In what states can Average Joe request police to run NCIC check for stolen gun?

I can tell you Seattle WA is pretty good about it. I did a few times, but the clerk who ran the check (a uniform officer BTW) looked at me like I was drunk, and said its the first time he's been asked. If it comes up stolen, they'll have questions for you thou. The King Co sheriff has done it too. I don't believe its a written law, but I think most police stations will do it for you if your polite, and don't walk in with the gun in your hand. Yea, they mentioned that because apparently people actually do that when they for whatever reason bring a gun in. There may be a website you can run the number with instead.

I can run a NCIC check on stolen firearms (or vehicles, whatever) from where I work. Or call central dispatch for when I am everywhere else.

Our county sheriff will run stolen firearm checks if they aren't too busy. Just DON'T bring the firearm in. They prefer a picture of the serial and not the gun itself. The bulletproof glass in front of the clerk indicates someone has brought firearms in before.

This is a good idea for a thread. I assume it sprang from this one: https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/private-party-sale-opinion.827550/page-2#post-10664332

Some of the quotes posted there (and reflecting very similar comments in many other threads) are:

dogtown tom said:

A police officer who uses the NCIC for anything not official business will lose his access rights. (if not his job)

Click to expand...

GRIZZ22 said:

Unauthorized use of NCIC is a crime punishable by up to 5 years and $250,000. That's a pretty big risk to ask any LEO to take to do you a favor.

Click to expand...

Yet we hear accounts of people regularly getting their local LEOs to do just this for them. Can anyone shed light on that and explain a) what the law exactly IS, and b) how department policy may be arranged so that officers aren't simply violating federal law when they do this favor for someone?

Local police are municipal not State. And every PD has it's own policies. Most of 'em charge a fee for doing anything.
"...don't walk in with the gun in your hand..." Yep. And there's nothing as scary as a frightened cop.

Couldn't any LEO claim that checking for a stolen gun is always legitimate police business?

Click to expand...

That's sort of the crux of my question. But I definitely see a difference between an officer taking control of a firearm as part of an investigation and running it's numbers (clearly "official police business") and getting a call from a buddy or Joe Public to run some random gun the guy doesn't even have or own.

There's even a potential question of whether doing that would constitute an unlawful search. Basically in "investigating" someone or someone's property (the seller's) when there's no reason to believe a crime has taken place. Getting pretty far into 4th Amendment theorizing, though.

Google

operating procedures ncic firearms

Click to expand...

NCIC 2000 Operating Manual – Gun File


1.2 CRITERIA FOR ENTRY
1. Records for serially numbered weapons that are stolen may be entered into the file if
a theft report has been made.
2. A record for a recovered (abandoned, seized, or found) weapon for which no stolen,
lost, or felony report is on file may be entered in NCIC 2000. The weapon must
remain in the possession of the entering agency or be readily available for
examination as long as the record is in NCIC 2000. If the entering agency loses
custody of the recovered gun, the recovered gun record must be canceled.
3. A record for a lost or missing weapon may be entered in NCIC 2000 if the entering
agency has supporting documentation.
4. A record may be entered for a weapon believed to have been used in the commission
of a felony as long as this fact is documented in the case file and the location of the
weapon is unknown.
5. Agencies must have documentation (electronic or hard copy) on file to support a gun entry.
Only the agency
1. holding the theft report and having primary jurisdiction over the place of actual theft,
2. possessing the recovered weapon,
3. maintaining documentation supporting a lost or missing weapon, or
4. maintaining documentation supporting a weapon believed to have been used in the
commission of a felony may make an NCIC entry.

Ok 243winxb, but that's for entering a gun into NCIC.

Any info on calling in a number to check and see if it matches an existing entry?

https://www.fbi.gov/services/cjis/ncic

Only accessible to law enforcement agencies nationwide, from what i read.

Users of the NCIC system will be restricted to only those privileges necessary to perform an authorized task(s)

Click to expand...

I believe the WA State Sheriff will also run a check, I do not understand how checking a stolen gun data base is a violation of federal law ,stealing a gun or owning or knowingly buying a stolen gun is against the law, what would the point of a data base be if it is not allowed to be accessed ?

"There's even a potential question of whether doing that would constitute an unlawful search. Basically in "investigating" someone or someone's property (the seller's) when there's no reason to believe a crime has taken place. Getting pretty far into 4th Amendment theorizing, though.

