To Develop and Implement a Universal Definition of a "Stolen" and "Recovered" Motor Vehicle as it Pertains to Motor Vehicle Theft

Submitted by: Vehicle Crimes Committee

VCC.018.t2017

WHEREAS, many vehicles that are reported "stolen" were, in fact, simply towed (e.g., repossession or parking infraction); and

WHEREAS, in such cases, it would be beneficial if law enforcement was capable of immediately identifying that a reported stolen vehicle has been impounded or towed by linking a tow file to an attempted entry of a stolen vehicle record within the state's Criminal Justice Information Sharing System; and

WHEREAS, this would elevate public service and decrease law enforcement allocation of personnel time in administrative and investigative time for towed vehicles being reported as stolen; and

WHEREAS, it is believed many law enforcement agencies are reluctant to report stolen vehicles originating from a rental agreement; and

WHEREAS, the lack of uniformity or understanding of a statutory motor vehicle theft definition that includes rental vehicle thefts gives criminal offenders the opportunity to gain from vehicle theft; and

WHEREAS, there is difficulty in identifying the actual number of motor vehicle thefts within the national databases, as stolen vehicles associated with other crimes are simply not identified; and

WHEREAS, for example, if a vehicle is stolen in a carjacking event, it is not identified as a stolen vehicle event; and

WHEREAS, some reporting systems and requirements use hierarchical reporting when a stolen vehicle is used in a more serious crime (e.g., armed robbery, homicide, or arson) would not be identified as a stolen vehicle event; and

WHEREAS, a challenge in attempting to identify the number of 'recovered' stolen vehicles varies from one reporting system to another; and

WHEREAS, since many auto theft enterprises flourish on a variety of deception (e.g., using stolen vehicle parts or vehicle identification number (VIN) swapping) it is important to understand whether a vehicle recovery event was a 'partial' or 'complete' vehicle recovery event; and

WHEREAS, in instances where only a part (e.g., license plate, fender, or motor) was recovered, the reporting system should be able to identify the type of recovery event as either "partial" or "complete"; now, therefore be it

RESOLVED that the International Association of Chiefs of Police calls upon the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to develop and implement a universal definition of a "stolen" and "recovered" motor vehicle as it pertains to motor vehicle theft within the reporting systems of the FBI National Crime Information Center (NCIC), FBI Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR), and the FBI National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS).

To Enhance the FBI NCIC's Ability to Assist Law Enforcement with the Interdiction, Apprehension, and Identification of Auto Theft Criminals

Submitted by: Vehicle Crimes Committee

VCC.019.t2017

WHEREAS, there is a need to revise the data fields within the FBI National Crime Incident Center (NCIC) to assist law enforcement in the interdiction of criminal activity; and

WHEREAS, many auto theft criminals are known to be involved in a wide variety of crimes against persons and property, migrating across multiple jurisdictional boundaries (inclusive of local, state, and national boundaries), it is necessary to provide added value to law enforcement for the reporting of a stolen vehicle and its associated recovery; and

WHEREAS, minimally, NCIC should have a mandatory requirement for all states and users to: (1) identify the location of a reported stolen vehicle theft entry by Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and/or street address, city, county, state, zip code and (2) identify the location of a reported recovered vehicle theft by GIS and/or street address, city, county, state, and zip code; and

WHEREAS, it is believed this practice will provide critical information to law enforcement for tactical, operations, and administrative purposes; and

WHEREAS, NCIC should consider adding data fields regarding a stolen vehicle entry or recovered stolen vehicle entry to include: (1) suspect information, (2) vehicle left running, (3) keys in vehicle, (4) cautionary warning related to officer safety issues (e.g., gun in vehicle, dangerous suspect), (5) other crime involved, and (5) rental vehicle; and

WHEREAS, this added information will provide standardization of data for assisting investigative and analytical efforts, and further minimize extraneous efforts currently performed by law enforcement, as many vehicle theft entries include this information with manual keystrokes within the miscellaneous field; and

WHEREAS, there is a need for NCIC, Nlets and/or NMVTIS (National Motor Vehicle Title Information System) to manage a centralized national law enforcement motor vehicle theft database, originating from entries performed in NCIC; and

WHEREAS, this database should be developed with the intention to aid law enforcement administrators, investigators, and crime analysts; and

WHEREAS, law enforcement administrators, investigators, and crime analysts primarily rely upon local databases (e.g., department, regional) to gain an understanding of the incidence of auto theft crime within their localities; and

