ALMOST 1,000,000,000 GUNS REGISTERED

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Tombs

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    12,022
    113
    Martinsville
    Ok. Let's say you are right, they've used AI to digitize all the paper records into a searchable database and scanned it all in to your 5 minute database. Then they illegally use the database to find out I bought a gun at an FFL last year.

    I've got a lot of guns. Some I bought from an FFL, some I didn't. I've given some to family members, I've sold a couple, I've traded others. So the database says I bought that gun last year. Now what? What do you do with that information and why?

    They decide that braced pistols are SBRs, so they go through the forums to find them, then show up at your door.

    One of many examples. You're seeing this play out with FRT triggers currently. It already happened with bumpstocks. I'm sure the same happens with auto sears, solvent traps, and what ever else law enforcement decides us little people can't be allowed to have.

    You act like these are crazy hypotheticals, but law enforcement has always been absurd when it comes to guns.
    They didn't even need a 4473 for many of these items to find the individual, so a 4473 would make their job a lot easier.
     

    DadSmith

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Oct 21, 2018
    22,200
    113
    Ripley County
    They decide that braced pistols are SBRs, so they go through the forums to find them, then show up at your door.

    One of many examples. You're seeing this play out with FRT triggers currently. It already happened with bumpstocks. I'm sure the same happens with auto sears, solvent traps, and what ever else law enforcement decides us little people can't be allowed to have.

    You act like these are crazy hypotheticals, but law enforcement has always been absurd when it comes to guns.
    They didn't even need a 4473 for many of these items to find the individual, so a 4473 would make their job a lot easier.
    What if you bought a lower and it's listed as other not pistol or rifle. Are they going to check the millions of lowers that could possibly be a rifle or a pistol, or possibly just sitting in a shelf nib?
     

    Tombs

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    12,022
    113
    Martinsville
    What if you bought a lower and it's listed as other not pistol or rifle. Are they going to check the millions of lowers that could possibly be a rifle or a pistol, or possibly just sitting in a shelf nib?

    All it takes is a few big busts to attempt to scare people into surrendering them.

    That's primarily how all gun laws seem to work, trying to frighten the law abiding.
     

    BehindBlueI's

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    29   0   0
    Oct 3, 2012
    25,890
    113
    This is illegal, and the ongoing registry only preps us for more, further intrusive atf illegal activities, is detrimental to the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding U.S. citizens. Period. And some here ask what the problem is?

    Know your friends, and separate them from some who claim to be your friends, but then won`t even acknowledge illegal government activity, or, the resulting assaults on your constitutional rights. There`s too much at stake.

    Is it illegal? You'll pardon me if I don't take what the media and alt-media sells as gospel. But ok, say it's illegal. What are you and those complaining about it going to do about it? Who's marching down to the courthouse with Kirk to file that lawsuit? Or whatever plan you have other that you think will matter?
     

    gregr

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 1, 2016
    4,300
    113
    West-Central
    Is it illegal? You'll pardon me if I don't take what the media and alt-media sells as gospel. But ok, say it's illegal. What are you and those complaining about it going to do about it? Who's marching down to the courthouse with Kirk to file that lawsuit? Or whatever plan you have other that you think will matter?
    GOA has begun a court case in response to this abuse of power, but the key at least is to first understand that it`s something that is illegal and needs dealt with.
     

    BehindBlueI's

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    29   0   0
    Oct 3, 2012
    25,890
    113
    They decide that braced pistols are SBRs, so they go through the forums to find them, then show up at your door.

    One of many examples. You're seeing this play out with FRT triggers currently. It already happened with bumpstocks. I'm sure the same happens with auto sears, solvent traps, and what ever else law enforcement decides us little people can't be allowed to have.

    You act like these are crazy hypotheticals, but law enforcement has always been absurd when it comes to guns.
    They didn't even need a 4473 for many of these items to find the individual, so a 4473 would make their job a lot easier.

    FRTs, bumpstocks, and solvent traps don't get 4473s, so I'm not sure you're making the point that this is now somehow a danger without a bigger issue to make it so and if the argument is they just need to 'do a few to get compliance from the rest', then again not sure how this makes us in more danger without something that's a bigger problem. I doubt you're going to convince lawmakers or judges to do away with the 4473, so if the goal is to identify a random gun owner, that's always an FFL inspection away. Plus a guy who bought one last week is a lot more likely to still have it then a guy who bought it in 1995.
     

    gregr

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 1, 2016
    4,300
    113
    West-Central
    Link? I'd be more interested in GOA's take.
     

    BehindBlueI's

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    29   0   0
    Oct 3, 2012
    25,890
    113

    Ah, ok. So no lawsuit.

    And they misrepresent the congressman's letter, which does not 'confirm a registry'. Read it yourself here:

    Congress enacted a prohibition on the creation of a federal gun registry that could allow the government to target American citizens who own guns. We are concerned that this Administration is leveraging its power in a way to establish a federal gun registry. Moreover, we are opposed to a recent proposed regulation that would require federal firearms licensees (FFLs)to facilitate the creation of a federal gun registry.

    This gives us serious cause for concern that the Biden Administration is intent on creating a federal gun registry by circumventing the legislative process

    Where the concern is the data *could* be used to create a registry. Not that a registry already exists. So we're back to exactly what I posted in #2 of this thread. Man, I nailed it without having to watch clickbait. You had me worried for a second.

    Interesting, the letter does say there is a time period for the records to be destroyed. 20 years. So the stuff I bought during the Clinton regime is almost safe now.
     

    gregr

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 1, 2016
    4,300
    113
    West-Central
    Ah, ok. So no lawsuit.

