Help PAC N Arms defend against ATF


PDA






Ryanxia
March 19, 2014, 03:39 PM
Last fall I brought to light a situation at our local gun shop PAC N Arms regarding the ATF attempting to mass copy every customer's info, even when no violation had taken place. This is apparently common practice among many gun shops, but most don’t know their Rights and some don’t see it as a concern.

A national firearms registration is illegal and something we should all be concerned about. 18 USC 926 of U.S. Federal law categorically prohibits anyone in the Justice Department (including the ATF) from seizing any records or documents other than those constituting material evidence of a violation of law.
The ATF is recording as much data on gun owners as they can, which never leads to anything good. The ATF backed down in Alaska and issued an apology when an Alaskan Senator got involved but we’ve had no such luck here in Maine. Furthermore, after PAC N Arms refusal of mass copying records the ATF has taken to trying to shut them down with every false allegation under the sun they can think of, in the hopes that something will stick.

PAC N Arms is challenging the ATF and this will be heading into a court room in the near future. The goal is to set a legal precedent for gun shops and other FFL’s to deny the copying of people’s personal information (DOB, SSN, address, ethnicity, exact gun purchased, etc.) when there is no violation or crime committed. If even 1 out of 5 gun shops did this it would make a national registration (already illegal) very difficult, especially in states where private sales are legal.

WHAT THIS MEANS TO YOU – While awareness is important, PAC N Arms needs YOUR help in the fight to Defend Freedom. The legal fees to go toe to toe with a corrupt federal agency are staggering. The owner is sending out a call for help to fellow Americans that still care about securing our Freedom and the Freedom of future generations.

ANY donation is appreciated, but in an effort to raise money quickly, PAC N Arms has setup a program where any donations over $50.00 will earn the donator their next firearm purchase at cost (plus tax, c.c. fee if applicable and shipping if you can’t come pick it up). Depending on the chosen firearm you could actually end up saving more money than you donate! (Personally speaking, I know his prices to be extremely competitive to begin with so I think this will be good for everyone involved).

HOW TO DONATE – 3 ways:
• You can mail a check/money order to PAC N Arms 125 Milton Avenue Sanford, ME 04027
• You can call the main shop number at (207) 324-1112 and give a credit/debit card over the phone, make sure you tell them you’re calling to donate to the PAC N Arms Defense Fund
• You can stop in and donate in cash

If your donation is over $50 be sure to include your full name and contact info, also keep record of the amount you donated and the date for verification later. Your information will be kept confidential and not shared with anyone.

There will also be raffles and t-shirts coming up which I will let everyone know about.

This man is putting his business and livelihood on the line for his customers and Americans everywhere.
Thanks for your help, it means a lot.

See Part 1 for several pages of background information. No other details of the case may be provided at this time.
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=737291

If you enjoyed reading about "Help PAC N Arms defend against ATF" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Twiki357
March 19, 2014, 07:29 PM
I think it’s a lot more common than what a lot of shops will admit.

I was talking to the owner of a local FFL about a year ago who told me that during the ATF exams they would photocopy all his 4473’s since the prior exam. He now has computerized records and they have him down load his records to a flash drive. I commented that that was illegal and his comment was “When the ATF says jump, he jumps or loses his FFL.” With the number of FFLs in my area, I suspect this is a general procedure though none of the others will admit it.

AlexanderA
March 19, 2014, 09:50 PM
Does anybody really have an expectation of privacy when it comes to Forms 4473? I'm not surprised or shocked by this.

dalek1967
March 19, 2014, 10:24 PM
Do they have a website with this info or anything? I'm a member on a social site and would like to post a link to a site for this if there is one. It would also make it easier for folks to donate too.

Just curious.

texasgun
March 19, 2014, 10:31 PM
Yeah... "donating" $ to a FFL?

I'd rather "donate" $5o to my local FFL by buying some magazines or ammo....

JSH1
March 19, 2014, 10:55 PM
If the ATF asks a FFL for permission to copy their records and the FFL says OK, that is not seizing records. It is also legal.

gunnutery
March 19, 2014, 11:13 PM
Yeah... "donating" $ to a FFL?

I'd rather "donate" $5o to my local FFL by buying some magazines or ammo....

This is where our complacency and apathy really shows through. I'll admit the first though that crossed my mind was "well, it's a legal battle very far from my home." :banghead:

It may be some far off legal battle, but the potential ramifications of a positive outcome could reach far and wide into our locales. If we turn a blind eye now, we may as well get our walking shoes on to go get in line to hand in our "evil guns". I will be contributing some when my credit card clears in a couple days. This FFL isn't just standing up for his Maine customers, he's making a stand for all of us by filing this action.