WHEREAS, many auto theft criminals are known to be involved in a wide variety of crimes against persons and property, migrating across multiple jurisdictional boundaries (inclusive of local, state, and national boundaries), it is necessary to provide a national tool for identifying patterns, series, trends, and hotspots; and

WHEREAS, many stolen vehicles are recovered outside the originating jurisdiction of the reporting agency, where a national reporting system would afford law enforcement administrators, investigators, and crime analysts the ability for discovery and identification of criminal organizations carrying out auto theft-related crimes; and

WHEREAS, the Colorado Crime Information Center has successfully modeled a statewide information sharing capability that can be duplicated at a national level; and

WHEREAS, the purpose of the centralized database should engage multiple data sources for use in law enforcement investigations and analyses to minimize duplicity of effort in searching multiple databases; and

WHEREAS, many law enforcement investigations involving auto theft require investigators and/or analysts to query a variety of databases, expending extraneous effort, which could be minimized with federated search capabilities (e.g., NCIC, NDex, NMVTIS, NICB, RMIN, ISO); and

WHEREAS, there is a need to negate the automatic purge of stolen vehicles in NCIC, currently performed after the year of entry plus 4 years; and

WHEREAS, once a vehicle is entered as stolen in NCIC, barring a recovery or deletion of the file by the originating agency, the entry should remain historically active; and

WHEREAS, it is now a common understanding that many stolen vehicles are being discovered outside the parameters of the existing purge time period; and

WHEREAS, in cases where stolen vehicles are discovered outside the boundaries of the United States, the lack of active status in NCIC creates a significant barrier to repatriating the vehicles; and

WHEREAS, in other cases, law enforcement officers and investigators are expending a significant amount of time and effort in researching stolen vehicles that have been purged; and

WHEREAS, it is believed that many vehicles manufactured in the 1990s have a longer life expectancy than was observed when the purge standard was implemented; and

WHEREAS, problematically, the re-entry of a stolen vehicle record from purged vehicles creates duplication of records for national statistics used by the National Insurance Crime Bureau; and

WHEREAS, it is known that a tremendous amount of time is expended by law enforcement agencies in "reentering" purged vehicles based on the need for continuation of active status or recovery documentation; and

WHEREAS, there is a need for all states to provide data to the National Motor Vehicle Title Information System (NMVTIS); and

WHEREAS, it is understood by this committee that only 35 states provide data and make NMVTIS inquiries before issuing new titles, whereas 8 states provide data, but do not make NMVTIS inquiries; now, therefore be it

RESOLVED that the International Association of Chiefs of Police calls upon the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to enhance NCIC's ability to assist law enforcement with the interdiction, apprehension, and identification of auto theft criminal information.

Support the Migration to the National Incident-Based Reporting System

Submitted by: Vehicle Crimes Committee

VCC.020.t2017

WHEREAS, currently, 33 states are certified to report data via the National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS), and 16 of these states include agencies that report all of their crime statistics through the incident-based reports; and

WHEREAS, nationwide, approximately 6,300 agencies (one-third of those that participate in the Federal Bureau of Investigation Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program) submit data via the NIBRS, while the rest report data in a summary format; now, therefore be it

RESOLVED that the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) supports the requirement that all U.S. states migrate to the NIBRS reporting system and calls upon the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to assist U.S. states with transitioning to reporting data via the NIBRS reporting system, in an expedient manner; and

FURTHER RESOLVED that the IACP encourages all nations to move to incident based reporting.

Opposition of Safe Injection Sites

Submitted by: Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs Committee

NDDC.022.t2017

WHEREAS, safe injection site programs convey an implicit acceptance of harmful drug use and exacerbate an already alarming drug abuse problem^[1]; and

WHEREAS, there are currently no federal laws in the United States that explicitly authorize a Supervised Injection Facility (SIF), and that at least two sections of the federal Controlled Substances Act can be interpreted to prohibit a SIFs^[2] this would, in effect, sanction the possession and use of illegal substances in these SIFs; and

WHEREAS, asking physicians, nurses and physician assistants to supervise the injection of unknown drugs, puts medical staff in physical danger,^[3] and, absent an explicit exemption from state and federal law, puts them at risk of liability^[4]; and

WHEREAS, there is grave concern about where safe injection sites would be located and the potential harm to the community and citizens in the vicinity^[5]; and

WHEREAS, there has not been a state or federally conducted rigorous, scientific evaluation of opening a pilot SIF program to demonstrate that exemption from federal law is beneficial^[6]; and

