HotGuns

We all have to undergo "background checks" to purchase a firearm.
We have to fill out paperwork, a form 4473,and put all kinds of info on it.

Although it has been argued by some, that it is illegal for the Federal Government to use any of this information to track or "register" serial numbers into a data base, do you honestly believe that in this age of computer technology that the Feds are using this information for purposes other than what it was designed for?

Various laws have been passed addressing this very thing. Even in my own state, Arkansas, the law that deals with the CHL process specifically states that the state can not use or keep serial numbers of guns for registration purposes.

Yet, just the other day, we see an example in Oklahoma, of a Police Chief sending out letters to people that owned a certain typed of weapon to voluntarily bring them in for testing, and if you don't, you are a suspect in a crime until proven otherwise. Since Oklahoma has no registration of guns, it makes one wonder where exactly that data came from.

So, I am going to start a poll. Do you trust the Government to do as it says? Or do you think that what amounts to de facto registration that could be disguised as a "background check" is being abused or has the potential to be abused?

Lets hear it.

__________________
AR. CHL Instr.

To achieve world government, it is necessary to remove from the minds of men, their individualism, loyalty to family traditions, national patriotism, and religious dogmas.'
Dr. G. Brock Chisolm

Hopyard

IF in fact the story from OK is true, and IF in fact the Sheriff obtained the names from information provided on the 4473, it would be clear that there is de facto arms registration, and that Uncle is not telling the truth about the uses to which background check information is put.

That said, somehow, I think we have not gotten the complete story from OK, and I'm not yet willing (though I am close) to cry foul.

David in FL

I know that the original, retail purchaser of a firearm can be identified.....but that's not the same as "registering" them. So I guess that's a no for me.

__________________
"Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in a grey twilight that knows not victory nor defeat."

Theodore Roosevelt

mlakrid

If it were illegal, and I would like to point out it is all a matter of public record... to keep these then why have anyone fill them out at all??

Fact is, especially since 911 the government has much more control then we as citizens like to admit... AND there is not much we can do about it...


Local States may have laws in place but lets go back to your original portion of the post:

It has to goto court... and be ruled on one way or another... in today's climate I think you would be hard pressed to find enough Judges to agree...

You have the right to bear arms, no where does it say you have the right not to register them...

I can play devil's advocate as well however, can anyone show me the "Law" which was passed by our congress which says I MUST pay income taxes?? Good luck finding it...

V/R,

Mike A!
Land O Lakes, FL

SIGguy229

My question is--why exactly is the 4473 needed after a background check is done and sale completed? If there is no gun registration...why are these needed again? [Fed law aside]

__________________
Patriotic dissent is a luxury of those protected by better men than they

Sacrifice: Congress thinks having to stay late to vote is sacrifice. Ask the Sailor, Soldier, Airman, or Marine meeting his child for the first time what sacrifice means

martyr is a fancy name for crappy fighter

Kerbouchard

I think it is naive to think that in todays society and with how easily information is shared that there is not 'de facto' gun registration already established.

__________________
Money can be lost or stolen, health and strength may fail, but what you have committed to your mind is yours forever.

http://miscmusings.townhall.com/

Who is John Galt?

Paco

I have a funny feeling that there is some record kept, weather or not it is immediately sent to some super secret NSA database or just made easily accessible on a "need to know" basis I am not sure; I just think with all the info taken, and not disposed of, that it is in fact kept.

I also wonder, following up on the OP, if with many of our records indicating prior service especially depending on the MOS of our service, if that is also tied in somehow. For example, if a former SF/Ranger/SEAL goes in and buys an AR from somewhere, does the background check get flagged, providing his/her record is clear of felonies?

__________________
"Don't hit at all if you can help it; don't hit a man if you can possibly avoid it; but if you do hit him, put him to sleep." - Theodore Roosevelt

If you are not willing to stand behind our Troops, feel free to stand in front of them!

-Paco

mlr1m

I believe that when a dealer goes out of business he has to turn over all his records at that time. In effect that is a back door registration system.

Michael

Paco

Then we must do our part to keep the dealers (legal gun dealers) in business

__________________
"Don't hit at all if you can help it; don't hit a man if you can possibly avoid it; but if you do hit him, put him to sleep." - Theodore Roosevelt

If you are not willing to stand behind our Troops, feel free to stand in front of them!

-Paco

SixBravo

So it's clear, I voted "No" on the whole thing. But I'm more or less undecided. I could still be swayed either way.

See on one hand, you all make excellent points. 4473's can be used as gun registration. However, they are also used to ensure that the shop is running a legal operation. We all know people who have guns that we stay away from because they aren't the most responsible. Who's to say they can't get a gun shop opened up?

My other reason for saying "No" is rather simple. Just look at the government. It's a mess. Anytime we have something stinky going down, there are leaks or rumbles about it. A database containing the names (and assuming files) of nearly half the people in the United States...? Plausible. But VERY unlikely. Whistleblower Protection Laws would help someone like that and all it would take is one person who knows who doesn't agree with the idea and boom - its front page on the Washington Post. Certain parts of the government are good at keeping secrets. Others - not so much. The people who would handle a database like this is not the NSA. Nor the CIA. Nor any of the intel agencies. They've got bigger problems to deal with. The ATF and FBI.. some subset of the DOJ would handle it. And if it were around, I would think the whistle would have been blown.

I'm not meant to incite riots or call anyone out for posts. Its all in good spirits. Sure I may have the unpopular opinion but I really like this topic. I think its a healthy debate we should have - but all angles should be examined, as well. Think of this as a little spice to your chili. haha Like I said, that's just my thinking on it but I could be swayed to either side.

__________________
The Gunsite Blog
ITFT / Quick Kill Review