Skip to main content

View Diary: Gun-trafficking case in Charlotte may have exposed loopholes in gun laws (129 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  ok thanks (0+ / 0-)

    hadn't seen that form asked for specifics as which firearm/.

    Seems unnecessary unless to yes it is a rudimentary registration..if digitized somewhere by somebody, otherwise it;s buried away in a paper drift somewhere not really useful or 'dangerous'..

       Perhaps a good change would be to make the firearm specifics only filled out (and can be inspected anytime by ATF) and signed by the FFL at the time of sale, also copied to his kept paper, kept on the new owners paperwork, and kept on the old owner (for private resales) with the new owners name blanked out.

    If a crime investigation occurs, LOE/ATF goes to FFL site where the physical paper is kept and sees number/caliber etc.

    Now if a crime is committed and they find a gun, they want to know if it was sold by an FFL, to whom, and to answer that the FFL should have to file a digital record or a paper one, whatever, with the ATF listing all guns sold, with SSN,....and keep the 'to whom' physical records cross listing gun sold to Form 4473.

    That might look less like a registration database capable of being abused by gummint/hacked/sold etc (NOFLY list, I see you) and yet still with little extra burden be available to track a gun by ATF if found necessary to track an individual gun. And those physical records at the FFL are gold if you are the dreaded home invasion gun thief. As it is now. I think...)

    If in the future gun owners are required to keep a record of disposition of guns they bought, this copy of the gun sale thru an FFL would be sufficient.


    You must be newish here....don't assume anything about what I want from one comment. Not a fan of gun controls as proposed or the NRA.

          Yet I have no problem with the burden of FFL check for all private sales, I am also concerned that the resistance to the gun registration database will screw any positive reforms. I also have little faith in the ability of workers in any bureaucracy to not screw things up...and yet do appreciate how much they do get right...especially every month when my ss check gets here. And daily when my mail shows up.

      Gummint has hurt me directly by abuse so I am not reassured by anybody that a gun database or any database can't and won't be abused/sold/hacked.

    But the FFL check for all private sales should be fixed and if it takes not being a de facto registration or looking like one, that's what it takes.

    And thanks for the link...

    This machine kills Fascists.

    by KenBee on Sun Jan 27, 2013 at 07:47:39 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  A lot of people do have a problem with FFL check. (0+ / 0-)

      And not for the burden.  The main issue is a registry--in fact if not in the most convenient form--that can be inspected at will.  I proposed a means to avoid that, by requiring all parties to a transfer through the aftermarket lifecycle to maintain, for all time, a detailed record of transfer.  At no point would either party be required to notify the government that a transfer had taken place; the state's only involvement would be to provide both buyer and seller immediate,, secure, and electronic clearance shortly before the transfer.  This could be as simple as downloading a yes/no bit hashed and authenticated by a government digitally signed certificate valid for say one hour.

      Any law enforcement agency could later follow a gun's chain of custody, but not at will.  They would require a warrant to get a look at the "bound book" at any step in the chain.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site