WHEREAS, generalizing and applying the findings of SIFs from outside the United States has limited, if any, utility to analyzing potential impacts of SIFs in the United States^[7]; and

WHEREAS, establishing protocols for informed consent is a complex legal issue when evaluating SIFs, given that the subjects may be under the influence of a controlled substance^[8]; now, therefore be it

RESOLVED, that the IACP opposes safe injection site programs and is highly concerned about the health and public safety risks to citizens, the community, and healthcare staff associated with SIFs, absent greater study, evaluation, and input from local law enforcement authorities; and be it

1 IACP Resolution NDDC.017.A11 "Opposing Safe Injection Site Programs and Legislation," Submitted by: Narcotics & Dangerous Drugs committee, Passed: October 2011.

2 Government, Politics, and Law; Peer Reviewed; Beletsky et al., American Journal of Public Health; February 2008, Vol 98, No. 2. See 21 U.S.C. § 844 (Penalties for simple possession); and 21 U.S.C. § 856 (Maintaining drug-involved premises).

3 "Three Nurses Treated with Narcan for Opioid Exposure at Massillon Hospital," by Jack Shea, Fox 8, August 10, 2017; "Deputy, Two EMS Providers Treated for Overdose Symptoms Responding to Call," The Baltimore Sun, May 23, 2017.

4 As Opioid Epidemic Rages On, Massachusetts Medical Society Backs Supervised Injection Rooms, by Martha Bebinger, April 29, 2017 (discussing potential liability to medical staff if intoxicated individual leaves SIF, operates a vehicle, and causes harm to another person in a traffic collision).

5 Safe injection sites not the best way to fight heroin addiction; Philadelphia Inquirer, June 5, 2017. Opinion and Editorial; http://philly.com/.

6 Establishment of Pilot Medically Supervised Injection Facility in Massachusetts; Report of the Task Force on Opioid Therapy and Physician Communication, April 2017 by the Massachusetts Medical Society.

7 Most of the research on SIFs has been conducted on two sites in Canada and Australia. Ibid. p. 4.

8 Ibid p. 4.

Opposition of the Legalization of Recreational Marijuana

Submitted by: Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs Committee

NDDC.023.t2017

WHEREAS, marijuana is a Schedule I substance, under the Controlled Substances Act, and Schedule I drugs are classified as having a high potential for abuse, no currently accepted medical use in the United States, and a lack of accepted safety for use under medical supervision; and

WHEREAS, marijuana has both short-term and long-term effects on the brain1 ; and

WHEREAS, marijuana, when smoked, passes from the lungs into the bloodstream which carries the chemical THC (tetrahydrocannabinol) to the brain and other organs of the human body2 ; and

WHEREAS, marijuana over-activates parts of the brain that contain the highest number of brain receptors that causes the "high" people feel, which can include altered senses, such as, an altered sense of time, changes in mood, impaired body movement, difficulty with thinking and problem-solving, hallucinations, delusions and psychosis, when taken in high doses3 ; and

WHEREAS, marijuana affects long-term brain development, particularly between the preteen years and early adulthood, by lowering intelligent quotient (IQ)4 ; and

WHEREAS, marijuana, in edible form, also increases the chance of harm, as edibles take longer to digest and produce a high. Therefore, individuals may consume more to feel the effect faster, leading to dangerous results5 ; and

WHEREAS, marijuana's effect on perception and coordination are responsible for serious impairments in driving abilities;6 and

WHEREAS, high doses of marijuana can result in mental confusion, panic reactions and hallucinations7 ; and

WHEREAS, researchers have found an association between marijuana use and an increased risk of depression; and increased risk and earlier onset of schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders, especially for teens that have a genetic predisposition;8 and

WHEREAS, driving after marijuana use is more common than driving after alcohol use, and teens are two times more likely to receive a ticket among high-school seniors who smoke marijuana, and 65 percent more likely to get into a car crash than those who do not smoke9 ; and

WHEREAS, legalizing recreational marijuana use in Colorado, Oregon and Washington states has resulted in collision claim frequencies that are approximately 3 percent higher overall than would have been expected without legalization10; and

WHEREAS, after retail marijuana sales began in Colorado, the increase in collision claim frequency was 14 percent higher than nearby Nebraska, Utah and Wyoming11; and

WHEREAS, treatment of teens (ages 13 to 21 year-olds) at a Colorado children's hospital emergency department, and its satellite urgent care centers, increased rapidly after legalization of marijuana for commercialized medical and recreational use, and a review of the diagnostic code for positive marijuana results from a urine drug screen more than quadrupled12; and