I will also add that just because they ask doesn't mean that they have the legal ability to compile a registration. There are certain things that LE can ask for without it constituting a search, but DOJ and affiliates are forbidden to compile searchable databases of firearm owners.

texasgun
March 19, 2014, 11:20 PM
@JSH1

EXACTLY !!

ATF asks and FFL gives the records... this is NOT seizing.

Seizing would be ATF marching in, cracking open the door and carrying the records into their truck....

If the legal battle is that "well prepared" from the FFL side... it's a waste of money. Won't make it far.

They also would have to prove in court that declining to hand over records to the ATF resulted in extra unfair scrutiny by the ATF :rolleyes: good luck with that. Unless they have a ATF whisteblower... it's going to be tough

JSH1
March 19, 2014, 11:32 PM
DOJ and affiliates are forbidden to compile searchable databases of firearm owners. A scanned copy of a 4473 is not a searchable database. The ATF does gun tracing by hand because they are not allowed to create a database.

texasgun
March 19, 2014, 11:39 PM
there is so much inability to actually comprehend the law in this post... it's not even funny anymore.

by all means - if you want to "donate" money to that specific FFL... please go ahead and do so (regardless of the fact that the NRA could use that money in bigger fights better...)... but don't be naive... the ATF is NOT (as seen by law) creating a "database" by merely copying individual records.

also... we constantly babble about "oooh... enough laws on the books... time to enforce what's already on the books" ... yet when the ATF checks FFL records or has undercover folks at gunshows trying to see if FFL sell without a background check... people freak out here. A little incoherent...

dalek1967
March 19, 2014, 11:41 PM
A scanned copy of a 4473 is not a searchable database. The ATF does gun tracing by hand because they are not allowed to create a database.
It may not be computer searchable but it is searchable by hand. Keep in mind, before computers came along, finger prints were searched by hand too. It was slow and time consuming but it worked. Those were used for decades. Even now with computers, they are still confirmed by humans so that they can testify in court if needed. Personally, I don't want them copying my gun purchases at all. I don't like them even being able to SEE them.

I think the biggest point of this is simple. We don't trust the Government. I know I don't trust them one bit.

hartcreek
March 20, 2014, 01:05 AM
Are all of you so computer illiterate that you do not know how to make a database?

The 4473 is a standardized form being such it is simple to transfer the information with OCR software and bingo you have a database that can be searched by which ever field is chosen.

gunnutery
March 20, 2014, 01:25 AM
A scanned copy of a 4473 is not a searchable database. The ATF does gun tracing by hand because they are not allowed to create a database.

Obviously not, but if they have so much time to scan every single 4473, then they also have time to enter all info of said 4473s into a searchable database. I heard an ATF agent on an NPR radio interview explain that they have to search them by hand for getting evidence in a criminal case and that they're NOT making a database. Ohhh...wellll, an ATF agent said.... That specific agent may actually believe everything he said, it doesn't mean that the agency is infallible or perfect.

Lest we forget Fast and Furious, or bribing inner city kids to hang out in their fake stores with drugs, or losing multiple full auto weapons, or the latest raid on the Ares store, despite a no contact order.

All they need is to convince a couple ambitious agents that "it's what's best for our country." Data-mining was taking place before it was "legal" in the patriot act too.

Ryanxia
March 20, 2014, 08:51 AM
This is where our complacency and apathy really shows through. I'll admit the first though that crossed my mind was "well, it's a legal battle very far from my home." :banghead:

It may be some far off legal battle, but the potential ramifications of a positive outcome could reach far and wide into our locales. If we turn a blind eye now, we may as well get our walking shoes on to go get in line to hand in our "evil guns". I will be contributing some when my credit card clears in a couple days. This FFL isn't just standing up for his Maine customers, he's making a stand for all of us by filing this action.

I will also add that just because they ask doesn't mean that they have the legal ability to compile a registration. There are certain things that LE can ask for without it constituting a search, but DOJ and affiliates are forbidden to compile searchable databases of firearm owners.
Well said, this fight is for our cause, not specific individuals.
And yes it is not illegal if the FFL allows it, problem is that most think they HAVE to allow it.

The ATF is already using these records and going to people and saying, 'hey we see you bought several guns this past year, what are you up to?' They're starting to harass and intimidate people for exercising their Second Amendment Rights.

If you think the ATF can do no wrong then by all means that's your Right.
If you think your money would be better spent donating to the NRA, then do it. This is a fight for all of our Rights, so every little bit helps.

Dalek1967 - There will be info up on the main PAC N Arms site shortly, but due to the high processing fees there is no way at this time to use a website to donate.

