alsaqr
Member
i stopped caring about government lists when my Top Secret security clearance with access to CNWDI was granted in 1960. Every five years there was another background investigation.
Tell me how ATF is going to compile a "database", (using any definition you want) when 99% of Form 4473's ARE NOT IN THEIR HANDS TO SCAN.Depends what you define as a "database". Any collection of text where text represents named data items that can be organized and identified by data name and can then be linked to other named data items is a database, regardless of how you choose to label it.
Section A of the 4473 has make, model, serial, type and caliber. Section B has transferee's name, address and personal info. After scanning into a digital text file with delimited fields, any data item in Sec A can be linked to any data item in Sec B. This is the essence of a searchable database. One unique firearm can be linked with its one unique transferee. If this doesn't "register" that firearm to that transferee by actual legal definition, it does so by practical usage. This is why the format of the 4473 was recently changed - so that only the top page would need to be scanned to get all the relevant data.
It ain't a rule yet.New rule coming into effect very soon...FFLs no longer allowed to destroy 4473s after 20 years...which means at some point ALL records will be with the ATF.
Drown them in paper? Love to.Further note on this...they get away with this...they will next change it to..store only for a year than forward to the ATF. Think they won't? If so, I got this bridge for sale.......
Uh, I'm a gun dealer. I know what is being scanned and you need to educate yourself on the topic of this thread.THERE IS A DATABASE NOW! How you not paid attention?
Nope.The 4473s are scanned and stored on a DIGITAL DATABASE.
Dude...........they HAVE THE DARN FORMS ALREADY!!!!! ATF scans the image so the ladies at the National tracing center don't have to stay for hours in those roach infested shipping containers.They say, for now, the software that enables a search by name is disabled. You know dang well how easy that is to enable again. Think they won't? If you do, I got this bridge for sale.....
That's sad.I trust the GOAs journalism way better than any lane stream news source, including Faux News. If you don't, I got this bridge for sale...
With all due respect you haven't a clue.All due respect here, what you wrote would be accurate for 1968. What you wrote is the intention of the orginal law. Whats going on NOW, Today, as we speak...is a whole new dark and evil ball game.
I don't. But I also know that my 24,000 Form 4473's since 2008 haven't been scanned.You can believe what you ATF says if you wish...if you trust them...well in that case, I got this nice bridge over here.....
They're scanning them during routine FFL audits..... when 99% of Form 4473's ARE NOT IN THEIR HANDS TO SCAN.
Software does. You think they don't have software? Read the GOA article. They are not making it up. They got it with a FOIA request. Its right out if the horses mouth..so to speak.Just scanning paper forms does not magically turn them into a "database."
Sorry, but you missed the point about where scannable text forms the input for a database. You just don't know what you're talking about. I do have some database coding experience.Just scanning paper forms does not magically turn them into a "database."
That's a valid point, and yes the information is freely and publicly available, if they look and they look in the right place; however how much easier to just scan FFL paper records during routine audits where the information they want is available already organized in the ways they want to index it and use it. I'm really not too concerned about posting anything personal here, and as a matter of fact, I'm going over to the "What did you shoot today?" thread to post my range trip today.Interesting. How many of you, myself included, who are complaining about this here, have willingly posted your firearm possessions right here on this very public, open to the entire world, internet website? How many of you have posted a photo of yourself with a deer and your rifle? Or a video of you running a USPSA/Steel Challenge course? Some things we just can't control, others, we can.
Are you an FFL?They're scanning them during routine FFL audits.
When was your last audit? You seem to forget...we have a new fake president who ordered a "zero tolerance" policy for FFL violations.Are you an FFL?
How many "audits" have you gone through?
Do you know why a particular Form 4473 might be scanned during an inspection?
I've had four compliance inspections. In not a single one did the ATF IOI scan my 4473's.......BECAUSE ITS NOT NEEDED!
If the licensee has significant or numerous errors, omissions or serious violations in his recordkeeping....then yes, the IOI might scan those 4473's as proof of the dealers violations.
Maybe not in your case, but apparently it's being done:Are you an FFL?
How many "audits" have you gone through?