WHEREAS, marijuana-related traffic deaths increased 62 percent from 71 to 115 after recreational marijuana was legalized in 2013 13; and

WHEREAS, the Colorado Highway Patrol's yearly interdiction seizures of marijuana increased 37 percent from 288 to 394, since recreational marijuana was legalized14; now, therefore be it

RESOLVED, that the IACP is gravely concerned about the dangers of continued legalization of marijuana and the expansion thereof and strongly encourages greater awareness regarding the harms and dangers; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, that the IACP cautions that research suggests marijuana use is likely to precede use of other illicit drugs and/or substances and that marijuana use also is linked to substance use disorders, including addiction to alcohol and nicotine; 15 and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, that the IACP actively supports increased community-wide and nation-wide education programs, like the Red Ribbon Week, Red Ribbon Patch Program by the Boy and Girl Scouts of America, D.A.R.E America, and National Prevention Week, as well as local anti-drug coalitions, to raise public awareness of the impact of recreational marijuana drug use on individuals, families, and communities.

1 National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), DrugFacts: Marijuana; revised August, 2017.

2 Ibid., 2.

3 Ibid., 2-3.

4 NICA's Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study, a major longitudinal study.

5 National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA), DrugFacts: Marijuana; revised August, 2017, pg. 3.

6 DEA Drug Fact Sheet: Marijuana; www.dea.gov.

7 Ibid.

8 Ibid.

9 National Institute on Drug Abuse; Drugged Driving.

10 Status Report - Vol. 52, No. 4; Insurance Institute for Highway Safety; Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI), p. 2.

11 Ibid.

12 Emergency visits related to marijuana use at Colorado hospital; http://www.aappublications.org/news/2017/05/04/PASMarijuana050417.

13 Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area report, The Legalization of Marijuana in Colorado, The Impact; Volume 4, September 2016.

14 Ibid, p. 4.

15 DEA/DOJ publication: Preventing Marijuana Use Among Youth & Young Adults; NIDA, 2017, from www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/marijuana.

WHEREAS, too many people in our communities are targeted for violence on the basis of race, national origin, ethnicity, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, religion, or disability; and

WHEREAS, per IACP's Investigation of Hate Crimes Model Policy^[1], bias is defined as a preformed negative opinion or attitude toward a group of persons based on their race, color, national origin, religion, disability, sexual orientation, ethnicity, gender, or gender identity; and

WHEREAS, per IACP's Investigation of Hate Crimes Model Policy^[2], hate crime is a criminal offense motivated by some form of bias against the victim and hate incidents are defined as those actions by an individual or group that, while motivated by hate or bias, do not rise to the level of a criminal offense; and

WHEREAS, hate or bias-motivated incidents and crimes have a devastating effect on individual victims and their families; and

WHEREAS, hate or bias-motivated incidents and crimes can have far reaching effects on large segments of the communities in which they take place; and

WHEREAS, these crimes infringe on the rights of individuals and threaten the communities they represent by creating fear of future violence and the nullification of constitutional rights; and

WHEREAS, hate or bias-motivated incidents and crimes are of critical concern for all law enforcement agencies and prosecutors because of their unique and negative impact on victims, communities, and social structure; and

WHEREAS, effective response to hate or bias-motivated incidents and crimes can not only bring justice to victims and their communities, but it can also strengthen the relationship between law enforcement and the communities they serve; and

WHEREASs, law enforcement agencies recognize the importance of accurate data about hate or bias-motivated incidents and crimes in order to effectively investigate and prosecute hate crimes; and

WHEREAS, the International Association of Chiefs of Police has partnered with the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law and convened a significant group of law enforcement leaders and civil rights advocates to address this issue; now, therefore be it

RESOLVED, that the IACP encourages law enforcement agencies and prosecutors to work closely with the victims of these crimes, affected communities, core community stakeholders, non-profit advocacy groups, and nongovernmental organizations to combat bias and hate, and strengthen trust with community members; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, that the IACP encourages law enforcement agencies and prosecutors to collect, analyze, and report incidents of crime that are, in whole or in part, directed against individuals because of race, national origin, ethnicity, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, religion, or disability through a national reporting system to the Federal Bureau of Investigation; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, that the IACP encourages law enforcement agencies and prosecutors to forge partnerships with community stakeholders, criminal justice system partners, and other organizations to conduct public outreach and multidisciplinary training, share information, address concerns, and support criminal and civil investigations; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, that the IACP encourages law enforcement agencies and prosecutors to work with communities to promote healing and respect, and proactively address bias and hate.