Click to expand...

NO. The 4th Amendment is an individual right and generally cannot be asserted by a third party absent some kind of legal privilege-e.g. attorney-client obviously. If the buyer chooses to have the serial number checked by the police, the seller (they are now the third party) cannot assert a right to privacy from the firearm being checked as the buyer is the one possessing the right of privacy and waiving it as far as the police and search goes.

Family used to own a pawnshop it was routine to run all buy's and pawn guns, but if one comes up stolen we had to keep it to be picked up by the police the once the officer gets a hit on a stolen gun it registers that officer and notifies the officer who entered the stolen gun serial number. The reason this came about was when we first opened a guy came in and this happened he got all upset started acting really crazy wanted his gun back he looked like a gang member we just wanted him out of the store gave it back to him he ran out the police showed up and gave us the riot act for not holding it but we felt threatened. That's what the officer told us his badge number was now in the system on that stolen gun after that we explained to each customer that we would have to hold it for the police if it was stolen some would leave quickly they knew it was stolen. We had a business to run wasn't our job to recover stolen firearms we didn't want to end up getting shot up over some $100 lorcin pistol.

JO JO said:

I believe the WA State Sheriff will also run a check, I do not understand how checking a stolen gun data base is a violation of federal law ,stealing a gun or owning or knowingly buying a stolen gun is against the law, what would the point of a data base be if it is not allowed to be accessed ?

Click to expand...

Same reason why the DMV database is not available to the public. Joe Whomever off the street cannot find the name and address of a vehicle owner by going to Google or anywhere else publicly on the suspicion of a stolen vehicle. 4th Amendment and privacy laws play into effect.

that's different if you buy a used car you should get a bill of sale and a title , If a buy a firearm it is safe to say I have no interest in buying a stolen one,
why is it unreasonable to ask to verify said firearm is clean ?
we have the 2 states above that will check if a firearm is stolen before you buy so it is not against any amendment to ensure your buying a clean item or the states would not offer such service.
Boom Boom posted above the explanation as well.

The Fourth Amendment protects citizens from unreasonable government searches and seizures of their persons, houses, papers, and effects.
so if a seller is willingly selling a firearm then how is asking to verify the item that is being willingly sold a violation of the 4th no one is searching or seizing anything ,there would be seller consent to legally sale it, if the firearm is stolen then there is cause to seize said item as stolen firearm sales is a felony,

NCIC records can only be accessed for legitimate criminal justice purposes. I'd argue that checking the serial number on a firearm that a citizen is concerned about would fall under the acceptable uses of this system. However, I'll only run such a clearance on a person (who wants to know if they have warrants) or a firearm (if someone wants it checked) if the person and/or firearm are standing in front of me at the time that I make the query. If someone calls the station to ask either of those questions, I just ask them to come on in and we'll check it out. But, if the firearm is stolen it is staying with us (for obvious reasons).

Sam1911 said:

That's sort of the crux of my question. But I definitely see a difference between an officer taking control of a firearm as part of an investigation and running it's numbers (clearly "official police business") and getting a call from a buddy or Joe Public to run some random gun the guy doesn't even have or own.

There's even a potential question of whether doing that would constitute an unlawful search. Basically in "investigating" someone or someone's property (the seller's) when there's no reason to believe a crime has taken place. Getting pretty far into 4th Amendment theorizing, though.

Click to expand...

Sam,

In the context of this question I see no 4th Amendment issue, with the caveats of following our procedures (as I described just above). If someone walks into my station, hands me a gun, and asks me if it is stolen, there are no rights being violated if I check NCIC to see if that's the case. There is also no NCIC violation.

Similarly, we often receive calls about vehicles that are parked in front of someone's house, because the homeowner believes they are stolen. Sometimes that's the case, other times it isn't. So, an officer will drive out there, check the license plate, and move on if the vehicle is not stolen.

However, we won't and can't just give some random person information over the phone. The most common call of this type is the: "I'm Joe Smith, do I have a warrant?" phone call. We have no idea if he is Joe Smith or not, so we aren't going to give him any information about Joe Smith over the phone (he can drive down to our station to find out if he has a warrant. If he does, he's going to jail).

JO JO said:

that's different if you buy a used car you should get a bill of sale and a title , If a buy a firearm it is safe to say I have no interest in buying a stolen one,

Click to expand...

Because vehicles are registered. In states that use similar registration for firearms, FFLs are used for transfers like DMVs are used for vehicles.

