefit by participat­ like these other operations in that it does ing in work release programs which not have access to a permanent source of opeI'ate in the community to which they working capital such as a revolving line will return. Such programs may link of credit. Other public and private busi­ inmates to potential local employers, ness operations require a ready source of further improving their chances to be­ capital to allow them to take advantage of come prod:.:ctive members of society. o opportunities that present themselves in the normal course of business. These opportunities include developing new products orservices, expanding existing production facilities, purchasing new equipment, or entering new markets.

The Commission recommends that the General Assembly direct that an interest-free revolving line of credit for VCE be established on the bouks of the State Comptroller. This line of credit will provide VCE with a permanent source of working capital. There are no other known public or private organiza­ tions in Virginia comparable in scope with VCE's operations that do not have such a source. The Commission recommends the formation of a study group to assess The additional sales revenue made these incentive systems for diverting state possible by this line of credit will allow responsible inmates to local work re­ o employment of 50 to 60 additional in­ lease programs, and to consirler expan­ mates. If VCE is not allowed access to sion of these programs. The Department such a source, it will be unable to take of Criminal Justice Services is cUlTently advantage of business opportunities and evaluating this incentive program. The will be unable to fulfill its mission of study group should include representa­ maximizing inmate training and work tives from the Department of Correc­ opportunities and providing for sus­ tions, the Department of Criminal Jus­ tained growth in today's competitive tice Services, the Virginia Parole Board, business environment. and the Virginia Sheriffs' Association.

Programmatic Recolllmelldatiolls Page 45 Expand Correctional Expand and Coordinate Substance Abuse Programs Inmate Community Aftercare Services A Joint Legislative Audit and Review Comrni&sionreportfound that over 80% of All inmates that are released from the offenders in the custody of the state correctional facilities have a parole Commonwealth have a history of drug or plan developed prior to their release. alcohol abuse. About 30% of inmates However, there are often no resources were committed to Virginia prisons in available to lmplement the plan once the 1990 for drug felonies, and many of the offender is released. Many offenders remaining 6,892 inmates were committed lv.ck the financial and other resources for drug-related crimes. A study of needed to become self-sufficient with­ Virginia drug felons released from prison out assistance. Under certain circum­ in 1983 found that 40% of the drug offend­ stances, the Department of Corrections ers were laterreconvicted forafelony. The (DOC) may provide inmates with up to highest recidivism rate, 57%, was for $25, clothing, and bus transportation offenders previously incarcerated for upon release. Funding allocated to DOC possession of Schedule IIII drugs. for such services amounts to less than $5 In 1990, 81 % of state inmates per offender. The Commission recommends that had a substance abuse problem when they were initially the correctional system's substance It is important that the limited incarcerated. A closer look at abuse treatment capacity be increased services that DOC is able to provide to this group indicated that 70% from 10% to 20% of inmates needing released inmates be coordinated with had regularly lIsed somefonll treatment. This would be accomplished existing community services. Inmates of illegal drug. by expanding the number ofspaces avail­ who start GED programs while in prison able in prison for: (1) substance abuse need to be linked to community-based education, (2) intensive counseling pro­ programs that enable them to complete grams, (3) therapeutic communities, and the GED. Likewise, inmates who re­ (4) aftercare and relapse prevention. ceive substance abuse or sex offender treatment while in prison should be Research has shown that substance linked with similar community-based abuse treatment programs in prison can services upon their release. Failing to succeed. The Therapeutic Community complete or continue these services (TC) program is a self-help approach following release may increase the involving lifestyle change and has proven chances that the inmate will recidivate. to be a powerful approach to rehabilitat­ Offenders who recidivate tend to do so ing substance abusers. within a short time following release,

Display 21 indicating that this is the most critical Percentage of Felons with Evidence of Drug Abuse time to make services available. and Felons Receiving Drug Treatment (1990 - 1992) 45% 44% The Commission recommends that more funding be provided for employ­ 35% ment and education services and for sub­ stance abuse and sex offender treatment 25% for state responsible offenders upon 15% their release. It also recommends that pilot programs be implemented in se­ 5% lected probation and parole districts in

0% which Transition Coordbators review Murder Robbery All Violent parolees' DOC program progress and link the parolees with needed commu­ • Evidence of Drug Abuse o Received Drug Treatment nity-based aftercare services.

Page 46 Programmatic Recommendations Expand llome Electronic Evaluate Alternative Monitoring Programs Sanction Programs

Home Electronic Monitoring (HEM) There are a variety ofprograms avail­ programs are an effective supervision able which provide sanctions that are Phases in the and case management option for certain alternatives to jail and prison incarcera­ Decision Making probation and parole populations. Cur­ tion. Most of these programs are de­ Process rently, the Department of Corrections signed to operate less expensively than has only 90 HEM units available for use incarceration, address offenderproblems Identifying statewide. CUlTently there are far more such as substance abuse, and maintain or Opportunities or f<- than 90 offenders who could benefit from establish links between the offender and Problems HEM supervision. the home community. These types of programs include supervised work ~ experience, treatment programs, andelec­ Identifying tronic monitoring programs. Offenders and may be sentenced directly to many of Exploring ~ Alternatives these programs instead of incarceration, or may be sent following a period of ~ incarceration. Evaluating Due to the proliferation ofthese pro­ Alternatives f<- grams in recent years, there is a need to assess the effectiveness of these pro­ t grams so that limited resources can be Choosing directed toward those which show the an ~ most potential for reducing costs, reduc­ Alternative ing recidivism, and protecting public The Commi~sion recommends that safety. ~ the Division of Community COlTection's Implementing HEM program be expanded by provid­ The Commission recommends that the ~ ing an additional 200 HEM units over the all alternative sanction pilot progrDms Decision next biennium. Expansion at this rate resulting from the Violent Crime Com­ will allow the Division to increase the mission contain provisions andresources t use of this effective option without over­ for objective third party evaluations of Evaluating the burdening the probation and parole dis­ their effectiveness. An objective evalu­ Results of tricts. The COlmnission also recommends ation of program effectiveness is critical the Decision that additional probation and parole staff for deciding which programs should be (both lit the officer and surveillance expanded and which should be discon­ I officer levels) be provided to ensure tinued. Arnold J. LOl'e lilfel7lal Evaluatioll: Bui/d­ proper supervision ofthe increased num­ c' illg Organizations From ber of offenders monitored through The primary impact of increased With ill. (1991) HEM. evaluation efforts will be on third party evaluators such as the Department of An additional 200 HEM units over Criminal Justice Services' Crilninal the next two years will allow a minimum Justice Research Center. Demonstration of 1,920 offenders to receive HEM su­ ofprogram effectiveness is the most criti­ pervision. The high risk offenders that cal criterion when considering expan­ would be supervised with these units sion of pilot programs. The Research will already be eligible for community Center will require more resources than supervision, and HEM supervision will it cUlTently has if evaluation of all the serve to intensify the supervision they pilot programs recommended by the receive. Commission is required.

Programmatic Recommendations Page 47 • gel· = Train Judges on Available Train Probation and Parole Intermediate Sanctions Officers in Sex Offender Supervision Many judges seek to punish offend­ ers using intermediate sanctions which Sex offenders present a unique set of are more restrictive than traditional pro­ challenges to the probation and parole bation, but less resttictive than incar~ officers responsible for supervising their ceration in jail or prison. There are a behavior in the community following variety of intermediate sanctions avail­ release from prison. Sex offenders are able in Virginia, including boot camp, more than twice as likely as other of­ community diversion incentive pro­ fenders to commit another sex offense grams, home electronic incarceration, following their release. Most probation day reporting, intensive probation, and and parole officers are not trained to deal drug treatment facilities. The types of with the special characteristics of this sanctions that are available to judges population of offenders. Behaviors which varies by jurisdiction. Because the avail­ may serve as warning signs of re­ ability of these sanctions varies, judges offending may go unrecognized. The are sometimes unclear about what sen­ supervision of sex offenders requires tencing options are available to them in specialized training in the etiology of their jurisdiction. Providing judges with sexual offending, understanding sex this information will give them in­ offender behavioral patterns, and the creased flexibility in sentencing. coordination of other involved parties in the community such as therapists, courts, The Commission recommends that law enforcement and family. the Department of Corredions' Division of Community Corrections make annual The Commission recommends that presentations to judges on the types of probation and parole officers be trained sanctions currently available as sentenc­ to monitor the sex offender's cycle of ing options in the jurisdictions they serve. offending and to identify early warning These oresentations should be made at signs of relapse. This would enable the se~i-annual meetings of circuit probation and parole officers to imple­ court judges conducted by the Judicial ment more stringent controls or more Conference of Virginia. These meetings intensive treatment if needed. This train­ could be used to keep judges apprised ing should be provided to probation and about the intermediate sanction programs parole officers in the Department of available in the jurisdictions within each Youth and Family Services and the judicial region. Department of Corrections, which are responsible for supervising sex offend­ ers. The cost of the training program will depend on the scope of the program. Both departments will need to determine the most cost effective manner in which to provide the training.

