Democrats Push for De-Facto Gun Registry

[melensdad]

Congress has SPECIFICALLY OUTLAWED the keeping of a centralized record keeping of guy buyers names/address but a couple Democratic Senators want to thwart that law and create a de-facto gun registry. Their stated purpose is so that guns used in crimes can be traced. However that is already possible (as shown by the government in the Mexico Drug Cartel gun farce). This will actually create a de-facto gun owners list that is centralized at the federal level (against the law) and it will open up to public groups, via the Freedom of Information Act, records of gun buyers (including police undercover operations!)

Here is the press release (used with permission!):

NEW YORK SENATORS ENDORSE ADDITIONAL GUN-CONTROL MEASURES . . .

U.S. Senators Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) have renewed their support for repealing the Tiahrt Amendment -- legislation that restricts firearms tracing data from the public so as to protect the lives of law enforcement officers and the integrity of undercover operations. The New York duo also called on President Obama to store firearm purchasing records of law-abiding citizens (gun owners who have already passed the required FBI background check) for up to 90 days. Currently, such records of law-abiding gun owners must be destroyed within 24 hours. Law enforcement already has the ability to trace all firearms sales to the first retail purchaser, and retailers are required to keep records of all retail sales for 20 years. This required Federal Form 4473 indicates that the purchaser successfully passed the required FBI records check. The purpose of the instant background check is to verify that this first purchaser is legally qualified to buy the firearm and to then allow the retailer to make the sale. This proposal to store background check records does nothing to assist law enforcement, since the records already exist in a readily traceable form at the retailer level -- and would create a federal registry of firearms purchasers, which Congress has specifically forbidden.
http://www.nssf.org/share/BP2/2009/042009.htm​

Now compare that, which has a complete explanation to one of the very brief AP news stories:

Schumer: Repeal Gun Records Policy
Last Edited: Sunday, 19 Apr 2009, 7:47 PM EDT
Created On: Sunday, 19 Apr 2009, 7:47 PM EDT

NEW YORK (AP) - New York Senators Charles Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand are calling for the repeal of federal policy requiring records of gun background checks be destroyed after 24 hours.

The Democratic lawmakers say the Tiahrt Amendment restricts police from using gun trace information. They say such information is crucial to cracking down on illegal gun trafficking and reducing gun violence.

Schumer and Gillibrand are urging President Barack Obama to reinstate a 90-day retention period. Obama has said he supports the repeal of the amendment.
090419_Schumer_Repeal_Gun_Records_Policy​

So my question is this, if the senators are lying, which they clearly are and which has been discussed on several TV news shows like CNN's Lou Dobbs, then why won't the media report the lies as lies? And why won't the media report the full truth about these stories?

The Senators claim the amendment "restricts police from using gun trace data" but the fact is the Tiahrt Amendment does no such thing. It actually protects the police and undercover operations from the public (newspapers, etc) from using the Freedom of Information Act to access these records for their own purposes. Why would the Senators lie about this and what is their real purpose?

 

[CulpeperMM]

gun registration is one step toward gun confiscation. that has been the case everywhere it has been implemented.

 

[SavageEagle]

Maybe they are looking for an excuse for US to revolt against THEM so they can call for a Constitutional Convention so they can throw out the Constitution altogether?

I know I sound paranoid, but could I be right?

 

[rjwin1967]

The FBI keeps track of people buying long guns with NICS checks. They were sued for keeping the records past 6 months. Anyone who thinks they actually got rid of them is kidding themselves. Most of the past complaints from the democrats were about handgun violence so why is the FBI so concerned about long gun sales? Guess. Your government is not your friend.

 

[Fletch]

Speaking from my bias as a computer professional, I don't believe for a minute that the records are actually destroyed now. I believe we already have a de facto registry in electronic form, and it can't be argued that the mandated retention of form 4473 by all dealers everywhere constitutes a de facto paper registry. Secondary sales make the registries somewhat inaccurate, but they're probably accurate enough.

Back to the software angle, any piece of data that's retained for even 24 hours probably has some sort of archival resting place as opposed to being completely de-rezzed -- it's just the way people like me tend to think. Data retention is firmly entrenched in everything I do, so firmly that I'd have to be given the source code of the system to be fully convinced that it's being destroyed. I once worked on a system that had a rolling 2-week data window, and every programmer on the team desperately wanted to figure out a way to archive the data as it rolled off the end of its lifespan. It's just the way we think.