gun registration

[Guest jimdigriz]

Thanks for the exact citation, TNTitan, but I already knew that the law required the destruction of the records. That falls short of proof that they are actually doing so.

As DaveTN says, this particular issue is speculative and probably cannot be definitively settled. As for me, I have little faith in the the authorities' respect for the law, because they have shown many times that they will not scrupulously abide by it. In any event, the existence of all of the form 4473s, available to the ATF, and eventually turned over to them, shows that we do indeed have a partial registration regime.

Jim

[Guest crotalus01]

If you guys are really worried about what little info they may or may not keep, nothing prevents you all from getting together and swapping guns. Then the records will all be moot as you can tell the fed (or whoever) that you no longer possess that particular weapon (and be truthful).

Really if you think about it, in TN cars are much more heavily tracked and registered than guns are - when you buy a car you must go down and register it before you can get a license plate to drive it (this also ensures TN gets their tax on what you paid for it). When they try to do that with gun sales, then I will start to worry. Until then, guns sales between private citizens of TN are pretty unregulated (really completely unregulated unless an FFL gets involved).

[Guest jimdigriz]

If you guys are really worried about what little info they may or may not keep, nothing prevents you all from getting together and swapping guns.

Just the fact that they can ascertain that an individual _has_ guns - nevermind the exact type and number - is unfortunate enough.

Until then, guns sales between private citizens of TN are pretty unregulated (really completely unregulated unless an FFL gets involved).

Something that absolutely ought to be taken advantage of.

Jim

[RobertY]

Stoopid questions here.

Okay, so I can purchase a handgun from a private person.

1) The seller does not have to do any paper work or turn anything into anyone?

2) Myself as the buyer will not have to fill out any paperwork or send it off to anyone?

3) No TIC or anything if I buy from a private person?

Sorry if all those questions are kind of redundant, but I just want to be sure.

Thank You.

[Daniel]

1. 2. and 3. are all correct.

[JayC]

The FFL is required by law to turn all of their forms over to the ATF when they shut down, and investigators can gain access to the records prior to that as well.

Also, are you certain that the BG check is actually deleted after 72 hours?

Jim

If the back ground check is not destroyed after 72 hours that would be a violation of TN law.

[Smith]

They wouldn’t unless they were required to by law.

I couldn’t care less if they keep the records; but if I did I wouldn’t care what their “Policy†is.

The questions are:

1. Is there a law that requires them to destroy the records?

2. Is there a procedure in place to make sure that happens?

<o></o>

If the answer to both those questions is “Yes†then you have accountability. If the answer to either of those questions is “Noâ€, then TBI can keep whatever they have.

It is Federal law that background checks/records ect have to be destroyed within 72 hours (since 1998). It was a big deal when Ashcroft discovered that Janet Reno had been keeping records for months and even years citing LE issues in violation of federal law. Even the NRA filed suites against Reno in 2000 over the issue. NRA v. Reno, 99-5270, Second Amendment, Gun Control and Dave Kopel & Glenn Reynolds on guns & terrorism on National Review Online

So question one is - yes

question two is - ? i guess they are using the honor system.

Edited July 9, 2010 by Smith

[TNFF319]

Just the fact that they can ascertain that an individual _has_ guns - nevermind the exact type and number - is unfortunate enough.

Jim

That is what I am thinking. When they come for the guns, they will search people who have been known to have guns. Do you really think the are going to let you keep some guns because you didn't buy them through an FFL?

Those that believe they can't come take your guns are foolish.

[DaveTN]

When they come for the guns,

Speaking of foolish….

Who is “they�

And why are they coming to get my guns?

<O:p</O:p

Katrina was an isolated incident during the worst disaster the area has ever seen.

States like Tennessee and others have enacted legislation to make sure that can’t happen again. So without using any lame azz Katrina pictures or videos…. Who did I need to watch out for?

<O:p</O:p

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Maybe the New Black Panther Party:D

With all the crap the White House has started, do you really

think they wouldn't have something like confiscation on the agenda?

If this administration is successful in retaining the House and

Senate, which I doubt, that would be right up their alley. You can

joke about these things, but history shows the precedent

[Mike.357]

Maybe the New Black Panther Party:D

As timing would have it, I was just flipping channels and saw Megyn Kelly. She is easy on the eyes so I stopped a ssecond.

At about 2:30 today ( about ten minutes) she is interviewing the head of the New Black Panther Party live. Having seen her at work in the past I am think she will do her best to make this guy uncomfortable. It will be worth watching.

OKAY back to the regularly scheduled thread

[mikegideon]

I figure they're going to pick up the 230 million guns about the same time they pick up the 11 million Mexicans. Hope they don't drop them off at the same place.

[DaveTN]

Maybe the New Black Panther Party:D

With all the crap the White House has started, do you really

think they wouldn't have something like confiscation on the agenda?

If this administration is successful in retaining the House and

Senate, which I doubt, that would be right up their alley. You can

joke about these things, but history shows the precedent

I’m the “States Rights†guy remember.

I’m sure Obama would like to take my guns. He has said so.

