The terrorist watch list is a good example of how the government runs and rates "risks" within its clear jurisdictional areas: https://www.thetrace.org/2016/06/

The terrorist watch list is a good example of how the government runs and rates "risks" within its clear jurisdictional areas: https://www.thetrace.org/2016/06/fbi-terrorist-watch-list-guns/ https://www.thetrace.org/2016/06/fbi-terrorist-watch-list-gu... Here's the key quote: > "Last year, the The Intercept published a government document that spelled out the process for putting suspects in the terrorist database. The guidelines say agencies can nominate candidates for the list if there is “reasonable suspicion” to believe they are a “known or suspected terrorist.” That’s a relatively low bar, and the guidelines even make clear that agencies don’t need “concrete facts” or “irrefutable evidence” to back up their assertions. The guidelines also give a single White House official unilateral authority to place entire categories of people on the no-fly list." We can only guess whether the public credit registry will be run with the same, better, or worse level of care and due diligence. And before you say "omg Trump!!11" note that this article is from June 2016 and the leaked guidelines are from March 2013.