Better supervision of sex offenders may reduce the high recidivism rates among paroled sex offenders. Reduced recidivism rates would enhance public safety and lead to reduced costs associ­ ated with prosecution, incarceration and treatment of repeat offenders.

Page 48 Programmatic Recommelldations I------·---·----"--~

I Q .. I

Pilot Test Intensive Evaluate the Effectiveness I b j Supervision Program of Sex Offender Treatment I b j for Sex Offenders Treatment programs for sex offend­ Paroled sex offenders present a sig­ ers may offer an alternative to expensive nificant risk to the community due to long-term prison incarceration. How­ their high levels of recidivism. As seen ever, research on the effectiveness of sex offender treatment programs shows in Display 22, nearly 50% of rapists ,B released from prison were convicted of mixed results. Some treatment pro­ another crime within 5 years of release grams are reported to effectively reduce and nearly 20% were convicted of an­ recidivism while others are not. Because other identical violent felony. the cost of sex offender treatment is o relatively high and the effectiveness of The lack of training in dealing with these programs is unproven, it raises the sex offenders, and the size of current question of whether or not Virginia caseloads for parole officers (up to should devote scarce resources to these 100 cases for adult probation/parole sex offender treatment programs. officers and 70 cases for juvenile proba­ tion/parole officers), prohibits effective Display 22 JI I supervision and treatment ofthis popula­ 5-Year Recidivism Rates for Rapists Released from tion of offenders. Prison in 1983, by New Conviction Type The Commission recommends that Virginia pilot test an intensive sex of­ New Rape fender parole supervision program in Conviction several localities with a large number of New Violent convicted sex offenders. This program Felony Conviction would use specially trained parole offic­ New Felony ers with reduced case-loads to provide Conviction intensive supervision, control and treat­ ment for sex offenders who have com­ Any New 46.l% pleted a residential treatment program. Conviction

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% The goal of this program is to reduce the high recidivism rates among sex Iii offenders, thereby enhancing public The Commission recommends that safety and reducing the costs associated financialincentives be created for pub­ with prosecuting, incarcerating and lic and private research agencies to pur­ treating these offenders. The program sue longitudinal outcome studies of sex should be evaluated by comparing the offender treatment. Theevaluation stud­ recidivism rates of participating offend­ ies should, at a minimum, address the ers to recidivism rates for sex offenders following questions: in similar localities where intensive • what types of sex offenders are supervision is not provided. most responsive to treatment? what treatment programs are most Additional parole officer positions successful in reducing recidivism? would be needed to pilot test tins pro­ • how effective are sex offender risk gram. The cost of these positions would assessment instruments? be directly related to the size of the pilot • what are the costs for different types f program. of treatment programs? . • what are appropriate lengths of time for parole supervision of sex offenders? I

Programmatic Recommendations Page 49 Use Risk Assessment Scales for Intermediate Sanction Candidates

Intermediate sanctions are designed to divert some offenders from prison, leaving more space in overcrowded pris­ ons for serious offenders. Intermediate sanctions are aimed at offenders whose crimes are serious enough to likely re­ ceive prison sentences, yet at the same As shown ill the display below, among time not as serious as the most danger­ felons convicted of robbelY who are ous prison-bound offenders. If interme­ rearrested within five years of release, diate sanctions are to help relieve over­ nearly 50% were rearrested within 12 months after their release. crowding, they must be applied to offenders who otherwise would have gone to jail or prison. However, national evaluation studies of diversion pro­ grams often show that the offenders diverted into these programs are offend­ ers who would not have been incarcer­ ated in the first place. As a result, many of these programs divert few offenders from jail or prison, do little to relieve overcrowding, and instead become a Display 23 more expensive form of probation. How Quickly Do Robbery Offenders Who Recidivate* Get Rearrested? The Virginia Judicial Sentencing Guidelines Committee has requested % Rearrested Months research directed at assessing the risk of Following At Each recidivism by offenders and identifying Release 12-Month Interval Total the factors associated with lower rates of recidivism. Results of this research will 12 49.0 49.0 help Virginia identify the most suitable 24 26.2 75.2 36 9.6 84.8 candidates for intermediate sanction 48 9.7 94.5 programs. 60 5.5 100.0

The Committee recommends that * Recidivists are defilled as those releasedfrom a the results of cunent recidivism and Virgillia Prison ill 1983 who were rearrested withill five years. risk assessment research be used to supplement current methods of select­ ing candidates for intermediate sanctions programs. The use of a risk assessment scale will increase the use of objective factors in this decision making. Further­ more, use of these scales should reduce recidivism as well as risks to public safety by improving the selection crite­ ria for work release and other programs. Additional advantages may include im­ proved techniques for evaluating alter­ native punishment programs.

Pagp. 50 Programmatic Recommendations cknowledgements

Harold Wright Tom D. Dertinger Jan Thomas Virginia Crime Prevention Association Governor's Employment & Training Virginia Commonwealth University

Mandie Patterson Drew Molloy Eric Stevens Department of Criminal Justice Services Department of Corrections Department of Labor and Industry

Michael McGready Dr. Patrick Gurney Dian McConnel Council, Child Day Care Department of Corrections Department of Youth and Family Services and Early Childhood Edward Wright Frank Ferguson Ronald Collier Chesterfield Community Corrections Division of Legislative Services Virginia Council for Coordinating Prevention Robert S. Weaver Lt. Melvin Jones Associated Marine Institutes, Inc. Petersburg Police Sue Geller Mental Health, Mental Retardation Dr. Russ Petrella Capt. W. A Nowinsky and Substance Abnse Services Commission on Sexual Assault Concerned Citizen

Jeff Steger FralIk Sansone Brenda Vaccarelli Arlington County Police (Retired) Governor's Employment & Training Concerned Citizen

Pam Everton Roslyn Keys Alan Griffith Virginia Council- Coordinating Prevention Capital Area Training Consortium Concerned Citizen

Patricia Boyd Paul W. Keve Nancy Ross Concerned Citizen Governor's Institute for Alcohol and Drugs Commission on Youth

Dana Schrad Nicholas Demos John Ireland Virginia State Crime Commission Center for Substance Abuse Treatment Concerned Citizen

Delegate G. Steven Agee Henry Altice Vonda Charlton House of Delegates Hegiera House Drug TreatmentIRoanoke Concerned Citizen

Tom Karwaki Hartsell Black Robert Kunkel Concerned Citizen Correctional Education Concerned Citizen

Darryl Morris Jay Cochran Thomas S. Huhrry Concerned Citizen Virginia Association of Chiefs of Police Concerned Citizen

Francis Neu, Jr. John Jones Helen Hinshaw Concerned Citizen Virginia State Sheriffs Association Department of Corrections

Louann White Edward Carpenter Bob Armstrong Department of Corrections Virginia Association of Commonwealth SHOCAP Attorneys Wayne Bennett Dr. Gail Browne Correctional Education George Crawley Virginia Parole Board City of Norfolk Dr. Richard Morrison Mindy Daniels Virginia Board of Health Professions Bob Heck Virginia Parole Board Department of Justice Edward Wieckowski Charles E. Hodges Department of Youth & Family Services Charles Deane Department of Youth & Family Services Hanover Learning Center Prince William Police Department Reid Wrenn Dr. Isaac Van Patten Dr. James C. May Brick and Tile Corporation Roanoke Area Sex Offender Program Virginia Task Force/ Substance Abuse Services for Offenders Gene Johnson Tracey A. Ragsdale Department of Corrections Xerox Corporation Katherine Lawson Violence Prevention Project Leslie Bubenhofer Virginia Commonwealth University Department of Corrections

Programmatic Recommendations Page 51 cknowledgements., continued

Malcolm Pitt Pat Paquette Mary J 0 Fields Virginia Camp for Boys Virginia Parole Board Virginia Municipal League