JSH1
March 20, 2014, 10:16 AM
Are all of you so computer illiterate that you do not know how to make a database?

The 4473 is a standardized form being such it is simple to transfer the information with OCR software and bingo you have a database that can be searched by which ever field is chosen.

I am well aware of what can be done with OCR software. There is a huge difference between what is possible to do and what is being done. The OP claims, without any proof, that the ATF IS creating a registry.

texasgun
March 20, 2014, 10:18 AM
"The ATF is already using these records and going to people and saying, 'hey we see you bought several guns this past year, what are you up to?' They're starting to harass and intimidate people for exercising their Second Amendment Rights. "

Any proof /source?

And don't come with guys on the Texas / Mexico border who are on record for buying a dozen of ARs while living in a trailer and "losing" them all the time...

Ryanxia
March 20, 2014, 11:52 AM
JSH1 - Mass copying of people's info typically isn't done to throw it out a few days later. Regardless of what they do today, allowing them to record every gun sale/transaction will eventually lead to registration, which is why there is a law prohibiting it (18 US 926).

Texasgun - I wish I could share more detail/proof but I cannot. I'm trying to make fellow gun owners aware of someone who is standing for our Rights, and it is something that many of us agree with and are working to see it through.
Unfortunately legal representation does not allow at this time many of the details to be released.

Mike1234567
March 20, 2014, 11:59 AM
I'm a natural skeptic and cynic. I nearly always suspect... no, I expect... the worst case scenario when it comes to other people and government. It's a "conditioned response". I have no doubts whatsoever that a national database has been in the making for a long time... and it isn't technically difficult. Regarding time spent; Ever heard of automatic feed scanners and OCR? Also, how many man-hours does the NSA spend listening to phone calls and monitoring forums and emails? To those who believe other folks are perfectly honest and governments have no hidden agendas... more power to you... but expect to be surprised when you're proven naive.

atomd
March 20, 2014, 12:20 PM
I am well aware of what can be done with OCR software. There is a huge difference between what is possible to do and what is being done. The OP claims, without any proof, that the ATF IS creating a registry.

As soon as you store all that information (in any format), it is then a registry since it can be used to look up this information at a later date. They are scanning everything they can, not just one specific 4473. You would only store things you don't need so they can be accessed if you need them. Sounds like a registry to me.

Ryanxia
March 20, 2014, 12:26 PM
As soon as you store all that information (in any format), it is then a registry since it can be used to look up this information at a later date. They are scanning everything they can, not just one specific 4473. You would only store things you don't need so they can be accessed if you need them. Sounds like a registry to me.
Well put atomd.

texasgun
March 20, 2014, 01:47 PM
"As soon as you store all that information (in any format), it is then a registry since it can be used to look up this information at a later date. They are scanning everything they can, not just one specific 4473. You would only store things you don't need so they can be accessed if you need them. Sounds like a registry to me."

as long as private party sales w/o background check are legal... a hypothetical registry by collecting 4473 forms is horribly incomplete and close to useless..... not even worth the time...

I bought close to 8 handguns over 4 yrs at 5 different FFLs. Out of those 8 handguns - I did sell 3 in private party transactions...

also: if the ATF would copying ALL records from ALL major FFLs... we would be hearing about it. That's hardly something which can be done secretly...

Midwest
March 20, 2014, 02:14 PM
....if the ATF would copying ALL records from ALL major FFLs... we would be hearing about it. That's hardly something which can be done secretly...
While there is a Federal Prohibition, there seems to be no state prohibition. A few states have gun registration in one form or another. Even so called "free states" were taking information down through the state system.

Ryanxia
March 20, 2014, 02:25 PM
Texasgun - Go ask your local gun shops what happens during their (usually annual) compliance inspection (audit).

Most the ones I've talked to say something like 'oh they just go out back and I leave em alone' or 'they just stick their thumb drive in and click a few buttons' or 'if they say they want something I comply or I lose my license'.

yzguy87
March 20, 2014, 02:33 PM
Thanks for posting Ryan. I will definitely donate as soon as I can.

texasgun
March 20, 2014, 02:39 PM
"Most the ones I've talked to say something like 'oh they just go out back and I leave em alone' or 'they just stick their thumb drive in and click a few buttons' or 'if they say they want something I comply or I lose my license'."

and nothing of the above mentioned is considered illegal during the regular compliance audits... and NOTHING of the above mentioned is proof in any way that the ATF is building a secret and illegal gun registry.

How in the world are ATF agents to conduct audits and check if all sold guns are accounted for without viewing the forms?

sorry... this apparent law suit by PAC N Arms has ZERO legal ground to stand on. Basically it's wasted money and only some lawyers will smile when they go to their bank to deposit a fat check.