Using NCIC to check for a stolen firearm is probably the easiest investigative work an officer can do. All it takes is punching in a serial number. And suspicion of a firearm being stolen is all the probable cause needed to justify the use of the system.

In my career I ran a number of weapons for citizens wanting to make a purchase here in Florida and not wanting involvement in anything reported stolen - and I always thought that was a very good practice for anyone considering a casual purchase... No, my agency had no policy at all regarding that sort of stuff and I'm certain some of my co-workers couldn't be bothered (and some might even cite some imaginary policy prohibiting that service). One small caveat, though. If the weapon came back as stolen -I'd be writing a report documenting the occurrence and it would contain the citizen's identifying data - as well as any information on the supposed seller... If the info was actionable it would go to our investigations unit for follow-up.

For what it's worth I don't think I ever got a "hit" on any such proposed sale - I imagine that those wanting to sell stolen (or just questionable) items will balk the moment you ask them for serial info as a potential buyer... Remember as well that, at times, a stolen item has not been discovered missing by the owner so an item can be stolen property - but a message isn't entered until days, weeks, or even months later when the theft or loss is discovered...

One other item to remember.... Guns manufactured before 1968 didn't have to have a serial number at all (some did, some didn't) and I once ran into a computer hit on a Sears .22 cal rifle (and the hit was for more than 15 different entries spanning a 30 year period...). After a bit of research here's what we found... that basic bolt action rifle never had a serial number - but did prominently display a model number that more than one owner believed was the serial number and reported it as such to whatever agency took the stolen report - and that's just how a bunch of them had been entered into the system... At that time I had our property room and went round and round before finally figuring out just why our entry wasn't valid either...

Being careful about gun transactions is just basic good sense - and I'd advise anyone who asked that it's a very good idea to make sure you've seen (and recorded) basic ID on whoever you purchase a gun from. If there's a problem later that will be your best defense in a world that is all too sensitive about guns these days...

NO. The 4th Amendment is an individual right and generally cannot be asserted by a third party absent some kind of legal privilege-e.g. attorney-client obviously. If the buyer chooses to have the serial number checked by the police, the seller (they are now the third party) cannot assert a right to privacy from the firearm being checked as the buyer is the one possessing the right of privacy and waiving it as far as the police and search goes.

Click to expand...

In the context of this question I see no 4th Amendment issue, with the caveats of following our procedures (as I described just above). If someone walks into my station, hands me a gun, and asks me if it is stolen, there are no rights being violated if I check NCIC to see if that's the case. There is also no NCIC violation.

Click to expand...

Right, that all makes perfect sense, and I agree. In essence if you're selling an item like a firearm you give up all rights over it, including any privacy expectations -- consenting to any search the new owner wants to have done into the history of that gun.

However, the possible issue I theorized would be more plausible in the case of that random phone call from Joe Public to run the numbers on a gun you don't (and for all you know, HE doesn't) have. You really don't know the circumstances and he may be legitimately checking on an item for sale, or just Billy Joe trying to stir up trouble for his neighbor Earl by copying down a serial number on the gun Earl just picked up for cheap, and fishing for something to get Earl in trouble over. Weird as it may be, that search may not be consensual. Possibly still not an actionable 4th Amendment issue, but another reason why departments may not simply leap to offer such services to anyone who calls.

Thanks OP for broaching this subject in this post and where the legality should be discussed. I did post that I had personally called myself a few times with positive results. I live in a rural area and am known by local LEO officers. I also told the sellers that my call would close the deal if they came back clean and did the deed in their presence every time so my request would have nixed the deal had they disagreed. I never thought I might be asking the Police to break the law if that turns out to be the case here in Ms. I surely wouldn't give someone money for anything knowingly if it wasn't going to legally belong to me. I've always heard a DA could indict a ham sandwich if they wish to and I really take my rights and freedom very much to heart. I am ignorant about a lot of matters concerning laws and ignorance wouldn't excuse me from receiving stolen property which I think should be a felony if in fact it is not.

... ignorance wouldn't excuse me from receiving stolen property which I think should be a felony if in fact it is not.

Click to expand...

Many people have discovered that they possess a firearm that was once stolen. It's an unpleasant surprise, and you do lose the gun, but it isn't something you get put in jail for, unless it can be proved that you knew the gun was stolen and were complicit in that illegal activity.