James P. Massie, Jr. Dave Jones Jim Price Concerned Citizen Department of Corrections Statewide Injury Prevention

Kathy Vesley Barry Green Robert L. Taylor Commission on Poverty Planning and Budget Concerned Citizen

William Gilette Debbie Kelso Dr. Edward Peeples Department of Corrections Office of the Lieutenant Governor Department of Preventative Medicine

Mark J. Lewis Judy Divers Jean Auldridge Concerned Citizen Commission on Poverty Virginia CURE

Sandra W. Brandt Fred Russell Mary Devine Step-Up, Inc. Virginia State Crime Commission Division of Legislative Services

Charles Green Department of Criminal Justice Services

ources

Publications: Data Bases: Federal and State Agencies:

Crime in Virginia, Uniform Crime Pre-Sentence Investigation (PSI) data base, State of Virginia Compensation Board Reporting Section, Virginia Virginia Department Display: 18 Department of State Police of Corrections Displays: Displays: 12,21 3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,13,14,15 United States Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Virginia's Modified Age, Race, Sex data and Firemms Inmate Employment Report, Virginia base, United States Display: 17 Department of Correcti0ns Bureau of the Census • Display: 20 Display: 16 VictimIWitness Section, Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Uniform Crime Reports for the Services United States, United States Display: 19 Federal Bureau of Investigation Displays: 1,2

Violent Crime in Virginia, Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services Displays: 22,23

Page 52 Programmatic Recommendations Appendix A:

Meetings of the Governor's Commission on Violent Crime

Full Commission

June 18, 1992 December 1, 1992 August 6, 1992 April 13, 1993 September 17, 1992* June 22, 1993 November 10, 1992 August 25, 1993

*Meeting and Public HearinglRichmond

Crime Prevention Subcommittee

September 2, 1992 May 25,1993 October 1, 1992* June 14, 1993 October 19, 1992 August 11, 1993 May 24,1993

*Meeting and Public HearinglHampton

Criminal Justice/Law Enforcement Subcommittee

September 1, 1992 June 9, 1993 September 28, 1992* June 16, 1993 October 29, 1992 July 29, 1993

*Meeting and Public Hearing/Arlington

Inmate Productivity Subcommittee

August 6, 1992 May 24,1993 September 3, 1992 June 1, 1993 September 14, 1992 June 8, 1993 October 13, 1992* June 11, 1993 October 21, 1992 July 23, 1993 October 26, 1992 August 12, 1993

*Meeting and Public HearinglRoanoke

Programll/atic ReCOlI/melldatiolls Page 53 Appendix B: Programs to Combat Violent Crime: The Community Reacts

The Participants:

Governor L. Douglas Wilder U. S. Attorney General Janet Reno O. Randolph Rollins, Chairman

Delegate James Almand L. D. Oakes Sugen Fulcher Chair-House Courts of Justice President Manager Arlington Virginia Municipal League Archway McDonald's

The Hcnorable Bruce Bach Steve Rosenthal Samuel Glasscock Judge, Fairfax Circuit Court Attomey General of Virginia Former Delegate Suffolk Delegate Robert Bloxom Rev. Benjamin Sparks Accomack SecJnd Presbyterian Church Senator Edward Holland Richmond Chair Dr. William Bosher Senate Courts of Justice Superintendent Paul Timmreck Henrico County Schools Secretary of Finance Delegate Jenauld Jones Vice Chair Col. Jay Carey Theophlise Twitty Commission on Youth Chief Deputy Secretary Newport News Police Dept. Office of Public Safety Susan Kirkley Director Robert Colvin Karen Washabau Alexandria CASA Commissioner Director Alcohol Beverage Control Department of Planning & Budget Senator Louise Lucas Norfolk Penny Anderson Lin Atkins Chair Director, Virginia CARES David Mitchell Virginia Board of Conections Roancke Virginia State Police

James W. Dyke, Jr. Lt. Governor Donald Beyer Chair, Rev. John Peterson Alfr~d Secretary of Education Comm.!Sexual Assault St. Baptist Church Alexandria Rick Gentry Robert Bobb City Executive Director ManagerlRichmond Pat Smith Executive Redevelopment & Housing Authority Director Joanne Bruce Offender Aid & Restoration Michael Greene Crime Victims' Advocate Deputy Secretary Ashland Senator Kenneth Stolle Economic Development Virginia Beach Major O. T. Clarke Christopher Hutton CommanderlRichmond Police Dr. Eugene Trani Commonwealth's Attorney Violent Crime Unit President, VCU Hampton Howard Cullum James Ukrop Lang Keith Secretary President President Health and Human Resources Ukrops Supermarkets Virginia Bar AssociationlMcLean Dr. Margaret Dolan Floyd Wiggins Willie Lanier President School Safety Superintendent. Wheat First Securities, Inc. Virginia Pediatrics Society Richmond Public Schools Ross Mackenzie Editorial Editor, Times Dispatch

Page 54 Programmatic Recommendations ;~~f.:~t~~~~i1

'/r'.- .. ~~ftr

~ Pf": ,...,." ~;-...- , .."-'" . -,.;;:.' r.

.·7··'····'~·~: ...... ~... ',< ~ .

•~ __ . ____T.r ... ~F-.III._.TP' ..

:~T ."''', ' Page 56 Gun Report i I

Guns and Violent Crime

Criminal Justice Research Center Richard P. Kern, Ph. D., Director

Research Analysts:

James C. Creech, Ph.D. Joseph Fridley Lynette Greenfield Kim S. Hunt, Ph.D. Anne A. Jones Neal B. Kauder Greg B. Lilley James J. McDonough, Ph.D. Nancy A. Merritt Stan J. Orchowsky, Ph.D. Tamara M. Poulos, Ph.D. John G. Schuiteman, Ph.D. Jacqueline N. Smith Mason

Research Assistants:

Jeff Chandler Richard Cr(;~s Kris Ragan Carolyn Williamson

Report editor:

James J. McDonough, Ph.D.

Report design:

Carlie Merritt, Division of Information Systems and Technology

Commonwealth of Virginia ----- Department of Criminal i)Ci) Justice Servi~

Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr., Director January, 1994

Gut! Report Page 57 able of Contents

Introduction ...... 59

Fireaml and Handgun Involvement in Murder ...... 60

Weapons Used by Juveniles Arrested for Murder in Virginia (1987-1992) ...... 61

Types of Firearms Possessed and Used by Juveniles and Adults Offenders in Virginia ...... " ...... 62

Most C;;nnmon Handguns Used in Virginia Murders (1989-1991) ...... 64

Revolvers and Semi-Automatic Handguns Used in Virginia Murders (1989-1991) ...... 65

Federally Licensed FireamlS Dealers in Virginia (1985 and 1992) ...... 66

Distribution of Handgun Sales by Virginia Dealers (FY 1991) ...... 67

Multiple Handgun Sales in Virginia (FY 1991) ...... 68

Sources of Firearms Used by Offenders ...... 68

Offenders and Armed Victims ...... 69

Virginia Firearm Legislation ...... 70

Local Firearm Ordinances in Virginia ...... 71

Virginia Firearms Transaction Program Performance (1990 and 1992) ...... 72

Virginia's Mandatory Firearms Penalty Enhancement Law ...... 73

Acknowledgements ...... 74

Sources ...... 75

Page 58 Gl/n Report Introduction

In recent years, Virginia's citizens For example: More than a thousand juvenile and and government leaders have become adult offenders under the custody of increasingly concerned about the pro­ • How prevalent is the use of guns the Deparotments of Corrections and liferation and misuse of firearms­ in violent crimes? Youth and Fru.nily Services, for ex­ partkularly handguns. The increased ample, were interviewed to gather availability of firemms has coincided • How often are juveniles involved data about how often these offenders with rapid increases in murders and in crimes using guns? carried and used firearms while com­ other gun-related violent crimes ,as well mitting crimes, what types offirearms as increases in juveniles committing • What types offirearms are used by they used, and how and where they violent crimes with guns, in the num­ criminals? obtained their firearms. The law ber of assault weapons confiscated by enforcement homicide files of selected police, and in the number of gun­ • Howdocriminalsobtainfirearms? large and small Virginia localities related incidents in public schools. were examined to (:;xtract detailed