MtnCreek
March 20, 2014, 03:06 PM
How in the world are ATF agents to conduct audits and check if all sold guns are accounted for without viewing the forms?

The 4473's, bound book and inventory are checked, but I don't see why ATF would need to leave with that information.

denton
March 20, 2014, 04:10 PM
Here is the actual law:

No such rule or regulation prescribed [by the Attorney General] after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or disposition be established. Nothing in this section expands or restricts the Secretary's authority to inquire into the disposition of any firearm in the course of a criminal investigation.

1. Parts of it cover the United States, the states, and all their political subdivisions.

2. It doesn't say anything limiting the law to "searchable", "machine searchable" or "electronic" databases.

3. A pile of papers containing the names and telephone numbers of people is a database. It's just not an electronic database. No matter. Yes, the phone book is a database. Really.

4. The law prohibits any system of registration of firearms, firearm owners, firearms transactions, and firearm dispositions. A partial list is as prohibited as a complete list.

MtnCreek
March 20, 2014, 04:20 PM
" A partial list is as prohibited as a complete list. "

How did they get around files surrendered when an FFL closes?

texasgun
March 20, 2014, 04:25 PM
"No such rule or regulation [legal blablabla] may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter [legal blablabla], be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof"

so unless you can point to specific RULES and REGULATIONS by the ATF which state that they copy/transfer 4473 forms - with the exception of forms during criminal investigations - en masse .... you have no legal case....

let me guess - there is no such rule/regulation by the ATF pointing towards copy/transfer of 4473 forms en masse and at will....

texasgun
March 20, 2014, 04:27 PM
" 4. The law prohibits any system of registration of firearms, firearm owners, firearms transactions, and firearm dispositions. A partial list is as prohibited as a complete list."

not. it doesn't. it basically prohibits a registration based on information contained in the 4473 forms... but there are plenty of states with firearms registration which is perfectly legal as it's not based on the federal 4473 form

larryh1108
March 20, 2014, 04:53 PM
Anyone who thinks there is no database from the 4473 forms has their head in the sand. By law, when an FFL closes, all their records go to the BATF. I guess someone just chucks them into a closet somewhere, to collect dust. Right, and I'm Batman.

The BATF has proven, time and again, that they feel they are above the law and answer only to the POTUS who has also proven he is bound by no laws. Nice combo, huh? I feel all warm and fuzzy.

With computer software able to "read" what is entered into a form and organize it into a specific database, they are, and have been, creating a searchable database. I bet one person could just feed these 4473s into a machine, one-by-one, and do thousands daily. The completed 4473s have all the info needed. When you call them in, there is no gun or serial number but it is recorded later after the approvel. Scan/convert/store. Easy.

They won't use it in court but I bet they can locate the info they need, in a hurry, and then go find the proper hard copy to provide LE investigators. Do not believe, for one second, that this specific government agency is following the laws they are bound by. If the day ever came, I'd bet they could spit out a list, by ZIP code, that has more than half of the guns sold thru FFLs and it seems they want the other half. They do it with fear and intimidation to FFL holders who don't want to risk their businesses or their assets by insinuated threats.

If you wish to think all is above board then make sure you set out your basket for the Easter Bunny. I hear he is nearby.

To the OP, I think your buddies need to set up a Pay Pal account to collect funds. Easy, quick and keeps a record. I don't like giving my CC# to anyone and I'd do a Pay Pal in a few seconds. I bet many people would. You can put a link on any web page, that is well recognized, as well.

Ryanxia
March 20, 2014, 05:09 PM
"Most the ones I've talked to say something like 'oh they just go out back and I leave em alone' or 'they just stick their thumb drive in and click a few buttons' or 'if they say they want something I comply or I lose my license'."

and nothing of the above mentioned is considered illegal during the regular compliance audits... and NOTHING of the above mentioned is proof in any way that the ATF is building a secret and illegal gun registry.

How in the world are ATF agents to conduct audits and check if all sold guns are accounted for without viewing the forms?

sorry... this apparent law suit by PAC N Arms has ZERO legal ground to stand on. Basically it's wasted money and only some lawyers will smile when they go to their bank to deposit a fat check.
I'll try to be more clear. The ATF certainly can VIEW records going back a certain time. They can request to copy EVERYTHING and most FFL's allow them to.

The problem we run into is that when denied to copy EVERYTHING that does not relate to any criminal investigation or violation, they start using heavy handed tactics. The link in the original post to the first thread made on this along with the attached letter in that thread will shed light on the situation we are talking about. The thread just got so long I decided to make a fresh one.