But the chances of the state of Tennessee allowing the Feds to do that is exactly the same as the Feds telling Illinois they have to recognize the 2<SUP>nd</SUP> amendment….. None.

[Guest jackdm3]

I’m the “States Rights” guy remember.

I’m sure Obama would like to take my guns. He has said so.

But the chances of the state of Tennessee allowing the Feds to do that is exactly the same as the Feds telling Illinois they have to recognize the 2<SUP>nd</SUP> amendment….. None.

I misplaced that somewhere. Can you refresh us?

[DaveTN]

I misplaced that somewhere. Can you refresh us?

Look it up. He said he wants to outlaw semi-auto weapons.

[Guest jackdm3]

Thanks for the encouragement.

<TABLE><TBODY><TR><TD><CENTER>Barack Obama on Gun Control </CENTER>

Democratic nomine for President; Junior Senator (IL)

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

<!-- End Section Head_Popup_after_ad --><!-- Start section Right_Halfway_Popup.inc --><!-- End section Right_Halfway_Popup.inc --><CENTER>Ok for states & cities to determine local gun laws

</CENTER>Q: Is the D.C. law prohibiting ownership of handguns consistent with an individual’s right to bear arms?

A: As a general principle, I believe that the Constitution confers an individual right to bear arms. But just because you have an individual right does not mean that the state or local government can’t constrain the exercise of that right, in the same way that we have a right to private property but local governments can establish zoning ordinances that determine how you can use it.

Q: But do you still favor the registration & licensing of guns?

A: I think we can provide common-sense approaches to the issue of illegal guns that are ending up on the streets. We can make sure that criminals don’t have guns in their hands. We can make certain that those who are mentally deranged are not getting a hold of handguns. We can trace guns that have been used in crimes to unscrupulous gun dealers that may be selling to straw purchasers and dumping them on the streets. <CENTER>Source: 2008 Philadelphia primary debate, on eve of PA primary Apr 16, 2008 </CENTER>

<CENTER>FactCheck: Yes, Obama endorsed Illinois handgun ban

</CENTER>Obama was being misleading when he denied that his handwriting had been on a document endorsing a state ban on the sale and possession of handguns in Illinois. Obama responded, “No, my writing wasn’t on that particular questionnaire. As I said, I have never favored an all-out ban on handguns.”

Actually, Obama’s writing was on the 1996 document, which was filed when Obama was running for the Illinois state Senate. A Chicago nonprofit, Independent Voters of Illinois, had this question, and Obama took hard line:

35. Do you support state legislation to:

a. ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns? Yes.

b. ban assault weapons? Yes.

c. mandatory waiting periods and background checks? Yes.

Obama’s campaign said, “Sen. Obama didn’t fill out these state Senate questionnaires--a staffer did--and there are several answers that didn’t reflect his views then or now. He may have jotted some notes on the front page of the questionnaire, but some answers didn’t reflect his views.” <CENTER>Source: FactCheck.org analysis of 2008 Philadelphia primary debate Apr 16, 2008 </CENTER>

<CENTER>Respect 2nd Amendment, but local gun bans ok

</CENTER>Q: You said recently, “I have no intention of taking away folks’ guns.” But you support the D.C. handgun ban, and you’ve said that it’s constitutional. How do you reconcile those two positions?

A: Because I think we have two conflicting traditions in this country. I think it’s important for us to recognize that we’ve got a tradition of handgun ownership and gun ownership generally. And a lot of law-abiding citizens use it for hunting, for sportsmanship, and for protecting their families. We also have a violence on the streets that is the result of illegal handgun usage. And so I think there is nothing wrong with a community saying we are going to take those illegal handguns off the streets. And cracking down on the various loopholes that exist in terms of background checks for children, the mentally ill. We can have reasonable, thoughtful gun control measure that I think respect the Second Amendment and people’s traditions. <CENTER>Source: 2008 Politico pre-Potomac Primary interview Feb 11, 2008 </CENTER>

<CENTER>Provide some common-sense enforcement on gun licensing

</CENTER>Q: When you were in the state senate, you talked about licensing and registering gun owners. Would you do that as president?

A: I don’t think that we can get that done. But what we can do is to provide just some common-sense enforcement. The efforts by law enforcement to obtain the information required to trace back guns that have been used in crimes to unscrupulous gun dealers. As president, I intend to make it happen. We essentially have two realities, when it comes to guns, in this country. You’ve got the tradition of lawful gun ownership. It is very important for many Americans to be able to hunt, fish, take their kids out, teach them how to shoot. Then you’ve got the reality of 34 Chicago public school students who get shot down on the streets of Chicago. We can reconcile those two realities by making sure the Second Amendment is respected and that people are able to lawfully own guns, but that we also start cracking down on the kinds of abuses of firearms that we see on the streets. <CENTER>Source: 2008 Democratic debate in Las Vegas Jan 15, 2008 </CENTER>

<CENTER>2000: cosponsored bill to limit purchases to 1 gun per month

</CENTER>Obama sought moderate gun control measures, such as a 2000 bill he cosponsored to limit handgun purchases to one per month (it did not pass). He voted against letting people violate local weapons bans in cases of self-defense, but also voted in2004 to let retired police officers carry concealed handguns.