Homicide, mainly by firearms, isnow G What laws exist related to the sale information about the types offirearms the leading cause of death anlOng male of firearms, and how many of­ used to commit murders in Virginia Africar-Americans 15 to 34 years old. fenders are convicted under these during 1989, 1990 and 1991. Addi­ laws? tionally, extensive information was Despite the growing concern and gathered from the Virginia Firearoms attention being focused on firearms In response to concerns about Transaction Program (VFTP) to docu­ violence, there is surprisingly little in­ growing firearms violence and the ment how many firearms are sold in formation available about the link lack of data needed to develop Virginia and how often illegal fire­ between guns and violent crime. With­ strategies to combat this violence, arms sales are blocked by the state's out such information, government the Secretary of Public Safety directed innovative instant criminal records can do little to develop policies to the Department of Criminal Justice background check. reduce this violence. Services' Criminal Justice Research Center to prepare a comprehensive Much of the information collected Many questions about guns and report on firemms and crime. at the request of the Secretary was violent crime are debated in gov­ presented to the Governor's Commis­ ernment, in the media, and by the This report draws on many sources sion on Violent Crime to help guide public, often without being guided by of data, some of which have never its deliberations and recommenda­ the solid data needed to provide much­ before been available to Virginia tions concerning firearms and violent needed answers. policy-makers. Much of the data con­ crime. However, much of the more cerning the number of violent crimes detailed infOlmation was not pre­ involving firearms in Virginia was sented to the Commission or was too drawn from the FBI's national Uni­ lengthy to present in the Commission's form Crime Reports (UCR) database. final report. Therefore. this data is Data concerning the number of Vir­ being presented in this separate, spe­ ginia convictions for firearms-related cialreport to beinc1uded with the final offenses was drawn from the state's report of the Commission. Pre/post-Sentence Investigation (PSI) report database. Hopefull y, this report will provide Virginiapolicymakers and others with Additional information was information to guide the development provided by data collection efforts ofpolici~s toreduce firearms violence developed especially for this report. in the Commonwealth.

GUll Repol1 Page 59 Ii Handgun and Firearm Involvement in Murder

Nearly three-quatters of the 563 Display 2 murders reported in Virginia during Violent Crimes Committed with a Firearm 1992 were committed with a firearm, in the United States and Virginia (1992) and more than 80% of these firearms 100% were handguns. Historically, handguns have been used in crime far more often 80% 72.3% than other types of firearms. Hand­ ~ guns are generally the least expensive 60% ~ firealm to obtain and they are much easier to carry and conceal than rifles 40% or shotguns. 20% Display 1 presents the percentage of all murders in the u.s. and Virginia 0% that were committed using a handgun Murder Robbery Assault during the period 1980 through 1992.

• Murders with a handgun increased in both the U.S. and Virginia between 1980 and 1992. In 1980, 49% of the • With the exception of 1982, the • The percentage of murders com­ murders in Virginia were committed percentage ofmurders in Virginia com­ mitted wit~ a handgun in Virginia with a handgun. By 1992, this p~rcent­ mitted with a handgun remained fairly exceeded those committed in the U.S. age had risen to 60%. Handgun mur­ constant between 1980 and 1986. during all years except 1982. dersin the U.S.rosebyasimi~aramount Handgun murders began to rise in 1987, during this same period. and the sharpest increase occurred The increase in violent crimes between 1989 and 1992. committed with firearms is not re­ stricted to murders, noris it restricted to only the use of handguns. Display 2 compares the percentages of murders, Display 1 Percent of Murders in the United States robberies and aggravated assaults com­ and Virginia Committed with Handguns mitted with all types of firearms in the 70% (1980-1992) U.S. and Virginia in 1992. VA 60% • About 68% of murders in the U.S. ______u.s. were committed with a firearm, com­ 50% P""' "" -~ pared to 72% of murders committed in 40% Virginia.

30% • A larger percentage of Virginia robberies were committed with a fire­ 20% arm than were committed in the U.S. 10% • Nearly 25% of the assaults in the 0% 1-,---,---.---,--,----,----.,---,----.,..---.---.---, U.S. were committed using a firearm, 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 compared to about 21 % of the assaults committed in Virginia.

Page 60 Gun Report Weapons Used by Juveniles Arrested for Murder in Virginia (1987-1992)

As seen in the previous display, combined) I. ,re than tripled dudng number of juveniles arrested for murders in Virginia committed with a this period. murder as reported by the UCR in the firearm rose significantly during the years 1987 through 1992. The num­ late 1980s and early 1990s. Onealann­ • The growth in the use of handguns bers shown in this display are less lng aspect of this increase is that mur­ by juveniles was even greater than the because each murder included in the ders by firearm committed by juve­ growth in the use of firearms in gen­ display is counted only once, regard­ niles (those less than 18 years old)rose eral. The number of murders commit­ less of how many juveniles may have even faster than murders overall. ted using a handgun more than qua­ been arrested for the crime. The.pCR drupled from 1987 to 1992. juvenile arrest totals, however, may This increase !is clearly seen include more than one juvenile arrest in Display 3, which presents the The numbers shown in this dis­ for each murder. numbers of Virginia murders during play are somewhat less than the total 1987 -1992in which at least onejuve­ nile was arrested. Murders are classi­ fied by the type of weapon used to Display 3 commit the clime. Weapon types are classified as handguns, other guns Virginia Homicides Involving Juvenile Offenders by Weapon Type (rifles and shotguns) and other weapons (1987 - 1992) (knives, clubs, fists, etc.). Data are taken from the Supplemental Homicide 1987 • Handguns Reports provided by the Uniform D Other Guns Crime Reporting (VCR) system. • Other Weapons 1988 • The number of murd(~rs commit­ ted by juveniles increased for all cat­ egories of weapon types betwee,n 1987 and 1992. Nearly three times as many 1989 juveniles were arrested for murde\.' in 1992 as in 1987. 1990 • The growth in the use of firearms by juveniles is clearly seen by con­ trasting the increases in murders com­ 44 mitted with and without firearms. In 1991 1992, the number of murders commit­ ted using a weapon other than a fire­ arm was almost twice what it was in 1992 1987. By contrast, the number ofmur­ ders committed with all types of fire­ arms (rifles, shotguns and handguns o 10 20 30 40 50

Gun Report Page 61 Types of Firearms Possessed and Used by Juvenile and Adult Offenders in Virginia

Data available from official crime Because the ages of those inter­ arm at a crime scene. statistics provides little information viewed were notrecorded,juvenile and about the relationship between crimi­ adult offenders were identified based • Although many offenders admit­ nals and guns. Generally, crime sta­ on the rep orted average age of offend­ ted to possessing a firearm, only about tistics reveal little more than whether ers in the facilities surveyed. Those one in ten juveniles and adults said an offender used a gun in a crime and identified as juveniles in Display 4 they had carried a firearm while com­ whether the gun was ahandgun, rifle or were incarcerated at a DYFS facility in mitting the crimes for which they were shotgun. which the average offender's age was incarcerated. Even fewer, about 5%, 15.6 years. Those identified as adults said they fired their weapon during To obtain more information about were incarcerated at DOC facilities these crimes. therelationship between criminals and with an averagcinmateageof31 years. guns, the Criminal Justice Research Additionally, because the offense lead­ • Juveniles were more thml twice as Center surveyed offenders incarcer­ ing to incarceration was not recorded, likely as adults to say they had ever ated in nine reception and classifica­ those interviewed are not limited to possessed a semi-automatic pistol. tion facilities operated by the Virginia only violent offenders. They were nearly three times as likely Department of Corrections (DOC) to say they had carried one at a crime and juveniles at the reception and Display 4 presents information scene. Adults were slightly more diagnostic center operated by the about the types of firearms owned and likely to say they had ever possessed Virginia Department of Youth and used by juvenile and adult offenders a revolver or carried or used it at a Family Services (DYFS). All surveys surveyed. All percentages shown are crime scene. were administered by DOC and DYFS based on the total number of offenders staff during interviews conducted be­ interviewed. Data m'e based on an • Adult inmates were somewhat tween November, 1992 and May, 1993. analysis of responses from 1,122 adult more likely than juveniles to have ever All offenders surveyed were assured and 192 juvenile offenders. possessed a rifle or shotgun. No more that their answers were confidential. than 3% of adults and juveniles said To ensure confidentiality, no data was • Juveniles were much more likely they ever carried or used these weap­ collected that would identify any than adults to say they had ever ons during a crime. individual's name, sex, age or convic­ possessed a firearm. Seventy percent tion offense. of juveniles said they had, compared • Almost twice as many juveniles as to less than one-half of the adult in­ adults said they had ever possessed an mates. This is somewhat surpris­ assault-type rifle. ing given that it is much harder

for a juvenile to legally obtain a 4 No more than 1 % of the juveniles firearm than it is for an adult. said they had ever carried an assault rifle at a crime scene. None of the • About one-third of the juve­ juveniles or adults surveyed said they niles and one-fifth of the adults had ever fired this type of weapon at a said they had ever carried a fire- crime scene.