EDIT: Thanks for the tip Larry, I will certainly get on that.

Baron66
March 20, 2014, 05:09 PM
sorry... this apparent law suit by PAC N Arms has ZERO legal ground to stand on. Basically it's wasted money and only some lawyers will smile when they go to their bank to deposit a fat check.

Texasgun, to make such a bold statement like this you clearly must be an expert on state and federal gun laws, and existing case law.

Can you please tell us where you studied law, and in what states you are authorized to practice law? And, since this is clearly your practice area, we would also love to know what cases you have worked that are relevant to this one.

I think that information would help us all understand your complacency towards this topic.

Mike1234567
March 20, 2014, 05:24 PM
Geez... are there government plants here trying to BS us? Or are some of our members really this brainwashed and naive?

316SS
March 20, 2014, 06:02 PM
Geez... are there government plants here trying to BS us? Or are some of our members really this brainwashed and naive?

Yes.

larryh1108
March 20, 2014, 06:22 PM
Some people have blind trust in our government. Usually they are anti-gun owners who feel the government will protect them from all evils, foreign and domestic.

Some branches of our government have proven, over time, that they fear nothing and no one. Research J Edgar Hoover, for starters. Research Fast and Furious for examples of today. How many decades has that covered? Now we read how our texts, emails and cell calls are recorded and monitored all over the world. Some still believe that the government is fair and pure and honest. <chuckle> It makes me wonder just how deep their heads are buried in the sand. I'm guessing ankle deep.

Sentryau2
March 20, 2014, 06:38 PM
The more i think about this, the more commited i become to buying only from private individuals. Will never buy another gun and fill out paper work on it.

denton
March 20, 2014, 08:16 PM
it doesn't. it basically prohibits a registration based on information contained in the 4473 forms

I don't see any reference in the law to Form 4473, though it does prohibit a database that includes information that is required to be kept. And I believe that information that is required to be kept is a subset of the 4473 info.

This law is undoubtedly being flagrantly violated by the US government. I do hope that Alan Gura gets around to fixing that one of these days.

JSH1
March 20, 2014, 08:40 PM
Anyone who thinks there is no database from the 4473 forms has their head in the sand. By law, when an FFL closes, all their records go to the BATF. I guess someone just chucks them into a closet somewhere, to collect dust. Right, and I'm Batman.

The BATF has proven, time and again, that they feel they are above the law and answer only to the POTUS who has also proven he is bound by no laws. Nice combo, huh? I feel all warm and fuzzy.

With computer software able to "read" what is entered into a form and organize it into a specific database, they are, and have been, creating a searchable database. I bet one person could just feed these 4473s into a machine, one-by-one, and do thousands daily. The completed 4473s have all the info needed. When you call them in, there is no gun or serial number but it is recorded later after the approvel. Scan/convert/store. Easy.

There is not secret plan to scan 4473s, it is an open plan. They invite reporters into the ATF building and show them how they do traces, search documents and scan 4473's. They used to convert the paper forms to microfilm, now they use a scanner. Why do they do it in the open? Because it isn't illegal. Whether the 4473 form is on paper, on microfilm, or a digital file, it is not a registry of guns or gun owners.

From: http://www.npr.org/2013/05/20/185530763/the-low-tech-way-guns-get-traced

"We have to have seven scanners running 16 hours a day or we fall behind," Houser says. But even once the pages are scanned, Houser points out, they're still not searchable. They're just making a digital image. "The only difference between the digital images and searching the boxes is that now somebody can sit at a TV screen, and they will flip through page by page. It's not searchable by anybody's name," he says. With so much paperwork flooding in — there's a backlog — about 3,000 boxes right now are waiting to be scanned.

Midwest
March 20, 2014, 09:37 PM
We are concerned about the ATF collecting and maintaining a gun database and rightly so. But it is not just the ATF we have to be concerned about. There are several states which already have some type of gun registry in form or another. Among them Hawaii and California. NY NJ MI for handguns, I guess we could add Massachusetts, Maryland and Connecticut to the mix.


So, what about so called "free states"? Surely they don't have gun registries, please read on. I found some interesting information about Pennsylvania and Washington State.


http://www.pagunblog.com/2012/11/19/state-registration-schemes/

"Much like Pennsylvania, this information is likely obtained from state required forms, which don’t fall under the purview of the federal government. In Pennsylvania’s case, the “Record of Sale” is used to compile a computerized registry.

If Washington State has a state form for gun purchases, it’s coming from that. Otherwise, Washington State is a partial Point-of-Contact state for Brady Act purposes, so it’s Washington State, not the FBI, which process background checks for every handgun sold. It’s also likely that system is tied in with a state “registry” as well.