Do you know why a particular Form 4473 might be scanned during an inspection?
I've had four compliance inspections. In not a single one did the ATF IOI scan my 4473's.......BECAUSE ITS NOT NEEDED!.
e.g. from here (just one of multiple references):Here’s what we know. ATF agents have used annual inspections to electronically record the contents of Form 4473’s being kept by federal gun dealers.
Last July.When was your last audit?
Do you think FFL's aren't aware of this?You seem to forget...we have a new fake president who ordered a "zero tolerance" policy for FFL violations.
That's a valid point, and yes the information is freely and publicly available, if they look and they look in the right place; however how much easier to just scan FFL paper records during routine audits where the information they want is available already organized in the ways they want to index it and use it. I'm really not too concerned about posting anything personal here, and as a matter of fact, I'm going over to the "What did you shoot today?" thread to post my range trip today.
Last July might as well been last decade. Things have changed very fast in 10 months.Last July.
Do you think FFL's aren't aware of this?
Good grief man.
Your GOA "article" references a well known incident in Alaska that got a couple of ATF IOI's in trouble.....A DECADE AGO. The second link in that "article" is a bunch of random anonymous posts. Zero creditability.Maybe not in your case, but apparently it's being done:
e.g. from here (just one of multiple references):
https://www.ammoland.com/2020/02/atf-proposes-make-national-gun-registry-easier/#axzz7UQtuufNI
Yes. Of course that will be GOA's next revelation....."ATF IOI's have bionic image capturing eyeballs!!!!"Then again, did you actually have eyeballs on your inspectors 100% of the time they were there for their visit?
Tell me how ATF is going to compile a "database", (using any definition you want) when 99% of Form 4473's ARE NOT IN THEIR HANDS TO SCAN.
I'm not the one posting old news, but since you think I'm unaware of the Biden Administrations view of gun dealers you seem to forget......Last July might as well been last decade.
No, they really haven't. It's the same anti gun agenda as always.Things have changed very fast in 10 months.
Only on TV..... I've read that they rarely solve crimes with 20+ year old ATF data anyway,...
It is new news if it's now factually documented by a legally admissable evidentiary process - the application of the Freedom of Information Act.....ya'll are posting OLD NEWS as if it were actualy news. It's not news, it's not new and it gets tiresome.
What part of IT'S BEEN COMMON KNOWLEDGE FOR YEARS do ya'll not get?It is new news if it's now factually documented by a legally admissable evidentiary process - the application of the Freedom of Information Act.
I think the GOA is every bit as corrupt as the NRA, less skilled, less effective.Seems to me your main gripe is with the GOA. If you have a problem with them, take it up with them. They're still doing good work and getting good results wrt the preservation of our Second Amendment rights , so regardless of how you feel about how they're going about it, they're winning your fight as well as mine.
You say it's been common knowledge for years and so is not newsworthy, but then in another post you deny that it's been happening. The two points are contradictions. Sorry, pal, but you don't sound like a reliable source for factual information. I'm sticking with GOA.What part of IT'S BEEN COMMON KNOWLEDGE FOR YEARS do ya'll not get?
Wow, just...wow. Shoot the messenger much?What part of IT'S BEEN COMMON KNOWLEDGE FOR YEARS do ya'll not get?
And its been discussed here on The High Road many times.
I think the GOA is every bit as corrupt as the NRA, less skilled, less effective.
My mmain gripe is presenting this as something newsworthy.
Up next........"GOA FOIA forces Biden Administration to disclose names of the signers of the Declaration of Independence!!!"
Your GOA "article" references a well known incident in Alaska that got a couple of ATF IOI's in trouble.....A
DECADE AGO. The second link in that "article" is a bunch of random anonymous posts. Zero creditability.
Just scanning paper forms does not magically turn them into a "database."
Sorry pal, I've not denied for one second that ATF has been scanning some 4473's. Again, its common knowledge that ATF scans Out Of Business records.You say it's been common knowledge for years and so is not newsworthy, but then in another post you deny that it's been happening. The two points are contradictions. Sorry, pal, but you don't sound like a reliable source for factual information. I'm sticking with GOA.