Page 62 Gun Report DispJay4 Firearms Possessed by Juvenile and Adult Offenders

••••••••••••• 70% 32%

48%

41%

18%

•••••••••••• 36%

• Juveniles o Adults 32%

111111111111111111111 25%

20%

20%

Fired at Latest Crime

10% Carried llt Scene 0% 0% Fired at L:llest Crime 0%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Gun Report Page 63

iii Most Common Handguns Display 5 Used in Virginia Murders Most Common Handguns Used in Virginia Murders 1989-1991 (1989 - 1991)

Official crime statistics contain .38 Revolver little information about the types of fIrearms used to commit violent crirnes. .22 Revolver For example, the Uniform Crime Re­ porting (UCR) system only identifIes fIrearms used in homicides as one of 9mmSemi­ three general types: handgun, rifle or Automatic shotgun. Homicide investigators work­ .25 Semi­ ing on individual cases gather much Automatic more information about the fIrearms involved, but this data is not collected .38 Semi­ or reported in any offIcial state crime Automatic reporting system. .32 Revolver To obtain more detailed informa­ .45 Semi- tion about the types of firearms used in Automatic Virginia homicides, the Criminal JJ~S­ tice Research Center collected d~ta .32 Semi- from the homicide case fIles of 18 Automati.c Virginia law enforcement agencies. The 18 agencies selected were in lo­ o 20 40 60 80 100 120 calities which reported more than five Number of Murders murders in the year 1990 to the Vir­ ginia State Police.* For each of these localities, the homicide fIles for the • Amongsemi-automatichandguns, recovered. In other cases, bullets that years 1989, 1990 and 1991 were exam- the 9mm pistol was the most frequently are recovered are so badly deformed ined. used weapon, followed by the .25 cali- that it is difficult to precisely identify ber pistol. the type of fIrearm from which it was A total of 590 murders was com­ fired. mitted with a fIrearm in these locali­ • Three of the most frequently used ties during 1989-1991.In4l30fthese handguns were revolvers and five were The homicide fIles examined to murders, law enforcement offIcials semi-automatic pistols. obtain this information also provided identified the fIrearm used as a hand­ some data about the use of "assault" gun. For 273 of these handguns, they In 30% of the 590 homicide fIles type semi-automatic pistols. Six such were able to identify the caliber and examined, law enforcement inves­ weapons were identified in these fIles. fIring action type of the weapon. Eight tigators were unable to identify the Two of the pistols were identified as types of handguns accounted for 256, type of firearm used to commit the the Intratec Tec-9. One-pistol wasiden­ or 94%, of the 273 murders in which crime. In some cases, neither the mur­ tifIed as "similar to a Tec-9," one as a the type of handgun used was identi­ derer or the fIrearm used was found. "Tec-9, Mac-lO or U zi" and one as an fied. These eight types of handguns are When a firearm is not found, investi­ "Uzi-type weapon." shown in Display 5. gators can often make inferences about the type offirearm used by examining * Twenty Virginia localities reported • By far, the most frequently used bullets recovered at thf, crime scene or more thanfive murders to the UCR section handgun was a .38 caliber revolver. from the victim's body. However, in of the Virginia State Police in 1990. The This handgun was used more than twice some cases even this information is homicide files from two ofthese localities as often as the next most frequently unavailable. Bullets sometimes enter were unavailable for examination, leaving 18 localities from which this data were used handgun, a .22 caliber revolver. and exit a victim's body and are not drawn.

Page 64 Gun Report Revolvers and Semi-Automatic Handguns Used in Virginia Murders 1989-1991

Although the previous display called "semi-automatic" because the represents the end-point of a six -month shows that the revolver is the most trigger must be pulled each time a interval. Data shown are based on the commonly used handgun in the homi­ bullet is fired. Fully automatic fire­ 256 handguns used in murders that cide cases, in recent years lawenforce­ anns, also known as "machine guns," were described in Display 5. ment officials and others have noted fire bullets continuously as long as the that more and more of the handguns trigger is pulled. • In the first half of 1989, revolvers used in violent crimes are semi-auto­ were used to commit 70% of the matic pistols. Semi-automatic pistols reportedly murders examined, compared to only are gaining popUlarity because they 30% for semi-automatic pistols. Revolvers are so given this name have a faster firing rate, are faster and because their ammunition is contained easier to reload, and generally have a " By the latter half of 1991, 43% of in a revolving cylinder. After each pull larger ammunition capacity than the handguns used in murders were of the trigger, the gun is usually manu­ revolvers. semi-automatic pistols. ally "cocked" to revolve the cylinder and align the next bullet with the gun Display 6 shows the relative per­ • As a result of the increasing use of barrel. Semi-automatic pistols, on the centages of revolver and semi-auto­ semi-automatic pistols by criminals, other hand, carry their ammunition in a matic handguns used in Virginia mur­ many federal, state and local law "clip" and automatically align the next ders committed during six consecutive enforcement agencies are replacing bullet with the barrel between each six-month intervals in 1989 through their revolver sidearms with senn­ pull of the trigger. These pistols are 1991. Each date shown in the display automatic pistols.

Display 6 Percent of Revolver and Semi-Automatic Handguns Used in Virginia Mu~ders (1989 • 1991) 70% 66% 70% 61% 56% 57% 60% 56%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0% Jun-89 Dec-89 Jun-90 Dec-90 Jun-I) 1 Dec-91

Type of Handgun: • Semi-Automatic D Revolver

Percentages based on the 8 most commonly used handgulls in 256 gUll-related murders i1l18 selected localities in Virginia with 5 or more murders ill 1990.

I I .: I i GUll Report Page 65 Federally Licensed Fire­ arms Dealers in Virginia 1985 and 1992

The previous displays examined Display 7 how often fIrearms are used in violent Federal License Data for Virginia crimes and the types of fIrearms used 1985 and 1992 by those who commit these crimes. Officials searching for solutions to the Percent problem of gun-related violence must 1985 1992 Change look at all available data when at­ tempting to develop policies to reduce Dealers 5513 6827 +24% these crimes. One approach to reduc­ Pawn Brokers 60 152 +153% ing fIrearms violence is regulating the Manufacturers of Firearms 12 20 +67% sa~e of fIrearms in an attempt to keep Importers of Firearms 23 43 +87% them out of the hands of criminals. To provide information about firearms sales in Virginia, the next several dis­ plays discuss the sources, types and ing fIreanns sales. The annual fee for dealer licensing system is too lenient. volume of commercial firearms a dealer's license is $10. Currently The U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco transactions in the Commonwealth. there are more tllan 287,000 Federal and Firearms (BATF) estimates that This information can be used in firearms licenses in the nation. only about 26% of the current licensees conjunction with other data to better operate from a commercial premises. understand the connections between Display 7 presents the number of BATF also estimates that the remain­ firearms, firearms availability, and federally licensed fIrearm dealers in ing 74% of the licensees conduct little violent crime. Virginia in 1985 and 1992, and the or no business, but simply use the change in these numbers over this license to engage in interstate fIrearms The Federal Gun Control Act of eight-year period. trading, buy guns at wholesale, and 1968 established a licensing system circumvent state record check require­ for persons who manufacture, import • The number of federally licensed ments. or deal in firearms. To obtain a license, fIrearms dealers in Virginia increased an applicant must be at least 21 years by 24% from 1985 to 1992. In 1993, President Clinton directed old, be legally able to possess fire­ the BATF to take steps to tighten com­ arms, and have a premises from which • The number of pawn brokers with pliance with the current dealer licens­ to conduct business. Licensed indi- a federal firearms license more than ing requirements. These steps include viduals must abide by all relevant state doubled from 1985 to 1992, increasing a more rigorous screening of license laws and local ordinances when mak- by 153%. applicants and firearm purchasers, making the "premises" requirement • There ar"e far fewer licensed fIre­ more meaningful, improving BATF's arms manufacturers tllan dealers in response to multiple handgun sales, Virginia. The number of manufactur­ increasing sanctions for dealer viola­ ers increased by 67% from 1985 to tions, and improving agreements with 1992. Most of these manufacturers pro­ state and local law enforcement agen­ duce parts for fIrearms rather than cies that address licensing and fire­ completed weapons. arms trafficking problems.