In Pennsylvania, a registry is supposed to be illegal by statute, but the State Supreme Court ruled that computerizing every Record of Sale was not a registry, because it wasn’t a complete record of firearm ownership.

Of course, in the past, that hasn’t stopped the police from treating it as such, and confiscating guns at traffic stops for not being “legally registered” to the owner."




Here is more about Washington State.

http://armsandthelaw.com/archives/2012/11/an_interesting_16.php

"At the state level, Washington does keep a list of who buys handguns from an FFL. It's a separate form that's filled out along with the federal form.

As far as I know, it only applies to FFL sales and not any subsequent private party sale."

Some of the reasons listed above is why I am not a fan of a "State Point of Contact". Other concerns include the state tacking on fees, (some excessive) just to maintain the State POC.

For instance New Jersey charges $15 and their state NICS is CLOSED on Sundays, State Holidays and seemingly whenever it snows. If that is not an infringement on the Second Amendment, then I don't know what is. On the other hand, the Federal NICS doesn't charge anything. Better yet, if one can do a private sale then all the better.

The politicians want to end all that with their so called UBC Universal Background Check. That is what Gabby and her "UBC Tour" is all about. As it is, some states already do NOT allow for private sales of certain type of firearms like pistols.

A few other states mandate that both pistols and long guns must go through an FFL with the state acting as Point of Contact which can lead to partial or complete registries of firearms sold through the FFL.

.

atomd
March 20, 2014, 10:47 PM
"We have to have seven scanners running 16 hours a day or we fall behind," Houser says. But even once the pages are scanned, Houser points out, they're still not searchable. They're just making a digital image. "The only difference between the digital images and searching the boxes is that now somebody can sit at a TV screen, and they will flip through page by page. It's not searchable by anybody's name," he says. With so much paperwork flooding in — there's a backlog — about 3,000 boxes right now are waiting to be scanned.

Now that is scary. If you're not upset by this, you're messed up in the head. REALLY messed up in the head.

If I took a pile of notebooks and a box of pens and recorded the names, addresses, sometimes social security #s of people who bought pencils.....I would still have a database of people who bought pencils. But using scanners and storing this data is ok? Does anyone have any idea that using software costing almost nothing you can turn every single scanned image into a searchable database in no time at all? Not to mention the law doesn't say how high tech it has to be. It just says a database. If all this data was stored on construction paper and written in crayon it would still be a database and would still be illegal.

The problem is .....when you're above the law you're going to have a hard time finding someone to apply the law to you.

JSH1
March 20, 2014, 11:49 PM
Now that is scary. If you're not upset by this, you're messed up in the head. REALLY messed up in the head.

If I took a pile of notebooks and a box of pens and recorded the names, addresses, sometimes social security #s of people who bought pencils.....I would still have a database of people who bought pencils. But using scanners and storing this data is ok? Does anyone have any idea that using software costing almost nothing you can turn every single scanned image into a searchable database in no time at all?

Yes, I know that it is possible to use computer software to search for text in images. No, it doesn't concern me at all. The ATF has the records either in paper, microfilm, or scanned form. Whether they search paper files page by page or a computer searches millions of images the result is the same, the only difference is the time and cost required to find the information they are looking for. I for one would like my government to operate as efficiently as possible. I would prefer that the ATF be allowed to search 4473 forms using a computer because it would greatly reduce the cost to do gun traces. However, they are not allowed to do that so we, the taxpayers, pay to maintain a horribly inefficient system for gun tracing.

atomd
March 21, 2014, 12:27 AM
Yes, I know that it is possible to use computer software to search for text in images. No, it doesn't concern me at all. The ATF has the records either in paper, microfilm, or scanned form. Whether they search paper files page by page or a computer searches millions of images the result is the same, the only difference is the time and cost required to find the information they are looking for. I for one would like my government to operate as efficiently as possible. I would prefer that the ATF be allowed to search 4473 forms using a computer because it would greatly reduce the cost to do gun traces. However, they are not allowed to do that so we, the taxpayers, pay to maintain a horribly inefficient system for gun tracing.
JSH1 is online now Report Post


You should be ashamed of yourself. Absolutely gut-wrenching disgusting.

denton
March 21, 2014, 12:34 AM
However, they are not allowed to do that so we, the taxpayers, pay to maintain a horribly inefficient system for gun tracing.

It was designed to be so.

The compromise that was reached in the gun legislation was that the government was not to have a database of gun owners and gun transactions. That information was to reside with the gun dealers, and the government was supposed to have access to it as needed, when needed. It was designed to be that way to prevent casual, non-crime linked searches for people who own guns.