    And they misrepresent the congressman's letter, which does not 'confirm a registry'. Read it yourself here:





    Where the concern is the data *could* be used to create a registry. Not that a registry already exists. So we're back to exactly what I posted in #2 of this thread. Man, I nailed it without having to watch clickbait. You had me worried for a second.

    Interesting, the letter does say there is a time period for the records to be destroyed. 20 years. So the stuff I bought during the Clinton regime is almost safe now.

    Sigh. Are you intentionally clueless? The sad truth is, there are way too many like you who call themselves friends of the Second Am3ndment. We`re better off without those like you, and in fact, we are without those like you.
     

    BehindBlueI's

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    29   0   0
    Oct 3, 2012
    25,890
    113
    Sigh. Are you intentionally clueless? The sad truth is, there are way too many like you who call themselves friends of the Second Am3ndment. We`re better off without those like you, and in fact, we are without those like you.

    Yup. I'm intentionally clueless in that I looked at the actual source document, read it, and understood it vs falling for today's latest Chicken Little narrative.

    Now I assume you'll go do something about it besides whine on the Internet? If not what we're effectively doing is the same other than feeling so hard at the problem. So what's the plan? Who's less of a friend, somebody who doesn't see the problem or somebody who does and just feels at it but doesn't really do anything?
     

    gregr

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 1, 2016
    4,300
    113
    West-Central
    Yup. I'm intentionally clueless in that I looked at the actual source document, read it, and understood it vs falling for today's latest Chicken Little narrative.

    Now I assume you'll go do something about it besides whine on the Internet? If not what we're effectively doing is the same other than feeling so hard at the problem. So what's the plan? Who's less of a friend, somebody who doesn't see the problem or somebody who does and just feels at it but doesn't really do anything?
    Whining. :lmfao:
     

    drillsgt

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    108   0   0
    Nov 29, 2009
    9,627
    149
    Sioux Falls, SD
    Ah, ok. So no lawsuit.

    And they misrepresent the congressman's letter, which does not 'confirm a registry'. Read it yourself here:





    Where the concern is the data *could* be used to create a registry. Not that a registry already exists. So we're back to exactly what I posted in #2 of this thread. Man, I nailed it without having to watch clickbait. You had me worried for a second.

    Interesting, the letter does say there is a time period for the records to be destroyed. 20 years. So the stuff I bought during the Clinton regime is almost safe now.

    The fact that the records are all being uploaded to a centralized database instead of sitting in boxes in a warehouse is concern enough, if they are scanned as PDF's then they are searchable, i'm not sure what more you would need to call it a 'registry'. Sure, it would be slow and cumbersome and not that organized but I don't see where they'd have to do anything more to it to get what they want. Don't think you're safe yet, many dealers don't destroy them after 20 years but just send them in to get them out of their storage. The ATF 'prefers' they not be destroyed and that's usually enough for dealers. Plus, there's not a lot of gun stores that make it to 20 years so everything gets turned in but as described in the letter now they want to make a ruling that everything gets turned in anyway. It just seems like a whole lot of effort and expense for nothing, there's not going to be any really useful information in 30 year old 4473's. There's typically little useful information that comes up even with recent traces. As you said before the traces really only show us the first person at point of sale after that good luck. When I was working at a big shop in MI during college we got a trace come in and I was looking at it and it was for a Taurus PT99, the original point of sale was my dad. He originally bought it and then after I turned 18 I got a purchase permit and transferred it to me. That gun went to CO with me on active duty and was eventually sold/traded out there. So they got no useful information after that. As a crime solving tool it's pretty much useless and they probably know it but just like Michigan's pistol purchase permit system it's become kind of institutionalized and they can't get themselves to get rid of it.
     

    Twangbanger

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    21   0   0
    Oct 9, 2010
    7,062
    113
    ...Interesting, the letter does say there is a time period for the records to be destroyed. 20 years. So the stuff I bought during the Clinton regime is almost safe now.
    Not necessarily. If you bought it from an FFL, and the shop went out of business before the 20-year trigger, or just sent the 4473s in to get it out of their storage (both of which are beyond your control), and the ATF scanned it...your stuff will never be "safe." That scanned 4473 is sitting there, waiting for a law to be passed allowing it to be relocated to a searchable database. A gun bought 50 years ago could literally turn up in the registry immediately.

    The ATF is concerned about 80% guns, but what they're doing by scanning these documents in .pdf form is an "80% registration system." They're a short technological step away from the goal line, and it simply awaits someone passing a law making that last step legal.

    This is solid reasoning, based on facts and readily foreseeable outcomes. You can try to wave it away by saying "hypothetical," but people who are concerned about this are not tilting at windmills. They'd like to preserve the option of keeping their long-owned guns out of a system, and the lawsuits which place the obstacles to the establishment of that system begin with discussions like this one.

    Your "whining" comment is indicative of the behavior currently being decried on the Chip Bennett thread. You cannot handle being challenged.
     
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 23, 2022
    76
    18
    Right behind you
    Didn't watch the videos, so correct me if I'm wrong:

    Click-bait based on out of business FFL's files transferred to the feds as required by law. Intentionally confusing that with a 'registry' while ignoring that FFL files only show who it was transferred to from that FFL. If a gun changes hands after that, there's no 'registry' requirements.

    Gun tracing works like this: Provide S/N, request trace. Trace gets you to the first "customer" as in the retail shop or department that bought it. Then you go to the retail shop and see who they sold it to from their records or the 'registry' if they are out of business. Then you go to that business/person and ask who they sold it to. Repeat until you find the current owner. Which is why I pretty much never asked for a trace, it's generally useless unless your guy bought it himself new (or cranky x-girlfriend says when/where he bought it) and you can't tie it to him any other way.

    Shhhh...introducing facts into click-bait threads is not allowed here.
     
    Top Bottom