• The number of importers of fIre­ The Commonwealth of VirgiI'lia ar"ms with a federal fIrearm license does not license fIrearms dealers. How­ increased by 87% from 1985 to 1992. ever, legislation to establish a state licensing system has been recom­ Federal and state officials have mended by the Governor's Commis­ expressed concern that the CUlTent sion on Violent Crime.

Page 66 Gun Report Distribution of Handgun Sales by Virginia Dealers FY 1991 Display 9 Top Ten Handgun Sales Handgun dealers in Virginia range • A total of 1,834 firearms dealers Localities (FY 1991) from dealers who sell fewer than 10 reported 60,044 transactions involving Handgun handguns per year to large dealers who one or more handguns to the VFTP Locality Transactions sell more than 1,000 handguns a year. during FY 1991. A total of 65,221 An indication of handgun sales volume handguns were sold in L~ese transac­ Chesterfield 5,474 in Virginia can be seen by examining tions. The number of handguns sold is Hanover 3,084 data from the Virginia Firearms Trans­ greater than the number of transac­ action Program (VFTP). Display 8 tions reported because some transac­ Virginia Beach 3,039 presents sales data for licensed deal­ tions involved more than one handgun. Prince William 2,454 ers in Virginia who sold at least one Roanoke City 2,272 handgun during fiscal year 1991. Data The 1,834 firearm dealers that Hampton City 2,104 are presented for dealers grouped ac­ reported handgun sales in FY 1991 is Newport News 1,782 cording to handgun sales volume. far fewer than the approximately 6,800 Isle of Wight 1,662 federally licensed frrearm dealers in Fauquier 1,625 • Dealers with the smallest volume Virginia in 1991. There are several Fairfax 1,555 of handgun sales made up 70% of the reasons for this difference. The major­ active handgun dealers in Virginia. ity of licensed dealers in Virginia only However, this group accounted for only sell rifles and shotguns. Also, many 7% of the handguns sold in FY 1991. individuals holding firearms licenses coullties with lm'ge sales volumes are are no longer or never were active adjacentto urban areas with ordinances • Dealers who sold between 11 and dealers. that regulate handgun sales (see 100 handguns made up 23% of all Display 15), This suggests that resi­ dealers in Virginia, and accounted for Display 9 lists the 10 localities in dents of these urban areas may 24% of the handgun transactions in the Virginia that had the largest volume purchase firearms by traveling to state. of handgun sales in FY 1991. It is neighboring jurisdictions with less interesting to note that several rural restrictive purchasing requirements. • Dealers who sold between 101 and 300 handguns made up only 6% of the firearm dealers in Virginia, but ac­ Display 8 counted for 31 % of all handgun trans­ Handgun Sales By Virginia Dealers (FY 1991) actions. This group sold agreaternum­ bel' of handguns than any other group. Number of Perceutof Percent of All Number of Dealer Handgun Handgun All Handgun Handguns Volume Transactions • Dealers who sold between 301 and Dealers Dealers Sold * 1,000 handguns made up only about (N =60,044) 1% of the firemms dealers in Virginia, but accounted for 22 % of all the hand­ 1 to 10 1,275 70% 7% 4,159 gun transactions. 11 to 100 415 23% 24% 14,439 101 to 300 111 6% 31% 18,528 • Only six firearm dealers in Vir­ 301 to 1,000 27 1% 22% 16,103 ginia reported sales of more than >1,000 6 0% 16% 11,992 1,000 handguns in FY 1991. These dealers specialize in firearms and Totals 1,834 65,221 firearm-related products. Although * Totalllumber of halldgulls sold is greater thall totall/Ilmber of handgun transactions few in number, these dealers accounted becallse some transactions involve sale ofT/lultiple handguns. for 16% of all handgun transactions.

GUll Report Page 67

hi Sources of Multiple Handgun Sales Display 11 in Virginia Firearms Used by Sources of Handguns for FY1991 Offenders 50% ".. Offenders 45% 40% '''' :>4'" 35% The sale of multiple handguns has Many people have argued that the 30% 27%: increasing use of fireatms in violent 25% 23\\1 been a major issue in the debate over 20% the availability of firearms and vio­ crime is related to the ready availabil­ 15% 1:% 10% lent crime. DisplaylO combines data ity of firearms. As previously seen, S% :" provided by the Virginia Firearms large numbem of firearms, particu­ 0% Familyl Black Friends Market Outlet Transaction Program (VFTP) and the larly handguns, are sold in Virginia Juveniles 0 Adults ll.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and each year, and fireanns are involved I• I Firearms to estimate how many Vir­ in an increasing proportion of violent giniahandgun sales in fiscal year 1991 crimes. Display 11 shows the percentages involved more than one gun. of juveniles and adults who reported Those who argue that the ease of obtaining handguns from each of sev­ • Multiple handgun sales accounted firearms availability contributes to eral different types of sources: family for at least 6% of the sales reported to increased firearms violence believe or friends, the black market, private the VFTP. Federal and state officials that regulating the availability of owners, retail outlets, and other sources. believe the 6% figure underestimates these weapons is one viable means of the multiple sale purchases. reducing violent crime. Such regula­ • Overall, adult offenders were most tion can take the form of prohibitions likely to report obtaining a handgun • Semi-automatic pistols made up on who can purchase firearms, limits from a retail outlet, whereas juveniles nearly three-quarters of the handguns on the number of firearms that can be were most likely to repOlt obtaining sold in these multiple handgun transac­ purchased within a certain period, or a handgun from a family member or tions. prohibitions on the sale of celiain types friend. of firearms. Other forms of regulation Concern about multiple handgun include imposing waiting periods on • Although retail outlets were the sales, and the fact that these weapons prospective firearms purchasers. Wait­ single most common source of hand­ have been found at crime scenes in ing periods would give law enforce­ guns owned by adult offenders, nearly major eastem U.S. cities, led to recent ment authorities time to check the two-thirds of these offenders reported legislation to limit these sales. The background of prospective buyers and getting a handgun from a source other 1993 General Assembly enacted the provide a "cooling off' period for than a retail outlet. "one handgun a month" law which would-be purchasers who may intend limits to one the number of handguns to use a firearm while angry or under • Only 5% of juveniles said they that an individual can purchase in a stress. obtained a handgun from a retail out­ 30-day period. The 1993 General let. This is not surprising because in Assembly also authorized the VFTP to Others argue that restricting the Virginia it is 1l1egal for anyone under begin collecting data on the number legal sale of firearms will do little to 21 years old to purchase a handgun. and type of firearms sold by fireatm keep guns from criminals because dealers. criminals can obtain their guns through • Forty percent of the juveniles said illegal means. They contend that re­ they obtained a handgun from a black IDisplay 10 stricting these sales will inconvenience mat'ket source. About one-quarter of Multiple Handgun Sales law-abiding citizens while having little adult offenders reported obtaining a FY 1991 effect on criminals. handgun from a black market source.

In an attempt to provide some • Some researchers contend that be­ Revolvers 26% information about how and where cause many offenders appear to obtain

Semi~ criminals obtained fireanns, incarcer­ handguns through noncommercial Automatic Pistols ated juveniles and adults interviewed sources, efforts to regulate the com­ 74% in the previously described survey were mercial sales of handguns will have

These Transactions asked several questions about the limited success in keeping handguns Total Transactions = 60,044 Involve 8,595 Handguns sources of their weapons. away from criminals.