JSH1
March 21, 2014, 01:00 AM
You should be ashamed of yourself. Absolutely gut-wrenching disgusting.

I'm not. It is part of my fiscally conservative nature.

It was designed to be so.

The compromise that was reached in the gun legislation was that the government was not to have a database of gun owners and gun transactions. That information was to reside with the gun dealers, and the government was supposed to have access to it as needed, when needed. It was designed to be that way to prevent casual, non-crime linked searches for people who own guns.

That works fine until the FFL goes out of business and the records go to the ATF. Then it is the ATF that has to hunt through boxes and boxes of old paper documents or pages of microfilm / scanned copies. Again, the result is the same regardless of the method.

dogtown tom
March 21, 2014, 01:09 AM
JSH1 ..... Whether the 4473 form is on paper, on microfilm, or a digital file, it is not a registry of guns or gun owners.
This.
The 4473 is a record of a firearm transaction between a licensed dealer and the buyer/transferee.......and that's it.

While YOUR STATE may have a registry of firearms or firearm owners, most do not.

It's a bit silly to argue over whether ATF is compiling a registry when no 4473 is required for transactions between nonlicensees.

Nearly every week I'll have a customer ask "I bought a gun ten years ago and someone wants to buy it, how do I get this gun out of my name?":scrutiny:
You can't. That 4473 stays with me for twenty years or until I go out of business.

For those that think ATF has a database take heart in this:
1. Dealers can destroy 4473's after 20 years.
2. ATF relies on 4473's stored at dealers and manufacturers for transaction less than 20 years old.
3. ATF National Tracing Center once asked me to find the 4473 for a "Kahr MP6 pistol cal 9mm" (no such model exists....the requesting PD meant "Kahr PM9")
4. If the secret ATF database is anything like Eforms we have nothing to worry about, they probably can't log in either.
5. Registry's, databases and boxes of files in caves aren't the problem. It's their misuse that's the problem.

atomd
March 21, 2014, 01:13 AM
I'm not. It is part of my fiscally conservative nature.


This has as much as to do with being fiscally conservative as a black hole has to do with being the cause of the flight 370 missing.

Billions and billions are being tossed out the window all the time but you are concerned with this? I smell something rotten.

If you were 1% concerned with being fiscally conservative (which I doubt you are) you would be worried about the payouts from the lawsuits from these incidents which are clearly illegal. Taxpayer money will pay for this.

I smell a rat.

atomd
March 21, 2014, 01:26 AM
And of course Tom has to come in and defend the ATF with his usual flawed logic as he usually does. I would expect nothing less.

I am not part of the whole tinfoil hat brigade that thinks drones and black helicopters are flying above spying on us for any and every reason 24/7...but the way people like Tom and JSH1 think.....I honestly think they might be posting for a reason. No one would go that far out of their way to post multiple times on current ATF wrongdoings threads defending them. It's very strange and it makes me wonder. No one I know is that far gone.

gunnutery
March 21, 2014, 04:11 AM
I don't really think we're going to settle this. As much as I believe the ATF IS compiling a searchable database, I have NO evidence other than recent shady events and my inherent distrust of .gov.

We can argue our different beliefs for a lot more pages, but neither side can produce enough evidence to change the other side's minds.

clutch
March 21, 2014, 05:02 AM
I don't really think we're going to settle this. As much as I believe the ATF IS compiling a searchable database, I have NO evidence other than recent shady events and my inherent distrust of .gov.

We can argue our different beliefs for a lot more pages, but neither side can produce enough evidence to change the other side's minds.

The trick is when they decide to OCR the scanned image files already created, the database will be created in just a few days depending on how many computers they munching on the image files.

larryh1108
March 21, 2014, 08:14 AM
And of course Tom has to come in and defend the ATF with his usual flawed logic as he usually does. I would expect nothing less.

Seriously?

Tom has always been a class act. As a FFL, he oftentimes answers questions we have concerning what an FFL does. He talks from experience, not guessing. He is an asset to these boards. If he's slanted at all, it's to how a FFL thinks or operates, which is much needed here with so many self-proclaimed experts in all walks of the gun world.

Ryanxia
March 21, 2014, 08:22 AM
I've seen a lot of opinions on this matter and we all have the Right to view Gun Rights in our own way. For those of us who refuse to give up another scrap of Freedom without a fight, this situation with PAC N Arms is a good way to do that on one front. We know what the anti-gunners end goal is, why make it easier for them if it ever legally passes?

I often help campaigns in other states to shut down laws that would hurt the American people in that state, even if it doesn't directly affect me YET. We all have a choice to make on what's worth fighting for. I've made my choice.