Submitted by: IACP Board of Directors, Victim Services Committee, Human and Civil Rights Committee

BOD.024.t2017

1 International Association of Chiefs of Police, Investigation of Hate Crimes Model Policy, 2016.

2 International Association of Chiefs of Police, Investigation of Hate Crimes Model Policy, 2016

Support to Prohibit the Possession or Transfer of Certain Firearm Accessories

Submitted by: Firearms Committee and IACP Board of Directors

FC.025.t2017

WHEREAS, the National Firearms Act of 1934 describes an automatic weapon as any weapon which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot automatically more than one shot without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger and explicitly includes any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun; and

WHEREAS, the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA) imposed a $200 tax and mandatory registration through the Federal NFA Registry on all machine guns and short- barrel firearms; and

WHEREAS, a trigger crank, bump-fire device, and similar attachments or accessories are designed or can function to increase the rate of fire of a semi-automatic firearm to that of an automatic weapon; now, therefore be it

RESOLVED, that the International Association of Chiefs of Police supports legislation that prohibits the possession, import, manufacture, transfer and sale of trigger cranks, bump-fire devices, and similar attachments or and accessories designed to increase or modify semi-automatic firearms to automatic weapons; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, that the International Association of Chiefs of Police supports requiring individuals currently in possession of a trigger cranks, bump-fire device, or and similar attachments or and accessories designed to increase or modify semi-automatic firearms to automatic weapons to surrender or register such devices with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) under the National Firearms Act of 1934; and be it

FURTHER RESOLVED, that the IACP supports providing the ATF with the resources needed to enforce a mandatory surrender or registration with respect to bump fire devices and other NFA weapons, including resources necessary to modernize and upgrade its equipment.

Opposition to Remove Silencers (Suppressors) from the National Firearms Act of 1934

Submitted by: Firearms Committee

FC.026.t2017

WHEREAS, since 1934, silencers (suppressors) have been registered under the National Firearms Act. The National Firearms Act describes silencers (suppressors) as devices for silencing, muffling, or diminishing the report of a portable firearms, including any combination of parts, designed or redesigned, and intended for the use in assembling or fabricating a firearm silencers or firearm muffler, any part intended for use in such assembly or fabrication; and

WHEREAS, to acquire a silencer(suppressors), the National Firearms Act requires an individual to pay a $200 tax, pass a background check, register the silencer and submit fingerprints and a photograph to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; and

WHEREAS, the National Firearms Act has effectively regulated silencers (suppressors) for over 80 years and they are rarely trafficked or used in crimes. In rare incidents where criminals have used silencers (suppressors) to alter or diminish the sound of gunfire, the results have been deadly; and

WHEREAS, the proliferation of silencers (suppressors) undermines the ability of gunshot detection technology, which is widely used in American cities, to alert law enforcement and first responders to shootings in the community; and

WHEREAS, silencers (suppressors) prevent police officers from quickly and effectively responding to active shooters, as silencers (suppressors) make it harder to recognize the sound of gunfire and mask muzzle flash, making it more difficult to locate and engage armed offenders; and

WHEREAS, firearms-related deaths were the number one cause of death for law enforcement in 2016 and law enforcement officers are particularly vulnerable to ambush-style killings, silencers (suppressors) are a particular threat to the security of our nation's law enforcement; and

WHEREAS, if silencers (suppressors) were deregulated from the National Firearms Act, individuals prohibited under federal law from owning silencers (suppressors) could easily acquire them without a background check and harm law enforcement and our communities; now, therefore be it

RESOLVED, that the International Association of Chiefs of Police opposes any efforts to remove silencers (suppressors) from the purview of the National Firearms Act, recognizing how this action would undermine the security of law enforcement and the safety of the public.

IACP messaging worksheets break down a critical topic, and provide key talking points and facts to assist you in your daily communications. The topic addressed in this messaging sheet is asset forfeiture, a critical legal tool that deprives criminals of the proceeds of their crimes. Asset forfeiture targets criminals, including members of organized crime syndicates and drug cartels, by confiscating their assets. Property recovered through asset forfeiture may be used to compensate victims and support crime reduction efforts.

Highlights law enforcement-involved reentry program profiles. The guide presents key strategies, components, and results of law enforcement participation in offender reentry efforts.

​​​​​​Features a police department that has developed, implemented, and currently manages a reentry program. The video illustrates potentially transferable strategies and practices that law enforcement executives can use in implementing or expanding an offender reentry program in their jurisdiction.