Page 68 Gun Report --

Sources of Firearms Used Offenders and Armed Victims by Offenders (continued)

The majority of those who see a offender admitted to ever possessing ! relationship between violent crime or using a gun in a crime. Findings In addition to being asked about and the availability offirearms believe from these questions are presented in the sources of their firearms, the incar­ that the large number of fireanns in Display 13. cerated juveniles and adults were asked society contribute to violent crime. about their involvement with stolen However, a few have argued that the o More than one-third of the juve­ firearms. Display 12 presents infor­ widespread availability of guns may niles interviewed stated that they had mation about how many juveniles and also have an opposite effect. Accord­ encountered an armed victim or had adults admitted to being involved with ing to this view, the widespread avail­ been scared off, shot at, wounded or stolen firearms of any type, including ability of fireatms may act as a deter­ been captured by a victim atmed with rifles or shotguns. rent to crime because criminals some­ a gun. times avoid committing a crime for • Most of the adults and juveniles fear of encountering a victim who is • Only about one in five adults ad­ surveyed stated that they had never armed. mitted having a similm' experience stolen a firearm. About one in five due to an encounter with an armed juveniles and one in six adults admit­ One possible way to test this asser­ victim. ted to having stolen a firearm. tion is to determine if known offenders report ever having been deterred from • About one in four juveniles and Display 12 criminal activity by the fear of encoun­ one in ten adults said that they had Firearms Stolen by Offenders tering an armed victim. Juveniles and decided not to commit a crime for fear adults interviewed in the previously of encountering a victim armed with a Have Siolen •••~ nOun PIlI described offender survey were asked gun. whether they had ever personally en­

Keptn .... countered a victim mmed with a gun These responses indicate that at Stolen Gun filii ~111111 (other than a police officer or security least some criminals have been de­ guard) while committing a crime, or ten-ed from committing a crime based Have Sold or 30% Traded a Stolen Gun whether they had ever been scared off, on a fear of encountering an armed '------' shot at, wounded or captured by an victim. However, it would be very dif­ armed victim. They were also asked if ficult to document any such wide­ they had ever decided not to commit a spread deterrent effect using official • Overall, juveniles were more likely crime because they knew or believed crime statistics. These statistics are than adults to say they had ever stolen that the intended victim was armed based on crimes reported to law en­ a firearm or kept, sold or traded a with a gun. These questions were forcement authorities and could not stolen firearm. asked of all offenders interviewed in measure crimes that did not occur due the survey, regardless of whether the to such a deterrent effect. About one-quarter ofjuveniles said they had previously kept a stolen firearm, compared to about one in six Display 13 adults. Offenders' Encounters With Armed Victims As can be seen in Display 12, the Have Encountered an •••••••••~ •••••• 35% Armed Victim 1-______---'20% percentages of juveniles and adults admitting to have ever kept, sold or Have13een Scared Off, ...... 35% traded a stolen firearm is larger than Shot At, Wounded 1--______--':'3% the percentages that admitted to steal­ Did Not Commit a Crime, ...... 26% ing a firearm. This discrepancy may be Feared Victim was Armed '--____--' 12% because some of the offenders inter­ viewed had obtained and used firearms which they knew to be stolen, but had not stolen the weapons themselves.

GUll Report Page 69 Virginia Firearms I Display 14 Virginia Firearm Felony Laws in Effect on December 1, 1993 Legislation and Number of Convictions: 1992

Virginia and all other states Penalty have enacted laws defining firearm Description Range Convictions offenses and prescribing penalties for violating these laws. Professor RESTRICTIONS ON WHO MAY POSSESS OR CARRY FIREARMS Franklin Zimring of the University of California has identified three Purchaser must not: broad types of firearms laws: • make false statements on form authOlizing restrictions on who may possess criminal history record check: lY-lOY 30 firearms, restrictions on the use of • transfer to; transport out of state and transfer to; purchase multiple firearms and provide to; or transport to another firearms, and restrictions on certain state and provide to an ineligible person: lY-lOY 0 types of firearms. Ineligible person must not use another person to obtain: lY-lOY * Display 14 presents 34 fire­ Alien may not possess/transport assault firearm: lY-5Y * arms-related felony offenses con­ Felon may not possess/transport/conceal: lY-5Y 428 tained in the Code of Virginia as of Citizen must not give or sell to felon: lY-5Y 1 December 1,1993. These offenses Citizen must not furnish a minor with a handgun: lY-5Y are grouped according to the three * RESTRICTIONS ON HOW FIREARMS ARE USED types of firearm laws identified by Professor Zimring. For each of­ A citizen must not: fense, the penalty range prescribed • possess "sawed-off' shotgun when committing a violent crime: 20-life 9 iI'! the Code is shown, as well as the • possess/use machine gun when committing a crime: 20-life 1 number of convictions for the of­ • discharge from a motor vehicle: lY-lOY 8 fense during 1992. Conviction data • use restricted ammunition in commission of crime: lY-lOY 0 are from the Pre/post - Sentence • maliciously discharge within/shoot-at occupied houselbuilding: 2Y~lOY 43 Investigation database, which does not include all felony convictions. • possess/use machine gun for offensive/ aggressive purpose: 2Y-lOY 1 • possess "sawed-off' shotgun: 2Y-lOY 49 The 1950 Code of Virginia • discharge within/shoot-at a school; or discharge listed eight felony firearms-related while on or within 1000 feet of school property: 2Y-lOY NA offenses. Since 1950, the General • possess while selling lIb. or more marijuana: 3Y 0 Assembly has added 26 new felony • subsequent offense: 5Y 0 firearms offenses. More than • use in commission of felony: 3Y 672 80% of these new offenses have • subsequent offense: 5Y 154 been added since 1986, and more • possess while selling Schedule IIII drugs: 3Y 0 than one-half of them have been • subsequent offense: 5Y 0 added by the last four General • discharge within/shoot-at occupied house/building: lY-5Y 41 Assemblies. • brandish/point while on/within 1000 feet of school property; or possess while on school property: lY-5Y 1 In addition to these 34 felony • possess while possessing Schedule IIII drugs: lY-5Y 248 offenses, the Code defines 22 • arrange so it.fires on touch/by remote control: 1Y-5Y 0 firearms-related misdemeanor of­ • possess an unregistered silencer or muffler: lY-5Y 0 fenses not listed. These offenses • conceal without a permit - second offense; lY-5Y 11 include several recent prominent pieces of legislation: the "one­ • conceal without a permit - third offense: 2Y-lOY 4 handgun-a-month" law, prohibi­ RESTRICTIONS ON ACCESS TO FIREARMS tions against minors possessing Import/seU/manufacture/transfer/possess plastic fIrearms: lY-lOY 0 handguns or assault rifles, and the prohibition of the Striker 12 * Indicates that the law became effective after 1992 alld, therefore, no conviction data is yet available. "Street-sweeper" shotgun.

Page 70 Gun Report ------

Display 15 Local Firearms Ordinar.:ces

Cities Counties Towns

CJ) ..c: E Q) 3: 0 c:: Q) <1l :g Restrictions on Who ..>:: Q) .8 <1l z :S "C Q) Q) ~ c.. "C .~ Q) e> ::J Q) co May Purchase, Possess, c:: ::J 1:: 0 c:: c:: 'E c:: §: Q) "C c.. 0 ..>:: <1l "§ Cii 0 ::J ~ E ~ c:: .c 0 ..>:: ..>:: .9 0 <1l .s; <1l ..c: E 0 'E .l!l > .;:::0 0 Q) oJ:: Cany, Transfer or <1l CJ) a c.. CJ) E c:: E Cl Ul 0 "C 0 c:: :E x E 0 3: :g 1:: oJ:: (tJ :e .2' Q) Q) c:: c:: r.: <1l "5 E OJ w ~ c:: .c .£: ~ ::J .;::: Sell Firearms oJ:: <1l OJ 0 0 .2 0 '5 oJ:: <1l OJ 0 0 0 'E « '-' ~ J: ~ Z Z c.. 0: 0: Cf) :> « ~ '-' ;f J: J: ..J c.. 0: Cf) ~ Cf)

Legend: • In effect II! Not stated in Code but • Local pennit authorized by (applicable to handguns) carried out in Practice Section 15.1-525, .code of Virginia

Note: Localities were selected all the basi:: ofpopulatioll or because they have a "perlllit to pL'rc!zase" ordinance in effect.

Local Firearm Ordinances in Virginia

In addition to state laws regulat­ The localities having "pelmit to In 1987 the General Assembly ing firearms, some Virginia localities purchase" ordinances were identified enacted legislation prohibiting locali­ also have enacted ordinances which by a 1990 survey conducted by the ties from passing firealll1S ordinances regulate firearms. Display 15 presents Virginia Department of State Police. without first obtaining the approval of a listing of firearm-related ordinances The survey was conducted shortly af­ the General Assembly. Although this currently in effect in Virginia's 20most ter the Virginia Firearms Transaction state "preemption" statute did not populous IC1calities and in four other Program became effertive to identify invalidate already existing local ordi­ localities that have "permit to pur­ localities with ordinances that might nances, nem-Iy all localities have since chase" ordinances. As in Display 14, conflict with state law. It is probable ceased to enact any new firearms ordi­ ordinances are grouped according to that some small localities with firearm nances. A few localities have enacted whether they restrict who may possess ordinances may not appear iJ; this firear: 1 ordinance" since 1987 after or whether they restrict the uses of table. This analysis focused on large obtaining the approval of the General firearms. None of the localities identi­ localities because it was assumed that Assembly. fied in the figure are known to have an large localities would be more likely ordinance restricting specifIc types of than smaller localities to have firearm firearms. ordinances.