<CENTER>Source: The Improbable Quest, by John K. Wilson, p.148 Oct 30, 2007 </CENTER>

<CENTER>Concealed carry OK for retired police officers

</CENTER>Obama voted for a bill in the Illinois senate that allowed retired law enforcement officers to carry concealed weapons. If there was any issue on which Obama rarely deviated, it was gun control. He was the most strident candidate when it came to enforcin and expanding gun control laws. So this vote jumped out as inconsistent.

When I queried him about the vote, he said, “I didn’t find that [vote] surprising. I am consistently on record and will continue to be on record as opposing concealed carry. This was a narrow exception in an exceptional circumstance where a retired police officer might find himself vulnerable as a consequence of the work he has previously done--and had been trained extensively in the proper use of firearms.“

It wasn’t until a few weeks later that another theory came forward about the uncharacteristic vote. Obama was battling with his GOP opponent to win the endorsement of the Fraternal Order of Police. <CENTER>Source: From Promise to Power, by David Mendell, p.250-251 Aug 14, 2007 </CENTER>

<CENTER>Stop unscrupulous gun dealers dumping guns in cities

</CENTER>Q: How would you address gun violence that continues to be the #1 cause of death among African-American men?

A: You know, when the massacre happened at Virginia Tech, I think all of us were grief stricken and shocked by the carnage. But in this year alone, in Chicago, we’ve had 34 Chicago public school students gunned down and killed. And for the most part, there has been silence. We know what to do. We’ve got to enforce the gun laws that are on the books. We’ve got to make sure that unscrupulous gun dealers aren’t loading up vans and dumping guns in our communities, because we know they’re not made in our communities. There aren’t any gun manufacturers here, right here in the middle of Detroit. But what we also have to do is to make sure that we change our politics so that we care just as much about those 30-some children in Chicago who’ve been shot as we do the children in Virginia Tech. That’s a mindset that we have to have in the White House and we don’t have it right now. <CENTER>Source: 2007 NAACP Presidential Primary Forum Jul 12, 2007 </CENTER>

<CENTER>Keep guns out of inner cities--but also problem of morality

</CENTER>I believe in keeping guns out of our inner cities, and that our leaders must say so in the face of the gun manfuacturer’s lobby. But I also believe that when a gangbanger shoots indiscriminately into a crowd because he feels someone disrespected him, we have a problem of morality. Not only do ew need to punish thatman for his crime, but we need to acknowledge that there’s a hole in his heart, one that government programs alone may not be able to repair.

<CENTER>Source: The Audacity of Hope, by Barack Obama, p.215 Oct 1, 2006 </CENTER>

<CENTER>Bush erred in failing to renew assault weapons ban

</CENTER>KEYES: [to Obama]: I am a strong believer in the second amendment. The gun control mentality is ruthlessly absurd. It suggests that we should pass a law that prevents law abiding citizens from carrying weapons. You end up with a situation where the crook have all the guns and the law abiding citizens cannot defend themselves. I guess that’s good enough for Senator Obama who voted against the bill that would have allowed homeowners to defend themselves if their homes were broken into.

OBAMA: Let’s be honest. Mr. Keyes does not believe in common gun control measures like the assault weapons bill. Mr. Keyes does not believe in any limits from what I can tell with respect to the possession of guns, including assault weapons that have only one purpose, to kill people. I think it is a scandal that this president did not authorize a renewal of the assault weapons ban. <CENTER>Source: Illinois Senate Debate #3: Barack Obama vs. Alan Keyes Oct 21, 2004 </CENTER>

<CENTER>Ban semi-automatics, and more possession restrictions

</CENTER>

• Principles that Obama supports on gun issues:
  
• Ban the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic weapons.
  
• Increase state restrictions on the purchase and possession of firearms.
  
• Require manufacturers to provide child-safety locks with firearms.
  

<CENTER>Source: 1998 IL State Legislative National Political Awareness Test Jul 2, 1998 </CENTER>

<CENTER>Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers.

</CENTER>A bill to prohibit civil liability actions from being brought or continued against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers of firearms or ammunition for damages, injunctive or other relief resulting from the misuse of their products by others. Voting YES would:

• Exempt lawsuits brought against individuals who knowingly transfer a firearm that will be used to commit a violent or drug-trafficking crime
  
• Exempt lawsuits against actions that result in death, physical injury or property damage due solely to a product defect
  
• Call for the dismissal of all qualified civil liability actions pending on the date of enactment by the court in which the action was brought
  
• Prohibit the manufacture, import, sale or delivery of armor piercing ammunition, and sets a minimum prison term of 15 years for violations
  
• Require all licensed importers, manufacturers and dealers who engage in the transfer of handguns to provide secure gun storage or safety devices
  

<CENTER>Reference: Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act; Bill S 397 ; vote number 2005-219 on Jul 29, 2005 </CENTER>