Mike1234567
March 21, 2014, 09:20 AM
I wouldn't worry about it. I'm sure all records are, or will be, turned over to the NSA for safe keeping.;)

atomd
March 21, 2014, 09:23 AM
Seriously?


Yep. I hope you don't have any 4473s in his possession. I bet he'd wrap them up with a bow, bake a nice batch of cookies and invite the ATF over for a scanning party. It's like Stockholm syndrome or something.

MtnCreek
March 21, 2014, 09:37 AM
Tom has always been a class act. As a FFL, he oftentimes answers questions we have concerning what an FFL does. He talks from experience, not guessing. He is an asset to these boards. If he's slanted at all, it's to how a FFL thinks or operates, which is much needed here with so many self-proclaimed experts in all walks of the gun world.

Big +1. I'm grateful he takes the time to post here.

JSH1
March 21, 2014, 09:38 AM
This has as much as to do with being fiscally conservative as a black hole has to do with being the cause of the flight 370 missing.<br />
<br />
Billions and billions are being tossed out the window all the time but you are concerned with this? I smell something rotten.

Many billions are being wasted so it is OK to waste even more? That is your argument? A fiscal conservative is concerned about waste in all departments, even those he doesn't like. The solution to spending you don't like is not to make that task more cumbersome and expensive, it is to eliminate the departments' mandate to do that task.

As a moderate, I reject the current tactic on both sides that if you can't win then try all you can to obstruct. I want my government to work.

JSH1
March 21, 2014, 09:47 AM
Nearly every week I'll have a customer ask "I bought a gun ten years ago and someone wants to buy it, how do I get this gun out of my name?":scrutiny:<br />
You can't. That 4473 stays with me for twenty years or until I go out of business.

They could also do the deal in your shop and have the buyer fill out a 4473. I recently got a revolver from my mother and I did the deal through a FFL so there would be a 4473 showing the sale. She wasn't worried about me but still wanted that record in case it was stolen or sold.

dogtown tom
March 21, 2014, 11:13 AM
atomd And of course Tom has to come in and defend the ATF with his usual flawed logic as he usually does. I would expect nothing less.
So what was my "flawed logic"?:scrutiny:
And exactly where did I "defend ATF"?:scrutiny:



I am not part of the whole tinfoil hat brigade that thinks drones and black helicopters are flying above spying on us for any and every reason 24/7...but the way people like Tom and JSH1 think.....I honestly think they might be posting for a reason.
You're correct. I do post for a reason.....it's called being a member of this forum and usually that means engaging in the conversation at hand. If you find fault with what I post then come back with a good argument. Trying to link JH1 and myself with some secret agenda IS full on tin foil hat brigade.

I'm a licensed firearms dealer. As such I agreed to follow Federal law and ATF regulations. Like it or not, that's what I'll do as long as I hold my FFL. If I disagree with something my IOI does or says I know how to reach his supervisor. In the last six years I've only had to do that once, and the supervisor set him straight.






No one would go that far out of their way to post multiple times on current ATF wrongdoings threads defending them.
Sure, when I see utter nonsense posted about ATF regulations or Federal law I'll point it out. If you believe what I write to be "defending ATF" it may be a simple explanation of why and how they do what they do.

And the licensed dealers on this forum often wonder what YOUR real experience is with ATF.



It's very strange and it makes me wonder. No one I know is that far gone.
Why not just call me an undercover ATF agent? :rolleyes:



atomd Quote:
Seriously?
Yep. I hope you don't have any 4473s in his possession. I bet he'd wrap them up with a bow, bake a nice batch of cookies and invite the ATF over for a scanning party. It's like Stockholm syndrome or something.
I would love it if ATF came over to pick up my 4473's. I have twelve large tubs of forms taking up space. I don't look forward to their continued growth.
Sorry to bust your bubble, but no I wouldn't invite ATF over for anything. And I doubt they would come since Federal law limits them to one inspection per year.

So far you've called me "far gone"and alluded to me having "Stockholm Syndrome".
Maybe if you spent a little more time research how often and widespread the "Great ATF Scanning Scandal" really is you wouldn't embarrass yourself any further.;)

Mike1234567
March 21, 2014, 11:20 AM
Well, I'm sure the Germans wanted their Nazi government to be efficient too and anyone obstructing their progress was labeled fiscally non-conservative and shot. That's far more efficient than going through a tedious time-consuming and expensive trial procedure.

Jorg Nysgerrig
March 21, 2014, 11:33 AM
Between personal attacks and Godwin, it's time to shut this one down.

If you enjoyed reading about "Help PAC N Arms defend against ATF" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!