GUll Report Page 71 Virginia Firearms Transaction Program Performance 1990 and 1992

Display 16 presents data supplied increase suggests that about two-thirds 1992 is that persons ineligible to pur­ by the Department of State Police of all transactions requests are for the chase fireanns have become more Virginia Firearms Transaction Program sale of rifles or shotguns. aware of the background check re­ (VFTP) on the number of firearm quirement and have avoided attempt­ transactions requested and denied in • Although there was a major in­ ing to purchase firearms through retail 1990 and 1992. Firearm transactions crease in transactions requested in outlets. are denied if the VFIP computerized 1992, the transaction denial rate in 1992 background check on prospective was considerably lower than in 1990. • The most common reason for firearms purchasers reveals a record denial of a transaction was that the indicating the purchaser is not legally • Two possible reasons have been person attempting to purchase the fire­ eligible to purchase firearms. Data is proposed for the decreased transaction arm was found to have a felony con­ also presented concerning the reasons denial rate in 1992. The majority of the viction. In 1992, more than three times for transaction denials and arrests made fireanns transactions in 1992 were for as many transactions were denied for in 1992 for illegally attempting to rifle or shotgun purchases, which did this reason as for prospective pur­ purchase firearms. notrequirea background check in 1990. chasers having an outstanding felony Itis possible that persons ineligible to charge or being identified as afugitive. • The number of transactions re­ purchase firearms are more likely to quested in 1992 was more than three attempt to purchase handguns than • In both 1990 and 1992, the number times greater than in 1990. The pri­ long guns. This is suggested by the of transactions denied was a very mary reason for this increase is that, in fact that most violent crimes are com­ small percentage of the total transac­ 1990, background checks wererequired mitted by individuals using handguns tions requested in each year. How­ only for handgun purchases. Begin­ rather than long guns. ever, the sman percentage of transac­ ninginJune, 1991, background checks tions denied should not be seen as a were required for allfirearmpurchases, • Another possible reason for the measure of the VFTP's effectiveness including rifles and shotguns. This decreased transaction denial rate in in blocking illegal firearms sales. It is likely that the background check pro­ I cess deterred some ineligible persons Figure 16 from attempting to purchase forearms. Virginia Firearms Transaction Program Performance However, the transaction denial rate 1990 and 1992 does not include illegal sales deterred in this manner. 1990* 1992

Transactions Requested: 60,018 191,540 In 1992 the Virginia State Police Transactions Denied: 1,035 1,667 established a Firearms Investigation Reasons for Denial Unit (Fill). The Fill staff investigate • Felony Conviction: 693 1,287 transaction requests that were denied Outstanding FeJony Charge: 302 295 because the prospective pur~haser was • Wanted (Fugitive): 40 73 found to be ineligible to purchase a D,,:nial Rate: 1.7% 1.0% firearm. Since starting these inves­ I Confirmed Arrests for Attempting to Purchase: -- 468 tigations, the Fill has increased the Confirmed Arrests of Wanted Persons: 116 number of persons arrested for illr­ -- gally attempting to purchase fireanns * VFTP app:oval was required only for handgull sales ill 1990. in Virginia. ""...... im1:f1.r~

Page 72 GI/n Report ---..-~-. ------

Virginia's Mandatory :Firearm Penalty Display 17 Enhancement Law Offenders Aware oflIntluenced by Mandatory Firearm Law

Like all other states, Virginia has '. .. .-' ~ .- :.', , .', - .... ~ :. . . ~. Are Aware of Virginia i2% adopted a mandatory firearms penalty LawlIncreased Penalty enhancement law. Virginia's law, which went into effect in 1975, pro­ Have Been Influenced 36% • Juveniles vided a mandatory prison term of one by the Added Penalty o Adul15 year for a first conviction and three years for a subsequent conviction for any persoll who used or attempted to use a firearm while committing mur­ their decision to use a firerum while influenced their decision to use or not der, rape, robbery, burglary or abduc­ committing a crime. Display 17 pre­ use a gun while committing a crime. tion. In 1980 and again in 1993, the sents data based on these questions. General Assembly increased the man­ • Nearly one-half of juveniles and datory prison term and added to the list • The majority ofjuveniles and adults 20% of adults stated that they carried a of offenses covered by this law. said they were aware of the penalty fireru'm. These percentages include enhancement law . Juveniles were more those who were and were not aware of For such a law to act as a deterrent likely to be aware of the law than adult the penalty enhancement law. against use of firearms in crime, those inmates. Percentages shown in the who commit (or contemplate) crimes figure are based on all offenders sur­ • This data concerning awareness of with a firearm must be aware of the veyed, including offenders convicted the penalty enhancement law is based law. In an attempt to determine if of crimes that did not involve firearms. on responses from convicted offend­ convicted offenders were aware of ers. As such, it provides no indication Virginia's firearm penalty enhance­ • Although the majority of offend­ of awareness of the law by those who mentlaw,juvenile and adult offenders ers said they were aware of the penalty may have been detelTed from commit­ interviewed in the previously described enhancement law, only about two­ ting crimes by the law. offender survey were asked about the thirds of juveniles and one-quarter of law and whether it ever influenced adults aware of the law said it had ever For alawto act as a deterrent, there also must be some degree of celtainty that the penalty will be applied in cases f Display 18 ~ covered by the law. Display 18 illus­ Percent Convicted of the Mandatory Firearm Law trates how often the law was applied in (1990 • 1992) various crimes involvjng the use of a firearm. Data are based on a three-year ()Ot;C average of convictions during the years 81.6~ EOe;;. 1990 through 1992. 70%

60~;' While the probability of an 50<;;, offender's incun'ing the mandatory 40% flrearms penalty was high, it was by 11{1 , 30>'r means certain. Although a judg~ had

20% to impose the penalty if an offender lOt;< was convicted under this statute, about

0% 25% of the criminals who used a fire­

!\'Iu:~ , _1: KiuIHPl'j!l~ arm in the offenses shown were not given this additional sanction. !tis likely --.~------~ that the penalty enhancement in these I.. • Convicted L Not COilvicted . cases was dropped as part of a plea negotiation.

GlIll Report Page 73

---.-~ ~------~------

cknowledgements

Alexandria Police Department Pulaski Police Department

Arlington County Police Deprutment Richmond Police Department

Chariottesvllle Police Department Roanoke Police Department

Chesapeake Police Department Suffolk Police Department

Chesterfield County Police Department Virginia Beach Police Department

Dinwiddie County Sheriff's Office Captain R. Lewis Vass, Department of State Police Fairfax County Police Department Donna Tate, Henrico County Police Deprutment Department of State Police

Henry County Sheriff's Office Irvin Morgan, U,S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Lynchburg Police Department Firearms

Martinsville Police Department Patrick J. Gurney, Ph.D. Department of COlTections Newport News Police Department William D. Brock, Ph.D. Pittsylvania County Sheriff's Office Department of Youth and Family Services Portsmouth Police Department

Prince William County Police Department

Page 74 Gun Report outees

PubUcations:

Crime in Virginia, Uniform Crime Reporting Section, Virginia Department of State Police • Displays 1,2,3

Uniform Crime Reports for the United States, United States Federal Bureau of Investigation

II Displays 1,2

DataBases:

Homicide Firearm Study data base, Criminal Justice Research Center, Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services • Displays 5,6

Pre-Sentence Investigation (PSI) data base, Virginia Department of COlTections e Displays 14,18

Survey of Virginia Prison Inmates and Youths Committed to Learning Centers data base, Criminal Justice Research Center, Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services • Displays 4,11,12,13,17

Federal and State Agencies:

Criminal Justice Research Center, Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services • Displays 14,15

United States Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms • Displays 7,8,9,10

Virginia Firearms Transacti.on Program, Department of State Police • Displays 8,9,10,16

GUF! Report Page 75 ~ \ 11

Page 76 Gun Report